PDA

View Full Version : And the Beat goes on for the Bengals...



Dee Dub
05-05-2010, 11:44 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=A ... fyarrested (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AgQIWZ8_nhW_VWd1Q2rivvpDubYF?slug=ap-bengals-purifyarrested)

Oh and they are close to signing Pac-Man Jones. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Jom112
05-05-2010, 11:45 AM
So you heard about that, huh?


Yeah... :HeadBanger

Shawn
05-05-2010, 11:49 AM
No offense Jom but this gives me great joy. Just when the Steelers are at their lowest their dear friends in Cinci come along and cheer us up.

Jom112
05-05-2010, 11:59 AM
No offense Jom but this gives me great joy. Just when the Steelers are at their lowest their dear friends in Cinci come along and cheer us up.

Yeah, it blows. I absolutely hate Pacman. What's even worse is that it's Deion Sanders that's helping him get back into the league...

Leper Friend
05-05-2010, 12:08 PM
No offense Jom but this gives me great joy. Just when the Steelers are at their lowest their dear friends in Cinci come along and cheer us up.

Yeah, it blows. I absolutely hate Pacman. What's even worse is that it's Deion Sanders that's helping him get back into the league...
I can't stand Pacman either but what all Steeler fans are learning now , you never really know what a guy is like.As long as he stays out of trouble now and produces , who cares.

hawaiiansteel
05-05-2010, 03:54 PM
and the beat goes on -


Bengals | Maurice Purify arrested

Tue, 04 May 2010

Cincinnati Bengals WR Maurice Purify was arrested Tuesday, May 4, for disorderly conduct, reports WLWT.com. Purify was seen fighting with at least one other person in a bar when he was arrested.


Read more: http://www.kffl.com/hotw/NFL?page=1#ixzz0n5Qs4WkW

Pahn711
05-05-2010, 04:04 PM
Unfortunately, the Big Ben situation has allowed the Bengals to pick him up rather discreetly. I would think it might have been a bigger deal otherwise.

hawaiiansteel
05-05-2010, 04:09 PM
Unfortunately, the Big Ben situation has allowed the Bengals to pick him up rather discreetly. I would think it might have been a bigger deal otherwise.


maybe the Bengals should trade in their Tiger Stripes for Prison Stripes -


Pacman Jones Criminal Record


Adam ‘Pacman’ Jones is the poster child for everything that is wrong with the NFL. NFL teams continue to draft thugs and convicts without regarding for their moral character or criminal record. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell is considering a proposal where NFL players will be kicked out of the league after three strikes.

Here is a rap sheet look at all of Pacman’s brushes with the law since joining the NFL’s Tennessee Titans:

July 13, 2005- Arrested and charged with assault and felony vandalism after a nightclub altercation. This began Pacman Jones NFL rap sheet. He already had a lengthy one from high school and college.

September 5, 2005- Adam was invited to attend the Nashville Sports Council Kickoff Luncheon. Jones went off on a verbal tirade while being told to wait for his car after the event. He then refused to tip the valet service.

October 2005- State of West Virginia filed a petition stating that Jones had not been contacting his probation officer and that he had not reported his July 2005 arrest. The judge extended the probation for just 90 days.

March 23, 2006- Charged with marijuana possession in Fayetteville, Georgia. He went on to claim that he knew how to beat the NFL’s drug test.

August 25, 2006- Arrested for disorderly conduct and public intoxication after being ordered by the cops to leave a Murfreesboro night club several times. Jones claimed a woman stole his wallet. The woman claimed that Jones spat on her. The judge in the case gave Pacman six months probation and told him to stay away from the club.

October 26, 2006- Jones was issued a citation for misdemeanor assault after a female student from Tennessee State University claimed that Jones spit in her face at a Nashville night club.

Feburary 19, 2007- The facts are disputed and no charges have been made yet, but Jones was in the middle of a fight and shooting at a strip club in Las Vegas that left one man paralyzed and two more wounded. The fight broke out after Jones showered strippers on stage with $81,000 dollars. The club owner claims Jones was beating a strippers head against the bar while claiming to kill one of the club’s employees.

January 3, 2008- Pacman is accused of punching Wanda S. Jackson in the face at an Atlanta strip club called the Body Tap Strip Club. Jackson says Jones reached over the counter and sucker punched her in her left eye.

