21isSuperman

Then why doesn't that apply to the owners/GMs? If politics have no place in the workplace, then shouldn't the owners and GMs ignore his politics and sign him regardless? Furthermore, he didn't "swindle" the league. He was treated unfairly and discriminated against, so the league had to compensate him for their own wrongdoing. So you're saying a business that thinks it has done nothing wrong will settle to give someone $80 mil just because it's cheaper than having lawyers? Can you point me in the direction of some of these companies? I'd love to have an extra $80 mil right now

It's speculation, but that's what people in the NFL believe it is

You don't settle to give someone $80 mil unless you did something wrong. They didn't explicitly admit to anything, but if they really didn't do anything wrong, they wouldn't have settled. The NFL, and any employer for that matter, has the right to not employ an individual, but for whatever reason. That's the whole basis of this case. The NFL does not have the right to not sign a player because of his political beliefs. Like I said above, you don't pay someone $80 mil to settle unless you know you did something wrong. There's definitely something going on behind the scenes that the NFL didn't want exposed, so they settled. That could be anything. Tell us how you really feel..... Why does he deserve to be unsigned? He's not an elite QB, but he brings a lot to the table. He doesn't throw a lot of picks and he can run as well as. You really want to claim that he doesn't deserve to be on an NFL roster, but Nathan Peterman or Blake Bortles do?

He was a 3-time Pro Bowler

That's a little ridiculous. TY is a momma's boy, but has 950+ receiving yards in every season except 1. Luck doesn't have a killer mentality, but was top 5 in passing yards and TDs this year. Ebron is too nice, but was top 3 in TDs overall and was the #1 TE for TD receptions. These guys are classy and don't need to yell to the world about how great they are, a la Richard Sherman. They also don't need to play rough or dirty to have an edge over the opponent. These guys have talent and skill, and that's what leads to wins. Vontaze Burfict plays with an "edge", but all that has gotten him is a reputation as one of the league's dirtiest players.

I saw reports that he got $80 mil from the NFL. They don't hand out that kind of money unless they did something wrong.

Yeah, that's how it works. For example, NFL Network is devoted to the NFL. When it's the NFL offseason, they still have to talk about football, so they'll talk about who has the best chance to repeat, what to look for in the upcoming offseason, the draft, etc. They can't discuss NBA or NHL scores, or the upcoming MLB season. They have to fill the air with something

What else do you want them to do? There aren't scores or big stories to talk about. It's just discussion topics for them to fill airtime and try to get some viewers and whatnot in the offseason, when things are generally slower. They have to fill their TV time up with something.

This thread isn't going towards anywhere productive and isn't creating a discussion. Closing

I wonder what his source is for this. I haven't been able to find any other reports on this. If true, that's absolutely insane.

You're wrong. The article hasn't been over the internet over the past few days. My whole point is this is old news and WISH is trying to make something out of nothing. This article was posted on Jan 25 and mentions Rihanna, Jay-Z, and Cardi B. The article also makes Jermaine Dupri a central figure. Cardi B refused to participate in the Super Bowl on Dec. 21 (https://pagesix.com/2018/12/21/why-cardi-b-wont-perform-at-the-super-bowl-halftime-show/) Rihanna refused on Oct 18 (https://consequenceofsound.net/2018/10/rihanna-super-bowl-kaepernick/) Jermaine Dupri responded to Rihanna and Jay-Z's refusal many months ago (https://www.okayplayer.com/music/jermaine-dupri-superbowl-boycott.html). This is garbage news reporting by two-bit journalists who are trying to make something out of nothing. They're looking for reactions instead of reporting the facts. This is a sad excuse for journalism.

In his defense, the Pelicans have done pretty much nothing to surround him with any talent since they drafted him. In this situation, I give Davis the benefit of the doubt because it's not like the team brought in another All-NBA talent and they won many playoff series. They were bad when they drafted him and are still bad. Had they surrounded him with talent and a winning team, he may have been more open to staying

Anthony Davis won't re-sign with New Orleans, and is asking for a trade. It won't happen, but I'd love to see him in Indy. Imagine adding him to our current team

Thank you both! I changed the title