Archived

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

Gazi

John Fox says DJ was cut because DUI

53 posts in this topic

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/05/john-fox-makes-it-clear-that-dwayne-jarrett-was-cut-because-of-dui-arrest/

Though there's a chance that Panthers receiver Dwayne Jarrett will file a grievance claiming that the Panthers can't discipline him in any way for his second DUI arrest, Panthers coach John Fox opted to call it like it is when discussing the situation on Sirius NFL Radio.

Appearing with Pat Kirwan and Tim Ryan of Movin' the Chains, Fox was blunt. "I think we've got a situation here where we do a lot of things for our guys to make sure that doesn't happen and he couldn't follow the protocol so we're going to move on," Fox said.

"It's amazing," Kirwan responded, "and this is about every guy who doesn't get it. What's up with these guys, John? It's like raising kids. You think you get the message across and you come home and it's still the same problem as the night before."

"Well, I think anytime, you know, just we're a part of society and it just gets more publicized, I think, when you're a star athlete," Fox said. "But you're going to have these issues. We're just a portion of society and, you know, it happens every day, you just don't hear it as much in other facets of it. It's part of people that make mistakes. You know, I think, there's a lot of guys that are doing it right that sometimes we don't hear quite as much about but unfortunately this is one that he wasn't doing right."

As we explained earlier today, paragraph 11 of the standard player contract permits a team to cut a player if "he has engaged in personal conduct reasonably judged by Club to adversely affect or reflect on Club."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it have anything to do with him filing a grievance? hmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the Panthers file a grievance for wasting a draft pick and 4 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry....where did it say that fox said he was cut before the DUI?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The title threw me for a second, the article states that Jon Fox makes it clear that DJ was cut because of the DUI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The title threw me for a second, the article states that Jon Fox makes it clear that DJ was cut because of the DUI.

fuging Florio had it as a title and then changed it. My bad. Corrected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of Delhomme being pulled out AFTER he hurt his thumb...not BEFORE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe he was cut first, thats why he went out drinking etc, had nothing to lose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Same people defending Hillary a few months ago are now drawing the conclusion that Flynn... and by association Trump... must be guilty of something because Flynn is getting immunity from the FBI. Works both ways. For the record... IMHO both Hillary and Trump are crooks.  If justice in this nation were truly blind these two politicians and their henchmen would be doing a long stretch in prison by now.
    • Slot receivers don't exist in 2 TE sets unless we're lining a TE on the outside which I haven't seen much out of the currently constructed Panthers. Maybe McCaffrey if he were to be split out wide but the Panthers usually keep a RB with Cam in-case Cam needs the extra protection and audibles the RB to block.  The Panthers would be best suited pairing KB with a speedster such as Charles Johnson, who's adept at running deep routes. Keep Howard and possible the RB (if not blocking) on short routes, KB on working the intermediate routes, Olsen running intermediate/deep routes, and Johnson running deep routes. That way Cam has a receiver on every level. All of this assumes Shula constructs a properly worked passing attack. 
    • Yes, that is correct. My point being Clinton was impeached and stayed in office. Almost everyone calling for impeachment of Trump thinks it means to remove him from office. He would have to be impeached and then found guilty to do that. The impeachment alone does not remove him. And my original point, no one was bringing up the electoral college back then. It makes no sense. Because the popular would surely rid us of corrupt politicians, right?