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!

     

Add sexual assault to the Dan Snyder allegations

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Sgt Schultz Grand Master

Sgt Schultz

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Anybodyhome said:

The fact Goodell is going to testify to a toothless Congressional committee may portend Snyder's future, but it, in reality, is nothing more than a dog and pony show.

I'll wait and see how long after Congress wrings their hands and tells us all how terrible this is, before Goodell actually convenes the Executive Committee to hear the matter and take a vote.

Congress will do the second best thing it can do:  nothing.  It won't be because they determine they can't really do anything, it will be because they are busying trying to find something else to make themselves look more effective than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest.....trying in vain, incidentally.

On the incidentally note, the worst thing the could do is something, because history tells us they would create three new problems for every one they tackle, and then eff up the one they tackle.

And, of course, if they wanted to do anything they would have to fend off the lobbying from the NSA.  In this case, it is the lobbying group of which Snyder is a member:  Narcissist's Society of America.  And we all know one of the myriad of things Congress can't do effectively is fend off lobbying.

So, there is all that.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8 minutes ago, Anybodyhome said:

The fact Goodell is going to testify in front of a toothless Congressional committee may portend Snyder's future, but it, in reality, is nothing more than a dog and pony show.

I'll wait and see how long after Congress wrings their hands and tells us all how terrible this is, before Goodell actually convenes the Executive Committee to hear the matter and take a vote.

I suspect Snyder will be gone more because he messed with the money than any of the other stuff.

But things like this are the kind of weapons the league can effectively use to help take him out.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anybodyhome Grand Master

Anybodyhome

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I suspect Snyder will be gone more because he messed with the money than any of the other stuff.

But things like this are the kind of weapons the league can effectively use to help take him out.

So, 32 owners will convene at some point and 24 of them must vote to oust him. Are 24 owners willing to scapegoat him knowing their own closets are full of skeletons? 

I'll play the cynic and say the only way it happens is if the vote taken by the Executive Committee is made public- who voted yes or no.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Anybodyhome said:

So, 32 owners will convene at some point and 24 of them must vote to oust him. Are 24 owners willing to scapegoat him knowing their own closets are full of skeletons? 

I'll play the cynic and say the only way it happens is if the vote taken by the Executive Committee is made public- who voted yes or no.

They were ready to do it with Richardson but he fell on the sword (and later grumbled about it).

And I know a lot of people take the "mutually assured destruction" route when talking about NFL owners but I'm not convinced all these guys know everybody else's secrets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I dont think what Richardson did was enough to force him to sell the team.  

He technically wasn't, but kinda was.

When Richardson announced his "internal investigation", I think he firmly believed the league would have his back. After all, he'd been loyal to them the whole time.

They didn't, and that probably came as a huge shock to him, plus a major disappointment.

As the sale was winding down, Darin Gantt reported that Richardson was walking around, grumbling things like "I don't have to sell this team", but there was no way the league was going to let him back out at that point.

My guess is he knew that if he didn't cooperate, things could have been far worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4Corners Grand Master

4Corners

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

I signed one recently because the agency is researching a new technology (that does not work), they are coming to the conclusion that its performance is not up to what is required, but somebody in the hundreds associated with this mess has been running back to the vendor, who prefers to lobby Congress rather than improve their technology (and I am not sure they can improve their technology).  The NDA was designed to stop that blabbing.  Will it?  Probably not.

I'm sure employees and contractors that work in the Supreme Court are all under NDA's, too. 

The example you gave is the texbook example.  Closely guarded company "secrets" or research into new products and services are generally the target.  We hear more about NDAs associated with settlements of court cases (or avoidance of them), but those between employers and employees/contractors are far more common, I would think.  And in those cases, the company could actually point to harm by the disclosure, rather than "I could go to prison for something I probably should have gone to prison for, anyway."

Fair enough and I am willing to concede that there may be a few instances of when an NDA is ethical and necessary - but I am also an advocate of transparency and protecting workers. 
 

NDAs used by wealthy people/corps to protecting themselves stuffing money in someone’s mouth to cover up illegal, unethical, and shady activities need to 100% be illegal in this country. But everyone knows rich people play by a different set of rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anybodyhome Grand Master

Anybodyhome

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

He technically wasn't, but kinda was.

When Richardson announced his "internal investigation", I think he firmly believed the league would have his back. After all, he'd been loyal to them the whole time.

They didn't, and that probably came as a huge shock to him, plus a major disappointment.

As the sale was winding down, Darin Gantt reported that Richardson was walking around, grumbling things like "I don't have to sell this team", but there was no way the league was going to let him back out at that point.

My guess is he knew that if he didn't cooperate, things could have been far worse.

But it would have been far more interesting to see an NFL ouster play out in the court system had Richardson not caved. Let's not forget the NFL has never had their hands forced. With JR, the league simply took him in a back room and twisted his arm a little- it never came to a formal convening of the Executive Committee for a vote.

As a matter of fact, the league went out of its way to issue a statement saying they were not forcing Richardson out.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tbe Grand Master

Tbe

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, 4Corners said:

Can you give me an example of how they are useful and important business functions? Like if someone knew the secret formula to coke they would have to sign one so they don’t rip them off and start selling it as someone else?

I had to sign a non compete for a previous job which the company justified as “they didn’t want to invest in training me to have me leave once it was done and go to competition” which is bullshit and goes against the free market 


Yes, the coke example is a good one. NDAs are also used a lot anytime sensitive financial info is shared (buy/sell a business, HR info like salaries, ect).

I sign them fairly regularly when working with clients. They don’t want me telling the world about certain competitive advantages they’ve created or learned.

Non-competes are a different thing and hard to enforce. They can’t keep you from making a living in your field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • therealmjl
      Panthers.com exclusive: Inside the draft room

      By therealmjl · Posted

      I think Tepper made huge strides in this area last year as well. It’s obvious he has trust in the Canales/Morgan pairing - and rightfully so.  
    • LinvilleGorge
      Panthers.com exclusive: Inside the draft room

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      Did you really just source your own Twitter account? LOL 
    • MHS831
      Panthers.com exclusive: Inside the draft room

      By MHS831 · Posted

      There are times during the prolonged, pre-draft process that you abandon your gut feelings and allow yourself to be persuaded by popular opinion.  My gut was more consistent with what Morgan et al did than my conclusions.  Here is why (my theory): 1. With social media, one opinion is often repeated until it seems like the majority. The more you see it, the more you feel that your gut was wrong.  You second guess and conform at times.  In January, if you told me TMac would be there at 8, I would have been very interested because there weren't other WRs like him and he was dominant on a bad team.  I let the comments about film, questions about separation, etc. sway my opinion.  I started comparing him to Kelvin Benajamin in my head (work ethic). So I took him off my board. 2.  Morgan said something rather profound (parphrasing): "We did not want to be restricted by need."  IMO, the biggest needs were Edge, S, WR.  We assume that the biggest need is aligned with the first overall pick in most situations.  Everyone was talking about Jalon Walker because Micah Parsons is a similar beast and Abdul Carter would be off the board.   However, as a former coach at Salisbury High School and someone who vaguely knew Walker's father before he was born, I still could not see the fit here.  I think Walker is a great person and will be a good pro, but he did not fill our needs.  TMac was the best player who filled a primary need and we could not find another TMac-type player in the draft.  However, there would be second round Edges that were, in my view, potentially as good NFL players.  The first through early third rounds were loaded with edges.  3. Since edge was our biggest need, Morgan added 2--one in the second and one in the third.  They mentioned referring to statistics to see the likelihood of a player being available at 55 as opposed to 59, guiding their trade practices, for example.  I noticed the talent grades did not drop as much for edge players into early round three and the WR market dropped rapidly.  Morgan mentioned that they only had 3 second round WRs on their board, which is why TMac in round 1 was smart.  I also posted the following stats from the internet and it is never wrong: First-round picks in the NFL Draft have a higher success rate than those in the second or third rounds. Whilethe first round boasts a success rate of around 58%, the second round is nearly as good at 49%. However, the third round sees a significant drop, with only a 25% success rate.    So let's do math.  If you draft 1 edge at #8 he has (since it is early in the round) about a 60% chance of being successful.  Morgan would earn 6 success tokens for his Edge need. If you draft an edge in the second, Morgan would earn 5 success tokens for his edge need. If you draft an edge in the third, Morgan earns 2.5 success tokens for his edge need. So Morgan gets the draft's WR unicorn in the first round and by using the second and third round selections, addresses the biggest need by collecting 7.5 success tokens instead of 6.   Morgan has a high probability of being successful with 2 of 3 of the teams' biggest needs.  He was not needs driven, however, he was market driven.  Supply and demand.  He was smart. Had we drafted Walker, a player who is a stud and can be most effective as an ILB with versatility, I am not sure we successfully addressed the need.  Other players with first round talent either lacked college productivity or had red flags.  We would HAVE to target one of the 3 WRs the Panthers had listed as second round possibilities (I am guessing Higgins and Burden III and Beck--all far inferior to TMac).  Higgins and Burden III were drafted before they were within trade range and it is not surprising that happened--leaving the Panthers with a only Beck at pick 57.  Putting that in perspective, Edge Scourton was taken at pick 51 and Mike Green was taken at pick 59. However, there were 5 edge players taken in the second round.  There were 6 edge players taken in round 3.  Value TMac was rated #4 by PFF and J. Walker was rated #25.  Meanwhile Beck (WR), the only second round WR available in round 2 (I should point out that Tre Harris was rated by PFF at #66, and he was taken in the mid second) was rated 40.  Had we taken an edge in round 1, it is likely we would have ended up with J Walker (#25) and in round 2 Beck (#40).  Instead, we drafted TMac (#4) and Scourton (PFF #29) and Princely (PFF #50). https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2025-nfl-draft-board-big-board In terms of trade value points, the PFF scores value Morgan's first and second round vs. the probably first and second round (had we taken Walker and then the best WR available in round 2 Beck): So you see, Morgan ended up, using the PFF ranking system, doubling the value he got from the first two picks than if he had taken Walker instead of TMac and then drafted the best WR left at pick 51 or 57. In terms of what actually happened, TMac was drafted at #8 and Scourton was taken at #51--this suggests that the Panthers got great value vs. the PFF rankings.  Walker was taken at #15, (10 places higher than his rankings) and Beck was taken at 58, (18 places lower than his rankings.)  So how did Morgan do if you compare drafting Walker/WR vs TMac/Edge?   So Morgan's value was still 24% higher than it would have been had he drafted Walker.  Of course, this does not factor in trades, etc.  but you get the idea.
×
×
  • Create New...