Bengals to sign Pacman Jones

[Benihana]

www.profootballtalk.com

You can't make this stuff up!

[CTA513]

He'll probably get himself in trouble in Kentucky while hes with the Bengals.

[Sea Ray]

There'd better not be any signing bonus so they can just cut him if need be

[Hoosier Red]

I prefer the guys who have had trouble before joining the Bengals, to investing a lot in guys who show red flags.

Guys who know this is their last chance seem to work out better. If he screws up he's gone either way.

[NJReds]

After watching his run with the Cowboys a couple years ago, it's safe to say that Pacman's best days are behind him. He was average at best and way more trouble than he was worth.

[bucksfan2]

Pacman is a waste of oxygen. I feel bad saying that about another human being but he really is. I have no idea why anyone would attempt to sign him and if he makes the team, I will boo him anytime he is on the field.

[durl]

I prefer the guys who have had trouble before joining the Bengals, to investing a lot in guys who show red flags.

Guys who know this is their last chance seem to work out better. If he screws up he's gone either way.

Thing is, he's had trouble in Nashville and Dallas. He's not shown the ability to learn from his mistakes.

Seriously, the guy had a LOT of chances with the Titans until the organization couldn't ignore his behavior any longer. He was arrested 3 times in the last 6 months of 2005, his rookie season.

I believe people can change, I just haven't seen any indication that he WANTS to change.

[Benihana]

Last chance...until the next one.

[yab1112]

Unbelievable. I don't see how the potential gain outweighs the enormous risk.

The Bengals had a bad run a few years ago with character risks. They've been pretty quiet in that respect the last couple of years and it would be a shame to take a step backward (especially with all the heat on the Steelers atm ;)).

[Jack Burton]

This guy deserves a prison cell not a contract.

[Yachtzee]

Sounds like it's got some truth:

http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/Update-Jones-mulls-Bengals-Agent/181c9278-4be9-4f15-b12d-13e637af8742

It sounds like Zimmer is the one wanting to bring him in after talking with Deion Sanders. I suppose if anyone can get Pacman to straighten himself out, it's Zimmer. If you want to look for a silver lining in this, the Bengals have Hall and Johnson starting with Morgan Trent and David Jones as backups. And don't forget they just drafted Brandon Ghee. So it's not like the Bengals are signing him with the expectation that he'll start. He'd be a nickel back at best. He's going to have to come in and fight for a spot with everyone not named Leon or Johnathan. It's similar to the Matt Jones signing - there's no guarantee they'll be on the roster to start the season.

[GIDP]

you could do a lot worse in return game and as a nickle probably. I dont like the guy but im not going to say no if its the coaches making the choice.

[Mario-Rijo]

I also heard they are signing S Gibril Wilson as well, don't have anything solid yet though. Also allegedly signing another potential problem child in LeMarcus Coker a RB out of Hampton (Via Tennessee). Apparently he tested positive for drugs like 4 times or something while at Tenn. This is from a Joe Reedy twitter apparently via one of Cokers family members.

[Sea Ray]

I suppose if anyone can get Pacman to straighten himself out, it's Zimmer. If you want to look for a silver lining in this, the Bengals have Hall and Johnson starting with Morgan Trent and David Jones as backups.

Johnson? They have a lot of Johnsons on the team but none that play CB that I'm aware of. Might you mean Joseph?

[Reds4Life]

Laughable.

The Bengals will never learn.

[Yachtzee]

Johnson? They have a lot of Johnsons on the team but none that play CB that I'm aware of. Might you mean Joseph?

Oops, you are correct. Mixed up my Johnsons with my Joseph.

I think Johnson is on autotext when speaking of the Bengals. ;)

[SeeinRed]

I don't really see the downside so many claim to see. If he gets into trouble he's gone. If he doesn't play well, he's gone. If he is on the straight and narrow and plays well, the Bengals look pretty smart. I'm going to guess there is probably little if any guaranteed money. The fact that Zimmer has a hand in this makes me feel even better about it.

[Hoosier Red]

Laughable.

The Bengals will never learn.
Probably because on the whole it's worked out insanely well for them in the past two years. But hey lets not let actual success get in the way of laughing at the Bengals.

Cedric Benson, Tank Johnson, Frostee Rucker, Bernard Scott, Rey Mauluga all have been good successful with few incidents.

If Jones has any issue he's gone.

[Sea Ray]

I'd make the case that the Bengals would not have made the playoffs in 2005 without Henry and Odell Thurman and they would not have made the playoffs last year w/o Benson. With that in mind, I'd conclude that the only time this team does excel is when they hit on these kind of dudes.

[TC81190]

I'd make the case that the Bengals would not have made the playoffs in 2005 without Henry and Odell Thurman and they would not have made the playoffs last year w/o Benson. With that in mind, I'd conclude that the only time this team does excel is when they hit on these kind of dudes.
Yep.

Also wasn't Pacman a pretty good return man once upon a time? The Bengals could use a homerun threat on special teams.

[GIDP]

Hey if only hte Bengals were like the Steelers and act like they were perfect and claim to hold their players to a higher standard maybe everyone would agree?

[Eric_the_Red]

If this happens, I may be done with the Bengals.

[SeeinRed]

If this happens, I may be done with the Bengals.


I'm not picking on you, but I really don't understand this type of knee jerk reaction to a signing that is for very little money and leaves the Bengals with nothing to lose. Jones is not going to be a starting corner, he is not going to make a lot of money unless he performs well, and if he does run into trouble, the Bengals just cut him loose for next to nothing. One player, especially one making minimum without a starting position is going to tear apart a team. The whole character aspect is way overplayed when it comes to this deal IMO. He doesn't have to be a great person. He just has to stay out of trouble and play well. If he doesn't do both, he is gone and it doesn't affect the team. He isn't being counted on to do anything for the team next year, but if he does play well it can only benefit the team.

I just don't understand where this could be the disaster some would have you believe. Nothing is more overplayed than character issues on this team. The Bengals are far from the only ones with players who have been in trouble, nor are they the team with the most of those types of players.

Maybe someone can enlighten me, but unless the terms of the deal come out and he gets a rediculous signing bonus I just don't see the downside.

[Redsfaithful]

I have no problem with this. It's not like he's been out raping women.

[Playadlc]

I'm not picking on you, but I really don't understand this type of knee jerk reaction to a signing that is for very little money and leaves the Bengals with nothing to lose. Jones is not going to be a starting corner, he is not going to make a lot of money unless he performs well, and if he does run into trouble, the Bengals just cut him loose for next to nothing. One player, especially one making minimum without a starting position is going to tear apart a team. The whole character aspect is way overplayed when it comes to this deal IMO. He doesn't have to be a great person. He just has to stay out of trouble and play well. If he doesn't do both, he is gone and it doesn't affect the team. He isn't being counted on to do anything for the team next year, but if he does play well it can only benefit the team.

I just don't understand where this could be the disaster some would have you believe. Nothing is more overplayed than character issues on this team. The Bengals are far from the only ones with players who have been in trouble, nor are they the team with the most of those types of players.

Maybe someone can enlighten me, but unless the terms of the deal come out and he gets a rediculous signing bonus I just don't see the downside.

I agree with this. Pacman knows this is his last chance. He is going to come in hungry and will do everything he can do get himself a new contract. If he screws up, he's done. It's as simple as that.

Outside of our two starting CB's, we have a void here that Pacman could fill for the league minimum. Move is a no-brainer to me.

[LoganBuck]

I have no problem with this. It's not like he's been out raping women.

Quoted because I thought it needed to be.

[Mario-Rijo]

I don't know what to feel here. On one hand I tend to agree with others that he isn't likely to screw up knowing the consequences this time means he needs to start learning the nuances of sidewalk produce sales. OTOH The more guys you have with the potential for problems the more likely one is to have a problem occur. And adding a guy who at times has seemed really, really, really foolish on the pile is just like the proverbial straw. I blasted the move at 1st because it just seems like they just get bolder and bolder with these signings, almost to the point where it seems they go out of their way to look up a guy with character concerns. It may work out but the odds are getting greater that we have a long string of occurences (which has already begun with Rey and now Purify).

[Eric_the_Red]

I'm not picking on you, but I really don't understand this type of knee jerk reaction to a signing that is for very little money and leaves the Bengals with nothing to lose. Jones is not going to be a starting corner, he is not going to make a lot of money unless he performs well, and if he does run into trouble, the Bengals just cut him loose for next to nothing. One player, especially one making minimum without a starting position is going to tear apart a team. The whole character aspect is way overplayed when it comes to this deal IMO. He doesn't have to be a great person. He just has to stay out of trouble and play well. If he doesn't do both, he is gone and it doesn't affect the team. He isn't being counted on to do anything for the team next year, but if he does play well it can only benefit the team.

I just don't understand where this could be the disaster some would have you believe. Nothing is more overplayed than character issues on this team. The Bengals are far from the only ones with players who have been in trouble, nor are they the team with the most of those types of players.

Maybe someone can enlighten me, but unless the terms of the deal come out and he gets a rediculous signing bonus I just don't see the downside.

Knee jerk reaction? It isn't just Pacman...it is a long history of the franchise thumbing their nose at the fans. I've about had enough.

Is Pacman out raping women? No, but he has his own storied history with the law (and women): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Jones_%28American_football%29#Legal_troubles

Being a fan doesn't mean that I have to root for whatever scum the Bengals give a contract to, nor does it mean I have to continue to support them forever. All fans have a choice in which team and what kind of players they support. Jones is not a player I want to support.

[texasdave]

Knee jerk reaction? It isn't just Pacman...it is a long history of the franchise thumbing their nose at the fans. I've about had enough.

Is Pacman out raping women? No, but he has his own storied history with the law (and women): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Jones_%28American_football%29#Legal_troubles

Being a fan doesn't mean that I have to root for whatever scum the Bengals give a contract to, nor does it mean I have to continue to support them forever. All fans have a choice in which team and what kind of players they support. Jones is not a player I want to support.

