What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*** T.O. suspension *** (1 Viewer)

A cancer that caused what? The Eagles to lose games? DMac to get injured? What cancer are we talking about? What did TO do that is directly related to the Eagles losing games?
:goodposting:
Please. Stop apologizing for this guy. He doesnt deserve it.He is directly responsible for causing such friction and distraction in a TEAM GAME that is destroyed the fabric of what made a very very good team a cohesive unit.

This is not rocket science. If you can not see his DIRECT impact, and would instead need to see him purposely miss blocks or drop balls to call his impact on the team direct, then perhaps you should look a bit more closely at the situation.

It is as if Owens made a traffic light green for both ways to an intersection, and you would claim he was not directly responsible for any ensuing accident.
So your saying if TO was a perfect gentleman this season they would go to the SuperBowl?TO is no longer with the team, is (should) no longer be a distraction. Why is Philly losing. How is it TO's fault?
I am saying without TO the Eagles would probably be in the playoff hunt.Philly is losing because the fabric of the team completely and utterly fell apart during a year of derision and distraction that can be traced to ONE individual - TO.
The horrific play of the DST is the reason the Eagles are not in the playoff hunt. This has ZERO to do with TO.
 
A cancer that caused what? The Eagles to lose games? DMac to get injured? What cancer are we talking about? What did TO do that is directly related to the Eagles losing games?
:goodposting:
Please. Stop apologizing for this guy. He doesnt deserve it.He is directly responsible for causing such friction and distraction in a TEAM GAME that is destroyed the fabric of what made a very very good team a cohesive unit.

This is not rocket science. If you can not see his DIRECT impact, and would instead need to see him purposely miss blocks or drop balls to call his impact on the team direct, then perhaps you should look a bit more closely at the situation.

It is as if Owens made a traffic light green for both ways to an intersection, and you would claim he was not directly responsible for any ensuing accident.
So your saying if TO was a perfect gentleman this season they would go to the SuperBowl?TO is no longer with the team, is (should) no longer be a distraction. Why is Philly losing. How is it TO's fault?
He's causing a distraction by suspending himself, taking himself to arbitration, holding a press conference the day of arbitration and refusing to take questions about himself, then asking the Eagles to take back 1.725 million of his signing bonus, all the time slipping further and further out of contention for the division. I can't believe that guy.
Are you suggesting that TO didn't create a distraction this year?Before the season started, he said that he would be a huge distraction if the Eagles didn't renegotiate his contract.

On that particular point, I'd say he lived up to his word.
Im saying he didnt. Im blaiming the media for the "overhype" and everyone one else in the world creating the distraction. At least any more of a distraction than most teams face every year. Romo broke a teammates face, did he get deactivated for a year? Steve Smith beat down some rookie in a meeting, did he get deactivated?For whatever reason, TO's fault or not, he creates the perfect media story. One that the media can run with till the cows come home. How long was the Stephen Davis/M Westbrook debacle?
Yeah, it is the media that made him one of the worst teammates I have EVER heard of (in the ultimate team game), a complete narcissist who goes after people when they are weak and a basical ##### who has received FAR more from the game and life than he seems to deserve. Yeah, it's the media.
TO is an idiot, no one is denying this. We all know TO will put his foot in his mouth every chance he gets. The things TO says are moronic. We all knew this prior to TO becoming an Eagle. That said:Why do we continue to listen to what TO has to say? Why do we care what TO says? I could care less about what TO tells Irvin or Stephen A Smith. All I care about is what TO does on the field.

 
I think it was Lou Holtz who said: "I'm not a great motivator. I just get rid of players who can't motivate themselves."
Holtz would have loved to have a motivated individual like TO. TO is very motivated. I dont understand your point.
 
Before the season started, he said that he would be a huge distraction if the Eagles didn't renegotiate his contract.

On that particular point, I'd say he lived up to his word.
And this is exactly the point at which the Eagles organization began to fail. This was the time to take action, to figure out how to deal with the problem and to address the problem - not 7 weeks in. Everything that's come since then in relation to Owens is a direct result of their failure to handle this particular event. They already knew he was difficult to deal with, he TOLD them he'd be causing problems, and they took no substantive measures to address that until it was far too late - and when they did address it I have to say they bungled it pretty badly.

Is Owens at fault? Absolutely. But the Eagles were not prepared to successfully deal with a problem they KNEW was coming - making them nearly equally culpable in this fiasco.
I think you're totally wrong here. They took every action available to them in the pre-season; sending TO home and giving him a formal warning as to his behavior. That's what you do when you have a problem employee; you communicate the problem and document the communication. If the employee is a total screw-up, they keep behaving badly, and then you take stricter action. I'm sure if they'd just suspended him right off the bat, the TO supporters would be even more up in arms.
I think a lot of people in this discussion haven't read the arbitrator's opinion pasted in this thread a few pages ago. It lays everything out -- TO's behavior and the team's response. TO's behavior and the team's response. TO's behavior and the team's response. And so on.
Maybe we got off on the wrong foot here. I have been specifically speaking to how the Eagles have handled TO from day 1. How they gave him a bad contract, expected him to play to it, while playing injured, and then turn face with "We tried to help TO help himself" :bs:
 
No, the point that we are making is that it is incorrect to say "a team cannot put up with disruption from a star athlete, even if that star athlete makes their team better".
If they thought he'd make the team better (disruption and all), they'd put up with it. But they don't. And I agree with them.
It doesnt sound like you work in a large business environment. People have to put up with idiotic people (at many different levels of idiocy) every day. As a manager, it is your responsibility to get what you can from every employee. You are not always in a position to fire someone and you have a responsibility to do your job.
I was actually going to make this same statement about you. You can run a business by creating a different set of rules for every employee and succeed.
It happens every day. Every company has corporate standards and compliance regulations, that is not what I am speaking to. I am specifically talking about performance goals and compensation. Individuals do not all work at the same level. Somce over-performers deserve better pay, bonuses, etc, the list goes on. TO deserved better compensation, he did not receive it.
 
It is the job of a manager to have the most productive and efficient group of workers.
No it's not. The manager's job is typically to accomplish some larger goal (like win a Superbowl). The manager has workers who will help them accomplish this. That's a very important distinction.
If you had TO as any part of a team dynamic, the best advice to take would be to get rid of him - ASAP.  He does not help teams win - this is demonstrated. 
That's not true. It's been demonstrated that he does help teams win. 2000 San Francisco 49ers led by Jerry Rice (6-10)

2001 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (12-4)

2002 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (10-6) - won a playoff game on Owens' 9 catches for 177 yards and 2 TDs, which was over haf of Garcia's passing numbers

2003 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (7-9)

2004 San Francisco 49ers without Owens (2-14)

It sure looks like he helped the 49ers win.

2003 Philadelphia Eagles without Owens (12-4, lost NFCCG)

2004 Philadephia Eagles with Owens (13-3, won NFCCG and almost won Superbowl on the back of Owens' 9 catches for 122 yards)

2005 Philadelphia Eagles with Owens (4-3)

2005 Philadelphia Eagles without Owens (1-3)

In fact, it can only be demonstrably proven that the teams he has played on are MUCH better WITH Owens than without him.
A player that destroys a team's cohesion is not a winning player. Have you played a team sport? Not saying you have not, but I do find it hard to believe that someone who worked in a dynamic like a football team would not see the pure destructiveness of Owens complete and utter lack of character.Second, about management - How do you think a manager accomplishes a greater goal? If it is all by their doing, then there isn't much managing going on.

Management by definition means best utilization of resources - which enables you to reach a certain goal.

Management is getting the most out of your most valuable resource (in this case for sure) - your employees. When one employee destroys the company's productivity as a whole, almost singlehandedly, that is not a very good utilization of resources.

