Matt Araiza-P-San Diego State

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by RDB4216:

Originally posted by NTeply49:
So we should bring him in for a tryout right?

I wanted to draft him so badly, so I would absolutely try him out now! It made more sense when we had Gould, as Araiza could have handled kickoffs and also been a back up kicker. Still I think he'd be a better option than Wish, and cheaper too.

And hopefully he turns around and sues his accuser into oblivion for defamation.

I don't view us as in the market for a punter, Wish is one of the best around

Maybe not. But a cheaper/better option for a team that is tight against the cap, is not a bad idea. I don't know his contract or the cap hit if we cut Wish, though.

If he is cleared of wrong doing I hope he gets a shot back in the NFL. And now he doesn't have to play out his weak rookie contract so he can get paid earlier.

Originally posted by btthepunk:
https://sports.yahoo.com/prosecutors-former-bills-punter-matt-araiza-wasnt-present-during-alleged-gang-rape-225211550.html

Lost his career over being innocent.

Hopefully he will get a chance in the NFL again. We all deserve a chance to watch this kid knock down an 80-yard punt.

"Punt God" - Yeah, you ABSOLUTELY bring him in. But we won't.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where was he then??

Who cares?

Originally posted by raywm3:
"Punt God" - Yeah, you ABSOLUTELY bring him in. But we won't.

Would be an absolute upgrade but unlikely to happen.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by raywm3:
"Punt God" - Yeah, you ABSOLUTELY bring him in. But we won't.

Would be an absolute upgrade but unlikely to happen.

Originally posted by Buchy:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/13c8gvm/prosecutors_former_bills_punter_matt_araiza_wasnt/

Link to Yahoo article in the above. This is why innocent until proven guilty is mandatory in any civilised society.

That's why the guilty until proven innocent game that you guys were playing is WRONG.

Also I don't believe any charges were filed at all that I know of. The lady and her father seem shady. The father was pushing big time for lawyers and money. In a real extreme push here in San Diego. He seems really problematic. I don't think anything was ever filed as far as charges. At least I haven't heard of anything here in San Diego to that effect. They interviewed that young lady many times and apparently her story had problems in it. Also the father was very problematic. If you ever heard him speak to the media it was always about money, money, money and how much he could get.

I have no idea what happened there. But it was always very murky if you live here in San Diego and heard the news. My general impression was it was a big push for money if they could get it and I think prosecutors eventually came to that same conclusion. I never heard of Araiza being a problem of any kind at San Diego State Aztecs and was a bit of a skeptic. He's a heck of a punter and can kick it 80 yards. I would give him a tryout. He's a great punter. This is why you don't ruin careers over allegations or rumors. Things need to be investigated, looked at, charged, proven. Sometimes they are never even charged like here.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Buchy:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/13c8gvm/prosecutors_former_bills_punter_matt_araiza_wasnt/

Link to Yahoo article in the above. This is why innocent until proven guilty is mandatory in any civilised society.

That's why the guilty until proven innocent game that you guys were playing is WRONG.

Also I don't believe any charges were filed at all that I know of. The lady and her father seem shady. The father was pushing big time for lawyers and money. In a real extreme push here in San Diego. He seems really problematic. I don't think anything was ever filed as far as charges. At least I haven't heard of anything here in San Diego to that effect. They interviewed that young lady many times and apparently her story had problems in it. Also the father was very problematic. If you ever heard him speak to the media it was always about money, money, money and how much he could get.

I have no idea what happened there. But it was always very murky if you live here in San Diego and heard the news. My general impression was it was a big push for money if they could get it and I think prosecutors eventually came to that same conclusion. I never heard of Araiza being a problem of any kind at San Diego State Aztecs and was a bit of a skeptic. He's a heck of a punter and can kick it 80 yards. I would give him a tryout. He's a great punter. This is why you don't ruin careers over allegations or rumors. Things need to be investigated, looked at, charged, proven. Sometimes they are never even charged like here.

From the beginning I said it was funny that they waited until he was drafted to bring this up. No charges ever filed, they were just looking for a civil suit in an attempt to take as much $$$$ as they could. Sadly, false allegations led to him being cut and out of NFL. I'm sure he will be back, now he should file some kind of suit for defamation.

Originally posted by Oscar8325:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Buchy:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/13c8gvm/prosecutors_former_bills_punter_matt_araiza_wasnt/

Link to Yahoo article in the above. This is why innocent until proven guilty is mandatory in any civilised society.

That's why the guilty until proven innocent game that you guys were playing is WRONG.

Also I don't believe any charges were filed at all that I know of. The lady and her father seem shady. The father was pushing big time for lawyers and money. In a real extreme push here in San Diego. He seems really problematic. I don't think anything was ever filed as far as charges. At least I haven't heard of anything here in San Diego to that effect. They interviewed that young lady many times and apparently her story had problems in it. Also the father was very problematic. If you ever heard him speak to the media it was always about money, money, money and how much he could get.

I have no idea what happened there. But it was always very murky if you live here in San Diego and heard the news. My general impression was it was a big push for money if they could get it and I think prosecutors eventually came to that same conclusion. I never heard of Araiza being a problem of any kind at San Diego State Aztecs and was a bit of a skeptic. He's a heck of a punter and can kick it 80 yards. I would give him a tryout. He's a great punter. This is why you don't ruin careers over allegations or rumors. Things need to be investigated, looked at, charged, proven. Sometimes they are never even charged like here.

From the beginning I said it was funny that they waited until he was drafted to bring this up. No charges ever filed, they were just looking for a civil suit in an attempt to take as much $$$$ as they could. Sadly, false allegations led to him being cut and out of NFL. I'm sure he will be back, now he should file some kind of suit for defamation.

Yeah it's really bad. If you were here in San Diego something about this just stunk and didn't make sense. It was not a typical allegation. The father of the alleged victim was really problematic and money hungry. Something didn't sit right with me about him on interviews. He was always seeking out the media and lawyers. He was trying to try it in the media and public opinion and not courts and it was always about money. He was a really problematic scary guy. I would not put any lie or shady maneuver past him. Just really a problematic father.

Sign him!!!1

- Sus/Chez

I don't believe I've ever stated whether I believe him to be innocent or guilty, but has the actual evidence used to prove his innocence been shared? I don't think a lack of prosecution, or a lack of evidence, proves innocence (or guilt) on its own.

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
I don't believe I've ever stated whether I believe him to be innocent or guilty, but has the actual evidence used to prove his innocence been shared? I don't think a lack of prosecution, or a lack of evidence, proves innocence (or guilt) on its own.

what do you mean has it been shared? It's breaking news all over the place as of today. You don't need to prove innocence. You are getting it 1000% backwards. You need to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. They can't even go to criminal trial, as there is not sufficient evidence to go to trial. Furthermore, the recent revelation is there is exculpatory evidence, meaning not only lack of evidence that he did it, but convincing evidence that he did not and could not have done it.

Guilty until proven innocent. Nice judicial system. Charging her with being a lying skank would be the first order of business.

"......wasn't in his room, wasn't even there. That was an important piece of information."

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
I don't believe I've ever stated whether I believe him to be innocent or guilty, but has the actual evidence used to prove his innocence been shared? I don't think a lack of prosecution, or a lack of evidence, proves innocence (or guilt) on its own.

what do you mean has it been shared? It's breaking news all over the place as of today. You don't need to prove innocence. You are getting it 1000% backwards. You need to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. They can't even go to criminal trial, as there is not sufficient evidence to go to trial. Furthermore, the recent revelation is there is exculpatory evidence, meaning not only lack of evidence that he did it, but convincing evidence that he did not and could not have done it.

𝗨𝗣𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘: New evidence now show that former #Bills Punter Matt Araiza was *NOT* present at the house when a woman alleged that he raped her, per @DanWetzel

Evidence instead show that the accuser was having consensual sex with several other men that night.

Araiza being… pic.twitter.com/lNM0GxDy79

— Dov Kleiman (@NFL_DovKleiman) May 9, 2023

I havent read any articles to be fair. But I'm not saying that the guy is guilty til proven innocent. Im speaking more to the "eat crow" crowd and the "put her in prison for lying crowd." If there is clear evidence that she was lying then fine. I won't argue further as I don't care to read the article and should not be having a debate on the subject with out due diligence into researching the subject.

Edit: I did click the link that you provided. Looks like the convincing evidence that he couldn't have done it consisted of someone (could be anyone: friend, foe, family, rival punter) saying that he left the party early.