Lucky Luciano

you seriously don't think picking up weak players in rounds 2 and 3 makes any financial difference when you sign them? i have to also ask why our scouting staff is spending so much time at these smaller schools? since 2002 angie has picked 5 players from small schools on the first day. that is not even counting the first day REACHES where he could have picked up a player in all probability ROUNDS later. 2002 second pick (3rd rd) in the draft - r. williams - tuskegee 2nd day picks - louisiana tech, pitt?, geogia southern, delaware 2003 3rd pick in the draft - tillman - la lafayette - certainly picked a round or 2 early 2nd day pick 6th rd - b. forsey - boise state. could he have been a walk on? at this point in the draft who knows. 2004 3rd round pick barrian - fresno state? 2nd round pick tank johnson a reach? 2nd day picks - maryland, pitt, miami fl 2005 2nd pick in the draft bradley - certainly a reach with this pick. could have gotten him a round or two later. 2nd day 6th rd pick la monroe again this is the place you reach so questionable as to being a bad pick. 2006 1st pick in draft (rd 2) manning - abilene christian. small school AND a reach. could have gotten him a round or two later. devin hester - certainly a reach at this spot no matter how he turned out. 2007 2nd pick bazuin - central mich, small school AND a reach in the 2nd round. g. wolfe northern illinois - a small school AND a reach. could have certainly gotten him a round or two later. michael okwo a REACH. 2nd day 4th rd pick j. beekman - a reach. kevin payne la monroe rd 5 - a reach AND small school. corey graham new hampshire 2008 2nd pick forte - a reach. 3rd pick bennet - probably a reach. 2nd day - bowman a reach, and davis? still scratching my head over that one another reach? another interesting note: 5 players from pitt and penn state picked an not a one worth a damn. where are you getting this stuff? 1. each of the last TWO coaches and their staffs were starting out pinching PENNIES!! because they gave them a raise that was comparable to the rest of the nfl after their first meager coaching terms were nearly up is moot. in fact the only REAL coaching money deal WAS done by mikey when he ponied up to pay the best prospect out there in wanny!! 2. paying for scouts? we went through this last time we argued about this. have you since gathered a single fact as to how much we pay them compared to the rest of the league? also see below. 3. the training facility ALSO was put into effect by mikey in the 90's. that's around 10 years ago. 4. the stadium maybe? uhhh no. paid for by tax payers. 5. player salaries? and yet again, player salaries are paid for by the salary cap allowances. you CAN'T keep drafting the same position players every year in the same draft slots no matter how you look at it. if you have a big need ok draft one higher and balance the rest of the team out by getting what you need on both sides of the ball. offensive linemen have been a need since angie CAME here!! yet he refuses to draft a guard higher than the the 5th round (almost all are in the 6th or 7th round) with the exception of metcalf who is crap. not cheap? does your personnel usually leave for less money? hmmmmmm... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8060801681.html When Bobby DePaul, who was a coach in Joe Gibbs's first stint with the Redskins, reported to Chicago, he was given a limited budget, and limited time, to locate two assistants. That night he woke from his sleep, grabbed a nearby notepad and scribbled two words: Morocco Brown. Morocco Brown had been assistant director of pro personnel for the Chicago Bears since 2001, earning a reputation as a bright prospect, league sources said, and was someone the franchise did not want to lose. The Bears won two division titles and reached a Super Bowl with Brown in the front office; he was assigned 11 teams to scout as well as the Arena League. well, let's look at our personnel compared to some other teams in the nfl: BEARS – 6 college area scouts; 1 director of college scouting; 2 pro scouts; 1 director of pro scouting Jerry Angelo GM DePaul, Bobby - Director of Pro Personnel Dennard Wilson - pro scout Bears hire former Maryland DB Wilson - pro scout Gabriel, Greg - Director of College Scouting Rex Hogan – in the East, scouting area that includes North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York Chris Ballard in the Southwest Marty Barrett in the West Ted Monago in the Rockies and Plains Jeff Shiver in the Midwest Mark Sadowski in the Southeast COLTS – 6 area scouts; 2 regional scouts; 2 scouting assistants; 1 pro scout; 1 director of pro player personel; 1 director of player personel with 1 assistant; 1 sr. player personnel consultant; 1 player development admin. ever wonder why they draft well? Tom Telesco ......................Director of Player Personnel Dom Anile ................Sr. Consultant to Player Personnel Clyde Powers ..............Director of Pro Player Personnel David Caldwell ......................Western Regional Scout Todd Vasvari ............................Eastern Regional Scout Bob Ferguson ....Special Asst. to the Dir. of Player Personnel John Becker ..............................................Area Scout Ryan Cavanaugh ......................................Area Scout Mark Ellenz ..............................................Area Scout Bob Guarini..............................................Area Scout Byron Lusby ..............................................Area Scout Matt Terpening ..........................................Area Scout Kevin Rogers ..............................................Pro Scout J.W. Jordan ..................Salary Cap/Personnel Analyst Stefani Paul ..............Player Development Administrator Jamie Moore ..................................Scouting Assistant Jon Shaw ........................................Scouting Assistant Debbie Finn ......Asst. to the Director of Player Personnel RAMS - 7 scouts; 1 scouting assistant; 1 director/scouting admin; 1 vp player personel; 1 vp pro personnel; 1 director player personnel Tony Softli Vice President/Player Personnel Charley Armey Vice President/Pro Personnel Lawrence McCutcheon Director/Player Personnel Jack Faulkner Pro Personnel Adminstrator Debbie Pollom Director/Scouting Administration Dave Boller Scout Cary Conklin Scout Dick Daniels Scout Luke Driscoll Scout Mel Foels Scout Brad Holmes Scout John Mancini Scout Brandon Schwab Scouting Assistant TITANS - 6 scouts; 1 national supervisor of college scouting; 1 eastern director of college scouting; 1 scouting coordinator; 1 scouting consultant; 1 director of pro personel; 2 pro personnel assistants Lake Dawson Director of Pro Personnel C.O. Brocato National Supervisor of College Scouting Mike Ackerley Eastern Director of College Scouting Blake Beddingfield Scouting Coordinator Ray Biggs College Scout Johnny Meads College Scout Phil Neri College Scout Cole Proctor College Scout Richard Shelton College Scout Marvin Sunderland College Scout Jon Salge Pro Personnel Assistant Brandon Taylor Pro Personnel Assistant Bo Bolinger Scouting Consultant BUCS - 5 scouts; 1 national