Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

DONTE STALLWORTH


TheClevelandSound

Recommended Posts

The uncapped year is all about dumping underachieving players without adverse salary cap consequences. Based on Stallworth's 2008 production, he's the poster boy.

 

If someone will give us a late round pick for him, great. Otherwise, cut him before another roster bonus is due. Edwards is gone. We don't need another club rat acting as a de facto mentor to our young receivers.

 

Being a third receiver to Moss and Welker, Stuckey would put up big numbers IMO. Kent State's other QB/receiver Julian Edelman is an UFA rookie who had over 100 yards receiving for the Pats yesterday when he was forced to step up in the offense. Stallworth's 2007 season with the Patriots didn't translate.

 

In 11 games and 7 starts he had 170 yards receiving for the Browns in 2008. That's only 60 yards more than Robiskie's disappointing rookie season with a whole lot more time on the field. I'll take my chances giving Robiskie or Stuckey that time.

 

Spend the $4 million or so that Stallworth would count against the cap next year on a real player (remember, Opie signed Stallworth to an absurd 7 year $35 million contract $10 million of which was guaranteed).

 

So, is this discussion over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say his second chance would be not going broke or going to jail for the rest of his life like any other person would do. He's just going to pick up where he left off. To me, if he get's back in the nfl it will be like he's taking one big year long vacation to be honest. Sure some people make the most out of second chances but for every one guy that does, about 100,000 dont.

 

For all we know that guy might of wanted to die. He seen that $300,000 car coming and darted for it knowing his family would be better off. Then again, maybe Stallworth passed out drunk and swayed left of center taking him out. None of us will ever know. We can only HOPE justice will prevail in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've been looking and i honestly haven't found any definitive answer either way. He claimed he "swerved as much as he could", but it's hard to say. I'm not denying Reyes was at fault here, in fact he has good blame. What i keep saying and no one will talk about is this

 

How is it fair that given the circumstances and the evidence that Stallworth should be given a gigantic second chance when you and I would not? No matter what part Reyes played in this, our lives would never be the same. We'd have to settle for less our entire lives. Yet because he catches a football well it's business as usual. What is fair in that?

 

There is nothing that says we would not have gotten the same treatment under the same circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very shocked that this topic hasn't even been mentioned yet. Stallworth is elligable to play again on the Browns next season. What will the team do with him?

 

We need him. He is a good play maker and we really lack a #2 reciever. Will Mangini and/or Holmgren put up with what has happened off the field?

 

I REALLY NEED SOME RESOLUTION HERE.

 

 

 

NO WAY!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing that says we would not have gotten the same treatment under the same circumstances.

 

can you honestly, without any qualms, type back and say we would of gotten that same treatment? Honestly, do you even believe that for 1/100th of a second? Come on now, don't even pretend that's a possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you honestly, without any qualms, type back and say we would of gotten that same treatment? Honestly, do you even believe that for 1/100th of a second? Come on now, don't even pretend that's a possibility.

 

Maybe he means if we were in Donte's shoes. A rich football player with deep pockets. There is no way the average income person could of got off like he did. Sucks I accidentally clicked thanks when I ment to hit quote for his post lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And didn't they come to an agreement becuase he gave them so much money?

 

They came to an agreement because he chose to take responsibility for his actions. If he truly tried to fight it or buy it off, he would have gotten off completely (maybe some probation) because of the circumstances.

 

The money to the family was to stave off a civil suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you honestly, without any qualms, type back and say we would of gotten that same treatment? Honestly, do you even believe that for 1/100th of a second? Come on now, don't even pretend that's a possibility.

 

Given the unique circumstances, I absolutely do believe so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They came to an agreement because he chose to take responsibility for his actions. If he truly tried to fight it or buy it off, he would have gotten off completely (maybe some probation) because of the circumstances.

 

The money to the family was to stave off a civil suit.

 

 

So even if the average person did get off the hook, in civil court they would of lost everything they had, not to mention half they're paychecks would of went to this family for the rest of their life. So technically what I said is right, the average person would of lost everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A source told ESPN's Kelly Naqi that while the financial terms of the settlement with the family have not been disclosed, Stallworth was covered by two insurance policies: a car insurance policy and a $5 million umbrella policy.

 

 

Tell me, how many five million dollar insurance policies do you have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So even if the average person did get off the hook, in civil court they would of lost everything they had, not to mention half they're paychecks would of went to this family for the rest of their life. So technically what I said is right, the average person would of lost everything.

 

not so... have you ever looked at people who have nothing who are sued in civil court for more money than they can possibly afford? Do you know what actually happens in those situations?

 

If you do, educate me. I doubt it is as drastic as you claim.

 

But even if what you say is true, that doesn't mean they lose everything. They can still work, they can still make a living at what they do best.

 

What you are really bitter about, isn't the dumb choice that was made, but rather the fact that he has more wherewithall to handle the consequences. Don't hate the rich because they are rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the unique circumstances, I absolutely do believe so.

 

well i'm done bringing this up to you haha. If you can really feel me, a middle class American would get the same opportunity of a multimillion dollar athlete after being convicted of DUI manslaughter, well good for you i guess. I don't care the circumstances, the facts are the facts. You simulate the situation 1,000,000 million times, 999,999 of the people get a hefty jail sentence and their lives tarnished.

 

That's just common sense, to think otherwise is literally crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No what bothers me is the fact that YOU think what he did was ok as long as does his time. What if it was your mother this drunk hit and killed? I bet you would be crying a different tune. You dont know me so dont act like you do fool. He earned his money and yea, thats fine with me. I wouldnt of been able to do what he did BUT, he killed a man and doesn't deserve crap IF it was his fault. IF it was his fault and that man didn't want to die, you think it's ok for him to keep doing what he's been doing. I can already tell you have a few dui's by way you talk. You even look like a drunk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hundreds of thousands of people have served more jail time then he has for doing non lethal stuff. What about them? You going to tell me that a man growing his own pot deserves the same sentence as someone who gets drunk and kills a man while he just got off work trying to support his family?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No what bothers me is the fact that YOU think what he did was ok as long as does his time. What if it was your mother this drunk hit and killed? I bet you would be crying a different tune. You dont know me so dont act like you do fool. He earned his money and yea, thats fine with me. I wouldnt of been able to do what he did BUT, he killed a man and doesn't deserve crap IF it was his fault. IF it was his fault and that man didn't want to die, you think it's ok for him to keep doing what he's been doing. I can already tell you have a few dui's by way you talk. You even look like a drunk.

 

Really? I think what he did was ok as long as he serves his time? Is that what I really said?

 

What he did was make a poor decision. Someone died. He is paying the consequences of his poor decision. But chances are, if he didn't make a poor decision, Reyes dies anyways based on what Reyes did.

 

Just because the poor decision was not ok for Stallworth to make, does not mean that Stallworth has to keep paying for his mistake after he has served the time a court of law sentenced him with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a civil suit, the injured or aggrieved party can seek economic and non-economic reparations. Economic damages can include medical expenses, other out-of-pocket expenses, loss of income, and the like.

 

 

Tell me, what does loss of income mean?

 

Sure, I hear you. And I'm not an idiot. However, explain to me how someone who has literally nothing is going to pay out millions of dollars? Will a court demand they pay half their income in perpetuity to make up for it? Even if it leaves them a pauper and unable to pay their own bills, eventually lose their house, car, job, and livelihood, and then eventually not be able to make the payments anymore? If that's so, then that's a crime too.

 

Do you have examples that prove me wrong?

 

If so, lets hear them.

