Carson Palmer Thread

[cincyhokie]

Otherwise, get to work and make the best of the situation like virtually every other American worker who is trying to better his sitatuion. If you're too weak-minded for the task, I hope you enjoy watching football on TV like the rest of us.

And here it is.

Alot of people are offended by this. I can understand that. I also can empathize with Palmer just wanting the best for himself. He's got needs just like we do. This isn't anything personal to the fans or to Cincinnati.

I'm trying to look at it from a business perspective and a rational view. What the Bengals are experiencing is a consequence of their own doing. I do not feel sorry for them. I support Palmer and his want for something better for him and his career. I hope he gets it. I hope this also serves as a wake up call for Mike Brown.

[cincyhokie]

And if I can't? What if for reasons I'm unable to control, or simply due to my own raging incompetence, I'm unable to produce anything better than a marginal NFL franchise doomed to play mediocre professional football in relative backwater obscurity? Should I accept my sad fate without protest and grant full control to every player who threatens to withhold his services regardless of contract status or importance to the teams future planning?

f**k that.

I'm asking the Bengals to run like a competitive franchise. Competitive franchises don't have players screaming to get out or flip burgers every 3-5 years. This isn't asking alot.

[derekshank]

The real issue is this: Why do the Bengals have this problem WAY more than other teams? Hmmmm....and if this can't be answered without redirecting it to the player's decisions then we have a serious problem.

I think you're overstating your case. As I mentioned before, MB set a precedent with many players that if you wanted to leave, he'd trade you. That's the culture he created he's currently fighting against. Frankly, I applaud the effort to change that mindset.

As to this being a bigger problem for the Bengals than other teams... I call bs. There are plenty of players who attempt to impose their wills. Without looking it up, I can think of plenty of similar situations, Vincent Jackson demanded a trade just a few years after Eli Manning publicly demanded the Chargers not draft him. Embarrassing stuff there.

Logan Mankins is refusing to be a Patriot much in the same way Deion Branch demanded to be traded a few years ago.

Jay Cutler and Brandon Marshall both decided they were done with the Broncos in the same season, and both eventually got their wish.

And of course there is the current Haynesworth and McNabb situation in Washington.

These are just some of the higher profile situations from off the top of my head. I'm sure if you did some digging, you'd find the Bengals situation is not all that extreme.

I'd also say that many of the most recent demands are mostly a symptom of Mike Brown's earlier philosophy of letting good players leave when the going got tough.

Many people thought Chad didn't get his way because he went about it the wrong way. Now with Palmer, people will understand more fully. Play out your contract, or retire. There's no third option.

[cincyhokie]

The real issue is this: Why do the Bengals have this problem WAY more than other teams? Hmmmm....and if this can't be answered without redirecting it to the player's decisions then we have a serious problem.

I think you're overstating your case. As I mentioned before, MB set a precedent with many players that if you wanted to leave, he'd trade you. That's the culture he created he's currently fighting against. Frankly, I applaud the effort to change that mindset.

As to this being a bigger problem for the Bengals than other teams... I call bs. There are plenty of players who attempt to impose their wills. Without looking it up, I can think of plenty of similar situations, Vincent Jackson demanded a trade just a few years after Eli Manning publicly demanded the Chargers not draft him. Embarrassing stuff there.

Logan Mankins is refusing to be a Patriot much in the same way Deion Branch demanded to be traded a few years ago.

Jay Cutler and Brandon Marshall both decided they were done with the Broncos in the same season, and both eventually got their wish.

And of course there is the current Haynesworth and McNabb situation in Washington.

These are just some of the higher profile situations from off the top of my head. I'm sure if you did some digging, you'd find the Bengals situation is not all that extreme.

I'd also say that many of the most recent demands are mostly a symptom of Mike Brown's earlier philosophy of letting good players leave when the going got tough.

Many people thought Chad didn't get his way because he went about it the wrong way. Now with Palmer, people will understand more fully. Play out your contract, or retire. There's no third option.

