Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why is the sale of the team taking so long?


Eazy-E

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Which brings up another question...

Does Richardson having to sell the team under a cloud of scandal make it easier for the NFL to nudge the sale toward their preferred guy?

What if the league simply decides the claims against JR don't rise to a level deserving of serious punishment? 

What if the league gives JR a slap on the wrist, a fine or written admonishment and concludes its investigation?

What if JR then decides to remain the owner of the Panthers?

Maybe JR never sells the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

What if the league simply decides the claims against JR don't rise to a level deserving of serious punishment? 

What if the league gives JR a slap on the wrist, a fine or written admonishment and concludes its investigation?

What if JR then decides to remain the owner of the Panthers?

Maybe JR never sells the team.

With what SI was able to find, that seems unlikely. Plus the sale process has already started. Kinda doubt they'd let him back out of it now.

Course if they did, the league would likely get #metooed to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

With what SI was able to find, that seems unlikely. Plus the sale process has already started. Kinda doubt they'd let him back out of it now.

Course if they did, the league would likely get #metooed to death.

From what we've witnessed over the last decade, I'm fairly certain JR isn't operating with a full deck of cards anymore.

Nothing JR decides to do would surprise me at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reynman said:

It would appear that the NFL would prefer a one owner situation...less messy with personalities.

But the decision is up to JR...and he would prefer to sell it to his friends.

We will see who wins...

That's a reasonable hypothesis but based on what? And who? That's just a guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

From what we've witnessed over the last decade, I'm fairly certain JR isn't operating with a full deck of cards anymore.

Nothing JR decides to do would surprise me at this point.

That's been suggested, and there's definitely reason to think so. Dirty old men sometimes just don't have all their mental filters.

31 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

That's a reasonable hypothesis but based on what? And who? That's just a guess

Probably Tepper based on the fact that he's already"part of the club". Also the fact this is how Haslam got the Browns and the NFL would certainly like to have someone worth nearly 12 billion dollars in their fold.

There's also Navarro whom Richardson might prefer because he's from the Carolinas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's been suggested, and there's definitely reason to think so. Dirty old men sometimes just don't have all their mental filters.

Probably Tepper based on the fact that he's already"part of the club". Also the fact this is how Haslam got the Browns and the NFL would certainly like to have someone worth nearly 12 billion dollars in their fold.

There's also Navarro whom Richardson might prefer because he's from the Carolinas.

I interpreted friends to mean someone local and already involved. Those two are the likely too candidates even without any thin strands of attachment. Very very thin strands 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

I interpreted friends to mean someone local and already involved. Those two are the likely too candidates even without any thin strands of attachment. Very very thin strands 

Gotcha. I definitely wouldn't call either of them friends. Sabates is friends with Ron Rivera, not sure about Jerry Richardson. I sincerely doubt his group is going to be able to offer a strong bid. Even if Richardson chose him, the league would have to approve.

The only real "strands" with the others are that Navarro is from the Carolinas and Tepper is associated with the organization that Richardson always said he wanted to model the Panthers after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...