football scout; 1 director of college scouting; 1 director of football operations; 1 senior assistant; 2 pro scouts; 1 director of pro personnel; 1 senior consultant; 1 personnel consultant; 1 personnel executive Mark Arteaga Director of Football Operations Kevin Demoff Senior Assistant Mark Dominik Director of Pro Personnel Chet Franklin Senior Consultant Jim Gruden Personnel Consultant Byron Kiefer National Football Scout Shelton Quarles Pro Scout Justin Sheridan Pro Scout Dennis Hickey Director of College Scouting Tom Throckmorton College Scout Dominic Green College Scout Frank Dorazio College Scout Seth Turner College Scout Reggie Cobb College Scout Doug Williams Personnel Executive BILLS - 6 college scouts; 1 coordinator of college scouting; 1 vp assistant director of college scouting; 2 scout emeritus; 1 pro personnel coordinator; 1 blesto scout; 1 pro personnel analyst; 1 scouting assistant Tom Modrak Vice President of College Scouting Linda Bogdan Vice President/Assistant Director of College Scouting Doug Majeski Coordinator of College Scouting Brad Forsyth College Scout Joe Haering College Scout Shawn Heinlen College Scout Dave W. Smith College Scout Brian Fisher College Scout Tom Roth College Scout Bob Ryan Scout Emeritus Dave G. Smith Scout Emeritus Rob Hanrahan Pro Personnel Coordinator Matt Hand BLESTO Scout Kevin Meganck Pro Personnel Analyst Jacky Kosmowski Scouting Assistant GIANTS - 4 executive scouts; 5 scouts; 1 director of college scouting; 1 scout emeritus; 1 blesto scout; 1 director of pro personnel; 3 assistant of pro personnel; 1 football operations coordinator; 1 assistant gm Kevin Abrams Assistant General Manager David Gettleman Director of Pro Personnel Marc Ross Director of College Scouting Jerry Shay Executive Scout Ken Sternfeld Assistant Director of Pro Personnel Joe Collins Executive Scout Jeremiah Davis Executive Scout Steve Verderosa Executive Scout Steve Devine Scout Donnie Etheridge Scout Ryan Jones Scout Steve Malin Scout Chris Pettit Scout Chris Watts BLESTO Scout Jeremy Breit Pro Personnel Assistant Matt Shauger Pro Personnel Assistant Raymond J. Walsh, Jr. Director of Research and Development Matt Harriss Football Operations Coordinator Harry Hulmes Scout Emeritus STEELERS - 5 scouts (includes 1 dual role college/pro scout) 1 college scouting coordinator; 1 blesto scout; 1 college personnel; 1 player personnel; 1 director of football operations Kevin Colbert, Director of Football Operations Doug Whaley, Pro Personnel Coordinator Ron Hughes, College Scouting Coordinator Joe Greene, Special Assistant Mark Gorscak, College Scout Phil Kreidler, Pro/College Scout Kelvin Fisher, College Scout Bruce McNorton, College Scout Dan Rooney, College Scout Dave Petett , Blesto Scout Bill Nunn, College Personnel Luke Palko, Player Personnel Intern BROWNS - 9 scouts; 1 player personnel assistant college scout; 1 director player development; 1 director pro personnel Zac Bocian College Scout Jake Hallum Senior Scout Jim Jauch Associate Director, Pro Personnel Daniel Jeremiah National Scout Kevin Kelly College Scout, Midwest Richard Long College Scout, East Robert Morris College Scout, Southwest Chisom Opara College Scout, Southeast Pat Roberts National Scout Bobby Vega College Scout Bob Welton College Scout, West Football Support Staff Jerry Butler Director, Player Development Donovan Beidelschies Player Personnel Assistant/College Scout PACKERS - 7 scouts; 1 director of college scouting; 1 assistant director of college scouting; 1 college scouting coordinator; 2 directors of football operations; 2 pro personnel directors * John Dorsey, Director of College Scouting * Reggie McKenzie, Director - Football Operations * John Schneider, Director - Football Operations * Shaun Herock, Assistant Director of College Scouting (Midwest) * Lee Gissendaner, College Scout (East Coast) * Brian Gutekunst, College Scout (Southeast) * Alonzo Highsmith, College Scout (Southwest) * Lenny McGill, College Scout (Central Plains) * Sam Seale, College Scout (West Coast) * Jon-Eric Sullivan, College Scout (mid-South) * Richmond Williams, College Scout (National Football Scouting) * Tim Terry, Assistant Director of Pro Personnel * Eliot Wolf, Assistant Director of Pro Personnel * Danny Mock, College Scouting Coordinator * Autumn Thomas-Beenenga, Pro Personnel Coordinator SAINTS - 6 scouts; 1 scouting assistant; 1 combine scout; 1 college scouting coordinator; 1 director of college scouting; 2 pro scouts; 1 director of pro scouting Rick Reiprish Director of College Scouting Ryan Pace Director of Pro Scouting Jason Mitchell College Scouting Coordinator Terry Fontenot Pro Scout Ryan Powell Pro Scout David Hinson Area Scout Dwaune Jones Area Scout Josh Lucas Area Scout Jim Monos Area Scout Barrett Wiley Area Scout Terry Wooden Area Scout Mike Siani Combine Scout Joey Laine Scouting Assistant LIONS - 2004 - 5 scouts; 1 blesto scout; 1 college scouting coordinator; 1 director of college scouting; 1 pro and advanced scout; 1 director of pro personnel; 1 assistant of pro personnel; 1 personnel assistant Sheldon White director of pro personnel Scott McEwen director of college scouting Charlie Sanders assistant director of pro personnel Russ Bolinger college scouting coordinator Dennis Murphy pro personnel and advance scout Chad Henry personnel scout Lance Newmark personnel scout Bob Beers personnel scout Silas McKinnie personnel scout Dave Uyrus personnel scout Dennis Gentry BLESTO personnel scout. Jo Ann Lendenpro-personnel assistant CHIEFS - 6 scouts; 1 regional scout/scouting coordinator; 1 director of college scouting Chuck Cook Director of College Scouting Bruce Lemmerman Regional Scout/Scouting Coordinator Terry Delp Scout Cornell Gowdy Scout Mike Hagen Scout Matt Littlefield Scout Greg Olejack Scout Willie Davis Scout Rosalind Ward Administrative Assistant to the Vice President of Player Personnel JAGS - 7 scouts; 1 vp player personnel; 1 executive director college and pro personnel; 1 scouting assistant college/pro personnel; 1 blesto scout; 1 director pro personnel; 1 assistant pro personnel (assists in college player evaluation) James Harris Vice President of Player Personnel - is responsible for all player acquisitions, including the annual college draft, free agency, undrafted player signings and the scouting and signing of players from other professional leagues. Gene Smith Executive Director, College and Pro Personnel Louis Clark Assistant Director, Pro Personnel - assists in college player evaluation. Larry Wright Assistant Director, Pro Personnel Terry McDonough National Scout Tim Mingey Executive Scout Art Perkins Executive Scout Andy Dengler Executive Scout Chris Driggers Regional Scout Marty Miller Regional Scout Chris Prescott Regional Scout Jason DesJarlais BLESTO scout Jake Peetz Scouting Assistant, College/Pro Personnel. BENGLES - 3 scouts; 1 scouting consultant; 1 director of player personnel; 1 personnel assistant; 1 director of football ops Jim Lippincott Director of Football Operations Duke Tobin Director of Player Personnel Greg Seamon scout Earl Biederman Scout John Cooper Scout Bill Tobin Scouting Consultants Debbie LaRocco Personnel Assistant