Embarrassing enough that those teams you mentioned have won Super Bowls and playoff games and displayed a consistent stretch of very good to elite football.

The Bengals in this time have done what???? Playoff wins??? Saved themselves from embarrassment??? Really? The Bengals are the NFL's punchline!!!

I see what Mike Brown is doing. I can understand that. It's not working. It never has.

The beginning of change in some cases begins with severe consequences to past and current behavior and actions. The Bengals and Mike Brown are experiencing a severe consequence. Go Carson.

[NJ29]

I'm on the team of "pay attention to obvious signs of dysfunction and fix it".

Yup. I think there's two basic schools of thought here.

Those siding with Mike see it this way - set a precedent and make it known that if you're under contract, you'll play in Cincinnati or you won't play at all. You can't bully management. Message sent.

But is that what's best for your football team?

f**k the business end. It's of now concern to me. Does setting that precedent win you football games, or set it up for long term success? Absolutely not. It's allowing a cornerstone of your franchise to simply float away without compensation. That doesn't amount to success on the field. Assuming that MB's priority is to win, I'm already off base of what reality is, but in my opinion, your job is to WIN. Period. And allowing Palmer to simply retire with no compensation does nothing to help you do that in the next five years. We can see the evidence of this with Chad's holdout. I think everyone on this forum would love to have exiled Chad to Washington and taken two extra first round picks. In the meantime, he's remained here as a disruptive malcontent who's done nothing beneficial for the team.

So the question remains, would you rather win a useless dick measuring contest or put yourself in a better position to win football games?

[derekshank]

Embarrassing enough that those teams you mentioned have won Super Bowls and playoff games and displayed a consistent stretch of very good to elite football.

The Bengals in this time have done what???? Playoff wins??? Saved themselves from embarrassment??? Really? The Bengals are the NFL's punchline!!!

That's a completely different conversation. To bring it up is merely a distraction. Cincinnati isn't the only team that deals with disgruntled players. The teams that deal with the problem range from the bottom-feeders to the dynasties.

[derekshank]

f**k the business end. It's of now concern to me. Does setting that precedent win you football games, or set it up for long term success? Absolutely not.

Conversely, will trading every player who decides the grass is greener elsewhere set up long term success?

You're not putting forth a blueprint for success. You're laying out the way the Bengals did business in the 90's.

[cincyhokie]

Embarrassing enough that those teams you mentioned have won Super Bowls and playoff games and displayed a consistent stretch of very good to elite football.

The Bengals in this time have done what???? Playoff wins??? Saved themselves from embarrassment??? Really? The Bengals are the NFL's punchline!!!

That's a completely different conversation. To bring it up is merely a distraction. Cincinnati isn't the only team that deals with disgruntled players. The teams that deal with the problem range from the bottom-feeders to the dynasties.

Right. However, the Bengals have had a long history of this happening. Players have stated they'd rather flip burgers than play for the Bengals. That doesn't sound like a player who just wants a new contract or is out for the money, does it?

And those teams that get rid of players that don't want to win end up still being good teams. Why? Partly, in my opinion, because they are doing things smartly. Building cohesive teams, drafting smartly, acquiring draft picks.

If the idea that this new MB stance will make the Bengals good, I disagree. I'd say that getting rid of players that don't want to be here and getting more draft picks has a better chance of working.

The ENTIRE football world practically is on Carson's side and thinking it's a SMART move for the Bengals to trade Palmer. Some of you guys are making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

[Kazkal]

Frankly, I still kinda hope Mike Brown digs in and forces Palmer into retirement. And makes him pay back some bonus money.

Why does Mike brown need it?I'd agree if he would use said money resign joseph but he wouldn't.

[HairOnFire]

I'm asking the Bengals to run like a competitive franchise. Competitive franchises don't have players screaming to get out or flip burgers every 3-5 years. This isn't asking alot.

So tell me how a competive franchise would react to the types of demands Palmer has made? Give me an example that's comparable and let's look at what the results were. For example....

Are the Bronco's better off without Cutler?

[derekshank]

Players have stated they'd rather flip burgers than play for the Bengals. That doesn't sound like a player who just wants a new contract or is out for the money, does it?

Chad said similar things. But here he remains.

And those teams that get rid of players that don't want to win end up still being good teams. Why? Partly, in my opinion, because they are doing things smartly. Building cohesive teams, drafting smartly, acquiring draft picks.

Sure. But again, that's a different topic. There are plenty of threads to complain about draft strategies, free agency and the like. What we're talking about now is letting the players run the show.

If that's how you would do business, I just want you to know that you would have fit in well in the Bengals front office in the 90's.

[Kazkal]

Chad said similar things. But here he remains.

Chad also could have gotten us high 1st & 3rd...Where palmer probably a 2nd & later draft pick.

[cincyhokie]

Players have stated they'd rather flip burgers than play for the Bengals. That doesn't sound like a player who just wants a new contract or is out for the money, does it?

Chad said similar things. But here he remains.

And those teams that get rid of players that don't want to win end up still being good teams. Why? Partly, in my opinion, because they are doing things smartly. Building cohesive teams, drafting smartly, acquiring draft picks.

Sure. But again, that's a different topic. There are plenty of threads to complain about draft strategies, free agency and the like. What we're talking about now is letting the players run the show.

If that's how you would do business, I just want you to know that you would have fit in well in the Bengals front office in the 90's.

How's Chad been working out with us?

My business model is to maintain a staff that is assembled and motivated to meet my organization's goals, mission, and vision.

When I was a company commander, you're damn straight when the guys that wanted out or switched to a new unit I did that immediately. If you don't want to be here, you don't meet my mission. Soldiers that did not want to be in my unit made work that much more difficult. They affected the other's concentration and focus.

Is this what you are talking about?

[membengal]

I could give a s**t about whether mike brown "needs" money back. He clearly doesn't. But if it f**ks w/ carson I am theoretically all for it.

To be clear, I am not on "mike brown's side"...I am simply against rewarding carson palmer for being a quitting panty-waist. f**k him straight into retirement.

[HairOnFire]

However, the Bengals have had a long history of this happening. Players have stated they'd rather flip burgers than play for the Bengals. That doesn't sound like a player who just wants a new contract or is out for the money, does it?

Actually it does. And we know that because Dillon uttered his burger flipping remark BEFORE agreeing to a new long-term contract with the Bengals. His latter unhappiness was strictly related to losing, not how the franchise operated.

If the idea that this new MB stance will make the Bengals good, I disagree. I'd say that getting rid of players that don't want to be here and getting more draft picks has a better chance of working.

I don't disagree entirely. In fact, I've said several times that I'm in favor of shopping Palmer simply because he no longer wants to be here....so we share plenty of common ground. In fact, I've consistently said I hope a trade is an option that's being explored. But unless the trade brings substantial return I think there's more at risk here than getting something for Palmer. Suffice to say I'd gladly play hardball and gain nothing at all rather than appear weak before settling for peanuts.

The ENTIRE football world practically is on Carson's side and thinking it's a SMART move for the Bengals to trade Palmer. Some of you guys are making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

Perhaps you're not making it complicated enough. Because I'm the one willing to consider all options, including seige warfare, while you argue that only one narrow option is worthy of consideration.

Ehh?

[cincyhokie]

However, the Bengals have had a long history of this happening. Players have stated they'd rather flip burgers than play for the Bengals. That doesn't sound like a player who just wants a new contract or is out for the money, does it?

Actually it does. And we know that because Dillon uttered his burger flipping remark BEFORE agreeing to a new long-term contract with the Bengals. His latter unhappiness was strictly related to losing, not how the franchise operated.

If the idea that this new MB stance will make the Bengals good, I disagree. I'd say that getting rid of players that don't want to be here and getting more draft picks has a better chance of working.

I don't disagree entirely. In fact, I've said several times that I'm in favor of shopping Palmer simply because he no longer wants to be here....so we share plenty of common ground. In fact, I've consistently said I hope a trade is an option that's being explored. But unless the trade brings substantial return I think there's more at risk here than getting something for Palmer. Suffice to say I'd gladly play hardball and gain nothing at all rather than appear weak before settling for peanuts.

