Stop being so logicaljobberone;2067214 said:Maybe its his interviews and a more intimate knowledge of all the facts which are causing teams to stay away from him.
aikemirv;2067945 said:Is he a drug dealer or a user? How much did he get caught with on both occasions?
Maybe that is the difference between him and Talib/ Manningham.
If he is just a user who got caught with it versus a user that tested positive for it that is just semantics IMO.
If the Koren Robinsons, Leonard Little's and Jeremay Stevens of this world get multiple chances there is really no reason Bowman should not be given another shot.
jobberone;2067214 said:Maybe its his interviews and a more intimate knowledge of all the facts which are causing teams to stay away from him.
The problem with this is that there should be virtually no risk at this point. You sign him to a peanuts UDFA contract and go from there. If he works out, great, if not there's absolutely no risk. You've got nothing to lose, but a very likely starting WR to gain.Reality;2067971 said:Stop being so logical
-Reality
theogt;2067974 said:The problem with this is that there should be virtually no risk at this point. You sign him to a peanuts UDFA contract and go from there. If he works out, great, if not there's absolutely no risk. You've got nothing to lose, but a very likely starting WR to gain.
UNLESS, there's risk coming from some other source, such as a threat by the league that they'll punish a TEAM (rather than just the player) for signing or drafting a player with a "history" and that player gets into more trouble. That added risk, would certainly cause teams to not sign him to an UDFA contract.
theogt;2067974 said:The problem with this is that there should be virtually no risk at this point. You sign him to a peanuts UDFA contract and go from there. If he works out, great, if not there's absolutely no risk. You've got nothing to lose, but a very likely starting WR to gain.
UNLESS, there's risk coming from some other source, such as a threat by the league that they'll punish a TEAM (rather than just the player) for signing or drafting a player with a "history" and that player gets into more trouble. That added risk, would certainly cause teams to not sign him to an UDFA contract.
No idea, but Goodell certainly hasn't cared about "equal treatment" in the past. It wouldn't surprise me for him to just pick and choose random players to rail against, such as Bowman. He may just want to set his example for college players coming into the NFL right now and Bowman looks like the easiest target.hendog;2067991 said:That makes sense but where would Pac fit into that scenario?
Yeah, I think he'd have some pretty serious legal problems on his hands if he warned teams against drafting or signing Bowman.stasheroo;2067995 said:I would be very interested in how Goodell could go about legally enforcing something like that.
If the league mandates that team not sign certain players, isn't that some sort of collusion? And by the very definition illegal?
I'm no expert, but that's sure what it looks like.
theogt;2067974 said:The problem with this is that there should be virtually no risk at this point. You sign him to a peanuts UDFA contract and go from there. If he works out, great, if not there's absolutely no risk. You've got nothing to lose, but a very likely starting WR to gain.
UNLESS, there's risk coming from some other source, such as a threat by the league that they'll punish a TEAM (rather than just the player) for signing or drafting a player with a "history" and that player gets into more trouble. That added risk, would certainly cause teams to not sign him to an UDFA contract.
Talib wasn't arrested just weeks before the Combine.aikemirv;2068015 said:If that is the case then why would you draft Talib in the late teens.
theogt;2068042 said:Talib wasn't arrested just weeks before the Combine.
31smackdown;2068068 said:My guess is that a player like this would probably go directly in the NFL substance abuse program with one strike. Which would mean that any further use would get a suspension.. (oh and a year in jail in this case) and I would not be suprised if there is a magic number of players that a team is allowed to have in these programs... substance abuse, or other programs. If teams know that they can only have 5 guys in programs without being penalized, then the risk of taking someone that would immediately add to that number is possibly too great. The Cowboys are probably close to that number now if I had to guess..
WoodysGirl;2068002 said:Bowman still unsigned
May 1, 2008 7:18 PM
Posted by ESPN.com's Bill Williamson
There is at least one interesting name who wasn't drafted last weekend or who wasn't signed as an undrafted free agent: Oklahoma State's Adarius Bowman.
Bowman is living proof that NFL teams now care about character. He was arrested in the weeks prior to the draft and he has, remarkably, gone untouched. He was expected to be a top choice prior to last season before he was injured. He was a productive player for the Cowboys and he has NFL size.
Bowman had the numbers to be drafted. But slow 40 times in recent months and his arrest have kept him off teams' radars. It's really an intriguing story. This kid has ability. Football speaking, he deserves to be signed. Really, he deserved to be drafted. But teams look for more than football these days and the fact that Bowman is still unsigned proves it.
I think the NFL tams do care about character, but not for the reasons one might think. They care about their character because it could co$t them, that is all.FCBarca;2068144 said:Bowman is living proof that NFL teams now care about character.
Not according to the Bengal fans I know.WoodysGirl;2068002 said:Bowman is living proof that NFL teams now care about character.