the Boston story

[football karma]

I talked yesterday to an old work friend who has some very tight connections in the Cards organization. What he tells me I trust –

He told me the deal on Boston was that beginning towards the end of 2001 Boston began missing early morning team meetings. For the 2002 season prior to his injury, he was missing early morning meetings regularly – something like 15 meetings. McGinnis got in his face, Sullivan got all over him – no improvement. In fact, reacted with indifference. It got to the point that the team had to send someone over to his house to make sure he was at morning team meetings. Coaches were almost happy to see him injured because it eliminated a huge distraction.


Take it for what its worth.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by en fuego
I talked yesterday to an old work friend who has some very tight connections in the Cards organization. What he tells me I trust –

He told me the deal on Boston was that beginning towards the end of 2001 Boston began missing early morning team meetings. For the 2002 season prior to his injury, he was missing early morning meetings regularly – something like 15 meetings. McGinnis got in his face, Sullivan got all over him – no improvement. In fact, reacted with indifference. It got to the point that the team had to send someone over to his house to make sure he was at morning team meetings. Coaches were almost happy to see him injured because it eliminated a huge distraction.


Take it for what its worth.

If this is true, than good riddince. He sounds more and more like a team cancer.

 

[Ryanwb]

Re: Re: the Boston story

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
If this is true, than good riddince. He sounds more and more like a team cancer.

I agree, if you truely look at all the great cancers in the world of sports...not too many of them ever win the World Championship let alone ever get there. For all of Boston's talent sounds like he left a lot to be desired

 

[Cheesebeef]

Agree - that if this all true then good riddance - still think that we could have gotten something for him though and ultimately stuck it to him by tagging him and somewhat deciding where he could have gone.

 

[seesred]

The trouble with tagging him if no one bought in (And we could not tag with intention of trading), we would be stuck with a 5 million dollar cancer. And for that there is no known cure!

GBR

 

[Cheesebeef]

Originally posted by seesred
The trouble with tagging him if no one bought in (And we could not tag with intention of trading), we would be stuck with a 5 million dollar cancer. And for that there is no known cure!

GBR

we could have then taken the tag off - that is allowed.

 

[Lex]

No kidding

This Boston stuff is old news. Reporters of that old news were called every derogotory name in the book by people on this forum way back when.

The reason we didn't franchise him, is because nobody would have paid him that 5+million, that the tag carried. We would have been STUCK WITH HIM for ANOTHER YEAR of CANCER, SUSPENSION, and NO PRODUCTION.

We offered Boston more money than he took in SD. He would have done ANYTHING to get out of here. And did.

Admit it people.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Re: No kidding

Originally posted by Lex
This Boston stuff is old news. Reporters of that old news were called every derogotory name in the book by people on this forum way back when.

The reason we didn't franchise him, is because nobody would have paid him that 5+million, that the tag carried. We would have been STUCK WITH HIM for ANOTHER YEAR of CANCER, SUSPENSION, and NO PRODUCTION.

We offered Boston more money than he took in SD. He would have done ANYTHING to get out of here. And did.

Admit it people.

First of all - I don't think that anything Ryan posted should be accpeted as fact - it is rumour and purely that - now I said if true - then I'm glad he;s off the team, it still doesn't excuse us for not even trying to see what we could have gotten for trade considering we could rescind the tag whenever we wanted to. Why can't you admit that?

Other players have been cancers on their teams (Joey Galloway, Sean Gilbert - hell - he sat out a FULL YEAR and the Skins still got TWO 1st round picks for him from the Panthers) or threatened to retire (our own Aeneas Williams) and those teams still got something in return for them.

By the way, your conetnion that we offered Boston more money than he took in San Diego is a manipulation of the numbers and doesn't take into consideration guaranteed money - and actually, besides us saying that Boston would be paid like one of the top receivers in thegame - DID WE EVER SEE THE ACTUAL CONTRACT THE CARDS WERE OFFERING? No - we heard speculation and nothing else if my mind serves me correctly.

 

[Ryanwb]

First of all - I don't think that anything Ryan posted should be accpeted as fact

Normally that would be true, but I didn't post this one

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

all this makes no difference. Bottom line is the Cards let a pro bowl WR walk away from the team with nothing, let me repeat -NOTHING-in return.

