Are Teams FINALLY Taking a Stand?

[Patler]

Obviously not a pivotal player, but from NFL.com.....



Dolphins cut DT Evans following arrest Click here to find out more!
NFL.com wire reports


MIAMI (June 28, 2007) -- Miami Dolphins defensive tackle Fred Evans, arrested over the weekend for refusing to leave a taxi on South Beach and for fighting with officers, was released by the team.

Evans played in one game as a rookie last season with the Dolphins.

Police twice used a Taser gun June 23 on Evans in an attempt to subdue the 6-foot-4, 305-pound player, according to the arrest report. Officers said they asked Evans to leave the taxi and, after he refused, they attempted to put him in handcuffs. He allegedly resisted, leading to the scuffle.

Evans was charged with multiple counts of battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting with violence, along with single counts of disorderly intoxication and trespassing. One officer was allegedly bitten on the wrist, and a female officer sustained scrapes on her left knee, police said.

"We will not condone this type of behavior," Dolphins coach Cam Cameron said in a statement released June 23. "I assure everyone it will be dealt with seriously."

[GrnBay007]

Taking a stand? ....or dumping them quickly and trying to replace them rather than having them sit through a suspension?

Either way, I'm glad there are starting to be some consequences for the illegal behavior.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Taking a stand? The dude was a 7th round pick in 2006 and played 1 game for them. He's a nobody that likely wouldn't have made the team. If Chris Chambers had done the same thing, you can be assured they wouldn't be doing the same thing.

[Brando19]

Yeah, this isn't taking a stand. This player wasn't worth the headache the Dolphins would suffer.

[Patler]

I meant with the Bears and Tank, now this guy, two teams have not hemmed and hawed. They were decisive and released the player within days. When has that happened in the past? When has GB ever done it?

This is exactly what needs to happen if players are to be brought in line. Swift response from the teams.

[retailguy]

I meant with the Bears and Tank, now this guy, two teams have not hemmed and hawed. They were decisive and released the player within days. When has that happened in the past? When has GB ever done it?

This is exactly what needs to happen if players are to be brought in line. Swift response from the teams.

So we forget about the previous incidents with the bears when they "stuck" with Tank?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Outside of Barnett (which may or may not be overblown, and an incident not worth cutting him), which incidents have Green Bay? I remember them cutting James Lofton, and it turned out they shouldn't have. It's always been easy for teams to "take a stand" against meaningless players. I think the fact that the team can now be punished if players misbehave is the real onus for them possibly "taking a stand" against better players.

[Patler]

Outside of Barnett (which may or may not be overblown, and an incident not worth cutting him), which incidents have Green Bay? I remember them cutting James Lofton, and it turned out they shouldn't have. It's always been easy for teams to "take a stand" against meaningless players. I think the fact that the team can now be punished if players misbehave is the real onus for them possibly "taking a stand" against better players.

I agree that it is the possibility of punishment that has "encouraged" the teams react more quickly. Whatever the reason, they are, and that is good.

In the past the teams feared the Union. As a result nothing was ever done until long after any trial, plea, whatever. And then often it was the team enacting a minor fine, and saying that punishment was up to the courts, not them. It didn't seem to matter how insignificant the player was.

This is different. A couple teams have reacted much sooner than they ever have in the past, probably because the league has told them the league will back them. I for one will be interested in seeing if others do, too. If more and more players find themselves unemployed shortly after run-ins with legal authorities, they might think twice.

But it doesn't have to be a firing. Why not fine Barnett just for being in a situation that got him arrested and not "defusing" it as MM said they are instructed to?

The Packers have had their share of players with legal predicaments:

Lofton
Ivery
Mossy Cade
Chmura
Antonio Freeman
Green (more than once)
Gilbert Brown
Ahmad Carroll
Tyrone Williams
Davenport
Barnett

Those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head.

[Patler]

Outside of Barnett (which may or may not be overblown, and an incident not worth cutting him), which incidents have Green Bay? I remember them cutting James Lofton, and it turned out they shouldn't have. It's always been easy for teams to "take a stand" against meaningless players. I think the fact that the team can now be punished if players misbehave is the real onus for them possibly "taking a stand" against better players.

I agree that it is the possibility of punishment that has "encouraged" the teams react more quickly. Whatever the reason, they are, and that is good.

In the past the teams seemed to fear the Union. Letting things "run their course" was a typical sort of response that I recall. As a result nothing was ever done until long after any trial, plea, whatever. And then often it was the team enacting a minor fine, and saying that punishment was up to the courts, not them. It didn't seem to matter how insignificant the player was.

This is different. A couple teams have reacted much sooner than they ever have in the past, probably because the league has told them the league will back them. I for one will be interested in seeing if others do, too. If more and more players find themselves unemployed shortly after run-ins with legal authorities, they might think twice.

But it doesn't have to be a firing. Why not fine Barnett just for being in a situation that got him arrested and not "defusing" it as MM said they are instructed to?

The Packers have had their share of players with legal predicaments:

Lofton
Ivery
Mossy Cade
Chmura
Antonio Freeman
Green (more than once)
Gilbert Brown
Ahmad Carroll
Tyrone Williams
Davenport
Barnett

Those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head.

[GrnBay007]

I'm drawing a blank. What were the legal problems with Antonio Freeman?

[retailguy]

I'm drawing a blank. What were the legal problems with Antonio Freeman?

It was in 2000. Here's a couple of blurbs I found. Pretty minor compared with the things going on today...

http://archive.profootballweekly.com/content/archives/features_2000/spin_122700.asp

Antonio Freeman
Brett Favre said he believes the enigmatic Antonio Freeman wants to be a part of the Packers despite offbeat actions that might indicate otherwise. Freeman’s season has been full of fines, missed meetings and legal battles, but Favre remains supportive, saying, "I believe Free wants to be part of this football team. I’m the quarterback, and he’s our go-to receiver. We need him on this football team."

Freeman was benched for last Sunday’s season finale for reportedly missing two Saturday meetings. He also was fined $10,000 by the league for slapping the ball out of an official’s hand and $9,000 by head coach Mike Sherman for being tardy after the bye week. Several traffic run-ins further tarnished his image.

PFW: Is Freeman’s situation salvageable at all?

Buchsbaum: It’s always salvageable, but he is making things very difficult for everyone. In games, he’s still a good receiver, but after what happened, he leaves a little to be desired off the field.

Agrest: Mike Sherman deserves a lot of credit for cracking the whip on Freeman, because what this guy is doing is disgraceful. He could have cost his team a shot at the playoffs. Freeman is still good player, but he’s definitely lost something since signing that big contract a couple of years ago, and there are more than a few football people who think the two are related. Favre better get in Freeman’s face and help him get his act together.

http://www2.jsonline.com/packer/news/sep00/packnot21092000.asp
Close call
Freeman confirmed a report by a local radio station that he was pulled over for speeding Tuesday and received a written warning.

Since no citation was given, it is not expected to affect his probation stemming from a December incident in which he and former teammate Charles Jordan were charged with obstructing officers for switching vehicles after an auto accident.

Freeman said news of the warning is being blown out of proportion.

"I was speeding," he said. "I was pulled over. Why is this such big news? Maybe it goes back to the accident. I don't know. It rubbed me the wrong way. A warning?"

[Patler]

I believe the auto accident was in a municipal parking lot or something. As I recall, Freeman hit another car, and there was a fair amount of damage. He switched cars with Jordan, but people had seen it all happen. When the police investigated, both insisted that Jordan was driving. Their story unraveled a couple days later, leading to the obstruction charges.

I agree, it was not a big deal compared to many of the things we see right now, but it kind of was at the time, mostly because he had some other odd things that happened about that time, leading to rumors about what the root cause was for his behavior.


The one I thought was kind of funny at the time was when Ahman Green slid off an entrance ramp in a snow and ice storm. He was driving a 4-wheel drive, so just drove himself out and went home. But, he had lost his license plate when he hit a guardrail as he slid off the road. He was charged with fleeing the scene of an accident, because state law requires that you immediately report an accident that causes damage to public property, and Green had damaged the guardrail! I think many of us might have been caught on that one! I think that was dropped after Green paid a small fine and did some service or something.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I believe the auto accident was in a municipal parking lot or something. As I recall, Freeman hit another car, and there was a fair amount of damage. He switched cars with Jordan, but people had seen it all happen. When the police investigated, both insisted that Jordan was driving. Their story unraveled a couple days later, leading to the obstruction charges.

Did he hit another car? I remember their car hitting a traffic light or sign, but I could be wrong.

[Patler]

I believe the auto accident was in a municipal parking lot or something. As I recall, Freeman hit another car, and there was a fair amount of damage. He switched cars with Jordan, but people had seen it all happen. When the police investigated, both insisted that Jordan was driving. Their story unraveled a couple days later, leading to the obstruction charges.

Did he hit another car? I remember their car hitting a traffic light or sign, but I could be wrong.

I remember it as another car, but I could be wrong too.

[esoxx]

He hit a light pole in the parking lot of Eve's Supper Club.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I don't think teams are taking a stand. The only player of any significance who was cut because of behavior have been Tank and he was a repeat offender. Look at he bangles, they have a lot of players with legal problems that are still on the team.

If your a good player, I think the team will generally only take a stand if the league takes a stand and suspends the player.

[Patler]

I don't think teams are taking a stand. The only player of any significance who was cut because of behavior have been Tank and he was a repeat offender. Look at he bangles, they have a lot of players with legal problems that are still on the team.

If your a good player, I think the team will generally only take a stand if the league takes a stand and suspends the player.

That's true, but most of the Bengals situations were before the league proclamation about behavior, although I think the last one was after it. I'm not talking about the past, I'm looking to the future. I don't expect all the teams to change instantaneously, but I don't remember any team cutting players as quickly as these last two.

We'll have to wait and see what the rest of the summer brings, to see if a change is in the wind, or not.

[GrnBay007]

Goodell expected to punish Dolphins' Porter
FOXSports.com

Joey Porter .... come on down! You're probably the next contestant on the NFL's new game show "How long will this guy be suspended for." Roger Goodell is expected to take action soon for Porter's assault on Levi Brown earlier this year.

[Scott Campbell]

That's true, but most of the Bengals situations were before the league proclamation about behavior, although I think the last one was after it.


I think Pacman's behavior occured before the league clampdown too.

[pbmax]

It used to be conventional wisdom that teams couldn't cut a player without due process (either Commissioner review or arbitrator/Special Master) even of they ran afoul of the law.

But Goodell has re-emphasized that teams can act, as the standard players contract allows for it to be terminated by the team if the player's actions reflect poorly on the team.

Its pretty broad language (if the quote I read is accurate) and its amazing teams didn't exercise it before. For this reason, I think Rozelle and Tags might have encouraged teams to wait for Commissioner review, and Goodell has said don't wait for me.

[MadtownPacker]

I think Pacman's behavior occurred before the league clampdown too.
Considering he single-handedly caused the league clampdown I would say so.
:lol: