Bobref

If we’re limiting it to high school fields, I’d say Fawcett Stadium in Canton, OH, home of the Hall of Fame, and Paul Brown Stadium in Massillon, OH, because ... well geez, I was a 16 yr. old kid growing up in Ohio, it was the late 1960s, and it was freakin’ Massillon!

I have always said, the day the bulldozers come for the Brickie Bowl, I’ll be sitting up on those tracks in a lawn chair with a six pack, cheering them on.

That we know of. I mean, that can’t be normal, can it? If you’re a pro athlete, and massage is part of your fitness regimen, aren’t you going to find the best and stick with him/her? He doesn’t go to a dozen different doctors or dentists, I bet. Very weird.

There has always been the “court of public opinion.” It’s just easier to find out what the jurors are thinking these days.

News like this is what made me say earlier that if he could settle all 22 claims for $100K per, he should jump at it right now.

So now, two of the lawsuit plaintiffs have gone public. They are the ones who have filed police complaints, so their identities would be public knowledge anyway. And Watson’s attorney immediately comes out with the fact that there was a settlement demand pre-suit of $100K, and characterizes it as “hush money.” To be honest, the amount is modest. If Watson could settle all 22 suits for $100K each, he should do it right now. And pre-suit settlement demands are commonplace. They only become “hush money” if the claim isn’t settled. If it had been settled it would be “a mutually agreed resolution of a dispute,” with a confidential settlement that includes non disclosure and non disparagement clauses. https://www.foxnews.com/sports/deshaun-watsons-attorney-fires-back-first-accuser-wanted-hush-money Deshaun Watson's attorney fires back at first accuser, claiming she wanted 'hush money' An alleged victim holds a press briefing while NFL star's camp makes an extortion claim By Daniel Canova | Fox News The attorney for embattled NFL star Deshaun Watson’s responded to one of his accusers -- Ashley Solis -- claiming she demanded $100,000 in "hush money" before filing a civil lawsuit against the Houston Texans quarterback. Solis, who previously sued under the "Jane Doe" pseudonym, on Tuesday said during a news conference that Watson acted inappropriately during a massage therapy session in March 2020. She said Watson purposely exposed himself and "purposely" touched her with his penis, which led to her ending the massage and he apologized for his actions. "I'm a survivor of assault and harassment. Deshaun Watson is my assaulter and my harasser," she said. "I replay the incident over and over in my head as if I'm trying to wake up for some horrible nightmare -- only that nightmare is real." The professional massage therapist said she and the other women accusing the quarterback "were all deceived into thinking Deshaun Watson was a good guy. … I will not let Deshaun Watson define who I am. I will not let him win. He needs to be held accountable for his actions." Following the news conference held at the office of Solis' attorney Tony Buzbee, Watson's lawyer countered Solis' statement. Attorney Rusty Hardin issued a statement claiming he has emails to prove that Solis was looking to get money from Watson. According to Hardin, rival attorney Buzbee -- who represents 22 women who have come out against Watson -- reached out to one of Watson’s representatives in February in an effort to "quietly settle the allegations the month before he filed the first lawsuit." In an email exchange obtained by Fox News, Buzbee’s associate Cornelia Brandfield-Harvey said that "my client’s demand is $100,000" adding that "this offer remains open until Friday of this week." Scott Gaffield, the General Counsel at the Athletes First agency of Laguna Beach, responded to Buzbee and Brandfield-Harvey on Feb. 19 saying, "we don’t believe that the alleged facts show that Deshaun did anything wrong…" "We believed then -- and fully believe now -- that Deshaun learned a lesson about putting himself in this type of situation by interacting with people he does not know," Gaffield said in a statement. "As the emails show, we were willing to continue discussions on Deshaun’s behalf to explore ways to prevent a lawsuit and a public spectacle. But Mr. Buzbee informed us that he was unwilling to do so. We expect that this matter will be resolved in court." The email communications occurred between Feb. 3 and Feb. 19. Fox News reached out to Buzbee for comment and is awaiting a response. During Tuesday's press conference one of Buzbee’s colleagues read a separate letter from another accuser. The woman, who was not present at the news conference, was revealed to be Lauren Baxley. The woman gave permission for her letter to be read out loud to the media. "Every boundary, from professional and therapeutic to sexual and degrading, [Watson] crossed or attempted to cross," the letter stated. Two of the 22 women who have filed lawsuits against Watson are now public. Houston police launched an investigation into the allegations after a complaint was filed Friday.

Heard a good one today. Justin Fields, once the consensus #2 pick, has fallen recently amid some whispering that he can’t make a 2nd read, doesn’t like film study, etc. Guy on the radio is of the opinion that those whispers were started by the puppetmaster himself, Belicek, so that New England can take him by moving up to #4. They can do that now because Atlanta is sticking with Matt Ryan for now, so they don’t need to pick #4 to get who they want. So, they can trade Atlanta for that pick, and by moving down, Atlanta can still get the non-QB they want.

