Carson Palmer Thread

[cincyhokie]

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.

I definately agree with this. I couldn't care less what he thinks. Or Carson for that matter.

But we have to ask ourselves when the team's image and perceived culture is GIVEN to them by the media and disgruntled trival minded drama queens...the Bengals lose.

And I would say it would go a LONG way for the product on and off the field if Mike Brown and the Bengals did a better job of promoting their product to prospective PLAYERS and FANS. Hell...using words, standards, and boundaries to communicate your image and culture don't cost anything.

[cincyhokie]

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.

Exactly. But you have to prioritize your decisions. Basically, create limits and boundaries. Chad and T.O. could've been the most awesomest WR's ever...but is their douchiness worth it?

The intangibles have a HUGE effect on a team and the wins and losses. More so than I think Mike Brown understands...hence is why I don't think he stresses the desired intagibles enough when bringing players in. And THAT is something he can control that could help these Palmer like issues in the future...

[derekshank]

The intangibles have a HUGE effect on a team and the wins and losses. More so than I think Mike Brown understands...hence is why I don't think he stresses the desired intagibles enough when bringing players in. And THAT is something he can control that could help these Palmer like issues in the future...

Interesting theory... that doesn't take into consideration that bringing in T.O. was something Palmer specifically requested.

So, on the one hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should listen to the requests of his star players. On the other hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should protect his star players from the negative intangibles that are brought on by players like T.O.

Seems like Mike Brown is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.

No matter the problem, Mikey makes a damn fine scapegoat. Yep... that pretty much sums it up.

[HoosierCat]

So, on the one hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should listen to the requests of his star players. On the other hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should protect his star players from the negative intangibles that are brought on by players like T.O.

The Bengals have a history of listening to, and sometimes even granting, player requests to bring in other players. Ron Dugans and TJ come to mind; both were reportedly touted by Warrick and Chad, respectively, on draft day after they were taken. (I'd bet Jordan Palmer falls into this category as well.) In the case of TO, I think his arrival in Cincy had more to do with Bryant's knee than any lobbying by Carson. He may have wanted him but if Antonio had gotten healthy, he wouldn't have got him.

[HairOnFire]

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.

Exactly. But you have to prioritize your decisions. Basically, create limits and boundaries. Chad and T.O. could've been the most awesomest WR's ever...but is their douchiness worth it?

The intangibles have a HUGE effect on a team and the wins and losses. More so than I think Mike Brown understands...hence is why I don't think he stresses the desired intagibles enough when bringing players in. And THAT is something he can control that could help these Palmer like issues in the future...

I might agree if you offered a better example. Mike Brown's month(s) long reluctance to sign Owens, ooupled with his willingness to throw millions of dollars at an already injured alternative, seem like ample proof of Brown's grasp of certain intangibles. Furthermore, the very reason the Chad/Owens/Palmer experiment failed utterly was due to the character weaknesses of the players involved. And those players were the very same voices who lobbied so loudly for Owens to be added, right?

Knowing all of the above to be true, well.....why shouldn't the opinions of players be ignored?

[cincyhokie]

The intangibles have a HUGE effect on a team and the wins and losses. More so than I think Mike Brown understands...hence is why I don't think he stresses the desired intagibles enough when bringing players in. And THAT is something he can control that could help these Palmer like issues in the future...

Interesting theory... that doesn't take into consideration that bringing in T.O. was something Palmer specifically requested.

So, on the one hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should listen to the requests of his star players. On the other hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should protect his star players from the negative intangibles that are brought on by players like T.O.

Seems like Mike Brown is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.

No matter the problem, Mikey makes a damn fine scapegoat. Yep... that pretty much sums it up.

Wow. That's nothing what I said.

If Mike Brown doesn't think that TO fits into his system or culture then no, he shouldn't listen to his players. If TO does, then in this case, I guess he should.

I would like to see Mike Brown more proactive in what he promotes. That's my stance.

And no, I don't think Palmer is the victim in all of this but I also don't think that Mike Brown is the poor victim either. Just because I don't blindly criticize Mike Brown doesn't mean that I am in the category of "scapegoaters".

