Steelers’ Maurkice Pouncey posts profanity-laced tirade against proposed NFL CBA

[hawaiiansteel]

Steelers’ Maurkice Pouncey posts profanity-laced tirade against proposed NFL CBA

CHRIS ADAMSKI | Wednesday, February 26, 2020

It’s fair to say that Maurkice Pouncey is against the proposed collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and its players.

In a 43-second, not-safe-for-work video message posted to his verified Instgram account Wednesday, Pouncey blasted the proposal that was ratified by the league’s owners and has been sent to a vote by rank-and-file players this week.

A veteran center and the Pittsburgh Steelers’ third-longest tenured player, Pouncey cursed about a dozen times while speaking while driving shirtless down a street with blue skies and palm trees.

“They ain’t looking out for the best of the players,” Pouncey said, referring to NFLPA leadership. “If you all want my vote, the Pouncey twins vote no.”

Pouncey’s brother, Mike, is an offensive lineman for the Los Angeles Chargers.

Maurkice Pouncey began his message by calling the proposed CBA — the current one expires next year, and ownership placed a deadline of next month for approving this proposed extension — “so (expletive) crazy” before criticizing “the dude at the top” of the union, and later referring to “the president.”

The NFLPA president is Eric Winston, a former NFL offensive lineman. The union’s executive director is DeMaurice Smith.

Pouncey, who’s made more than $23 million in his career, made an appeal to younger players who are making far less salary, ones that potentially feel more pressure to agree to a deal.

“And if any player on any one of our teams, if you all are hurting for rent money or anything while we go through this lockout, call us,” Pouncey said in his video. “Man, we got way more money than what they had back in the days. We ain’t got to worry about that. All the vets on each team, stand the (expletive) up. Stand up. Show these guys that we care about them. Man, I care about all you young players and I love you guys to death. I ain’t gonna let y’all down. Trust and believe.”

Pouncey joins other veteran players such as Richard Sherman, Russell Wilson and Aaron Rodgers who have been publicly against the proposed CBA.

https://triblive.com/sports/steelers...posed-nfl-cba/

[whatever]

Lol.....what a POS.

[feltdizz]

you sure love to call our players and coaches POS.

[whatever]

you sure love to call our players and coaches POS.

I call em like I see em.

[Ghost]

The new CBA is not good for the players. It’s a straight money grab with little thought towards player health and safety. Rogers, Wilson, Jeffries, Sherman have all come out against it. Why is Pouncey bad?

[NorthCoast]

Pouncey needs to move on to his life's work. His game ain't all that anymore.
And these high $ contract players are trying to shout down the mid and low tier players that could benefit most from the proposal.

[hawaiiansteel]

Ramon Foster takes his apparent support for CBA proposal public

Posted by Mike Florio on February 26, 2020

In 2011, the Steelers were unanimously opposed to the new CBA. In 2020, they apparently won’t be unanimous.

Center Maurkice Pouncey left no doubt regarding his position on the matter when he posted on social media a more-profanity-than-not video attacking the proposed CBA. Guard Ramon Foster, Pittsburgh’s player rep, has shared his own perspective on Twitter, in response to any and all naysayers.

“This discussion of the deal has been in place for years,” Foster said. “We’ve withheld our royalty checks for years prepping for this.”

As to the rash of players offering up a vague “no” on the proposed CBA, Foster said this: “No one ever explains why, it’s just no. Kinda like voting for Trump in 2016. A lot of folks said they didn’t, but the polls and the end result said differently. No that’s not my political stance and I’d never discuss that publicly. I’m still kinda old school.”

Given the context, the inescapable conclusion is that Foster supports, and in his capacity as a representative voted for, the proposed CBA. And as guys like Pouncey will be trying to get other players to vote against in when full membership addresses the CBA, Foster and others will be pushing the other way.

With this being the first NFL CBA fight in a world of fully-developed social media, the two sides in this debate may be just getting warmed up.
Center Maurkice Pouncey left no doubt regarding his position on the matter when he posted on social media a more-profanity-than-not video attacking the proposed CBA. Guard Ramon Foster, Pittsburgh’s player rep, has shared his own perspective on Twitter, in response to any and all naysayers.

“This discussion of the deal has been in place for years,” Foster said. “We’ve withheld our royalty checks for years prepping for this.”

As to the rash of players offering up a vague “no” on the proposed CBA, Foster said this: “No one ever explains why, it’s just no. Kinda like voting for Trump in 2016. A lot of folks said they didn’t, but the polls and the end result said differently. No that’s not my political stance and I’d never discuss that publicly. I’m still kinda old school.”

Given the context, the inescapable conclusion is that Foster supports, and in his capacity as a representative voted for, the proposed CBA. And as guys like Pouncey will be trying to get other players to vote against in when full membership addresses the CBA, Foster and others will be pushing the other way.

With this being the first NFL CBA fight in a world of fully-developed social media, the two sides in this debate may be just getting warmed up.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...oposal-public/

[BURGH86STEEL]

Pouncey needs to move on to his life's work. His game ain't all that anymore.
And these high $ contract players are trying to shout down the mid and low tier players that could benefit most from the proposal.

I don't believe the mid and low tier players benefit the most. They would continue to throw those players scraps when in comparison to what the top players in the league earn. The only way those players would benefit more is if the league guaranteed those players a lot more money. We all know that's not going to happen.

At the end of the day teams are going to reward players according to how much they value x, y, or z players.

The players gain very little by playing another game. Another game only increases the risk of injury and long term health of players.

The NFL isn't like the other sports leagues where they can increase games without repercussions. Ultimately I believe the quality of the game might be effected.

[Steelerphile]

If what the players are mostly against is the expanded 17-game season then I am completely supportive of that. Football is not a sport to expand the season. The sport is far too physical and too many injuries occur for the season to be expanded. The 16-game season is already the ultimate test of endurance for a player. So I don't think there are many players that want an expanded season, regardless of what other perks would accrue.

I, who am just a fan, hate the concept of the expanded 17-game season. There are probably other fans who either hate the idea of an expanded 17 or 18 game season or don't really have a great desire for it. I don't sense any clamoring for the expanded season from the players or the fans. So, it is mostly Goodell and the owners who want it. The question is what do they gain? If it is only revenue, then they are greedy beyond imagination. There is already plenty of revenue and Goodell make millions a year and offers this dumb idea all the time.

[feltdizz]

How many people on here have pushed for 1 more game?