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!

     

Peter King says maybe Brees to Panthers?????


Billy Love
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 4Corners said:

Agree w this.
Brees got fired for being horrible on TV and now in a PR move attempting to look like he “controls” the situation he talking all sorts of poo like “oh please I got plenty of better options” I’m taking my ball and going home wah wah wah 

typical beta male move here 

Beta recognize beta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 4Corners said:

Brees was a very solid QB but it a religious nut job and probably a Christian nationalist. No thanks! 

By definition, a Christian is not going to openly advocate for laws or lack there of opposing their world view so throwing “nationalist” behind the term is not only redundant but hypocritical as we all vote for what we believe is best for us and society as a whole. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 4Corners said:

Brees was a very solid QB but it a religious nut job and probably a Christian nationalist. No thanks! 

I might be alone here, but his religious beliefs don’t mean a damn thing to me once he’s behind center. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Huddler said:

why on a personal level?

 

 

he vocally supports and actively pushes the worst of the evangelical dominionist camps like focus on the family and gay conversion, is a willing stooge of the military's propaganda wing and publicizes guantanamo torture facility tours like it's a zoo trip, is an anti-kneeling chud whose first comments after george floyd's murder were about disrespecting the flag. he's fuging gross

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

By definition, a Christian is not going to openly advocate for laws or lack there of opposing their world view so throwing “nationalist” behind the term is not only redundant but hypocritical as we all vote for what we believe is best for us and society as a whole. 

wrong. dominionist movements are a thing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 4Corners said:

Agree w this.
Brees got fired for being horrible on TV and now in a PR move attempting to look like he “controls” the situation he talking all sorts of poo like “oh please I got plenty of better options” I’m taking my ball and going home wah wah wah 

typical beta male move here 

 

2 hours ago, 4Corners said:

Brees was a very solid QB but it a religious nut job and probably a Christian nationalist. No thanks! 

 

You truly love the sound of your own voice don'tcha?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

he vocally supports and actively pushes the worst of the evangelical dominionist camps like focus on the family and gay conversion, is a willing stooge of the military's propaganda wing and publicizes guantanamo torture facility tours like it's a zoo trip, is an anti-kneeling chud whose first comments after george floyd's murder were about disrespecting the flag. he's fuging gross

LOL jesus christ dude. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, joemac said:

LOL jesus christ dude. 

I understand and accept the fact that people will look the other way for for sports stars when their skills and winning outweigh the stuff you don’t agree with. 
 

The emotional baggage and personal agenda Brees has won’t be swept under the rug any longer because his skills have diminished greatly. Not to mention the guy lied about having hair plugs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No, the casual fan gets sucked into THIS^^^ kind of thinking, and it's so woefully incorrect that it's almost sad. The first is what I've said numerous times, NOTHING about non guaranteed contracts save the billionaire owners a single penny, because they still have to spend their cap floor, and the only reason teams ever don't spend the full limit, is to then roll it over into the next season to be able to spend more that year. But in the end, owners pay the same amount of money no matter what. The reverse is also the same, that the players in totality make the same amount of money as well, because in your example of Clowney not getting that money this year, it will go to another player, as the cap needs to be spent. And you say how we just cut Clowney after we gave him the 2 year contract, but everyone including Clowney's agent and himself, knew when it was signed, that it was more likely to be a 1 year contract than a 2 with how it was structured.  The 2nd year was just to be able to spread out the cap hit and he was always most likely going to end up getting traded or cut. It's why agents and players don't care about the total money in a contract, it's always and only been about the guaranteed money, as the years and overall value are meaningless, always have been, always will be.
    • Agents will have their 1st round picks hold out until the pay structure of their contract is to their liking, not how much money they'll get or even how much is guaranteed, just the when/how they will get the money over the course of the contract. If they're willing to recommend those players hold our, do you really think they won't do it for 2nd rounders to guarantee them an extra 10% of their entire rookie contract?
    • If BY continues to develop.  XL learns how to catch with his speed. Tet lives up to his hype... THEN Brooks comes back.. dammmmmmmmmmmmmm
×
×
  • Create New...