Carson Palmer Thread

[HairOnFire]

And there's the proverbial rub, because when asked to explain why the Bengals can't win the most common response from those very same clock punching players is to point towards some trivial piece of bulls**t that they could very easily control or correct.

I don't necessarily think that's completely true that every greivence is valid but at the same time, many people seem to quickly dismiss every report we hear as "he's a stupid slacker, complainer, and doesn't know what he's talking about". So we can say the same about both sides.

I see know reason to play the "both sides are equally guilty game" when we're talking about a decades old pattern of players going through the motions or quitting outright due to their frustrations, real or imagined, over trivial matters.

Player after player have stepped forward over the years to add their complaints about the way the Bengals do business, yet each time they do so the things they complain about turn out to be almost laughable. In fact, if I were Caleb Miller I'd be embarrassed by the things he said, especially the bit about the players grievances being trivial, and how that was the whole point.

Miller seems to be saying that while the complaint is trivial the desired correction is easy to do. But Miller's brainpan seems incapable of grasping the obvious. How his complaint will always be trivial regardless of how much importance he thinks it deserves. Nor does he seem capable of grasping how his complaint doesn't become less trivial when coupled with dozens of equally trivial demands. It's still trivial bulls**t, and if the frustrations that result are enough for you to derail your own career, well.....that's on the player.

IMHO complaints about the size of towels or the quality of the free food served in the lunchroom are NOT valid excuses for punching the clock, quitting, or simply settling for less. And speaking only for myself, as a long suffering Bengal fan, I'm flat out sick of the excuses being offered by Bengal players who have underperformed or neglected their leadership duties.

Last point. Miller claimed he couldn't hink of a single example where the team had listened to his suggestions and then acted upon them. Well, how about the way Palmer lobbied for Terrell Owens for months? Isn't it obvious now that the Bengals only agreed to Palmer's desires after exploring every other option available? Doesn't it seem obvious now that the Bengals were initially trying to protect Palmer by refusing to add yet another larger than life personality that the quiet complainer Carson Palmer wouldn't be able to control?

[HoosierCat]

Player after player have stepped forward over the years to add their complaints about the way the Bengals do business, yet each time they do so the things they complain about turn out to be almost laughable.

True, yet that really isn't surprising. Remember the Simpsons episode in which Mr. Burns figures out he can shed his cheap image by giving the employees an extra 5 cents worth of tartar sauce for their fish sticks? People don't get labeled cheap for refusing to spend on big-ticket items, they get that rep when they are seen as skimping on "trivial" things they could easily afford.

Ultimately, that's what's so frustrating. Mike doesn't have to build a bubble or spend $100 million on free agents to make a huge chunk of this problem go away. A free soda here, an all-beef frank there and a $25 gift card to Target at Christmas and suddenly he's the best boss evah and the locker room is a much happier place.

[cincyhokie]

And there's the proverbial rub, because when asked to explain why the Bengals can't win the most common response from those very same clock punching players is to point towards some trivial piece of bulls**t that they could very easily control or correct.

I don't necessarily think that's completely true that every greivence is valid but at the same time, many people seem to quickly dismiss every report we hear as "he's a stupid slacker, complainer, and doesn't know what he's talking about". So we can say the same about both sides.

I see know reason to play the "both sides are equally guilty game" when we're talking about a decades old pattern of players going through the motions or quitting outright due to their frustrations, real or imagined, over trivial matters.

Player after player have stepped forward over the years to add their complaints about the way the Bengals do business, yet each time they do so the things they complain about turn out to be almost laughable. In fact, if I were Caleb Miller I'd be embarrassed by the things he said, especially the bit about the players grievances being trivial, and how that was the whole point.

Miller seems to be saying that while the complaint is trivial the desired correction is easy to do. But Miller's brainpan seems incapable of grasping the obvious. How his complaint will always be trivial regardless of how much importance he thinks it deserves. Nor does he seem capable of grasping how his complaint doesn't become less trivial when coupled with dozens of equally trivial demands. It's still trivial bulls**t, and if the frustrations that result are enough for you to derail your own career, well.....that's on the player.