But, I will tell everyone I know who has/does manage people (well, the successful ones at least) that they have it all wrong.
Help me understand why star athletes still have (had) jobs. Players like Artest, Manny Rameriez, Leanord Little, Lawrence Taylor, Key Johnson, Carl Pickens, etc.
 
Why do we continue to listen to what JAA has to say?  Why do we care what JAA says? 
Fixed.
excellent retort. actually makes my point, thank you :thumbup: You know Im going to take TO's side because Im an appologist right? Why bother listening to me right? Well guess what ... when you see me in a TO thread you know you dont have to read it, because you know what I will say. You have now just used logic and forethought to achieve a desired result.

:own3d:

 
It is the job of a manager to have the most productive and efficient group of workers.
No it's not. The manager's job is typically to accomplish some larger goal (like win a Superbowl). The manager has workers who will help them accomplish this. That's a very important distinction.
If you had TO as any part of a team dynamic, the best advice to take would be to get rid of him - ASAP.  He does not help teams win - this is demonstrated. 
That's not true. It's been demonstrated that he does help teams win. 2000 San Francisco 49ers led by Jerry Rice (6-10)

2001 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (12-4)

2002 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (10-6) - won a playoff game on Owens' 9 catches for 177 yards and 2 TDs, which was over haf of Garcia's passing numbers

2003 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (7-9)

2004 San Francisco 49ers without Owens (2-14)

It sure looks like he helped the 49ers win.

2003 Philadelphia Eagles without Owens (12-4, lost NFCCG)

2004 Philadephia Eagles with Owens (13-3, won NFCCG and almost won Superbowl on the back of Owens' 9 catches for 122 yards)

2005 Philadelphia Eagles with Owens (4-3)

2005 Philadelphia Eagles without Owens (1-3)

In fact, it can only be demonstrably proven that the teams he has played on are MUCH better WITH Owens than without him.
A player that destroys a team's cohesion is not a winning player. Have you played a team sport? Not saying you have not, but I do find it hard to believe that someone who worked in a dynamic like a football team would not see the pure destructiveness of Owens complete and utter lack of character.Second, about management - How do you think a manager accomplishes a greater goal? If it is all by their doing, then there isn't much managing going on.

Management by definition means best utilization of resources - which enables you to reach a certain goal.

Management is getting the most out of your most valuable resource (in this case for sure) - your employees. When one employee destroys the company's productivity as a whole, almost singlehandedly, that is not a very good utilization of resources.

But, I will tell everyone I know who has/does manage people (well, the successful ones at least) that they have it all wrong.
Help me understand why star athletes still have (had) jobs. Players like Artest, Manny Rameriez, Leanord Little, Lawrence Taylor, Key Johnson, Carl Pickens, etc.
:goodposting: And while you're at it, if these guys are so disruptive, why have so many of the above won championships.

 
It is the job of a manager to have the most productive and efficient group of workers.
No it's not. The manager's job is typically to accomplish some larger goal (like win a Superbowl). The manager has workers who will help them accomplish this. That's a very important distinction.
If you had TO as any part of a team dynamic, the best advice to take would be to get rid of him - ASAP.  He does not help teams win - this is demonstrated. 
That's not true. It's been demonstrated that he does help teams win. 2000 San Francisco 49ers led by Jerry Rice (6-10)

2001 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (12-4)

2002 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (10-6) - won a playoff game on Owens' 9 catches for 177 yards and 2 TDs, which was over haf of Garcia's passing numbers

2003 San Francisco 49ers led by Owens (7-9)

2004 San Francisco 49ers without Owens (2-14)

It sure looks like he helped the 49ers win.