October 8, 2008- Jones got into an alcohol related incident which turned into a physical confrontation with bodyguards that had been assigned to him by the Dallas Cowboys. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has suspended Jones indefinitely for the second time in his NFL career.

The above time line doesn’t include his sentence of one year in prison for a bar fight in Morgantown, West Virginia while in college.

http://bumpshack.com/2007/03/02/pacman- ... al-record/

RuthlessBurgher
05-05-2010, 04:14 PM
Unfortunately, the Big Ben situation has allowed the Bengals to pick him up rather discreetly. I would think it might have been a bigger deal otherwise.

Who is making a big deal about Big Ben situation at this point (other than HeHateMe, of course, who is apparantly not capable of talking about anything else)? Ben's a non-story until October, when he is eligible to return to the field.

The reason a Pac-Man signing isn't a huge deal is because it is with the Bengals. There is no surprise there whatsoever. Everyone pretty much expected that he would end up there eventually anyway (it was inevitable). If he signed with a totally unexpected team like, say, the Colts, then it would be news. Pac-Man to Cincy has the shock value of Ricky Martin announcing he is gay.

Pahn711
05-05-2010, 04:20 PM
Unfortunately, the Big Ben situation has allowed the Bengals to pick him up rather discreetly. I would think it might have been a bigger deal otherwise.

Who is making a big deal about Big Ben situation at this point (other than HeHateMe, of course, who is apparantly not capable of talking about anything else)? Ben's a non-story until October, when he is eligible to return to the field.


Oh I'm just saying that perhaps the Bengals don't have the undisputed "jailhouse team" title right now cause of the Big Ben thing (in the minds of the general public anyways). I'm not saying the Steelers situation is anywhere near deserving of that title, but there are plenty of haters out there who will think that.

hawaiiansteel
05-05-2010, 04:20 PM
Unfortunately, the Big Ben situation has allowed the Bengals to pick him up rather discreetly. I would think it might have been a bigger deal otherwise.

Who is making a big deal about Big Ben situation at this point (other than HeHateMe, of course, who is apparantly not capable of talking about anything else)? Ben's a non-story until October, when he is eligible to return to the field.

The reason a Pac-Man signing isn't a huge deal is because it is with the Bengals. There is no surprise there whatsoever. Everyone pretty much expected that he would end up there eventually anyway (it was inevitable). If he signed with a totally unexpected team like, say, the Colts, then it would be news. Pac-Man to Cincy has the shock value of Ricky Martin announcing he is gay.



Ricky Martin is gay? :shock:

http://media-files.gather.com/images/d868/d295/d746/d224/d96/f3/full.jpg

steelblood
05-05-2010, 08:29 PM
To some degree, I believe that Mike Brown really embraces troubled players because he feels for them and wants to give them a chance. And, to some degree, I believe that Mike Brown really embraces troubled players because they are the most talented players at their draft spot, or they are the best bargains in free agency. Either way, he is an idiot for putting so many guys with questionable work ethic and shady pasts in the same locker room. If the Bengals win the Super Bowl any time soon, there really is no justice in the world and/or the Bengals coaching staff should be called the best in football.

Pahn711
05-05-2010, 08:59 PM
To some degree, I believe that Mike Brown really embraces troubled players because he feels for them and wants to give them a chance. And, to some degree, I believe that Mike Brown really embraces troubled players because they are the most talented players at their draft spot, or they are the best bargains in free agency. Either way, he is an idiot for putting so many guys with questionable work ethic and shady pasts in the same locker room. If the Bengals win the Super Bowl any time soon, there really is no justice in the world and/or the Bengals coaching staff should be called the best in football.

Mike Brown embraces whatever it takes to win. Considering how many terrible seasons the Bengals have gone through, I can't say I particularly blame the guy. Now its pretty clear this strategy has not paid off for them, so I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.

hawaiiansteel
05-05-2010, 09:06 PM
I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.



because the Bengals just signed one of the biggest idiots of all time in Pacman Jones?

Pahn711
05-05-2010, 09:25 PM
I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.

because the Bengals just signed one of the biggest idiots of all time in Pacman Jones?

