Of pillars and paucity, part 2 of 2
First, let me offer my apologies for being so late with this. I hate missing self-imposed deadlines, and I definitely did with this one. But the k is back, and I'm getting back into the groove with part 2 of my "role models gone wild" series.
In part 1, I argued that the addition of any of the Vick, Burress or Marshall trio would be a poor element to add to the team, mainly because they have a track record of behavior that suggests they would not make the most out of the opportunity.
There is a difference, however, between those three and athletes who get, and deserve, a second chance.
More after the jump.
Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future. - Oscar Wilde
I've gone on record saying the characters the Rams add over the next few years as we rebuild ourselves into playoff contention needn't be squeaky clean. No, we cannot afford to bring in guys who exhibit consistent off-the-field problems that interrupt their lives to the degree that it affects their performance on the field as well as the franchise's health. We can, and should, bring in players who are talented whose quirks, misgivings and vices can be controlled to the point where they do not affect their professional outputs.
Consider Ray Lewis. Lewis is one of the most well-respected, feared linebackers in the history of professional football. Lewis is known as a consummate teammate and a ferociously dedicated laborer, a prime example of someone who overcomes a difficult adolescence and rises to highest tier of his sport. For a more profound read into Ray's travails, check out the WaPo's 2004 summation that does more justice to the man, and the story, of Ray Lewis. For the lazier of you (and those who are either under 13 or just got into football with the advent of Turf Show Times), Lewis was implicated in a double homicide in early 2000, nearly a year to the day before he was awarded the MVP trophy for his role in the Ravens' Super Bowl XXXV victory over the Giants. How does this make him different than any of the 2009 trio of Vick-Marshall-Burress? That was the first incident in which Lewis was ever known to have been involved in (in the public) that was anything but positive.
And what about our own Leonard Little? One year and three months before he helped the Rams win their only Super Bowl Trophy in SB XXXIV, a drunk Little plowed into Susan Gutweiler, ending her life. Later to everyone's amazement, Little picked up a second DUI, although this arrest cost no lives. Despite his efforts, Little continues to be painted in a negative light, and I suppose that's his cross to bear. But let's compare a 2001 Leonard Little to our trio of today. The prime difference again is someone whose mistake, which is an understatement to say nothing else, was the sole blemish on a life that was otherwise relatively spotless in the public eye.
I'm not saying Lewis and Little are perfect; I don't know them, and I'm not trying to judge them. But what is obvious to me, and what I hope would be obvious to everyone else, is that there is a blatant difference between guys like Vick, Marshall and Burress who have repeatedly exhibited behaviors and extirpated what would have otherwise have been tremendous careers.
This is the difference between Fakhir Brown and Claude Wroten, people who have made mistakes and people who have made mistakes part of their lifestyles. I'm not defending Ray Lewis or Leonard Little in the least. What I'm doing is defending the age old maxim that people who make mistakes deserve a second chance, deserve a shot at redemption. People who squander those second chances (and there's a fair argument to be made that neither Vick nor Burress have received a "true" second chance, and that their previous transgressions were so minor in comparison to their more publicized misdeeds that to apply the term "second chance" to their pasts is unfair), I opine, don't deserve the same breaks as those have yet to receive them.
And with that, I'll let you guys jump on me. And strangely, I missed TST. Hit me up.
0 recs |
8 comments
|
Comments
my thoughts are
at least on Vick and Burress, Vick had a dogfighting ring ok so what? it happens around the world, and in some countries is a huge event. Dont get me wrong i am a huge dog lover, and i think it was pretty hainous(sp?) what he did, but i honestly still dont think its as bad as killing a person while driving drunk…your first problem is your driving drunk, and yes i understand its a mistake the can but shouldnt happen ive personally been there, and i thank god everyday that i didnt hurt someone or myself. But when you kill someone because of that its worse 100 fold.
Burress shot himself in the leg, and hes an egocentric personality. I dont think he had the gun at the club to shoot anyone just protection. did he go about wrongly? yes very much so. the gun shouldve been registered and he shouldve had a conceal and carry, for him to not get those is irresponsible and couldve hurt someone else besides himself. Does he need to learn a lesson? of course. Was he stupid in not taking the plea deal? certainly. That DA is going to stick where the sun dont shine to prove the state of NY isnt messing around anymore. But my point is people are overreacting for these two. Do we really need an apology from these two people who only mean something to us if theyre on our favorite team or fantasy leagues?
Marshall is a repeat abuser of women nuff’ said, horrible role model, bad history of violence and cant get away from a childhood environment. Out of the three at least to me is the worst offender, while he hasnt killed animals, or shot himself, you never ever ever hit a woman
Pujols takes out "I" in BIG and "A" in MAC, previously considered to be an unyielding, consonant threat
by DESTROYER on Jul 7, 2009 7:34 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, it's okay to kill animals as long as you don't hit a woman.
