Is Eric Reid invisible?

[Peppers90 NC]

2 safeties that don’t cover very well won’t fix our problems. I’d be excited if we got him tho.

[Khyber53]

In the end, we just don't know what it would do to the team's locker room chemistry or if he'd become a huge distraction. His abilities aside, I'd rather not take the risk if I were a team owner/manager/coach.

[CRA]

29 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

In the end, we just don't know what it would do to the team's locker room chemistry or if he'd become a huge distraction. His abilities aside, I'd rather not take the risk if I were a team owner/manager/coach.

Don’t think he would really be that much bigger of a distraction than someone like Smith has the potential to be. 

[PantherOnTheProwl1523]

10 hours ago, PantherNation123 said:

Yeah you have literally 0 evidence that this is true. We have no idea what he is asking nor do we know if we have even been in touch

Honestly, I can understand on some level us not reaching out (the distraction), but to claim he is asking for above market value as the reason is just so obtuse. 

Edit: and clearly he is fuging good enough

Reid has slid back some on his play abilities and is not the player he was and he is not worth a big paycheck.

[tiger7_88]

Players who willingly drink the purple invisibility koolaid aren't allowed to be pissed when teams can't see them afterward.

[MHS831]

1 hour ago, CRA said:

Don’t think he would really be that much bigger of a distraction than someone like Smith has the potential to be. 

 

This is about the rift between the owners and players; no owner wants a player putting him in a bad situation--forced to support black lives matter and lose 30% of your white paying customers or support standing for the Anthem and lose the locker room. I do not agree with the 30% who think the players should stand, but I understand the economics behind it.  Does Reid pose a threat on that level?  Probably.  The NFL owners, after all, are not supporting patriotism over civil rights--they are concerned about the bottom line.  Does that excuse their lack of empathy?  their lack of creativity and leadership to come up with a viable solution?  Their lack of a backbone?

I 100% support the players' position, but I do not think they should act in any manner that might cause the owners to lose customers.  You have first amendment rights, but if you exercise those to offend the client in any business, you are subject to termination and exclusion. The NFL owners are risking their money to put people in the seats and to attract TV viewers to watch football without politics.  Having said that, the players are in a position to lead, but most leaders become martyrs and are willing to pay that price--Jesus, Lincoln, MLK, Ghandi---etc.  Is it right?  Who decides?

[tondi]

28 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

 

This is about the rift between the owners and players; no owner wants a player putting him in a bad situation--forced to support black lives matter and lose 30% of your white paying customers or support standing for the Anthem and lose the locker room. I do not agree with the 30% who think the players should stand, but I understand the economics behind it.  Does Reid pose a threat on that level?  Probably.  The NFL owners, after all, are not supporting patriotism over civil rights--they are concerned about the bottom line.  Does that excuse their lack of empathy?  their lack of creativity and leadership to come up with a viable solution?  Their lack of a backbone?

I 100% support the players' position, but I do not think they should act in any manner that might cause the owners to lose customers.  You have first amendment rights, but if you exercise those to offend the client in any business, you are subject to termination and exclusion. The NFL owners are risking their money to put people in the seats and to attract TV viewers to watch football without politics.  Having said that, the players are in a position to lead, but most leaders become martyrs and are willing to pay that price--Jesus, Lincoln, MLK, Ghandi---etc.  Is it right?  Who decides?

Didnt you get the memo?  Unless you support the players right to say and do whatever they want, whenever they want, you do not "100% support the players position".  You are either with them or you are with the enemy.  No middle ground to internet social justice warriors. 

[MHS831]

8 minutes ago, tondi said:

Didnt you get the memo?  Unless you support the players right to say and do whatever they want, whenever they want, you do not "100% support the players position".  You are either with them or you are with the enemy.  No middle ground to internet social justice warriors. 

Yes, we are a polarized nation right now.  I can agree with the premise, just disagree with the platform. 

[LxDunn]

On 9/1/2018 at 12:58 PM, Udogg said:

fixed in for you. 

Glad you fixed it