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!

     

Panthers in violation of NFL rules regarding their search for a permanent head coach, multiple sources tell CBS Sports.

SgtJoo

By SgtJoo,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

It’s not an hour. They bring an agency in to coach you and then spend time quizzing you and “certifying” you .
 

Just adding context so people understand that this isn’t some online quiz. It’s a process.

Tepper sent the bill to Rock Hill and when he found out they weren't picking up the tab he was just like, "Well, fug it. We aren't doing that poo then."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KSpan Grand Master

KSpan

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, 4Corners said:

So she is too lazy or entitled to do the little things, spend an hour of her day, but she is qualified to hire a new head coach? What a train wreck this team is 

Who says she knew and didn't complete it? I'm not saying you're 100% wrong and Tepper has been a total clown to date, but the failure could easily be organizational vs her personally.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, ladypanther said:

Following a request for comment, a team spokesman said in a statement: "She was trained prior to participating in interviews." No further elaboration was given.

Multiple sources have refuted the Panthers' statement.

lol.  Oh we did “other training”.   What clowns.  Just say you didn’t do it and will get it done.  Tepper sounding like my middle schooler. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, CRA said:

lol.  Oh we did “other training”.   What clowns.  Just say you didn’t do it and will get it done.  Tepper sounding like my middle schooler. 

She could still could be trained in diversity hiring… that’s not a lie. It’s the fact that they didn’t use one of the NFL’s partnered agencies. That’s where the NFL is fining them.

Edited by TheCasillas
  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CamTheMan Community Regular

CamTheMan

Posted
Posted

The NFL sucks balls god damn. 
 

2011-2018: The only team with a minority head coach and minority quarterback 

2018: Owner says a no-no word and gets the entire team taken from him

2019: New guy guts the team and replaces the coach and quarterback with white people with no personality 

2019-2022: Team eats poo, new minority head coach as interim

2023: Has a woman as a leading decision maker in the hiring process, but can’t make a hire until we interview enough black people (interim coach doesn’t count cause, yknow, that’d be racist?)

…

Some asshole getting paid a 6-digit salary with the job title “league inclusion officer”: woah woah woah, you didn’t complete your inclusive hiring training bro? u some kinda racist? you have to interview the coaches the way WE tell you to or ELSE!!!

 

At a certain point this has to get demeaning to minorities but this probably isn’t the best place for that discussion heh

  • Pie 8
  • Flames 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

She could still could be trained in diversity hiring… that’s not a lie. It’s the fact that they didn’t use one of the NFL’s partnered agencies. That’s where the NFL is fining them.

lol.  What it is, is just bologna.  They were called out for not doing the league required training.  You either did it or you didn’t.   Issuing a statement that she was in fact trained is politician type BS.   It’s irrelevant to the fact at hand.  

It doesn’t matter if she did other training.  it’s like the league saying you have to pee in a cup for them. You don’t.  When called on it you claim you totally did….at home by yourself and it looked good. 
 

Big deal? Not really.  Not by itself.  But there is a pattern with Tepper at this point.   That’s the point.  We are poorly run in lots of ways. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...