IMHO complaints about the size of towels or the quality of the free food served in the lunchroom are NOT valid excuses for punching the clock, quitting, or simply settling for less. And speaking only for myself, as a long suffering Bengal fan, I'm flat out sick of the excuses being offered by Bengal players who have underperformed or neglected their leadership duties.

Last point. Miller claimed he couldn't hink of a single example where the team had listened to his suggestions and then acted upon them. Well, how about the way Palmer lobbied for Terrell Owens for months? Isn't it obvious now that the Bengals only agreed to Palmer's desires after exploring every other option available? Doesn't it seem obvious now that the Bengals were initially trying to protect Palmer by refusing to add yet another larger than life personality that the quiet complainer Carson Palmer wouldn't be able to control?

I completely agree.

But why don't the Bengals simply avoid drafting or bringing in these types of players?

Why don't they draft more Laphams, Fulchers, and Munozes? Talent aside all of these players acknowledge the "Bengal Way" but none of them let it affect their play or dedication.

[HairOnFire]

I completely agree.

But why don't the Bengals simply avoid drafting or bringing in these types of players?

My take? Because most of the players the Bengals draft aren't that type of player before they get here. But once here they're pulled aside by veteran "leaders" and given the players version of the so-called Bengal Way. And there's the rub because the players version is based upon elevating what they admit is trivial bulls**t into giant obstacles that are simply too great to overcome. And that's total bulls**t.

Quite frankly, all I'm seeing is example after example of the very same kind of needless drama that most of us witness in our own workplaces, most often demonstrated by small groups of employees constantly demanding their bosses do something/anything to prove how much they care.

[HairOnFire]

Ultimately, that's what's so frustrating. Mike doesn't have to build a bubble or spend $100 million on free agents to make a huge chunk of this problem go away. A free soda here, an all-beef frank there and a $25 gift card to Target at Christmas and suddenly he's the best boss evah and the locker room is a much happier place.

I'm guessing even you don't believe what you just wrote.

Employees will always bitch about their bosses. It's what they do. And as much as both sides attempt to portray themselves as being in partnership the simple fact of the matter is both sides have different goals which sometimes puts one side in competition with the other. It's why you rarely hear examples of players criticizing other players regardless of what that player might be trying to pull.

Want to tank a season? Well, manangement won't approve and neither will most fans, but there are plenty of players who will support a players right to deliberatly underperform. Or perhaps a player wants to break a contract that has 4 years remaining by pretending to retire? Well again, most people will quicly see the bulls**t in that, but there are plenty of players who will support that players campaign of lies and deception, including a few who will do so by proclaiming the liar to be a man of his word. And yeah, if all of that seems crazy it's because it probably is. Because simply put, most player complaints are complete bulls**t.

Goodwill? All Mike Brown is going to buy with a free soda here and a free hotdog there is a roster full of players who expect free steaks and lobster tomorrow.

[HoosierCat]

My take? Because most of the players the Bengals draft aren't that type of player before they get here. But once here they're pulled aside by veteran "leaders" and given the players version of the so-called Bengal Way.

Or they just talk to their friends around the league. The NFL's not that big and these guys all know each other from college. So Joe Cowboy calls Jim Bengal to tell him about how Dallas picked him up at the airport in a limo and had a stripper with a chilled shrimp cocktail waiting at his locker, after Jim had to pick up his own cab fare and pay for a bottle of water at PBS.

Quite frankly, all I'm seeing is example after example of the very same kind of needless drama that most of us witness in our own workplaces, most often demonstrated by small groups of employees constantly demanding their bosses do something/anything to prove how much they care.

Agreed, but having worked for companies up and down the food chain, I've found that the good ones tend to have fewer drama queens and that they mostly tend to be ignored. The lower down you go, the higher the drama quotient rises, usually due to a combination of 1. the company actually not being well-run and 2. the employees being ones who can't get or keep a job at good companies.

[cincyhokie]

Which all leads us to the question that if there's a problem, how does it get fixed?

a. Do we ask other teams to not treat their players so well?

b. Do we become more upfront in presenting our "Bengal culture" to prospective players? Afterall, if it's the right thing to do, why not promote it?