[derekshank]

The Bengals have a history of listening to, and sometimes even granting, player requests to bring in other players. Ron Dugans and TJ come to mind; both were reportedly touted by Warrick and Chad, respectively, on draft day after they were taken. (I'd bet Jordan Palmer falls into this category as well.)

So to recap... Palmer was listened and had sway when it came to the important matters of filling out the roster and surrounding him with weapons of his choosing.

Yet Palmer is bitter because the team Christmas party was lame.

F*ck Carson Palmer.

In the case of TO, I think his arrival in Cincy had more to do with Bryant's knee than any lobbying by Carson. He may have wanted him but if Antonio had gotten healthy, he wouldn't have got him.

That's hardly relevant. You could just as easily say if Bryant was healthy, Palmer wouldn't have felt the need to lobby for T.O.

The point is that Palmer lobbied, and got his way. Yet Palmer is viewed as a victim of a tyrannical leader who won't compromise on the all important issues of the quality of the free food.

Yeah... F*ck Carson Palmer.

[derekshank]

The intangibles have a HUGE effect on a team and the wins and losses. More so than I think Mike Brown understands...hence is why I don't think he stresses the desired intagibles enough when bringing players in. And THAT is something he can control that could help these Palmer like issues in the future...

Interesting theory... that doesn't take into consideration that bringing in T.O. was something Palmer specifically requested.

So, on the one hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should listen to the requests of his star players. On the other hand I'm hearing that Mike Brown should protect his star players from the negative intangibles that are brought on by players like T.O.

Seems like Mike Brown is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.

No matter the problem, Mikey makes a damn fine scapegoat. Yep... that pretty much sums it up.

Wow. That's nothing what I said.

My point wasn't specific to you... but to the thread as a whole. Your criticism of Mike Brown is the exact opposite of the criticism he's been getting for the last two pages in this thread. I find that ironic.

Most Bengal fans will find a way to blame Mike Brown for this one way or the other, logic be damned. The real issue, that only a precious few want to admit, is that Palmer is a bitch.

The beauty of it is that Palmer being a bitch in no way excuses Mike Brown from a variety of other faults. But Joe Bengalfan is comforted by the notion that all his problems can be boiled down to one finite being. So this too must fit into that paradigm, or the entire worldview will be shattered.

[cincyhokie]

Knowing all of the above to be true, well.....why shouldn't the opinions of players be ignored?

If those voices fail to meet his expecations and standards of a consistent culture that he's setting then...he should ignore the opinions of players.

Or better yet, shouldn't he exercise when and with who he listens to based on sound intent?

This is a subjective issue...it'd be better if it was all black and white...but it ain't.

[HoosierCat]

So to recap... Palmer was listened and had sway when it came to the important matters of filling out the roster and surrounding him with weapons of his choosing.

Yes, just like other players. The Bengals often listen to players when it comes to on-the-field issues. However, when it comes to how the Browns run the organization, they pay no more attention to the players than they do us fans.

[cincyhokie]

The real issue, that only a precious few want to admit, is that Palmer is a bitch.

I hope that is the only problem. Because if that's true we won't have anymore, or much fewer, issues with players quitting mid-contract. And if Palmer's the problem and he's gone...then there isn't a problem.

What I find curious is that there are few who recognize that this issue isn't so much blame and fault but a huge mixture of things. Some here, some there. Some Palmer, some Mike Brown, etc.

Since I'm not a fan of the Carson Palmers but a fan of the Bengals, I would just like to see the owner of the team I root for do his part to fix what he's contributed. Example: Stop drafting selfish a**h***s and non-commited players if there seems to be a systemic problem.

[HairOnFire]

Knowing all of the above to be true, well.....why shouldn't the opinions of players be ignored?

If those voices fail to meet his expecations and standards of a consistent culture that he's setting then...he should ignore the opinions of players.

Or better yet, shouldn't he exercise when and with who he listens to based on sound intent?

Absolutely.

Which explains very well why Mike Brown would be wise to ignore the advice and input of Carson Palmer. And I say that precisely due to the mounting evidence that Carson Palmer greatly overrated his own leadership skills and his ability to control players who have a larger personality than Palmer's. Which by most accounts includes almost everyone in the room.

Furthermore, it's that inflated sense of self worth that is the common thread in most complaints offered by the players. We're smarter, they say. We know better than you. In reality, most players don't know s**t.

[HoosierCat]

The trouble with the "Carson Palmer is a bitch" theory is that Palmer is just the latest in a long string of disgruntled Bengals players -- a string that, it should be noted, stretches back well before the start of the Mike Brown era. The food and towels and all the rest of the "trivia" have been irritating Bengals players pretty much from day 1. Dismissing Palmer as a bitch is fine, he may even be one, but the record suggests that the underlying issues which create or trigger such bitches remain. In short, this will happen again...and again...and again.

[HairOnFire]

The trouble with the "Carson Palmer is a bitch" theory is that Palmer is just the latest in a long string of disgruntled Bengals players -- a string that, it should be noted, stretches back well before the start of the Mike Brown era. The food and towels and all the rest of the "trivia" have been irritating Bengals players pretty much from day 1.

True, but from day one players have also complained about being a Bengal simply because that dictated they live in Cincinnati or Hilltuckey. And that speaks directly to your rant about some players being jealous of other players and the perks available on more glamorous teams located in more glamorous cities.

[derekshank]

The real issue, that only a precious few want to admit, is that Palmer is a bitch.

I hope that is the only problem.

I didn't say it's the only problem. Simply that this particular problem is on one guy. And one guy only.

Since I'm not a fan of the Carson Palmers but a fan of the Bengals, I would just like to see the owner of the team I root for do his part to fix what he's contributed. Example: Stop drafting selfish a**h***s and non-commited players if there seems to be a systemic problem.

The suggestion implies that not only was Carson Palmer a selfish and uncommitted a**h*** the day he was drafted, but it was a quality that was well-known to Mike Brown.

But Carson Palmer said all the right things. Even that he was proud to be a Bengal for life. So, at best, Palmer is a bitch who quits when things get difficult, at worst he is a liar and he deceived the entire country into believing he was something he is not.

Either way... Mike Brown, for all his faults, doesn't make for a good scapegoat here.

[cincyhokie]

The suggestion implies that not only was Carson Palmer a selfish and uncommitted a**h*** the day he was drafted, but it was a quality that was well-known to Mike Brown.

But Carson Palmer said all the right things. Even that he was proud to be a Bengal for life. So, at best, Palmer is a bitch who quits when things get difficult, at worst he is a liar and he deceived the entire country into believing he was something he is not.

Either way... Mike Brown, for all his faults, doesn't make for a good scapegoat here.

Well, then the Bengals must have run into a bad string luck wise of getting players who bitch about small towels, think the food sucks, want to flip burgers at McDonald's, and quit mid contract.

Hopefully, someday the tide will turn, the luck will go from good to bad, and the wind will blow in a different direction.

Ehh...I think that there's more to these patterns than the players just being "bitches".

[derekshank]

Ehh...I think that there's more to these patterns than the players just being "bitches".

Ok. I'm listening.

Palmer was surrounded with talent. The Bengals regularly used early picks to give him weapons. They signed his little brother, and went out and got T.O. because Palmer asked them to. For better or for worse, they built their offense around Palmer and made roster moves to appease him.

But, the reasons Palmer doesn't want to play for the Bengals any more are... the quality of free food, the lame Christmas party, and the size of the towels in the locker-room.

So you tell me. Who is being unreasonable here?

[cincyhokie]

Ehh...I think that there's more to these patterns than the players just being "bitches".

Ok. I'm listening.

Palmer was surrounded with talent. The Bengals regularly used early picks to give him weapons. They signed his little brother, and went out and got T.O. because Palmer asked them to. For better or for worse, they built their offense around Palmer and made roster moves to appease him.

But, the reasons Palmer doesn't want to play for the Bengals any more are... the quality of free food, the lame Christmas party, and the size of the towels in the locker-room.

So you tell me. Who is being unreasonable here?

I guess that would be a fair question if we had both sides to the story or were a player in the lockeroom or there during draft interviews. I don't know who is being unreasonable. There's a good chance it is Palmer.

I'm really not as concerned with why one player has a problem but more so with a long stretch of years consisting of disgruntled players. There's a trend, is there not?

[derekshank]

I'm really not as concerned with why one player has a problem but more so with a long stretch of years consisting of disgruntled players. There's a trend, is there not?