There is a difference between pointing out that the Bengals signed an idiot and suggesting that they are prison inmate recruiters, as the title of this thread implies. I'm not criticizing anyone discussing this on a forum, I just have an issue with the media pushing this type of propaganda. The guy is irrelevant, and as far as I know, every troubled player they have picked up has pretty much been irrelevant. Its just not worth it.

Shawn
05-05-2010, 10:20 PM
I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.

because the Bengals just signed one of the biggest idiots of all time in Pacman Jones?

There is a difference between pointing out that the Bengals signed an idiot and suggesting that they are prison inmate recruiters, as the title of this thread implies. I'm not criticizing anyone discussing this on a forum, I just have an issue with the media pushing this type of propaganda. The guy is irrelevant, and as far as I know, every troubled player they have picked up has pretty much been irrelevant. Its just not worth it.

Seriously? I like Jom as much as the next guy. But, if you can't talk smack about your division rivals...what has this world come to?

Jom112
05-05-2010, 10:28 PM
I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.

because the Bengals just signed one of the biggest idiots of all time in Pacman Jones?

There is a difference between pointing out that the Bengals signed an idiot and suggesting that they are prison inmate recruiters, as the title of this thread implies. I'm not criticizing anyone discussing this on a forum, I just have an issue with the media pushing this type of propaganda. The guy is irrelevant, and as far as I know, every troubled player they have picked up has pretty much been irrelevant. Its just not worth it.

Seriously? I like Jom as much as the next guy. But, if you can't talk smack about your division rivals...what has this world come to?

I knew it!


Anyway, I'll say this. The one guy I'll give Mike Brown credit for is Chris Henry (However unfortunate it ended up). Everyone gave up on him, and Mike Brown truly did feel bad that he was out of work. There was a lot of time from various people in the organization from Eric Ball the director of security to Rock Oliver the strength & conditioning coach, who spent extra time getting Henry and the right path and turning his life around.

If that same approach can be applied to Pacman (If he shows that he really does want to change), then I can somewhat support it.

But the majority of players we do bring in with troubled paths, we don't really go out of our way to help. Either you start producing like Benson and stay on the team or you don't like a number of other players and you get cut.

Also, we are division rivals, we should laugh at stupid things like this. Freakin Pacman Jones... :HeadBanger

Pahn711
05-05-2010, 10:38 PM
I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.

because the Bengals just signed one of the biggest idiots of all time in Pacman Jones?

There is a difference between pointing out that the Bengals signed an idiot and suggesting that they are prison inmate recruiters, as the title of this thread implies. I'm not criticizing anyone discussing this on a forum, I just have an issue with the media pushing this type of propaganda. The guy is irrelevant, and as far as I know, every troubled player they have picked up has pretty much been irrelevant. Its just not worth it.

Seriously? I like Jom as much as the next guy. But, if you can't talk smack about your division rivals...what has this world come to?

...You obviously didn't make much of an attempt to read what I said. In no way did I imply that we couldn't talk smack on the bengals. I just gave my opinion, for what little it is worth anyways.

Shawn
05-05-2010, 10:51 PM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

Pahn711
05-05-2010, 11:01 PM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

I agree, but people DO take it literally, and that is the problem. And also why I stated that I hate when the media promotes that angle. You are taking a giant leap by implying that a simple criticism of one form of Bengal "smack talk" ultimately incorporates and prohibits all smack talk.

I share no love for the Bengals, but I'm not gonna criticize them for having troubled players when the Steelers have similar problems of their own.

Shawn
05-06-2010, 12:16 AM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

I agree, but people DO take it literally, and that is the problem. And also why I stated that I hate when the media promotes that angle. You are taking a giant leap by implying that a simple criticism of one form of Bengal "smack talk" ultimately incorporates and prohibits all smack talk.

I share no love for the Bengals, but I'm not gonna criticize them for having troubled players when the Steelers have similar problems of their own.

One difference...we don't seek them out.

Pahn711
05-06-2010, 12:32 AM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

I agree, but people DO take it literally, and that is the problem. And also why I stated that I hate when the media promotes that angle. You are taking a giant leap by implying that a simple criticism of one form of Bengal "smack talk" ultimately incorporates and prohibits all smack talk.

I share no love for the Bengals, but I'm not gonna criticize them for having troubled players when the Steelers have similar problems of their own.

One difference...we don't seek them out.

And you think the Steelers double standard with regards to their own criminal offenders is any better?

