Are Troubled Athletes Worth Keeping?

[BZBot]

Are troubled athletes worth keeping on the roster? OK, yes this question has been asked –and answered.

Source: http://www.bengalszone.com/article.php?sid=422

[Stripes]

Good stuff, Jay. I agree with a majority of the points you've made.

I get tired of all this offseason "bad character talk" because it'll all barely be a blip on our radars when Henry is catching touchdowns and Rucker is sacking quarterbacks.

[ArmyBengal]

I don't think it's as easy as a simple yes or no, but based on a case by case basis and information that everyday "joe's" just don't have. Henry and the others just aren't going anywhere... Henry because, in large, he's still injured and can't be released until cleared or he has the right to file a grievance with the players union. The others because they were drafted and they will remain with stipulations allowed by contract. It's just not as black and white as some might think it is...

WHODEY !!!

[Spain]

Risk , reward these gus are first round talent that fell for those reasons, nuff said!

[Kazkal]

Depends on how troubled if theres hope that theyll change their life then ya it is.

[ChadJohnson-85]

I have a question..... How come all of the good players get into trouble?

[Dadraftnick]

I would have to add about the players listed Moss,Carter,and Janikawski,that Carter had to be released by the team that drafted him before he turned it arround and he admits that if he wouldn't have been he wouldnt have straightened out.

Moss was such a distraction to his team that they had to get rid of him and he isn't doing much for the Raiders.

Janakawski may be a good kicker but,look at the Raiders record.

I would have to say all thee players have been major distractions on their teams,none of them have a SB and Carter did turn it aroun but not for the team that drafted him.

I would have to say that you really cant compare what the three of these guys have done and even what Chris Henry has done to a history of repeated sexual assualts like Rucker has and to a lesser extent Nicholson.

[ArmyBengal]

I have a question..... How come all of the good players get into trouble?

Because the par to sub par players can't afford to get into trouble !!!

WHODEY !!!

[Dadraftnick]

I have a question..... How come all of the good players get into trouble?

You mean like Carson,like RudI,likeWillie Anderson.

How many guys on the Patriots have you heard in trouble?

I mention them because they are the team with the most # of Supper Bowls on the last 5 years.

The best players dont get in trouble.

There are some good players that ,because they are good,use it as an excuse to behave like an idiot.

They think that they are above the law.

If you remember O.J. trial quite a few times you heard that O.J.'s dead ex-wife or a friend of O.J. said that they heard him tell his ex that if he killed her he would get away with it because he was O.J. Simpson.

The things that Dillon were overlooked because he was a good player,but he was a selfish player that only cared about himlelf and how many yards he got and how many carries he got.

The thing is if you are a guy that only plays on special teams they wouldnt put up with it if yo caused enough trouble.

[Kazkal]

Well patriots have corey dillion + heard about someone else getting in trouble recently,

Ray lewis may had "off the field issues" but he still was a stud and one most importent keys too the ravens

[kingwilly]

...and Rucker is sacking quarterbacks.

That right there is pretty funny.

But to TDB's point: it is worse/furstrating when a productive player has bad character...as in, what you lose is something of high value.

Let's keep this in mind:

Bad Character does not equal criminal (as in TO)

Criminal does not always mean bad character, there are alot of good people who have done stupid things.

[HoosierCat]

I would have to add about the players listed Moss,Carter,and Janikawski,that Carter had to be released by the team that drafted him before he turned it arround and he admits that if he wouldn't have been he wouldnt have straightened out.

Moss was such a distraction to his team that they had to get rid of him and he isn't doing much for the Raiders.

A-yup. And therein lies the broader problem: when a "character" blows up, he leaves a hole. And when multple characters blow up simultaneously -- as it appears they have on the Bengals -- you get multiple holes. The whole team ends up, at the very least, taking fewer steps forward. At worst, it slips.

To me, the trouble is that, regardless of their talent, we just can't count on these guys to be there contributing. For example, will Henry escape all consequences or get suspended? If so, how long? 1, 2, 4 games? A season?

If Frostee has a decent season, would you support letting Justin Smith walk, knowing his history now?

And who knows what, if anything, is up with Odell. But if something *is* up, that's a big loss -- and again, who knows for how long? If at all.

I don't have a problem with taking the occasional character risk. I do have a problem with making it a habit, as the Bengals seem to be doing.

[HairOnFire]

If Frostee has a decent season, would you support letting Justin Smith walk, knowing his history now?

Frankly, I wouldn't have supported that idea under any circumstances. My guess is that he was drafted to provide quality depth and backup duty and, should Smith leave, he buys time until a high draft pick can be burned on a high impact DE.

One of the thing that cracks me up is how quickly many people are to step off of the ledge in regards to this issue. For example, lets look at the player names who keep popping up on PFT. Chris Henry is a #3 WR. He may have gotten more balls this season had he kept his nose clean, but he was never a threat to take either of the top two spots. Best, he plays a position that the Bengals are deepest at. More? Frostee Rucker was drafted to provide depth. The same is true of AJ Nicholson. In a few years we may expect more from them, but neither player was going to play much this season. And then there's the FA fullback that PFT keeps calling a turd. Can any of us even name him without looking it up first? Does anyone think he makes the roster? And if he does will he ever play a down away from special teams.

Frankly, Odell matters. The others, not so much.

[BengalByTheBay]

I would have to say that you really cant compare what the three of these guys have done and even what Chris Henry has done to a history of repeated sexual assualts like Rucker has and to a lesser extent Nicholson.

I agree -- mistreatment and objectification of women is wrong. (BTW - I'm in love with your avatar nick.)

Just kidding there, but it seems that you are finally ready to concede that you have a particular problem with Frostee and AJN because their problems involve women - no? It's not that this is wrong or anything. I happen to share the opinion that bullying women is one of the most revealing of a man's behaviors. That said, and understanding that neither Frostee, Carson Palmer nor any other Bengals are coming over to your house for dinner, why should that preclude Rucker more than somebody who has committed a felony with a firearm? There are a lot of bad behavior that don't compare to each other, but the snowman seems to have a permanent place on your s-list. By all accounts he has been above reproach since August of 2005. Does the fact that he had these "incidents" before mean to you that he absolutely will have the same problems in the future?

[HoosierCat]

One of the thing that cracks me up is how quickly many people are to step off of the ledge in regards to this issue.

I think the number of incidents, if not their severity, is worth a few peeps over the edge. You are right that, with the exception of Odell, all the rest are No. 3/backup types (tho one could argue that as a 3rd rounder Frostee ought to be considered a potential starter). But that's still one more slot that was thought to be filled until ooops! [insert dumb illegal stunt here], and one more blow to our depth. And it's one more piece of aggravation that Marvin certainly doesn't need.

I think the thing that bugs me the most is just the ongoing pattern, by Bengals players, of dumbs*it behavior that f**ks up the team. It started with Reggie Myles and the lunchroom fight, proceeded through the halftime meltdown that possibly cost us the playoff game against Pitt, then the whole associated "lockerroom snitch" bit, and now we get an avalance of illegal idiocy to fill in the time in the offseason.

IMHO, all this stupid crap really needs to stop.

[BengalByTheBay]

Hard to argue with you Joisey. The true impact of these things, involving at least 3 potentially starter/1st backup players, is that the availability of the affected guys is in doubt. Not the kind of thing that helps us to get ready for the season. It would seem to me that Henry's will definitely happen -- ie, he will miss some games. AJ...possibly, hard to handicap at this point. Frostee -- I'm gonna say no, barring further incident. OT -- I remain concerned. This would be the biggest blow if something is, indeed, happening. Obviously, you don't want anybody who actually makes the roster being unavailable. Whether they're good guys or not isn't really an issue in my book. It's nice if they are -- really nice, but kinda rare. But I think it nearly impossible to field a competitive team of good guys. I'm looking for practical, not perfect.

[kybengalsfan]

Hard to argue with you Joisey. The true impact of these things, involving at least 3 potentially starter/1st backup players, is that the availability of the affected guys is in doubt. Not the kind of thing that helps us to get ready for the season. It would seem to me that Henry's will definitely happen -- ie, he will miss some games. AJ...possibly, hard to handicap at this point. Frostee -- I'm gonna say no, barring further incident. OT -- I remain concerned. This would be the biggest blow if something is, indeed, happening. Obviously, you don't want anybody who actually makes the roster being unavailable. Whether they're good guys or not isn't really an issue in my book. It's nice if they are -- really nice, but kinda rare. But I think it nearly impossible to field a competitive team of good guys. I'm looking for practical, not perfect.

Marvin is a great coach, but one shortcoming of his remains the fact that he feels he and his staff can straighten out these wayward souls. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, as any correctional statistician will tell you. There is a reason we get these guys in the third and later rounds. Are the headaches associated with these "bargains" really worth it? We'll see.

[HairOnFire]

I think the thing that bugs me the most is just the ongoing pattern, by Bengals players, of dumbs*it behavior that f**ks up the team. It started with Reggie Myles and the lunchroom fight, proceeded through the halftime meltdown that possibly cost us the playoff game against Pitt, then the whole associated "lockerroom snitch" bit, and now we get an avalance of illegal idiocy to fill in the time in the offseason.

