Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Califan007

Members
  • Content Count

    39,504
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    124

Posts posted by Califan007

  1. 1 hour ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:


    Eventually it will be. I think they do have the votes to override. I don’t think his ask is crazy though... 

     

    I thought I read on here that Trump asked for higher payments several times before now. I’m not sure what Stephen Denis is talking about....

     

    Trump isn't supposed to "ask" for higher payments...he's the ****ing president. He's supposed to lead and govern and put in the hard work necessary months ago that lead to higher payments. The only way he knows how to govern is to make grand proclamations on twitter.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  2. 44 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


    You don’t realize you have a reading comprehension issue on this one. You can cut a player for any reason or no reason.

     

     

    You know this as fact when it comes to COVID or you are assuming it's treated no differently than anything else? Do you know if it was addressed in any talks with the NFLPA? Are there issues if one player breaks protocols and is cut and another player also breaks protocols and is kept on the team? Any of this covered in the grievance process discussion? Is the reason no players have been cut after breaking COVID protocols is because teams don't see it as being worthy of releasing players over? Or are they trying to avoid the issue I just mentioned of cutting one player for breaking the protocols but not others? Or were teams notified about taking all measures in these situations except for cutting players? Is there a 3-strikes process in place, or a zero-tolerance policy? I mean, that last point is obviously not or else a bunch of players would have already been dropped from their teams. How much leeway do individual franchises have in actions taken against players who break protocol? Did the NFLPA try and gain some guarantees for those players who chose to take certain risks to keep the money train running for the owners? Or is opting out the only choice given to them?

     

    Let me know if you need help comprehending what I just wrote.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  3. 12 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


    Obviously I do know and spelled it out for you. You can be suspended for conduct detrimental to the team for violating covid protocols.  Suspension for conduct detrimental to the team can also void guarantees in a player contract.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2020/08/04/nfl-coronavirus-policy-could-mean-fine-suspension-players/5580837002/

     

     

    I don't know if you realize this, but that doesn't answer my question. You told me twice what teams could do, but did not tell me what teams can NOT do, and why. That's what you don't  know. I don't know it, either, which is why I asked.

     

     

    15 minutes ago, veteranskinsfan said:

    Remember how fast Riverboat Ron cut Dunbar?  Now he has to be consistent and send another message to the team.  Clowns will not be kept on the roster.

     

    We didn't cut Dunbar.

     

    EDIT: Someone beat me to it lol...

  4. 14 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


    Yes they agreed blatant disregard for protocols can be subject to conduct detrimental to the team. Every player had the option to opt out and not play this year. They proactively agreed to the restrictions by reporting. Violating the rules twice with a coach who is high risk is beyond inexcusable. 

     

    Having dealt extensively with unions for well over a decade, my question goes beyond mere fan snark. It would not surprise me if the NFLPA took a specific stance (if there was actually any negotiations). There have been numerous players who have broken COVID protocols...I'm not sure if any of them have been cut. Is it because teams just don't want to cut players over it or is there something else--obviously you don't know. I think Watson was one of recent players.

  5. 3 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


    You can cut for any reason or no reason. If you claim it was conduct detrimental to the team and seek to void guarantees and recoup portion of the signing bonus, then the NFLPA would certainly intervene. 

     

    Players can also file a grievance, though. I was wondering if there was anything on the books specifically concerning COVID violations.

  6.  

    Can you get cut for breaking COVID protocols?...I don't remember if there was anything involving the NFLPA about it when the league was figuring out how this season would proceed.

     

    He owned up to it publicly, apologized, and talked to Rivera about it. I'm good with whatever Rivera's response will be.

     

    .

    • Like 2
  7. Just now, DJHJR86 said:

    That's dumb of Montez to do that on social media....but can you really blame the guy?  He's been on the practice squad all year, showing up and putting in the work, and Haskins has had repeated issues both on and off the field and has continued to get chances.  

     

    Can I blame the guy for being dumb and putting his personal feelings above what's best for the team? Abso-****ing-lutely.  Did it for Haskins, don't see why it shouldn't be done for Montez.

     

     

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
  8. 1 minute ago, Panninho said:

    I don't think Kraft is a good comparison here. Jerry Richardson had to sell because he made inappropriate sexual comments to female employees. But he agreed to sell, I don't think Snyder would agree to sell the team. He would have to be forced out by the league.

    So in general I tend to agree with your overall assessment. The lack of public outcry here makes me believe that nothing substantial will happen.

     

    More accurately, Richardson sold because he made inappropriate sexual comments to female employees AND the league discovered he had paid out settlements in connection to those actions. So...just saying lol...(he also used the "N-word" to a black employee)

  9. 2 minutes ago, Panninho said:

    1.6 million Dollar is a lot of money to pay to someone who cannot back up any of her allegations. Also the WaPo article says that she wasn't officially fired:

    "Though the woman had been terminated for cause, she and the team agreed that her personnel file would be changed to show that she voluntarily resigned. The team also provided the woman with a letter of recommendation, signed by Mitch Gershman, then the team’s chief operating officer, which described her as “well-respected by her colleagues here at The Washington Redskins and around the NFL” and said she “will be an asset to another organization.”

     

    With everything reported over the last couple of weeks about the culture within this organization it also gives such a report a whole new level of credibility.

     

    Settlements can often entail squelching bad press and other issues that aren't directly tied to the allegations as they are to being able to prove allegations, especially when you (figuratively at least) have billions at your disposal. And I didn't mean she was fired, I was only commenting on the part that said that she could have been fired for cause and gave what I had read/heard was the cause (or speculation that it was the cause, anyway)...

  10. I think I read/heard yesterday that the woman's allegations were "investigated" by two different law firms, I think both hired by the team/Snyder (going off memory right now so might not be accurate). They couldn't find anything to back up her allegations or something like that, and they showed that she had lied to the lawyers about something (I don't think it was said what she lied about) and that was the "cause" for being fired. Both she and Snyder signed NDAs with the settlement saying neither one could talk about anything.

  11. 1 hour ago, ultravin said:

    really don't understand why they would not want to keep kyle smith. i think he's done a helluva job here.  

     

     

    Possibilities:

     

    - He and Ron just don't "gel"...and Rivera feels there are others out there just as good at acquiring talent that he does gel with.

    - Due diligence...no mention of Kyle because they already know all about him so only mentions of others they want to investigate to be thorough, because they may find someone better.

    - Traditional GM duties getting split between Kyle and someone else, with the "someone else" handling the more administrative aspects that maybe Ron has been handling. Can't remember which ex-GM said this but they said something like 80% of a GM's workload has nothing whatsoever to do with talent evaluation.

    - Adding a cover to adhere to the Rooney Rule...team hired Terry Bateman without doing a bunch of interviews first with others, especially candidates of color. That got them investigated by the NFL to see if they complied with the Rooney Rule before hiring Bateman. To avoid that with Kyle, might be showing that he wasn't just handed the GM position without interviewing others.

    - It's all speculative hot air.

    • Like 1
  12. 43 minutes ago, ntotoro said:

    I have a weird feeling Rivera isn’t ok with his losing QB maskless with a bunch of strippers after already once having a covid suspension.

     

    Yeah, there is no ****ing way in hell he's ok with this. Not from a player standpoint, not from a culture standpoint (especially on a team that is going through a toxic workplace/sexual harassment investigation), not from a "we're in the middle of the ****ing playoff run" standpoint,  not from a trade value standpoint.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...