+1

[bucksfan2]

I'd make the case that the Bengals would not have made the playoffs in 2005 without Henry and Odell Thurman and they would not have made the playoffs last year w/o Benson. With that in mind, I'd conclude that the only time this team does excel is when they hit on these kind of dudes.

You don't win in the NFL with Boy Scouts. Even the super bowl champs are having a problem with prescription pain killers. Every team has their fair share of misfits. I was vehemently against he signing of Tank Johnson. From what I saw of him on the field and as well as the brief clips on Hard Knocks I great to actually like the guy. That said I don't know if I want any Bengal living next door to me.

[SeeinRed]

Knee jerk reaction? It isn't just Pacman...it is a long history of the franchise thumbing their nose at the fans. I've about had enough.

Is Pacman out raping women? No, but he has his own storied history with the law (and women): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Jones_%28American_football%29#Legal_troubles

Being a fan doesn't mean that I have to root for whatever scum the Bengals give a contract to, nor does it mean I have to continue to support them forever. All fans have a choice in which team and what kind of players they support. Jones is not a player I want to support.


I respect your opinion and it is your decision to support the Bengals or not. I would still call it a knee-jerk reaction because your decision is triggered by a player making minimum or close to it with not guarantee to make the team and will definately not be a starter. I still don't agree that the Bengals are thumbing their nose at the fans with this signing or any other for that matter. Fans don't make those decisions, nor should they.

On top of that, I haven't seen a scenario where this plays out into the disaster some want me to think it could be. How can this end with anymore than the Bengals losing next to nothing? Any problems or lack of performance and he is gone anyway.

Tank Johnson worked out pretty well despite "character issues." Cedric Benson has been a huge plus. Chris Henry was a major contributor to the team last season until his injury despite his long track record. Jonathan Joseph has been arrested for marijuana possesion and Leon Hall for a DUI. The Bengals don't win the division without those players last year.

As long as we are piling on Adam for his issues (most of which is deserved), lets take a moment to talk about the little bit of good he has done. From Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacman_Jones):


After Jones had signed with the Titans, he donated money to the 100 Club (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Club), a charity that financially supports the families of firefighters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefighter), police (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police), and emergency workers. Also in 2005, Jones traveled to Pearl Cohn High School (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Cohn_Comprehensive_High_School) in Nashville, Tennessee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nashville,_Tennessee) to help the school after one of its football players died in a car crash that also injured others on the team. Jones reached out to them during the season, making at least two trips to encourage the team. Additionally, Jones donated money so Nashville firefighters and police officers could get new uniforms.

All in all, an awful lot is being made about nothing IMO. The Bengals stand to lose nothing from where I stand. All this contract will probably amount to be is an extended tryout. He is not a Bengal yet from where I stand, even if he does sign a contract. If he proves himself to be capable of being on the roster and doesn't get into any trouble at all, I'll welcome him to the team with no problem.

[Sea Ray]

On top of that, I haven't seen a scenario where this plays out into the disaster some want me to think it could be. How can this end with anymore than the Bengals losing next to nothing? Any problems or lack of performance and he is gone anyway.




Unfortunately there is a scenario where this could hurt the Bengals. He could make the team and be a contributing member and then mid season be lost to a bone headed decision where the team will have limited resources to replace him. This happened with Odell Thurman and Chris Henry (several times). Pacman is one bad decision away from getting a lengthy suspension or even getting shot literally.

[SeeinRed]

Unfortunately there is a scenario where this could hurt the Bengals. He could make the team and be a contributing member and then mid season be lost to a bone headed decision where the team will have limited resources to replace him. This happened with Odell Thurman and Chris Henry (several times). Pacman is one bad decision away from getting a lengthy suspension or even getting shot literally.

If that happens, he is probably making minimum and not close to any incentives. The Bengals only lose what they had paid him to that point. Unless there is an injury to Hall or Joseph, he doesn't sniff being a starter. His biggest contribution will probably come as a KR. Quite a stretch to go from player making near minimum to player being huge impact player who is irreplaceable.

[Cedric]

Another arrogant decision by an organization that just doesn't get it. Pac Man Jones was bad two years ago and there is no way someone can convince me it's worth the risk.

It's just sad that the Bengals feel this is the best way to improve depth. That is what happens when Mike Brown owns your team.

[Redsfaithful]

All fans have a choice in which team and what kind of players they support. Jones is not a player I want to support.

Yeah, I do agree with you there, Jones just hasn't done anything I really honestly care about. I mean as a human being I don't like everything he's done, but it's not really my business, and nothing he's done has been bad enough for me to care from a football standpoint.

If the Bengals signed Ben Roethlisberger I wouldn't be able to root for them while he was on the team. I guess rape is where my personal line is drawn. I'd also have a hard time rooting for Michael Vick or Ray Lewis. I just don't personally think Pacman is on their level.

The Bengals could use more depth at cornerback, I don't hate Morgan Trent or David Jones, but neither are great players. Pacman might not be either anymore, but he was once pretty good so you have to think the potential is still there.

[GIDP]

Another arrogant decision by an organization that just doesn't get it. Pac Man Jones was bad two years ago and there is no way someone can convince me it's worth the risk.

It's just sad that the Bengals feel this is the best way to improve depth. That is what happens when Mike Brown owns your team.

Was he bad as a starter or bad as a NFL player? I think this matters quite a lot.

[Eric_the_Red]

If the Bengals signed Ben Roethlisberger I wouldn't be able to root for them while he was on the team. I guess rape is where my personal line is drawn. I'd also have a hard time rooting for Michael Vick or Ray Lewis. I just don't personally think Pacman is on their level.


Why is raping a woman the tipping point? Isn't a professional athlete being physcially abusive to a woman almost (or just as) bad? I guess we all have our own moral lines.

[Eric_the_Red]

And my reaction isn't knee jerk. I've made numerous posts in the past about considering placing my loyalty behind another team 100% (the Colts). I think it will happen if Pacman signs, regardless of whether or not he makes the team.

Mike Brown would rather comb the sewers for "bargains" than invest in a scouting department. Mike Brown would rather send his team to an indoor soccer field than pay for a practice bubble. Mike Brown would rather cling to an out-dated system of building an organization rather than pay a GM. THAT is thumbing their nose at the fans.

So, buy your tickets, merchandise, concessions, etc. and help make Mike Brown richer and give guys like Pacman more money to "make it rain" with. It is hard for me to do so in good conscience.

[SeeinRed]

And my reaction isn't knee jerk. I've made numerous posts in the past about considering placing my loyalty behind another team 100% (the Colts). I think it will happen if Pacman signs, regardless of whether or not he makes the team.

Then why haven't you if its not a knee-jerk reaction? To me that only proves this is something that is an automatic reaction to when the Bengals sign a player with character issues. The fact of the matter is you have admitedly said similar things in the past but haven't acted on them. That means either you don't mean it, or you opinion changed after making the initial strong statement. Either way, that is the absolute definition of a knee-jerk reaction.


Mike Brown would rather comb the sewers for "bargains" than invest in a scouting department. Mike Brown would rather send his team to an indoor soccer field than pay for a practice bubble. Mike Brown would rather cling to an out-dated system of building an organization rather than pay a GM. THAT is thumbing their nose at the fans.

So, buy your tickets, merchandise, concessions, etc. and help make Mike Brown richer and give guys like Pacman more money to "make it rain" with. It is hard for me to do so in good conscience.

Supporting a team has nothing to do with morals. Every team has issues, every team has the "character issue" players. If you really want to stop making Mike Brown rich, stop supporting the NFL as a whole. If you want to stop giving guys like Pacman more money, stop watching and supporting any type of professional sport.

The "Mike Brown is cheap" argument is getting old and a cliche' that really is overblown nowadays. Mike Brown didn't start "being cheap" when they signed Jones and yet there is still a lot of support for the team. Trying to pull morals into the argument and throwing mud at those who still support the team is rarely a good argument.

Mike Brown may not be the best owner, but his team has been performing a lot better in the Marvin Lewis era than it had for a long time before. Marvin gets credit, but so does Mike Brown. These reclamation projects are no small reason for that.

The practice bubble is probably going to be taken care of but any plans were likely put on hold with the impending capless season. I'm sure the rent they have been paying for the indoor facility they have been paying to use is not that far off what they would pay for their own in the long run.

All in all, I feel as though there have been improvements in the organization as a whole. That in itself is something I never thought I'd say.

CTR has an argument (http://cnati.com/blogs/ctrent/) I think is much more along where fans should be:


As for Pacman coming to Cincinnati -- eh. My bigger complaint than any puritan disgust was that he just wasn't very good in Dallas. He'll likely be cheap -- and with no cap, he'll be cheap to cut if he's not any good.

[Cedric]

Then why haven't you if its not a knee-jerk reaction? To me that only proves this is something that is an automatic reaction to when the Bengals sign a player with character issues. The fact of the matter is you have admitedly said similar things in the past but haven't acted on them. That means either you don't mean it, or you opinion changed after making the initial strong statement. Either way, that is the absolute definition of a knee-jerk reaction.



Supporting a team has nothing to do with morals. Every team has issues, every team has the "character issue" players. If you really want to stop making Mike Brown rich, stop supporting the NFL as a whole. If you want to stop giving guys like Pacman more money, stop watching and supporting any type of professional sport.

The "Mike Brown is cheap" argument is getting old and a cliche' that really is overblown nowadays. Mike Brown didn't start "being cheap" when they signed Jones and yet there is still a lot of support for the team. Trying to pull morals into the argument and throwing mud at those who still support the team is rarely a good argument.

Mike Brown may not be the best owner, but his team has been performing a lot better in the Marvin Lewis era than it had for a long time before. Marvin gets credit, but so does Mike Brown. These reclamation projects are no small reason for that.

The practice bubble is probably going to be taken care of but any plans were likely put on hold with the impending capless season. I'm sure the rent they have been paying for the indoor facility they have been paying to use is not that far off what they would pay for their own in the long run.

All in all, I feel as though there have been improvements in the organization as a whole. That in itself is something I never thought I'd say.

CTR has an argument (http://cnati.com/blogs/ctrent/) I think is much more along where fans should be:

Mike Brown might not be the best owner? That's the understatement of the century.