 

Otherwise, shut your trap.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, I hear you. And I'm not an idiot. However, explain to me how someone who has literally nothing is going to pay out millions of dollars? Will a court demand they pay half their income in perpetuity to make up for it? Even if it leaves them a pauper and unable to pay their own bills, eventually lose their house, car, job, and livelihood, and then eventually not be able to make the payments anymore? If that's so, then that's a crime too.

 

Do you have examples that prove me wrong?

 

If so, lets hear them.

 

Otherwise, shut your trap.

 

Well from the suit I have on the guy that hit me I received upwards of 250,000 $ now he definitely did not have that in his insurance policy so they garnished wages and took his house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. This thread went in the wrong direction. All I asked was if you thought he would be on the Cleveland Browns in 2010. I didn't ask you if what he did is morally wrong and to argue about it. So please make a new thread if you want to do that. If not, lets get back to business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've been looking and i honestly haven't found any definitive answer either way. He claimed he "swerved as much as he could", but it's hard to say. I'm not denying Reyes was at fault here, in fact he has good blame. What i keep saying and no one will talk about is this

 

How is it fair that given the circumstances and the evidence that Stallworth should be given a gigantic second chance when you and I would not? No matter what part Reyes played in this, our lives would never be the same. We'd have to settle for less our entire lives. Yet because he catches a football well it's business as usual. What is fair in that?

 

 

Yes, he catches a football well. And guess what, there's a lack of people who can do that in this world. If he was some IT guy, sure, he'd get fired. Because anybody can be an IT guy. There's an abundance of people who can do that. There's not many people who can go out on Sundays and make plays.

 

Don't let the amount of money he makes play into this. It's starting to sound like sour apples on your part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, he catches a football well. And guess what, there's a lack of people who can do that in this world. If he was some IT guy, sure, he'd get fired. Because anybody can be an IT guy. There's an abundance of people who can do that. There's not many people who can go out on Sundays and make plays.

 

Don't let the amount of money he makes play into this. It's starting to sound like sour apples on your part.

 

you're playing into my point exactly. It should be no different if it was bill gates, donte stallworth, or you and I. I understand it will never be like this, but I certainly have a gripe that it isn't fair. I would of done the exact same thing he did if I were in his shoes. I don't blame the man for paying off the family and not serving serious jail time. My point is that it's ridiculous a sentence can be so radically different just because of what he does. To say it should be different because he has a unique skill is simply bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't exect to see Dante in a Browns uniform again.May not even play in the sunday league anymore. Two many hurdles to overcome. If he were 6 years younger he would be a lot more marketable. too many birhtdays for a player already carrying baggage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is that it's ridiculous a sentence can be so radically different just because of what he does. To say it should be different because he has a unique skill is simply bullshit.

 

Sounds like you have a beef with the media and social structure, not Stallworth. He's just playing his cards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. This thread went in the wrong direction. All I asked was if you thought he would be on the Cleveland Browns in 2010. I didn't ask you if what he did is morally wrong and to argue about it. So please make a new thread if you want to do that. If not, lets get back to business.

 

That's part of the problem. People are liking what he did as to whether he should be back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you're playing into my point exactly. It should be no different if it was bill gates, donte stallworth, or you and I. I understand it will never be like this, but I certainly have a gripe that it isn't fair. I would of done the exact same thing he did if I were in his shoes. I don't blame the man for paying off the family and not serving serious jail time. My point is that it's ridiculous a sentence can be so radically different just because of what he does. To say it should be different because he has a unique skill is simply bullshit.

 

 

I agree with that. He should have been giving more time. He shouldn't have been treated any different than any of us. But the fact of the matter is that he was. A lot of money goes a long way. It's not something for us as people to be proud of, but it's the truth. People who make a lot of money get preferential treatment. But Stallworth did the time that was appointed to him, he lost his driver's license for the rest of his life, and he has a boatload of community service hours to do. That's not what we would have gotten, but it's what he got. To say that he shouldn't be allowed to play football anymore because the judge gave him less time than was deserved is just bull, though. He did what was asked of him, now let him live his life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...