Call him a cancer, call him a drug user, whatever you want to but it seems to me everyone was singing a different tune a while back. He had one phenomenal year, was injured last year, and odds are that he will have another phenomenal year this year. There is absolutly zero justification for letting the best player from a 5-11 team walk with nothing in return.

I could care less if he missed morning team meetings or not!

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
all this makes no difference. Bottom line is the Cards let a pro bowl WR walk away from the team with nothing, let me repeat -NOTHING-in return.

Call him a cancer, call him a drug user, whatever you want to but it seems to me everyone was singing a different tune a while back. He had one phenomenal year, was injured last year, and odds are that he will have another phenomenal year this year. There is absolutly zero justification for letting the best player from a 5-11 team walk with nothing in return.

I could care less if he missed morning team meetings or not!

You could care less, but I would say any rational NFL team would.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Not really. Fact is, a lot of players do this type of thing and when injured and rehabbing arent around all that often. Big deal he missed a few morning meetings.

Are you gonna contend the Cards should cut all the guys who have been missing the off-season workout programs? Or the veterns who miss the mini-camps?

Fact is that this is another 'smokescreen' to divert attention away from letting Boston walk with nothing in return.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
Not really. Fact is, a lot of players do this type of thing and when injured and rehabbing arent around all that often. Big deal he missed a few morning meetings.

Are you gonna contend the Cards should cut all the guys who have been missing the off-season workout programs? Or the veterns who miss the mini-camps?

Fact is that this is another 'smokescreen' to divert attention away from letting Boston walk with nothing in return.

No, because offseason workouts aren't mandatory....meetings are. Are really so blind that you can't see how big of a problem Boston not showing up can cause? And according to the first post it wasn't a "FEW" meetings, it was a bunch of meetings.

It sounds like that you could find out that he raped someone and you would still think letting him go was a mistake (basically it raises questions about your objectivity).

 

[pinnacle]

krang..I am going to make you apologize again for jumping on my case early last season when I began posting my boston hates it here threads

at least I was right about something for once!

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
No, because offseason workouts aren't mandatory....meetings are. Are really so blind that you can't see how big of a problem Boston not showing up can cause? And according to the first post it wasn't a "FEW" meetings, it was a bunch of meetings.

It sounds like that you could find out that he raped someone and you would still think letting him go was a mistake (basically it raises questions about your objectivity).

Is Boston missing meetings as bad as Jake reportedly not watching film?

If this info is accurate, then I would say good riddance as well BUT cheesebeef makes a very good point. The Cards should have done the SMART thing and not the RIGHT thing. They should have tagged and traded him or tagged him (they still had the transition which carries a cheaper price at their disposal) and hoped someone offered up the picks for him.

The top teams do the SMART thing. The bottom Teams try to do the RIGHT thing.

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by pinnacle
krang..I am going to make you apologize again for jumping on my case early last season when I began posting my boston hates it here threads

at least I was right about something for once!

I was saying the same thing and I swear krang would have kicked my ass if I had been in front of him over it.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
No, because offseason workouts aren't mandatory....meetings are. Are really so blind that you can't see how big of a problem Boston not showing up can cause? And according to the first post it wasn't a "FEW" meetings, it was a bunch of meetings.

It sounds like that you could find out that he raped someone and you would still think letting him go was a mistake (basically it raises questions about your objectivity).

First off, you know nothing of which you speak. The thread started with a rumour! If you want to base your entire arguement on that, thats your perogative. I prefer to base mine on fact-which is the Cards let Bosotn leave with no compensation i return. Second, and my point is-if you care to read the entire post before repsonding- is that it was a huge mistake to let him walk. Are there things you and I dont know about the situation? Of course. But the bottom line-the facts- are that they let him go with nothing in return, and if you believe that to be "ok" then perhaps you should very slowly take your thumb and fore finger gingerly press it against the rim of those rose-colored glasses and remove them! Talk about not being objective!!!


Oh and of course if he was CONVICTED of raping someone then yes by all means he should be released, jailed, or worse! But how does question my morals have anything to do with the Cards making a bonehead move?

