I'll respond again to your edit.

I don't care where a player is picked.

If he shows potential, you give him more than two ****ing years to show something.

I guarantee you that Pioli's first and second day picks get more than two years.

And this bullshit about DL taking longer is bullshit. It's not like safeties walk right in and play lights out either.

It takes longer than two years to hit your prime at ANY position.

NFL front offices care.
That makes all the difference in the world.
You and I BOTH know that being a Top 5 pick means you'll get every opportunity in the world to pan out. Being a mid-to-low 2nd round pick? Not so much.

No one suggested he should be in his prime after just 2 seasons.
Certainly it's not too much to ask that he make his case in 2 years though.
Whether or not he did...can be argued.

We should probably be fair and clarify that it was after his THIRD season that the team cut him.
He was NOT a two-year player.

You tend to make that clear as it relates to Cassel...
Despite his not having played much in the early-going. Let's do the same with Pollard.

It had a lot more to do with being cursed at, and you know it. He didn't feel like he was being treated like an adult. And based on what we witnessed with Haley's tirades in the weeks prior to the Pittsburgh game, I can see his point.

If they continue to treat players like this, they'll continue to lose players.

Luckily, I think Haley realized this just before the Pittsburgh game. He magically started acting like a coach and less like a tyrant after his dad visited.

Plus there were a few reports that Clark asked him to tone it down.

I'd agree if you were talking about a 4th round pick or later.

But most 2nd round picks get more than two years to develop.

It's professional football. Grow a set, build a bridge and get over it Bernie.
This was a first year team. Haley was trying to overcome a softer regime that preceded his and get his team off the ground at the same time. It's called tough love. Helped Derrick Johnson.

It's been an issue with exactly two players.
I think they'll be fine.

I hoped its helped DJ. I hope his last game of the season carries over to this season and is the start of something new.

It does look like he won the organization over. whether he plays at a high level remains to be seen. My jury is still out.

Helped DJ how?

By sitting his ass on the bench, even though he is far and away the most talented LB we have?

(and I know that's not saying much)

Bottom line is this:

Pollard was a casualty of Pioli's ego.

I guarantee that players like Tyson Jackson, Alex McGee, Matt Cassel, etc will get more than two years to prove themselves.

Mic, or anyone else:

I'd love to hear an argument as to why cutting Bernard Pollard was a good decision. Why cutting him makes us a better team.

Did you watch the Denver game?

He's also done the least on the field with the most athletic ability.
And he doesn't have the kind of work ethic necessary to close that gap.

Jackson deserves more time. He was the 5th overall pick.
Cassel deserves more time. He's a QB and they've invested in him BIG.

Magee's the only player who shouldn't warrant more time.

I don't think it's as cut and dry as that.

If Pollard hadn't been playing at an abysmally low level during preseason, after turning in a shitty 2008, he may not have been cut.

But play like shit and act like shit...you get flushed.

By the way, DJ's benching was completely warranted. He proved that by missing quite a few tackles (despite his lack of PT) and doing stupid shit like blowing pass coverages...remember the Pittsburgh game?

If doing that turns him into a better player it was the right move.

I don't know that it was necessarily good or bad for the team.

Tell me why cutting Pollard made the team worse...

Funny, DJ had a similar game in Baltimore.

First game of the year, before Haley started ****ing with him.

To claim that Heley's mind games is going to make DJ a better player is ****ing ridiculous.

He's always had the talent. What he hasn't had is solid coaching.

There's no reason he shouldn't start 16 games this year, provided he stays healthy.

To think otherwise is to say, "**** it."

Might as well cut Albert and Bowe as well.

I guess you didn't see what he did in Houston?

You think he couldn't have done that in KC with competent coaching?

Pollard was dead ****ing right. Gunther and Pendergast were morons. Gunther played him, DJ, Dorsey and others out of position. Pendergast was just a flat-out dipshit.

Good for him that he got out.

I haven't read the thread, and I'm grilling so I'll read it later. I just wanted to chime in that Pioli and Haley totally knew Pollard was going to be great, he just wasn't a part of the right 53. You guys need to understand the process.

Seems like your argument, Mic, all boils down to him being expendable because we hadn't invested highly in him like we have Cassel and Jackson.

Those players who we haven't invested as much in, who are making a small salary, are usually the players that make or break a franchise.

Having talented low-priced players is essential to being successful and making a championship run.

Scott Pioli, of ALL ****ING PEOPLE, should know that.

When/if McCluster and Arenas are nothing more than average the next two years, should they be flat-out cut?

They won't be, because Pioli's ego won't allow it.

Pollard wasn't his pick. Therefore, he's gone. And is successful elsewhere.

Meanwhile, his being cut proved nothing - we cut a player with potential without any reward in return.

That's bad decision making any way you slice it.