Over the past several years, more than two dozen women have accused the N.F.L. quarterback Deshaun Watson of inappropriate sexual conduct. In March, the second of two grand juries declined to charge Watson with any crimes for his behavior, which allegedly included coercing masseuses into sexual acts and inappropriately touching them. (Last week, twenty of the two dozen women who filed lawsuits reached financial settlements with Watson, who has denied wrongdoing.) Despite the controversy, Watson—formerly of the Houston Texans—signed a fully guaranteed two-hundred-and-thirty-million-dollar contract with the Cleveland Browns, meaning that he will be paid even if the N.F.L. decides to suspend him. His arbitration hearing with the league began this week; a ruling is expected shortly.
I recently spoke by phone with Jenny Vrentas, a sports reporter for the New York Times who wrote the paper’s investigation into Watson. She interviewed several of the women who filed lawsuits against him—and other masseuses who had never before gone on the record—and showed how the Texans had helped Watson use nondisclosure agreements when scheduling appointments. Vrentas joined the Times after covering the N.F.L. for nearly a decade at Sports Illustrated. Last week, she reported on a congressional inquiry of Daniel Snyder, the owner of the Washington Commanders; the inquiry found that he meddled in an investigation into his team’s treatment of sexual-harassment claims and hired a legal team to harass accusers. (A spokesperson for Snyder said that the team had addressed these issues, and called the inquiry “pre-determined from the beginning.”) During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed what Vrentas learned about Watson’s behavior, whether the N.F.L. has got more serious about athlete misbehavior toward women, and why sports journalists sometimes struggle with #MeToo stories.
How does one go about reporting a story like this? What were you setting out to find?
I didn’t know what I would find. When the first allegations came out, and the first lawsuit was filed, I had absolutely no idea what to make of it. So, at that point, in March, 2021, I just started reaching out to massage therapists in the Houston area to try and understand things a little bit better: the dynamics in the massage room, what was being alleged, what the laws and regulations are. I ended up connecting with one woman who had worked on Watson, and I spoke to others.
When I got to the Times, there hadn’t been a ton of news that had come out [about it]. The statute of limitations on some of the criminal cases was two years, and there was an allegation in March, 2020. So that prompted me to renew my focus on reporting. Then, after neither grand jury decided to indict and the Browns signed Watson to the contract that they did, I still had a sense that there was more to be uncovered. I truly didn’t know what there was to find. That is one of the things that I’m really grateful for at the Times—you can take the time to do that without knowing where it will lead.
I also submitted some records requests to try to learn more about what happened in the criminal process. Even though there were no indictments, I still felt there was more we could learn about the process, especially as it pertains to a high-profile case of sexual violence.
What did your reporting suggest about why cases of sexual misconduct are so hard to punish criminally, even if you do not want to make a judgment about this case in particular?
You see the statistics of how many allegations of sexual violence actually reach some resolution in the criminal-justice system—it’s a low percentage. I have not spoken to every woman who’s made a claim against Watson, but I have spoken to several. And I knew that some of the criminal cases really did have the contemporaneous evidence that often is lacking in cases of sexual violence. In Ashley Solis’s case, she had a message from Watson after the appointment apologizing for her feeling uncomfortable. A colleague had reached out for help the next day about how to handle her friend being solicited in a session. There was another account of a woman who ended up blocking his number after he continually tried to set up appointments after one that she said made her feel uncomfortable in which she alleged misconduct. A lot of times, we hear that cases of sexual violence are hard because there’s not a lot of evidence, but I had seen firsthand some evidence for some of these cases that were being considered for criminal charges. That led me to want to know more about how the process unfolded.
What did you learn?
The records request showed that there was an extensive amount of communication between Watson’s defense attorney and the prosecutor who tried the case, or who was presenting the case.
But that is not necessarily rare or corrupt, right?