Shawn
05-06-2010, 01:09 AM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

I agree, but people DO take it literally, and that is the problem. And also why I stated that I hate when the media promotes that angle. You are taking a giant leap by implying that a simple criticism of one form of Bengal "smack talk" ultimately incorporates and prohibits all smack talk.

I share no love for the Bengals, but I'm not gonna criticize them for having troubled players when the Steelers have similar problems of their own.

One difference...we don't seek them out.

And you think the Steelers double standard with regards to their own criminal offenders is any better?


Yes...I hope that helps.

Steelers>Bengals

:tt2

Pahn711
05-06-2010, 01:27 AM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

I agree, but people DO take it literally, and that is the problem. And also why I stated that I hate when the media promotes that angle. You are taking a giant leap by implying that a simple criticism of one form of Bengal "smack talk" ultimately incorporates and prohibits all smack talk.

I share no love for the Bengals, but I'm not gonna criticize them for having troubled players when the Steelers have similar problems of their own.

One difference...we don't seek them out.

And you think the Steelers double standard with regards to their own criminal offenders is any better?

Steelers>Bengals

:tt2

Now there is something we can agree on. :bungalssuck :tt1

hawaiiansteel
05-06-2010, 03:24 AM
Even for team like Bengals, signing Pacman Jones makes no sense


Bengals aren't only club dealing in miscreants; but they're perfecting the model.
Maybe Cincy will come to senses, pass on Pacman ... nope, they're the Bengals

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/writers/paul_daugherty/05/05/pacman/pacman.jones.jpg
Troubled cornerback Pacman Jones hasn't played in the NFL since being cut by the Cowboys in 2008.



The Cincinnati Bengals are on the verge of signing Pacman Jones even though they don't need a backup cornerback and they already have enough players who can return kicks. Last year went too well for the Bengals, who won the AFC North and avoided clogging the judicial system. They needed to change things up, to get back to who they were five years ago when half their roster was auditioning for Cops.

Sometimes as a sportswriter I get confused. Which player beat up his girlfriend again? Was it the guy whose posse fired shots inside the Las Vegas strip club or the guy who resisted arrest and had to be handcuffed after cops clocked him driving 100? Are they related to the quarterback who had sex with a coed in a nightclub bathroom?

The Bengals aren't the only club that deals in miscreants. They're just perfecting the model. Before their pursuit of Pacman Jones, they signed receiver Antonio Bryant for four years and $28 million. Bryant is no Pacman. He has been suspended only once, four games in 2006, for violating the NFL's substance abuse policy. Of course, Bryant also sat out the entire '07 season rather than subject himself to league drug testing.
Earlier this offseason, Cincinnati landed wideout Matt Jones, whose three-game league suspension came in 2008. Properly humbled, Jones was arrested again last March, after a failed drug test violated the terms of his probation.

In this year's draft, the Bengals took Carlos Dunlap, a defensive end from Florida who was suspended for last year's SEC title game after being charged with DUI five days before the game.

Mother, make it stop.

Why the Bengals would throw another lifeline to Pacman is a mystery, even for them. They have two corners on the verge of stardom, Johnathan Joseph and Leon Hall. They thought highly enough of another corner, Brandon Ghee, to spend a third-round draft choice on him last month. Their other backups, Morgan Trent and David Jones, played frequently last year, on the league's fourth-ranked defense.

If they want Pacman to return punts, he needs to do better than average five yards an attempt, which he did in Dallas the last time he played, in 2008. The Bengals were second in the league in punt returns, averaging 11.9 yards.

You can take questionable players. Every team does. You don't have to collect them like bobbleheads. You don't have to wallow in them.

Why players get multiple chances to screw up is obvious: Winning. There's more to it than that, though. Ben Roethlisberger's lawyer provided a glimpse.

After Roethlisberger met with commissioner Roger Goodell, and before Goodell suspended the Steelers' quarterback, David Cornwell wrote a letter to Goodell. SI's Peter King obtained a copy this week. Cornwell suggested Goodell do more than simply suspend Roethlisberger:

"I am unable to discern a link between a suspension and any useful lesson that would tend to alter Ben's conduct,'' Cornwell wrote.

Fair enough. Goodell might have considered that in his ruling: Six game suspension, plus a behavioral evaluation and counseling.

Then Cornwell got it badly wrong.