I honestly don't see why it can't sound like this: "This is what we are but we aim to be old school and hard nose. We don't like drama and complainers. Do you think you can handle that? Because if you can't, then we won't draft you."

c. Or do we do nothing and keep letting the circumstances handed to us as an organization be dictated by thing out of our control? Continually blaming the same players that we drafted that THEY are the problem.

I can guarantee you A and C won't fix this.

[HairOnFire]

My take? Because most of the players the Bengals draft aren't that type of player before they get here. But once here they're pulled aside by veteran "leaders" and given the players version of the so-called Bengal Way.

Or they just talk to their friends around the league. The NFL's not that big and these guys all know each other from college. So Joe Cowboy calls Jim Bengal to tell him about how Dallas picked him up at the airport in a limo and had a stripper with a chilled shrimp cocktail waiting at his locker, after Jim had to pick up his own cab fare and pay for a bottle of water at PBS.

Well, I'll counter your fictional example with one that actually happened just this week. Specifically, how ex-Bengal Madieu Williams spoke to Taylor Mays about the Bengals after Mays was traded. And according to Mays himself, Williams had only good things to say about the franchise and the people who run it.

But who remembers when someone says something positive, right? Most of us either ignore that sort of stuff precisely because it doesn't fit into a preconceived rant OR we give it less credence than the trivial yammerings of a perennial backup player whos is still bitching about the free food he was served several years ago.

Furthermore, your fictional example only serves to underscore the stupidity behind the complaints made by Bengal players. Because really, who amongst us really gives a shid about whether a rich guy had to pay for his own strippers?

[Spor_tees]

If a guy is getting paid 100 million dollars he could pay to have Montgomery Inn or whatever meal he wants catered to the club house everyday and twice on Sundays. I wish Marvin would send Carson some tissue paper and baby wipes with a note that reads "Shut the hell up and play."

[HoosierCat]

Furthermore, your fictional example only serves to underscore the stupidity behind the complaints made by Bengal players. Because really, who amongst us really gives a shid about whether a rich guy had to pay for his own strippers?

Well, whether we give a shid isn't the point. We're talking about whether the players give a shid. And as with any organization, there will be some who do, some who don't, and some who don't care one way or the other. The question at hand is, how do you minimize the ones who get bent out of shape over "trivia?"

If, as we've already established, you can't avoid drafting them, then the obvious answer is to eliminate the trivia. The problem as I see it is, there's no economic incentive for the Bengals to do so. Spending on employee satisfaction might lead to better financial results in some industries, but it's hard to figure out how that happens in the NFL.

[Spor_tees]

Furthermore, your fictional example only serves to underscore the stupidity behind the complaints made by Bengal players. Because really, who amongst us really gives a shid about whether a rich guy had to pay for his own strippers?

Well, whether we give a shid isn't the point. We're talking about whether the players give a shid. And as with any organization, there will be some who do, some who don't, and some who don't care one way or the other. The question at hand is, how do you minimize the ones who get bent out of shape over "trivia?"

If, as we've already established, you can't avoid drafting them, then the obvious answer is to eliminate the trivia. The problem as I see it is, there's no economic incentive for the Bengals to do so. Spending on employee satisfaction might lead to better financial results in some industries, but it's hard to figure out how that happens in the NFL.

I just don't understand some of these rich players in the NFL. It reminds me of the movie Major League where the highest paid player (Roger Doran I believe played by Corbin Bernson) complains about stuff while pretty much all the other guys are just happy to be playing in the Major Leagues. Some of the guys need to get a grip and quit asking to be pampered all the time, especially when they are getting paid millions upon millions of dollars to play a game.

[bwillycuse]

Lecharles Bentley on the radio in Cleveland was given a shot by the Bengals awhile back after hs knee issues,

Mike Brown personally picked him up from airport. No other team gave him a secoond look.

Bentley had only glowing comments toward Brown. If anything, he treats his playeers with respect. I'm not defending Brown, but employees complaining about the lack of a christmas party or small towels is sad.

[cincyhokie]

So I guess there's no problem? Right? On some regards, I don't believe that there is. Whatever Mike Brown has adopted as a way to run a business is fine. His principles and beliefs are more than his right to have. In fact, I bet if I met him I'd be right there with him in agreement as we talked about the way things in life SHOULD be.