I think there is little danger of that happening unless they find another Bob Knight-like figure, whose personality overshadows the fact that he was a 1 in a million coach.

I loved that team ... but the best NCAA team ever was Lew Alcindor (Kareem Abdul Jabbar) and any 4 other guys you could find on the street.

My memory isn’t what it used to be.

I am not much of a basketball fan. I haven’t watched a college or pro game this season. But I confess to feeling glad that Baylor beat Gonzaga last night, just because it keeps the IU 1975-76 squad as the last team to go unbeaten. I was in law school in Bloomington during that team’s run. Saw every one of their home games. That was a magical time in Bloomington. What a lot of people don’t know is that the 1974-75 team was better than the squad that went undefeated the next season. They swept through their Big 10 schedule with an average 23 pt. margin of victory. But Scott May, IU’s leading scorer, rebounder, and the eventual 1976 Player of the Year, broke his arm in the last game against Purdue, and was limited to playing 7 minutes in a 92-90 loss to a powerhouse Kentucky team in the Regional. The Hoosiers landed 4 of the 5 spots on the All Big Ten first team that year: May, Quinn Buckner, Steve Green, and Kent Benson. Although Steve Green graduated, John Laskowski, the outstanding sixth man on the 74-75 team, moved right into Green’s spot the next season, and they ran the table. Just a great, great team. They were such a joy to watch.

Well, generally speaking, poorly performing programs don’t travel well when the game is across town, let alone when it’s in another county. The expanding availability of outlets by which you can watch the game at home hurts these teams disproportionately, IMO. And yes, I have seen the teams you identified on the road many times over the years. They don’t travel well. But honestly, a well-filled visitors’ stands is becoming a real rarity these days. There are very few programs that command significant fan following on the road. And the farther away the game, the less likely the visitors are to make the trip. That is a generalization that applies everywhere, not just to the identified programs.

I’m certainly no expert in Texas Civil Procedure, and I have no idea what the state court civil docket is like in Houston. But the defendant has not even filed an answer in any of the cases yet, and I don’t expect that for a while, as there will likely be procedural jockeying for position at the start. Once the complaint is answered, the parties engage in discovery, including depositions. In this situation, I would expect that to be very extensive. Somewhere in there, the court will hold a conference, out of which comes the schedule for disposition of the case, including trial. 3 yrs. from filing to trial would not surprise me in the least. And the number is now 21.

Ummm ... no.

That merely tells us why the feds can do it. It says nothing about whether they should.

Why should the federal government decide that’s the best policy everywhere?

And now the cops are finally involved. It’s unclear whether the person who filed the criminal complaint is one of the plaintiffs, although it’s probably not. The complaint was filed after the plaintiffs’ attorney said he changed his mind about turning over evidence to the Houston police. If so, that would bring the number of women coming forward to 23. I have a hard time seeing how this is going to end well for Watson. Makes having an imaginary girlfriend seem sort of benign by comparison, don’t you think? https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/texans/2021/04/02/deshaun-watson-houston-texans-police-investigation/7070050002/ Houston Police Department investigating complaint against Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson The Houston Police Department announced Friday that a police report has been filed against Houston Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson. "As with any allegation, the Houston Police Department is now conducting an investigation and will not comment further during the investigative process," the department wrote in a statement on social media. Asked Friday if the department could provide details of the nature of the complaint, a sergeant with Houston police said not at this time. The nascent criminal investigation comes after 21 unnamed women filed civil lawsuits against Watson in recent weeks, each accusing him of sexual misconduct or assault during separate massage sessions dating back to March 2020. A 22nd woman came forward with similar allegations to Sports Illustrated but said she had not filed a lawsuit. Watson's attorney, Rusty Hardin, said in a statement Friday evening that his client welcomed the investigation, calling it a "long overdue development." "Now we will learn the identity of at least one accuser," Hardin said. "We will fully cooperate with the Houston Police Department." With the filing of a police report, Watson is now facing the prospect of a criminal charge in addition to possible compensatory damages in the 21 civil cases. Experts have said some of the acts outlined in the various lawsuits could meet the criteria for indecent assault, a misdemeanor under Texas law. One of the allegations – that Watson forced a woman to perform oral sex – could possibly be classified as a felony, according to Meredith Duncan, a professor at the University of Houston Law Center. It is unclear which allegation or allegations were reported to police Friday. The attorney representing all 21 plaintiffs, former Houston mayoral candidate Tony Buzbee, said in a statement that he "was not personally involved" in the filing of the police report Friday. But he indicated that other criminal complaints will soon be filed "in Houston and in other jurisdictions and with other agencies." "I will let the authorities do their jobs, and will continue to do mine, on behalf of these courageous women," Buzbee said. Watson, 25, broadly denied wrongdoing in his lone public statement on the matter March 16, when the first lawsuit was filed. He wrote in a social media post that he has always treated women with “utmost respect." Hardin, meanwhile, has previously said that he believes "any allegation that Deshaun forced a woman to commit a sexual act is completely false." Most of the lawsuits filed against Watson allege that he exposed himself or touched the women with his genitals during massage sessions at various locations over the span of a little more than a year. Two of the complaints include claims of sexual assault. The women filed the lawsuits anonymously, using the pseudonym "Jane Doe," but many are described as licensed massage therapists, estheticians or business owners. Buzbee said two weeks ago that his clients had not reported the incidents to police, but planned to do so. He reversed course this week, writing on social media that he was wary of taking his clients' accusations to Houston police because he had previously called for the resignation of a former police chief, and because Hardin's son, Thomas, works in the department. "My clients will go elsewhere to provide our evidence to investigative authorities," Buzbee wrote, without providing any additional information. The allegations – and, now, police investigation – come just months after Watson asked the Texans to trade him to another team. One of the top young quarterbacks in the NFL, he led the league in passing yards last year and has been named to three consecutive Pro Bowls. In addition to civil and criminal penalties, there is also still the chance that Watson might face discipline from the NFL, which has been investigating the matter independently. In response to a request for comment, league spokesperson Brian McCarthy wrote in an email that the league is "continuing to monitor all developments in the matter which remains under review of the Personal Conduct Policy."

And @Coach Nowlin’s head goes in 3 - 2 - 1 - ... 🤯 https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10000627-bears-matt-nagy-to-call-plays-in-2021-oc-bill-lazor-handled-duties-last-season Bears' Matt Nagy to Call Plays in 2021; OC Bill Lazor Handled Duties Last Season Chicago Bears head coach Matt Nagy is going to take over play-calling duties for the offense next season. Nagy addressed the decision to run the offense in 2021 on Friday. “I’m gonna be the one calling the plays this year," he told reporters. "The fun part right now is building what we wanna do better...getting that right.” Bill Lazor, who was hired as offensive coordinator in January 2020, took over play-calling duties midway through last season. Nagy had been calling plays for the Bears offense since being hired as head coach in January 2018. He spent the previous two years as Andy Reid's offensive coordinator with the Kansas City Chiefs. Chicago ranked 20th and 25th in Football Outsiders' offensive DVOA in Nagy's first two years. After the Bears lost four of six games following a 3-0 start last season, Nagy ceded play-calling duties to Lazor. The offense was averaging 19.8 points through the first nine games when the change was made. Coming out of their bye in Week 11, the Bears did play better on offense down the stretch to make the playoffs. They scored at least 25 points in five straight games from Week 12-16, including a season-high 41 points against the Jacksonville Jaguars on Dec. 27. Chicago was held to nine points and 239 total yards in the NFC Wild Card Round loss to the New Or Saints. The Bears are preparing to open this season with Andy Dalton as their starting quarterback. He signed a one-year contract worth $10 million plus incentives with the team in March.

The last time UNC hired a head coach who didn’t already have close ties to the program was 1946. Just sayin’.

🤪 The last time they hired a head coach without close ties to the program was 1946.

A game-changer, no doubt. Imagine the NCAA having to police whether a benefit is “education-related!”

A game-changer, no doubt. Imagine the NCAA having to police whether a benefit is “education-related!”

Now it makes sense. 🤣😂

Try as I might, I can make no sense of this.

