OFFICIAL 2010 NFL SEASON THREAD: BREAKING NEWS VIKINGS WAIVE RANDY MOSS

wfan reporting that revis said if he doesnt get his money soon, hes done with the jets


would love him on my niners
pimp.gif
 
wfan reporting that revis said if he doesnt get his money soon, hes done with the jets


would love him on my niners
pimp.gif
 
Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
 
Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
 
[h1]Roethlisberger suspension reduced to 4 games[/h1]
By BARRY WILNER, AP Pro Football Writer 35 minutes ago

NEW YORK (AP)—Ben Roethlisberger’s(notes) suspension has been cut from six gamesto four by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

The Pittsburgh Steelers’ star quarterback met with Goodell early Friday andwas told he could return on Oct. 17 against Cleveland.

Roethlisberger was suspended in April for violating the league’s personalconduct policy, but Goodell said at the time he would review the player’sbehavior over the next few months. Goodell was satisfied that the quarterbackhas

Roethlisberger was accused of sexually assaulting a Georgia college studentfollowing a night of drinking in a Milledgeville, Ga., bar on March 5. He wasnot charged by Georgia authorities.

The league said the “reinstatement is contingent on Roethlisbergercontinuing to adhere to the program established by our advisors and avoiding anyfurther violations of the personal conduct policy.
Click to expand...
 
[h1]Roethlisberger suspension reduced to 4 games[/h1]
By BARRY WILNER, AP Pro Football Writer 35 minutes ago

NEW YORK (AP)—Ben Roethlisberger’s(notes) suspension has been cut from six gamesto four by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

The Pittsburgh Steelers’ star quarterback met with Goodell early Friday andwas told he could return on Oct. 17 against Cleveland.

Roethlisberger was suspended in April for violating the league’s personalconduct policy, but Goodell said at the time he would review the player’sbehavior over the next few months. Goodell was satisfied that the quarterbackhas

Roethlisberger was accused of sexually assaulting a Georgia college studentfollowing a night of drinking in a Milledgeville, Ga., bar on March 5. He wasnot charged by Georgia authorities.

The league said the “reinstatement is contingent on Roethlisbergercontinuing to adhere to the program established by our advisors and avoiding anyfurther violations of the personal conduct policy.
Click to expand...
 
Adam Schefter reporting Browns RB Montario Hardesty has a torn ACL and Broncos RB Lendale White tore his achilles - both done for the year.

What the hell is going on in Denver with these injuries?
sick.gif
 
Adam Schefter reporting Browns RB Montario Hardesty has a torn ACL and Broncos RB Lendale White tore his achilles - both done for the year.

What the hell is going on in Denver with these injuries?
sick.gif
 
Originally Posted by bijald0331

Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
Click to expand...


Wow. NFL is by far and away the richest sport in America and these owners are stressing 270k?
smh.gif


I really don't ever want to hear another person complain about a player holding out or trying to get a better contract.
 
Originally Posted by bijald0331

Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
Click to expand...


Wow. NFL is by far and away the richest sport in America and these owners are stressing 270k?
smh.gif


I really don't ever want to hear another person complain about a player holding out or trying to get a better contract.
 
Originally Posted by bijald0331

Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
Click to expand...


Wow. NFL is by far and away the richest sport in America and these owners are stressing 270k?
smh.gif


I really don't ever want to hear another person complain about a player holding out or trying to get a better contract.
 
Originally Posted by bijald0331

Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
Click to expand...


Wow. NFL is by far and away the richest sport in America and these owners are stressing 270k?
smh.gif


I really don't ever want to hear another person complain about a player holding out or trying to get a better contract.
 
Originally Posted by bijald0331

Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
Click to expand...


Wow. NFL is by far and away the richest sport in America and these owners are stressing 270k?
smh.gif


I really don't ever want to hear another person complain about a player holding out or trying to get a better contract.
 
Originally Posted by bijald0331

Little stuff like this makes a lockout seem more and more of a possibility


Title: Possible Collusion and the 85 Percent Rule: Are NFL Teams trading and cutting rookies to avoid paying into collectively-bargained pool? Author: Greg
Spoiler [+]
The National Football League Players' Association is reportedly looking into whether teams are trading rookie players who would be cut in order to avoid cutting them themselves and having to pay 85% of the player's salary. If they are doing that, they could be deemed to be colluding, which generally means two or more teams acting in a way to deprive players of collectively-bargained rights. The NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement contains anti-collusive language under Article XXVIII. Here's more on the allegation:


In a pair trades on Monday, Washington sent 6th round draft pick tight end Dennis Morris to St. Louis for a conditional pick and the Rams sent 5th round pick defensive end Hall Davis to the ******** for a conditional pick. On the same day, Philadelphia traded 6th round pick running back Charles Scott to Arizona for 6th round pick cornerback Jorrick Calvin.

Under collective bargaining rules, if a player is cut by the team that drafted him, that team is required to pay 85 percent of that player's salary into a pool that is distributed at the end of the season.

The ******** have already cut Davis.


For more, see this excellent explanation by Sean Fagan of SB Nation:


The Washington ******** may have gotten up to some hijinks with their trade involving recently-cut defensive lineman Hall Davis and a prior trade involving tight end Dennis Morris. According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, both the ******** and the St. Louis Rams are under investigation by the NFLPA for attempting to circumvent the little-known "85 percent" rule.

In layman's terms - any rookie that is drafted by an NFL team is owed 85 percent of his salary if subsequently cut by the team which drafted him. By trading Davis to the ********, and having him cut by Washington rather than St. Louis, the Rams save $272,00. Further, the ******** will save the same $272,000 dollars owed to Morris, who was traded to the Rams earlier in the week and is also expected to be cut.


Might this be collusion by NFL teams to avoid paying salaries -- and salaries of obscure rookie players who when cut attract minimal media attention and who individually may not have much influence on the Players' Association? Or is it just a case of a bunch of late round picks -- whose chances for making any team are likely low -- simply not being good enough to make an NFL team?
Click to expand...


Wow. NFL is by far and away the richest sport in America and these owners are stressing 270k?
smh.gif


I really don't ever want to hear another person complain about a player holding out or trying to get a better contract.
 
Was hoping for the suspension to be cut in half but no dice. I really hope Dixon plays well....


Or .500 would be good enough
 
Was hoping for the suspension to be cut in half but no dice. I really hope Dixon plays well....


Or .500 would be good enough
 
Was hoping for the suspension to be cut in half but no dice. I really hope Dixon plays well....


Or .500 would be good enough
 
Was hoping for the suspension to be cut in half but no dice. I really hope Dixon plays well....


Or .500 would be good enough
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest News

View All News

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom