Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

28 Jun 2018

Jameis Winston Suspended for Three Games

It's almost old news at this point, but it just became official today: Tampa Bay Buccaneers quarterback Jameis Winston has been suspended for the first three games of the 2018 season.

Ryan Fitzpatrick will quarterback the Bucs against the Saints, Eagles, and Steelers -- three teams that won their respective divisions in 2017.

Winston has been suspended for violating the NFL's personal conduct policy after he was accused of groping a female Uber driver in March of 2016. Winston's story, along with that of other witnesses, has changed has changed over the course of the investigation. Here's what we know: Winston was at an Arizona nightclub with former Florida State teammate Ronald Darby, a witness in the incident that led to Winston's sexual assault accusations in college. Also with them was Brandon Banks, a former Vanderbilt football player who at the time was facing charges for a 2013 gang rape at the school. (Banks has since been convicted on those charges and is now serving a 15-year prison sentence.) Winston and Darby claimed that all three of them got into one car; Banks and Winston's accuser claim that two cars were called, and Winston was the only passenger in his vehicle. It has also been reported that all three got into one car, but Banks and Darby were dropped off first, leaving Winston as the sole passenger. The driver says Winston grabbed her crotch while waiting in a drive-through at a Mexican restaurant.

In a written statement, Winston apologized to the Uber driver "for the position I put you in" and claimed he had matured since the incident, eliminating alcohol from his life. Winston is not facing criminal or civil charges in the case, but he will lose about $124,000 in base salary due to the suspension. It also remains to be seen how this will affect his contract negotiations with Tampa Bay. The Buccaneers' have picked up his fifth-year option, guaranteeing him more than $20 million in 2019. (This is one of the reasons Winston is not fighting the suspension -- he would risk losing a lot more money if the case dragged out into next year.) His status in 2020 and beyond is unresolved.

Posted by: Vincent Verhei on 28 Jun 2018

52 comments, Last at 12:20am by MC2


by Will Allen :: Thu, 06/28/2018 - 4:26pm

It's possible he'll sober up and be worth the risk of another sizeable guarantee, on his 2nd contract, but that isn't the way to bet. Unlike Roethlisberger in his drunken thug days, Winston's never been any good on the pro level.

Even money Koetter is gone by next January, even though it'll be a dumb move. Nobody with options will want the job in 2019, with a 20 million dollar guarantee owed to Winston.

Taking large risks on stupid people, at that position, is ill advised.

by ssereb :: Thu, 06/28/2018 - 5:32pm

As Drew Magary pointed out, the Bucs have gone out of their way to back up Winston and say positive things about him every single time he's done stupid shit and there's no reason to think they're going to stop now.

by Vincent Verhei :: Thu, 06/28/2018 - 5:40pm

Unlike Roethlisberger in his drunken thug days, Winston's never been any good on the pro level.

Winston has been 10th to 16th in DVOA and DYAR in each of his three NFL seasons. Not as good as a young Roethlisberger, obviously, but nothing to sneeze at.

by Will Allen :: Thu, 06/28/2018 - 5:48pm

Yeah, as soon as I posted that, I thought I should have phrased it as "he's never been outstanding, unlike drunken thug Roethlisberger". Not commenting on the ethics of it, but in a pure cold blooded efficiency sense, the 5th best qb in the league is worth more risk than the 13th.

by Vincent Verhei :: Thu, 06/28/2018 - 8:12pm


by jtr :: Thu, 06/28/2018 - 7:48pm

Winston had local police and FSU cover for him during both his college rape accusation and his shoplifting incident. He never had to face any consequences for his actions, so it's really no surprise that he's never learned. This is still a slap on the wrist, relatively speaking, considering this is now his second credible sexual assault and all its going to cost him is three weeks pay. But at least he's facing SOME consequence rather than nothing. Maybe he'll grow up eventually, though his "I'm sorry she got upset and I'm sorry I have to miss some football games" non-apology don't exactly fill me with hope.

by serutan :: Fri, 06/29/2018 - 2:51pm

Well the league's shot across Ben's bow got across to him and they're obviously hoping that will happen again. And at least (feel free to reach for your smelling salts now ... ) the league actually acted with some consistency in these two situations.
Was wr

by Mikey Benny :: Wed, 07/11/2018 - 11:29am

Yeah, Winston definitely seems like he has issues.

by IAmAFootballFan :: Wed, 07/11/2018 - 11:24am

Blaming FSU and the Tallahassee Police doesn't really ring true when you look at the facts.