2003 Philadelphia Eagles without Owens (12-4, lost NFCCG)

2004 Philadephia Eagles with Owens (13-3, won NFCCG and almost won Superbowl on the back of Owens' 9 catches for 122 yards)

2005 Philadelphia Eagles with Owens (4-3)

2005 Philadelphia Eagles without Owens (1-3)

In fact, it can only be demonstrably proven that the teams he has played on are MUCH better WITH Owens than without him.
A player that destroys a team's cohesion is not a winning player. Have you played a team sport? Not saying you have not, but I do find it hard to believe that someone who worked in a dynamic like a football team would not see the pure destructiveness of Owens complete and utter lack of character.Second, about management - How do you think a manager accomplishes a greater goal? If it is all by their doing, then there isn't much managing going on.

Management by definition means best utilization of resources - which enables you to reach a certain goal.

Management is getting the most out of your most valuable resource (in this case for sure) - your employees. When one employee destroys the company's productivity as a whole, almost singlehandedly, that is not a very good utilization of resources.

But, I will tell everyone I know who has/does manage people (well, the successful ones at least) that they have it all wrong.
Help me understand why star athletes still have (had) jobs. Players like Artest, Manny Rameriez, Leanord Little, Lawrence Taylor, Key Johnson, Carl Pickens, etc.
:goodposting: And while you're at it, if these guys are so disruptive, why have so many of the above won championships.
Its the easy way out to point fingers and the little things going wrong. Things like a player speaking his [idiotic] mind to the press than to place blame on the FO's inability to handle situations they are specifically put in a position to do. Fact of the matter is that when everything is fine and dandy, being a manager is SIMPLE. What defines you ability to handle people is how you handle the adversity. I think the Eagles have a track record of handling diversity poorly ... piss poorly I might add.:diehardeaglesfan:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fact: You cant blame TO for actions that we all saw coming
That's not a fact at all.
Before the season started, he said that he would be a huge distraction if the Eagles didn't renegotiate his contract.
Really?
Yes, really. You blame people for their own behavior. I think it's amazingly obvious, so I won't elaborate.
Is that what you tell the judge and jury in court :confused:
Actually, yes. If my opposing counsel argued that you can't blame her client for his own behavior, I would probably just make fun of it.
 
Fact:  You cant blame TO for actions that we all saw coming
That's not a fact at all.
Before the season started, he said that he would be a huge distraction if the Eagles didn't renegotiate his contract.
Really?
Yes, really. You blame people for their own behavior. I think it's amazingly obvious, so I won't elaborate.
Is that what you tell the judge and jury in court :confused:
Actually, yes. If my opposing counsel argued that you can't blame her client for his own behavior, I would probably just make fun of it.
Please show me where I said TO was not at fault. The context from above that you have so kindly quoted says that TO cant be blamed for the "chaos" he said he would create if his demands weren't meant.As an organization, Philly needed to A) give into his demands or B) shut him down prior to being able to follow through on his threats.

Frankly, idle minded attitudes like the one you have shown in this thread remind me a lot of what I don't like about our wonderful country of the USA. It is to easy for individuals or groups of individuals not to take action in situations that call for it because those folks feel "its not my fault". Fact of the matter is you should be help culpable for your action, i.e. lack of action. Ideally, individuals would take appropriate action to meet the demands of unsavory threats prior to those threats being realized especially when the impact of those threats effect not only that business unit, but large amounts of external stakeholders.

In the end, to each his own.

:popcorn:

 
The context from above that you have so kindly quoted says that TO cant be blamed for the "chaos" he said he would create if his demands weren't meant.
That is the most bassackwards logic I have ever come across in my entire life.No need to reply with more reasoning JAA. You're not making a bit of sense to me......maybe others understand you though.

 
Fact of the matter is you should be help culpable for your action, i.e. lack of action.
You're exactly right. And Owens is accountable for what he did and did not do.The Eagles would be to blame if they placed a bowel movement in the locker room and on the practice field each week. Inanimate objects like bowel movements have no choice in their actions. They just sit there, smelling, and basically being turds.

The Eagles did not place an inaminate object in the locker room and on the practice field. Owens is a person and people are not inanimate objects. They have the ability to decide what they do and to foresee consequences. He foresaw the disruption he intended to cause, and then he caused it. He is responsible for that.

Shifting the blame to others because you like him doesn't really change that responsiblity. He's not an inaminate object, he's a responsible person.

 
Fact of the matter is you should be help culpable for your action, i.e. lack of action.
Shifting the blame to others because you like him doesn't really change that responsiblity. He's not an inaminate object, he's a responsible person.
I think you are missing my point. I am not attempting shift blame. I am saying blame falls on the Eagles. TO is an idiot. You can call that blame, I dont. We all knew what TO would do. Matter of fact, he even told us. There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
 
I think you are missing my point. I am not attempting shift blame. I am saying blame falls on the Eagles. TO is an idiot. You can call that blame, I dont. We all knew what TO would do. Matter of fact, he even told us. There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
 
Maybe the problem here is that people are talking about different things. TO is 100% to blame for him being an idiot, and 100% to blame for his suspension, garnishing of wages, and anything else the Eagles decide to do to him.But maybe some people are more concerned with, "who is to blame for wrecking my fantasy season by getting TO benched mid-season?" There, the blame lies mostly with the drafter, but certainly if the Eagles had handled the situation differently, it might have worked out better for fantasy players. (Major clue: The Eagles don't care about your fantasy team).

 
I think you are missing my point.  I am not attempting shift blame.  I am saying blame falls on the Eagles.  TO is an idiot.  You can call that blame, I dont.  We all knew what TO would do.  Matter of fact, he even told us.  There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
 
Please show me where I said TO was not at fault. The context from above that you have so kindly quoted says that TO cant be blamed for the "chaos" he said he would create if his demands weren't meant.
You wrote, and I quote: "Fact: You cant blame TO for actions that we all saw coming."That's not correct. To the extent that we're talking about TO's actions, we can blame TO for them.

 
I think you are missing my point. I am not attempting shift blame. I am saying blame falls on the Eagles. TO is an idiot. You can call that blame, I dont. We all knew what TO would do. Matter of fact, he even told us. There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
There is no duty to duck. A person has the right to stand still. The puncher is responsible for damages.
 
Please show me where I said TO was not at fault.  The context from above that you have so kindly quoted says that TO cant be blamed for the "chaos" he said he would create if his demands weren't meant.
You wrote, and I quote: "Fact: You cant blame TO for actions that we all saw coming."That's not correct. To the extent that we're talking about TO's actions, we can blame TO for them.
:own3d: Maurile: :thumbup:

JAA: :11:

 
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
Because I was busy doing my job, as I should. As the Eagle players and coaches were. The idea that everybody has to avoid Owens's wrath or misbehavior or else they are to blame for it is just bully-worship. Or spoiled-child worship. Or cowardice.

 
I think you are missing my point.  I am not attempting shift blame.  I am saying blame falls on the Eagles.  TO is an idiot.  You can call that blame, I dont.  We all knew what TO would do.  Matter of fact, he even told us.  There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
There is no duty to duck. A person has the right to stand still. The puncher is responsible for damages.
And yet, you'd still think the guy who just stood there was an idiot.
 
I think you are missing my point. I am not attempting shift blame. I am saying blame falls on the Eagles. TO is an idiot. You can call that blame, I dont. We all knew what TO would do. Matter of fact, he even told us. There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
There is no duty to duck. A person has the right to stand still. The puncher is responsible for damages.
And yet, you'd still think the guy who just stood there was an idiot.
No doubt.The Eagles didn't just stand there, though. They were pretty active in notifying TO in writing several times about how his behavior had been unacceptable, and what he'd have to do if he wanted to keep playing.

 
I think you are missing my point.  I am not attempting shift blame.  I am saying blame falls on the Eagles.  TO is an idiot.  You can call that blame, I dont.  We all knew what TO would do.  Matter of fact, he even told us.  There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
There is no duty to duck. A person has the right to stand still. The puncher is responsible for damages.
And yet, you'd still think the guy who just stood there was an idiot.
No doubt.The Eagles didn't just stand there, though. They were pretty active in notifying TO in writing several times about how his behavior had been unacceptable, and what he'd have to do if he wanted to keep playing.
If the guy says "If you punch me, I'll call the cops", then gets punched, then calls the cops, he still got punched. Similarly, Reid sending letters may have been the best way to protect the Eagles when they released him, but it wasn't a very good way to change the behavior, or control its impact on the locker room.

 
Please show me where I said TO was not at fault.  The context from above that you have so kindly quoted says that TO cant be blamed for the "chaos" he said he would create if his demands weren't meant.
You wrote, and I quote: "Fact: You cant blame TO for actions that we all saw coming."That's not correct. To the extent that we're talking about TO's actions, we can blame TO for them.
You can be content in taking my words out of context or you can accept the intent of my discussion from post 1 up to this point. In all honesty, like a typical lawyer, you have not engaged this discussion of its actual grounds but instead pulled out 1 liners in an attempt to make yourself sound correct.I think this is a good opportunity we agree to disagree. This is not a subject we will see eye to eye on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you are missing my point.  I am not attempting shift blame.  I am saying blame falls on the Eagles.  TO is an idiot.  You can call that blame, I dont.  We all knew what TO would do.  Matter of fact, he even told us.  There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
There is no duty to duck. A person has the right to stand still. The puncher is responsible for damages.
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: No one is argueing you dont have the right to standstill. I never said the Eagles did have the right to make those decisions. I simply disagree with not ducking simply because I have the right to. :topcat:

 
I think you are missing my point.  I am not attempting shift blame.  I am saying blame falls on the Eagles.  TO is an idiot.  You can call that blame, I dont.  We all knew what TO would do.  Matter of fact, he even told us.  There is no "blame" there, he admitted to it before hand.
That's the equivalent of saying that, because I say I'm going to punch someone, I am blameless for punching them since I told them ahead of time. And that the blame falls on them, since I told them.
You are to blame for the punch. We arent talking about "the punch". We are talking about the black-eye you received from the punch. I would say you are to blame for the black eye. He stood there and told you he was goint to punch you. He has given black-eyes in the past. You and all the people around you knew it was coming. Why didnt you duck :confused:
There is no duty to duck. A person has the right to stand still. The puncher is responsible for damages.
And yet, you'd still think the guy who just stood there was an idiot.
No doubt.The Eagles didn't just stand there, though. They were pretty active in notifying TO in writing several times about how his behavior had been unacceptable, and what he'd have to do if he wanted to keep playing.
Similarly, Reid sending letters may have been the best way to protect the Eagles when they released him, but it wasn't a very good way to change the behavior, or control its impact on the locker room.
:goodposting: The only thing this did was "cover our own asses". There was no forthought about the teams performance on or off the field.

 
:own3d:

JAA: :11:

If we were in the NFL you just got your self suspended for speaking out of line negative against the team.

See To

See E Moulds

That is what is sad about the whole TO mess. Is that owners think that they can take away the freedom of speech from the players. :no:

 
If we were in the NFL you just got your self suspended for speaking out of line negative against the team.

See To

See E Moulds

That is what is sad about the whole TO mess. Is that owners think that they can take away the freedom of speech from the players. :no:
"Freedom of speech" doesn't mean you can say whatever you want with no repercussions, and it certainly doesn't mean your employer has to put up with it. (The Constitution is binding on the government, not on private entities).
 
Exactly. No one is saying it is illegal for him to speak against the Eagles. No one is taking away his freedom of speech. But if he chooses to say some things, there will be repercussions. I can legally walk up to my boss right now and tell him to go #### himself, but freedom of speech does not prevent him from firing me.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top