PDA

View Full Version : ODell Thurman suspended by the Bengals



KYPack
07-13-2006, 04:01 PM
In addition to drafting Ahmad Brooks with the 3rd round in the Supp draft, the Bengals announced that MLB O'Dell Thurman is suspended for the first 4 games of the '06 season.

The suspension is the result of failing to take a scheduled drug test, but it is the same as if he flunked it.

Maybe Brooks will get in the Bengal LB mix faster than was first thought.

BallHawk
07-13-2006, 04:08 PM
God, Marvin Lewis is running a correctional facility over there.

jack's smirking revenge
07-13-2006, 04:22 PM
Definitely interesting. Perhaps drafting Brooks was a requirement with Thurman's issue. Maybe Thurman's situation is worse than is being reported.

tyler

HarveyWallbangers
07-13-2006, 05:50 PM
Odell Thurman, Chris Henry, Brooks. I have my doubts about whether an organization can win a championship with questionable characters like this littered throughout the team.

Partial
07-13-2006, 06:17 PM
I don't. All three are straight up ballers.

Rastak
07-13-2006, 07:32 PM
I don't. All three are straight up ballers.


I disagree, whenh Thurman is suspended and Henry is in jail and Brooks hits stage 3 of the substance abuse program what are they left with?

I wouldn't want that collection of clowns on my team.

Fosco33
07-13-2006, 07:44 PM
Bengals have stripes.
Prisoners sometimes wear stripes.

Coincidence, I think not.

http://img6.picsplace.to/img6/23/cell-door-occ.jpg (http://picsplace.to/)

Row 67
07-13-2006, 07:47 PM
I think Marvin Lewis is a disciple of the Jerry Tarkanian philosophy of coaching. Get the crooks that can ball, win as much as you can. The trouble they make, for the most part, will be overlooked as long as you're winning.

Marvin probably thinking- heck, the last team I coached on, our star linebacker killed a guy. This stuff is nothing.

Rastak
07-13-2006, 07:50 PM
I think Marvin Lewis is a disciple of the Jerry Tarkanian philosophy of coaching. Get the crooks that can ball, win as much as you can. The trouble they make, for the most part, will be overlooked as long as you're winning.

Marvin probably thinking- heck, the last team I coached on, our star linebacker killed a guy. This stuff is nothing.


Actuaslly his buddys did, he just covered it up. I watche4d most of that trial
on court tv.

b bulldog
07-13-2006, 08:01 PM
Thurman would make the allass team.

hurleyfan
07-13-2006, 08:02 PM
I think Marvin Lewis is a disciple of the Jerry Tarkanian philosophy of coaching. Get the crooks that can ball, win as much as you can. The trouble they make, for the most part, will be overlooked as long as you're winning.

Marvin probably thinking- heck, the last team I coached on, our star linebacker killed a guy. This stuff is nothing.

It's all about the "brotha's / gangsta's / black-better-than-white-athelete-my-team-can-kick-yo-ass team, and the hell with sportsmanship!

The Shark was a big proponent of the "best athelete" available, and who gives a crap about his background?

Thurman was a "questionable personality" when he was chosen, but he could run, tackle, and it, so all the questionable HUMAN traits were overlooked.. just like Brooks,, he can run, hit and tackle, so we don;t care about what kind of past he has...

Just continue with the look the other way philosophy with America's win at all cost mentality!

Crap, may be I should take this over to JSO and get involved with FYI!

RashanGary
07-13-2006, 08:08 PM
That is why you dont' draft character risks high. Maurice Clarett, Marcus Vick ect...Let them go.

hurleyfan
07-13-2006, 08:15 PM
They can't help it Nick


The desire to win "no matter what / who we draft" is too much to resist..

Some of these players have a "history" that is questionable, but as long as they can hit / tackle, "we" look the other way..

Let's accept the sub-par human qualities, and accept these qualities as "acceptable" for our young kids growing up that it's OK to be a gangsta / criminal as long as you're a good athelete! OUCH

b bulldog
07-13-2006, 09:35 PM
Brooks falls into the same boat but where they got him, he is worth the risk imo.

b bulldog
07-13-2006, 09:35 PM
B must be having a bad day with this news

Bretsky
07-13-2006, 09:41 PM
B must be having a bad day with this news

I was wondering where in the H you've been lately ?

I figured the forum might rub this one in a bit harder after pounding the table for Green Bay to trade down a few spots and pick Thurman last year.

I'd still rather have Odell Thurman than Aaron Rodgers.