The NCAA strictly regulates what benefits its member schools can provide scholarship athletes. A federal district court judge ruled that this violated antitrust laws, and that each school should be free to decide what benefits it will provide athletes. On appeal, the 9th Circuit affirmed. Should the NCAA lose this one — and they rarely win — it could easily turn college sports into just another labor market, where employers are free to fashion their own compensation packages... so long as they have some connection to education. How’d you like to compete for talent against Alabama, whose cash rich athletic department sends all football players to a 2 week course of study abroad on the Riviera, or Paris? The Justices’ questioning at argument seemed to focus on the illusory nature of the present status of “amateurism “ in big time college sports, a concept the NCAA is having a lot of trouble defending, when you contrast that with the multi-billion dollar industry that is big time college athletics. https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/31172473/supreme-court-questions-validity-amateurism-ncaa-business-model Supreme Court questions validity of amateurism in NCAA's business model Dan MurphyESPN Staff Writer The justices of the Supreme Court of the United States questioned whether amateurism is an essential part of the NCAA's business model Wednesday during a landmark hearing for the future of college sports while also expressing concerns about starting a slippery slope of judicial rulings that could lead to the destruction of an American tradition. The Supreme Court heard more than 90 minutes of oral arguments Wednesday morning in the NCAA v. Alston case, the first time the nation's highest court has weighed in on the business of college sports in nearly four decades. The question in front of the court is whether the NCAA deserves special relief from normal antitrust rules in order to protect its educational mission and preserve a tradition of amateurism in college sports. The court is expected to make a ruling sometime in late spring or early summer. A federal district court judge decided in her ruling in the Alston case in 2020 that the limits NCAA member schools mutually agree to place on what each school can provide to its athletes in compensation are illegal. The judge's ruling opens the door for athletes to receive unlimited benefits as long as they are related in some way to education. That includes items such as classroom equipment, study abroad travel, funding for post-graduation internships and cash payments for academic achievements. The NCAA appealed the judge's ruling, arguing that the loose guidelines of education-related benefits could be exploited in a way that will blur the lines between college sports and professional leagues. "Whatever their labels, these new allowances are akin to professional salaries," said Seth Waxman, the NCAA's lead attorney, during his opening arguments Wednesday. Waxman and the NCAA claim that the unpaid status of college athletes is a key part of their appeal to consumers. Waxman says that because amateurism is the characteristic that sets the NCAA apart from others in the marketplace of sports entertainment, the organization should get to decide how to define the line between amateurs and professionals. He said that the ruling in district court amounted to a judge micromanaging the NCAA's business. Plaintiff's attorney Jeffrey Kessler and several of the justices pushed back on the idea that providing athletes with money would cause the public to lose interest in college sports. "The courts are appropriately focused on that, but we believe nothing bad will happen," Kessler told ESPN on Wednesday afternoon. "Just like nothing bad happened after the O'Bannon case they lost. Nothing bad happened after the Board of Regents case they lost. Nothing bad happened after the NCAA v. Law case that they lost. They always warn, the NCAA, that this will be the thing that ruins college sports. And what we find instead is that when they're forced to comply with the law it actually helps college sports." Justice Samuel Alito pointed out that athletes already receive some payment in the form of scholarships, stipends and other benefits and that those allowances have not caused a downturn in TV ratings or ticket sales. Waxman said the NCAA defines payment as any compensation that goes beyond "reasonable and necessary expenses to obtain an education." Justice Amy Coney Barrett later questioned why the NCAA should get to decide how to define what it means for an athlete to be paid. Several justices also expressed skepticism about the NCAA's "high-minded" claims about the importance of preserving amateurism. Justice Elena Kagan asked why the court shouldn't see the NCAA as an organization that has undisputed power over its market and uses the idea of amateurism to fix the price of labor. Kagan said that while amateurism may have been created more than a century ago to protect an institution that provides social value, that doesn't mean that is its function today. "You can only ride on the history for so long. A great deal has changed since 100 years ago in the way student-athletes are treated," Kagan said. "A great deal has changed [since 1985], let alone 100 years ago. I guess it doesn't move me all that much that there is a history to this." Later, when questioning the plaintiff's case, Kagan asked whether the incremental increase in what athletes are allowed to make will lead to more litigation in the future. She echoed the concern of several justices that their ruling in the Alston case would be the first step in a series of lawsuits that steadily chip away at the NCAA's rules until college sports are clearly professional by anyone's definition. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wondered what the "end game" would be for the plaintiffs to feel fully satisfied in the future. Kagan referred to it as the "floodgates argument." "What's next?" she asked. "Is it going to go up and up and up and pretty soon it will just be a regular labor market?" Justice Stephen Breyer was the most adamantly opposed of his colleagues to treating college sports like other industries. "I think if we really have a case here, it's a tough case for me," Breyer said. "This is not an ordinary product. This is an effort to bring into the world something that has brought joy and all kinds of things to millions and millions of people, and it's only partly economic. OK, so, I worry a lot about judges getting into the business of deciding how amateur sports should be run." Breyer argued that even if consumer demand wasn't significantly harmed by providing more compensation to athletes, there were other implications to changing the NCAA's rules that were worth considering. He cited the administrative burden on colleges and universities to implement these new rules as one example. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who spoke at the hearing in support of the plaintiff's side, said that the antitrust issue in front of the court was the only argument for it to consider. She said it was up to Congress and state legislators, not the judicial branch, to decide whether other problems that might come from changing the NCAA rules are worth the government's intervention. Prelogar petitioned to speak at the hearing in a somewhat unusual move in order to share the Department of Justice's thoughts on amateurism rules and how they fit into antitrust law. She said that amateurism was relevant in the case only to the extent that it impacts the NCAA's business model. She urged the justices to affirm the lower court's decision, saying that "there is no pro-competitive justification to deprive athletes to get benefits through ordinary competition."