OVCChairman

Per TMZ: Reuben Foster Cleared of Charges

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

The Redskins never said that part in bold. Ever.

 

Gruden was asked if they did any investigation and he only said "a bit".

 

At the most, they said they did their own investigating but overwhelmingly they kept saying that putting in a claim would allow them to do an investigation along with what the NFL and the police were doing. We even had a large number of ES members making fun of the idea of only doing a true investigation after putting in the waiver claim. So no idea where you got that from.

 

"Allen told Lisa Salters of ESPN that the team “gathered its own information,” which allowed the organization to become “comfortable that they had heard a side of the Foster story that is different.” Allen claimed that he tapped into Tampa-area contacts developed during his time there as G.M. of the Buccaneers."

" the impression created by Salters’ explanation was that Allen had done his homework before the waivers claim was made"

 

To say they "knew what they were doing" was hyperbole, ill give you that. But, to me, reading that in Bruce Allen's voice, he is saying he knows something no one else knows....

 

 

Edited by dballer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always knew Dan and Bruce were the smartest guys in the room

 

The whole 20 year FedEx fan revolt fiasco was just a carefully laid distaction before the final reveal

 

 

giphy (15).gif

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just to be clear -its not really true that the Redskins took NO risk on this.

Foster has been on "paid" Leave since Nov.  The Redskins HAVE been paying him all this time.  

 

So yeah - If he was found to be guilty -the Redskins wasted some money, and terrible PR.

 

Also - I read that charges were dropped simply because there wasn't enough evidence. Doesn't mean he has been proven innocent.  Prosecutor needs "beyond a reasonable doubt", the NFL does not.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RonArtest15 said:

 

I agree...I only wish this news broke before a MNF game with the SKins where Witten was calling it.  

 

His opinion is worth nothing.  Also he's a godawful color man.  You should be able to complete a coherent sentence in order to get a job in broadcasting.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TMK9973 said:

 

Just to be clear -its not really true that the Redskins took NO risk on this.

Foster has been on "paid" Leave since Nov.  The Redskins HAVE been paying him all this time.  

 

So yeah - If he was found to be guilty -the Redskins wasted some money, and terrible PR.

 

Also - I read that charges were dropped simply because there wasn't enough evidence. Doesn't mean he has been proven innocent.  Prosecutor needs "beyond a reasonable doubt", the NFL does not.   

We were paying Reuben pennies....the 49ers had to eat most of that money because they release him, we just paid his base salary, 250K which is chump change to the Redskins.

 

But the PR hit initially was not very good but so far so good....looks like he will be on the field Week 1 next year barring any other incidences.   I think the Redskins played it about as good as you could.  Give him a chance and if it doesn't work then cut him loose.  Luckily we get to keep this asset and I think it will pay off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

His opinion is worth nothing.  Also he's a godawful color man.  You should be able to complete a coherent sentence in order to get a job in broadcasting.

 

If you're a former Cowboy, all prerequisites are blowed out the window.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dballer said:

 

"Allen told Lisa Salters of ESPN that the team “gathered its own information,” which allowed the organization to become “comfortable that they had heard a side of the Foster story that is different.” Allen claimed that he tapped into Tampa-area contacts developed during his time there as G.M. of the Buccaneers."

 

To say they "knew what they were doing" was hyperbole, ill give you that. But, to me, reading that in Bruce Allen's voice, he is saying he knows something no one else knows....

 

 

1

 

You left this part out:

 

"Before making the decision to sign Foster, Allen told Salters, he had conducted his own “investigation of sorts”..."

 

Quite different from what you described as "If they had actually done a thorough investigation, which i don't really believe, then it wouldn't be so much luck as a calculated risk."

 

And as I said before, any type of risk, calculated or otherwise, involves luck by default in order to be successful.

