Why Should Chiefs Do the Right Thing ?

[Adamixoye 604]

1 hour ago, Handswarmer said:

Go back and look at E Elliot's suspension. He was never charged with a crime yet served a 6 game suspension.

There was photo evidence and no other suspect.  IIRC charges were not pursued because the victim did not want to continue with the process.

The question of whether or not Tyreek actually abused his child is still unique with respect to any other past incident the NFL has suspended for, in that there is no evidence, no arrest, and a very viable second suspect.  I have said this a dozen times on this board and no one acknowledges it.  It's uncharted territory.  Doesn't mean the NFL won't suspend, just that it is an orange compared to any other apple that you could cite.

Having said that, I think that it is possible that Tyreek could be suspended for the audio recording alone.  That was a game-changer.

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 hour ago, Handswarmer said:

Go back and look at E Elliot's suspension. He was never charged with a crime yet served a 6 game suspension.

Again we know Goodell does what he wants.  But even the Elliott deal was a mess in the courts and took months to resolve over a 6 game suspension. There’s a big difference between that and kicking somebody out of the game and denying their livelihood. Plus I doubt Goodell wants to push the envelope too far with a new CBA negotiation coming up. 

How does this all pertain to Tyreek? No clue. I’m convinced the drama hasn’t remotely finished there and still think some response from the girl is coming very soon. 

[Handswarmer 645]

25 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

There was photo evidence and no other suspect.  IIRC charges were not pursued because the victim did not want to continue with the process.

The question of whether or not Tyreek actually abused his child is still unique with respect to any other past incident the NFL has suspended for, in that there is no evidence, no arrest, and a very viable second suspect.  I have said this a dozen times on this board and no one acknowledges it.  It's uncharted territory.  Doesn't mean the NFL won't suspend, just that it is an orange compared to any other apple that you could cite.

Having said that, I think that it is possible that Tyreek could be suspended for the audio recording alone.  That was a game-changer.

 

21 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

Again we know Goodell does what he wants.  But even the Elliott deal was a mess in the courts and took months to resolve over a 6 game suspension. There’s a big difference between that and kicking somebody out of the game and denying their livelihood. Plus I doubt Goodell wants to push the envelope too far with a new CBA negotiation coming up. 

How does this all pertain to Tyreek? No clue. I’m convinced the drama hasn’t remotely finished there and still think some response from the girl is coming very soon. 

My exact point as this is a far worse "look" for the NFL because the child is involved and the recording is out there. Same as for Rice and Hunt, when the video came out, it was too much to bear for the teams and the Shield.

I agree with you Mloe- the new CBA will include a clear cut procedure for adjudication of crimes/offenses. Last one, the players gave up money in exchange for more time off (less OTA's) and less contact in practice.

This drama is not over yet but I will reiterate my stance that some sort of compensation should exist for the team that cuts a troublemaker/offender from the team that signs him. Like the Browns should owe the Chiefs a draft pick and his salary and dead money should be wiped from the cap.

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 hour ago, Handswarmer said:

 

My exact point as this is a far worse "look" for the NFL because the child is involved and the recording is out there. Same as for Rice and Hunt, when the video came out, it was too much to bear for the teams and the Shield.

I agree with you Mloe- the new CBA will include a clear cut procedure for adjudication of crimes/offenses. Last one, the players gave up money in exchange for more time off (less OTA's) and less contact in practice.

This drama is not over yet but I will reiterate my stance that some sort of compensation should exist for the team that cuts a troublemaker/offender from the team that signs him. Like the Browns should owe the Chiefs a draft pick and his salary and dead money should be wiped from the cap.

We definitely agree with the core of this. And it is worse because we are talking about a kid. But notice how the NFL has largely ignored this so far. Goodell is a complete wild card that seems to measure his moves more on PR value than anything else. 

[Adamixoye 604]

2 hours ago, Handswarmer said:

 

My exact point as this is a far worse "look" for the NFL because the child is involved and the recording is out there. Same as for Rice and Hunt, when the video came out, it was too much to bear for the teams and the Shield.