mikey may not phoning in the picks but as i have stated in the past: if management is too cheap or too stupid to hire, not only better, but more scouts then it falls on them along with the rest. example... if the scouts we now employ are better at finding defensive players then don't you think we should add some more on the offensive side that can evaluate talent? could ONE of angies many problems be that he is not only looking at players talent wise but how much he thinks he can sign them for? this could be a major problem if he keeps drafting damaged goods or small school talent because he thinks his cap figure duties outweigh choosing the best players. another approach to this issue is if you draft a major number of players at the same positions, as he does, year after year aren't you bound to have a better chance at finding good players? the problem is you ignore the rest of the teams needs in doing so. another indication relating to this statement... how many safeties have we drafted since angie took over? how many are considered starters? how many linebackers have we drafted? DT's? etc.

great point about wasting a high priced free agent by running out his time in the nfl in the wrong position. these are the kind of gm gaffs that hurt your franchise for multiple years.

i'm not sure i go along with this train of thought. peterson is a very good special teams player who is always in the mix on tackles in coverages. as a 3rd down back he is adequate and can get the job done one in that slot is expected to do. the problem (thanks angie) is wolfe. now we have 2 third down type backs. the question is which gives you the most bang for the buck? peterson has proved his worth year after year. he doesn't cost much and is a major locker room plus. another question is how many hits can we keep putting on our special teams coach? we keep slaughtering his squad and expecting him to put the same quality back on the field each year. his saving grace is that angelo keeps drafting ST players instead of starters and acquires ST free agents on top of that. that said it would be a major loss on ST's for peterson to be gone.

