Why the NFL is Hesitant to Suspend Players Accused of Horrible Crimes

Pittsburgh Steelers v Jacksonville Jaguars
Clay Travis: “The problem with automatically putting people on the Commissioner’s Exempt List is what it would incentivize, theoretically, is anyone coming out and making allegations against players. You could end up with a lot of Duke Lacrosse-like situations. I use that as an example because those guys were accused of raping an exotic dancer in their house and were 100% innocent and did nothing wrong. The accuser was untrustworthy, had major psychological issues, and was a liar, and yet Duke lacrosse had their entire season end, they fired their coach, and all these kids were charged with crimes. Then it comes out they didn’t do anything at all… These NFL players could turn out being completely innocent and then the player can sue the NFL because they didn’t do anything wrong and the NFL took away their ability to earn a living.” (Full Audio at Bottom of Page)

Listen to Clay Travis, a former attorney in the U.S. Virgin Islands, explain why he doesn’t think the NFL has suspended Antonio Brown at this point in time, just hours after he was named in a lawsuit that alleges his raped his former trainer.

Brown’s lawyer Darren Heitner has denied all allegations, and Brown’s agent Drew Rosenhaus has called the civil lawsuit a ‘money grab’, as the accusations levied against Brown are still civil in nature, and not criminal.

Brown’s status for Sunday’s game in Miami versus the Dolphins is still unknown, but Brown was seen at Wednesday’s New England Patriots practice.

Check out the audio below as Clay explains why the NFL is hesitant to suspend players accused of horrific offenses, saying the league can’t just automatically rely on testimony from the accusers, when we’ve seen how cases like the Duke lacrosse rape case, where the defendants turned out to be entire innocent.

The latest in news, straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to the FOX Sports Radio newsletter!


Content Goes Here