I agree with you Mloe- the new CBA will include a clear cut procedure for adjudication of crimes/offenses. Last one, the players gave up money in exchange for more time off (less OTA's) and less contact in practice.

I've said over and over again, I agree that there is precedent for suspension without charges.  But I disagree that that the only factor in play here.  Prior to the audio, the only grounds for suspending Hill would have been, "he has a history, and something probably happened even if we don't know who."  Again, I wasn't predicting that the NFL wouldn't try something, only stating that we were in uncharted territory.

With the audio my stance has changed.  I now believe that the NFL may suspend him on that basis alone (threatening a woman, which he admitted to).  This is also somewhat unprecedented as well, because Tyreek's statement ("you should be terrified of me b----") isn't a crime per se, but is obviously awful and reflects poorly on the league.

2 hours ago, Handswarmer said:

This drama is not over yet but I will reiterate my stance that some sort of compensation should exist for the team that cuts a troublemaker/offender from the team that signs him. Like the Browns should owe the Chiefs a draft pick and his salary and dead money should be wiped from the cap.

As much as I would like as a hardcore fan for the Chiefs to be retroactively compensated for Hunt, or should something happen to Hill, this just won't work.  The obvious counterargument is that the Chiefs have already benefitted from taking a risk on Hill, and they shouldn't be rewarded again for employing players with a history of such off-the-field issues.

[Handswarmer 645]

3 hours ago, Adamixoye said:

I've said over and over again, I agree that there is precedent for suspension without charges.  But I disagree that that the only factor in play here.  Prior to the audio, the only grounds for suspending Hill would have been, "he has a history, and something probably happened even if we don't know who."  Again, I wasn't predicting that the NFL wouldn't try something, only stating that we were in uncharted territory.

With the audio my stance has changed.  I now believe that the NFL may suspend him on that basis alone (threatening a woman, which he admitted to).  This is also somewhat unprecedented as well, because Tyreek's statement ("you should be terrified of me b----") isn't a crime per se, but is obviously awful and reflects poorly on the league.

As much as I would like as a hardcore fan for the Chiefs to be retroactively compensated for Hunt, or should something happen to Hill, this just won't work.  The obvious counterargument is that the Chiefs have already benefitted from taking a risk on Hill, and they shouldn't be rewarded again for employing players with a history of such off-the-field issues.

What if, like a Ray Rice, there was no history and the incident was the first time offense? Rice never played again because he was already on the decline, but say it was Hills 1st offense and he gets cut- shouldn't you be awarded compensation because now you are deprived of his services? Almost like alimony....

[Docbarnabee 225]

I think that unless Hill is convicted of a crime, he does not get suspended. If the statement his lawyer sticks and everyone stays with this story.. I hope that this story has a happy ending for Tyreek, his son (especiaally) , Espinal and of course ,the Chiefs. 

[Adamixoye 604]

40 minutes ago, Handswarmer said:

What if, like a Ray Rice, there was no history and the incident was the first time offense? Rice never played again because he was already on the decline, but say it was Hills 1st offense and he gets cut- shouldn't you be awarded compensation because now you are deprived of his services? Almost like alimony....

I see your point but I think it causes more problems than is solves.  Namely, I want the NFL involved less, not more, as some sort of extralegal authority regarding these incidents.  Should the NFL distinguish between incidents pre- and post-entering the league?  Should the NFL distinguish between rumors, accusations, arrests, or convictions?  Ultimately, do you trust the NFL to NOT overcomplicate it and turn it into a "catch rule" sort of mess?  I don't.

[Docbarnabee 225]

We will see how it plays out, but if Hill is not charged and gets suspended for that audio, the NFL players association will go apeshit.

[Mloe68 1,521]

5 minutes ago, Docbarnabee said:

We will see how it plays out, but if Hill is not charged and gets suspended for that audio, the NFL players association will go apeshit.