yes it is true we have too many holes to fill in one draft. as i see it, that has been angies biggest problems. you have to have a clue on not only who to draft, but WHEN. he drafts the same position players (defense) on the first day of the draft year after year and ignores the obvious shortcomings on offense until the situation is beyond critical. at this point it's too late unless you give up a season or two to give rookies a chance to get up to speed in the nfl or are forced to spend top dollar for free agents and short term fixes. 2004 - LT - q. mitchell - who for X's sake replaced gandy at LT. need i say more? LG - r. brown (32 years old) with metcalf, a third round pick by angie who seems to want to force this bum into the lineup to save face, as depth who having been in the nfl for 2 previous years was atrocious by ANY standard when forced to play. this is WHY we got a 32 year old free agent reuben brown in the first place! RG - s. edwards (an undrafted player?) with r. tucker (always injured) and m. gandy (who was a complete bust at LT) for depth RT - tait in 2004 not a single player has played next to each other on the entire OL. in 2003 we dumped a good RG in villarrial and replaced him with a walk on in edwards who was playing LG. we thought so much of metcalf filling in at LG we brought in aging free agent r. brown to play LG. we dumped a FA experiment in a. gibson at RT and angie buys another RT in 2004 at a huge price in tait. tait in his prime was a good move at RT but was wasted by lack of talent surrounding him and having to move him to LT in 2005 which WASN'T his strong point. so you ask, what does all this tell you? like maybe NOW is the time to draft some offensive linemen for our future starters at guard and tackle? hmmmm......... 2005 - LT - we move tait from his all-pro position at RT to have him play average at LT. LG - we start r. brown, 33 years old, and back him up with garza another questionable FA at LG who has knee problems. RG - we demote edwards at RG and replace him with metcalf who has never done anything to show he belongs in the nfl. now edwards is our back-up RT and RG. RT - we fill an all-pro RT's position with an aging RT, at the end of his string, in f. miller. we also have a still injured columbo who we then cut or trade to dallas. we pick up an average back-up swing tackle in st. clair. we did not drafted a single offensive lineman in 2004 to replace... A. an aging r. brown. or for that matter draft any STARTER quality depth or future starter replacements at guard on EITHER side. B. a left tackle in q. mitchell who, to say the least, was BAD!! on top of that, the ONLY offensive linemen that have played next to each other in the 2005 season are kreutz and r. brown. so much for continuity. again, what does all this tell you? one of the most important aspects of your franchise needs some serious work by drafting OL for not only your future but your present. 2006 - LT - tait remains at LT backed up by st. clair LG - r. brown is still plugging away at 34 years old. RG - garza replaces a totally inept metcalf. we also cut oft injured tucker AND edwards depleting our depth even more. RT - 33 year old f. miller is now our starting RT for 2 years in a row. he is playing average at best and is declining in talent. our backup is st. clair. we did not drafted a single offensive lineman in 2005 to replace... A. our LT in tait so we could move him back to his original position. B. an aging LG in r. brown or a replacement/starter for metcalf or garza at RG. C. a RT to replace an aging miller in a year or two IF you are dumb enough to want to keep a high priced tait out of his best position. 2007 - LT - tait continues to play average and out of position. LG - r. brown at 35 is showing his age AND is injured. RG - garza starts again for the 2nd year in a row and plays average at best. RT - a 34 year old miller is playing like someone 84. in the 2006 draft, with our offensive line aging fast, we drafted 1 offensive lineman in the 6th round who didn't even make the roster. how stupid is that? setting new records for BAD offense for a club known for bad offenses throughout the last 4 decades says it all. that we don't have a single backup player or future starting GUARD this coaching staff feels is better than a one armed 35 year old player is mindboggling. the state this club that i am commenting on is not through 20/20 hindsight but by logical deduction that anyone with even a drop of nfl insight could plainly see by just looking at our roster. it is only common sense that you have to draft players a year of two in advance of a critical situation coming due or suffer the consequences such as we did and DO. 2008 - we finally draft highly, LT, a dire need on the OL but AGAIN fail to have the intelligence and forsight to draft a guard or another tackle before the 7th round. so that puts us yet again at a disadvantage NEXT season + not to mention this one. if you want quality guards you draft them in rounds 3-5 (even the 2nd) until you get your starters. then once set, you draft their replacements. if you want quality players in the most important position in your offense, next to qb, you have to plan in advance how to get it done within the scope and limitations of the nfl salary cap. this is only possible, long term, through the draft. why now and not later.... rookie linemen can come in and play reasonably well if surrounded by good veteran talent but still need that extra year to gain the experience to work as a cohesive unit and understand the nuances of nfl defenses. when i stated in my previous post there was a 2-3 year lag i was specifically talking about the OL and QB positions and not the rb or wr positions you commented on. these OL positions NEED this break in time to become aquainted with the complexity and the speed of the nfl. these are the guys that can make or break your franchise by keeping your #1 player, the QB, clean and off the IR. one only has to look back at our drafts to realize how pathetic our gm has done. it's his job to find the talent not only on the field but finding personel to teach/coach them to be better players (specifically qb). that is his main job in my opinion. it's not enough by a long shot that he works our cap figures well. that is what you hire the bean counters like phillips for to negotiate contracts with the gm's input. so in conclusion..... in a good franchise where the owners really understand football our gm would be walking on thin, thin, thin, ice and headed for deep water. here they give him extensions. so until we get someone who not only can judge and draft offensive talent but hire coaches and trainers to COACH this talent we do draft we are going nowhere fast with only a short term anommaly as our only hope.