Neither is okay, but the way you’re saying it, it sounds like an animals life doesn’t matter.
S-St. Louis, R-Rams, D-Dallas, M-Mavericks, A-Arizona, D-Diamondbacks.
by srdmad on Jul 10, 2009 6:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shocked
How you can say Mike Vick and Burress is a bigger risk than Little……Sounds like someone just wanted to write a column. This is just ridiculous……I am deeply shocked by your analysis. I expected better and clearer thoughts
by RamsMan on Jul 7, 2009 8:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
How can I say it?
Because their repeated behavior off the field has removed them from the teams who shelled out millions for their services. Think about what the Falcons or the Giants have lost by investing in Vick and Burress. Little, on the other hand, has been a great teammate and has avoided the consistency of mistakes that VBM (as I’m now calling them) have shown.
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on Jul 7, 2009 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not that it's even relevant but...
Those four turds were caught with their pants down under the Goddell watch. Unlucky for them, that just brought more media attention their way which magnified their problems.
This piece would have never been written 10 years ago. People didn’t care if players with questionable character played starting WR or CB on their favorite team. The NFL is now the moral police, aided by the media, out to get players with a past. Screw up and your career, livelihood is over.
Under Gooddell, Little would not be in the NFL right now and would be cast off as one of those players who squandered a second chance.
Remember, Gooddell preached accountability and is trying to clean up the mess leftover from the 90’s and early part of this decade.
Past mistakes and character are brought into question anytime an NFL player sneezes without covering his nose in public. Unlike years before when Mr. Rogers (Tagliabue) was in charge, players in the NFL committed off-field transgressions with impunity and garnered very little media attention- thus no background check on said player for a juicy story. People didn’t care.
Little and Lewis pulled their crap before Goodell took over.
Give me Burress over Little- he’s just an immature knucklehead who needs some tough love.
Some players show a pathology that is hard to ignore, for most of them its hard to overcome that “difficult adolescence”. Shoot, Lawrence Taylor is prime example.
Talent is talent. I think those who say off the field problems affect the organization are drama queens and that argument is exacerbated by the media.
I hear the Rams might re-sign Laurence Phillips ;) .
Congrats on the little bundle of joy!!!
"Remember this. Bear Bryant retired at age 69, and he died 28 days after he stopped coaching. If you don't have something, and a purpose in your life, you're gonna die."- Lou Holtz (funny old man)
by BLUE_Thru-n-Thru on Jul 7, 2009 9:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Big O
What’s good, brother.
I admit, you make a good point that I certainly agree with. Little certainly would have faced a much harsher fate under Goodell than he did under Tagliabue. It will be very interesting to see how he handles Donte Stallworth, especially given that Stallworth has a past of substance abuse that predated the manslaughter. Nevertheless, I think it’s a sidebar to my principal point: players with a history of poor decisions and behavior hurt their team.
What I disagree with is this:
Talent is talent. I think those who say off the field problems affect the organization are drama queens and that argument is exacerbated by the media.
My main point is that off the field problems do affect organizations. I agree the media only amplifies the noise that follows athletes’ miscues, but certainly that’s part of their role, no? Aren’t the teams who sign these types of players to multi-million dollar contracts now suffering because they were unable to get sufficient return on their investment not due to poor play but due to a lack of it? And drama queens?! Cmon, bro. I know you’re just hurting because of the White House….
Holler at me.
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on Jul 7, 2009 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that’s part of the media's role
I have often thought that 90% of the news we get from “main stream media” is gossipy drama type stuff that’s none of our business, and crap we didn’t need to know anyway. Most people like to hear about scandalous private details because they think its fun to talk about. “Did you hear…” and where there is demand, there will be also be supply. Reputations are shaped that way and opinions are formed that people probably don’t have a right to have. Does anyone really need to know that McNair had a girlfriend on the side? Of course not.
Sometimes an organization gains a reputation based on the mere perception the public has about the people that work for it. That’s not fair and not always legitimate but it’s a well known reality and high profile people need to accept that fact of life and negotiate it accordingly.
Part of these guys’ problem is the person ultimately in charge….Goodell….is not going to tolerate the reputation they have gained because of how it reflects on the league as a whole. I don’t think thats a surprise. They knew or should have known the deal going in, they can’t claim to be caught off guard by it, so I don’t haave a lot of sympathy for their situations.
However……I am a big fan of booze and whores, and hated the way some people thought my off-time was their business. But if you put yourself out there as someone who stands up and says “look at me”, people are going to look.
Lived in LA during the Rams and Raiders days. Now based in NorCal, I am still a die hard Rams fan and Raiders season ticket holder.
by CoachConnors on Jul 7, 2009 7:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
A take from Taiko
Taiko has some interesting opinions on a connection between our four pillars and Steve McNair’s death over at his blog, Rams Herd.
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on Jul 8, 2009 7:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 