[SeeinRed]

Mike Brown might not be the best owner? That's the understatement of the century.


Obviously it wasn't said as a compliment to Mr. Brown, but he does get a lot less credit for some of the things that go right than he should.

[KoryMac5]

Not happy about the potential signing because I don't think he was very good for the Cowboys. Zimmer thinks he sees some potential and I guess that plays into his sisters of the poor approach that he has taken since he got here. I think it is a low risk big reward signing. If Jones comes in and blows the coaches away he gets a roster spot. If Jones is fighting on the last day for a spot with a good character kid he probably gets the boot.

As far as changing loyalties to your team over some questionable signings I don't get it myself. Every NFL team is going to have one or two guys who have a questionable past. For me it becomes more a question of how these players conduct themselves when they are here. Cedric Benson and Tank Johnson were supposedly big problems when the team signed them. Christ, Benson was peppered by the police and Johnson had a small arsenal in his SUV. However since they have been here they have been good for both the team and the community.

I gave these two guys a second chance and I am willing to give Jones a chance without pre judging him.

[Eric_the_Red]

Second chance...seventh chance...whatever, right?

[Hoosier Red]

Second chance...seventh chance...whatever, right?

I agree with KoryMac's point. It's not like the Bengals are likely to give him any benefit of the doubt.
Certainly there's an argument to be made as to whether or not he can actually help the team, but I don't understand the harm that he would cause.

If there are any incidents, he's gone. Now maybe this causes a PR issue, but I don't apparantly care about the PR issues.

As to Eric's point, are you cheering because they are good guys in the first place? Or are you cheering because they score touchdowns and prevent the other team from scoring?

[CTA513]

If they are fine with bringing guys with trouble pasts in then give Thurman another shot.

[SeeinRed]

As to Eric's point, are you cheering because they are good guys in the first place? Or are you cheering because they score touchdowns and prevent the other team from scoring?


I mostly agree with what you said, but in Eric's defense it isn't that black and white. Winning helps a lot, but I don't want a team full of criminals either. I just don't think this signing is as big of a deal as some have made it out to be. The risk is very low and I don't know that he has the greatest of chances to make the team to begin with. If he can help the team, great, if not he certainly won't be a starter or someone they lean on to contribute a great deal.

It has been stated that he did not play well in Dallas, but the tryouts were at least good enough for Lewis and Zimmer to give him an opportunity. That is good enough reason for me to be ok with the move.

[SeeinRed]

If they are fine with bringing guys with trouble pasts in then give Thurman another shot.

I don't know how you honestly feel about that, but I would be open to him returning if he were deemed fit.

Honestly, I loved the way Thurman played. IIRC, a judge on one of his cases said he was impressed with Thurman's conduct after sentencing and he was taking the correct steps, or something to that affect. You keep hearing he burned too many bridges within the organization though. I doubt you see him back with the Bengals even if he does get into the NFL.

[Mario-Rijo]

I don't know how you honestly feel about that, but I would be open to him returning if he were deemed fit.

Honestly, I loved the way Thurman played. IIRC, a judge on one of his cases said he was impressed with Thurman's conduct after sentencing and he was taking the correct steps, or something to that affect. You keep hearing he burned too many bridges within the organization though. I doubt you see him back with the Bengals even if he does get into the NFL.

IIRC he flat lied to them about his doings, apparently they do have a line.

[Redsfaithful]

Why is raping a woman the tipping point? Isn't a professional athlete being physcially abusive to a woman almost (or just as) bad? I guess we all have our own moral lines.

No. It's quite a lot worse in my opinion.

Not that I'm not appalled, but these guys aren't boy scouts, I don't expect them to be, and I honestly don't care what they do in their personal lives, short of the most egregious crimes. If this is your breaking point with the Bengals then I'm not sure why it wasn't one of the other dozens of criminals or projects they've taken on in the past 20 years. It's not like this is new or even remarkable.

It's interesting that the Bengals never get credit for turning anyone around. Sure you hear about the great value they picked up with a guy like Cedric Benson, but you don't hear any commentators mention the personal upside to giving these guys another chance.

[CTA513]

I don't know how you honestly feel about that, but I would be open to him returning if he were deemed fit.

Honestly, I loved the way Thurman played. IIRC, a judge on one of his cases said he was impressed with Thurman's conduct after sentencing and he was taking the correct steps, or something to that affect. You keep hearing he burned too many bridges within the organization though. I doubt you see him back with the Bengals even if he does get into the NFL.


I feel if these other guys can get chance after chance then Thurman should also be given another chance.

[Eric_the_Red]

As to Eric's point, are you cheering because they are good guys in the first place? Or are you cheering because they score touchdowns and prevent the other team from scoring?

Are those two mutually exclusive? I prefer to cheer for good guys that score touchdowns. They do exist, regardless of what Mike Brown and some posters here think.

I thought this was a well-written post about the situation, which echoes many of the points I have brought up:
http://www.whodeyrevolution.com/whodeyrevolution/2010/05/random-thoughts.html

[Hoosier Red]

Are those two mutually exclusive? I prefer to cheer for good guys that score touchdowns. They do exist, regardless of what Mike Brown and some posters here think.

I thought this was a well-written post about the situation, which echoes many of the points I have brought up:
http://www.whodeyrevolution.com/whodeyrevolution/2010/05/random-thoughts.html

I don't mean to disparage that view at all, obviously I'd rather have good guys who are play well than bad guys who play well all things considered equal.

The problem is we just don't know.

You mentioned the Colts.

Until 2 1/2 years ago everyone would assume that Marvin Harrison was a solid citizen. Now, there's a fair amount of evidence that he was involved in at least two seperate shooting incidents and one possible murder.
Backup DT Eric Foster is currently being sued for sexual assault in a case where the alleged victim believes the IUPUI police mishandled just like Rothelisberger's case.
Ed Johnson was signed by the Colts despite many character concerns at Penn State, he was cut less than 24 hours after being arrested for having marijuana in 2008, then he was signed in May 2009. He was eventually cut mid season last year because of a lack of production.


The point of bringing up these incidents is not to defame the Colts, I'm not sure they could have prevented any of these things from happening. But rather to point out that every team will take chances on guys for one reason or another.

Obviously Johnson's case is less severe than Foster's or Harrison's but it points out a subtle point. No one else had signed Johnson in the interim. He certainly wasn't somebody that the team had to have in order to "win now" as evidenced by how quickly he was cut. So why would the Colts who have a much cleaner reputation than the Bengals to uphold, sign a guy with noted off field issues even though he'll likely end up on the bottom of the roster? Because if the Colts feel he's better than the 53rd guy currently on their roster than they wanted to have him. The moment he wasn't, he was cut.

[Hoosier Red]

Are those two mutually exclusive? I prefer to cheer for good guys that score touchdowns. They do exist, regardless of what Mike Brown and some posters here think.

I thought this was a well-written post about the situation, which echoes many of the points I have brought up:
http://www.whodeyrevolution.com/whodeyrevolution/2010/05/random-thoughts.html

Those guys are really pushing themselves to stay negative after last year. It's truly impressive.

As I said, anyone who's available has some baggage. Whether its underproduction, injury, or some criminal red flags there's a reason these guys are available.
I tend to think these guys know they have a short rope and if they step out of line, off they go.

[Eric_the_Red]

I don't mean to disparage that view at all, obviously I'd rather have good guys who are play well than bad guys who play well all things considered equal.

The problem is we just don't know.

You mentioned the Colts.

Until 2 1/2 years ago everyone would assume that Marvin Harrison was a solid citizen. Now, there's a fair amount of evidence that he was involved in at least two seperate shooting incidents and one possible murder.
Backup DT Eric Foster is currently being sued for sexual assault in a case where the alleged victim believes the IUPUI police mishandled just like Rothelisberger's case.
Ed Johnson was signed by the Colts despite many character concerns at Penn State, he was cut less than 24 hours after being arrested for having marijuana in 2008, then he was signed in May 2009. He was eventually cut mid season last year because of a lack of production.


The point of bringing up these incidents is not to defame the Colts, I'm not sure they could have prevented any of these things from happening. But rather to point out that every team will take chances on guys for one reason or another.

Obviously Johnson's case is less severe than Foster's or Harrison's but it points out a subtle point. No one else had signed Johnson in the interim. He certainly wasn't somebody that the team had to have in order to "win now" as evidenced by how quickly he was cut. So why would the Colts who have a much cleaner reputation than the Bengals to uphold, sign a guy with noted off field issues even though he'll likely end up on the bottom of the roster? Because if the Colts feel he's better than the 53rd guy currently on their roster than they wanted to have him. The moment he wasn't, he was cut.

Difference is that the Colts has NO idea that Harrison was that type of person. He was an enigman. His teammates knew little about him and he didn't interact with them. I think he is more of a personality disorder than a "thug".

Then you name two other instances. How many instances about the Bengals could you name in the last few years? I am not naive to the fact that every team probably has a few troubled pasts, but it seems the Bengals attract/seek them out.

[SeeinRed]

Are those two mutually exclusive? I prefer to cheer for good guys that score touchdowns. They do exist, regardless of what Mike Brown and some posters here think.


I would guarantee you can find some character flaws in a vast majority of NFL players, even the great ones. Sure those types of players exist, but no team has a roster full of them. The Bengals have their share of both. Carson Palmer, Dhani Jones, and Bobbie Williams would be on the good list just off the top of my head. Even Chad Ochocinco has shown a lot of his good qualities in his involvement community. I haven't seen one person claim that you have to be a bad person to be a good player. Kinda hypocritical to say someone is making things too black and white by making another black and white argument.

[SeeinRed]

I am not naive to the fact that every team probably has a few troubled pasts, but it seems the Bengals attract/seek them out.

See this is the problem I have. Do the Bengals sign more that the average? Probably. Do other teams seek to get talented players on the cheap? Absolutely, and they do it in the exact same way the Bengals have. It is not a situation in any way unique to the Bengals, and it can make a team look very smart. The Bengals don't get the benefit of looking smart. If it works out for them, nobody is willing to give them credit for it, but if it doesn't people are sure ready to pile on them for getting a player with character issues.

