Jump to content

Why do rebuilding team feel the need to get rid of good players?


Gnorts
 Share

Recommended Posts

Im sure there are many reasons for doing this. Salary cap reasons, good players that have maxed out and are on the down side(Crump), injury prone players(Crump), disgrunteled players that dont want to be apart of a rebuild(Hall, Taylor), may not fit the new coaches scheme, new coaches want to bring in younger players they can build a foundation, older players are poisioned by the many coaching changes. Thats some reasons, Im sure ther are more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gnorts (7/21/2008)
Why do rebuilding team feel the need to get rid of good players?  We get rid of Hall and crumpler.  Toronto want to get rid of Sundin?  Miami trades whats his face....

What is up with that.

thats usually due to age since rebuilding takes time. like minnesota trades garnett because hes old as dirt and its gonna take time to rebuilt the wolves. miami trades taylor because hes old and probably only has 2 years at most (either left in tank or his willingness to play) and obviously miami will take time to rebuild.

but in our case, hall was traded because the FO simply didnt like him. thats all i can get out of that, i loved hall. i think hes a phenomonal player, whether hes overrated or not, hes still a great player.

and as for crumpler, thats for reasons i have no idea on. u hear hes innjury prone but hes not injury prone at all. u hear hes losing his steps, but he had one bad season. and that was a lost season... crumpler was close to vick and he was probably just unfocused or lacked passion to play. im not saying that is excusable, but think of the colts losing peyton manning and a new coaching staff comes in while ur at it and ur not very fond of the head coach and ur new quarterback is a bonafied bust. and u also hear he was being paid overpaid. well... isnt that a situation u can sit on for a while instead of releasing him ASAP. they didnt even try to keep him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sdogg (7/21/2008)
Im sure there are many reasons for doing this. Salary cap reasons, good players that have maxed out and are on the down side(Crump), injury prone players(Crump), disgrunteled players that dont want to be apart of a rebuild(Hall, Taylor), may not fit the new coaches scheme, new coaches want to bring in younger players they can build a foundation, older players are poisioned by the many coaching changes. Thats some reasons, Im sure ther are more.

You think its just remotely possible that the coaching staff and managers have sen more tape and listened to more scouts about Crumpler's current state than you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

chifalc (7/21/2008)
sdogg (7/21/2008)
Im sure there are many reasons for doing this. Salary cap reasons, good players that have maxed out and are on the down side(Crump), injury prone players(Crump), disgrunteled players that dont want to be apart of a rebuild(Hall, Taylor), may not fit the new coaches scheme, new coaches want to bring in younger players they can build a foundation, older players are poisioned by the many coaching changes. Thats some reasons, Im sure ther are more.

You think its just remotely possible that the coaching staff and managers have sen more tape and listened to more scouts about Crumpler's current state than you?

Im sure they have. Whats your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last thing a new regime needs is a macontent holdover. You can look at the QB position universally. We'll look specifically at Chris Chandler and Mike Vick. At the time Vick took over, Chandler was clearly the most qualified leader of the team. However, Vick was expected to come out and play early on. You have to eventually trade or release Chandler instead of keeping him as a backup because the vets on the team don't feel like they have time to wait for rookies to earn their stripes. They want to get it while the gettin' is good. Chandler was another of those injury prone guys too. If not, Vick could have sat for a whole year and eased himself into the starting position the following year. Whether it's a new coaching staff or just new players, changes have to come in many areas to avoid major conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

miKevicK777 (7/21/2008)
Gnorts (7/21/2008)
Why do rebuilding team feel the need to get rid of good players?  We get rid of Hall and crumpler.  Toronto want to get rid of Sundin?  Miami trades whats his face....

What is up with that.

thats usually due to age since rebuilding takes time. like minnesota trades garnett because hes old as dirt and its gonna take time to rebuilt the wolves. miami trades taylor because hes old and probably only has 2 years at most (either left in tank or his willingness to play) and obviously miami will take time to rebuild.

but in our case, hall was traded because the FO simply didnt like him. thats all i can get out of that, i loved hall. i think hes a phenomonal player, whether hes overrated or not, hes still a great player.

and as for crumpler, thats for reasons i have no idea on. u hear hes innjury prone but hes not injury prone at all. u hear hes losing his steps, but he had one bad season. and that was a lost season... crumpler was close to vick and he was probably just unfocused or lacked passion to play. im not saying that is excusable, but think of the colts losing peyton manning and a new coaching staff comes in while ur at it and ur not very fond of the head coach and ur new quarterback is a bonafied bust. and u also hear he was being paid overpaid. well... isnt that a situation u can sit on for a while instead of releasing him ASAP. they didnt even try to keep him.

Hall was traded because he didnt want to be part of a rebuilding team...he said multiple times that he wouldnt play for a losing team, and that if the falcons didnt plan on winning now, he would go elsewhere.....Hall knew he wanted to leave, and his public comments where just his way of making it happen....If Hall would have keep his mouth shut, and just layed low during the coaching change over, he would still be on this team.

Crumpler on the other hand, was a salary cap cut in my opinion, Mularkey has never really used a TE for anything more than blocking, and Crumpler was one of the highest paid TE in the league, we needed to free that money up to sign guys like, Turner, Coleman, and the rest of our signings, not to mention our draft picks.

Thats just my 2 cents:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

chifalc (7/21/2008)
sdogg (7/21/2008)
Im sure there are many reasons for doing this. Salary cap reasons, good players that have maxed out and are on the down side(Crump), injury prone players(Crump), disgrunteled players that dont want to be apart of a rebuild(Hall, Taylor), may not fit the new coaches scheme, new coaches want to bring in younger players they can build a foundation, older players are poisioned by the many coaching changes. Thats some reasons, Im sure ther are more.