"(Roethlisberger's) passion for football and the remarkable success resulting from his commitment to the game necessarily means that he has compromised his development in other areas. No person has unlimited capacity.''

Oh. OK.

This takes us to a new level of understanding, on the subject of misbehavior in the NFL: To become a great football player requires such "commitment'' that other aspects of your life suffer. Or, you know, disappear altogether. Such as being a decent human being.

The dogged pursuit of football excellence requires some tradeoffs. How can a man who spends hours studying film be expected not to force himself on young women?

Allegedly.

It's a tradeoff. You can't be a civil human being and a great NFL player at the same time. You have to choose. Good human/good player. Human/player. After all, no person has unlimited capacity.

Why didn't Pacman think of this?

"I'm sorry I was arrested six times and involved with cops a total of 12 times. I'm sorry I was once suspended for 22 out of a possible 28 games. And, you know, if I'm in a Vegas strip club throwing dollar bills at the dancers, then I get mad when the dancers take the money and a little scrap ensues and a club employee gets shot and paralyzed as a result, well, it's because I'm a football player doing the best I can in my chosen profession and sometimes that doesn't leave a lot of time for me to work on, you know, my personal game plan.''

Apparently, anyone who devotes his life to a single-minded pursuit of excellence can be excused for acting like a caveman. When I sit down to craft the Great American Novel, I will keep that in mind.

In the meantime, the Cincinnati Bengals are on the verge of signing Pacman Jones, the embodiment of athletic diligence, evidently. Either that or he's just a troubled guy who keeps getting chances. Maybe the Bengals will come to their senses and allow Pacman the privilege of playing football elsewhere.

Or maybe they won't. These are the Bengals' senses. Never mind.

Paul Daugherty is a columnist for The Cincinnati Enquirer.


Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/w ... z0n8DnsHZx (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/paul_daugherty/05/05/pacman/index.html?eref=sircrc#ixzz0n8DnsHZx)
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

Shawn
05-06-2010, 04:54 AM
That writer states...

"(Roethlisberger's) passion for football and the remarkable success resulting from his commitment to the game necessarily means that he has compromised his development in other areas. No person has unlimited capacity.''

Oh. OK.

This takes us to a new level of understanding, on the subject of misbehavior in the NFL: To become a great football player requires such "commitment'' that other aspects of your life suffer. Or, you know, disappear altogether. Such as being a decent human being.

What the writer doesn't understand is Ben's lawyer makes a valid point in certain individuals. Some individuals have a stunted maturation process due to early success, fame, intensive training etc. They never had to develop the tools that many of us have to develop to survive.

Have you ever noticed the 10/10 knock out who is a total byotch, thinks the world revolves around her, self centered...me me me? There is a reason for that. Society treats beautiful people and talented people differently. They tend to have less negative consequences to poor behavior and never develop the tools to be a proper human being.

In no way is that an excuse for boorish behavior. But, it's important to study cause so that you can aid a person's development. If Ben's accident isn't the cause of his poor behavior then this likely is. Sorting through the cause will aid those helping Ben develop those tools.

Pahn711
05-06-2010, 10:21 AM
That writer states...

"(Roethlisberger's) passion for football and the remarkable success resulting from his commitment to the game necessarily means that he has compromised his development in other areas. No person has unlimited capacity.''

Oh. OK.

This takes us to a new level of understanding, on the subject of misbehavior in the NFL: To become a great football player requires such "commitment'' that other aspects of your life suffer. Or, you know, disappear altogether. Such as being a decent human being.

What the writer doesn't understand is Ben's lawyer makes a valid point in certain individuals. Some individuals have a stunted maturation process due to early success, fame, intensive training etc. They never had to develop the tools that many of us have to develop to survive.

Have you ever noticed the 10/10 knock out who is a total byotch, thinks the world revolves around her, self centered...me me me? There is a reason for that. Society treats beautiful people and talented people differently. They tend to have less negative consequences to poor behavior and never develop the tools to be a proper human being.

In no way is that an excuse for boorish behavior. But, it's important to study cause so that you can aid a person's development. If Ben's accident isn't the cause of his poor behavior then this likely is. Sorting through the cause will aid those helping Ben develop those tools.

I still prefer the "hit in the head one too many times" excuse myself.