No question. The audio is a really bad look but holds very little water. If Tyreek abused his kid there needs to be some documented evidence that the kid was hurt beyond the broken arm that he denied doing four times on that same audio where he "admitted" to spanking and then had a non denial of this punching deal which still isn't clear at all. I know a Child Services worker in Johnson County and it's interesting she said 90 percent of abuse calls they get our spouses or significant others who are angry at their partners. Perhaps starts to fit with his version? 

 What exactly was the evidence that caused them to remove Tyreek from the house? At this point that's really all I care about as it pertains to what the Chiefs and NFL should do. Beyond that we know Goodell will act or not act based on how he thinks it will effect the PR value for the league. I'm just waiting for more tangible information or a likely rebuttal from the girlfriend that she never wrote that text and denies hurting the kid. That's almost gotta be coming. 

[Dan4pres 125]

35 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

I see your point but I think it causes more problems than is solves.  Namely, I want the NFL involved less, not more, as some sort of extralegal authority regarding these incidents.  Should the NFL distinguish between incidents pre- and post-entering the league?  Should the NFL distinguish between rumors, accusations, arrests, or convictions?  Ultimately, do you trust the NFL to NOT overcomplicate it and turn it into a "catch rule" sort of mess?  I don't.

The fact of the matter is, Clark Hunt probably cut Hunt too quickly. In his mind, Hunt’ s lack of integrity outweighed his value for compensation. Each owner/GM would have to weigh that decision accordingly. I’m just glad that the Chiefs didn’t bow to public pressure before all the facts were in on Hill. Fans and the press have no right to demand the release of a player. Who the fuck are they?? I suspect that Clark Hunt would cut Hunt  again today if given the choice. Losing trust is bigger than winning a couple more games/draft pick to Mr.  Hunt. I can respect that. That’s what makes me even more angry when the press state that the Chiefs have no moral compass. 

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

19 minutes ago, Dan4pres said:

The fact of the matter is, Clark Hunt probably cut Hunt too quickly. In his mind, Hunt’ s lack of integrity outweighed his value for compensation. Each owner/GM would have to weigh that decision accordingly. I’m just glad that the Chiefs didn’t bow to public pressure before all the facts were in on Hill. Fans and the press have no right to demand the release of a player. Who the fuck are they?? I suspect that Clark Hunt would cut Hunt  again today if given the choice. Losing trust is bigger than winning a couple more games/draft pick to Mr.  Hunt. I can respect that. That’s what makes me even more angry when the press state that the Chiefs have no moral compass. 

It was not that at all.  Kareem Hunt lied to the Chiefs front office staright to their faces.  That is something that any employer has a right to terminate an employee over.  There was nothing at all premature in their decision. As for Hill, the man is a ticking time bomb when it comes to personal relationships in a family.  He is 90% likely to repeat.  The Chiefs cannot really afford that in the middle of a season with a title run at stake.  Better to let them develop the chemistry and playbook they need before a season starts.

I would venture to guess that a large percentage of those screaming now about how he should not be released for lack of definitive evidence are the same people who screamed in irritation when he was drafted, when they knew he had punched Crystal in the stomach when she was pregnant and tried to strangle her. People who do that do not simply "learn their lesson."  There is no "lesson" involved.  It is an emotional reaction that can barely yield to years and years of therapy.  If we want to talk about "the fact of the matter," that is the actual fact of the matter.  The Chiefs knew the risk when they drafted him. Plenty of other teams had a chance to draft him and took a pass. Chiefs fans were NOT happy at the time because of his history.

[Dan4pres 125]

11 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

No question. The audio is a really bad look but holds very little water. If Tyreek abused his kid there needs to be some documented evidence that the kid was hurt beyond the broken arm that he denied doing four times on that same audio where he "admitted" to spanking and then had a non denial of this punching deal which still isn't clear at all. I know a Child Services worker in Johnson County and it's interesting she said 90 percent of abuse calls they get our spouses or significant others who are angry at their partners. Perhaps starts to fit with his version? 