[Hoosier Red]

Difference is that the Colts has NO idea that Harrison was that type of person. He was an enigman. His teammates knew little about him and he didn't interact with them. I think he is more of a personality disorder than a "thug".

Then you name two other instances. How many instances about the Bengals could you name in the last few years? I am not naive to the fact that every team probably has a few troubled pasts, but it seems the Bengals attract/seek them out.

They've brought in a lot of guys with issues before joining the Bengals but of players that were actually on the Bengals, but since the beginning of 2008, they've had 5 arrests;

Chris Henry 3/31/08 - Assault and Disorderly Conduct, assault charge later dropped
Ahmed Brooks 5/1/08- Misdemeanor Assault
Leon Hall 4/5/09 -DUI
Rey Maualuga 1/29/10- DUI
Maurice Purify 5/24/10- Disorderly Conduct

Since 2008, the Colts have 4 arrests.
Kenton Keith 4/21/08- Public Intox, Disorderly Conduct, resisting Law Enforcement
Ed Johnson 9/10/08- discussed above
Darrell Reid 2/10/09- Disorderly conduct and Trespassing(though to be fair charges were dropped the next day)
Taj Smith 1/1/10 - DUI(Happy New Year)

In addition to this there's Foster's incident(the night before the AFC Playoff game thank you very much) and Harrison who was never arrested.

Source:NFL Arrest Database http://www.signonsandiego.com/nfl/arrests-database/

Since Marvin Lewis took over as coach in 2003, the Bengals have had 17 players arrested a total of 23 times. The Colts have had 12 players arrested a total of 14 times.

If anything, the success the Bengals have had with guys who had problems with other teams points to a strong locker room that is able to thrive on the fact that these guys know its their last chance.

[RedsManRick]

From the "where there's smoke there's fire" department:

Incidents in the NFL arrests database:

Cincinnati 31
Minnesota 30
Jacksonville 25
Kansas City 25
Denver 24
Miami 24
Chargers 22
Tennessee 22
Cleveland 20
Tampa Bay 18
Chicago 17
Indianapolis 17
New Orleans 17
Pittsburgh 16
Baltimore 15
Carolina 15
Buffalo 13
Seattle 13
Atlanta 12
Green Bay 12
Oakland 12
N.Y. Giants 11
New England 11
Washington 11
Arizona 9
Dallas 9
Houston 9
San Francisco 8
Detroit 7
N.Y. Jets 7
Philadelphia 7
St. Louis 6

[Mario-Rijo]

Candied...err candid Tank on PacMan.


Tank will be there for Jones

GEOFF HOBSON

They still appear to be ruminating over the details of a deal for cornerback Adam Jones.

It is believed a formal offer has been sent to and perused by his agents, but there has been no word of a verbal agreement. Ray Savage, one of Jones’ representatives, had no comment at the end of business Wednesday but is expecting to speak with the Bengals Thursday.

Jones has already told once and future teammate Tank Johnson he’s coming to the Bengals and that “he’s ecstatic.”


There are also indications that veteran safety Gibril Wilson is moving closer to a deal in Cincinnati but agent Alvin Keels said late Wednesday afternoon he was still working on it. Like Jones, Wilson had a fruitful post-workout meeting with the defensive coaches Tuesday.

"He really hit it off up there and I know they liked him and he liked them," said Keels, the agent for Andre Smith, the Bengals' No. 1 pick last year. "We're trying to get something done and we're still talking."

Jones figures to sign (probably for one year with incentives) before the Bengals’ on-field voluntary drills start Tuesday and Johnson assures, “With his head screwed on tight, he can play.
”
Johnson and Jones were teammates in Dallas in 2008, when Jones was the fourth cornerback, got suspended for six games, and was released into free agency after the season and hasn’t played since. But Johnson says that Pacman Jones and this Adam Jones aren’t the same guy.

“I know he’s settled down,” Johnson said Wednesday. “I think you have to settle down. I think he would have been dead by now if he didn’t settle down. That’s the honest to god truth.”

Johnson knows the path.

While Jones served a season-long suspension in 2007 for a slew of off-field transgressions, Johnson had his own eight-game sentence. He came back to play in Dallas and when they let him go after the ’08 season, the Bengals gave Johnson a one-year shot and he turned it into a four-year deal with a solid ’09 after he earned a starting job at tackle despite playing hurt under the tough love of defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer.

“I don’t make any guarantees for any man. That’s not how it works,” said Johnson, who talks to Jones a couple of times a week. “I think he’s made definite strides. I think coming into this Bengal family with Coach (Marvin) Lewis and Coach Zim and the Brown family, that is going to be great for him. I think Dallas was too much glitz, too much of a wild situation to go into, but this is definitely a more tame situation.”

Zimmer is the main reason Jones is here. After coaching Deion Sanders in Dallas, Zimmer has remained in touch with the future Hall-of-Famer that has befriended Jones and has talked to him endlessly about him. Sanders, Zimmer said, has told him that Jones will play for him.

Johnson feels like he has blossomed under Zimmer’s no-nonsense style and he thinks Jones can, too.

“I think Zim will be good for him. All he has to do is listen to Zim,” Johnson said. “I can talk to Zim. Adam needs to listen to Zim. There is a difference there. I’ve earned the right to talk to Zim and Adam has not earned the right to open his mouth to Zim. He needs to listen to all the wise things Zim has to say and soak it all in like a sponge and go from there.”

Johnson says that Jones has followed his example in trying to put his associations into the past with his past.

“He’s humble. I think the time off has humbled him and humility is the first step to recovery,” Johnson said. “When you get broken down to a point the only place you can go is up, it starts to take the weight off your back of the other things that weigh you down so when you get to that rock bottom point, you’ve got to realize you’ve got to cut lose those people that are anchoring you, and help get your way back to the top. I just pretty much cut ties with anybody who could put me in potential of harm and people that were way too volatile. I had to do that to secure my safety and the longevity of my career. I think he’s done that.”

Johnson says it’s a good feeling to be free of the past. He’s got four more years and he says he’ll try to help Jones get there. His advice is simple.

“I saw Mike Vick this offseason,” Johnson said of the quarterback who returned to the NFL last year after serving 18 months in a dog fighting scandal. “We were just so proud of each other that we made our way back to the top. There is a small fraternity of bad boys who turned to good boys. When you come in here, keep your mouth shut and decline all interviews and that’s it.”

[Joseph]

Difference is that the Colts has NO idea that Harrison was that type of person. He was an enigman. His teammates knew little about him and he didn't interact with them. I think he is more of a personality disorder than a "thug".

Then you name two other instances. How many instances about the Bengals could you name in the last few years? I am not naive to the fact that every team probably has a few troubled pasts, but it seems the Bengals attract/seek them out.

Just because YOU didn't know it, doesn't mean the Colts didn't know it.

I'll worry about Pacman when he does something on or off the field [as a Bengal] to warrant the attention. Right now its a total non-story and we are all blowing it way out of proportion.

[Hoosier Red]

From the character counts so long as he can catch the damn ball department.

Regression Analysis # of incidents versus the # of wins

r² 0.007
r 0.083
Std. Error of Estimate 16.179
n 31
k 1
Dep. Var. # wins


# Incidents # wins
Cincinnati 31 68
Minnesota 30 84
Jacksonville 25 76
Kansas City 25 70
Denver 24 94
Miami 24 79
San Diego 22 84
Tennessee 22 91
Cleveland 20 57
Tampa Bay 18 79
Chicago 17 81
Indianapolis 17 115
New Orleans 17 83
Pittsburgh 16 103
Baltimore 15 92
Carolina 13 83
Buffalo 13 65
Seattle 13 82
Atlanta 12 71
Green Bay 12 95
Oakland 12 62
NY Giants 11 88
New England 11 112
Washington 11 70
Arizona 9 62
Dallas 9 82
San Francisco 8 68
Detroit 7 42
NY Jets 7 76
Philadelphia 7 103
St. Louis 6 71



Average 15.6 80.3
Std Deviation 7.0 16.0

[TC81190]

Just because YOU didn't know it, doesn't mean the Colts didn't know it.

I'll worry about Pacman when he does something on or off the field [as a Bengal] to warrant the attention. Right now its a total non-story and we are all blowing it way out of proportion.
I don't even think it's a non story, I think it's a good one. The organization is bringing in a player on the cheap with very little risk but one who has the potential at least to provide good production. Is the franchise thumbing it's nose at its fans? Hardly. They're attempting to put a winning product on the field in an efficient matter. I'd say they're doing just the opposite.

[Eric_the_Red]

Just because YOU didn't know it, doesn't mean the Colts didn't know it.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/don_banks/02/04/colts/index.html


Harrison was always known for being a loner, even among his teammates, but to hear Wayne, who played alongside him for eight years, describe him as having lost total touch with his former team was shocking.

"It's not a surprise,'' Wayne said. "Our lockers were next to each other and we very seldom talked then. It's not like we were text message buddies in eight years. So I kind of figured it'd be that way. You've just got to understand his character.''

[Eric_the_Red]

They've brought in a lot of guys with issues before joining the Bengals but of players that were actually on the Bengals, but since the beginning of 2008, they've had 5 arrests;


Since Marvin Lewis took over as coach in 2003, the Bengals have had 17 players arrested a total of 23 times. The Colts have had 12 players arrested a total of 14 times.



Why did you pick 2008? Why not go back to 2001 and view the last decade?

And of the Colts 4 arrests listed, as you noted 1 was thrown out and another was a New Year's DUI. So, that would make it 5 Bengals to 2 or 3 Colts.

So since 2003 the Bengals have had about 30% more players arrested and about 40% more arrests than the Colts. You are making my point- the Bengals are in trouble more than the Colts.

And I bet the Bengals have signed more players with previous arrests than the Colts have too.

[Yachtzee]

Why did you pick 2008? Why not go back to 2001 and view the last decade?

And of the Colts 4 arrests listed, as you noted 1 was thrown out and another was a New Year's DUI. So, that would make it 5 Bengals to 2 or 3 Colts.

