Kareem Hunt

[Cobra Mgr]

Again, I've made it a point to talk less football because I'm disgusted with how it is run. Pro & college.

Case in point..........

When all this talk began about "conduct policy" I said the NFL had no business policing players off the clock. I stand by that. It is not the NFL's job to police society. It is society's job to police the NFL. I also said the NFLPA giving the league, specifically the commish, full discretion in handing out punishment w/o agreed, written guidelines was foolish and short sighted. Because it gives the commissioner the leeway to play favorites and become arbitrary in how he handles violations. They will punish the negative PR, not the actual crime.

You can't offer to me a credible justification for why Ezekiel Elliott was suspended 6 games last season, but Kareem Hunt has played the whole season up to now. After multiple investigations in which their own lead investigator said Elliott's had no credibility, Badell took away almost a 3rd of his season. But w/videotaped evidence (keep this in context w/the Ray Rice fiasco & reaction to the NFL's excuse that they couldn't gain access to the tape) of Hunt attacking a woman, they did nothing to him. He attacked her despite his whole entourage trying to hold him back. He injured her by going thru his own friend. No suspension. Not even a fine.

And someone needs to go after the Cleveland police as well. They couldn't, in their words, determine a crime had been committed? Really????!??!!!!

[Airdrop01]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Again, I've made it a point to talk less football because I'm disgusted with how it is run. Pro & college.

Case in point..........

When all this talk began about "conduct policy" I said the NFL had no business policing players off the clock. I stand by that. It is not the NFL's job to police society. It is society's job to police the NFL. I also said the NFLPA giving the league, specifically the commish, full discretion in handing out punishment w/o agreed, written guidelines was foolish and short sighted. Because it gives the commissioner the leeway to play favorites and become arbitrary in how he handles violations. They will punish the negative PR, not the actual crime.

You can't offer to me a credible justification for why Ezekiel Elliott was suspended 6 games last season, but Kareem Hunt has played the whole season up to now. After multiple investigations in which their own lead investigator said Elliott's had no credibility, Badell took away almost a 3rd of his season. But w/videotaped evidence (keep this in context w/the Ray Rice fiasco & reaction to the NFL's excuse that they couldn't gain access to the tape) of Hunt attacking a woman, they did nothing to him. He attacked her despite his whole entourage trying to hold him back. He injured her by going thru his own friend. No suspension. Not even a fine.

And someone needs to go after the Cleveland police as well. They couldn't, in their words, determine a crime had been committed? Really????!??!!!!

What are you talking about? Video first seen today by anyone but PD ....at least as far as NFL and Chiefs go...... Victims had refused to speak or cooperate.


Within hours of this new info he's on commissioner exempt list meaning he cannot play, practice or attend team activities. Chiefs have released him. Outright.

All within hours of the video surfacing showing he lied about the event.

[Cobra Mgr]

If the NFL wanted to see the video, they could have seen the video. TMZ wanted the video. They got the video.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Again, I've made it a point to talk less football because I'm disgusted with how it is run. Pro & college.

Case in point..........

When all this talk began about "conduct policy" I said the NFL had no business policing players off the clock. I stand by that. It is not the NFL's job to police society. It is society's job to police the NFL. I also said the NFLPA giving the league, specifically the commish, full discretion in handing out punishment w/o agreed, written guidelines was foolish and short sighted. Because it gives the commissioner the leeway to play favorites and become arbitrary in how he handles violations. They will punish the negative PR, not the actual crime.

You can't offer to me a credible justification for why Ezekiel Elliott was suspended 6 games last season, but Kareem Hunt has played the whole season up to now. After multiple investigations in which their own lead investigator said Elliott's had no credibility, Badell took away almost a 3rd of his season. But w/videotaped evidence (keep this in context w/the Ray Rice fiasco & reaction to the NFL's excuse that they couldn't gain access to the tape) of Hunt attacking a woman, they did nothing to him. He attacked her despite his whole entourage trying to hold him back. He injured her by going thru his own friend. No suspension. Not even a fine.

And someone needs to go after the Cleveland police as well. They couldn't, in their words, determine a crime had been committed? Really????!??!!!!

I'm going to refrain from commenting on this because I think you know my opinion already. Everything you wrote I already knew. But reading it is making me want to lose my cool. I usually don't do that. What is this commish doing?

[Cobra Mgr]

Does this make any sense to you?

Cleveland police spokesperson Jennifer Ciaccia told USA TODAY Sports in an email Saturday that while the police reports noted surveillance footage of the incident existed, "detectives only follow up on felonies. This is a misdemeanor." Ciaccia also said nobody within the department – including the offerers who responded to the incident – had reviewed the video until TMZ posted the footage.

[Cobra Mgr]

The Athletic reports the NFL told the Chiefs to stop seeking the video since they were taking over the investigation. Nice job.

[Déjà Bru]

I'm just getting into this story now. Apparently, the video leaked online which preempted the police and the NFL because the Chiefs took it upon themselves to release Hunt anyway. What's your take on that?

[Ragnar]

My only question is, How does everything think Le'Veon Bell will look in red?

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I'm just getting into this story now. Apparently, the video leaked online which preempted the police and the NFL because the Chiefs took it upon themselves to release Hunt anyway. What's your take on that?

TMZ evidently bought the vid & released it. That's what sent the NFL & police into scramble mode. The authorities & the NFL come out stinking in this fiasco.

Cleveland PD claims the responding officers had no evidence a crime had taken place. Yet they seized possession of the security tape. What was the purpose of collecting it then?

They also claim since it was a misdemeanor (again, they had evidence of a crime?) there was no reason to look at the tape. What kind of reasoning is that? Why store evidence when you aren't going to do anything with it?

