Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Texans preemptively settle with 30 women


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Settling that fast when not guilty yeah right. Probably better off not releasing a statement

Yeah...can't recall too many cases of somebody settling with people who haven't actually sued them yet.

5 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Avoiding that is certainly one of the team's biggest wins recently.  And it was completely by mistake.

That seems to be our best shot at winning things these days.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stbugs said:

 

 

Sorry, but I disagree with you guys on this. I think the Texans just want their name out of the picture and are willing to pay a little to do it. The chances of success suing the Texans was much smaller than Watson. Watson did it, not the Texans. I think they probably threw out a $50k or so deal just to make their brand clean again. Let Cleveland be linked with Watson. Considering the revenue sharing and the fact that NFL teams are now $4B companies, throwing out a million or two is chump change and the lawyers would jump on the free cash knowing they might not get anything from the Texans.

The lawyer's aren't settling these cases for $50k. What's that, $20,000 per case for hundreds of hours of work? Not a chance. Each settlement is easily in the low-to-mid 6 figures.

I think they're guilty, or at least complicit, and this move is a two-fold win for them; they get to silence the accusers behind an NDA before the details can come out, and on top of that they get to control the narrative and have the last word. We will never hear the accusers' side of the story, and the Texans can claim these settlements were some sort of altruistic gesture because they #believewomen. No one will ever be able to refute them. That's a massive PR victory for the Texans.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Captroop said:

The lawyer's aren't settling these cases for $50k. What's that, $20,000 per case for hundreds of hours of work? Not a chance. Each settlement is easily in the low-to-mid 6 figures.

I think they're guilty, or at least complicit, and this move is a two-fold win for them; they get to silence the accusers behind an NDA before the details can come out, and on top of that they get to control the narrative and have the last word. We will never hear the accusers' side of the story, and the Texans can claim these settlements were some sort of altruistic gesture because they #believewomen. No one will ever be able to refute them. That's a massive PR victory for the Texans.

They get to avoid anything coming out in discovery, but it's not really fooling anyone in the media who will poo on them for a couple days and then move on to the next thing. Oh it's Friday how convenient

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...