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
First off, you know nothing of which you speak. The thread started with a rumour! If you want to base your entire arguement on that, thats your perogative. I prefer to base mine on fact-which is the Cards let Bosotn leave with no compensation i return. Second, and my point is-if you care to read the entire post before repsonding- is that it was a huge mistake to let him walk. Are there things you and I dont know about the situation? Of course. But the bottom line-the facts- are that they let him go with nothing in return, and if you believe that to be "ok" then perhaps you should very slowly take your thumb and fore finger gingerly press it against the rim of those rose-colored glasses and remove them! Talk about not being objective!!!


Oh and of course if he was CONVICTED of raping someone then yes by all means he should be released, jailed, or worse! But how does question my morals have anything to do with the Cards making a bonehead move?

I could careless what you think. I will criticize the team as I see fit, and I think the team SHOULD HAVE gotten something for him.

We could've tagged him and been STUCK with him and his whining and bitching. That truly would have been a headache.

Pinnacle: YOU WERE RIGHT! And I was wrong. I wish that I would've realized that at the time (Skkorp said it, AJ said, and you said it).

 

[pinnacle]

Krang: I guess rumors and such are always hard to count on..but Boston was so completely strange acting at training camp last year that is was hard to believe...but it is hard to believe this stuff unless you see if for yourself..behaviour continued for the 1st few games..

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by pinnacle
Krang: I guess rumors and such are always hard to count on..but Boston was so completely strange acting at training camp last year that is was hard to believe...but it is hard to believe this stuff unless you see if for yourself..behaviour continued for the 1st few games..

That's WHY I believe it.

Every single person who mentioned Boston said he was a total jerk at training camp (you included). And many people made points about his sideline behavior (which was apparent to anyone who watched....I thought he was frustrated).

I knew he had a drug problem before he was arrested. I heard something from a classmate of mine that I don't want to say for fear of slandering Boston. The guy said some things that are right on the money now so I tend to believe it.

 

[Cardiac]

A small point that everyone seems to miss; the only team that really showed an interest in DB was San Diego. The Falcons and Redskins were rumored to have interest but we can tell by their actions that they didn't. Both teams gave up a 1st rd draft pick for players with lesser talent instead of going after DB. Both teams layed out good money for Price and Coles so it wasn't a money thing. You have to consider that these teams first choices were to give up A FIRST ROUND PICK INSTEAD OF SIGNING BOSTON. Now given this FACT how much interest do you think would we have gotten for DB if he had been tagged. Yes I know the argument is that it only takes one team but no one can assume that we could have gotten anything for him.

It seems what many play down as rumors must have been fairly common knowledge in the NFL. I make this statement because the only team that showed any interest in him was the Chargers. None of us can assume they would have given up anything for him. Plus Marty seems to turn a blind eye to character, so good luck to him and the Chargers as they deal with this spoiled brat some on this board call the best WR in the NFL.

The Cards were not going to have this soap opra drag out during the FA period by playing the "Now you're tagged, now you're not" game. Remember at this time they had hopes of signing Colvin, Holliday, Jackson, a QB, a DT, obviously O-line depth and LB depth and we can assume an eye towards Emmitt. Tagging DB would have tied up too much money to carry on with the rest of their offseason plans. Why even bother playing this silly game when the odds were no one was going to bite on DB. Daily headlines about this situation would have been counter productive. Either he signed the no guarenteed money offer or he moved on, but the team wasn't going to have this punk dominate their headlines the entire offseason and hinder the rest of their FA plans.

So yes good ridance to bad rubbage and if by chance DB stays injury free and gets his head together than god bless him. Maybe as Chris Carter once showed the class to thank the Eagles for giving him his wake up call DB will do the same thing a couple of years from now.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by AZCB34
I was saying the same thing and I swear krang would have kicked my ass if I had been in front of him over it.

I'm not a big guy....I might have kicked you in the balls and ran!

Seriously though, I hoped that finally we could have a star that wasn't a complete jackass, and I will admit in this instance I didn't want to admit what was clearly going on.

He didn't want to be here, he was using drugs, and he was getting too big for his own good.

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
I'm not a big guy....I might have kicked you in the balls and ran!

Seriously though, I hoped that finally we could have a star that wasn't a complete jackass, and I will admit in this instance I didn't want to admit what was clearly going on.

