JR Addresses Accusations of Being Cheap

[riddel]

What do you mean "again"? Not said anything wrong yet.

Source of your info? It seems to be an "opinion," not statement of fact.

http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/2011/02/21/the-positive-aspects-of-psls/

I believe a PSL to be an asset and an investment, whether the contract specifically says that it's not an investment is of no consequence. If the PSL is proven to turn a profit, then it's an investment whether the Carolina Panthers deem it to be an investment or not....that's why the wrong again statement...

[riddel]

For the sake of argument, lets assume that there is a binding agreement between the PLS owners and JR himself contained in that letter.

He sent that letter in Dec of last year. What precisely do you think he has done or hasn't done since sending that letter that undermines the commitment within it?

He guarantees his continued commitment to the PSL owner. The date of the letter is not of consequence. He clearly protects the Panthers with the wording of the letter, stating that he believed the team would be successful in 2010, but since this letter he has admitted that he tanked the season to prepare for the future 2011 season. The commitment to the PSL owner has never changed since 1993 when PSL's were advertised and sold. The problem with the letter is that he directly contradicts himself in his recent interviews stating he sacrificed 2010 so he could full fill his commitment in 2011.

This is pretty freakin illegal in most business circles. Richardson is in bed with the PSL owner whether he likes it or not. He can't intentionally hurt the PSL owners seat value.

[bleys]

The letter expresses his commitment to the PSL owners in the last paragraph. By signing and sending this letter he has signed a commitment to the PSL owner. Now that all is said and done he is saying during interviews that last years sacrifice was necessary. Basically he sent the PSL owners an apology that stated he did not intend to place a subpar product on the field and committed to placing a quality product on the field in the future. Currently he is telling everyone that he knew they would not be successful and that he had to do this to resign his core players for 2011. This is a blatant contradiction to the PSL letter and I guarandamntee you that if enough PSL owners signed a petition and then lawyered up they could get a settlement for the LACK of commitment that Richardson specifically guaranteed to the PSL owners in the letter.

damn son that's one helluva reach..

[Urrymonster]

I find it quite ridiculous that people think buying a ticket, a season ticket or a PSL entitles them to anything other the opportunity to watch a football game. Look at how much it costs to buy whatever you have, then compare it to the annual revenue of the team. I wonder what percentage of the team you own with that investment...

You are a fan. You pay because you either like what the team stands for, or are a local person. You may have initially paid to help Carolina get an NFL team, so you would have the privilege of watching them year after year. That is all though. What product is put on the field is irrelevant. Shout all you want about some random statement that may or may not be in, that you found because of your undergraduate 1st year law qualification, but do you seriously think all the lawyers at this place would allow a document to go out that entitled you ANYTHING? Seriously?

[riddel]

damn son that's one helluva reach..

Not a reach if he tells the PSL owner he didn't know that his actions would hurt the team, but then turns around in interviews and tells the public that he had to sacrifice 2010 in order to make the 2011 moves. I commitment is a commitment and if he told the PSL owners in the letter that he tanked the season on purpose, then there would be law suits, so now that he is saying it in interviews the same reasoning applies.

If I owned a PSL I'd get a petition and seek 2010 refunds based on the fact Richardson admits he was not committed to winning last season, but securing the new CBA. You can't claim a commitment in writing and while in reality Richardson admitted to committing to securing a new CBA even if it was in conflict to his commitment to the PSL owner.

[bleys]

besides all that.. the fact remains,

Fox decided to stay in 2010 and with the lockout looming, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize it would be smart to delay a coaching change for a year, get through the lockout, and then re-energize this fanbase and team..

Not a reach if he tells the PSL owner he didn't know that his actions would hurt the team, but then turns around in interviews and tells the public that he had to sacrifice 2010 in order to make the 2011 moves. I commitment is a commitment and if he told the PSL owners in the letter that he tanked the season on purpose, then there would be law suits, so now that he is saying it in interviews the same reasoning applies.

you have nothing.. hence, reach.

[riddel]

I find it quite ridiculous that people think buying a ticket, a season ticket or a PSL entitles them to anything other the opportunity to watch a football game. Look at how much it costs to buy whatever you have, then compare it to the annual revenue of the team. I wonder what percentage of the team you own with that investment...

You are a fan. You pay because you either like what the team stands for, or are a local person. You may have initially paid to help Carolina get an NFL team, so you would have the privilege of watching them year after year. That is all though. What product is put on the field is irrelevant. Shout all you want about some random statement that may or may not be in, that you found because of your undergraduate 1st year law qualification, but do you seriously think all the lawyers at this place would allow a document to go out that entitled you ANYTHING? Seriously?

A ticket purchase is not the same as PSL ownership. I never compared the two. Richardson was the one who made the commitment to the PSL owner in writing. You can't make a commitment in writing while directly contradicting that commitment. PSL owners do have a lawsuit. It would get paid to some extent if enough PSL owners signed the petition. Richardson should have never admitted to tanking 2010 to secure a 2011 CBA.