here is the problem with that scenario: besides the possible age and/or injury to existing key players over this rebuilding period, we still did not draft enough players to fill the positions on offense that have held us back and CAUSED this rebuilding process. when you rebuild you need to develop prospective starting players to replace the existing problems. each of our problem positions takes time to develop and most would agree that a 2-3 year LAG may not even be enough time to develop them EVEN if we had them!! 1. we still have absolutely no depth at guard and in fact we don't even have a real starting guard on this roster with the 'possible' exception of garza. metcalf is a wasted roster spot, beekman can't even replace a one armed guard and is not even considered in the mix to replace that drone metcalf. the rumors have it he is to replace kruetz in the future at center but if he can't even sub as guard how good is he really at replacing a pro bowl player at the center position? that leaves who, that wasn't passed over for st. clair last season at that position? 2. all of our tackles, with the exception of the rookie, are aging. by the time this rebuilding process is over they will have a short shelf life themselves and will need to be replaced. are we again going to rebuild after this rebuilding process? again, a 2-3 year lag for a replacement tackle to get up to speed in the nfl even IF he has talent. which also brings into question the lack continuity of your offensive line playing together. if we fail to draft these type players, that means that we have to spend BIG dollars for free agents at a position that should be easy to fill in the draft and ignore or go cheap on other skill position players we may need in free agency like receivers and running backs (not to mention players on the defensive side of the ball). this is the reality of angies failure to draft offensive linemen over the last SIX YEARS!! 3. at qb we are existing on a wing and a prayer. both qb's will be free agents or gone when this rebuilding process is over. if both fail to become even reasonably effective average qb's then what? we passed on the possibility to draft a replacement this season yet AGAIN. so add another 2-3 year LAG period to this process even if we can find a quality player to draft NEXT year. the only other option is we can acquire a free agent ham and egger to do the same thing we have done for 40 years. again this position is just an afterthought for angelo who still roams the plains with dinosaurs and believes defense wins championships.

put me on your list... i'm in

if i were benson's lawyer here is something else i would be interested in: what did they do with benson's boat while they took him to shore? did they tow it in? did they put an officer on board to operate benson's boat to shore? did they leave the boat adrift in the lake? who operated it when benson was taken ashore? was he/she given a sobriety test before the took over? if not how dumb is that? if they left the occupants to their own means in the middle of the lake is that not a safety violation on their (officers) part? did this THEN discriminate against benson if they did by singling him out from the rest?

this whole situation and the facts keep changing. at first and what was posted was that his boat was at anchor. then someone said he was pulled over while operating the boat. now you say he was free drifting and not anchored. there is a HUGE difference as to probable cause depending upon which scenario is correct. 1. if he was pulled over while operating the vessel and alcohol was evident on the boat (or not) they 'could' ask for a sobriety test of him specifically if they suspected he 'could' be intoxicated. they usually wouldn't if he wasn't operating his boat erratically and appeared not to be intoxicated while speaking with him and checking for safety equipment. if this is the case they could do so without jeopardy as long as they did this within the limit of the law. 2. if he was ANCHORED outside of a navigational channel and not in a restricted zone with the vessels engine turned off, they had no cause what-so-ever to ask him for a sobriety test that included a BWI. no ifs ands or buts, they were wrong. 3. if he was drifting free of an anchor and not beached then there is a real possibility that he was subject to testing and the boat nazi's did have a right to test him for sobriety in most instances and especially if he stated he was the operator at the time. the assumption if you are drifting free is that you would have to operate the vessel if it became a navigational hazzard by drifting into an area where he would eventually have to move the vessel to a different location for safeties sake due to wind, current, or tides. this 'could' be a gray area depending upon the circumstances at the time. 4. having said that even if he were subject to sobriety testing in situations 1 and 3 ONLY they would have to have probable cause to suspect he was intoxicated to bring him to shore for further testing (which is the correct thing to do on water) anyway. if these 'officers' have the field sobriety testing equipment on board they should have had him blow into it (or ask him to) to confirm any suspicions if he failed any verbal or preliminary physical tests. if benson was asked to leave his vessel and return to shore on the officers boat it would be a legal requirement for him to wear a life vest in the process so there is no wrong doing in that aspect and benson would have to comply to that request. all of this said it is still possible that he was harassed and asked to do unesessary testing when/if he passed the preliminary tests they asked him to perform. in other words if they didn't find something wrong on the water, why bring him to shore for further testing if not just to dog him?

i agree with you. another point to make is most if not all of this 'hazing' is put into motion by the fans. in green bay their were fire alarms pulled at the hotels in the middle of the night to deprive bear players of sleep etc. also on another posters comments that hookers were sent to a hotel room there is still the choice of the player to refuse and go to bed alone. i'd like also to comment on the scouring the rooms for left over game plans on paper is one thing. this would be negligence on the team/players part and it's fair game. but if the host team were to bug a room with audio and video to spy on their opponents or pay a player to leave this information laying around this is another story altogether. even if the team were aware of a private person doing this and accepting that information to me that's illegal also.