Yeah. And we don’t know the extent of what was discussed. But one thing that was interesting to me was that they met at Rusty Hardin’s office. [Hardin is Watson’s attorney.] Rusty said that he gave a presentation to the prosecutor with some of the information on criminal complainants and some of the depositions. At that point, Watson had not been deposed. So these were depositions of some of the women. Then they had a regular dialogue leading up to the grand jury. Then Rusty Hardin presented a grand-jury packet, which appeared to be a PowerPoint presentation that the prosecutor would present to the grand jury.
This is not something that never happens. Talking to experts, they said, “Packets are not necessarily common, but it’s not like they don’t happen.” We didn’t say anything definitive about why there weren’t criminal charges, but, at the very least, I think it helped give some context for how a case involving a high-profile person with resources may factor into the process.
I’m trying to understand the power imbalances here, where you have someone worth millions of dollars, while I imagine most masseuses in the Houston area are not paid a lot of money. What did you learn about them?
The power imbalance in this story is really important. That was something I only really started to understand once I spoke to the women who actually were in the massage room with Watson. A lot of women go into massage therapy because they enjoy healing or they want to be in that kind of self-care world where you’re helping other people. And some people go into it because it’s an extra job to help make ends meet. But, to all of these women, their business and their ability to have a prominent client was important to them. That creates a dynamic in the room that has not really been well articulated or understood by most people who’ve been talking about the Watson case.
I remember talking to Ashley Solis last summer, the first plaintiff. She described to me how she didn’t really know who he was when he first reached out to her. But family members mentioned that this was a prominent athlete who had done a lot in the community. While her massage appointment was unfolding, Solis talked about how she was almost undercutting herself in terms of assessing what was happening. She said he tried to take the appointment in a sexual direction, starting to expose himself under a small towel, giving different directions on how or where she should touch him. She found herself saying, “Well, this is a guy that’s well known. He’s done good things for the Houston community. I should give him the benefit of the doubt.” I think other women have mentioned that this is somebody that they thought could be important for their business. He actually directly told some women, “I'm trying to support Black businesses” or “I want to support your small business.” If things are going in a direction that you’re uncomfortable with, it’s harder to redirect in a situation when there is a power imbalance.
While you were reporting this story, did you get any sense that either the Texans, the Browns, or the N.F.L. were reporting simultaneously on what might have occurred?
That’s an interesting question, because I did not really get any indication that they were talking to the same people. You know how it is sometimes when you’re reporting a story and you can hear footsteps? In this case, I never felt that many of the women that I was speaking to were doing other interviews. I was aware that some of the plaintiffs—I think about half of the plaintiffs—interviewed with league investigators. And I did speak to two women about their experiences with N.F.L. investigators. I was also aware of women who had interviewed with the police. But, beyond that, I never had anyone I spoke to say to me, “I’ve been in touch with the Browns. I’ve been in touch with the Texans.” And certainly there were several women I spoke to who said, “You’re the first person who has ever called me about this, but I have an experience that I would like to share.” I was actually somewhat surprised at the number of people who said that.
Did the people who spoke with the N.F.L. give some sense of what that experience was like?
Yeah. Ashley Solis and Lauren Baxley talked about their experience with N.F.L. investigators and they both felt that the lines of questioning were victim-blaming. I think they were uncomfortable with some of the lines of questioning, including being asked what they were wearing in the appointments. They felt it was putting the onus on them rather than the behavior that they alleged Watson had committed.
What role did the Texans play in actually assisting Watson? And, beyond that, did you have any sense that the Browns had a real interest in getting to the bottom of these stories?
I knew there was a connection in terms of the team setting up some access for Watson at the Houstonian. That’s the luxury hotel in Houston where he had some of his massage appointments. Learning about the team putting the N.D.A. in his locker specifically after a woman who would later sue him threatened online to expose him and put some personal information out—I found those pieces of information together to be interesting.
If you’re the Browns and you’re committing two hundred and thirty million dollars in guaranteed money, I think there are certainly some questions. The second grand jury had not even met yet. So there was still the possibility of a criminal charge in another county.
Yeah, it was about a week after the Browns gave him the contract that the second grand jury said they were not going to file charges.
Right. I think for me what has really shaped my understanding of this story is speaking directly with women who have been in a massage room with Watson. For the Browns to skip that step raises questions.
Do we know that they skipped that step?
The Browns have said they did not reach out to any of the twenty-two plaintiffs or the plaintiffs’ attorney.
What has this story revealed to you about the sports media more broadly?
We talked earlier about the power imbalance that can exist in a massage room. In some ways there’s a similar power dynamic that has the potential to influence media coverage. On the one hand, there’s a very talented young quarterback who, before any of this came out, looked to have a very long and successful N.F.L. career ahead of him. On the other hand, there’s a group of relatively anonymous massage therapists who you will probably never cross paths with again. A lot of the ways that information flows in the league is through power brokers, whether that be team officials or agents or prominent players. There is certainly an incentive to rely only on those power brokers.
The very first story I did on this was a woman whom we called Mary, and I reported on her story for Sports Illustrated. She wasn’t suing Watson, didn’t file a criminal complaint, was sharing her story for the first time, but really wanted to speak up because she felt her account might help corroborate the other accounts. So I do want to say that if you work for a major national outlet, you do have more ability to do these stories. I’m grateful that the Times gave me the time and space. I had the time and space at Sports Illustrated, as well. The reality of our media landscape, with private-equity firms gutting newspapers, is that there are fewer and fewer resources for those kinds of investigations. That makes it even more important for national publications to take these kinds of things on. In some respects, the reporting is very intensive. It’s very complicated. The corroboration process that has to go into publishing any account is lengthy and labored, but, at the same time, it’s also just reaching out to people. It’s seeking the voices of people who may not have standing in the sports world and hearing what they have to say.
When you say that agents and people like that have power, are you saying that, for reporters it’s a requirement to have a certain amount of access to players, and that to do that there’s a certain amount of playing ball—to use the obvious metaphor—which has to be done? Some journalists, such as ESPN’s Adam Schefter, seemed to be mouthing talking points about this which came from players or their representatives. [ESPN disputed this characterization. Schefter tweeted, in March, after a grand jury declined to indict Watson, “This is why Deshaun Watson, from the beginning, welcomed a police investigation. He felt he knew that the truth would come out.” Schefter posted a follow-up acknowledging that the original tweet was “poorly worded” and “intended to provide insight into the strategy of Watson’s legal team from its POV.”]
I think a lot of sports journalism in particular is access-based. Look, I have been there. I’ve been on a beat. I know what it’s like to have to go to a team every day and maintain a good enough relationship with the team so that you can get the interviews you want to do your job well. I understand those pressures. There are certain people who gate-keep information. Having access to the gatekeepers of information can also be as important to some of that reporting as access to the players themselves. But it was also really important for me to reach out directly to women and to hear directly from women. Covering this story without speaking directly to any of the women who have come forward—to me that would be a real blind spot for either a journalist or for a team considering trading for Watson.
I often think that the sports media is divided between people who really want to be journalists and people who just want to cover the fun aspects of sports. When I heard Watson’s press conference—where he was asked questions like, “How are you doing emotionally?”—I didn’t think that these people were in bed with agents or something. They just seemed to be engaging with a topic that they weren’t trained to report on. What do you think about that?
It’s a really good question. I’m trying to think of the best way to respond. I started out my career on a beat, and, when I look back on that, sometimes I recognize that there were probably missed opportunities to dive into more serious issues. There’s not always the time and the space to do that, especially as our media industry has been gutted and stripped down.
I don’t know what the answer is to get this shift to take place, but it’s important to be able to cover serious allegations of sexual misconduct or workplace harassment. It’s impossible to cover a sports league without having to cover these topics thoughtfully and smartly. I think a lot about what things I might’ve missed early on in my career.
You think in some ways you had the mindset going into sports journalism that I described in the previous question, or something else?
I got into sports journalism because I loved sports and it was fun to cover sports. I enjoyed telling people’s stories. But the deeper I’ve gotten into this business, you realize how essential it is that these issues are covered in sports. Just because these are powerful athletes who can do great things on the field, it doesn’t mean that, if there are serious allegations, we sign up only to cover their sports careers. And, because they’re such prominent athletes, it makes it even more important that we cover serious allegations against them. The ability to cover that thoughtfully and carefully is an essential part of sports journalism. It’s not always emphasized the way that it should be. In covering the story over the last year, there were times that I felt really alone. I don’t mean to say that in a way that I was doing something special. That’s not what I mean. I guess I was just doing what I really thought needed to be done and I was surprised that I seemed to be somewhat alone in that.
With big N.F.L. stories, you’re almost never talking to people who’ve talked to only you. When reporting a feature on a big N.F.L. player, any person you call has probably talked to dozens of reporters. You’re clamoring for a couple minutes of someone’s time. To talk to women who can so directly speak to their accounts and provide you corroborating information about their experiences with Watson and to have them say, “You’re the only person who’s ever tried to talk to me,” was really—I can’t think of the right word. It was unsettling.
How has the gender balance in N.F.L. media specifically changed since you got into the business?
There were a lot of times early on in my career when I would be the only woman in a press room. This was the mid-two-thousands. That was surprising to me. That happens less often, but you’re still a minority in any press conference. This is true for other demographics, as well. N.F.L. media is primarily white, covering a primarily Black league. The journalism industry and certainly sports media have a long way to go in terms of making sure that there are people with more perspectives and backgrounds represented.
At the same time, I think a huge part of being a journalist is being able to seek out and value and listen to people of other perspectives. Just because this is a story in which the people coming forward are women, and in most cases women of color, you shouldn’t have to be a woman or a woman of color to be able to write about what the women are saying, or to be able to say that their perspectives are valuable enough that I’m going to seek to hear directly from them.
The N.F.L. has been criticized for how it’s dealt with athlete misbehavior over the past decade or so, certainly in the era of Roger Goodell, the current commissioner of the league. What do you think of those critiques, and do you think the N.F.L. has changed?
On the one hand, the idea of ascribing a certain number of games of discipline for serious misconduct allegations strikes all of us as uncomfortable. But, of course, this is a private entity and these are players who are representing the N.F.L. on major national stages. [The league] has put forth a personal-conduct policy for that reason. The N.F.L. has a difficult challenge. The criminal-justice system didn’t issue charges. And some of the civil cases are still moving forward and going to trial. So what’s the right number of games for twenty-four lawsuits and two additional criminal complaints, and other women who say his behavior made them uncomfortable? We’re never going to have an answer to that question which feels good.
We look to leagues like the N.F.L. because they are such a mainstay in culture and play such a role in societal norms. We do look to leagues like that to provide some answers and guidance or some assessment of what behaviors are O.K. and not O.K. I struggle with this a lot because I just don’t know what the right number is.
I guess you could say that, if an organization or a workplace is looking into these things seriously, and with a real intent to find out the truth and to discourage that type of behavior, it’s still a hard question about what the punishment should be. But whether the organization is going about the investigation with the utmost seriousness and conviction to find the truth is another matter.
Yeah. I was actually just going to say something similar. What matters less than the eventual punishment is how the process is handled. The women who have come forward in the Watson investigation really wanted to feel like the N.F.L. respected them and heard them. Some did not feel respected by the process. That the Browns didn’t seek to hear directly from any of the plaintiffs, I think, also sends a message that their perspectives aren’t valued. Whatever they decide in terms of the number of games, there has already been a little bit of a miss in the N.F.L. in how seriously it’s handled looking into this.
One thing that’s been really interesting to me in covering this, in what’s supposed to be a post-#MeToo world, is that many of the women were women of color and they were not prominent figures. They’re relatively anonymous massage therapists who didn’t get the same kind of credibility that well-known actresses did when they came forward against Harvey Weinstein.
It’s interesting to think about whether someone who was accused by dozens of famous people of this type of misconduct would, say, play football again.
That’s right. ♦