 

As for direct quotes:

 

". . . Basically what you’re doing here is you’re taking a high-risk chance. The high risk was the beat-up that we’re going to take from PR. We understood that from a PR standpoint, and we’re taking it. The most important thing is, we’re hoping that things come out and it wasn’t the way that everything has been perceived. We don’t know that. We have to wait and see. If things are as bad as it’s made out to be, he might not get a chance to play for us. We don’t know.” -Doug Williams

 

"Taking a chance"...We're hoping"..."We don't know that"...'We have to wait and see"..."If"..."We don't know"...

 

How did you miss all that.

 

And I'll quote myself as well lol:

 

"At the most, they said they did their own investigating BUT overwhelmingly they kept saying that putting in a claim would allow them to do an investigation along with what the NFL and the police were doing."

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dballer said:

 

They rolled the dice and it came up 7. Luck was on there side. 

 

 

 

I'm not sure how rolling the dice and getting a 7 is luck, since 7 is the most likely number to roll.

 

If you had said rolled dice and got snake eyes that at least would have made sense.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

You left this part out:

 

"Before making the decision to sign Foster, Allen told Salters, he had conducted his own “investigation of sorts”..."

 

Quite different from what you described as "If they had actually done a thorough investigation, which i don't really believe, then it wouldn't be so much luck as a calculated risk."

 

And as I said before, any type of risk, calculated or otherwise, involves luck by default in order to be successful.

 

As for direct quotes:

 

". . . Basically what you’re doing here is you’re taking a high-risk chance. The high risk was the beat-up that we’re going to take from PR. We understood that from a PR standpoint, and we’re taking it. The most important thing is, we’re hoping that things come out and it wasn’t the way that everything has been perceived. We don’t know that. We have to wait and see. If things are as bad as it’s made out to be, he might not get a chance to play for us. We don’t know.” -Doug Williams

 

"Taking a chance"...We're hoping"..."We don't know that"...'We have to wait and see"..."If"..."We don't know"...

 

How did you miss all that.

 

And I'll quote myself as well lol:

 

"At the most, they said they did their own investigating BUT overwhelmingly they kept saying that putting in a claim would allow them to do an investigation along with what the NFL and the police were doing."

 

 

I didn't miss all of that. None of that had to do with my point. This was supposedly a unilateral move by Bruce, so when Doug is out there talking to the media forgive me for not taking everything he says as the bible. And all of that is after the outrage came. That was him trying to do damage control.

 

And i understand what you are saying about a calculated risk and luck. You can't have a calculated risk without luck. But you can have luck without a calculated risk. You can have luck with no risk, with just risk, or with calculated risk. Again, the fact that he claims he did an investigation of sorts before making the decision to sign Foster is to my point. He is claiming he had knowledge. To quote you " they kept saying that putting in a claim would allow them to do an investigation". But Bruce said he did one "before making the decision to sign"...which again is him making a inference that he had knowledge prior. 

 

I don't really understand what the issue is about saying luck. You have to get lucky in the NFL every once in a while. It is just hard for me to give them credit for being calculated on this one. Obviously the PR portion of it was not calculated. Even the quotes we are going over here are contradicting and messy. 

 

I thought claiming Foster at the time was worth it. I calculated that risk up to the point of - He is a good player, we need that position, what the heck - and I am no shrewd GM.

 

 

1 minute ago, Master Blaster said:

 

 

I'm not sure how rolling the dice and getting a 7 is luck, since 7 is the most likely number to roll.

 

If you had said rolled dice and got snake eyes that at least would have made sense.

 

But in the game of craps...ah nevermind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, dballer said:

 

But in the game of craps...ah nevermind

 

 

You understand if you play Craps and bet for 7's the whole table hates you right?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Master Blaster said:

 

 

You understand if you play Craps and bet for 7's the whole table hates you right?

 

You do understand rolling a 7 on the come out?

