Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Which begs the question about how thorough their initial investigation could have been. There’s no new information that’s emerged on this matter. They’re just late in getting it. And the fault for that may well be theirs.

There was new information on Thursday, for crying out loud.  A ton of it.

38 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

This ain’t Alabama — it’s SDSU.

Indeed.  And a punter and a red-shirt freshman, too.  I have a tough time seeing the ol' athlete cover up here.

Edited by Eleven
Posted
2 hours ago, Taro T said:

One thing to remember in this when looking at timelines: This civil lawsuit literally was filed yesterday. 

Fairly certain the Civil lawsuit was filed Monday the 22nd

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Fairly certain the Civil lawsuit was filed Monday the 22nd

Almost positive it was filed Thursday (which would've been off 1 day regardless as had meant to write it was filed literally the day before the game; thanks for catching that the post indicated Friday and it was filed prior to that).   (Lots of on-line articles stating it was Thursday.  Haven't seen any stating Monday, but haven't seen the actual filing and don't feel like looking it up on Pacer to confirm the actual date.)  Point still stands there was almost no heads up to the civil suit prior to last night's game.

🍺

Posted
1 hour ago, Eleven said:

There was new information on Thursday, for crying out loud.  A ton of it.

I think we have differing definitions of “new” information. All of the relevant events - perhaps outside of their being framed in legal pleadings - occurred many months ago. I’m not necessarily talking about what the Bills knew; I’m talking about what they should have known. If they just learned new information a few days ago, I’m asking why they’re only learning it now when it was knowable in July.

Posted

Wading through TBD, ouch. 200 pages of hothead opinions from those that have never ever done anything wrong in their lives. It's awful. 

The court of public opinion has already labeled MA guilty. However this whole thing has many lapses than do not allow for proper judgment in either direction. 

I do believe he may be cut, wrong or right and I wish there was a way for the exempt list to be a thing here, from what I gather, because this happened before the draft, he in not eligible for the commissioner exempt list. 

As for Buffalo being a Super bowl team vs the lowly lions, that is a lazy argument and should not change this situation and it's handling at all. Someone had a life ruined here, and someone is at risk of losing their future life. Time is needed to migitage any future pain/suffering and incorrect labeling. 

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted

McDermott made pretty clear the locker room was feeling it.  First Knox's brother and now this back to back.  It showed last night.  They got to get past his and quick.  You cannot go in distracted or deflated to LA week one.  

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Not sure what the legalities are. Perhaps they’re looking to void his contract rather than just cut him.

You can’t fire someone in this state due to a criminal record, I’m assuming you can not fire someone for being accused of criminal activity.

Not to mention the NFLPA will fight it as a matter of course

Edited by tom webster
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
51 minutes ago, tom webster said:

You can’t fire someone in this state due to a criminal record, I’m assuming you can not fire someone for being accused of criminal activity.

Not to mention the NFLPA will fight it as a matter of course

His entire contract over the 4 year period is worth a total of 4.3 Million. I imagine it would be worth it to them to pay that out for publicity reasons 

He’s gone

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

Does this girl have any self respect? 

Her Profile should say welcome to onlyfans 

Have you ever asked the same question about a guy? Just because you view her as a sex object doesn't mean she's not allowed to dress how she wants. Considering you're posting in a Bills thread where the punter was accused of gang rape this is pretty tone deaf.

 

Edited by LGR4GM
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

Does this girl have any self respect? 

Her Profile should say welcome to onlyfans 

Really, a girl in shorts and a pink top with minimal cleavage is "does she have any self respect?"

You disgust me and your comment is sexist trash. Do better. 

  • Thanks (+1) 2
Posted

I have to think there are some heated conversations going on In the front office and scouting staff about how they missed this when other organizations said they knew about the situation. I’m sure Terry isn’t happy about this either and has let his feelings be known.

  • Agree 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Have you ever asked the same question about a guy? Just because you view her as a sex object doesn't mean she's not allowed to dress how she wants. Considering you're posting in a Bills thread where the punter was accused of gang rape this is pretty tone deaf.

 

Don't give that person the attention...

Posted
3 hours ago, tom webster said:

You can’t fire someone in this state due to a criminal record, I’m assuming you can not fire someone for being accused of criminal activity.

Not to mention the NFLPA will fight it as a matter of course

It’s the CBA that governs here moreso than NY law. And NFL players get cut all the time for (alleged) acts of moral turpitude. I’m not sure what the NFLPA would be able to grieve here.

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

I don't know who this is.

Me neither. She had the scoop first on Twitter.

Posted

I’m wondering whether there’s been turnover with the Bills social media team. Posting a hunky picture of the guy as part of the Tweet announcing his release is a weird (bad) choice.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Eleven said:

I don't know who this is.

She's just a huge Bills fan and a workout freak. Not sure how she got the blue checkmark. She is just another Bills fan.

Posted
4 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Posting a hunky picture of the guy as part of the Tweet announcing his release is a weird (bad) choice.

JC. That’s just a picture. If you find that hunky then you should quietly question yourself.

He’s been around a month. Sorry they couldn’t get a photo of him looking like an ogre (lower case, no relation).

The kid is an asshat and will be kicking a can down the road until he is incarcerated, no need for the Pegulas to follow him and help him kick it.

They did nothing wrong.

 

  • Agree 2
Posted
7 hours ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

The court of public opinion has already labeled MA guilty. However this whole thing has many lapses than do not allow for proper judgment in either direction.

It would be interesting to see the timeline of how this unfolded from the Bills standpoint. They may have been gaslit by Araiza and his lawyer and convinced the whole thing was fabricated. The victim admitted she was barely coherent through much of what happened.

The fact that no charges came after almost a year would lend credence to the "fabricated event" theory. But when the civil lawsuit dropped it became clear that even if the allegations were just a little bit true, Araiza had to go.

It would also be interesting to find out who in the organization knew what and when. Apparently not everyone was aware of the situation to the same degree. (This may have been why Haack was released.)

All this might make the Bills actions justifiable within the organization, but they'll never be able to convince the court of public opinion that they acted wisely in the matter. I expect them to cut bait and move on and never bring it up again.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...