IMHO, all this stupid crap really needs to stop.

You'll get no argument from me on most of the above. In a previous thread one of the things I listed as a goal for the coming season is a greater maturing of the team. Thanks to the halftime meltdown it was an issue that was on my mind long before Chris Henry went all gangsta on us. But when it comes to the maturity of a football team I think we've got to acknowledge the difference between the types of incidents that take place on the field or within the lockerroom from those that take place at parties, nightclubs, or hotel rooms.

Consider the examples listed above. First, a very good special teams player steps over a line he had no business crossing, then a Pro Bowl WR chooses the worst possible moment to meltdown, and finally a Bible thumping backup QB plays the role of postgame snitch and quickly gets fitted with a long tail and rat whiskers. In each example the player who melted down was previously portrayed as a high character player and a team leader with an outstanding work ethic. Yet each of them failed to act as team leaders at the most critical time within the lockerroom, and the team suffered as a result. But because Chad Johnson and Jon Kitna were important players, and fan favorites, their own behavior and lack of maturity and leadership qualities aren't being called into question nearly as much as that of mid-round rookie backups.

That seems sorta fugged up to me.

Wanna debate the matter of team maturity? Well, I say start at the top of the roster and work your way down, not vice versa. Because there's no way a Frostee Rucker or AJ Nicholson can hurt this team the way Chad Johnson and Jon Kitna already have. No, if Rucker or Nicholson meltdown they'll quickly go the way of Reggie Myles.*

* Replaced before the shouting stops.

[derekshank]

I think the thing that bugs me the most is just the ongoing pattern, by Bengals players, of dumbs*it behavior that f**ks up the team. It started with Reggie Myles and the lunchroom fight, proceeded through the halftime meltdown that possibly cost us the playoff game against Pitt, then the whole associated "lockerroom snitch" bit, and now we get an avalance of illegal idiocy to fill in the time in the offseason.

IMHO, all this stupid crap really needs to stop.

You'll get no argument from me on most of the above. In a previous thread one of the things I listed as a goal for the coming season is a greater maturing of the team. Thanks to the halftime meltdown it was an issue that was on my mind long before Chris Henry went all gangsta on us. But when it comes to the maturity of a football team I think we've got to acknowledge the difference between the types of incidents that take place on the field or within the lockerroom from those that take place at parties, nightclubs, or hotel rooms.

Consider the examples listed above. First, a very good special teams player steps over a line he had no business crossing, then a Pro Bowl WR chooses the worst possible moment to meltdown, and finally a Bible thumping backup QB plays the role of postgame snitch and quickly gets fitted with a long tail and rat whiskers. In each example the player who melted down was previously portrayed as a high character player and a team leader with an outstanding work ethic. Yet each of them failed to act as team leaders at the most critical time within the lockerroom, and the team suffered as a result. But because Chad Johnson and Jon Kitna were important players, and fan favorites, their own behavior and lack of maturity and leadership qualities aren't being called into question nearly as much as that of mid-round rookie backups.

That seems sorta fugged up to me.

Wanna debate the matter of team maturity? Well, I say start at the top of the roster and work your way down, not vice versa. Because there's no way a Frostee Rucker or AJ Nicholson can hurt this team the way Chad Johnson and Jon Kitna already have. No, if Rucker or Nicholson meltdown they'll quickly go the way of Reggie Myles.*

* Replaced before the shouting stops.

Valid points all the way around Hair. We're willing to give Chad a pass on his mistakes because he's a top 3 receiver... even though in all likelyhood his actions negatively effected the team more than Chris Henry getting arrested 3 times (and if I'm reading people's posts correctly, the only thing people here are concerned about his how it damages the team and its play, not the individuals as human beings).

However, you're points above are exactly what worry me about taking more character risks. Rookies take their cues from veterans. I think we happen to have a majority of high-quality veterans, but as you pointed out, we still have veterans who lack maturity and make big-time mistakes in big-time situations. With veterans that have relatively little maturity, it may be even a bigger risk to take a character guy when you can't really count on the veterans to steer them in the right direction.

[ArmyBengal]

Well, nothing like an intriguing post from Hair. I guess I never really thought about it that way and will conceed that your point about Chad and Kitna is on point. Sooooooo, if Henry would come back and put up the crazy numbers he's capable of, he would get a pass like Chad... Maybe because he's started out a liability, it changes the way things are viewed a bit !!!

WHODEY !!!

[HairOnFire]

However, you're points above are exactly what worry me about taking more character risks. Rookies take their cues from veterans. I think we happen to have a majority of high-quality veterans, but as you pointed out, we still have veterans who lack maturity and make big-time mistakes in big-time situations. With veterans that have relatively little maturity, it may be even a bigger risk to take a character guy when you can't really count on the veterans to steer them in the right direction.

But again, we're talking about incidents that occur far from the lockerroom as a reason to question the maturity levels of Rucker and Nicholson, when the college scouting reports of both players portray them as very good team leaders. That tells me that when they're in their element, a football environment, they get it. When away from that environment trouble occurs.

Which brings me to this troubling question about maturity within a football environment. Does Chad Johnson get it, and if he doesn't is he worth keeping? Almost everything written about him portrays an athlete whose actions are commendable, but his attempts to assume a leadership role are spotty at best, and are almost always rooted in "look-at-me" self-promotion. And that constant self-promotion, wrapped in his frustration with Kitna's inability to get him the ball, was said to be at the very core of his playoff game meltdown....an act may have cost the Bengals a championship. The stakes, and the risks, don't get any bigger than that, right?

As for my answer to the above question?

Hell yeah, Chad Johnson is worth keeping ecause his talent level says he's worth the headaches he sometimes causes. And along those same lines...because Odell Thurman and Chris Henry have rare talent the team will overlook whatever problems they cause IF possible. And so will many Bengal fans. We've proven that, right? But the difference, in the case of Rucker and Nicholson, is that fans will very quickly toss them under the bus because they're rookies who haven't played a down. And since we have no emotional investment in them most fans will be reluctant to make the very same excuses for them as they have in the past for players like Henry, Thurman, Dillon, Big Daddy, et cetera......

[derekshank]

However, you're points above are exactly what worry me about taking more character risks. Rookies take their cues from veterans. I think we happen to have a majority of high-quality veterans, but as you pointed out, we still have veterans who lack maturity and make big-time mistakes in big-time situations. With veterans that have relatively little maturity, it may be even a bigger risk to take a character guy when you can't really count on the veterans to steer them in the right direction.

But again, we're talking about incidents that occur far from the lockerroom as a reason to question the maturity levels of Rucker and Nicholson, when the college scouting reports of both players portray them as very good team leaders. That tells me that when they're in their element, a football environment, they get it. When away from that environment trouble occurs.

Which brings me to this troubling question about maturity within a football environment. Does Chad Johnson get it, and if he doesn't is he worth keeping? Almost everything written about him portrays an athlete whose actions are commendable, but his attempts to assume a leadership role are spotty at best, and are almost always rooted in "look-at-me" self-promotion. And that constant self-promotion, wrapped in his frustration with Kitna's inability to get him the ball, was said to be at the very core of his playoff game meltdown....an act may have cost the Bengals a championship. The stakes, and the risks, don't get any bigger than that, right?

As for my answer to the above question?

Hell yeah, Chad Johnson is worth keeping ecause his talent level says he's worth the headaches he sometimes causes. And along those same lines...because Odell Thurman and Chris Henry have rare talent the team will overlook whatever problems they cause IF possible. And so will many Bengal fans. We've proven that, right? But the difference, in the case of Rucker and Nicholson, is that fans will very quickly toss them under the bus because they're rookies who haven't played a down. And since we have no emotional investment in them most fans will be reluctant to make the very same excuses for them as they have in the past for players like Henry, Thurman, Dillon, Big Daddy, et cetera......

Agreed... but still call me more worried about the fact that guys like Rucker and Henry have guys like Thurman and Chad to look up to. Like it or not, these guys aren't looking up to Carson Palmer when it comes to their behavior. Whether or not these rookie's problems will create real problems for the team is yet to be seen, and I'm willing to wait to make my final judgement (as I think I've proven throughout my posts)... but the combination of character questions with these rookies, and immature (at best) veterans is where the real risk lies.

[BengalByTheBay]

Agreed... but still call me more worried about the fact that guys like Rucker and Henry have guys like Thurman and Chad to look up to. Like it or not, these guys aren't looking up to Carson Palmer when it comes to their behavior. Whether or not these rookie's problems will create real problems for the team is yet to be seen, and I'm willing to wait to make my final judgement (as I think I've proven throughout my posts)... but the combination of character questions with these rookies, and immature (at best) veterans is where the real risk lies.

1. Rucker probably hasn't even met most of his teammates, so I doubt he's looking up to anybody right now. More significantly, the last time he had a problem with the law was in August of 2005 when he was looking up to Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart or LeDale White. I don't see this as a valid point at all.

