Indefinite Suspension? - Watson

[Stewy]

(06-18-2022, 03:01 PM)CloeHokie Wrote: Ah I looked for one but that title didn't tell me much. 

Calvin ridley was just put on indefinite suspension last season for betting.

I get that he doesn't want to use the exempt list. Not talking about that. 

Suspend him now indefinitely. He won't look bad as that is the purpose of an indefinite suspension. You pick the correct time when you know what to give him. But we all know he's going to get at least 6 games so why not start it? No There may not be games playing but he can still practice and take the field that way. And the longer this goes on with no punishment the more women etc perceive it as the NFL not caring etc.

Why not use the indefinite suspension is my question? Isn't this the definition of why you would use it?

Firstly the situations are different.   

Ridley = Gambling Confirmed.  There's no doubt he did it, and one does not gamble on the sport you are currently involved in playing, coaching etc.

In the case of DW, there is A LOT of smoke, which leads to supposition of fire, but no direct proof, evidence or admittance of guilt.  The latest precedent for DW is Zeke Elliot's punishment for 6 games for one incident, which my understanding had less proof and evidence than any of the DW cases.  One case got 6 games, DW has 24 going on 26 cases of accusations of misconduct, so DW's situation is unprecedented and Ridley's situation and punishment aren't related at all.