Jom112
05-06-2010, 10:28 AM
What the writer doesn't understand

The writer is Paul Daugherty. He doesn't understand a lot of things, which makes him a perfect fit for SI...

frankthetank1
05-06-2010, 10:43 AM
pacman isnt even that good of a CB

RuthlessBurgher
05-06-2010, 11:00 AM
To some degree, I believe that Mike Brown really embraces troubled players because he feels for them and wants to give them a chance. And, to some degree, I believe that Mike Brown really embraces troubled players because they are the most talented players at their draft spot, or they are the best bargains in free agency. Either way, he is an idiot for putting so many guys with questionable work ethic and shady pasts in the same locker room. If the Bengals win the Super Bowl any time soon, there really is no justice in the world and/or the Bengals coaching staff should be called the best in football.

I believe it is more the latter than the former.

He's bargain-hunting...plain and simple. Like a guy going to a discount factory outlet store and buying a designer pair of jeans that would typically cost $90 in stores, but he is able to get it for $15 instead because of some imperfection (like the zipper doesn't work).

He sees a guy with first round talent still available in the 5th round? Bargain! Athleticism trumps all those DUI's. He sees a guy with Pro Bowl level raw ability but was cut by multiple teams and is not garnering any interest on the open market? I only have to pay a 6-figure veteran minimum salary instead of an 8-figure signing bonus? Bargain! Talent trumps all those run-ins with the law.

He probably realizes that most of these guys will flame out, so he figures that if he signs a half dozen of these type of guys, perhaps one might live up to his potential. However, he refuses to acknowledge the effect that having so many guys like this could have on his locker room, and that will be his team's ultimate downfall.

Dee Dub
05-06-2010, 12:16 PM
Oh I read it and my reading comprehension is just fine. Suggesting that the Bengals are prison inmate recruiters is a form of smack talk...and not to be taken literally by sensitive folk.

I agree, but people DO take it literally, and that is the problem. And also why I stated that I hate when the media promotes that angle. You are taking a giant leap by implying that a simple criticism of one form of Bengal "smack talk" ultimately incorporates and prohibits all smack talk.

I share no love for the Bengals, but I'm not gonna criticize them for having troubled players when the Steelers have similar problems of their own.

One difference...we don't seek them out.

And you think the Steelers double standard with regards to their own criminal offenders is any better?


Yes...I hope that helps.

Steelers>Bengals

:tt2

I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

Dee Dub
05-06-2010, 12:19 PM
Oh and just to add.....the Jets are the next to team to fall as a result of bringing in bad character players. Bank on it.

Jom112
05-06-2010, 01:03 PM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...

Djfan
05-06-2010, 01:36 PM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decision the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...


Agreed. I also rememeber that we passed over Dan Marino in the draft. The rumors were that the reason was because of his supposed pot smoking in college, or something like that.

steelblood
05-06-2010, 01:59 PM
I really don't see why people feel the need to dig this issue up.

because the Bengals just signed one of the biggest idiots of all time in Pacman Jones?

There is a difference between pointing out that the Bengals signed an idiot and suggesting that they are prison inmate recruiters, as the title of this thread implies. I'm not criticizing anyone discussing this on a forum, I just have an issue with the media pushing this type of propaganda. The guy is irrelevant, and as far as I know, every troubled player they have picked up has pretty much been irrelevant. Its just not worth it.

The Bengals are signing UFAs and spending high draft picks on players with very questionable work ethic and/or character and high talent. This is interesting and can be discussed. Not all of these players are "irrelevant" as you suggest (Rey Maluaga for example). Several played important roles on the team. Some have been quite successful. Why do you feel the need to be so dismissive? Join another discussion if you don't like this one.

RuthlessBurgher
05-06-2010, 02:18 PM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decision the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...


Agreed. I also rememeber that we passed over Dan Marino in the draft. The rumors were that the reason was because of his supposed pot smoking in college, or something like that.

There were unsubstantiated rumors about Dan Marino and cocaine while at Pitt.

Pahn711
05-06-2010, 03:43 PM
The Bengals are signing UFAs and spending high draft picks on players with very questionable work ethic and/or character and high talent. This is interesting and can be discussed. Not all of these players are "irrelevant" as you suggest (Rey Maluaga for example). Several played important roles on the team. Some have been quite successful. Why do you feel the need to be so dismissive? Join another discussion if you don't like this one.