2. Why would Henry look up to Thurman when they were drafted on the same day. Chad?, maybe...probably even. Say what you want about Chad -- he has not really shown any leadership qualities and I don't expect him to -- some guys aren't cut from that cloth. But if you were looking up to Chad you would be busting your ass to get better and you would be staying out of trouble off the field. Hell, I think CJ sleeps in the Total Access studio in the offseason. You never hear about that guy getting into any trouble in LA or FLA. I would say that, on balance, if Henry were looking up to Chad his life would be much better off.

I think that everybody on the team looks up to Palmer. I just don't think that a lot of these guys can relate to growing up in OC and being groomed for a pro career all along. CP is definitely mature and is becoming a heck of a leader, but it's been a transition because I don't think that part of it comes naturally to a self-effacing guy like him. He hasn't been "the guy" for all that long, but what I've seen from him in the last 12 months suggests to me that he's gonna take a stranglehold on this team for a long time. Bottom line is that the Bengals have just as deep veteran leadership and character as any other NFL team. Anderson, Simmons, James -- these are solid guys who have an impact in the room. If anything, I do think you may have an argument that in a few years when this level of leadership is gone there may be a problem based on the kind of guys being drafted right now. That's a legitimate concern.

[derekshank]

You don't have to see it as a valid point for it to be true. The fact is that rookies take their cues on how to act in the locker-room from the veterans on that team. Henry wouldn't get his cues from Thurman. He would get them from Chad. Chad's a drama queen, and has taught him that you can get into a fight at halftime of a playoff game, and walk away with a huge contract extention a couple months later.

Players who have character question marks who go to the Patriots (like Corey Dillon) find ways to fall into line. Wheras players with character guestions that go to the Raiders (i.e. Charles Woodson) prove to be dickheads. The atmosphere in the locker-room matters, and that atmosphere is created and maintained by the veterans... not 3rd and 5th round rookies.

So the real question is... do we have quality enough veterans to be taking players with character risks? That is my point, and it is a valid one. The answer is yet to be seen.

[BengalByTheBay]

You don't have to see it as a valid point for it to be true. The fact is that rookies take their cues on how to act in the locker-room from the veterans on that team. Henry wouldn't get his cues from Thurman. He would get them from Chad. Chad's a drama queen, and has taught him that you can get into a fight at halftime of a playoff game, and walk away with a huge contract extention a couple months later.

Players who have character question marks who go to the Patriots (like Corey Dillon) find ways to fall into line. Wheras players with character guestions that go to the Raiders (i.e. Charles Woodson) prove to be dickheads. The atmosphere in the locker-room matters, and that atmosphere is created and maintained by the veterans... not 3rd and 5th round rookies.

So the real question is... do we have quality enough veterans to be taking players with character risks? That is my point, and it is a valid one. The answer is yet to be seen.

I'm sorry, I thought you said something to the effect that Rucker and Henry would have guys like Chad and Thurman to look up to. Oh wait, you did say that. I understand why you would want to revise that remark, which is what I accept your comment to be. That makes it more valid. As stated, however, it's not a valid point to say that Rucker is looking up to CJ and Thurman, but not Palmer. What is that based on? I'll bet you he's more likely to look up to Palmer just because he already knows him.

Okay, Chad's a drama queen and gets special treatment. Most teams have that situation, especially at WR. Your example of the Patriots as the way things should be is starting to come apart at the seams. CD kept his mouth shut for a superbowl run. I'm guessing that's not that hard to do for anybody. He whined about his treatment here and now he's whining about being disrespected in NE. Not a real example of a "high class" veteran atmosphere is keeping a jerk in line is it? I think it's more accurate to say that competing for a superbowl keeps even drama queen prima donna RB's in line...for awhile. Isn't that an atmosphere "created and maintained by" winning? Did the Ravens have a veteran atmosphere to thank for their SB run? No, the unchallenged leader there was also a huge "character" problem wasn't he?

It's a subjective thing as to how much impact you think certain guys will have. My point is simply that the house isn't burning down in Cincinnati due to a few problems that a few guys have. If the problems get to be too bad, the perpetrators will probably be gone. If you discount Henry, there has been a total of 1 offseason arrest for this team. How does that stack up with other NFL teams? If you say you can't discount Henry, I disagree. Henry has basically gone AWOL -- the guy's off the reservation -- pretty much everybody concedes that, including me. If you want to say he should be cut, I'll listen to that. If you want to say his behavior is hurting the team, I'll agree that being suspended for games will hurt the team. However, you can't say that about Rucker or Nicholson either at this point. Nicholson stole a stereo from his former roommate. Stupid -- ummmm yeah. A threat to the Cincinnati Bengals as a competitive football team - not really.