this is really bad, bad news. metcalf has shown nothing in the entire time he has been in chicago. why he even is on this team is mindboggling. this seriously will not help our rookie left tackle playing next to a semi-pro scrub.

do you even know what you are talking about? do you even know what the definition of "intervene" IS?? in·ter·vene - to become a third party to a legal proceeding begun by others for the protection of an alleged interest first: what 'legal' proceeding are they becoming a part of? i must have missed the news flash that the NFL can practice and enforce U.S. criminal law. second: in the U.S. they have investigations to DETERMINE if a law or statute has been broken. ever heard of a grand jury? third: how can you determine if there has or has not been a criminal offense if you don't QUESTION the parties involved either under oath of congress or a grand jury if you have a 'reasonable' suspicion that a crime has been committed or at the very least, view the physical evidence as presented (oh thats right, it was destroyed)? fourth: are you roger GOoDell? if not where are you getting this conclusive evidence that no federal laws were broken? a gut feeling on your part? it's true just because you say so? a qui ji board? transmissions from deep space? all of the above? if not then POST your conclusive evidence and it's sources for us to read. fifth: you say i won't answer what laws were broken? i'm not clairvoyant as you appear to be. to determine what, if ANY, laws were violated i (and i assume congress also) would have to ASK QUESTIONS to determine that. what violations 'could' there be? off the top of my head there is a real possibility that the EEA laws were violated which involves corporate espionage statutes. could there be gambling violations or racketeering laws at risk? who could possibly know without asking questions? like was anyone in the franchise or their family using information on this to place bets? was anyone that they told or knew of aware of it and did they place any bets? could there be a multitude of others? YES!!!!! here is a scenario for you... what if the cameraman or someone in the system evaluating this information was part of or friends with the gambino crime family in new york? would that be enough for you to ask questions? sixth: show me ANYWHERE i was lying in any of my posts. show me ANYWHERE what i posted is BS. don't just yap about it, PROVE IT!!!! can't? hmmmmm... now what does that make YOU?

if you don't get the comparrison to enron i sure won't waste any more time trying to explain it to you. ask your parents. are you using cryptology on this post? if so post the key so i can follow your train of thought. sorry, but you lost something in the translation from crayon to keyboard.

what does it mean? it means that a specific franchise/s used possible ILLEGAL means to determine the outcome of NOT only a specific game but possibly an entire season!!! thereby possibly causing another franchise/s, its city, its state and its fans to lose millions upon millions of dollars in REVENUE!!!!! isn't that enough in itself for you??? in not, then what if just one of those games determined whether another team made it to the playoffs? what if one of those games determined WHERE a playoff game was to be held? couldn't that also have shaped not only WHO went to the superbowl but who WON it???????? does this affirm my statements on anti-trust laws and federal regulation? if you don't think so, then why wouldn't it be declared to have a monopoly on it's televised rights and FORCED by federal law to break up this monopoly and give equal access? you can't have it both ways. how can you DETERMINE proof of any violation of law without access to the EVIDENCE???? you seem to want to just believe whatever you are told by the corporate NFL as being gospel. kinda like baseball and their steroid debacle huh? why would anyone not believe selig about ANYTHING and call for investigation?? again i ask you.... if billion dollar corporations, that not only rely on the public trust but their funds to supplement paying for their stadiums, are manipulating the public, is that not enough for you to feel any concern or justification to investigate? if not, just what does? yea, that really makes sense. haven't i said NUMEROUS times that nearly this entire debate with you IS my opinion?????? what else could it be? you think i have the power to enact absolute law in this country? if you don't like my opinion on it so what? nobody has a gun to your head forcing you to agree with me. you state your opinion, or facts if you have any, to back up your point and i will do the same. and just for the record... i don't need a majority to pat me on the back to HAVE an opinion.