Rey Maluaga? Thats the best you can do? :roll: Hes a second round pick, thats the extent of his relevance.

My point was that none of these guys they've picked up have become superstars or pushed their team to the Superbowl. So they are getting way more attention than they deserve.

Shawn
05-06-2010, 05:11 PM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...

Really? Red flags? Jom we are not talking about drafting guys with some question marks we are talking about signing players with significant criminal records.

As for Santonio the main question mark that surrounded him involved him fathering children with different mothers. He had no significant problems while at OSU.

steelblood
05-06-2010, 07:10 PM
The Bengals are signing UFAs and spending high draft picks on players with very questionable work ethic and/or character and high talent. This is interesting and can be discussed. Not all of these players are "irrelevant" as you suggest (Rey Maluaga for example). Several played important roles on the team. Some have been quite successful. Why do you feel the need to be so dismissive? Join another discussion if you don't like this one.

Rey Maluaga? Thats the best you can do? :roll: Hes a second round pick, thats the extent of his relevance.

My point was that none of these guys they've picked up have become superstars or pushed their team to the Superbowl. So they are getting way more attention than they deserve.


So, unless a player takes his team to the Super Bowl, he is pointless and not worth discussing? That is ridiculous.

Djfan
05-06-2010, 07:24 PM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decision the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...


Agreed. I also rememeber that we passed over Dan Marino in the draft. The rumors were that the reason was because of his supposed pot smoking in college, or something like that.

There were unsubstantiated rumors about Dan Marino and cocaine while at Pitt.

I knew that they were unsubstantiated, but didn't know it was cocaine. Man, I wish we had chosen differently.

Pahn711
05-07-2010, 04:30 AM
So, unless a player takes his team to the Super Bowl, he is pointless and not worth discussing? That is ridiculous.

What I said applies only to the Bengals situation, don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say it like that. Thats your interpretation.

I'm just pointing out that its not like the Bengals have had huge success by bringing in these types of players. If they did, I could see alot more merit in being annoyed with them.

Pahn711
05-07-2010, 04:40 AM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...

Really? Red flags? Jom we are not talking about drafting guys with some question marks we are talking about signing players with significant criminal records.

As for Santonio the main question mark that surrounded him involved him fathering children with different mothers. He had no significant problems while at OSU.

Unfortunately I think it went deeper than that. Wasn't he once a drug dealer? And I read several articles after he was released that the Steelers were concerned about his character before they drafted him, and particularly worried about what he would do going from extreme poverty to being a millionaire.


Which makes me ask the question, if these sources were true and the Steelers did have these concerns, why the hell would they pay the high price of trading up for him?

steelblood
05-07-2010, 08:38 AM
So, unless a player takes his team to the Super Bowl, he is pointless and not worth discussing? That is ridiculous.

What I said applies only to the Bengals situation, don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say it like that. Thats your interpretation.

I'm just pointing out that its not like the Bengals have had huge success by bringing in these types of players. If they did, I could see alot more merit in being annoyed with them.

That is exactly what you are saying. You are dismissing an entire discussion because (as you say) players that don't help win a super bowl are irrelevant. Rey M. was a very good starter this year and has good potential. But since he wasn't a first round pick and hasn't won a Super Bowl, you say he is irrelevant. That is a sad, sorry argument. You can't apply a different standard to each discussion and expect to gain credibility.

steelblood
05-07-2010, 08:40 AM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...

Really? Red flags? Jom we are not talking about drafting guys with some question marks we are talking about signing players with significant criminal records.

As for Santonio the main question mark that surrounded him involved him fathering children with different mothers. He had no significant problems while at OSU.

Unfortunately I think it went deeper than that. Wasn't he once a drug dealer? And I read several articles after he was released that the Steelers were concerned about his character before they drafted him, and particularly worried about what he would do going from extreme poverty to being a millionaire.


Which makes me ask the question, if these sources were true and the Steelers did have these concerns, why the hell would they pay the high price of trading up for him?

To win a Super Bowl
(by your own logic)

Pahn711
05-07-2010, 11:06 AM
So, unless a player takes his team to the Super Bowl, he is pointless and not worth discussing? That is ridiculous.

What I said applies only to the Bengals situation, don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say it like that. Thats your interpretation.

