News: PFT: Marriott: NFL interviewed employee, reviewed video in Michael Irvin case

Status
Not open for further replies.
CouchCoach said:
No, I will not stop. I consider what he said in that press conference worse than what he might have said to that woman.
Click to expand...
lol.... oh please. His comments were accurate. he isnt saying he is getting hung, he is comparing the process of what is happening to him with exactly what used to happen to black men in the past. He has immediately been found guilty by Marriott, NFLN, NFL and ESPN and nobody is giving anything he says any credence, or the 2 witnesses that said this is all nuts.
 
CouchCoach said:
It does get more interesting with every new release of information.

Getting the investigator involved that quickly was interesting and if she did really move quickly after viewing the video, what did she see? And why call in more NFL personnel to take Irvin out of the hotel?
Click to expand...
cmon.... get it straight,... she didnt even show up until the next day. She had nothing to do with Irvin getting booted from the hotel. My guess it was what the woman said more than the video that got her to bring in others.
 
The documents say when Irvin returned to the Renaissance Phoenix Hotel on February 5, he "appeared to be visibly intoxicated," and in conversation with the female staffer, asked a lewd question that's too graphic to detail on TV, but referenced intercourse with a Black man.

Attorneys for Marriott say: "Taken aback by Irvin’s comments, the Victim responded that his comments were inappropriate, and she did not wish to discuss it further…Irvin then attempted to grab the Victim’s hand again and said he was ‘sorry if he brought up bad memories for her’…The Victim pulled her hand away and tried to back away from Irvin as he continued to move toward her."

According to Marriott, "two other Hotel employees noticed that the Victim had a look of concern on her face…Irvin then stated that he would come back to find her sometime that week when she was working."
Marriott goes on to say another employee walked over to Irvin after the victim walked away, and that "After Irvin finished leering at the Victim and turned back to Employee 1, he said aloud ‘she bad,’ ‘she bad…’" followed by a sexual remark.

He then "slapped himself in the face three times, saying ‘keep it together Mike.’"

This is what Marriot is claiming.
 
All this happen so fast and
Reality said:
It's a good strategy, but the problem is that they still started this process by proactively contacting the NFL and informing them of it, so they are on the hook unless/until it is ruled that what she is claiming is true.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind Irving was technically on the clock/assignment for NFLN. I'm pretty sure they covered all his per diem expenses. So from the hotel perspective, he was an employee of NFLN, not a private paying customer. Why does that matter? Think about it.......drunk/ intoxicated people come through their lobby every night and I'm sure some cross the line a bit flirting with employees/staff. What happens if the customer gets out of control and their lodging is immediately terminated and they are asked to leave? Imagine if it's a private customer vs an employee of a high-profile company.

I would think the protocol of handling a private custom vs business customer in this situation is a bit different. The private paying customer probably gets tossed immediately vs some due diligence with a business customer to avoid harming their relationship with one of their business partners. In fact, I think Marriot stated that they were told by NFLN to alert them of any issues with their employees.

In other words, this started as an issue between Michael Irving and an employee and quickly escalated to NFLN and Marriot protecting their partnership. Marriot is right, they didn't take Michael off the air. That decision was made by NFLN who obviously sided with Marriot. They could have easily stalled/delayed their decision until AFTER the Super Bowl by moving Mike to another hotel and promising to investigate the matter but it will take a little time.
 
Hawkeye0202 said:
All this happen so fast and

Keep in mind Irving was technically on the clock/assignment for NFLN. I'm pretty sure they covered all his per diem expenses. So from the hotel perspective, he was an employee of NFLN, not a private paying customer. Why does that matter? Think about it.......drunk/ intoxicated people come through their lobby every night and I'm sure some cross the line a bit flirting with employees/staff. What happens if the customer gets out of control and their lodging is immediately terminated and they are asked to leave? Imagine if it's a private customer vs an employee of a high-profile company.

I would think the protocol of handling a private custom vs business customer in this situation is a bit different. The private paying customer probably gets tossed immediately vs some due diligence with a business customer to avoid harming their relationship with one of their business partners. In fact, I think Marriot stated that they were told by NFLN to alert them of any issues with their employees.

In other words, this started as an issue between Michael Irving and an employee and quickly escalated to NFLN and Marriot protecting their partnership. Marriot is right, they didn't take Michael off the air. That decision was made by NFLN who obviously sided with Marriot. They could have easily stalled/delayed their decision until AFTER the Super Bowl by moving Mike to another hotel and promising to investigate the matter but it will take a little time.
Click to expand...
Yeah i don’t see Mike collecting
 
This destroys the oft-stated theory that Irvin brought the NFL's attention by making statements on the radio show.
 
did anyone read this new one link above ?? lol
it has it detailed fairly good.
the nfl person sent out saw the video, talked to woman and that led to irvin being moved and taken off nfl network.
So there must be something there. If not why would he be taken off nfl network?
Him being moved could have been a request by hotel.

Later espn I guess just heard about this and took him off their network.
This will take weeks or months to sort out, and we may never see that video.
 
Hawkeye0202 said:
All this happen so fast and

Keep in mind Irving was technically on the clock/assignment for NFLN. I'm pretty sure they covered all his per diem expenses. So from the hotel perspective, he was an employee of NFLN, not a private paying customer. Why does that matter? Think about it.......drunk/ intoxicated people come through their lobby every night and I'm sure some cross the line a bit flirting with employees/staff. What happens if the customer gets out of control and their lodging is immediately terminated and they are asked to leave? Imagine if it's a private customer vs an employee of a high-profile company.

