Uh-Oh Lewis has had it.

[HoosierCat]

I have always found Chris unbiased and very well informed. Well what did he say............ In essence he said that while the money was agreed upon ,there were several stipulations in the contract that were holding things up. It seems that the guaranteed money isn"t exactly guaranteed in that the way it is written now, if they wanted to cut DP after one year that the guaranteed money would default to a fraction. Translation........If DP gets hurt there is no guaranteed money. Also, There seems to be this little stipulation that he can be fined 100,000 per day for violation of seemingly ambigious team rules. And this fine is solely at the discretion of management.

Nothing that would surprise me if true. The Bengals have always insisted on doing business their way; standard contract structures and language good enough for 31 other teams aren't good enough for the Bengals.

[walzav29]

I'm basically writing these out of frustration. I just want Pollack to sign. To be honest, this has been going on for years. It can't always be the greedy player. At some point the Bengals have to fine tune the way they do contracts. The Bengals have to lead the league in hold-outs over the last 20 years. Hell, didn't Jason Buck hold out, and also a linebacker in the 80's? Ricky Hunley, Justin Smith, Akili, Perry, Keiwan, etc..... I mean the Bengals now routinely have 2nd round holdouts. That is ridiculous. All us fans want is to win. That's it. We will all root for Pollack, just like we do Smith. It just seems like a waste of a year.

[Semper_Fi_Dawg]

And that's exactly what Chris Mortensen implied last night. That the management had placed stipulations in his contract the you would not find anywhere else in the league. Now for someone with a problem past I don't find that an issue, (read T.O.) but for someone with an impecable past, I just don't find it justified. Chris Mortensen called it "Silly". In fact I wonder if DP has had the unfortunate luck to be first caught in the cross-fire in an emerging conflict between management and players that is resulting from the whole T.O. incident. There isn't a team in the NFL that isn't looking at Phily and saying "What can we do to prevent something like this from happening to us." It seems that the Bengals are maybe the first to try to institute some anti-T.O. measures and we are getting a glimpse of how players are going to respond. You can rest assured that all future contracts league-wide are going to have more stringent rules regarding player behavior. I just think that maybe the Bengals swung the pendulum a bit too far toward management on this first attempt and they probably picked the worst player in the draft to do it to. If DP has in fact become the guinea pig for this ...........and this is all an assumption......then management has already lost the fight. Because if you are going to make someone a poster child for the fight against renegade behavior you probably don't want to single out a rookie. Furthermore you don't single out the rookie that is know for his integrity more than any guy since Reggie White, you pick someone who has a history like Keshawn, T.O., et. al. If you must pick a rookie you pick someone like M. Clarett. In fact that may be why Odell and Perry signed already, there was a little dirt on them from college so management had a bit of leverage. Anyway, just a long winded assumption, but a plausible one.

Bottom line is I agree with Chris Mortensen in that the fault lies with management.

[The Big Orange]

I, like most people, go back and forth on this...

I woke up this morning and drove over to Pollack's house and left a steaming pile of my feces on his front porch with an artistic undigested peanut on top.

After reading that 7 of the last 8 first round picks were held out or late to camp I wallpapered my office at church with printouts of Mike Brown's face with the eyes cut out.

I need a hug.

[Semper_Fi_Dawg]

I, like most people, go back and forth on this...

I woke up this morning and drove over to Pollack's house and left a steaming pile of my feces on his front porch with an artistic undigested peanut on top.

After reading that 7 of the last 8 first round picks were held out or late to camp I wallpapered my office at church with printouts of Mike Brown's face with the eyes cut out.

I need a hug.

Big O. I love you man.

[HoosierCat]

I'm basically writing these out of frustration. I just want Pollack to sign. To be honest, this has been going on for years. It can't always be the greedy player. At some point the Bengals have to fine tune the way they do contracts. The Bengals have to lead the league in hold-outs over the last 20 years. Hell, didn't Jason Buck hold out, and also a linebacker in the 80's? Ricky Hunley, Justin Smith, Akili, Perry, Keiwan, etc..... I mean the Bengals now routinely have 2nd round holdouts. That is ridiculous. All us fans want is to win. That's it. We will all root for Pollack, just like we do Smith. It just seems like a waste of a year.

The Bengals' "fine-tuning" of contracts is precisely the problem. You see the same problems when they pursue free agents. Remember Sharper earlier this year, when they "proposed a structure"? Not a contract, but a "structure." And it's hard for me to get on someone like Pollack's case when the Bengals insist he sign a deal laden with clauses and codicils absent in most, if not all, other contracts.

It's as if you and nine other guys were to go buy a car, and they all get standard financing agreements, but yours has all these addenda stapled on: you have to wash the car once a week, no smoking or pets allowed, you can't drive it between the cours of 2 and 5 in the morning, and the dealer reserves the right to reposess your vehicle if a random tank check shows you have less than a quarter-tank of gas left. And all this follows contentious negotiations in which the sales guy started by saying he expected twice the MSRP for the car.

As far as I can tell, the big hangup appears to be that, like other teams, the bengals are pushing the big guaranteed money off until next year. But they want to be able to reduce that payment to a fraction if Pollack gets hurt (the "Chris Perry" or perhaps "Ki-Jana" clause?). I can see how Pollack would resist that; he gets injured badly and he's out the door with nothing in his bank account.

[HairOnFire]

I, like most people, go back and forth on this...

I woke up this morning and drove over to Pollack's house and left a steaming pile of my feces on his front porch with an artistic undigested peanut on top.

After reading that 7 of the last 8 first round picks were held out or late to camp I wallpapered my office at church with printouts of Mike Brown's face with the eyes cut out.

I need a hug.

For those of you who think Mort is fair I'll remind you that he was on Sportscenter repeating his rant to Dan Patrick, mentioning between Joise-styled laughs that 7 out of 8 1st round picks had held out before closing big with the remark/punchline that the Bengals negotiations with Pollack were..."right on schedule."

Does that sound fair to you? Does it sound remotely accurate? Before you answer let me ask you one simple question.

If you were the least bit unbiased wouldn't you agree that prolonged holdouts of this type are unusual and shouldn't be compared to minor skirmishes that last a day or two?

In addition, Mort isn't reporting whether the Bengals were well served to go to the wall over tougher incentive triggers for players like Akili Smith. It doesn't seem to matter to him that the Bengals hardline stance prevented them from paying a bust several million more than they actually did. All his reports do is imply that Akili's holdout counts exactly the same as Takeo's, Levi's, or Steinbach's.

I've never been impressed with ESPN's sources when dealing with the Bengals. There's no comparable version of Sal Pal and the Eagles or Ed Werder and the Cowboys. In fact, I'll argue that most of their info seems to come by way of the agents pipeline and they don't seem to care if they're being played by the agent as long as they can fill 2 or 3 minutes of air time. Or didn't you guys notice when earlier in the week the Bengals were said to be one of the teams interested in trading for Terrell Owens...only a few days before they reported that no teams are interested in trading for Owens.

Again, does that sound accurate to you?

In my opinion Mort gave an agent a national platform to use as he continues to negotiate in the press, and I'm guessing he did so because the agent is his only source of information. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the agent was the one who fed him the line about negotiations being...right on schedule.

[HairOnFire]

I mean the Bengals now routinely have 2nd round holdouts. That is ridiculous.

Remember when two different agents held out their clients....against the wishes of the players...so that a symbolic battle could be fought over the loyalty clause?

Good times, right?

Anybody remember how that pissing contest turned out?

I seem to recall both players eventually saying enough is enough...whatever point you were trying to make has been made....before reporting.

Oh yeah, at a later date the legal fight against the loyalty clause was rejected.

But what the heck, those agents really showed the Bengals, didn't they?

[Kirkendall]

Translation........If DP gets hurt there is no guaranteed money.

That's not completely true -- but not completely untrue either. From my understanding, the injury thing is thanks to Winslow in that if you get hurt on a non-football related injury, than this applies. But keep in mind, that all that is unconfirmed.

Bottom line is I agree with Chris Mortensen in that the fault lies with management.

However, like Clayton's many reports, not all their information is proving to be accurate and in fact some of the parties involved have denied the various ESPN reports -- including agents. Unless the team opens up, and the Pollack camp opens up, it's a little silly to suspect ESPN guys know more than our local beat writers.

Hair --

Great post!

[Semper_Fi_Dawg]

Unless the team opens up, and the Pollack camp opens up, it's a little silly to suspect ESPN guys know more than our local beat writers.

Good point and well taken. I guess the point I'm trying to make is this. DP is a good guy and a hellulva football player. I'm rather frustrated with so many of the masses pointing their finger at him as the one being a fault when no one really knows who's at fault myself included. However, it seems the party that is most likely to blame..........if you must assign blame, may very well be the same party that (for whatever reason, good or bad) has a history of this. I honestly agree at least somewhat with what both sides are trying to accomplish. If I put myself in either sides shoes I would probably want the same thing based on how little I know about the situation. My biggest frustration second to him not being in camp is seeing how he is being trashed. That being said, there's nothing I can do about it other than try to point out that he may very well not be guilty of anything other than wanting a reasonable contract.

[HairOnFire]

However, it seems the party that is most likely to blame..........if you must assign blame, may very well be the same party that (for whatever reason, good or bad) has a history of this.

Seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Couldn't I point out that David Pollack's professional history suggest he'll hold out 100% of the time?

[Semper_Fi_Dawg]

good one.

[TJJackson]

I'm done with him. He will most probably be of little use to our team in 2005.

Reduce the offer every day. Move guarenteed money to incentive clauses. Screw it, he's lost time and ERGO lost value.

This from me, who wrote a long, long post detailing how and why David Pollack was the very best player for us to pick of all those we could have picked. Well, forget all that. Any player who let's his agents run rampant like that and hurt his team is not a player I even want on the Bengals at this point.....

[CBin2k7]

Unless the team opens up, and the Pollack camp opens up, it's a little silly to suspect ESPN guys know more than our local beat writers.

Good point and well taken. I guess the point I'm trying to make is this. DP is a good guy and a hellulva football player. I'm rather frustrated with so many of the masses pointing their finger at him as the one being a fault when no one really knows who's at fault myself included. However, it seems the party that is most likely to blame..........if you must assign blame, may very well be the same party that (for whatever reason, good or bad) has a history of this. I honestly agree at least somewhat with what both sides are trying to accomplish. If I put myself in either sides shoes I would probably want the same thing based on how little I know about the situation. My biggest frustration second to him not being in camp is seeing how he is being trashed. That being said, there's nothing I can do about it other than try to point out that he may very well not be guilty of anything other than wanting a reasonable contract.

both sides have a history of first round hold outs. Pollacks agents are known for holding out their players.

[HoosierCat]

Seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Couldn't I point out that David Pollack's professional history suggest he'll hold out 100% of the time?

Staistically speaking, no. Insufficient sample size.

[DesperateDerelict]

Insufficient sample size.

Seems to me, I've heard that before . . . mostly from my wife.

[Spain]

Thats like the saying that size doesnt matter,which was invented by a man with a small penis!

[HairOnFire]

Seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Couldn't I point out that David Pollack's professional history suggest he'll hold out 100% of the time?

Staistically speaking, no. Insufficient sample size.

No argument. But it seemed a little silly to suggest that Mike Brown is to blame because he has a history, good and bad, while Pollack has none. Mike Bown has a record that can be judged because his job dictates he has multiple opportunities every year. Pollack has no history precisely because he's never been in this position before.

Frankly, when it comes to assigning blame over the failure to compromise David Pollack gets no more of a pass from me than Mike Brown gets from you. The difference I see is that I won't hate Pollack as a result of my frustrations.

[HoosierCat]

Frankly, when it comes to assigning blame over the failure to compromise David Pollack gets no more of a pass from me than Mike Brown gets from you. The difference I see is that I won't hate Pollack as a result of my frustrations.

I don't hate Mikey. I simply understand him.

Mike Brown, and his family, which makes up the Bengals' front office, loves the game of football. And why shouldn't they? They grew up around it, worked in it, all thanks to football legend Paul Brown. Like any mom n' pop shop, it isn't just a 9-to-5 thing, it's a way of life.

What they hate is the business of football -- or more specifically, the business that football has become since the early 1990s and the start of free agency.

They hate free agency, the costs it imposes on them to keep talent and the "funny money" contracts it created.

They hate giving big guaranteed money to draft picks who've never played an NFL down. They hate all the shennigans placed in NFL contracts today -- voidable years, two-tiered signing bonuses, soft incentive and escalataor targets, roster bonuses -- all the non-performance (and minimum-performance)-based junk that's been developed to shimmy and shally around the salary cap.

And they hate the corporate nature of modern football. You may like to comment on how willing I am to tell Mikey how to spend his money -- but Mikey is equally willing to tell Jerry Jones how he should spend his. And specifically that he should spend more of it on...Mike Brown. Because Mike is in a small market and he doesn't want to sell stadium naming rights and he's like, poor, y'know? Hwever you feel about revenue-sharing, it isn't hard to understand why Jerry's response is to flip Mikey the bird.

And so every time the busines of football comes up, as it does, with all those things the front office hates, every year when time comes to sign draft picks...we get these kind of results. The front office enters negotiations with all the enthusiasm you or I might feel for a root canal, sulkily starts at the absolute bottom of the barrel, and then refuses to budge until forced. And when that attitude comes up against a major agency like IMG that does deals by the dozens with all manner of sports teams on a regular basis and suddenly finds itself faced with a front offce with a bad attitude and a homespun contract...well, bad things are likely to happen. And this year, they are.

[The_Next_Big_Thing]

Joisey, I think you are the first person to talk about Mike Brown taht actually does understand him.

[DesperateDerelict]

Joisey, I think you are the first person to talk about Mike Brown taht actually does understand him.

NBT -

Come to think of it . . . have you ever seen Mike Brown and JoiseyCat in the same room at the same time?

Seriously, I think JoiseyCat is giving the Browns (& Katie B.) WAY too much credit. This opinion has been supported by the likes of Bob "Cement Hands" Trumpy and Boomer Esiason, who've undergone the excrutiating process known as contract negotiations with the organization.

So please consider: Unlike a majority of NFL owners, the NFL franchise in Cincinnati is the owner Brown's sole source of income. We're not talking one man here, but an entire extended family, ALL of whom are supporting THEIR families and lifestyles and palatial homes in Indian Hill (Cincy's most exclusive neighborhood) on profits generated by the Bengals. There is NO other source of income for these folks.

Revenues are fairly fixed, with a little fluctuation based on local advertising and radio and stadium sales and concessions. The largest expense is athlete's payroll, a large majority of which goes to high priced free agents (we have none) and 1st round picks.

In other words, every additional dollar spent on Pollack is a dollar the Brown family can't spend on something really important, like a new swimming pool. My feelings for Mikey and company are similar to my feeling for sharks protecting their feeding ground . . . I find it impressive, unnerving, and, at times, nauseating.

Ultimately, "Who Dey?" is too often answered by "The Brown Family"!

[HoosierCat]

Seriously, I think JoiseyCat is giving the Browns (& Katie B.) WAY too much credit.

You could be right. I guess my point is just that, it isn't that I hate Mike Brown and the Bengals' front office, but that I have no patience with them any longer.

I have heard all the complaints about how they con't do business like the rest of the NFL, and all the attendant reasons (like, as you cite, it being their sole source of income, etc.). I've listened to it for lo these many years -- and I'm just done with giving it an ear.

My question is, if the business of modern football is so repugnant to the Brown family...why not just give it up? I mean, if I were in a business I didn't like, and had the kind of options that ownership of an NFL franchise affords one, I'd find something more enjoyable to do with my life.

That's why I don't buy the "Mikey is just in it for the money" arguement. While I am sure the money is very good...he could turn around and sell the team for what, half a billion? At least? Just shove it in savings, CDs and mutual funds and you'd make tens of millions in interest. If money is Mikey's sole object, there are far less stressful ways to get it.

So I conclude that he and his family really do love the game. In which case, my response to complaints about the business side is: so someone moved your cheese? Well, shut up and deal with it. Change happens to every business, and football is no exception. If you don't like it, see the previous paragraph.

[DesperateDerelict]

So I conclude that he and his family really do love the game. In which case, my response to complaints about the business side is: so someone moved your cheese? Well, shut up and deal with it. Change happens to every business, and football is no exception.

(Author's note: my apologies, BO, if I'm steppin' on your chaplain toes)

Parable Of The Roast Beef

Stan and Susan were newlyweds. A couple of weeks after they were married, Susan decided to fix roast beef for dinner. She set the roast out on the counter along with two dishes. One was fairly large, the other small.

She proceeded to cut about two inches off the end of the roast beef. Then she put the larger portion into the larger dish and the smaller portion into the smaller dish. Both dishes were put into the oven to cook.

Now Stan sat in silence watching all of this, but finally his curiosity got the best of him. “Why did you divide the roast up that way?”, he asked. “Well,” she answered, “that’s the way that it’s supposed to be done. It’s the way my Mom taught me how to cook roast beef.”

Stan dropped the question for the time being. But the next time they were visiting her parents, he asked his mother-in-law about this strange custom. “That’s the way you cook roast beef,” she replied. “That’s exactly the way my mother taught me how to cook it and I’ve passed it on to Susan.”

By now, Stan’s curiosity was about to get the best of him. Fortunately, the next weekend they had the opportunity to visit Susan’s grandparents.

At an opportune moment, Stan asked the grandmother about this practice of dividing up the roast beef into a larger dish and a smaller dish. Her answer? “Heck, I just never had a dish large enough to hold the roast beef, so I had to cut it up to make it fit,” announced the grandmother.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

To belabor the obvious: This entire ritual, that was so rigidly adhered to, had been created by a set of circumstances that no longer existed. Doesn't this remind you of the way Mike Brown, Katie, Paul III, etc. run the organization. They may love football, but I'm not sure they UNDERSTAND it anymore.

[HoosierCat]

Good parable, DD. I'm not sure it's totally applicable to the Bengals' front office, but I think we're both in pretty much the same place. I think they understand modern football perfectly well...they just spend more time and energy wishin' it weren't so than they do finding ways to adapt to change. But the net result, whether they don't understand it or just resist it, is the same: accomplishing things takes 10 times as long, and generates 10 times the bad feelings, as it should.

[HairOnFire]

Joisey, I think you are the first person to talk about Mike Brown taht actually does understand him.

Apparently I understand Mike Brown too as I too hate all of the things Joisey says Mikey hates.