Again, I'm against employers policing off the clock conduct. But since the NFL has claimed a moral responsibility to handle these situations, they look like pathetic, incompetent, insincere grandstanders. They told the Chiefs to stop investigating because they were taking charge. They then "investigated" by not even interviewing Hunt. Kareem, of course, wouldn't have told them the truth. It still doesn't excuse not even taking the opportunity for Kareem to lie to them. Then you question their drive to get the truth when you see TMZ was willing to pay for the tape & the NFL seemingly made only token attempts to view it.

[Déjà Bru]

Here's my opinion. I believe in due process of law. There is a constitutional amendment that says no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." To deprive somebody of a lucrative job is depriving him of property.

So, nobody should be released for alleged crimes or other misbehavior outside of the realm of the sport until they have been tried and proven guilty. Even then, it should be in the player contract that a felony or misdemeanor of a certain level will result in this consequence. Should a law enforcement agency require incarceration, then that should be a suspension, with pay if he's found not guilty, without pay if he is guilty.

Thus Hunt should have been playing for the Chiefs today but at the same time, the Cleveland Police Department should have gotten off their asses and either pressed or dismissed charges.

I'm liberal, but this #MeToo thing bugs me. Either something is serious enough to prosecute, or not. Nobody should be crucified on the basis of an online video unless it is evidence of a crime for which he is found guilty.

[Cooleyvol]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Here's my opinion. I believe in due process of law. There is a constitutional amendment that says no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." To deprive somebody of a lucrative job is depriving him of property.

So, nobody should be released for alleged crimes or other misbehavior outside of the realm of the sport until they have been tried and proven guilty. Even then, it should be in the player contract that a felony or misdemeanor of a certain level will result in this consequence. Should a law enforcement agency require incarceration, then that should be a suspension, with pay if he's found not guilty, without pay if he is guilty.

Thus Hunt should have been playing for the Chiefs today but at the same time, the Cleveland Police Department should have gotten off their asses and either pressed or dismissed charges.

I'm liberal, but this #MeToo thing bugs me. Either something is serious enough to prosecute, or not. Nobody should be crucified on the basis of an online video unless it is evidence of a crime for which he is found guilty.

Alleged? The video basically kills the 'alleged' argument. He definitely struck the woman at least twice. Should he have been cut for that? Probably just suspended until a verdict or the case is dropped, but I suppose that's the Chief's right to handle as they see fit.

[Cobra Mgr]

I don't think they cut him because of what was on the video. I think the Chiefs were ticked off because the video proved he lied to their faces. And I do believe that should be a firing offense. Reports say they tried to get ahead of the situation. Then they got blindsided. Again, news reports are showing all parties were blindsided by the vid's release. So KC is right to feel hurt about Kareem's lying as it put them in a terrible position.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Here's my opinion. I believe in due process of law. There is a constitutional amendment that says no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." To deprive somebody of a lucrative job is depriving him of property.

So, nobody should be released for alleged crimes or other misbehavior outside of the realm of the sport until they have been tried and proven guilty. Even then, it should be in the player contract that a felony or misdemeanor of a certain level will result in this consequence. Should a law enforcement agency require incarceration, then that should be a suspension, with pay if he's found not guilty, without pay if he is guilty.

Thus Hunt should have been playing for the Chiefs today but at the same time, the Cleveland Police Department should have gotten off their asses and either pressed or dismissed charges.

I'm liberal, but this #MeToo thing bugs me. Either something is serious enough to prosecute, or not. Nobody should be crucified on the basis of an online video unless it is evidence of a crime for which he is found guilty.

I agree with you in the sense that NFL contracts in general screw the player. Non-guaranteed contracts are a very poor system. However, I think the video itself is enough where you should allow a team to release someone and let the legal part of it (i.e. how much the team then owes the player) come down to league fines and clauses based on legal issues. No team should have to play a guy after seeing a video like that.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Here's my opinion. I believe in due process of law. There is a constitutional amendment that says no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." To deprive somebody of a lucrative job is depriving him of property.

So, nobody should be released for alleged crimes or other misbehavior outside of the realm of the sport until they have been tried and proven guilty. Even then, it should be in the player contract that a felony or misdemeanor of a certain level will result in this consequence. Should a law enforcement agency require incarceration, then that should be a suspension, with pay if he's found not guilty, without pay if he is guilty.

Thus Hunt should have been playing for the Chiefs today but at the same time, the Cleveland Police Department should have gotten off their asses and either pressed or dismissed charges.

I'm liberal, but this #MeToo thing bugs me. Either something is serious enough to prosecute, or not. Nobody should be crucified on the basis of an online video unless it is evidence of a crime for which he is found guilty.

Look, dude, I know you're left of center but I usually like your posts. But you can't seriously believe what you wrote here. What you wrote could not be further from reality. No private entity is required to adhere to your model. Most can fire you for wearing a red hat let alone shoving a woman into a wall and then kicking her. Trust me when I say this because I'm not trying to insult you. But this has to be one of the more bizarre posts I have ever seen.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Look, dude, I know you're left of center but I usually like your posts. But you can't seriously believe what you wrote here. What you wrote could not be further from reality. No private entity is required to adhere to your model. Most can fire you for wearing a red hat let alone shoving a woman into a wall and then kicking her. Trust me when I say this because I'm not trying to insult you. But this has to be one of the more bizarre posts I have ever seen.

He's not saying what "is". He's stating his opinion on how it should be.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

He's not saying what "is". He's stating his opinion on how it should be.

Ok. My bad if that's the case. I just read "there is a constitutional amendment" and thought oh boy, here we go.

[Zorro]

The only sound that left, After the ambulances go, Is Cinderella sweeping up on Desolation Row.....