 

i mean i am no expert. Just always thought rolling a 7 or 11 was good :silly:

 

I guess i should have said "if you are trying to roll a 7, and you roll one, it is luck, since it is more likely to NOT roll a 7 than it is to roll a 7"

 

Edited by dballer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's young, he's serviceable, takes away a draft need that could be used on another position now.   I hate Bruce and want him gone as much as anyone, but he got this one right. We can sit here and say he isn't vindicated, there's still more to this, etc, etc, but the charges were DISMISSED by a court of law.  This was a good move by the Redskins and should pay off.  

 

PS - The blind squirrel has found a nut.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, A Skinhead in Saints Land said:

 

 

PS - The blind squirrel has found a nut.

 

HAHA I came to post the same thing, and only saw the your post.

 

 

Edited by RandyHolt
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

There is no future or value in an outlook like this.  And there’s really no reason not to be optimistic about today’s news.

 

Cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

His opinion is worth nothing.  Also he's a godawful color man.  You should be able to complete a coherent sentence in order to get a job in broadcasting.

Not a fan of Witten but given his background, I understand his reaction to domestic violence. IIRC his mom had to literally sneak out with kids to get away from his abusive father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Peregrine said:

Cleared of charges, or charges dropped by the accusser?

I don’t think the accuser can drop charges in a domestic violence case.

 

my understanding is that they declined to go forward with the charges. 

 

Ie: not enough evidence to feel comfortable going to court. 

 

Not the same same thing as “being cleared”. 

 

Kind of like being found not guilty is not the same as being found innocent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dballer said:

 

It is a big jump to make that they had "information". I am not taking their word for that one.

 

If they invested nothing, then they could lose nothing, which wouldn't make it very savvy. it would make it a no brainer. 

 

Yes.

 

This move was.

 

Which is why it was so odd to see people say it wasn't.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the team was careless in making the move, but I'm happy it appears to have paid off. 

 

For us Reuben still has to make it through the offseason without another incident. That's been a challenge so far in his career. Wish him the best and hope he can suite up on September.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

I'm betting that this isn't the last time he doesn't see a charge like this.  

 

Ding ding ding.

 

1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

There is no future or value in an outlook like this.  And there’s really no reason not to be optimistic about today’s news.

 

Uh, what?  There's no reason to be optimistic.  This is the third arrest, second for DV this year.  He also went ape**** on a nurse at the friggin' combine.

 

If someone had the injury history of this guy's legal history, then you wouldn't be optimistic, would you?

 

This will happen again.  And dropped charges mean nothing.  These situations are infinitely more complicated than the vast majority here do, or even want to, understand (not aimed at you, TTB, just didn't want a second post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the way it works, once an arrest is made the state can continue to press charges if they feel there is sufficient evidence of a crime, even if the girlfriend tries to change her story or decline to help.  So what likely happened is law enforcement/attorneys/etc etc didn't have enough info on their end to continue with the investigation. 

 

I remember a long time ago I sat on a jury for a domestic violence trial.  The girlfriend called the cops due to an assault, then turned around and declined to press charges but the assault so obviously took place that the state moved forward with the trial anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain what this means as far as him actually signing with the Skins. Claimed off waivers mean that we assume his current contract? Not sure how this works going forward contract wise. Little help please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chris 44 said:

Can someone explain what this means as far as him actually signing with the Skins. Claimed off waivers mean that we assume his current contract? Not sure how this works going forward contract wise. Little help please.

 

Pretty sure we pick up the remainder of his rookie deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chris 44 said:

Can someone explain what this means as far as him actually signing with the Skins. Claimed off waivers mean that we assume his current contract? Not sure how this works going forward contract wise. Little help please.

 

Yes, he's on his rookie deal.   We owe him a very tiny base salary and NO bonus money.    This is why there was never any risk to the waiver claim.

 

There's no risk on Foster until he plays with us the next two years and plays well enough to earn a new contract with guarantees.   Then we expose ourselves to risk on a player with a history, though in that case, he'll have had NO history during his time with us other than being a player we deemed worthy of a new contract.   Now, I would work in something to such a deal if it were to occur that he forfeits guarantees if he has an arrest.   But that may or may not fly depending on what his value is at that time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.