The Importance Of Character

[FAX]

I'm reading with great interest some of the posts regarding draft choices and the reasons they were selected. It brings to mind the situation with PacYourThingsMan and other players who are, or are on the verge of, a career implosion.

The Chiefs have, in the past, emphasized the importance of character when it comes to contracting and retaining a player. I just wonder how you guys feel about this question.

Is character more important than performance? In other words, as a Chiefs fan, would you rather have players with high moral values and a mediocre team? Or, alternatively, would you prefer a SB appearance in which we field a bunch of baddies? After all, a locker room isn't a monastery.

Thanks for the input and may the best man win.

FAX

Disclaimers: Sorry if repost.

[Direckshun]

You have to get a balance. Moderation is key.

I don't pretend to be better than anybody else. If you have a skidmark or two on your record, you shouldn't be banned from playing on my team. If you've got attitude like LJ, throw fits like Dante, or get in legal trouble like Jared Allen, I'd be one hell of an elitist, holier-than-thou snob trying to get rid of you for those reasons alone.

Eddie Kennison had a terrible reputation and he's been a total pro in Kansas City. Everybody deserves their fair amount of chances, and only when that's been stretched to its reasonable max do I think it's worth disbanding on the basis of character.

[crazycoffey]

I don't think the Titans or the Raiders or Bengals or the Cowboys (with the TO addition) have done so well with the "locker room full of baddies" to get to the superbowl.

It would be one thing if that was a reciepe for success, but I think if anything it's been more proven a reciepe for destruction.

I'll take the character guys, and we get enough of them we will not be fielding a mediocre team.

[crazycoffey]

You have to get a balance. Moderation is key.

I don't pretend to be better than anybody else. If you have a skidmark or two on your record, you shouldn't be banned from playing on my team. If you've got attitude like LJ, throw fits like Dante, or get in legal trouble like Jared Allen, I'd be one hell of an elitist, holier-than-thou snob trying to get rid of you for those reasons alone.

Eddie Kennison had a terrible reputation and he's been a total pro in Kansas City. Everybody deserves their fair amount of chances, and only when that's been stretched to its reasonable max do I think it's worth disbanding on the basis of character.


I can agree with the Balance terminology. Giving Jarred and Eddie chances were good, but I would be careful with a chance to Pacman, after the suspension if he's shopped around.

[FAX]

I don't think the Titans or the Raiders or Bengals or the Cowboys (with the TO addition) have done so well with the "locker room full of baddies" to get to the superbowl.

It would be one thing if that was a reciepe for success, but I think if anything it's been more proven a reciepe for destruction.

I'll take the character guys, and we get enough of them we will not be fielding a mediocre team.

Point, Mr. crazycoffey. I wasn't suggesting that the two were, in reality, mutually exclusive. Simply, for the sake of argument, presenting a choice.

Are we hungry enough for a SB at this point, that the "character" issue should be eliminated as a consideration? Perhaps that's the best way to pose the question.

FAX

[scott free]

I dont care...i'd rather go 3-13 than have to try & root for a team full of pacmans, henrys, ray-rays etc.

It would really kill my buzz.

[crazycoffey]

Point, Mr. crazycoffey. I wasn't suggesting that the two were, in reality, mutually exclusive. Simply, for the sake of argument, presenting a choice.

Are we hungry enough for a SB at this point, that the "character" issue should be eliminated as a consideration? Perhaps that's the best way to pose the question.

FAX

I misread you, good kind sir. It sounded exclusive, one choice a mediocre team of good characters or a team of bad apples just to get a SB appearance.

I think we can get to the SB with good "character" guys. So, I'm not hungry enough to sell my soul to al davis.

[StcChief]

Definite factor. Character does matter, alot.

[Semen]

In a perfect world I would like both. Since that won't happen anytime soon, I think performance would have to be the most desirable trait, but character has to play a part in there as well. With that being said, I would much rather be a fan of guys who are of high character and producing 9-7 or so seasons versus a team producing 12-4 to 13-3 seasons who are similar in character to TO or PacYourThingsMan (btw, love that name :toast: ) I'll pull for the "Rudy" team any day.

At the end of the day, I'm not at the point where I'd be willing to trade a SB win with an assortment of low character guys on the team for what we have now, but check back with me on Dec. 31st. :)

[chagrin]

All I know is I don't want some nappy headed ho on our team







sorry - just trying to keep the theme going

[JBucc]

If I were GM, I would only draft white protestant Christians with 4 year degrees. Sure they may not be as good as the steroid using devil worshiping Negroes other teams have but at least my team would be a beacon of hope in a sea of despair for the countless white children who's dreams of playing in the NFL are crushed by notion that they are athletically inferior to their immoral colored counterparts.