He didn't want to be here, he was using drugs, and he was getting too big for his own good.

The biggest problem is, the star players are often the ones who are the jackasses because they are told so often their **** doesn't stink and pretty soon, they start to believe it. They are held to a completely different set of rules and they begin to beilieve they will get away with anything. Some of them don;t even work all that hard yet their talent is so impressive, they still stand head and shoulders above the rest.

That is why the argument is always against 100% good character since people think you have to have a rebel cornholio to get your team over the top. Why? Because all too often it is the top tier players who are the jackasses yet their talent is what can propel teams over the top.

The Cards must start to keep their top players otherwise they will continue to be perennial also-rans.

 

[Cardiac]

Originally posted by AZCB34
The biggest problem is, the star players are often the ones who are the jackasses because they are told so often their **** doesn't stink and pretty soon, they start to believe it. They are held to a completely different set of rules and they begin to beilieve they will get away with anything. Some of them don;t even work all that hard yet their talent is so impressive, they still stand head and shoulders above the rest.

That is why the argument is always against 100% good character since people think you have to have a rebel cornholio to get your team over the top. Why? Because all too often it is the top tier players who are the jackasses yet their talent is what can propel teams over the top.

The Cards must start to keep their top players otherwise they will continue to be perennial also-rans.

ACZB34, I usually agree with your points of view but I do have to disagree with you here. In the NFL team morale and chemistry play a huge part in a teams success. For every Irving there is and Emmitt and Jerry Rice and Brett Favre. Just because someone has elite talent doesn't mean they have to be an ass. I think it is usually the opposite. Players that make a big difference for the long term are usually leaders on the team. Doing drugs, skipping meetings and caring only about themselves are not Hall of Fame attributes.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Originally posted by Cardiac
A small point that everyone seems to miss; the only team that really showed an interest in DB was San Diego.

The Cards were not going to have this soap opra drag out during the FA period by playing the "Now you're tagged, now you're not" game. Remember at this time they had hopes of signing Colvin, Holliday, Jackson, a QB, a DT, obviously O-line depth and LB depth and we can assume an eye towards Emmitt. Tagging DB would have tied up too much money to carry on with the rest of their offseason plans. Why even bother playing this silly game when the odds were no one was going to bite on DB.

Okay - I just have a bit of problem with those two paragraphs. DB signed the first place he went for a good chunk of change - besides, we know that Baltimore had expressed interest - and who's to say no one else was interested - did we know the Cards were interested in Hodgins? Darling? Did we know the Pats were that interested in Colvin - it seemed to me that that one came out of nowhere - hell even with Dexter Jackson - interest wasn't known in him until he scheduled his trip and then there was more coverage because of the bidding war with the Steelers. There's a lot of things that we don't know about player interest and there are things we do, but to to point blank say no one was else was interested can't be supported by facts.

On to your next claim - let's see - right now we are 17.5 million dollars under the cap - say we had signed Colvin and his cap figure was around 6 million (and that's high -probably around 5) - that shaves the cap down to 11.5 million - okay so are you telling me that we would have still gone after Holliday as well and kept after him when it was appraent he wouldn't have wanted to be here if he had his choice? Also did they really think they would have had a shot at getting BOTH OF THE TOP RATED PASS RUSHERS IN FREE AGENCY? Even if that were the case - okay - they got both and planned that way - there's another 4 million on the cap - so that's 7.5 million - now if they had tagged Boston - they still could have gotten ALL THOSE GUYS YOU MENTIONED WE DID SIGN as well as having the cap roomn to sign Colvin and Holliday and still had 2.5 left over - now if no one bit after the draft - then you take the tag off, giving yourself cap room for the rookies as well as room to go find a WR at June 1st -(especially considering that we have appeared to make no effort to do so during the pre-draft FA period - which I cannot believe) but at least make the earnest try to get something - saying something wouldn't have been there when no one even tried to see is a self-defeating argument.

But now what it boils down to it seems for you is that the Cards didn't want to deal with a situation that could have been sticky, yet fruitful in some ways so they could go get al those other free agents, who subsequently turned them down - WELL THAT SOUNDS GREAT TO ME! Sorry, IMO, I just can't understand the reasoning in defending the non-use of the tag.