So since 2003 the Bengals have had about 30% more players arrested and about 40% more arrests than the Colts. You are making my point- the Bengals are in trouble more than the Colts.

And I bet the Bengals have signed more players with previous arrests than the Colts have too.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

If you're going to be a Colts fan, be a Colts fan then. No one is forcing anyone to root for the Bengals. But if character issues are a problem for you, why not go for the Rams?

[Hoosier Red]

Why did you pick 2008? Why not go back to 2001 and view the last decade?

And of the Colts 4 arrests listed, as you noted 1 was thrown out and another was a New Year's DUI. So, that would make it 5 Bengals to 2 or 3 Colts.



New Year's DUI's don't count? Curious. I admittedly cherry picked 2008 as it was at the end of the run of arrests for the Bengals players and marked a time where Marvin Lewis began to exercise a little more control.(Cutting Chris Henry immediately after his arrest, though he was signed back later.)

Also, three years tends to be representative of the average NFL career, so it makes a pretty good beginning point in my mind. 2001 is a long time, I did go back to the beginning of the Marvin Lewis era for a longer term view.

The figures also don't represent Eric Foster's incident(I assume you wouldn't be happy about signing Rothelisberger who also wasn't arrested,) or Marvin Harrison's. So again in recent history, the Colts and Bengals have been fairly similar.


And I bet the Bengals have signed more players with previous arrests than the Colts have too.

I actually alluded to this in the bottom of my last post. They have signed a number of players who were arrested prior to joining the Bengals and have had a great amount of success with them. In fact I can't think of a player who the Bengals signed as a free agent who had arrests on his record who went on to get in any trouble with the Bengals.

Doesn't mean it won't happen, but perhaps we should give Mike Brown and the coaching staff a little more credit on evaluating which players are ready to make a change for the better.

[Redsfaithful]

I think he is more of a personality disorder than a "thug".

Anyone who is running around committing multiple crimes pretty much by definition probably has antisocial personality disorder. Including Pacman Jones. And Chris Henry. And Ben Roethlisberger.

I honestly don't know what your criteria is for "thug", but the word has such a racist connotation anymore with sports (I never hear it uttered when it comes to a white player) that it makes my skin crawl.

[Kingspoint]

Lately, though, people are getting into less trouble after coming to Cincinnati than how much trouble they were getting into before they came to Cincinnati. The Cincinnati Bengals are helping many to improve their lives.

If Pacman Jones had a chance to improve himself, it's going to be in Cincinnati more than any other place right now.

[Kingspoint]

Anyone who is running around committing multiple crimes pretty much by definition probably has antisocial personality disorder.


Development

The criteria for the Antisocial Personality Disorder was made by Spitzer, Endicott and Robbins because of concern in the development of the DSM-IV that too much emphasis was focused on research data and not enough on more traditional psychopathic traits such as a lack of empathy, superficial charm, and inflated self appraisal. Lack of remorse is not included among other things because of cases that show that it does exist. For example the antisocial person may show guilt or remorse and offer excuses and rationalizations. However, over a period of time, remorse or guilt over an action/crime may be lost.


Diagnostic criteria

Three or more of the following are required:

Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;

Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;

Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;

Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;

Reckless disregard for safety of self or others;

Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;

Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.

[Eric_the_Red]

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

If you're going to be a Colts fan, be a Colts fan then. No one is forcing anyone to root for the Bengals. But if character issues are a problem for you, why not go for the Rams?

It isn't just character issues that have made me question my devotion to the Bengals. Those are the tipping point perhaps. But again, poor drafting, lack of investment in scouting, substandard practice facilities, no General Manager, the nepotism shown in control of the team, the yearly first round holdout, Chad Ochocinco's contract dispute a few years ago, unimaginative playcalling and character issues/dumpster diving combine to paint a picture of an organization that doesn't put winning with integrity first.

Do they want to win? I'm sure. Do they devote the same amount of resources to winning as the premier organizations? I don't think anyone can argue that. So, if the organization isn't willing to put everything they can into being a first rate NFL franchise, why should fans shell out money to support that business model?

It's amazing how one above-average season can erase the memories of the past.

[Razor Shines]

If the Colts had signed Pacman, I'd be more upset about the fact that I don't think he can play anymore than the fact that he's been in trouble. He did not look like an above average corner with Dallas.

Not to I wouldn't be upset at the fact that he's been in trouble, it's just that his lack of ability would tip the scale.

[bucksfan2]

Didn't the Colts have a corner back who was stabbed in the knee by his wife the night before an AFC Championship Game? Not that it was an arrest but it came up when I was thinking about this thread.

[Hoosier Red]

It isn't just character issues that have made me question my devotion to the Bengals. Those are the tipping point perhaps. But again, poor drafting, lack of investment in scouting, substandard practice facilities, no General Manager, the nepotism shown in control of the team, the yearly first round holdout, Chad Ochocinco's contract dispute a few years ago, unimaginative playcalling and character issues/dumpster diving combine to paint a picture of an organization that doesn't put winning with integrity first.

Do they want to win? I'm sure. Do they devote the same amount of resources to winning as the premier organizations? I don't think anyone can argue that. So, if the organization isn't willing to put everything they can into being a first rate NFL franchise, why should fans shell out money to support that business model?

It's amazing how one above-average season can erase the memories of the past.

Eric,

If it's a tipping point, I understand to a degree, but what I don't understand is why would you leave now. Whatever Mike Brown's problems, and there are many, I find it impossible to see where the team isn't miles ahead of where it was 5 years ago, which was miles ahead of 5 years before that.

I found it interesting that 12 of the arrests since Marvin's been here all came out of 2 draft classes. Perhaps the Bengals have learned something since those two draft classes.

[Yachtzee]

It isn't just character issues that have made me question my devotion to the Bengals. Those are the tipping point perhaps. But again, poor drafting, lack of investment in scouting, substandard practice facilities, no General Manager, the nepotism shown in control of the team, the yearly first round holdout, Chad Ochocinco's contract dispute a few years ago, unimaginative playcalling and character issues/dumpster diving combine to paint a picture of an organization that doesn't put winning with integrity first.

Do they want to win? I'm sure. Do they devote the same amount of resources to winning as the premier organizations? I don't think anyone can argue that. So, if the organization isn't willing to put everything they can into being a first rate NFL franchise, why should fans shell out money to support that business model?

It's amazing how one above-average season can erase the memories of the past.

My point is that if you're going to switch allegiances, fine. But spare us the rationalizations, because "winning with integrity" is pretty much an oxymoron in the NFL these days. Every team makes plenty of decisions their fans don't like, whether it's the Bengals, Colts, Patriots or whatever. Integrity and the Colts? Not only do they have plenty of bad boys on their team, but even some of their own fans were upset when they pulled their standard ploy of practically throwing games at the end of the season by pulling all their starters once they had their playoff spot wrapped up. In fact, it was the Irsay family that packed up the team in the middle of the night and moved them out of Baltimore, and didn't even have the decency to leave the team's name, colors and history in Baltimore for the fans. And just about every other regular playoff contender has baggage. Maybe you'd like the Patriots? Once again, bad boys on the roster (although Belicheck seems to get praised for turning these guys around), allegations of cheating by stealing other teams' signals, and who knows what else. Steelers? We all know the troubles they've been having.

Sounds to me like your beef is with Mike Brown. Fine. All you have to say is "I don't like Mike Brown." Or better yet, say nothing and just buy yourself a Colts jersey. But trying to rationalize it based on the signing of Pacman Jones being the last straw, when it seems to have been the call of Mike Zimmer, a coach who has been universally lauded for his work with the Bengals defense, just seems silly.

[Cedric]

My point is that if you're going to switch allegiances, fine. But spare us the rationalizations, because "winning with integrity" is pretty much an oxymoron in the NFL these days. Every team makes plenty of decisions their fans don't like, whether it's the Bengals, Colts, Patriots or whatever. Integrity and the Colts? Not only do they have plenty of bad boys on their team, but even some of their own fans were upset when they pulled their standard ploy of practically throwing games at the end of the season by pulling all their starters once they had their playoff spot wrapped up. In fact, it was the Irsay family that packed up the team in the middle of the night and moved them out of Baltimore, and didn't even have the decency to leave the team's name, colors and history in Baltimore for the fans. And just about every other regular playoff contender has baggage. Maybe you'd like the Patriots? Once again, bad boys on the roster (although Belicheck seems to get praised for turning these guys around), allegations of cheating by stealing other teams' signals, and who knows what else. Steelers? We all know the troubles they've been having.

Sounds to me like your beef is with Mike Brown. Fine. All you have to say is "I don't like Mike Brown." Or better yet, say nothing and just buy yourself a Colts jersey. But trying to rationalize it based on the signing of Pacman Jones being the last straw, when it seems to have been the call of Mike Zimmer, a coach who has been universally lauded for his work with the Bengals defense, just seems silly.

I didn't know switching teams was a choice. If it was I would have bailed on the Bengals about a decade and a half ago.

I'm stuck!

[bucksfan2]

I didn't know switching teams was a choice. If it was I would have bailed on the Bengals about a decade and a half ago.

I'm stuck!

Yep. It switching teams were easy I would have been a Patriots and Yankees fan right now. I almost wish I could. I have heard the easiest job in sports is being a Yankees fan.

[Yachtzee]

I didn't know switching teams was a choice. If it was I would have bailed on the Bengals about a decade and a half ago.

I'm stuck!

For some of us, it isn't. I've tried to quit the Bengals many times and they keep dragging me back in. If anything, I'd say I've reached the point where I've become more fairweather about the NFL. If the Bengals do well, I'm happy and I cheer for them. If they do poorly, well I've got better things to do with my life. But I'm not going to jump to another team because experience tells me that, when it comes to the NFL, if you choose to follow a team based on intangibles such as "integrity" and "how they play the game," you're doomed to be disappointed.

[Eric_the_Red]

Zimmer tells Mike Brown who to sign? News to me. I think we all remember how Mike Brown really listened to Marvin Lewis when Marvin was against bring Henry back.