Perhaps... but it's a little overstated. Especially considering that there are plenty of teams that deal with the same things.

The Chargers are full of players, current and past, who rail against the way management treats the players. The Patriots have had a litany of guys hold out and demand trades.

Yet, the fans of these teams don't ask the same kinds of questions Bengal fans ask. In fact, it is regularly assumed that the player in question is an entitled douchebag (and isn't that usually the case?)

[cincyhokie]

I'm really not as concerned with why one player has a problem but more so with a long stretch of years consisting of disgruntled players. There's a trend, is there not?

Perhaps... but it's a little overstated. Especially considering that there are plenty of teams that deal with the same things.

The Chargers are full of players, current and past, who rail against the way management treats the players. The Patriots have had a litany of guys hold out and demand trades.

Yet, the fans of these teams don't ask the same kinds of questions Bengal fans ask. In fact, it is regularly assumed that the player in question is an entitled douchebag (and isn't that usually the case?)

I hate to use the old saying "I only care about what my team does" but I only care about what my team does. I'm sure there's other teams that have some of the same problems and I definately have no idea how to measure the amount of disgruntledness.

I do believe that while the Bengals have had success recently they have always had a tremendous problem with consistency and continuity which leads to bad seasons following good seasons. I just don't see a promoted culture or "way of doing things" that can keep and BRING IN more of the Whitworth of this team and less of the "trivial complainers".

And because the Bengals don't communicate any specific way of doing things, or culture, to the fans, potential players, and the football world....you get what you ask for. A media labled, misunderstood idea of what things the Bengals really stand for, or want to stand for.

[HoosierCat]

In fact, it is regularly assumed that the player in question is an entitled douchebag (and isn't that usually the case?)

Of course. But that's an occupational hazard of running an NFL team. The college football system breeds entitled douchebag athletes like cockroaches. Question is, how do you deal with it? Do you throw a few trivial amenities at them so entitled douchebag feels titled and doesn't rock the boat? Or do you say, eff 'im, he can buy his own lunch, and watched as entitled douchebag becomes disgruntled entitled douchebag?

[derekshank]

In fact, it is regularly assumed that the player in question is an entitled douchebag (and isn't that usually the case?)

Of course. But that's an occupational hazard of running an NFL team. The college football system breeds entitled douchebag athletes like cockroaches. Question is, how do you deal with it? Do you throw a few trivial amenities at them so entitled douchebag feels titled and doesn't rock the boat? Or do you say, eff 'im, he can buy his own lunch, and watched as entitled douchebag becomes disgruntled entitled douchebag?

C'mon Hoosier. You know what happens when you give a mouse a cookie.

So the question here isn't if you draw a line, but where. Because at some point, the entitled douchebag is going to hear the word 'no' for the first time. And we see it all over the league. Chris Johnson, Vincent Jackson, Logan Mankins, Frank Gore. Every owner eventually says 'no' and a temper tantrum ensues. You don't like the line Mike Brown has drawn... and it's fine for you to disagree with the proximity of the line, but silly to think that moving it would solve the problem.

Whether the line is about the franchise tag, being on time to team meetings, or all-beef franks, an entitled player is going to feel slighted. Hell, Adrian Peterson thinks playing in the NFL is modern day slavery. You can't argue with stupid. So... you let him retire.

[HairOnFire]

The college football system breeds entitled douchebag athletes like cockroaches. Question is, how do you deal with it? Do you throw a few trivial amenities at them so entitled douchebag feels titled and doesn't rock the boat?

You say the above as if tossing around a few trivial trinkets would somehow change the cockroach-like douchebag's sense of entitlement.

I say it won't.

[HairOnFire]

C'mon Hoosier. You know what happens when you give a mouse a cookie.

Sweeter smelling mouse droppings?

[HoosierCat]

You don't like the line Mike Brown has drawn... and it's fine for you to disagree with the proximity of the line, but silly to think that moving it would solve the problem.

Of course it wouldn't solve the problem. Players will always complain that their underpaid, or don't want to be franchised, or what to "play for a winner" or whatever. But it's already been pointed out that the vast majority of complaints we hear falls into that "all-beef franks" category. Resolving that wouldn't be either difficult or horribly expensive, and would work to reduce the level of disgruntlement to that typical of most NFL teams.