The ENTIRE football world practically is on Carson's side and thinking it's a SMART move for the Bengals to trade Palmer. Some of you guys are making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

Perhaps you're not making it complicated enough. Because I'm the one willing to consider all options, including seige warfare, while you argue that only one narrow option is worthy of consideration.

Ehh?

My option is to get draft picks from the highest bidder. Get as much as possible. Palmer is not going to get "nothing" or "peanuts" for offers. If the NFCW bidding war opens up, it very well may include a first round draft pick.

It's the idea of "don't trade him and let him rot" that is completely irrational.

[HairOnFire]

How's Chad been working out with us?

Sadly, he says he's happy now and wants to remain a Bengal for the rest of his career.

[derekshank]

How's Chad been working out with us?

My business model is to maintain a staff that is assembled and motivated to meet my organization's goals, mission, and vision.

When I was a company commander, you're damn straight when the guys that wanted out or switched to a new unit I did that immediately. If you don't want to be here, you don't meet my mission. Soldiers that did not want to be in my unit made work that much more difficult. They affected the other's concentration and focus.

Is this what you are talking about?

I'm not saying I wouldn't have traded Chad for a 1st and a 3rd. But I'm also well aware of how the Bengals were routinely set back by trading away their talented players. (btw, have you ever looked at how that trade likely would gave played out? '08 was a rough draft year).

Regardless, I'm not suggesting I want guys on the team that don't want to be there. But if you trade every player that makes the demand, it creates a culture where leaving is an option. If MB makes players honor their contracts, at least there is a chance that players will actually want to be successful in Cincy instead of looking for an opportunity to bolt.

[HairOnFire]

My option is to get draft picks from the highest bidder. Get as much as possible.

Outstanding. I'm behind you 100%.

Palmer is not going to get "nothing" or "peanuts" for offers.

I'm still with you. In fact, I've said as much myself on numerous occasions.

If the NFCW bidding war opens up, it very well may include a first round draft pick.

If I'm Mike Brown I'd make it clear that the opening bid for Carson Palmer was at least a 1st round pick, and if that's deemed too much then there's no reason to talk further. Or rather, no reason to talk again until the following year when the whole ridiculous dance begins anew.

It's the idea of "don't trade him and let him rot" that is completely irrational.

True, but's it's nearly as irrational to think Palmer has to be traded immediately and under fire sale conditions. Far better to make it clear that Palmer might be traded but only if the deal makes sense for the Bengals. Make it clear that you will let the guy rot for a year or more if needed.

After all, what's the hurry? This years team has already cratered, and it all happened the moment Palmer's real estate agent delivered his ultimatum.

[derekshank]

My option is to get draft picks from the highest bidder. Get as much as possible. Palmer is not going to get "nothing" or "peanuts" for offers. If the NFCW bidding war opens up, it very well may include a first round draft pick.

Draft picks in exchange for a franchise QB? I hate to break it to you... but that's peanuts.

Draft picks are an unknown quantity... that's why the Bears gave up a serviceable Orton AND two 1st round picks for Cutler. What did Denver end up with? Orton, Robert Ayers, and Tim Tebow.

Now, I'm not saying to MB "don't trade Palmer" but I am saying... "do it on your terms." If Browns terms are, "I'll trade you in good time... but in 2011, you're a Bengal" and Palmer retires, so be it. What MB gains is a locker room that finally understands that they can't get their way by acting like spoiled children.

[membengal]

My option is to get draft picks from the highest bidder. Get as much as possible. Palmer is not going to get "nothing" or "peanuts" for offers. If the NFCW bidding war opens up, it very well may include a first round draft pick.

Draft picks in exchange for a franchise QB? I hate to break it to you... but that's peanuts.

Draft picks are an unknown quantity... that's why the Bears gave up a serviceable Orton AND two 1st round picks for Cutler. What did Denver end up with? Orton, Robert Ayers, and Tim Tebow.