yea i read it. so what? if congress was limited on who to investigate by which corporations give them campaign contributions they would never investigate anyone as corps contribute to nearly all candidates on both sides!! just for the record how many congressmen in your estimation does it take to 'ask' for further congressional investigations? 2? 5? 10? 100? dodging it?? ok, let's get to the evidence... how about "evidence" that was video taped? how about "evidence" as stated by the perpetrators to journalists and the nfl investigators? what are the looking for? they should be looking for violations by ANY team that gave that team an unfair advantage and led to ANY victory or advantage over an opponent as it pertains to a violation of law. the results of which could/did cause the public, the city of origin and the franchise in case to lose, or possibly lose, millions of dollars in revenue. what gives them the right to spend your tax dollars on a witch hunt you ask? in case any are not aware, the federal government has granted the nfl federal anti trust law exemptions. that makes congress, legally, the watchdog and overseer of the nfl to be sure no federal laws are violated. the nfl would also be included in federal statutes (economic espionage act or the EEA) regarding corporate espionage laws and regulation violations. add to this the federal laws governing the sales of corporate stock and/or bonds by the nfl and it's subsidiaries at either the local, state, or national/international level and on top of that, the regulation of state or federal tax laws. what has this to do with the price of tea in china you ask? the concept of professional football is founded on public trust that the games will be regulated and legally fair to all parties involved INCLUDING the public. if there is doubt that the league operates in a fair and unbiassed manner it is not only the right, but the duty, of congress to do thorough investigations in an attempt to not only correct the problems but to determine if any laws have been violated. that a corporation would destroy all evidence of it's investigation could in itself be a crime, (obstruction of justice) if determined there was any violation of law. just for the record... if anyone thinks a corporation should head the investigation of itself in a legal determination of violations of law they are surely misguided. it would be like taking the word of enron's skilling and lay that all is well and nothing is amiss but thanks for asking. i would also like to add... if anyone in the know knew of these taped violations, who is to say this information couldn't have or actually WAS used in gambling, either by specific persons, companies or even organized crime, to enrich themselves? that in itself is racketeering!!! what ifs?? how about 'if' the nfl had not destroyed the freakin HARD evidence and turned this over to review by our legal system to determine there were no violations of law, if asked to do so. the whole process would be dead now if they were squeaky clean. as it turns out we have to rely on the word of a corporate president whose company stands to possibly lose not only the faith and trust of the public but possibly MILLIONS of dollars in repercussions!!

butkus could play in any era, period. he had football instincts and drive. he was a freakin terminator. was he as fast as url? no but not many in the history of the nfl were/are. if speed means that much in this discussion, why are we even considering bringing back mike brown? for that matter why was he even on this team? how fast was ronnie lot, singletary, ray lewis etc. if you have a killer player you build your defense around him not the other way.

well... that may be fine for you and you are entitled to your opinion. but, if i paid higher taxes to build a stadium for what i THINK/THOUGHT is a legitimate sport and that sport is manipulated by specific corporations to THEIR monetary advantage i wanna know and i wanna know NOW. these are billion dollar corporations we are talking about. the bone that was thrown out there that there are bigger fish to fry than a manipulation of one of the largest money markets in this country is a bit nieve (sp).

just for your paranoid information, i disagreed with your opinion as to whether congress should be involved in this and stated so. the rest of what i posted, that seemed to infurriate you, was MY reasons and thoughts as to why they SHOULD investigate in response to your post. it's a pretty novel concept, but people tend to do that sometimes on these message boards. so unless you have different rules of communication than most normal people, some will make their own comments to justify THEIR opinions that may not be directly replying to your specific quotes and/OR inferring that "you said". amazing but true. again i ask.... did you READ my original post?? anyway, here's an example: just so you know, this is my quote that WASN'T in reply to anything you previously said... "if so where does the bill of rights come into play? where does federal legislation step in and enforce it's rico acts and other laws on the books related to corporate espionage?" the "important question" (your quote) would be if these nfl corporations were in violation of federal laws due to corporate espionage statutes AND to their ability to uphold the integrity of the nfl who garner federal tax breaks and incentives, not to mention the sales of bonds or local tax revenues to PAY for their venues. that the nfl delegated it's own judgements along with penalties AND destroyed evidence is CERTAINLY cause for concern (my OPINION). in direct answer to YOUR question.... YES!!! i don't believe we should wait for the next 10 + years like baseball did to ensure a legitimate game. if one team is cheating who is to say others are not? are there OTHER ways that they are cheating also? sorry, but relying on the truth from corporations and people who are NOT under oath and risk the penalty of purjury and could be financially hurt by the truth is nonsense. every fan should be concerned no matter what team they root for. in fact every citizen in america should be concerned if their tax dollars are involved in ANY way.

give you a break?? maybe you should re-read my post. i never 'said you said' anything about my points at ALL!!! i disagreed with your point of saying it is and was not important for congress to pursue this agenda and gave MY examples of why it SHOULD be or COULD be legitimately pursued. YIKES!!!

i have to strongly disagree. if it takes a "witch hunt" to legitimize this sport then so be it. otherwise we end up with either an exhibition like all star wrestling where it's predetermined the outcome ends it being called an actual sport, a league controlled by the gambling interests including organized crime and racketeering, or frankly baseball and it's decades of steroid use and problems with no control initiated by that idiot bud selig. another thing... these franchises are closed corporations who most likely are getting federal, state, and local tax breaks and incentives NOT to mention the actual funding by local and state governments to build these new stadium complexes. if baseball couldn't contain and control it's own interests what makes you think that the nfl can? where is the line drawn to keep sports legitimate? is it ok to pay off ref officials who control the ebb and flow of the game? is it ok for its players to use steroids and HGH to create a more dramatic edge scenario on the field? is it ok for it's players and coaches to bet on nfl games? is it ok to steal from each other in pro football to give you an advantage by electronically eavesdropping or recording other teams meetings or practices? if so where does the bill of rights come into play? where does federal legislation step in and enforce it's rico acts and other laws on the books related to corporate espionage? in my opinion congress has a duty to the public to get to the bottom of this even if the results turn out unfavorable for our bear franchise. without rules that are enforced rigidly you have nothing in sports. it's just a sham.

