10-23-2015, 08:30 AM
(10-23-2015, 12:47 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: Speaking that type of truth might get you branded around these parts.
People want the players to be as loyal to the team as we the fans are, but it's not like that. This is a business, and how those players provide for their families. There is blame on both sides in almost every one of these situations, but it's easier to lash out at the player then accept that ownership and in some cases even the fans ran a player out of town.
There are multiple version of "the truth," and there are infinite interpretations of "the facts." There is also a line that separates football the sport, and football the business. I expect the business side of things to be conducted with a level of professionalism, and to leave the passion to the sport.
In this situation, I thought both sides were unprofessional in leveraging the fanbase emotions when airing the private business of contract renegotiations. The Bengals wanted Willie to take a pay cut. Willie refused. Both sides used the newspapers to try to skew public opinion. That was a wash in my eyes, and the result was Willie was released by the team at final cutdowns. He was 33ish, his knee and foot were going south, he'd missed most of the previous season to injuries, and he was leaving with the $20 million guaranteed from his contract he signed less than two years prior. Sucked to see him go, but I understood the team's thought process, and knew Willie had been well paid...
Where things cross a line for me is that Willie immediately ran to our division rival, signed a deal with them two days before the season opener against them, and was repeatedly shown during the game with headsets on, and in animated discussions with defensive coaches when the Bengals offense was on the field, and with offensive coaches when our defense was on the field. We did nothing on offense that day, and got shredded on defense.
Was Willie free to sign with 31 other teams after being released by the Bengals? You bet. Happens all the time. Going to a hated rival two days before a game against them and using your intimate knowledge on tv strikes me as rather nasty and vindictive.
...I'll avoid the bit about fans running guys out of town as I don't think that applies to this conversation.
(10-23-2015, 01:34 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: You mean how the Bengals didn't re-sign him and he continued his career in Baltimore? Plus, how do you know he 'leaked' play-calls? It's not like the Ravens couldn't go to the previous year and get the same play calls.
Shut up.
Also, why don't you have a grudge against Michael Johnson then? He left Cincinnati and for all you know he could have 'leaked' Bengals defensive calls.
You seem to be mistaken about the course of events. Willie was released, not failed to re-sign. As to the leaked play calls, he was shown on tv several times doing it during the games. He was released August 30, signed by the Ravens September 5, and wearing a headset and animatededly talking to coaches during the game on September 7. Willie had a knowledge base of the current calls, tendencies, adjustments, and verbiage the Ravens couldn't have from watching game film. There's not a whole lot of debate on wether or not he did it. The only real debate is on if it was something you think tarnishes his memory of him. For me, it does. For others, it doesn't. From your 'shut up,' I'm guessing it doesn't change how you view him. That's fine. I'm not raging and demanding others believe what I want.
As for guys like MJ, it's a different animal. He was a free agent, got a better deal elsewhere, and kept everything professional. I don't care if you go play somewhere else. I don't even care if you leave and sign with a division rival (I don't love it, but whatever). What rubbed me the wrong way with Willie was the immediacy of running to the Ravens, and the public nature of his role in the season opener. He didn't play in the game. His singular purpose was to hurt his old team. It bugged me.
(10-23-2015, 01:40 AM)Atomic Orange Wrote: I am in awe at the number of people who despise our former players. I can understand some (Palmer, Dillon mostly) but Big Willie?
You'll have to take 'despise' up with someone else. I hold Willie in a category of former Bengals who left in a manner which diminishes how I think of them. I don't obsess over it, or wish him harm. I just don't think enough of him to click on a link and listen to him. If you are in awe of that, we can discuss it further. If my level of 'grudge' makes more sense now, cheers!
(10-23-2015, 03:08 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: No reason to. Quite possibly the best offensive tackle the Bengals ever had not named Munoz.
Surprised these people aren't hating Hue Jackson either. Since. You know. He left and was with another team that played against the Bengals.
Different situations. People who conduct the business of football in a business like manner are aces in my book. Hue has followed a career path that has never seemed vindictive to any former employer (despite having serious reason, I've heard). 99.99% of all players and coaches move from team to team in a professional manner. It's that 1 in a 1000 guy that seems to have an agenda that bugs me... Favre trying to stick it to the Packers by angling his way to the Vikings is another rare instance.
