(04-04-2017, 01:53 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: It is an issue of controversy. Rogerian unconditional positive regard versus tough love. Mike Brown uses unconditional positive regard and does not judge the person but this isn't necessarily condone their behavior either. Sometimes the person's behavior and the person's identity are one and the same.
The the inadvertent consequence of unconditional positive regard can be creating apathy or decreasing motivation the change. Making reoccurring mistakes is one thing nevertheless if it's part of a person's character it's another. Some might say it's hard to distinguish between the two.
The Cincinnati Bengals overall message from the front office to players and coaches is "forgiveness."
This modus operandi it's not a good mix for players with questionable character and inept coaches.
NSFW:
Just messing with ya. Your post makes a lot of sense. You are a "pysch doctor" after all.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
Have said it before and will say it again. Pacman is a thug punk and deserves no more chances.
Will all gave him a chance and referred to him as Adam per him claiming to be a changed man.
Yet his repeated actions and not paying the man who was paralyzed have earned him the name Pacman back from me and wish his walking papers from Bengals would follow.
If MB wanted to keep his family from going homeless or whatever. He could just give them a job outside of football or provide a house for them to live in as a tax write off.
Do agree with second chances though. Especially young adults as OP mentioned.
Cam Robinson for example is one I would like to see given a second chance by MB.
The water tastes funny when you're far from your home,
yet it's only the thirsty that hunger to roam. Roam the Jungle !
(04-04-2017, 01:12 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I was reading Daugherty's recent piece on Mike Brown not drawing any lines, and it got me thinking.
Is Mike's constant forgiveness to players like Pacman really good in any way?
It certainly doesn't help the team or the perception of it or the city. But I'd also argue that it doesn't help the person he's being lenient with.
Sometimes people need a wake up call.
In the long run, it can't be good for him. It just prolongs the inevitable fall that a self destructive dude has waiting for him. And usually, it takes a big fall to wake a guy like Ten Chances up. He's headed for a bad end and Mike just keeps greasing the wheels.
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.” ― Albert Einstein
(04-04-2017, 01:12 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I was reading Daugherty's recent piece on Mike Brown not drawing any lines, and it got me thinking.
Is Mike's constant forgiveness to players like Pacman really good in any way?
It certainly doesn't help the team or the perception of it or the city. But I'd also argue that it doesn't help the person he's being lenient with.
Sometimes people need a wake up call.
It may be that Mike Brown gets invested in a Bargain move he made that worked out well and then wants to get as much mileage out of that move as possible. What I mean is, the Bengals were able to get Pac man initially because his bad character drove down his Market value. Mike Brown then signed him getting a solid corner and special teams player below what that player would cost if his character wasn't bad. There was then a period of time when Pac Man made a Pro Bowl and was out of trouble. The Bengals got positive Press for a little while during this time. Mike Brown had rescued his career after all. Forward to today and the Bengals still need his experience while trying to develop William Jackson III. They still feel they need him for football reasons, likely have developed a sense of caring for him & his family, hope he has another stretch of good behavior and rationalize it all through the Media. They send a message to the Public and Pac Man that they are saving his Family by keeping him with hopes of gaining fan support while also hoping Pac man will appreciate this & stay out of trouble for a while.
(04-05-2017, 12:12 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I guess employers should never fire a guy that fails a drug test or misses 5 days in 2 months then.
We should also get rid of the legal system. Pfff... who needs all those judges judging people?
Neither or those apply to Pacman. He has a problem with alcohol and rage both can be contributed to the violent life that he lives as an NFL player. Do you write him off or do you continue to help him? I don't condone anything he's done but I think Mike Brown is doing the right thing continuing to help Jones and his family.
I have the Heart of a Lion! I also have a massive fine and a lifetime ban from the Pittsburgh Zoo...
(04-05-2017, 01:28 PM)Synric Wrote: Neither or those apply to Pacman. He has a problem with alcohol and rage both can be contributed to the violent life that he lives as an NFL player. Do you write him off or do you continue to help him? I don't condone anything he's done but I think Mike Brown is doing the right thing continuing to help Jones and his family.
Or those traits could be attributed to him being a thug, the same as he has been his entire life.
(04-04-2017, 01:12 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I was reading Daugherty's recent piece on Mike Brown not drawing any lines, and it got me thinking.
Is Mike's constant forgiveness to players like Pacman really good in any way?
It certainly doesn't help the team or the perception of it or the city. But I'd also argue that it doesn't help the person he's being lenient with.
Sometimes people need a wake up call.
It probably is a good PR move overall with the local african-American community and local ACLU chapter since no one can take a racist angle on MB. And in this day and age, can never be too careful as even letting Pacman go which would be for legit reasons could easily be misconstrued as being racist.
(04-05-2017, 05:07 PM)Millhouse Wrote: It probably is a good PR move overall with the local african-American community and local ACLU chapter since no one can take a racist angle on MB. And in this day and age, can never be too careful as even letting Pacman go which would be for legit reasons could easily be misconstrued as being racist.
Are you serious with this? Please find me one instance where the ACLU protested an NFL player being cut, please find an instance where community leaders claimed it was "racist" to cut an NFL player. I don't live in Cincinnati, but must have missed news of all the demonstrations that have taken place since he was arrested. Did Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton make an appearance? Has "Free Pacman" taken hold as a rallying cry throughout the city? The ignorance of your statement is overwhelming...
(04-06-2017, 10:16 AM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: Are you serious with this? Please find me one instance where the ACLU protested an NFL player being cut, please find an instance where community leaders claimed it was "racist" to cut an NFL player. I don't live in Cincinnati, but must have missed news of all the demonstrations that have taken place since he was arrested. Did Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton make an appearance? Has "Free Pacman" taken hold as a rallying cry throughout the city? The ignorance of your statement is overwhelming...
Forgot to add a ...better? Besides Shake proposed a question and I proposed an answer, all be it hypothetical in nature.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: Screenshot-2022-02-02-154836.png]](https://i.ibb.co/db2LNsj/Screenshot-2022-02-02-154836.png)
...better? Besides Shake proposed a question and I proposed an answer, all be it hypothetical in nature.