again i would like to emphasize these points... 1. the boat was at anchor and unless these water nazi's saw benson 'operate' or drive his boat to that location of anchor and immediately pulled up to test him then there is absolutely no possible reason to test him for anything other than having the required safety equipment on board. the boat was not being operated on any waterways under any definition of law if it was not free drifting with or without a line and it was out of the navigational channel or a restricted area. 2. other than a breathalizer test, these clowns should know the law and the effects of giving a physical sobriety test NOT only on a moored boat but even on a dock. it's inconclusive and ridiculous to do so because of movement due to wind, current or wave action or just the movement on a vessel due to passengers moving about. it should be conducted on dry land if possible and warranted in which they had no reason legally to do so as the boat was not being operated. 3. by singling out benson from a number of people on his boat, whether the he was owner or not, to administer an unwarranted illegal test, they harassed him specifically by not asking everyone on board to submit to a sobriety test. there would have been no possible way without a qui ji board to determine WHO would even be the operator of the boat when benson's party decided to leave and whether at that time if any or all involved would have been legally sober and able to operate his vessel. ON QUESTION.. in an instance of a sobriety test doesn't the officer have to board the offending vessel to give the test? although a vessel can be boarded if there is a legitimate reason to believe there is a violation of law, i have to question whether they can force someone to leave their vessel in the first place without probable cause. on final note: i want to reiterate that the laws for auto's and the laws for boating are NOT the same and not even similar with the exception of the operator subject to sobriety only. it is not illegal to drink on a boat, it is not illegal to have open containers on a boat. it is not illegal for the operator of a boat to drink as long as he does not operate the boat in any manner until he is sober.

again i am not trashing anything about the site. it's hard work keeping a site going and you guys have done a good job to make it a place to come and discuss the bears. it really is appreciated by all. just that you are listening to the posters and their suggestions is a major plus and shows that you care about the environment created here. here is why i stepped up on this subject: the "Bear Report" message board used to be a good place to hang out and get a lot of good information along with the "Bear Shrine". after they moved to their new provider in washington the report became lax in their profanity regulation and in fact the moderator himself (in reality a nice enough hard working guy) became one of the biggest offenders. it started out with a few f words and escalated into some real raw language as people pushed the limits after being allowed the continuous flow of the four lettered kind. to put it in a nutshell, there was still some good posting on the board but it became hard to get through some real raunchy posts. i started frequenting it less and moved almost completely to the the latter site where it was more policed and moderated. it's a shame because i read that site for years. look, i'm not a prude and when angry at times i can make a lifer marine blush but... i always try on these boards to behave verbally like i were in a room full of 8-10 year olds which in reality there really may be some on here. i just figure that i would not use four lettered expletives and worse if i were talking to someones young children in real life and don't see the need to do so on here. so for me the filter converting things to freakin or fricken would not bother me in the least. however it works out i know as a moderator you will get some knuckleheads who insist this is america and it's their constitutional right to be obscene because we have freedom of speech and so on, and so on, when in reality it's not their right to do as they please on someone else's property which this surely is. you are paying the costs to keep this site up and most if not all the mods are working for free because they care about the site as a whole. at times it will be a thankless job but just know that if moderated within reason the core players on your site will appreciate it whether they say so or not.

sorry, but i totally disagree. if you know what types of defense or offense is called at a given time it is a HUGE difference maker that can and probably does change the entire outcome of a game. it's no different if they listen in illegally on what signals are being sent in to the qb's headset than reading and KNOWING what hand signals come in off the sidelines because they have correographed their entire system weeks before. yea, everyone tries to get an advantage but not everyone cheats to get it. if that were so then what is wrong with steroids and HGH? what is wrong with purposely injuring a key player? and on and on and on? because it's the rules of the game. that is WHY their are rules so everyone has a level playing field and the competition is fair. in my opinion they should have taken the game they were caught cheating last season in and forfeited the jets game. if it is determined they cheated in a playoff game, or if the games they cheated in during regular season led them to be in the playoffs then they should relinquish any and all superbowl winnings and it should default to the team they beat in the superbowl.

on the old board the moderators played it pretty close to the vest when it came to hard obceneties and it worked well, at least for me. either deleting the immediate disputed word/s and letting the person know where and why it was edited with a warning and at least listening to the offenders side of the story, if there was one, via email or whatever. if some want a place for adults to vent in that manner then a page off of the main with an adults warning label on it is a possibility. that may be amicable to all. the truth of the matter is that smaller children or young adults either do, or want to, read information on such an informed bear site as this one with the great variety of posters. that their father or mother or friends frequent this site makes it harder to say they shouldn't be able to read what is posted on here because of hard core adult language. in fact some younger people may be great CONTRIBUTORS if given the chance and add to our depth. one other item on the other board/s i have frequented... absolutely no racial, ethnic origin, religious, or physical threatening attacks or justifications were tolerated. not saying that any of this has ever happened on here or will, it's good policy to put it boldly in the rules as unacceptable to any passing through flamers ect. i would also while i am at it say thanks to you and all who have provided this space for all of us. i think you have done pretty well so far. congratulations.

agree. there is no need for the hard core profanity on a board where you HOPE to get young kids or ladies attending and reading your site. it is to me what made our previous site better than a lot of the rest where it became a crude obscene contest with some posters. seems like &%$%^ (mentally enter your own word here), works ok for me.