HarveyWallbangers
07-13-2006, 10:01 PM
Calling out Bretsky. Maybe we can stop hearing about how he wanted Thurman.
:lol:

Well, at least until he stays clean for a few years. This is why he didn't go in the first round. This guy is on his way to Onterrio Smith Lane. The next strike is a year.

Partial, three straight up ballers? Thurman is one strike away from a year-long suspension, the Bengals are looking to get rid of Henry, and we have no idea how good Brooks is. Very seldom does a team led by guys with poor character win championships.

Deputy Nutz
07-13-2006, 10:15 PM
YA YA, Bretsky why don't you put this in your pipe and smoke it!

Get it?

Smoke it? Pipe? Drugs? Suspension? HAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!Cough cough, HA!

Deputy Nutz
07-13-2006, 10:17 PM
I don't. All three are straight up ballers.

They are all jokers.
They all had character issues coming out of college, The bangles to a risk and failed misserably

Bretsky
07-13-2006, 10:19 PM
Calling out Bretsky. Maybe we can stop hearing about how he wanted Thurman.
:lol:

Well, at least until he stays clean for a few years. This is why he didn't go in the first round. This guy is on his way to Onterrio Smith Lane. The next strike is a year.

Partial, three straight up ballers? Thurman is one strike away from a year-long suspension, the Bengals are looking to get rid of Henry, and we have no idea how good Brooks is. Very seldom does a team led by guys with poor character win championships.

No no no; Bretsky is a stubborn old goat and would still take Odell Thurman over Aaron Rodgers. I'll go down hard with the Thurman ship if Odell ends in permanant drug rehab and Rodgers Shines. But I do hope Rodgers shines.

HarveyWallbangers
07-13-2006, 10:22 PM
No no no; Bretsky is a stubborn old goat and would still take Odell Thurman over Aaron Rodgers. I'll go down hard with the Thurman ship if Odell ends in permanant drug rehab and Rodgers Shines. But I do hope Rodgers shines.

You are like my buddy who was a huge Darryl Strawberry fan growing up, and still is to this day. He even met the Straw That Stirs The Drink. He said he seemed like a nice guy.

Noodle
07-14-2006, 09:21 AM
Harvey, is your brother a coke dealer?

Back on point, I was in the Barrett Ruud camp, and, as time has unfolded, I have been proved right.

If we had picked Ruud instead of AR, we'd have had a guy who's pretty close to Hawk already locked in. That way, we could have picked up Leinart in this year's draft. And you bet I'd take a slightly less great linebacker prospect for a lot more talented QB prospect.

Bretsky would have blown it with his desire to bring in the human drama machine Thurman, but at least B was on the right track. And at long last, I have something to rub back in B's face when he points out how right he was about Chambers over Fergy.

chain_gang
07-14-2006, 09:42 AM
Nothing right now says leinart is any better than rodgers, look at the team Leinart had around him. How many have been drafted in the last few years. He's slow footed, doesn't seem to throw well on the run from the games I've seen, arm strength while somewhat overrated is in doubt, plus he would bolt green bay the first chance he gets. Leinart wants the warm weather, glamorous life, he'd be bored in Green Bay. Put Rodgers on the USC team the last few years and he'd be a top 10 pick easily. Put leinart on Rodgers last team at Cal and would he have been as good as Rodgers was? Debateable. I don't see that much of a difference between the two. However, I would have continued to groom Nall as our QB of the future. If nothing else because Rodgers will have too big of shoes to fill, being a first round pick following a HOF'er, let Nall be the scapegoat. Plus I would have liked to seen Marlin Jackson in Green and Gold, not thurman, not Ruud. Jackson is going to be a Star, more so than anyone else rated that high that the packers could have drafted.

HarveyWallbangers
07-14-2006, 10:28 AM
If we had picked Ruud instead of AR, we'd have had a guy who's pretty close to Hawk already locked in. That way, we could have picked up Leinart in this year's draft. And you bet I'd take a slightly less great linebacker prospect for a lot more talented QB prospect.

Ruud isn't even close to Hawk. If he was, he'd be projected to beat out the likes of Ryan Nece and Shelton Quarles in his second year. He has decent potential, but Ruud is closer to Brady Poppinga than A.J. Hawk. I'm not a big Leinart fan. He's in a great situation in Arizona, but I have my doubts on whether he can be a franchise QB.

Leinart + Ruud or Rodgers + Hawk? Probably close to a wash. Hard to judge though. We don't know if ANY of these guys are players at this point. Say what you will about Thurman, he at least showed he could be a solid starter last year. Whether he can stay off the drugs has always been the question.

