[cardcrimson]

Can the NFL teams who pursued Watson possibly look worse? How in the hell can teams who were waiting until the Houston Grand Jury outcome before trading for Watson, have actually done so, when there is yet another Grand Jury proceeding in a different jurisdiction this week?!?!!?

I mean if you were waiting to see if he was innocent before trading for him, you were basically saying we want to make sure he's not been charged with crimes when we get him. Makes no sense and demonstrates an impotent effort to actually do your due diligence on the situation and protect your franchise.  What would be more Browns than trading the store and blowing up their salary structure with fully guaranteed money for a player who was indicted and went to prison, when you just had to wait another week to make sure he really was in the clear.

It is impossible for me to believe the Browns weren't aware of - or had no way to know of - this additional Grand Jury would be ruling on Watson's case.

Maybe Watson's contract includes an out that he must forfeit the deal if indicted, but I don't see how he would sign such a deal given the number of pursuers he had, the fact he got $230M guaranteed at signing, and the Browns didn't wait until after the additional Grand Jury before signing him.

You left out this consideration:  which Texas grand jury is more likely to return an indictment against Watson - (a) one empaneled while Watson is on the Houston roster, or (b) one empaneled while Watson is on the Cleveland roster?

[And I'm only half-kidding . . . I think!].

I was about to make a joke that, by Sunday, Garoppolo will be in a Browns uniform, but was too worried that I'd be accused of casting aspersions again.

[cardcrimson]

Can the NFL teams who pursued Watson possibly look worse? How in the hell can teams who were waiting until the Houston Grand Jury outcome before trading for Watson, have actually done so, when there is yet another Grand Jury proceeding in a different jurisdiction this week?!?!!?

I mean if you were waiting to see if he was innocent before trading for him, you were basically saying we want to make sure he's not been charged with crimes when we get him. Makes no sense and demonstrates an impotent effort to actually do your due diligence on the situation and protect your franchise.  What would be more Browns than trading the store and blowing up their salary structure with fully guaranteed money for a player who was indicted and went to prison, when you just had to wait another week to make sure he really was in the clear.

It is impossible for me to believe the Browns weren't aware of - or had no way to know of - this additional Grand Jury would be ruling on Watson's case.

Maybe Watson's contract includes an out that he must forfeit the deal if indicted, but I don't see how he would sign such a deal given the number of pursuers he had, the fact he got $230M guaranteed at signing, and the Browns didn't wait until after the additional Grand Jury before signing him.

You left out this consideration:  which Texas grand jury is more likely to return an indictment against Watson - (a) one empaneled while Watson is on the Houston roster, or (b) one empaneled while Watson is on the Cleveland roster?

[And I'm only half-kidding . . . I think!].

I was about to make a joke that, by Sunday, Garoppolo will be in a Browns uniform, but was too worried that I'd be accused of casting aspersions again.