Now, I'm not saying to MB "don't trade Palmer" but I am saying... "do it on your terms." If Browns terms are, "I'll trade you in good time... but in 2011, you're a Bengal" and Palmer retires, so be it. What MB gains is a locker room that finally understands that they can't get their way by acting like spoiled children.

That. Put me on team Derek. This is, above all else, an AWFUL time to try and accomodate the spoiled brat. After next off-season, maybe. But not now, and not under thse circumstances. And, yes, to all of you wanting to trade him at apparently all costs, it sends, again, a message that the inmates run the asylum. Hair is right, that message has been sent over the years when the Bengals have indeed honored these kind of trade demands. The result being that players you need tend to pull up stakes when things get hard. Not exactly the atmosphere you want for your football team, last I checked.

[HoosierCat]

Now, I'm not saying to MB "don't trade Palmer" but I am saying... "do it on your terms." If Browns terms are, "I'll trade you in good time... but in 2011, you're a Bengal" and Palmer retires, so be it. What MB gains is a locker room that finally understands that they can't get their way by acting like spoiled children.

I doubt it. Palmer's situation is relatively unique. Most players don't have the coin to make walking away a viable threat (see Dillon, Chad, etc.). I don't think there's much in the way of lessons to be taught or precedents to be set (except possibly, "don't pay players 'f**k you' money' two years into their careers").

[HairOnFire]

When going gets tough, Palmer takes his ball and goes home

By Gregg Doyel

CBSSports.com National Columnist

March 3, 2011

Jim Brown was the best player in football in 1965, but he wanted to do movies. So he retired. He was 30.

Barry Sanders was the best running back in football in 1998, but he wanted to be done. One season away from becoming the NFL's all-time leading rusher, he retired. He was 30.

Doak Walker retired after the 1955 Pro Bowl. Robert Smith ran for 1,521 yards, then retired after the 2000 Pro Bowl. Both were 28.

All four of those guys retired with dignity, so it can happen. A player can bail out on his career, his team, his teammates, and he can do it with dignity.

Or he can do it like Carson Palmer.

Since 2004 Palmer has been the quarterback of the Cincinnati Bengals, but if you believe him -- and I do -- he's now their former quarterback. Because he says he will retire before playing another game for Cincinnati. He's 31.

Unlike those who came before him, Palmer isn't retiring for noble reasons. He doesn't have another career to pursue and he hasn't exhausted the competitive drive that resides in all professional athletes. He hasn't hit the wall that Brown, Sanders, Walker and Smith hit.

Palmer doesn't even want to retire.

He just doesn't want to play for Cincinnati. He's pointing his soft, little finger at the Bengals and saying, This is their fault. I'm not leaving because of me. I'm leaving because of them.

Well, technically, Palmer isn't saying anything. He's letting everyone else talk for him: An anonymous source here, a confidant there, even the Realtor who announced that Palmer was so serious about leaving the Bengals that he had put his house up for sale. Typical Palmer. Silent, right to the end.

Giving the Bengals an ultimatum -- trade me or I retire -- is Palmer's right, but it will destroy his legacy. He'll always be one of the guys who won a Heisman at Southern California, but he'll also be the baby who took his NFL football and went home.

By telling the Bengals he'll retire before playing another game in their uniform, he has done something I didn't think possible: He has made me root for Mike Brown, one of the silliest owners in sports. Brown isn't a bad guy, just a cheap one. And he's not a soft guy, just a naïve one. Brown welcomes problem players from other teams, possibly because he believes in second chances, but also because it's the only way he can get that kind of talent onto his roster.

Unless they draft a game-changing athlete like Pacman Jones or a Hall of Fame receiver like Terrell Owens or even a run-clogging defensive tackle like Tank Johnson, the Bengals would never get those guys. Because those guys, when they behave, cost too much. But let a guy like Pacman or Tank or T.O. become available on the cheap, whether it's because of a rap sheet or a bad attitude, and Mike Brown jumps at them.

Mike Brown is not someone to like, not as a fan of the NFL or as a resident of Cincinnati. I'm both, and Mike Brown makes my skin crawl. But I'll tell you what: I want him to beat Carson Palmer, even if winning this battle means losing the larger war.

Calling Palmer's bluff and letting him retire is not in Brown's best interests in the short term. Palmer has trade value. Not as much as he should, given his recent mediocre numbers and his soft mental makeup, but he has value to the 2011 Bengals as a trade asset. He has no value as a retired player, although Brown would be doing himself a service in the long run by standing up to Palmer. Not every player would follow through on such a bluff -- Chad Ochocinco cried "wolf" so many times, the Bengals tuned him out -- but by standing up to a franchise quarterback, Brown would demonstrate to future disgruntled Bengals the futility of playing hardball.

But that's not my concern. I don't want Mike Brown to be firm now so the Bengals win in the long run. I want him to be firm so Palmer loses right now. Loses everything -- his career, his reputation, his legacy.

Again, don't compare Palmer to men like Brown and Sanders, Walker and Smith. Palmer isn't retiring from football so much as he's giving up on the Bengals. There's a difference, and it's not subtle. It's not semantics. Palmer was the Bengals' quarterback, their leader -- he had the power to reign in the malcontents in his huddle, idiots like Ochocinco and T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Owens -- but he passed the buck. Palmer pretended he was just one cog in the machine instead of acknowledging that his position and salary made him as powerful as anyone in the building, including coach Marvin Lewis.

Nope, Palmer let it go. He let Houshmandzadeh and Ochocinco pout, whine and scream. He forced the ball to Owens all last season, even as Owens repeatedly quit on throws that would have required tough or painful catches, simply because forcing the ball to Owens beat the alternative -- having T.O. savage him in the press.

The Bengals' passing game didn't hit its stride until the final two games of the season -- Palmer threw for 574 yards, five touchdowns, two interceptions and completed 73 percent of his passes -- and those were the only two games the team played without Ochocinco and Owens. Coincidence? Of course not. Those guys dragged down the team, and Palmer let it happen.

And now he's standing up for himself? Now? That's not leadership or even independence. It's passive-aggression, and it's pathetic, and it cannot be allowed to succeed. Palmer can be finished playing, but let's be clear on our terms.

He's not retiring.

He's quitting.

/>http://www.cbssports...l-and-goes-home

[membengal]

Sweeet jeebus, I actually agree with Gregg Doyle. This really is a f**ked up situation. Because what Doyle wrote is my take.

[HairOnFire]

Most players don't have the coin to make walking away a viable threat (see Dillon, Chad, etc.)

Let me get this straight. You're saying Corey Dillon and Chad Johnson hadn't made enough money to actually back their threats? Well, didn't both players sign contract extensions with the Bengals that briefly made them the highest paid players at their positions? Wasn't that enough to add a little backbone to their spines? And isn't it entirelly possible that Corey Dillon and Chad Johnson popped off like idiots simply because they wanted more money? In fact, didn't both players prove exactly that later on. Like when Dillon willingly signed a contract extension with the Bengals after claiming he'd rather flip burgers than play for them again? Or when Chad's trade me demand morphed into a pay me plea?

This grinds me. Every example of a past Bengal holdout is now being held up as if they were all the result of the same situations as Palmer now finds himself in, yet Palmer hasn't even bothered to explain what prompted his actually breaking point. No matter, says you. You claim you don't care what Palmer might say because you're not the spurned girlfriend type.

How convenient.

BTW, in the ESPN article the writer suggests Palmer has leverage simply because he has enough money to quit. But all players have the power to end their own careers anytime they see fit, do they not? So what does Palmer's 80 million buy him if he still wants to play? How can he use that 80 million to force the Bengals to trade him if they don't want to? Where's the leverage if Palmer really wants to play? Furthermore, as the article begins to wind down the the writer does indeed see fit to question Carson Palmer's heart and desire. Proving yet again that the one thing Palmer's 80 million bucks can't buy is a valid excuse for quitting.