And resting your starters after the #1 seed is wrapped up is not even close to seeking out players with troubled pasts as buy low opportunities. (And for the record, I could care less that they rest their starters. It's a smart football move.)

I don't know how well I would do with divorcing myself from the Bengals. I don't know what it would look like for me to give up on them. I'd still watch them, as I watch just about any NFL on tv. But perhaps instead of going to 3 or 4 Bengals games a year, I spend my money in Indianapolis.

It just seems to me that over the last 20 years Bengals fans have cared more about having a winning team than Bengals ownership. Fans certainly do have the option to choose their allegiance based on their perceptions of teams. I feel sorry for those fans that are so locked into one way of thinking that they would rather suffer, and perhaps comprimise their integrity, in the hopes of watching their team succeed than to change their mind and allegiance. My friend & I were discussing the Pacman signing and he basically said "whatever it takes to win, I don't care who is on the team". That is more perplexing to me than choosing to root for another team.

[SeeinRed]

Zimmer tells Mike Brown who to sign? News to me. I think we all remember how Mike Brown really listened to Marvin Lewis when Marvin was against bring Henry back.

Which is one example. I'm sure Mike Brown has his players on the team, but Lewis and Zimmer get their guys too. I'm also guessing Brown's picks are far fewer than Lewis' or Zimmer's. You can pick at certain decisions all you want, but the whole picture is looking much better than it did before Lewis was hired.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of work yet to be done. I don't think you will find a single person on here who denies that. The fact of the matter is that Brown is letting Lewis and his staff make personnel decisions that previous coaches would not have been able to make. Lewis even says there is work to be done in that department, but it has been said by many different reporters that Brown may have the final say on players, but Marvin does get his guys. Its all moving in the right direction, if only slowly.

[Cedric]

Zimmer tells Mike Brown who to sign? News to me. I think we all remember how Mike Brown really listened to Marvin Lewis when Marvin was against bring Henry back.

And resting your starters after the #1 seed is wrapped up is not even close to seeking out players with troubled pasts as buy low opportunities. (And for the record, I could care less that they rest their starters. It's a smart football move.)

I don't know how well I would do with divorcing myself from the Bengals. I don't know what it would look like for me to give up on them. I'd still watch them, as I watch just about any NFL on tv. But perhaps instead of going to 3 or 4 Bengals games a year, I spend my money in Indianapolis.

It just seems to me that over the last 20 years Bengals fans have cared more about having a winning team than Bengals ownership. Fans certainly do have the option to choose their allegiance based on their perceptions of teams. I feel sorry for those fans that are so locked into one way of thinking that they would rather suffer, and perhaps comprimise their integrity, in the hopes of watching their team succeed than to change their mind and allegiance. My friend & I were discussing the Pacman signing and he basically said "whatever it takes to win, I don't care who is on the team". That is more perplexing to me than choosing to root for another team.

Are you serious? My integrity is in question because I can't root for anyone in the NFL but the Bengals? You might need to just stop watching sports all together if you are that serious.

[forfreelin04]

Are you serious? My integrity is in question because I can't root for anyone in the NFL but the Bengals? You might need to just stop watching sports all together if you are that serious.

I'm with you Cedric and I probably have more of a reason to agree with Eric.I just recently finished a degree in a Christian based school that emphasis business with morality. Careful not to turn this into a religious thread, I won't go into detail.

However from this education, I've learned that the businesses that people buy from everyday are probably doing worse things for themselves and doing it at the expense of the innocent. Examples are the purchase of Nike shoes or investing in RJ Reynolds stock.

That being said, I don't look down upon people that purchase Nike shoes. Do I own a pair? Heck yes I do, but they were a gift. Would I purchase them? No.

I look at it sort of like that. Would I sign Pacman? Heck no. But, watching the Bengals to me is a gift. I've grown up with them. If the team starts parading the streets in Riot Gear, and smacking old ladies, I'll root for the Colts. Pardon me if I don't get twisted over a washed up cornerback whose about as likely to make this team as an undrafted college player. There's a line between what is lawful and what is immoral. I'm not sure many Bengals have crossed it. If anything, there simply buying low. Sounds like good business to me.

[Hoosier Red]

Are you serious? My integrity is in question because I can't root for anyone in the NFL but the Bengals? You might need to just stop watching sports all together if you are that serious.

I think you're missing the forest for the trees there Cedric.
In fact I believe Eric agrees with you.

[forfreelin04]

Yep. It switching teams were easy I would have been a Patriots and Yankees fan right now. I almost wish I could. I have heard the easiest job in sports is being a Yankees fan.

It's amazing to me that people can switch. Those proud owners of their Dallas Cowboy Starter Jackets. You know who you are!!!:nono:

[Eric_the_Red]

Let me ask this....if Ben Roethlisberger were a Bengal, would you root for him with the same zeal you do Palmer? Or Benson? Or Pacman, if he makes the team?

Point being...I think we all have lines what we draw. Some baseball fans left the game and still haven't been back after the 1994 strike. I don't agree with it, but I don't disparage their decision. I'm sure the steroirds era has cost MLB some fans as well. Everyone has their own individual tipping points. There is no right or wrong about it- it's an opinion.

I'm sure plenty of Reds did steroids. I don't agree with steroid use. But I still root for the Reds. Now, if they went out and signed a bunch of guys that were known/suspected PED users, or they seemed to almost defend PED use (Tony LaRussa, I'm looking at you) then I may feel differently.

Sometimes I just don't buy the "that's just the way it is" defense. Perhaps I'm too idealistic/naive, perhaps it is my faith impacting my decisions (As forfreelin04 discussed. And no, I don't buy Nike shoes either, and I avoid Wal-Mart as much as possible) but I'd rather root for an organization that, win or lose, seems to want to win and win without selling its soul/lockerroom.

The Reds haven't been serious contenders for years, yet I still root for them. Because, as poor as some of their decisions may have been, I feel like they make the decisions in an effort to improve and win. I truly believe that Mike Brown is perfectly happy with the last 3-4 year cycle: mediocrity, then a poor season, then a winning season just to bring the fans back. It cheap and it makes him money, and those winning seasons every few years are something for him to point to and say, "See? I want a winner too!" and PBS continues to sell-out game after game.

[forfreelin04]

Let me ask this....if Ben Roethlisberger were a Bengal, would you root for him with the same zeal you do Palmer? Or Benson? Or Pacman, if he makes the team?

Point being...I think we all have lines what we draw. Some baseball fans left the game and still haven't been back after the 1994 strike. I don't agree with it, but I don't disparage their decision. I'm sure the steroirds era has cost MLB some fans as well. Everyone has their own individual tipping points. There is no right or wrong about it- it's an opinion.

I'm sure plenty of Reds did steroids. I don't agree with steroid use. But I still root for the Reds. Now, if they went out and signed a bunch of guys that were known/suspected PED users, or they seemed to almost defend PED use (Tony LaRussa, I'm looking at you) then I may feel differently.

Sometimes I just don't buy the "that's just the way it is" defense. Perhaps I'm too idealistic/naive, perhaps it is my faith impacting my decisions (As forfreelin04 discussed. And no, I don't buy Nike shoes either, and I avoid Wal-Mart as much as possible) but I'd rather root for an organization that, win or lose, seems to want to win and win without selling its soul/lockerroom.

The Reds haven't been serious contenders for years, yet I still root for them. Because, as poor as some of their decisions may have been, I feel like they make the decisions in an effort to improve and win. I truly believe that Mike Brown is perfectly happy with the last 3-4 year cycle: mediocrity, then a poor season, then a winning season just to bring the fans back. It cheap and it makes him money, and those winning seasons every few years are something for him to point to and say, "See? I want a winner too!" and PBS continues to sell-out game after game.

In regards to your question, I think you draw the line between someone being detrimental to themselves or being detrimental to others. We could talk for hours about Ben's deeds. We could talk about Pacman's deeds for hours. At the end of the day, its all relative.

Personally, (if I'm to believe SI has truth) Big Ben sounds like someone nobody should be rooting for. His actions, IMO are less forgivable than hanging out too late at strip joints and getting in fights like PacMan. But like I said, depends on your definitions of right and wrong. Certainly, the law provides "a" framework but it doesn't necessarily tell the whole story. Everyones made bad decisions in their life. Whether or not they learn from them, and how many chances they get from fans may be the real question.

[joshnky]

It looks like the Bengals signed Gibril Wilson to a one year deal. I would think that makes a Pacman signing very unlikely given the numbers crunch in the defensive backfield.

[CTA513]

It looks like the Bengals signed Gibril Wilson to a one year deal. I would think that makes a Pacman signing very unlikely given the numbers crunch in the defensive backfield.


The Bengals signed both Wilson and Jones.

[joshnky]

The Bengals signed both Wilson and Jones.

Well it didn't take long for me to be proven wrong.

It still seems that the numbers don't work out if they plan on both these guys making the team.

Starters:
Hall
Joseph
Williams
Crocker

Backups:
Hebert
Jones
Ndukwe
Nelson
Ghee
Trent

They kept ten last year. Will they keep ten this year again and cut two of these guys to make room for Jones and Wilson?

[Benihana]

Well it didn't take long for me to be proven wrong.

It still seems that the numbers don't work out if they plan on both these guys making the team.

Starters:
Hall
Joseph
Williams
Crocker

Backups:
Hebert
Jones
Ndukwe
Nelson
Ghee
Trent

They kept ten last year. Will they keep ten this year again and cut two of these guys to make room for Jones and Wilson?

You may see a surprising name cut in the secondary in training camp. May be one of the guys they signed today, or it may be a guy like Williams or Crocker.

On pure talent I would imagine it would be Nelson and D.Jones that get cut. Hebert is quite valuable on special teams, and Ghee and Pacman should battle over the nickel spot, pushing Trent into the 5th CB role. The signing of Wilson makes Nelson expendable.

[Yachtzee]

I'm with you Cedric and I probably have more of a reason to agree with Eric.I just recently finished a degree in a Christian based school that emphasis business with morality. Careful not to turn this into a religious thread, I won't go into detail.


I deal with people who have broken the law everyday as my job and one of the things I find most interesting is that it's the businesses run by people with strong religious convictions that seem more likely to hire convicted felons than any other kind of business. Those that are more oriented toward just making money want nothing to do with these people, but business owners with strong moral convictions just seem to look beyond a person's past. Maybe they just feel that anyone can redeem themselves. I see a lot of similarities between Mike Brown and these type of businesses. I think Mike Brown honestly believes that players with troubled pasts should have the opportunity to turn their life around.

I'm usually more ticked off by the Bengals signing "me first" types than ones with criminal pasts. If a guy is willing to come in, work hard, and be a team player to help the Bengals win games, I'm fine with that. I'd be more concerned if they went out and signed T.O.

[WMR]

From the "where there's smoke there's fire" department:

Incidents in the NFL arrests database:

Cincinnati 31
Minnesota 30
Jacksonville 25
Kansas City 25
Denver 24
Miami 24
Chargers 22
Tennessee 22
Cleveland 20
Tampa Bay 18
Chicago 17
Indianapolis 17
New Orleans 17
Pittsburgh 16
Baltimore 15
Carolina 15
Buffalo 13
Seattle 13
Atlanta 12
Green Bay 12
Oakland 12
N.Y. Giants 11
New England 11
Washington 11
Arizona 9
Dallas 9
Houston 9
San Francisco 8
Detroit 7
N.Y. Jets 7
Philadelphia 7
St. Louis 6

Amusing St. Louis is 'last' on your list yet one of the most egregious offenders, IMO.

[WVRed]

Amusing St. Louis is 'last' on your list yet one of the most egregious offenders, IMO.

I like the Jets though. Added two offenders in Antonio Cromartie and Santonio Holmes during the offseason.

[traderumor]

I really do not understand why fans care so much about the morality of a professional football player. As if the sport is a picture of morality. And I watch football all fall, but I'm not watching a guy blow another guy up and thinking "man, if he could just stay out of fights when he goes to a strip bar" as having any value for the job.

[Eric_the_Red]

I really do not understand why fans care so much about the morality of a professional football player. As if the sport is a picture of morality. And I watch football all fall, but I'm not watching a guy blow another guy up and thinking "man, if he could just stay out of fights when he goes to a strip bar" as having any value for the job.

Why is this any different than any other entertainment industry? I can't watch anything Tom Cruise is in these days without thinking what a nut job he is. Ask Paul Reubens if getting arrested changes how "entertaining" people think you are.

I view Alex Rodriguez differently when I watch him play now because of immoral behavior.

And, maybe we should look at the Tiger Woods thread to see if people have different feelings towards him now.

[Tony Cloninger]

I just don't think the guy is good enough to be worth the hassle.....and it tells me they would rather not try and sign one or both of these really CB's?
That makes me more upset.

[Razor Shines]

Why is this any different than any other entertainment industry? I can't watch anything Tom Cruise is in these days without thinking what a nut job he is. Ask Paul Reubens if getting arrested changes how "entertaining" people think you are.

I view Alex Rodriguez differently when I watch him play now because of immoral behavior.

And, maybe we should look at the Tiger Woods thread to see if people have different feelings towards him now.

If that's the way you go about picking your entertainment you're probably always going to be let down. If I didn't watch any movie because there's an actor or actress that I think is crazy or says something that I happen to think is stupid, well I probably wouldn't see any movies.

I love the Colts and I love Peyton Manning, but hell, even he was accused of sexual harassment at Tennessee.

Is there a line? Sure, I guess. Roethlisberger's probably crossed it, but I wasn't a fan of his anyway so I don't know how I'd feel if I was. I'd prefer the athletes I like to be moral character people, but it just seems like you're always going to find something.

[traderumor]

Why is this any different than any other entertainment industry? I can't watch anything Tom Cruise is in these days without thinking what a nut job he is. Ask Paul Reubens if getting arrested changes how "entertaining" people think you are.

I view Alex Rodriguez differently when I watch him play now because of immoral behavior.

And, maybe we should look at the Tiger Woods thread to see if people have different feelings towards him now.It isn't any different, and I do understand that people feel this way. What I am saying is that most of the immorality has nothing to do with job performance. I know people want their idols to be better people than they are, or at least as "good." Adultery, perversion, alcohol and drug addiction, etc. are going on all around us, and crimes are committed thereon. Will you have a hard time buying toothpaste because employees at Proctor and Gamble engage in such behaviors?

[Eric_the_Red]

It isn't any different, and I do understand that people feel this way. What I am saying is that most of the immorality has nothing to do with job performance. I know people want their idols to be better people than they are, or at least as "good." Adultery, perversion, alcohol and drug addiction, etc. are going on all around us, and crimes are committed thereon. Will you have a hard time buying toothpaste because employees at Proctor and Gamble engage in such behaviors?

No, but I'm not paying to watch them make the toothpaste. Entertainment dollars are spent differently than other income. (That said, if a large part of a corporation engaged in practices I didn't approve of, I wouldn't support them, like my stance on not buying Nike shoes).

I don't see what I am saying is any different than someone who liked Tiger Woods before the scandal saying "I can't root for him anymore, so I will cheer for (player X)." Player X may not have any public problems, but I believe we live in a fallen world and we all sin. I realize that nobody is perfect. But I have trouble endorsing unrepentent repeat offenders with my discretionary income.

Are players going to get arrested on every NFL team? Sure. But some teams try to limit these occurrences by not drafting potential problems (see Bryant, Dez). Not only do the Bengals draft potential problems (Rey) but they often sign players with past problems (Matt Jones & now Pacman). I don't think Mike Brown is doing this to rehabilitate them- he wants potential talent at rock bottom prices. If it works, then he looks like "The Redeemer". If not, they can cut the player and wash their hands of the situation. I don't buy it.

[LoganBuck]

Agree with Razor and traderumor 100%

If I limited my entertainment to people I agreed with 100% of the time, I would be amish.

[LoganBuck]

I don't think Mike Brown is doing this to rehabilitate them- he wants potential talent at rock bottom prices. If it works, then he looks like "The Redeemer". If not, they can cut the player and wash their hands of the situation. I don't buy it.


Your point?

[Cedric]

Your point?

So I wasn't the only one confused there?

[Eric_the_Red]

Agree with Razor and traderumor 100%

If I limited my entertainment to people I agreed with 100% of the time, I would be amish.

Where did I say I limit my entertainment to people I agreed with 100% of the time? Where did I even say I limit my entertinament to people I agreed with?


Your point?

Point being Mike Brown places saving money over the reputation of the organization and the types of people he employs. I bet I could open up a day care center and save a lot of money by hiring pedophiles on the cheap. In my world, character counts for something. I guess I'm alone on that island.

[SeeinRed]

Point being Mike Brown places saving money over the reputation of the organization and the types of people he employs. I bet I could open up a day care center and save a lot of money by hiring pedophiles on the cheap. In my world, character counts for something. I guess I'm alone on that island.


Quite stretch to compare Pacman with pedophiles and criminals playing football to pedophiles taking care of kids. Secondly, I don't think Mike Brown emphasises cheap as much as most would like to believe. I think he emphasises giving people a chance to turn their life around. The Bengals have ponied up plenty of money to talented players, especially the "reclamation projects" like Benson. Thirdly, I really don't think the Bengals had much of a reputation to uphold. They were/are known as a disastrous franchise with terrible personnel decisions. The criminal reputation was not a hard one to pin on them although I really think it is way more amplified to people around Cincinnati than anywhere else.

The Bengals have made some pretty bad choices even in recent memory, but for the sake of making the most of the resources they have I don't think they should stop taking calculated risks on these types of players. It is a very smart and cheap way to maximize talent/cost ratios. I already know there is going to be contention with the calculated risk statement, but there is no way you can convince me that there isn't serious contemplation over the risk/reward aspects of any player signed with known character issues.

[Hoosier Red]

Part of the problem I have in complaining about bringing in "guys with bad character" is that character in general is difficult for fans to assess.
The only information we receive about players off the field is when they're arrested. So do we know if a player has matured? If he was a decent guy who made a bad decision? Or does he become a number, 31 Bengals have been arrested since 2000. They're a team of bad guys.

If the Bengals actually do help turn around guys like Benson, Tank Johnson, or Frostee Rucker do they get any credit for it?

Not getting arrested is not something you're complemented on. You don't get awards for not getting arrested and being a decent human being.(And I'm not suggesting you should.)

So for the rest of these guys' career, they'll have the stigma of "was arrested on XX/XX/XX for XXXXXX."

Add that to the number of arrests the Bengals have had over 10 years, and you have a perception that is difficult to break and almost impossible because there are no positive images that are as strong as a number of arrests.

[Hoosier Red]

Quite stretch to compare Pacman with pedophiles and criminals playing football to pedophiles taking care of kids.

It's not as serious as Eric's example, but Eric does have a point. Ultimately entertainment is selling image just as a day care is selling safety of the children being cared for.
And for many people, being able to identify with the entertainer is an important aspect of that image. Pacman damages the Bengals ability to do that.

[Hoosier Red]

One last point. I apologize, there have been a lot of different things brought up and I like this discussion.

For those who are against this signing, thinking it either a) shows Mike Brown is just dumpster diving because he's cheap, b) doesn't care about character, and Pacman Jones is a bad character which will negatively impact the team or c) Pacman Jones is a dispicable human being who shouldn't be allowed on an NFL field.

Imagine that Pacman is in fact sorry for what he's done, has made amends with those he has wronged in the past, and is dedicated to a new and better life. Imagine that he will be both a good citizen and a good teammate.
How would we know? Would you ever believe?

Imagine that Mike Brown and Marvin Lewis have in fact discovered a trait in players that have been arrested which allows them to see who will be good teammates, productive citizens, and will represent the city with pride.
How would we know?

The short term track record on players kept versus not, and on those signed versus not over the past few years has been promising. Guys like Frostee Rucker, Jonathan Joseph, Leon Hall, Cedric Benson, and Tank Johnson have been kept, guys like AJ Nicholson have not.