[Urrymonster]

Not a reach if he tells the PSL owner he didn't know that his actions would hurt the team, but then turns around in interviews and tells the public that he had to sacrifice 2010 in order to make the 2011 moves. I commitment is a commitment and if he told the PSL owners in the letter that he tanked the season on purpose, then there would be law suits, so now that he is saying it in interviews the same reasoning applies.

If I owned a PSL I'd get a petition and seek 2010 refunds based on the fact Richardson admits he was not committed to winning last season, but securing the new CBA. You can't claim a commitment in writing and while in reality Richardson admitted to committing to securing a new CBA even if it was in conflict to his commitment to the PSL owner.

Prove to us that he intentionally harmed the team, aka 'the product', whilst refuting the obvious comeback that JR would have of 'I honestly thought we could compete'.

[bleys]

plenty of fans thought the team was going to compete.. we shed a few old motherfugers.. Matt Moore had a record worth betting on. it failed, people fail.. our team failed. Fox failed.. a long time ago actually.

now the team is re-energized... can't wait.

[Urrymonster]

A ticket purchase is not the same as PSL ownership. I never compared the two. Richardson was the one who made the commitment to the PSL owner in writing. You can't make a commitment in writing while directly contradicting that commitment. PSL owners do have a lawsuit. It would get paid to some extent if enough PSL owners signed the petition. Richardson should have never admitted to tanking 2010 to secure a 2011 CBA.

Yes, but others have claimed that buying tickets entitles them. Hence why I said 'people'...

His 'commitment' is simply to field a team that you are proud of. Define proud. That could be exemplary professionals and role models, exciting to watch or successful, or it could be the epitome of hard work and determination. It's a wishy-washy statement to make PSL owners feel like they are worth something and have some say in what happens at the Panthers. Sad fact is, some buy it.

You are trying to make a lot of noise, but if you sat back and pictured presenting this in a court of law, you would realise how ridiculous this all is. Afterall, what if JR's definition of proud differs to yours? Well you could always give up your PSL as you don't like what ownership is doing...

I get the impression that everything you do in life, is serious.

[riddel]

Since you brought out the letter as the evidence that would facilitate a lawsuit Id say its date is pretty damned relevant.

Anyway its becoming pretty clear that those high priced lawyers wouldn't need to bother themselves with your lawsuit. They would leave it to the associates that are planning to take the Bar Exam next year.

The Letter states the following:

Richardson did not know that the Panthers would suck in 2010 due to the lack of moves he made in 2010 and apologizes for the fact that they did suck, he then takes the blame for the mistake.

The recent interviews states the following:

Richardson did know that the Panthers would suck in 2010 due to the lack of moves he made in 2010 and apologizes for the fact that they did suck, he then take the blame for the mistake and states that it was necessary to secure the new CBA.

The point of the letter is not the date, it is the fact he states he was unaware that the team would suck, but now in interviews he states that he knew the team would suffer in 2010, but it was necessary. Another point of the letter is that Richardson states he is committed to fielding the best product available.

He didn't do this in 2010. He denies it in the letter, but admits it now. Basically he is telling the PSL fans that he was committed winning in 2010 in a letter, but he is telling the world today that he was not committed to winning in 2010.

Richardson intentionally damaged the PSL value in order to secure a new CBA. PSL owners who sold last year for a loss due to Richardson deliberate damage or couldn't sell their tickets due to the deliberate damage very well may have a lawsuit.

[bleys]

The Letter states the following:

Richardson did not know that the Panthers would suck in 2010 due to the lack of moves he made in 2010 and apologizes for the fact that they did suck, he then takes the blame for the mistake.

The recent interviews states the following:

Richardson did know that the Panthers would suck in 2010 due to the lack of moves he made in 2010 and apologizes for the fact that they did suck, he then take the blame for the mistake and states that it was necessary to secure the new CBA.

The point of the letter is not the date, it is the fact he states he was unaware that the team would suck, but now in interviews he states that he knew the team would suffer in 2010, but it was necessary. Another point of the letter is that Richardson states he is committed to fielding the best product available.

He didn't do this in 2010. He denies it in the letter, but admits it now. Basically he is telling the PSL fans that he was committed winning in 2010 in a letter, but he is telling the world today that he was not committed to winning in 2010.

Richardson intentionally damaged the PSL value in order to secure a new CBA. PSL owners who sold last year for a loss due to Richardson deliberate damage or couldn't sell their tickets due to the deliberate damage very well may have a lawsuit.

give direct quotes to his words recently and a link so we aren't listening to paraphased statements, and not out of context....

[riddel]

give direct quotes, not out of context....

I'm not trying the case and I don't feel like doing the work....you have the link...read it and then listen to the interviews and quotes from the last 6 months....they are in direct contradiction. I've seen lesser cases settled out of court.

[Urrymonster]

I haven't ever heard him say that. I heard him say that they wanted to get young and build through the draft, then keep their core players... In fact I am almost certianly he has always maintained that they thought they would be better and be able to compete.