At the same time there's nothing wrong with wanting good food, bigger towels, a practice bubble, a ride from the airport, a better contract, etc. There is NOTHING wrong with a player wanting any of these things. Because when we start labeling these things we're getting into preferences and beliefs. So who's to tell a 22 year old draft pick that he can't want something in the way of money or ammenities? Especially if it's not out of the realm of possibility because other players are getting these things. Hell, this is the NATURE of college football recruiting.

There's nothing wrong with Mike Brown and there's nothing wrong with the players, even Corey Dillion, Dave Rimington, Carson Palmer, Carl Pickens, Chad Johnson, Caleb Miller, and on and on.

The problem I see is that there is no continuity in how the Bengals operate a culture of what they are. Do they have one that they promote? Do players understand it? Or are the Bengals just misunderstood from "spiteful players" and the "media"? Do the Bengals communicate who they are to prospective players? The fans? THESE are the things they can control. For every player taken that complains about the food or towels there was a front office decision to draft that player who didn't fit into that system or the failed to communicate the "Bengal Way".

There's alot of things the BENGALS and MIKE BROWN can do to get better and I look at them to get better. As much as I think Carson Palmer and Caleb Miller are douchebags and as much as I can't understand why someone would rather "flip burgers at McDonalds" than play a game, there's always something that that the TEAM can be doing to not let this happen. I don't root for Carson Palmer or Corey Dillion (I mean how can the Bengals be so unlucky as to keep drafting distracted players?). I root for the Bengals so I will continue to look at them to make changes and make adjustments that create a continuity and a culture of Bengals football. Or do we really have one? Is that the media's job to give us an identity?

[HairOnFire]

Furthermore, your fictional example only serves to underscore the stupidity behind the complaints made by Bengal players. Because really, who amongst us really gives a shid about whether a rich guy had to pay for his own strippers?

Well, whether we give a shid isn't the point. We're talking about whether the players give a shid.

Like hell it isn't the point. By his own words Caleb Miller's intent is to let fans know what's going on behind the curtain. Thus, he pops off like an idiot about how he can't think of a single example where the Bengals listened to Palmer, easily disproven btw, and then proceded to yammer about how a mountain of trivial things eventually amounts to something more than a mountain of trivial things. In reality, it doesn't. In reality it's still a mountain of trivial bulls**t. And at no point does it ever become an acceptable excuse for quitting, as Miller stupidly claims is the case with Palmer.

[HoosierCat]

Like hell it isn't the point.

It may be your point, but it's not mine. Carry on.

[HairOnFire]

So I guess there's no problem? Right? On some regards, I don't believe that there is. Whatever Mike Brown has adopted as a way to run a business is fine. His principles and beliefs are more than his right to have. In fact, I bet if I met him I'd be right there with him in agreement as we talked about the way things in life SHOULD be.

At the same time there's nothing wrong with wanting good food, bigger towels, a practice bubble, a ride from the airport, a better contract, etc. There is NOTHING wrong with a player wanting any of these things. Because when we start labeling these things we're getting into preferences and beliefs. So who's to tell a 22 year old draft pick that he can't want something in the way of money or ammenities? Especially if it's not out of the realm of possibility because other players are getting these things. Hell, this is the NATURE of college football recruiting.

Whose to tell a 22-year old that he can't want something? Nobody.

Whose to tell a 22-year old he can't have something? Well, anyone he's asking to pay.

Frankly, you and Hoosier are working the same points with the only real difference being your defense of "wanting" while he defends acts of blatant jealousy. And to a point you're both right. But to another point you're both wrong.

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

[HoosierCat]

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

Not saying it's a noble cause. But trivial bulls**t is relative. Yup, to you, me, just about anyone, a guy making millions who's complaining about not getting free bottled water or big towels generally doesn't earn much sympathy.

Of course, to that guy living in a mud hut in Bangladesh, what would our complaints about having to kick in more for our health coverage or pay $4 a gallon for gas sound? Pretty trivial, right?