According to the police report (http://cdn1.sbnation.com/assets/3679987/tpd-documents.pdf), Tallahassee Police gave her a rape kit that night 2-3 hours after the incident, performed physical examinations, set her up with a rape counselor, etc. Furthermore, Winston wasn't identified as the alleged attacker until six weeks later. TPD didn't know this was about Winston for six weeks, because Kinsman didn't name him until then.

The main impetus behind the Police Department and State Attorney’s Office dropping the investigation was Kinsman’s testimony, which the State Attorney described as “problematic”.

Kinsman's friend testified against her, contradicting her by stating that Kinsman "wasn’t drunk", and that Kinsman showed her a text from Winston asking her to meet him in the front (Kinsman claimed she was dragged into the car against her will). The friend claims Kinsman asked her if she should go. In her friend's official police statement, she told Kinsman, "you can go" and stated that Kinsman immediately left.

The statement of Kinsman's friend is consistent with the statements of Winston and his two friends.

During this time, described by both Winston's and Kinsman's friends, Kinsman claims she was blacked out by a blow to the head. It was determined by testimony and physical evidence there was no physical attack. Kinsman then claimed she blacked out from a shot -- with no higher than a 0.10 BAL and no drugs in her system (from toxicology reports performed the night of the incident).

Say what you will about Winston with "where there's smoke", etc. you can't really blame TPD or FSU for what happened. If Winston raped Kinsman, which is certainly possible, Kinsman ruined the chance to bring him to justice by continually lying.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 07/12/2018 - 9:08pm

Wow, it's almost as if Kinsman just went through a horribly traumatic experience or something!

I haven't seen anything supporting any of this crap.

by Will Allen :: Fri, 07/13/2018 - 11:02am

It's been widely reported that her account of consuming a lot of alcohol was completely contradicted by her toxicology workup, which was done fairly quickly after the alleged assault. Look, you don't have to be a Winston defender to observe the undeniable reality that when an alleged victim's account of the pertinent facts, surrounding the alleged assault, are plainly contradicted by empirical proof, then successful criminal prosecution becomes essentially impossible, unless you want to toss the beyond a reasonable doubt standard for criminal proceedings. That would be ill advised.

by MC2 :: Fri, 07/13/2018 - 1:25pm

Unfortunately, when it comes to sexual assault cases (and domestic violence cases), there are some people who want to keep the reasonable doubt standard, but reverse the burden of proof. That is to say, they want to start with a presumption of guilt, and then require the accused to prove their innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the gist of the "believe the victim" movement, and yes, it's ill advised, to say the least.

by Will Allen :: Sat, 07/14/2018 - 10:02am

It doesn't appear to have been an overriding issue in Winston's FSU sexual assault allegation (pro tip: when you need descriptors to delineate between allegations of sexual assault that have been leveled against you, you may need to change your life), but if we, as a society, could ever get to where we, woman, man, or child, no longer see being a victim of sexual assault as shameful, justice would be better served. Then evidence would be more consistently collected in a timely manner, when it is easier to corroborate or dispute, and the question of "why was there so much delay in reporting a crime?" would have more relevance, in terms of the truthfulness of the accusation.

by MC2 :: Sat, 07/14/2018 - 3:43pm

I agree, and the same is true of domestic violence (including child abuse). But how do we get there? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that abandoning the presumption of innocence, as many people nowadays seem eager to do, is definitely not the solution.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Tue, 07/17/2018 - 7:47am

The only people who are concerned about "abandoning the presumption of innocence" are people who feel very guilty.

by Will Allen :: Tue, 07/17/2018 - 8:14pm

That isn't true at all.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:02am

Yeah, it is. There is no "abandonment of the presumption of innocence" happening at all. The only people who think there is are the ones with guilty consciences.

by Will Allen :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 9:14am

Assuming you can detect why complete strangers believe what they believe is an extraordinarily stupid practice. It is inadvisable to pursue an extraordinarily stupid practice.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:26pm

Well, I can't see any other reason they'd believe that, so I think I'll go with my educated guess.

by Bright Blue Shorts :: Thu, 07/19/2018 - 4:20am

"The only people who are concerned about "abandoning the presumption of innocence" are people who feel very guilty."

One alternative reason I can put forth is a fear of being falsely accused. Nothing to do with guilt.

Women can be mad and vindictive when things aren't going their way. You could be together for five years and having consensual sex throughout; but she'd only need to say she didn't agree to it the most recent time and under your system that would be enough to be in jail.

How are you going to prove your innocence without having got her to sign a form before penetration?

by ssereb :: Sun, 07/15/2018 - 1:39pm

Beyond a reasonable doubt is and should be the standard required to impose the ultimate punishment for most crimes, the deprivation of freedom. It is not and should not be the standard required for people to face social and professional consequences for their actions, which is what the movement toward believing the victim is generally about. I've never seen a criminal case where the prosecutor argued that a jury should convict someone solely because it's their responsibility to believe the victim.

by MC2 :: Sun, 07/15/2018 - 3:55pm

Go back and reread the comment to which you replied. I didn't say people were trying to replace the reasonable doubt standard. I said they were trying to replace the presumption of innocence with a presumption of guilt.

There are many reasons why the presumption of innocence makes sense in a courtroom, and most of those reasons also apply just as well in other settings. Adopting a presumption of guilt only makes sense if you're conducting a witch hunt.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Tue, 07/17/2018 - 7:48am

Fake rape allegations are an absolutely tiny drop in the sea compared to real rape victims who don't come forward due to attitudes like this. Sexual assault is the one crime where the victim spends more time on trial than the perp. So shut up with this.

by MC2 :: Tue, 07/17/2018 - 5:59pm

This is the epitome of question begging. Without knowing whether the accusation is true, we don't even know who the "victim" is. If the allegation is false (either an intentional lie, or simply a false memory, of the sort you describe below), then the accused is the victim.

Then again, it doesn't seem like you're interested in truth anyway. You just want show trials to vindicate your moral outrage. I'm beginning to see what the "Soviet Union" in your username means.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:12am

You know you can actually look this stuff up, don't you? Speaking of not "interested in truth anyway".

The percentage of false rape allegations are tiny and even they're massively inflated by an artificially small denominator due to the number of non reported assaults.

And LOL at the accused being the victim. I don't suppose you could give me an example of a man who had his life ruined by being falsely accused, could you?

Something like 2% of rapists actually spend a single day in jail, but yes, enough about rape victims. Lets look at the real victims here; the poor menz.

by Will Allen :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 10:31am

"And LOL at the accused being the victim. I don't suppose you could give me an example of a man who had his life ruined by being falsely accused, could you?"


It is interesting that an intelligent person like yourself has chosen to be ignorant with regard to the observable world around you, about those phenomena you choose to comment on.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:31pm

OK, I'll grant the point that some men (pretty much always Black) have been falsely accused. But the larger point is that this is an absolutely miniscule problem when roughly 2% of actual rapists spend even a single day in jail.

If you hear about sexual assault and your first reaction is "witch hunt" and "what about fake allegations", your priorities are out of whack. Or you're telling on yourself.

by Will Allen :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 7:49pm

In other words, you chose to put forth a false implication about this topic. Unlike you, I really try to avoid speculating why people do things or believe things, absent a large amount of information which would support that speculation. So I really don't know why you would so foolishly imply that it would at all be difficult to find examples of men whose lives had been ruined by a false rape accusation, when obviously you are intelligent enough to know otherwise. Your willingness to do so, however, calls into question every other assertion you've made in this thread.

Now, I'm no expert on the literature, so there is plenty of stuff about the frequency of false accusation that I am ignorant of. I do know it is an incredibly difficult phenomena to study, however, since , among other reasons, and as you rightly note, even determining the frequency of rape is very difficult. If you can cite a well constructed, peer reviewed study, however, which supports the statistical assertions you've made, I'd be happy to look at it.

My final point is simply this. Knowing something for a fact is really goddamned hard, and on something as important as this our only ethical choice is to push ourselves as hard as we can to achieve that state of knowledge. That requires a lot things and as I said elsewhere in the thread, I wish we could do away with the notion that there is any shame is being sexually assaulted. Victims could heal and obtain justice more frequently if it were the case. The idea, however, that only people with a guilty past would ever be concerned that an accused citizen was not afforded the presumption of innocence, is revolting and/or ignorant.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Thu, 07/19/2018 - 2:42am

"The idea, however, that only people with a guilty past would ever be concerned that an accused citizen was not afforded the presumption of innocence, is revolting and/or ignorant."

Except that's not what I said or was replying to. I was replying to a comment about how the "presumption of innocence" was being abandoned. Given the conviction rate for sexual assaults, it quite clearly has not.

And, yeah, I feel comfortable saying that men who talk about "witch hunts" and "believing the victim can go too far" are indeed very nervous about what would happen if we did start to believe them.

by Will Allen :: Thu, 07/19/2018 - 7:23am

You said that anyone who had a fear of the abandonment of the presumption of innocence must have a guilty mind. It is logically impossible to be fearful that some citizen is not being afforded the presumption of innocence without having a fear of the abandonment of the presumption of innocence. That is what the words mean. You wrote them. Either stand by them or renounce them.

by MC2 :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:41pm

You really don't understand the concept of "question begging" at all, do you?