 What exactly was the evidence that caused them to remove Tyreek from the house? At this point that's really all I care about as it pertains to what the Chiefs and NFL should do. Beyond that we know Goodell will act or not act based on how he thinks it will effect the PR value for the league. I'm just waiting for more tangible information or a likely rebuttal from the girlfriend that she never wrote that text and denies hurting the kid. That's almost gotta be coming. 

That’s really interesting Mloe. I even question if the kid was “abused”.  I know of three incidents: 1) the broken arm - rumors are flying that the kid fell and broke it. Thus the reason for the quickly closed case on the first incident. 2) chest tapping/spanking marks.- if you believe Hill, it was a light tap to get his attention. Not a harmful fist. Does anyone actually believe a man with Hill’ s strength could punch a three year old and not inflict massive damage? The spanking marks appear to have left by the mother. 3) passed out Mom - this is the incident where I would agree with the DA. The kid was running around unsupervised for hours - neglected. Again she was clearly the one at fault.

My point is this, what “obvious crime” is the DA investigating? The broken arm clearly is out since the elected not to pursue it immediately. It must be either the paddling/chest punching allegation or the passed out Mom allegation. Maybe I missed something but it would help to know why they reopened the case. Based on an audio tape that they already possessed where Hill provided no admission of guilt? I really don’t understand it beyond political posturing.

 

[Dan4pres 125]

8 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

It was not that at all.  Kareem Hunt lied to the Chiefs front office stright to their faces.  That is something that any employer has a right to terminate an employee over.  There was nothing at all premature in their decision.

 

I agree 100%. Maybe I wasn’t clear. Hunt was ultimately terminated for lying. Clark wouldn’t stand for that regardless that some other team would eventually benefit.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

Crystal is terrified of him.  The boy is terrified.  That shuts up the abused the vast majority of the time.  They don't want him to come back and do it again.  They don't want to live in fear.  This is the nature of domestic abuse. It is hard to prove in court, because the victims are afraid to testify.  They have to live with the threat forever.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

2 minutes ago, Dan4pres said:

I agree 100%. Maybe I wasn’t clear. Hunt was ultimately terminated for lying. Clark wouldn’t stand for that regardless that some other team would eventually benefit.

Got it.  I understand what you were saying, now.

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 minute ago, Dan4pres said:

That’s really interesting Mloe. I even question if the kid was “abused”.  I know of three incidents: 1) the broken arm - rumors are flying that the kid fell and broke it. Thus the reason for the quickly closed case on the first incident. 2) chest tapping/spanking marks.- if you believe Hill, it was a light tap to get his attention. Not a harmful fist. Does anyone actually believe a man with Hill’ s strength could punch a three year old and not inflict massive damage? The spanking marks appear to have left by the mother. 3) passed out Mom - this is the incident where I would agree with the DA. The kid was running around unsupervised for hours - neglected. Again she was clearly the one at fault.

My point is this, what “obvious crime” is the DA investigating? The broken arm clearly is out since the elected not to pursue it immediately. It must be either the paddling/chest punching allegation or the passed out Mom allegation. Maybe I missed something but it would help to know why they reopened the case. Based on an audio tape that they already possessed where Hill provided no admission of guilt? I really don’t understand it beyond political posturing.

 

All good points. So far we haven't had any confirmation whatsoever the kids been hurt in any way other than the broken arm have we? We hear things that out of context mean basically nothing. But where is the real evidence here? At this point the audio tape combined with the DA saying a crime was committed have served to bury Tyreek with many people. And I get that, but I also fully get the other side of this as well especially with Tyreek going all in he didn't do anything but spank the kid with a belt and that the fiance is the guilty party of the only documented injury we know of.

You are correct right now this is more PR and perception than reality and facts. But with Tyreek going all blaming the fiance, I expect this to perhaps gain some clarity. Maybe she will flip on him. Maybe she is the real abuser. Maybe they are both guilty. I can't imagine she's gonna just lay down and accept the blame if she didn't do anything especially after going to all the trouble to record her alibi of sorts. And perhaps that will bury Tyreek, I just don't know. How can anyone not extremely close to this. 

