San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. Pretend for a second that you're not a Bills fan: SOMEONE ELSE: Hey, looks like Tampa signed Buffalo's Angelo Crowell. YOU: Who? ----SCENE----- Seriously though, it's not a hole if the guy hasn't been on the field since 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. I have no problem with people making a principled decision. However, if you're going to be principled as an NFL GM or similar, have winning be one of those and make decisions that support that goal. That would include your choice of head coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Pretend for a second that you're not a Bills fan: SOMEONE ELSE: Hey, looks like Tampa signed Buffalo's Angelo Crowell. YOU: Who? ----SCENE----- Seriously though, it's not a hole if the guy hasn't been on the field since 2007. Amen! Absolutely THE best post ever on this tired topic. Goodbye Angelo. Enjoy your year in Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 9, 2009 Author Share Posted April 9, 2009 Pretend for a second that you're not a Bills fan: SOMEONE ELSE: Hey, looks like Tampa signed Buffalo's Angelo Crowell. YOU: Who? ----SCENE----- Seriously though, it's not a hole if the guy hasn't been on the field since 2007. Disagree Cat. That might be the case for a casual fan but that's not me. I think the drop off from Crowell to Ellison is quite large...and now we might have to burn a draft pick unless they think that Alvin Bowen is the answer. I have no problem with people making a principled decision. However, if you're going to be principled as an NFL GM or similar, have winning be one of those and make decisions that support that goal. That would include your choice of head coach. Agree. And I think that Brandon's actions were not in the best interests of the team. It's his job to make decisions that are in the best interests of the team...not break out Gregg Williams' figurative bullhorn or thump his own chest. We are all as principled as we can afford to be. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face. You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Are there any other applicable cliches I missed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Disagree Cat. That might be the case for a casual fan but that's not me. I think the drop off from Crowell to Ellison is quite large...and now we might have to burn a draft pick unless they think that Alvin Bowen is the answer. Agree. And I think that Brandon's actions were not in the best interests of the team. It's his job to make decisions that are in the best interests of the team...not break out Gregg Williams' figurative bullhorn or thump his own chest. We are all as principled as we can afford to be. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face. You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Are there any other applicable cliches I missed? "Don't cry over spilled milk." "Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. First of all, it was Ralph's decision. Secondly, Crowell definitely is a better player than Ellison but he is severely overrated by a lot of people here. He freelances a lot. He may have made a slight difference but not that big of one. Thirdly, it did seem like he was more worried about his free agency than helping out the team. He picked a weird time to have a surgery. i'm sure there are 2 sides to the story but if I was Ralph, I'd be pissed too. Lastly, there are more talented LBs in this draft. Elite LBs don't sign 1 year contracts for a $1 million. Crowell seems like a good guy and i wish him well but let's move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Well, that's one side of the story. I'd like to hear the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. Do you know this for a fact, or are you just presuming that Brandon, and not Ralph, made that decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 If I were a betting man, I'd bet that we'll be missing AC not long into the '09 campaign. And living down here in NFC South land, I'll see a fair bit of the guy most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. I normally agree with many things you say, but I think this one was more on Ralph than Brandon. That was the impression I got all along. There is no proof who did what, but it seems to fall under the M.O of Ralph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 If I were a betting man, I'd bet that we'll be missing AC not long into the '09 campaign. And living down here in NFC South land, I'll see a fair bit of the guy most likely. Good thing you're not a betting man. Why--after him not playing for a year--would anyone BET on him being valuable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Good thing you're not a betting man. Why--after him not playing for a year--would anyone BET on him being valuable? Well, four reasons: 1) He was a pretty damn good player before he got hurt, 2) He's still in his mid-20s, 3) players come back to form after knee surgery all the time nowadays, and 4) I saw Keith Ellison play last year. Want another one? The Bills tried to keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. IIRC, late in the season, Cro himself said that he couldn't have played at all last year after the surgery. He couldn't practice a week or so ago and was just cleared to play for the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Well, four reasons: 1) He was a pretty decent player before he got hurt, 2) He's in his late-20s, 3) players come back to form after knee surgery some of the time, and 4) I saw Keith Ellison play last year. The Bills tried, but not that hard to keep him. That'll do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 That'll do. Ah, so semantics is your game, eh? I'll remember you 6-8 months from now, Big Cat!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/apr/09/sp...ct/sports-bucs/ Quite likely Crowell's account and the Bills account differ as far as the chronology of when the subject of surgery was first brought up. Regardless, Crowell would have been out 3-4 weeks. As I stated before, the IR move by the Bills smacked of punishment, pettiness and spite. They've carried injured players on the roster for weeks before Crowell. But Brandon was pissed off by the timing of Crowell's decision regardless of how the Bills may have been complicit in that decision. That tough guy Brandon sure showed us...that he has another roster hole to fill. From the article. That's Jauron's polite phrase for a sudden disconnect between an organization and one of its cornerstone players. I'm not sure Crowell was a "cornerstone" player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Pretend for a second that you're not a Bills fan: SOMEONE ELSE: Hey, looks like Tampa signed Buffalo's Angelo Crowell. YOU: Who? ----SCENE----- Seriously though, it's not a hole if the guy hasn't been on the field since 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 IIRC, late in the season, Cro himself said that he couldn't have played at all last year after the surgery. He couldn't practice a week or so ago and was just cleared to play for the first time. Thank you for noting that, Kelly. So much of the discussion of Crowell hinges on this phantom "3-4 week" statement, as if that were a given. He ended up needing and having much more intense surgery, he would not have been available in 3-4 weeks. Whether the Bills should have signed him anyway is another matter, but this fixation on poor Crowell being the victim of mindless pettiness has to end.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Thank you for noting that, Kelly. So much of the discussion of Crowell hinges on this phantom "3-4 week" statement, as if that were a given. He ended up needing and having much more intense surgery, he would not have been available in 3-4 weeks. Whether the Bills should have signed him anyway is another matter, but this fixation on poor Crowell being the victim of mindless pettiness has to end.... This article from this week shows that he is clearly not ready and couldn't have played last year after the surgery. He is just starting to do "football movements" now. The Bucs docs tell him in four weeks from now he should be able to run full speed. http://www.pewterreport.com/articles/view/5376 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts