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!

     

NFL Owners Secret Meeting With Players Over Kneeling Protests

Greatman77

By Greatman77,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Lumps Newbie

Lumps

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, TPanther920 said:

And the players don’t understand that no business will allow behaviors by its employees that the businesses primary ($$$) customers find objectionable. 

Find another way to express your concerns on your own time

I don't understand why everyone doesn't understand this concept. Also, I believe we all have the right to protest what we want, when we want...even while working for a company. But to think that's ok while at the same time thinking it's not OK for said company to fire you and another to not hire you for these actions makes no sense to me. Companies and business are made to look out for their money first and foremost, agree with the protests or not...but the cause has nothing to do with being hired or fired.

I could completely agree with a cause that someone I hire is protesting. But if they protest on the job and lose me business/money, I'd part ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Cary Kollins said:

a bunch of old white billionaires are out of touch, weird

A bunch of old white billionaires with a track record of making money and understanding targeted markets.

A bunch of players that frequently find multiple ways to flush the money earned from their contracts down the toilet.

Gosh, why listen to those billionaires about anything, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t96 Grand Master

t96

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TPanther920 said:

And the players don’t understand that no business will allow behaviors by its employees that the businesses primary ($$$) customers find objectionable. 

Find another way to express your concerns on your own time

Exactly. And for a backup QB you don't want him being a distraction to your team and the league like Kaepernick would inevitably be at this point. If he was actually starter material a team would take a chance but everybody knows he isn't. He couldn't beat out Blaine Gabbert for god sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
morgan55 Newbie

morgan55

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, mc52beast said:

Try protesting at YOUR place of employment and see how well that goes. Owners sign the paychecks, if they don’t want you kneeling then you either kneel and possibly don’t play or you stop kneeling.

Snowflakes don’t understand this concept 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRed Newbie

TheRed

Posted
Posted

When evaluating this discussion as a whole, it's almost astounding how different posters on this board bizarrely flip flop from being pro player to mimicking the same tired tone deaf owner speak they railed against.

Like on the kneeling discussion one group of fans will side with the owners and call the players pampered greedy babies who should just be happy with what they have and keep quiet. But when you switch to a discussion involving a certain former GM, or a guy asking for an extension, suddenly the side who defended the players kneeling in protest reverts straight to the same sort of rhetoric they previously opposed. Doesn't add up. I expect it from borderline neanderthals like thomas96 or tiger7_88, but the so called evolved huddlers here truly need to evolve or quit playing pretend when it suits them.

Those who remember the Jerry Richardson pie chart memes that were really popular here during the lockout know what I'm talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      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.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      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.
×
×
  • Create New...