 

[Dan4pres 125]

7 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

Crystal is terrified of him.  The boy is terrified.  That shuts up the abused the vast majority of the time.  They don't want him to come back and do it again.  They don't want to live in fear.  This is the nature of domestic abuse. It is hard to prove in court, because the victims are afraid to testify.  They have to live with the threat forever.

Maybe they both are terrified of him. Maybe they  should be. However the only evidence of this terror is the audio where many agree she was trying to bait him. She didn’t seem too terrified when they were walking hand in hand to the courthouse last week. She had it made. She had sole custody of the kid for a week and couldn’t even handle it. Some people will never like Hill because of that incident in college. I get it. I just don’t want him railroaded if he has truly learned from that mistake. That one line from the audio may be his undoing. 

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

1 hour ago, Dan4pres said:

 if he has truly learned from that mistake.

It was not a "mistake."  And you cannot unlearn a rage response.  It isn't something that you think and decide to do based on some kind of moral teaching or motivational instruction.   It is a pure emotional reaction.  It is not some kind of reasoned response.  It takes emotional re-programming which takes a very, very long time.  A lot longer than a career in football.   It is like asking Dexter from the TV series to just decide to start to have real feelings. I keep trying to post this, but no one seems to realize the nature of this kind of thing. It is not something that exists at the level of conscious decision-making.

[oldtimer 8,694]

14 hours ago, Fmbl2187 said:

Crystal is terrified of him.  The boy is terrified.  That shuts up the abused the vast majority of the time.  They don't want him to come back and do it again.  They don't want to live in fear.  This is the nature of domestic abuse. It is hard to prove in court, because the victims are afraid to testify.  They have to live with the threat forever.

Horseshit..all speculation from a call that has all the ear marks of a set up  "Gotcha call" by  the woman 

[oldtimer 8,694]

13 hours ago, Dan4pres said:

Maybe they both are terrified of him. Maybe they  should be. However the only evidence of this terror is the audio where many agree she was trying to bait him. She didn’t seem too terrified when they were walking hand in hand to the courthouse last week. She had it made. She had sole custody of the kid for a week and couldn’t even handle it. Some people will never like Hill because of that incident in college. I get it. I just don’t want him railroaded if he has truly learned from that mistake. That one line from the audio may be his undoing. 

agreed

[kkuenn 3,614]

30 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

agreed

to be fair, some abused women go along with it all in order to not cause trouble. They are or feel threatened to rock the boat, so to speak, and will make things appear better than they are.

[oldtimer 8,694]

6 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

to be fair, some abused women go along with it all in order to not cause trouble. They are or feel threatened to rock the boat, so to speak, and will make things appear better than they are.

agreed some do ..but to assume this freak show of a woman  is  takes much into assumption..after all she did stage the phone call and she did blame the broken arm on Tyreek to get back at him  and gain  the upper hand in a custody  battle. Do I think Tyreek is God's gift to a stable family  environment?..nope! I also have great pause to say he is guilty of  all that he has been accused of.

 

 time will tell

[kkuenn 3,614]

5 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

agreed some do ..but to assume this freak show of a woman  is  takes much into assumption..after all she did stage the phone call and she did blame the broken arm on Tyreek to get back at him  and gain  the upper hand in a custody  battle. Do I think Tyreek is God's gift to a stable family  environment?..nope! I also have great pause to say he is guilty of  all that he has been accused of.

 

 time will tell

It will in fact do that. I am just waiting for it all to happen, keep him or not, and move on.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

1 hour ago, oldtimer said:

agreed some do ..but to assume this freak show of a woman  is  takes much into assumption..after all she did stage the phone call and she did blame the broken arm on Tyreek to get back at him  and gain  the upper hand in a custody  battle. Do I think Tyreek is God's gift to a stable family  environment?..nope! I also have great pause to say he is guilty of  all that he has been accused of.

 

 time will tell

You sure are trying, OT.  I have to hand it to you.  To me, a lot of the Hill defenders in here sound like they are squirming to avoid an unfortunate reality. As for her problems, remember "like attracts like."