You think its just remotely possible that the coaching staff and managers have sen more tape and listened to more scouts about Crumpler's current state than you?

YES  .... IT IS REMOTELY POSSIBLE. I'M JUST WAITING ON THEM TO BRING IN SOMEBODY BETTER THAN CRUMP. I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT GUY YET. IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT HARD FOR THEM TO DO, SINCE THEY LOOK AT SO MUCH FILM AS YOU SAY. DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT BE REMOTELY POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO DO THIS? AND IF YOU WANT TO ARGUE THE POINT, YOU'LL HAVE TO FIND SOMEONE ELSE. YOU LOVE TO ARGUE. I KEEP TELLING YOU, "ARGUING IS A CHARACTER FLAW."  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The H.N.I.C. 2! (7/22/2008)
miKevicK777 (7/21/2008)
Gnorts (7/21/2008)
Why do rebuilding team feel the need to get rid of good players?  We get rid of Hall and crumpler.  Toronto want to get rid of Sundin?  Miami trades whats his face....

What is up with that.

thats usually due to age since rebuilding takes time. like minnesota trades garnett because hes old as dirt and its gonna take time to rebuilt the wolves. miami trades taylor because hes old and probably only has 2 years at most (either left in tank or his willingness to play) and obviously miami will take time to rebuild.

but in our case, hall was traded because the FO simply didnt like him. thats all i can get out of that, i loved hall. i think hes a phenomonal player, whether hes overrated or not, hes still a great player.

and as for crumpler, thats for reasons i have no idea on. u hear hes innjury prone but hes not injury prone at all. u hear hes losing his steps, but he had one bad season. and that was a lost season... crumpler was close to vick and he was probably just unfocused or lacked passion to play. im not saying that is excusable, but think of the colts losing peyton manning and a new coaching staff comes in while ur at it and ur not very fond of the head coach and ur new quarterback is a bonafied bust. and u also hear he was being paid overpaid. well... isnt that a situation u can sit on for a while instead of releasing him ASAP. they didnt even try to keep him.

Hall was traded because he didnt want to be part of a rebuilding team...he said multiple times that he wouldnt play for a losing team, and that if the falcons didnt plan on winning now, he would go elsewhere.....Hall knew he wanted to leave, and his public comments where just his way of making it happen....If Hall would have keep his mouth shut, and just layed low during the coaching change over, he would still be on this team.

Crumpler on the other hand, was a salary cap cut in my opinion, Mularkey has never really used a TE for anything more than blocking, and Crumpler was one of the highest paid TE in the league, we needed to free that money up to sign guys like, Turner, Coleman, and the rest of our signings, not to mention our draft picks.

Thats just my 2 cents:D

Agreed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

REV.2000 (7/22/2008)
chifalc (7/21/2008)
sdogg (7/21/2008)
Im sure there are many reasons for doing this. Salary cap reasons, good players that have maxed out and are on the down side(Crump), injury prone players(Crump), disgrunteled players that dont want to be apart of a rebuild(Hall, Taylor), may not fit the new coaches scheme, new coaches want to bring in younger players they can build a foundation, older players are poisioned by the many coaching changes. Thats some reasons, Im sure ther are more.

You think its just remotely possible that the coaching staff and managers have sen more tape and listened to more scouts about Crumpler's current state than you?

YES .... IT IS REMOTELY POSSIBLE. I'M JUST WAITING ON THEM TO BRING IN SOMEBODY BETTER THAN CRUMP. I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT GUY YET. IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT HARD FOR THEM TO DO, SINCE THEY LOOK AT SO MUCH FILM AS YOU SAY. DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT BE REMOTELY POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO DO THIS? AND IF YOU WANT TO ARGUE THE POINT, YOU'LL HAVE TO FIND SOMEONE ELSE. YOU LOVE TO ARGUE. I KEEP TELLING YOU, "ARGUING IS A CHARACTER FLAW." :)

YOu have to see if Crumpler is still better in Crumpler. Just because Tennessee signed him doesn't mean he is going to have a god season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gnorts (7/21/2008)
Why do rebuilding team feel the need to get rid of good players?  We get rid of Hall and crumpler.  Toronto want to get rid of Sundin?  Miami trades whats his face....

What is up with that.

Taking evreything into concideration , It is when their negatives out weigh their positives to put it in short form. And a big part of that is how much do they cost also! If you get the money the high profile players get , there should be no baggage at all. None ! Natta! And there is the biggest reason why , the high profile players cause a lot of problems in a hurry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say the most common reason is because the good players are disgruntled.  If they are considered a good player, that means they are established, which means they are a veteran.  If you've been working on something for 3-4 years, you are not going to be happy about having to start all over again.  If you've seen success doing things a particular way, you are also going to be hesitant to change it. 

For DHall and Jason Taylor, they were both disgruntled.  They both had bad PR around their names.  That's the last thing a rebuilding team needs.  A rebuilding team needs buy in from the players, and that's much harder to get from players that have seen success and lost it due to a new regime.

In regards to Dunn, it was a smart move.  In regards to Crumpler, he was coming off two knee injuries and was the second highest paid TE in the league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see the movie "Hoosiers" ?  Gene Hackman comes in to rebuild a team and immediately has a "run in" with the old coaches and parents.

That's the idea here.  No player is bigger than the team.  Players like Crump, Hall, and Coleman were reportedly very vocal in the locker room and to the media.  The coaches didn't want these guys "brainwashing" the other players, especially the rookies.  They wanted to truly "rebuild." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...