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 tells TD to sit at home


ncfan

Recommended Posts

Im sorry but this is fugging dumb.

Ive seen players who have faced suspensions sitting up in the team suits before.

He's serving the suspension, he's not on the field or locker room with the team

He's trying to sit in his own d@m seats he purchased!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheCasillas said:

NBA does the same thing. Not sure of the purpose, maybe competitive advantage but that's dumb.

Or they honestly could be just saying you broke the rules, so go to your room.

I could see maaaybe if he's sitting up in the owners suit or something which would be purchased or provided by the organizations

These are his psl's seats He purchased back before this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Devil Doc said:

Wait, can they deny a season ticket holder from going to the Games, if they own the seats? 

I also didnt know the Panthers had 3 Home Games in the first 4 Weeks. 

Apparently, if your a player facing suspension 

 

But again, have seen players sitting up in team suits on tv before while facing suspension and the NFL didnt bat an eye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ncfan said:

Apparently, if your a player facing suspension 

 

But again, have seen players sitting up in team suits on tv before while facing suspension and the NFL didnt bat an eye

Technically, if you are sitting in the stands, you are not a player, your a spectator. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...