I would think the protocol of handling a private custom vs business customer in this situation is a bit different. The private paying customer probably gets tossed immediately vs some due diligence with a business customer to avoid harming their relationship with one of their business partners. In fact, I think Marriot stated that they were told by NFLN to alert them of any issues with their employees.

In other words, this started as an issue between Michael Irving and an employee and quickly escalated to NFLN and Marriot protecting their partnership. Marriot is right, they didn't take Michael off the air. That decision was made by NFLN who obviously sided with Marriot. They could have easily stalled/delayed their decision until AFTER the Super Bowl by moving Mike to another hotel and promising to investigate the matter but it will take a little time.
Click to expand...
Irving????? That is a city, no? Your membership in this forum should be revoked for not even knowing who Michael IRVIN is.
 
let irvin...ing come up to some of you guys' wives or daughters and talk crap to them. Oh," it's okay, the playmaker is wanting to smash my wife, dang I hope I can get his autograph after he smashes them." "I hope he comes back later looking for them!"
 
Last edited:
Reid1boys said:
yes, you are confused. MARRIOTT removed Mike, not the NFL. The NFL investigator came to interview the employee and see the video the NEXT DAY. Mike was long gone from that hotel already. The NFL investigator didnt call in other NFL people to remove mike, she called in other people to review the video and probably go over what she had found out at that point so she could get some back up opinions on what actions they should take. Where are you getting that anyone "Took custody," of Irvin? That is certainly NEVER said in any document I have ever seen.
Click to expand...
“The NFL investigator then asked to review the video and the Hotel allowed her to do so,” Marriott’s lawyers wrote. “Following her review of the video, the NFL investigator escalated the matter and additional NFL personnel quickly arrived at the Hotel.”

Why were additional NFL personnel needed at the hotel? And according to this, he was still on the premises.
 
Reid1boys said:
lol.... oh please. His comments were accurate. he isnt saying he is getting hung, he is comparing the process of what is happening to him with exactly what used to happen to black men in the past. He has immediately been found guilty by Marriott, NFLN, NFL and ESPN and nobody is giving anything he says any credence, or the 2 witnesses that said this is all nuts.
Click to expand...
Nice try but no cigar. The race card was played for effect and most likely orchestrated by his lawyer.
 
DandyDon52 said:
did anyone read this new one link above ?? lol
it has it detailed fairly good.
the nfl person sent out saw the video, talked to woman and that led to irvin being moved and taken off nfl network.
So there must be something there. If not why would he be taken off nfl network?
Him being moved could have been a request by hotel.

Later espn I guess just heard about this and took him off their network.
This will take weeks or months to sort out, and we may never see that video.
Click to expand...
Or know the real facts.
 
TwistedL0g1k said:
This destroys the oft-stated theory that Irvin brought the NFL's attention by making statements on the radio show.
Click to expand...
Yes, that was mine and it does blow that down.

This is also the first we heard that the NFL called in additional personnel to escort Irvin out of the hotel. I thought the hotel had already moved him on their own.

This also brings up why did they not stop him from making that call into 105.3? They had his schedule and knew that was on it.

What did they tell him when they helped escort him out of the hotel?

What if they hadn't told Irvin what was coming down at the time he did make that call in? That could have been the accelerator for sending him home.
 
CouchCoach said:
Yes, that was mine and it does blow that down.

This is also the first we heard that the NFL called in additional personnel to escort Irvin out of the hotel. I thought the hotel had already moved him on their own.

This also brings up why did they not stop him from making that call into 105.3? They had his schedule and knew that was on it.

What did they tell him when they helped escort him out of the hotel?

What if they hadn't told Irvin what was coming down at the time he did make that call in? That could have been the accelerator for sending him home.
Click to expand...
is this the time when he was "hiding"
 
Captain-Crash said:
hum, so he was hiding because he hadn't done anything wrong. lmao, yep that's how it works.
Click to expand...
He said he was hiding out until we figure out what to do, or something to that effect. I don't know if we was Irvin and his agent or the NFLN was involved in that we.

The Marriott has certainly shifted a lot of the weight over on the NFL as far as what happened to Irvin.
 
What if the NFL told Irvin not to make that call and he panicked a little because he felt it was closing in on him. If you listen to his voice in that call in, he is definitely nervous and he sounds like he is trying not to be overheard by someone in the next room, he's almost whispering.

And since he broke his own story and even told them he was doing that, did he fear things were already out of control? This was his chance to tell his side of the story only he couldn't and therein lies the rub.

If he's using the "can't remember because I had a few drinks, to tell the truth" is that red flagging the investigator and NFL? Do they not buy it?

Because if that conversation really happened as the hotel has described, no way he doesn't remember that unless he was blackout drunk. That, was not a casual encounter with a fan.

And I am not saying the conversation went as reported by the hotel but he can't or won't refute anything they've said.

Does anyone here really think he's going to take the stand and convince a jury he cannot recall what he said but he didn't say what they said he said? Just how does he prove he didn't say what they said he said?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Total: 4,421 (members: 45, guests: 4,376)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,618
Messages
13,822,448
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top