I'm just pointing out that its not like the Bengals have had huge success by bringing in these types of players. If they did, I could see alot more merit in being annoyed with them.

That is exactly what you are saying. You are dismissing an entire discussion because (as you say) players that don't help win a super bowl are irrelevant. Rey M. was a very good starter this year and has good potential. But since he wasn't a first round pick and hasn't won a Super Bowl, you say he is irrelevant. That is a sad, sorry argument. You can't apply a different standard to each discussion and expect to gain credibility.

....Fine, I still contend that this was not what I was trying to imply, but this is a silly argument. I fold. And if I were looking for credibility, it would not be among fans with their own opinions, right or wrong.

Go Steelers! :tt2

hawaiiansteel
05-08-2010, 02:31 AM
I have to agree with Shawn Med (not to be confused with Club Med---if it were--I wouldnt want to vacation there :mrgreen: ), on this one.

The Steelers do not seek out bad character players and they have made a stance regarding their own players---Ben and Santonio to name the most recent. This is something the Bengals do not do....and as a result, combined with other terrible personnel decisions...do not win championships...the Steelers do.

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the F.O. makes but the Steelers do sign troubled players as well. Santonio Holmes definitely had a lot of red flags when you guys drafted him...

Really? Red flags? Jom we are not talking about drafting guys with some question marks we are talking about signing players with significant criminal records.

As for Santonio the main question mark that surrounded him involved him fathering children with different mothers. He had no significant problems while at OSU.

Unfortunately I think it went deeper than that. Wasn't he once a drug dealer? And I read several articles after he was released that the Steelers were concerned about his character before they drafted him, and particularly worried about what he would do going from extreme poverty to being a millionaire.


Which makes me ask the question, if these sources were true and the Steelers did have these concerns, why the hell would they pay the high price of trading up for him?

To win a Super Bowl
(by your own logic)



absolutely! Santonio should be banned from using Twitter, but that was a beautiful catch he made to help us win the Super Bowl.

http://moretalk.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/holmes-catch.jpghttp://www.mypokertube.com/files/photos/a546203962b8877L.jpg

hawaiiansteel
05-11-2010, 11:27 PM
gotta give him credit, he's got me beat by 98 days... :Cheers



Rey Maualuga celebrates 100 days of sobriety

Posted by Mike Florio on May 11, 2010 9:53 PM ET


On one hand, we're happy that Bengals linebacker Rey Maualuga hasn't had a drink in the 100 days since he was arrested for DUI. On the other hand, it's amazing that he was able to conceal a drinking problem for so long, especially since he seems to concede that his consumption affected his performance.

"My body never felt so great. I never looked so good," Maualuga told Steve Wyche of NFL.com. "I am so anxious for OTAs to start up. Now I can hopefully compare myself to last year when I wasn't able to run 10 or 12 plays within a drive and not be incredibly tired. All my focus is on my body and how much stronger I can get, how much smarter I can be and being a reliable teammate. . . .

"I never gave my body the respect it deserves. I never gave my mind time to go through plays and dig deep and watch film and better myself as an intelligent football player instead of just a physical specimen on the field. I don't think I played to my abilities last season. People say, 'You did good for a rookie.' I came out and made some plays but that wasn't enough for me."

The irony, of course, is that the Bengals, who routinely take chances on players with a history of off-field issues, picked Maualuga even though his problems apparently weren't widely known.

Then again, some were surprised that Maualuga lasted until the second round. It could be that some teams had heard about his drinking, and that they had opted to steer clear, at least in the first round.

Regardless, Maualuga seems to have gotten the message. He has accepted the consequences of his arrest, and he has committed to staying sober and doing the best he can in the future as a pro football player.

"Some people sat there and said they could have got me the best lawyers to get out of it or to push off the court date and see if we can fight it or appeal it and win. [But] what's all that going to prove?" Maualuga said. "I'm going to get a slap on the wrist, pay a ticket and not get a DUI charge? It's not going to prove anything. I'm going to keep doing the same BS stuff and not taking care of my body and partying. I'm glad it happened. I got to learn some things and dig deep inside and listen to and find out about the people who cared who Rey Maualuga is."

Wow. We all love a story of redemption, and Maualuga has written the early chapters of a saga that could be one of the best we've seen in recent years.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -sobriety/ (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/11/rey-maualuga-celebrates-100-days-of-sobriety/)