Unfortunately, the number of us (and I include myself in that) who actually wake up on a regular basis and think, hey, I should be grateful for all I've got, is pretty small. Mostly we're obsessed with what we don't have and others do. We're always looking at the people who have more, not less, especially among our peer group. "Keeping up with the Joneses" isn't a cliche for nothing.

So does it surprise me that some Bengals players are upset that they don't get the same trivial perks as their peers elsewhere? Not at all. There's nothing noble about it, it's just human nature.

[cincyhokie]

Frankly, you and Hoosier are working the same points with the only real difference being your defense of "wanting" while he defends acts of blatant jealousy. And to a point you're both right. But to another point you're both wrong.

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" in any of this. I looking from what the perspective from what Mike Brown and the Bengals can do because they remain and players come and go. What Carson or Caleb does or thinks doesn't have an effect on this team. Or does it?

Because if it does then there is a consequence. A consequence to an action or an inaction contributed by you to the situation. Nobody in Palmergate is a complete victim. If we can respect that both Mike Brown and these disgruntled players have a right to act on whatever they believe in, then who's in more of a position to dictate their stance? A 22 year old? Or an organization? If it's the organization then they would be wise to adjust their future actions so the same thing doesn't happen again. I don't think Mike Brown wants another Palmer situation to occur.

I would argue that it is Mike Brown and the powers that be that are forced to make a change in some regard. Have you ever tried to change someone's thoughts, wants, or beliefs? Pretty hard especially dealing with the desires of many pro athletes. Mike Brown doesn't have to change either because as previously stated he holds his own beliefs and values.

However, when someone experiences a consequence to action or inaction, i.e. Palmer's demands, you must look at what changes YOU can make. Because, again, you cannot expect other people to change simply based on the fact that you don't share the same values and beliefs.

If you don't like the consequences experienced from drafting players with different values what are you to do? Make changes for the organization or wait for 22 year olds to change? And, again, if you don't think there's a consequence being experienced then don't do anything. So we're back at square one. Is there a problem? Does Mike Brown think there is one?

[cincyhokie]

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

Again, I agree with this. But as Hoosier stated, who are we to say what is trivial and what is not? I can tell someone all day long that they should want or believe in something but it's up to them to change their minds.

Why would an organization insist on HOPING that they players they draft will possess the same value systems that they, you, and me have? That doesn't sound very proactive and assertive. It sounds of being passive and playing the victim.

[HairOnFire]

However, when someone experiences a consequence to action or inaction, i.e. Palmer's demands, you must look at what changes YOU can make. Because, again, you cannot expect other people to change simply based on the fact that you don't share the same values and beliefs.

I'm betting Mike Brown has learned a few lessons in life, including the one about how people don't change by themselves. Thus, you have to change people. And by that I mean replace them.

[HairOnFire]

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

Again, I agree with this. But as Hoosier stated, who are we to say what is trivial and what is not? I can tell someone all day long that they should want or believe in something but it's up to them to change their minds.

Who are we to say what is trivial and what isn't?

We're fans.

And as fans we judge what we see and what we're told. So consider what Caleb Miller has said about how trivial issues are the "whole point" behind player frustration. Then consider his ridiculous claim about how Carson Palmer's suggestions were never acted upon. As a fan do you find merit in Miller's remarks? Can you support them?

And if not, why should anyone give credence to the message or the messenger?

[cincyhokie]

However, when someone experiences a consequence to action or inaction, i.e. Palmer's demands, you must look at what changes YOU can make. Because, again, you cannot expect other people to change simply based on the fact that you don't share the same values and beliefs.

I'm betting Mike Brown has learned a few lessons in life, including the one about how people don't change by themselves. Thus, you have to change people. And by that I mean replace them.

Yep. But he seems to be slow at doing that. Chad?

Or go a step further and select players that fit your system and culture. Do the Bengals have one? Do they promote it?

[cincyhokie]

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

Again, I agree with this. But as Hoosier stated, who are we to say what is trivial and what is not? I can tell someone all day long that they should want or believe in something but it's up to them to change their minds.

Who are we to say what is trivial and what isn't?

We're fans.

And as fans we judge what we see and what we're told. So consider what Caleb Miller has said about how trivial issues are the "whole point" behind player frustration. Then consider his ridiculous claim about how Carson Palmer's suggestions were never acted upon. As a fan do you find merit in Miller's remarks? Can you support them?

