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!

     

Fowler rips Tepper

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
Just now, OldhamA said:

No problem with that piece (as someone with a Journalism degree).

Personally I wouldn't be calling out a vindictive billionaire, but more power to Fowler. 

my brother said the same thing, those dudes know people who know people who know people.  Not saying its violence but someone worth 22 billion can make life miserable through various channels for a damn columnist or anyone for that matter

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrisbanePanther Mentor

BrisbanePanther

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

my brother said the same thing, those dudes know people who know people who know people.  Not saying its violence but someone worth 22 billion can make life miserable through various channels for a damn columnist or anyone for that matter

It won't take all that.

He'll just right a check tomorrow and buy the Observer. Then sack Fowler. Then buy the next media outlet that hires Fowler. Then sack him again. On and on and on...all while spending the equivalent of couch cushion change.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhoKnows Grand Master

WhoKnows

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I believe he said that frank told him at the combine who he liked or something to that effect.  

What? If Reich told a Colts beat writer who he liked at QB, knowing the Colts needed a QB and we had a pick 5 picks after, that is about the stupidest thing Reich can do. Hopefully, he was just blowing smoke. Again, we didn’t have the number 1 pick until a month after the combine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4Corners Grand Master

4Corners

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, OldhamA said:

No problem with that piece (as someone with a Journalism degree).

Personally I wouldn't be calling out a vindictive billionaire, but more power to Fowler. 

Real Journalism is a dying profession anyway. You really aren’t supposed to be a part of the story, but I guess in this day and age who cares. 
 

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
4Corners Grand Master

4Corners

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, stratocatter said:

Technically, it used to. 

Yeah but I mean I guess he is right. In this day and age, in the era of clicks and tweets and like and publicity, it really doesn’t matter if some clown reporter makes it about himself. Me me me me is what’s it’s about now. 

  • 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...