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 talks David Tepper


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Agree with him. I wasn’t a fan of Reich in the first place but to only give him 11 games is completely ridiculous. Also Tepper preached a 5 year plan with Rhule and didn’t even give him 3 years. It takes time to build something but Tepper expect it to happen overnight which is indeed lunacy

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just hope this is rock bottom. I don't see how it can get any worse then this no matter who is here next year. I guess the defense is going to get worse once Burns is gone. 

 

A note : I don't think any of these firings were bad ( I don't know anything about soccer ). Rivera had to go, he still isn't a winning coach. Rhule sucked and Reich did too. I am glad he got rid of Reich early rather then see himself prove he isn't a good HC again next year. 

Edited by PanthersGTI
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also from King…

The Christian McCaffrey trade. Sunday was his 25th Niner game since the trade from Carolina last fall. He’s given San Francisco 2,920 rushing/receiving yards and 30 touchdowns, in exchange for the 61st, 93rd, 132nd picks in 2023 and approximately the 165th in 2024. Some trade, John Lynch.

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PanthersGTI said:

I just hope this is rock bottom. I don't see how it can get any worse then this no matter who is here next year. I guess the defense is going to get worse once Burns is gone. 


Worse is having this same offense with a D that is giving up 30+ a game.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, uncfan888 said:

It's just funny to see him so upset. Just like that tweet about horn being benched when anyone with a brain knew it wasn't because of performance 

I get that, but I don't know that any of us would feel different having to deal with Tepper.

Hell, a good portion of us dislike him intensely without ever having met the man.

  • Pie 1
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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • 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
    • 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...