Broncos get warning over Russell Wilson situation: Asshole Face 'messed with the wrong guy'

[Kupped]

The broncos should try to recoup some of the money Wussell stole from them.

Why?
Reward bad management? Fuck that.

 

[WestCoastRam]

Wilson was 4-11 for the Broncs and now Payton has them at 8-8, (7 wins in last 10) so I think it's pretty clear who's been more capable of "doing their job"
I had a lot of respect for (and fear of) Wilson for many years, but he really seemed to morph in to some sort of different guy.
Wilson will get dumped, Payton will continue to coach and this will all blow over.

I think the argument is that Wilson is the same as he's always been but that there was a lot that Pete kept a lid on and Wilson's eroding physical skills no longer allows him to play hero ball at the exceedingly high level that stuck fear into defenses. Without his ability to run around being what it was, all the limitations to his game are strikingly apparent.

Also, I think people are all irked that the Broncos asked what they asked but the news cycle has already blown past it. I doubt anything comes from the NFLPA's saber rattling. I think it was the right move for the team. And it was the right move for him to call their bluff.

It's a pebble in the pond of the NFL season.

 

[WestCoastRam]

Why?
Reward bad management? Fuck that.

What are they gonna do, steal one of the eight toilet's from his house and sell it?

 

[Kupped]

What are they gonna do, steal one of the eight toilet's from his house and sell it?

lol.

Yeah.. I’m not a Wilson fan AT ALL.. guy’s a weirdo…

But.. Broncos deserve to feel the pain.

 

[AZRams]

Funny to think that ROD would think "Asshole Face" is how his name would appear in the original piece.

 

[Selassie I]

Funny to think that ROD would think "Asshole Face" is how his name would appear in the original piece.

We always strive for the truth... so it makes complete sense.

 

[Angry Ram]

Elway got them a championship with that kind of aggressiveness, so I'd give him a pass, if I'm a Bronco fan.

He signed Peyton as a FA. He stunk at getting any other QB.

And they didn't even win b/c of Peyton. They won on the DST. TJ McDonald fucked up the Broncos and Peyton that year. They never were the same after.

 

[JYB]

He signed Peyton as a FA. He stunk at getting any other QB.

And they didn't even win b/c of Peyton. They won on the DST. TJ McDonald fucked up the Broncos and Peyton that year. They never were the same after.

He had two Super Bowl appearances in ten years and won one of them. That's a good record, even if his QB picks weren't the greatest.

Los of people said McVay and Snead fucked up the Rams after their Super Bowl win, but most Ram fans thought the (apparently overestimated) cost was worth it. I suspect most Bronco fans are pleased with the job Elway did.

 

[PARAM]

Wilson is 17-27 since losing to the Rams in the 2020 playoffs. I think Russell "cooking" was helped immensely by the WRs (Lockett & Baldwin, then Metcalf) who knew the scramble drill well. Even then, the Seahawks were just 1-3 in the postseason his last 3 years there. Jeudy & Sutton aren't so adept as Lockett, Baldwin & Metcalf were with Wilson. FWIW, I think AD and the Rams screwed his head up. As far as Payton is concerned, he may not steal as much of the Broncos money as Wilson but he's gonna steal some just the same.

 

[JimY53]

Elway got them a championship with that kind of aggressiveness, so I'd give him a pass, if I'm a Bronco fan.

Yes, all GMs make mistakes. Rams fans have lived with a lot worse back in the St. Louis era ... in the dark years. Sean Payt.on did improve the team ... and he has some to work with but he has to get a QB, without that things won't turn around. At that point Elway's decisions will stand ... for good or bad. If they go bad -- he'll have to take responsibility

 

[PARAM]

What's odd about the Denver situation is they have had the same 5 guys start on the OL all season. And they're not jags. Yet they're #17 rushing the ball and #26th in passing while allowing the 6th most sacks in the NFL. I guess he's got to blame somebody so it's'the QB and not the head coach. He's got a good RB in rookie Jaleel McLaughlin (5.6 ypc) but he doesn't use him. Javonte Williams is getting 3.6 ypc, and that has gone down every year. I don't know, maybe it is all Wilson's fault.

 

[Juice]

Can I just say that I don't give a damn about Russell Wilson? I realize that I should just move on and mind my own business. However, the chance not to say, "Fuck Russell Wilson" is too difficult for me at this time.

 

[Allen2McVay]

Can I just say that I don't give a damn about Russell Wilson? I realize that I should just move on and mind my own business. However, the chance not to say, "Fuck Russell Wilson" is too difficult for me at this time.

You Made Russell Cry!!! ... Good Job.

 

[Corbin]

https://www.si.com/nfl/broncos/news/nflpa-letter-broncos-russell-wilson-threat

Leaked NFLPA Letter Makes Broncos Look Worse in Russell Wilson Saga​

The NFLPA's letter to the Denver Broncos on behalf of Russell Wilson has fueled more scrutiny on the demotion heard 'round the world.

• CHAD JENSEN
• JAN 1, 2024 5:03 PM EST

In this story:​

Sunday morning, before the Denver Broncos took the field against the Los Angeles Chargers, a new report from NFL insider Ian Rapoport seemed to cast doubt on Russell Wilson's accusation that the team "threatened" to bench him unless he removed the injury guarantees from his contract.
Rapoport cited a source confirming the Broncos did reach out to Wilson's agent Mark Rodgers, who then took the team's request to the NFLPA. But Rapoport painted the picture that while Wilson took the Broncos' request as a threat, the player's union didn't view it as being 'real' — whatever that means.

As many agents do amid negotiations, Rodgers took the Broncos' proposal to the NFLPA, which often consults with agents on big-money player contracts. The union did not view any "threat" of benching as a real threat, and Wilson turned down the Broncos' offer, which is his right. No grievance was filed, and it's unlikely one will be. One source called such negotiations "commonplace."

Fast forward to Monday, and amid the Broncos moving up in the standings by securing their eighth win of the season while simultaneously being eliminated from playoff contention, a letter the NFLPA sent to Denver's front office seems to contradict some of Rapoport's reporting. The Washington Post published excerpts from that letter to the Broncos, which also seemed to be laying the groundwork for future litigation, despite Rapoport claiming that a grievance is "unlikely" to be filed.

“It has come to our attention that the Denver Broncos recently informed Mr. Wilson and his Certified Contract Advisor that if Mr. Wilson would not renegotiate his Player Contract to relinquish certain salary guarantees, the Broncos would remove him from the starting lineup.
“If the Broncos follow-through on the Club’s threat, the Club will violate, among other things, the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Mr. Wilson’s Player Contract and New York law. And, we are particularly concerned that the Broncos still intend to commit these violations under the guise of ‘coaching decisions.’
“Accordingly, we write to notify you that the NFLPA and Mr. Wilson ‘reasonably anticipate’ arbitration and/or litigation against the Broncos and the Management Council, triggering your respective obligations to preserve potentially relevant documents."

https://sibforms.com/serve/MUIFAP4N...2kwMS6oZQJ1fSH7FIvgtfGFav24_fkdD0eeL8o5hFEytV
Initial reports on the Broncos' alleged threat included the team's side of the story, who adamantly claimed that no threat to Wilson was made. But the Broncos also made sure to stipulate that GM George Paton's call to Rodgers was "documented," so if this does end up in some sort of arbitration or litigation, it will play a role in determining the veracity of the team's defense.

If the call were to ever leak into the public, and it's revealed that Paton did, in fact, threaten to bench Wilson if the quarterback's camp didn't play ball, the Broncos would be caught lying. The team went to great lengths to assure ESPN's Josina Anderson that no threat was made, resting on their laurels of the Broncos' long-standing reputation for ethical business dealings.

However, while the NFLPA's letter to the Broncos does lend credence to Wilson's accusations of being threatened, the union will always take the side of the player. It's the reason for its existence, after all.

This letter proves that the NFLPA was led to believe by the Wilson camp that the Broncos made threats, but it's still based on the quarterback's interpretation that Paton was actually levying an ultimatum.

Occam's Razor could apply here. The simplest explanation is often the right one, meaning the Broncos probably did threaten Wilson with the bench if he didn't renegotiate the injury guarantee terms of his contract.

But the team's adamant denial in the press, and what we know about Paton, is enough to give pause to automatically believing Wilson's side of the story. However, even if it's not rock-solid proof the Broncos are lying, the NFLPA's letter does offer circumstantial evidence that supports Wilson's claim.
The only way we'll ever know for sure is if the Broncos or the Wilson camp leak the recordings or transcripts of the calls in question. The NFL, and especially the Broncos, don't usually air their dirty laundry in public, so while I don't expect such concrete proof to ever materialize, never say never.

The NFLPA's letter paints the picture that the Broncos benched Wilson under the rubric of "coaching decisions." Head coach Asshole Face has maintained his position that Wilson's demotion was a football move, though he did acknowledge that "economics" were part of the picture.

Payton has also denied having any knowledge of or participation in the phone calls to Wilson's camp relative to the Broncos' request for the QB to renegotiate his contractual injury guarantees.

“I’m not privy to any of those [discussions]," Payton said on Friday. "I’m handling the football."
However, while we don't have cause to doubt Paton's word as a general manager, Payton's track record for veracity isn't exactly bulletproof, as his 'Bounty-gate' denials more than a decade ago proved to be false in the fullness of time. It's too easy to say that the truth is somewhere in the middle of these two sides' respective claims.
Either the Broncos threatened Wilson, or they didn't. Either Payton was involved in those "discussions," or he wasn't. There's no gray area.

Wilson has opted to kick this story into the public spotlight by commenting from his locker last Friday. If the Broncos are telling the truth, and Wilson's interpretation of the team's request is off-base, Denver may have no choice but to fight fire with fire and leak whatever evidence Paton may be sitting on that exculpates the organization of any wrongdoing.

 

[Merlin]

Wilson's a stupid hill to die on for the player's union. Even to fight on. Teams need to have the power to shitcan dudes who aren't good enough. It is their choice to shut him down so they don't have to pay him stupid money even longer.

He's coming out of this looking just fine. If the fucking union gave a shit about the players they would do something about QB salaries to ensure so much of the cap isn't going to one dude on a team. But they're greedy and stupid.

 

[Selassie I]

The best quote in that article in case you glossed over it...

"Asshole Face's track record for veracity isn't exactly bulletproof "


Definition of veracity- conformity to fact; accuracy.
AKA... he is a known Liar.

LOLOLOLOL

 

[dieterbrock]

If the fucking union gave a shit about the players they would do something about QB salaries to ensure so much of the cap isn't going to one dude on a team. But they're greedy and stupid.

Not to sidetrack this, but how is the union responsible for this??? They've been able to upgrade the revenue share in the CBA, the salary cap may be over 240 mill for 2024. Cant hold the union responsible that the players dont share it equally
I dont think any player would support max salary by position
Alas, Fuck Payton and Wilson, they can both burn on a 49ers bonfire for all I care

 

[Merlin]

Not to sidetrack this, but how is the union responsible for this??? They've been able to upgrade the revenue share in the CBA, the salary cap may be over 240 mill for 2024. Cant hold the union responsible that the players dont share it equally
I dont think any player would support max salary by position
Alas, Fuck Payton and Wilson, they can both burn on a 49ers bonfire for all I care

Just pointing out that I don't think their priorities are in the right place for benefitting the players as a group. They should be talking with the NFL about capping what QBs make in terms of the cap percentage. Or some other metric to ensure most of the money is disseminated among the players. You may disagree and that's fine by me, but I think how that cap is distributed is very much in their wheelhouse.

Going to bat here for Wilson, ok fine go through the motions on it or whatever. I don't think it's a winning deal for them. They aren't in a position to tell owners they have to play him. But I think it demonstrates to some extent that their priorities are fucked up.

 

[dieterbrock]

Just pointing out that I don't think their priorities are in the right place for benefitting the players as a group. They should be talking with the NFL about capping what QBs make in terms of the cap percentage. Or some other metric to ensure most of the money is disseminated among the players. You may disagree and that's fine by me, but I think how that cap is distributed is very much in their wheelhouse.

They represent the players, if the players association want it done that way, the union will fight for it. The union doesnt make unilateral decisions regarding the players.
I agree the system is broken, and the cap is all about the QB's but the players themselves need to figure it out. I wouldnt be surprised if the owners even suggested it at some point, as it would behoove them as well

 

[Kupped]

They represent the players, if the players association want it done that way, the union will fight for it. The union doesnt make unilateral decisions regarding the players.
I agree the system is broken, and the cap is all about the QB's but the players themselves need to figure it out. I wouldnt be surprised if the owners even suggested it at some point, as it would behoove them as well

Why would players artificially put a cap on the value of a player position?
Think about the precedent.. and it's easy to see why they wouldn't.
They want the players to get theirs... and the OWNERS are the opposition.. not fellow players.

Contracts are contracts.. why the hell should Wilson change his because the Broncos fucked up? Ridiculous.