"We should believe rape victims when they say they have been raped."


"Because they are rape victims, and it's important to believe them."

Logic doesn't get much more circular than that.

The percentage of false rape allegations are tiny and even they're massively inflated by an artificially small denominator due to the number of non reported assaults.

If the presumption of innocence were replaced by a presumption of guilt, the number of false allegations would skyrocket. The presumption of innocence helps ensure that charges are only brought when there is enough hard evidence to make conviction likely. If a mere accusation and "believing the victim" were sufficient to get a conviction, the number of people being charged would skyrocket. Some would be guilty, but many would not.

And LOL at the accused being the victim. I don't suppose you could give me an example of a man who had his life ruined by being falsely accused, could you?


How about this one? https://ktla.com/2015/11/23/man-expected-to-be-exonerated-after-16-years...

Or this one? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11912748/Guilty-until-prove...

Or the Duke lacrosse case? I could go on and on, but why? It's really beside the point, which is that, however many false allegations there are now, there would be many, many more if the "believe the victim" crowd succeeded in abolishing the presumption of innocence.

Something like 2% of rapists actually spend a single day in jail...

How about a cite for that? Otherwise, I think we can safely assume you pulled it out of your ass.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Thu, 07/19/2018 - 2:58am

"How about a cite for that? Otherwise, I think we can safely assume you pulled it out of your ass.:

Google "percentage of rapists that go to jail" and you'll find numerous ones.

And there is absolutely no danger of the presumption of innocence being replaced by the presumption of guilt, you really don't need to be concerning yourself with that.

Here's another example. You know Roy Moore, the Alabama politician who ran for senator earlier this year? Well, a whole heap of people came forward to accuse him of being a pedophile.

And a right wing organisation tried to sandbag it by going undercover to the press with a false accusation to try and discredit the whole thing. Guess what happened? The news org did some research and realised what was going on. Because, counter to your concerns, people do actually fact check this stuff.

by MC2 :: Sun, 07/22/2018 - 12:20am

Google "percentage of rapists that go to jail" and you'll find numerous ones.

Better yet, how about you go to Google, find one, and post a link to it here, just like I did when you asked me to provide evidence of men being falsely accused.

And there is absolutely no danger of the presumption of innocence being replaced by the presumption of guilt, you really don't need to be concerning yourself with that.

Dude, that is literally the entire goal of the "believe the victim" movement.

"Believe the victim" = presumption of guilt.

...counter to your concerns, people do actually fact check this stuff.

Sure they do, in the status quo that you are so quick to condemn. But in your preferred "believe the victim" world, the fact checking would go out the window. Why bother to gather evidence when you've already predetermined that everything the accuser says is true?

Also, you still haven't explained 2 things:

First, how do we know which parts of the victim's account are true, and which are false memories, brought on by trauma?

Second, in the case of men who accuse women of domestic violence, with no physical evidence, should we automatically accept their accounts? In other words, is it "believe the victim" or "believe the woman"?

by Duff Soviet Union :: Tue, 07/17/2018 - 7:52am

I wish more people understood the effect of trauma on the brain. It causes people to misremember details all the time. I know one woman who has described her sexual assault to me. One thing she mentioned is she swears she was wearing track pants on the night, but she's seen a photo taken earlier that night and she was wearing jeans. But in her mind, she's still adamant she was wearing track pants. This is the kind of thing that could be used as a "gotcha / bitches be lying" moment, but it's just trauma.

by MC2 :: Tue, 07/17/2018 - 5:57pm

So, if you can't trust her memory about something as fundamental as that, how can you trust her memory about the other things she's "adamant" about (like whether she was raped, and if so, who did it)?

This little anecdote of yours just underscores the importance of having hard evidence, as opposed to automatically "believing" someone who, by your own admission, is prone to confabulation.

by Duff Soviet Union :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:10am

If trauma is causing the brain to misremember small details, I'd say it's pretty likely she's suffered trauma.

Again, the fact that you're using this to suggest "bitches be lying" is quite telling.

I know you think this "I just need the evidence" concern trolling is cute, but it's really quite transparent. We all know no matter how much evidence is presented, you'll just keep demanding more while presenting yourself as a "devils advocate" or "rational observer" or whatever.

by MC2 :: Wed, 07/18/2018 - 6:49pm

So, you're not only fond of circular logic, but apparently of straw men as well. I never said anything about "bitches be lying" or anything of the sort.

And of course, you never explain how we know which parts of the story are true, and which are simply products of trauma. Sure, a woman may have been raped, but if her memory is being clouded by the trauma she suffered, it's entirely possible she may misremember key details, including the identity of her assailant. This is why hard physical evidence is needed.

Finally, you are the one who is transparent. Let me ask you this: A 6'4", 300-pound man has a black eye, and he swears his 5'0", 100-pound wife did it. She swears that she did not. There's no physical evidence -- just his word against hers. Would you say that we should just "believe the victim" and convict her?

by The Ninjalectual :: Fri, 07/20/2018 - 4:19pm

Might as well say "I hadn't heard anything about this" is in no way equivalent to "abandoning the presumption of innocence."

I will note that the U.S. legal system HAS NOT had an effective presumption of innocence in my adult lifetime. When I was 18 an overzealous cop lied and gave me a DUI; I naively thought "being literally innocent" was enough to survive a court trial, and that conviction has fucked my earning ability even today, 20 years later. On the bright side, that and a similar incident the same year taught me the lesson "do what you know is right, no matter what the law says," which has gained me lots of great nonmonetary compensation.

IANAL but jury selection in large part seems to be aimed at weeding out the majority of people who believe things like "choosing not to testify is a sign of guilt", and is cruelly ineffective at it.

by Raiderjoe :: Fri, 06/29/2018 - 10:56am

thsis guy seems to ahve a lot of problems

by ssereb :: Fri, 06/29/2018 - 1:00pm

Always count on RJ to succinctly arrive at the heart of the issue.

by The Ninjalectual :: Sat, 06/30/2018 - 2:59pm

+99 problems

by mehllageman56 :: Fri, 06/29/2018 - 12:12pm

Glad I'm not rooting for him, but I still hate Rothlisberger more. Like the Pats beating them 67-2 more. And I'm a Jets fan.

by RobotBoy :: Sat, 06/30/2018 - 2:36am

Sexual Assault: 3 Games
Allegedly Deflating Footballs: 4 Games

by ChrisS :: Mon, 07/02/2018 - 9:58am

Years of sexual harassment and bigotry: 0.1% of the $value of your team

by Theo :: Sat, 06/30/2018 - 3:53am

Funny how last year's Hard Knocks made him out to be the next coming of Mother Theresa.

by Hoodie_Sleeves :: Mon, 07/02/2018 - 12:45pm

Considering that Mother Theresa was a horrifying ghoul who the establishment decided should be treated as a saint, it seems appropriate.

(For those of you who've never actually looked at what Mother Theresa did - she didn't help sick and dying people - she collected them and denied them medical care them because she felt misery was a path to enlightenment.)

by morganja :: Wed, 07/04/2018 - 12:44pm

That's total BS. You're basing that on Christopher Hitchens' take down of her, which essentially was him, as an atheist, criticizing her because she was Catholic. As a person who worships the Patriots beyond the point of idolatry, one would think that you might have more sympathy for a person's religious faith.

by Hoodie_Sleeves :: Thu, 07/05/2018 - 8:35am

This has nothing to do with her faith.

It has to do with her rounding up people who were sick, and not giving them basic medical supplies like pain killers and antibiotics.

“Pain and suffering have come into your life, but remember pain, sorrow, suffering are but the kiss of Jesus - a sign that you have come so close to Him that He can kiss you.”

That sound like a lady who thinks suffering is a bad thing?

by Duff Soviet Union :: Fri, 07/06/2018 - 8:04pm

Hey, I've finally found someone who feels the same way about her as I do. The whitest of white saviours and a massive proponent of poverty p0rn.

by morganja :: Thu, 07/05/2018 - 9:20am

I believe you might be misinformed. Her quote is taken out of context.
Unfortunately, it is the human condition, that some only find God when confronted with adversity. It is a sin to inflict pain on others. But, it is not a sin to help a person in pain to find peace and hope through faith. It is well worth reading Elie Wiesel's book, Night. It is this same message from his experience in the Nazi death camps.

Because of Mother Theresa, many people were organized, and much money was raised, to help millions of people suffering in squalor and pain.

Some, like Christopher Hitchins, criticized her for not doing enough, or not applying the funds freely given to her, in the way that Hitchins thought best.

However Christopher Hitchins never used his gifts for helping anyone but himself find the nearest liquor store.

by The Ninjalectual :: Sat, 07/07/2018 - 3:00am

I'll never forget Wiesel's Night, no matter how much I wish I could. (Of course I know that's part of the point.)

by Theo :: Sun, 07/15/2018 - 8:05am

"find god" / "will believe anything to make them feel better" / "will take any help they can get" however you want to phrase it.