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!

     

ESPN still taking runs at Cam

Vagrant

By Vagrant,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Vagrant Explorer

Vagrant

Posted
Posted

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13657212/cam-newton-left-florida-gators-teammates-wondering-lost-potential

ESPN is still on board with trying to diminish Cam Newton for what happened in Florida. 7 years after he left the squad. I'm so tired of this bullshit. The man clearly matured, understood what he needed to do in order to be a leader, and became a better person. Why do these articles continuously pop up while other guys continue to get passes for everything they've done? I hear more about Cam Newton's past than I hear about Roethlisberger's and there nowhere near comparable.

Some people can't get over Cam's "fake smile." It's ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mage Grand Master

Mage

Posted
Posted

What was wrong with the article?

The rise and fall of Florida was something they were discussing recently and Cam leaving had a big impact on that, at least based off what he did at Auburn.  I think it is a legit question to ask if he would have had the same success if he never left Florida in the first place.  Cam would probably be the first to tell you he's matured a lot since.

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

    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
    • PNW_PantherMan
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      You're really gonna pass up the opportunity to make a joke about skidmarks in underwear here?  Alright fine.
×
×
  • Create New...