Maurkice Pouncey posts heated tirade against proposed NFL CBA

It’s going to be a hard no from Maurkice Pouncey on the proposed new NFL CBA.

The All-Pro center took to social media on Wednesday to air his thoughts about the new CBA and, if you were curious with which way he would vote, that question was solved in the first few seconds of his video.

“I vote no, f— that s—,” Pouncey said in a video on his Instagram story. “Our NFLPA, the dudes at the top, the leaders? Man, that s— all f—ing bulls—.”

The complete 43-second rant can be heard here, but — fair warning — there’s strong, gloriously explicit language:

Pouncey also mentioned a harrowing byproduct of what could happen should the CBA not be extended: a lockout.

“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 the 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 f— 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.”

The deal, which was sent from NFLPA leadership to player members on Wednesday, has been widely rejected from players across the league, including Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers and J.J. Watt.

The proposed CBA features a 17-game season — no shortening of the preseason, at that — with a less-than-50 percent share of revenue split: less than a percentage point increase for players. There also is no mention of guaranteed contracts, concessions on marijuana use or health benefits for the players, three issues that were expected to be addressed in the deal.

The deal originally also included a cap of players’ salaries in the proposed 17th game at $250,000, regardless of salary made throughout the year. That proposition was removed.

NFLPA representatives voted 17-14 in favor of the CBA (one vote abstained), with some 2,000 players having to vote to ratify the proposal for it to go into effect. A decision could be expected — reached or rejected — sooner rather than later.

Source: Read Full Article