Certainly guys like Rey Maualuga bear watching. He has said all the right things, entered rehab which was apparantly necessary, but how would we know if he's the right one to keep?

[SeeinRed]

It's not as serious as Eric's example, but Eric does have a point. Ultimately entertainment is selling image just as a day care is selling safety of the children being cared for.
And for many people, being able to identify with the entertainer is an important aspect of that image. Pacman damages the Bengals ability to do that.


I don't have a problem with his point, but the example is rather rediculous. I do disagree that the overall image of this team is tarnished by this signing. He hasn't made the team yet, nor is it a lock that he will. It is basically an extended tryout.

Sure, the team isn't held in the same esteem as say New England, but the Bengals haven't tried to covertly video an opposing team's practice or the coaches to pick up plays. Indianapolis has been accused of pumping in crown noise to try and amplify the home field advantage. The Steelers have recent legal problems.. I mean you can go all day.

I honestly believe, that if you can't root for the Bengals for the reasons stated, I really don't know how you can root for any NFL team. The NFL as a whole has just as bad of an image problem as the Bengals.

[Kingspoint]

Lately, the Bengals have been the best place in the NFL, as far as morals go.

Nobody has shown more forgiveness or had more guys turn their characters around than the Bengals.

If you want to root for "the Good Guys", then the Bengals are that franchise now.

The past is past. If someone's not willing to move on, they're worse than the "old" Bengals.

[1990REDS]

No thanks to pacman jones! Not that it has anything to do with his character, i just dont think hes that good anymore. You cant just take a year of from the nfl and be a productive player. Hopefully im wrong and he ends up being a solid addition to theteam and he stays out of trouble , but sorry guys i just dont see the storybook ending on this one.

[texasdave]

No thanks to pacman jones! Not that it has anything to do with his character, i just dont think hes that good anymore. You cant just take a year of from the nfl and be a productive player. Hopefully im wrong and he ends up being a solid addition to theteam and he stays out of trouble , but sorry guys i just dont see the storybook ending on this one.

Quite the contrary, I do see a storybook ending. Anyone remember "Fractured Fairy Tales"?

[traderumor]

No, but I'm not paying to watch them make the toothpaste. Entertainment dollars are spent differently than other income. (That said, if a large part of a corporation engaged in practices I didn't approve of, I wouldn't support them, like my stance on not buying Nike shoes).

I don't see what I am saying is any different than someone who liked Tiger Woods before the scandal saying "I can't root for him anymore, so I will cheer for (player X)." Player X may not have any public problems, but I believe we live in a fallen world and we all sin. I realize that nobody is perfect. But I have trouble endorsing unrepentent repeat offenders with my discretionary income.

Are players going to get arrested on every NFL team? Sure. But some teams try to limit these occurrences by not drafting potential problems (see Bryant, Dez). Not only do the Bengals draft potential problems (Rey) but they often sign players with past problems (Matt Jones & now Pacman). I don't think Mike Brown is doing this to rehabilitate them- he wants potential talent at rock bottom prices. If it works, then he looks like "The Redeemer". If not, they can cut the player and wash their hands of the situation. I don't buy it.Again, there is no difference between what you're saying and the Woods example. My point is that I disagree with making morality or personal opinions/worldview a "root for/against" decision rule. I know that there are people that look at it like you do. I just don't understand what one thing has to do with the other. For example, it makes me laugh when I hear people say they hate the Braves because Bobby Cox beat his wife. On the other hand, I love Harrison Ford's acting and enjoy his movies even though I disagree with his personal opinions. I think it is immoral for women to practice lesbianism, but I laugh at a good joke cracked by Ellen. And I will not lose a wink of sleep in the process.

[Cedric]

And people wonder why I still question anything around Mike Brown? The guy just can't give up control can he?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/morning-jolt/05/10/pacman.jones/index.html?eref=sihp

"Cincinnati's courtship of Adam Jones is winding to its official conclusion. The decision to bring Pacman in was not well received throughout the Bengals organization, though. According to an ESPN report, the decision was "hardly unanimous" inside the front office, and it wasn't a "slam dunk" among the coaches either. Bengals front office translation: Mike Brown really wanted Pacman, and he's the boss."

[Hoosier Red]

I don't know Zimmer put forth a pretty solid statement of support. Maybe he just did that because he was told to, but it would be odd for that to come from Zimmer instead of Marvin if it wasn't genuine.

I don't know maybe it blows up in Mike Brown's face. But what would that entail?

If he makes the team, makes contributions, but isn't arrested, does the signing become a success?

If he gets arrested in a month and is let go, does that mean the signing was a failure?

[Yachtzee]

I don't know Zimmer put forth a pretty solid statement of support. Maybe he just did that because he was told to, but it would be odd for that to come from Zimmer instead of Marvin if it wasn't genuine.

I don't know maybe it blows up in Mike Brown's face. But what would that entail?

If he makes the team, makes contributions, but isn't arrested, does the signing become a success?

If he gets arrested in a month and is let go, does that mean the signing was a failure?

I don't really get it myself. Mike Zimmer doesn't seem like a guy who is going to put his neck out for a guy unless he believes in him. Especially with his statements regarding talking to Deion Sanders about the guy. Sanders could always come out and and say "I never talked to Zimmer about Pacman. I don't know what he's talking about." Of course I don't always trust ESPN's coverage when it comes to the NFL, or any sports for that matter. They haven't always been impartial and unbiased. I don't think they've ever had anything good to say about Mike Brown.

They could be making a mountain out of a mole hill by taking something somebody said like, "Mike Brown held a meeting on Pacman and some guys expressed reservations, but Zimmer spoke up for him and Brown went with Zimmer's opinion." This gets spun into "Not a unanimous decision" and then taking an old Mike Brown quote about him seeing himself as a "redeemer" to make it look like he got Pacman when his staff didn't want the guy. We won't know what really went on because ESPN is using a "source" who isn't likely to come out and challenge things because he doesn't want to be the guy who caused trouble by talking to ESPN.

[GIDP]

That story sounds straight out of Paul Daughterys bag of fake sources

[Brutus]

Another arrogant decision by an organization that just doesn't get it. Pac Man Jones was bad two years ago and there is no way someone can convince me it's worth the risk.

It's just sad that the Bengals feel this is the best way to improve depth. That is what happens when Mike Brown owns your team.

It's arrogant to sign a player that has talent?

[Yachtzee]

That story sounds straight out of Paul Daughterys bag of fake sources

Only this time, it's Sports Illustrated pointing to a story from PFT, which in turn got it from ESPN. Ever since ESPN was bought by Disney, they've been a Mickey Mouse organization. (ba-dum-bum ching)

[GIDP]

Only this time, it's Sports Illustrated pointing to a story from PFT, which in turn got it from ESPN. Ever since ESPN was bought by Disney, they've been a Mickey Mouse organization. (ba-dum-bum ching)

Yea no doubt. The only person worth trusting from ESPN is Adam Schefter.

Unless they give names of people who were "against it" then the story is worthless to me. Its really easy to make up something and just saying "people inside".

"The reds are currently looking at Roy Oswalt as a fix for their rotation, per a source who is close to the front office"

See how easy that is? Paul Daughtery or people from ESPN might as well pick up on it right now.

[Cedric]

It's not really a stretch to see someone with common sense question this. A declining talent that nobody else wanted with a ton of baggage.

I don't personally care about his baggage. The guy just can't play anymore.

[Yachtzee]

It's not really a stretch to see someone with common sense question this. A declining talent that nobody else wanted with a ton of baggage.

I don't personally care about his baggage. The guy just can't play anymore.

Well, they worked him out a few times, so it seems they must feel he fits into the scheme somewhere. Again, I just don't see Zimmer sticking his neck out for the guy unless he saw something there.

[GIDP]

Im guessing more teams didnt want to take the chance on him. Bengals obviously have a history of takin these chances. Match made in heaven. Bengals have nothing to lose. They are already falsely labled as thugs so if anything having Pacman come back and play well will buy them plenty of good vibes through the league with other players. Bengals have a knock amongst players of being a pile of crap place to play. Having guys come here and speak well about it like Tank Johnson or Pacman Jones will go a long way in improving that.

[joshnky]

The guy just can't play anymore.

I feel fairly confident that if this proves true they'll cut him in training camp. To make the team, he will have to beat out either Trent or Ghee.

[Patrick Bateman]

It's not really a stretch to see someone with common sense question this. A declining talent that nobody else wanted with a ton of baggage.

I don't personally care about his baggage. The guy just can't play anymore.

Is it possible that after watching the work-outs that he's in better shape and actually can play.

He's not exactly a guy bereft of football talent. That's still in him, much like Josh Hamilton.

If he's actualyl back in shape and properly conditioned, why is it such a stretch that a guy that showed as much promise as he once did can't be a factor as a nickel guy or perhaps even experimental cover saftey?

[cincrazy]

I don't think it's worth it with Pacman. Best case scenario, he's a solid guy in the nickel. Is it really worth the roll of the dice? Can't we find someone else to be a solid, not spectacular, contributor, who doesn't have nearly enough baggage?

If Pacman Jones is a factor for the Bengals this season, I'll be stunned.

[Oxilon]

I don't think it's worth it with Pacman. Best case scenario, he's a solid guy in the nickel. Is it really worth the roll of the dice? Can't we find someone else to be a solid, not spectacular, contributor, who doesn't have nearly enough baggage?

If Pacman Jones is a factor for the Bengals this season, I'll be stunned.

Apparently you didn't see PacMan play when he was with Tennessee. I'd say you're underplaying the "best case scenario" part.

[Screwball]

Apparently you didn't see PacMan play when he was with Tennessee. I'd say you're underplaying the "best case scenario" part.

Yep, there's a pretty big difference between best case scenario and the more likely one. Jones being a decent DB in nickel coverage speaks more to the latter. A ball hawking 3rd CB with game-changing kick returns would be the former, IMO.

[Mario-Rijo]

Since this was initially Zimmer's idea I think I am gonna give it a chance. Well that and the upside of the deal. I have a much better feeling about it now than at first.