Noodle
07-14-2006, 11:24 AM
Do folks seriously believe AR is the same caliber as Leinart? Leinart is bigger, stronger, more accurate, and has won some huge games -- even in the big one he lost, he played huge.

No way, I say we'd have been a lot better off with Leinart than with AR. And while I'll admit Ruud is not Hawk, don't harsh on him. A lot of his numbers are pretty close to Hawk's, and he has similar intangibles, if not buzz. And it's no shame to play behind an icon and pro bowler like Quarles at TB.

Of course, it's chicken crap to say we don't know yet, because of course we don't know yet, that's what forums are for!

Zool
07-14-2006, 11:26 AM
I think what he's saying is the ratio that Hawk is better than Ruud is greater than or equal to the ratio that Leinart is better than Rodgers. I'm not 100% sold that Leinart will be a lock as an all-pro. Only time will tell.

Partial
07-14-2006, 11:31 AM
Do folks seriously believe AR is the same caliber as Leinart? Leinart is bigger, stronger, more accurate, and has won some huge games -- even in the big one he lost, he played huge.

No way, I say we'd have been a lot better off with Leinart than with AR. And while I'll admit Ruud is not Hawk, don't harsh on him. A lot of his numbers are pretty close to Hawk's, and he has similar intangibles, if not buzz. And it's no shame to play behind an icon and pro bowler like Quarles at TB.

Of course, it's chicken crap to say we don't know yet, because of course we don't know yet, that's what forums are for!

but rodgers beat him

Partial
07-14-2006, 11:35 AM
Henry had a big rookie year. He is just a moron. Thurmann is a very good player. Good players, just young bitches. Give 'em 5 years, they'll grow up and be solid pros

wist43
07-14-2006, 11:49 AM
When it comes to these immature guys that are "character risks"... You have to look the guy in the eye and talk to him for a while and make up your own mind as to whether or not you think the guy will grow up or flame out.

Based on talent, for my money, Thurman was the pick - having never looked the guy in the eye.

Sometimes this is the kind of thing that matures a guy... other guys are punks down to their core and will be sellin crack when they're 45 years old. Each case is different and you have to look the guy in the eye and engage him on a personal level to get a good feel for whether he'll punk out or not.

Bretsky
07-14-2006, 10:39 PM
Harvey, is your brother a coke dealer?

Back on point, I was in the Barrett Ruud camp, and, as time has unfolded, I have been proved right.

If we had picked Ruud instead of AR, we'd have had a guy who's pretty close to Hawk already locked in. That way, we could have picked up Leinart in this year's draft. And you bet I'd take a slightly less great linebacker prospect for a lot more talented QB prospect.

Bretsky would have blown it with his desire to bring in the human drama machine Thurman, but at least B was on the right track. And at long last, I have something to rub back in B's face when he points out how right he was about Chambers over Fergy.

For the record I'm not admitting fault about Odell Thurman yet; he's a better player than Barrett Rudd. Only time will tell is he can get by his poor attitude; if he does we may seem him in multiple Pro Bowls.

Deputy Nutz
07-14-2006, 11:33 PM
Henry had a big rookie year. He is just a moron. Thurmann is a very good player. Good players, just young bitches. Give 'em 5 years, they'll grow up and be solid pros

HOMER!!!!

You can't play ball when your taking the fall!!!

Fritz
07-18-2006, 06:41 AM
Harvey, is your brother a coke dealer?

Back on point, I was in the Barrett Ruud camp, and, as time has unfolded, I have been proved right.

If we had picked Ruud instead of AR, we'd have had a guy who's pretty close to Hawk already locked in. That way, we could have picked up Leinart in this year's draft. And you bet I'd take a slightly less great linebacker prospect for a lot more talented QB prospect.

Bretsky would have blown it with his desire to bring in the human drama machine Thurman, but at least B was on the right track. And at long last, I have something to rub back in B's face when he points out how right he was about Chambers over Fergy.


Bretsky, our man Odell let us down. How are we supposed to crow about how smart we are when he won't be making any tackles for the first four games of the year?

I say we trade for him - send the Bungals Ahmad Carroll plus a get-out-of-jail-free card. And throw in Marvins Gardens.

For the record I'm not admitting fault about Odell Thurman yet; he's a better player than Barrett Rudd. Only time will tell is he can get by his poor attitude; if he does we may seem him in multiple Pro Bowls.