Sorry I couldn't help myself with all this Imus stuff going around.


But really it is kind of important. I don't mind a couple of problems, everyone makes mistakes, but if someone was arrested a bunch or kicked off the team that would throw up a red flag for me and they would have to wow me in interviews to even consider drafting them.

[FAX]

I dont care...i'd rather go 3-13 than have to try & root for a team full of pacmans, henrys, ray-rays etc.

It would really kill my buzz.

See, that's the way I've always felt about it, Mr. scott free. I prefer to root for the "good guys".

I just don't get to do a lot of that in January.

FAX

[scott free]

See, that's the way I've always felt about it, Mr. scott free. I prefer to root for the "good guys".

I just don't get to do a lot of that in January.

FAX

*gestures thoughtfully with tip of thumb*...I Feel Your Pain!!!...

[Chiefnj]

Character matters, but it's tough to judge at the college level. How many people on this board were wild in college and got arrested or could have gotten arrested, or had some close calls, etc.? These are 18-22 year old kids that are going to make mistakes and take some lumps while they grow up.

Sapp had some marijuana issues in college years ago, but IIRC has been clean in the NFL. So maybe you take a chance on a kid like Marcus Thomas.

Merriweather has been flagged by some for returning fire with a legally owned gun. Some people say good for him others may think it reflects on the crowd he is hanging out with and that future trouble is inevitable.

Then you have someone like Merriman who was clean in college but tests positive for banned substances months into his career.

I think the interview process probably tells more about the kids than any history of getting arrested on campus, etc. They can probably get a good idea of the crowd they hang out with, etc.

[FAX]

Evaluations can be difficult, for sure, Mr. Chiefnj. That's part of the problem. The whole "character" issue is nothing more than a judgement call by evaluators who are never 100% right - even in respect to projecting a player's on-the-field success.

Let's say that the Chiefs have an opportunity to draft WR Mustafa Jones. Mustafa is an incredible talent who, in college, scored every time he touched the ball. But, unfortunately, Mustafa likes to wear the bling, smoke the weed, bang the ho, and maintains a deep-seated hatred for authority figures due to the fact that his father was ass capped by the police while attempting to rob a liquor store. In the past, it could be argued that the Chiefs would pass on Mustafa on "character" grounds. So, he goes to the Steelers who turn him into a pro-bowl wide out who leads them deep into the playoffs. Isn't it time we signed Mustafa and let the nacho chips fall where they may?

FAX

[88TG88]

Character matters, but it's tough to judge at the college level. How many people on this board were wild in college and got arrested or could have gotten arrested, or had some close calls, etc.? These are 18-22 year old kids that are going to make mistakes and take some lumps while they grow up.

Sapp had some marijuana issues in college years ago, but IIRC has been clean in the NFL. So maybe you take a chance on a kid like Marcus Thomas.

Merriweather has been flagged by some for returning fire with a legally owned gun. Some people say good for him others may think it reflects on the crowd he is hanging out with and that future trouble is inevitable.

Then you have someone like Merriman who was clean in college but tests positive for banned substances months into his career.

I think the interview process probably tells more about the kids than any history of getting arrested on campus, etc. They can probably get a good idea of the crowd they hang out with, etc.
I agree it has alot to do with the crime and how they handled the punishment.

[Rain Man]

I hate to admit this, but I don't really care about what they do off the field as long as it doesn't affect their presence or play on the field. If a guy wants to spend his offseason in jail, that's more or less his business other than my general societal disdain for criminals.

It's warped to say this, I know, but I'm nothing more than a fan. I'm more ticked about Jared Allen and Eric Warfield missing games than about them being in jail or wearing ankle bracelets. My only interaction with them is watching them on a football field.

I'm more concerned about them being a thug on the field because that's the more relevant potential embarrassment. Give me a choice between Pacman Jones or Bill Romanowski, and I'd much rather root for Pacman on Sunday. I haven't seen Pacman try to injure other players. I'd rather have a Trent Green or a Will Shields, but hey, a clean win is a clean win.

[Color Red]

The NFL looks at their 32 teams as franchises of their business, and they are smart to take responsibility for what amounts to bringing troubled or troubling players to any of their team communities.

No one is wringing their hands in the NFL's office over the plight of Pac Man Jones.

They realize that players aren't saints, but they also aren't going to knowingly let some thug bring their criminal influence to an NFL community, thus the suspension.

If it doesn't send a message and make Jones clean up his act, the NFL would just say forget him.

The NFL doesn't owe it to an NFL team to in effect bankroll a sordid influence in a community just because the player is a top talent and producer on the field.

It also sends a message to teams just before draft time: if you don't try to make character an issue on draft day, you might be on your own.