And if not, why should anyone give credence to the message or the messenger?

Well, yeah, of course. But what we think in context of Caleb Miller won't change anything.

What Mike Brown believes in concerning Caleb Miller won't change anything unless he changes his course of actions concerning players like Miller.

[HairOnFire]

However, when someone experiences a consequence to action or inaction, i.e. Palmer's demands, you must look at what changes YOU can make. Because, again, you cannot expect other people to change simply based on the fact that you don't share the same values and beliefs.

I'm betting Mike Brown has learned a few lessons in life, including the one about how people don't change by themselves. Thus, you have to change people. And by that I mean replace them.

Yep. But he seems to be slow at doing that. Chad?

Or go a step further and select players that fit your system and culture. Do the Bengals have one? Do they promote it?

Did the Bengals keep Chad too long?

Absolutely....at least in my opinion. But keep something in mind. As recently as the 2010 season fans like Hoosier were writing post after post about how Chad was the only productive weapon in the Bengals passing game, and should NOT be traded. Furthermore, guys like Hoosier repeatedly claimed a non-productive WR, Chris Henry, was actually the key to any success in the Bengals passing game.

Regardless of whether you agree with those points or not they do serve one purpose very very well. Both players were kept longer than many felt was prudent precisely because the Bengals actually do have a culture or core belief that dictates much of what they do and who they are. And there's the rub because we know who they are, don't we?

We ARE the Bastard Sons of Paul Brown and throwing the ball around the yard is and will always be job one.

Because the above is true, and it is, I believe this team will always feature a core based upon the QB and WR positions. It's who they are. It's how they define themselves. Coaches may come and coaches may go but the one constant that remains is the focus on the passing game. And because the QB and WR positions are considered most important to the teams core beliefs the team simply will NOT rid itself of a player like Chad until a suitable replacement is found OR that player's skill level declines to such a point that the team can rid itself of the player soley on football related terms.

And yeah, in the Chad example I think we watched as both things finally happened. The very moment AJ Green fell into the Bengals laps they not only had a suitable replacement for Chad, but also....a player who was an upgrade in talent. And perhaps just as important, Green gave the Bengals a more versatile player capable of lining up in each and every one of the WR roles....thereby making Chad's one-trick pony act instantly expendable. But the arrival of AJ Green did much more than make Chad expendable. Almost overnight the Bengals shifted from a stance where Chad was greatly valued to one where he was no longer needed or wanted. Without Green on the roster that simply doesn't happen.

To recap, while I personally believe the Bengals got rid of Chad at least two years later than I would have I have to acknowledge how the decisions they made were based soley upon factors that are entirely football related. Everything else, from the trivial to the distinctly douche-like, was coldly and perhaps unwisely ignored. And yeah, that can be a problem with real world consequences. But the much bigger problem IMHO is the willingness of core Bengal players to deliberatly put themselves above the team, something I beleive is only possible due to the core importance the team places upon the WR and QB positions. Players at those positions believe the very positions they play give them more leverage than they actually have, and act as if normal rules do not apply. In reality, due to Mike Brown's willingness to overlook off the field antics, those players have no more leverage to force change upon the Bengals than a backup FB might have.

[HairOnFire]

Trivial bulls**t is just that. You can't spin it into a noble cause or justification for settling for less.

Again, I agree with this. But as Hoosier stated, who are we to say what is trivial and what is not? I can tell someone all day long that they should want or believe in something but it's up to them to change their minds.

Who are we to say what is trivial and what isn't?

We're fans.

And as fans we judge what we see and what we're told. So consider what Caleb Miller has said about how trivial issues are the "whole point" behind player frustration. Then consider his ridiculous claim about how Carson Palmer's suggestions were never acted upon. As a fan do you find merit in Miller's remarks? Can you support them?

And if not, why should anyone give credence to the message or the messenger?

Well, yeah, of course. But what we think in context of Caleb Miller won't change anything.

Perhaps not. But speaking only for myself I can no longer give credence to any players complaint if the most damning complaint they can come up with is food related. Simply put, Caleb Miller can go eat a dick for all I care.