Of reclamation projects and RKG's

[jday]

Last year, in the wake of the Ro McClain signing, I felt it necessary to review exactly what Jason means when he talks about RKG. With the potential acquisition of Greg Hardy looming, it's probably a good time to review.

RKG doesn't necessarily mean choirboy, boyscout, or good Samaritan. Granted, as a general rule, guy's who are RKG's on the field are also RKG's off the field. But that doesn't necessarily mean a player has to have a perfect off-the-field persona. Truth be told, Romo/Witten, the consummate RKG's, have skeleton's in their closet...they have just done a better job than Ro, Hardy, and other character questioned players of keeping their issues in-house. But that is beside the point.

The point is RKG has very little to do with moral compass and values and everything to do with a players love and commitment to the game of football. It questions their heart. It questions their effort. It questions what type of teammate they are. It questions the work they put in to be the best they can be. It does not question rather or not they help old ladies cross the street in their spare time.

With that said, should the Cowboys acquire Hardy, it doesn't mean a departure from the RKG model or exceptions are being made for talent. It simply means the Cowboys are granting Hardy the opportunity to prove he is in RKG...because if he doesn't, he will not last long here in Dallas.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

No offense to the OP as it is not directed at them but just in general.

RKG=WMTBO

WMTBO= Wearing me the blank out... Family friendly version

 

[BigStar]

What coach isn't looking for these traits...outside of Cincy?

 

[jday]

No offense to the OP as it is not directed at them but just in general.

RKG=WMTBO

WMTBO= Wearing me the blank out... Family friendly version

No offense taken. I'm annoyed by the discussion, as well. But I find it even more annoying when people take RKG out of context, hence the post.

 

[jday]

What coach isn't looking for these traits...outside of Cincy?

Another great point! Every team is pretty much looking for the same thing. Jason just has a name for it.

 

[BigStar]

Another great point! Every team is pretty much looking for the same thing. Jason just has a name for it.

I'm over JG tbh and like what the team accomplished enough last season to understand he earned an extension even with some personal gripes about his tenure here, etc. Call it whatever ya like JG, just bring in talent when available; when we sign/retain problem players(Ro/Brent), they are still problem players despite our vague definition of RKG, etc.

 

[slick325]

No offense to the OP as it is not directed at them but just in general.

RKG=WMTBO

WMTBO= Wearing me the blank out... Family friendly version

Maybe the quote from Garrett you posted in the article earlier should be stickied.....in case a poster forgets they can look it up at will. SMH...

Edit: Not directed at you Jday...

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

No offense taken. I'm annoyed by the discussion, as well. But I find it even more annoying when people take RKG out of context, hence the post.

Yes... I agree. I have also said multiple times that RKG pretty much means anything someone wants it to mean to justify taking a player.

 

[BigStar]

Yes... I agree. I have also said multiple times that RKG pretty much means anything someone wants it to mean to justify taking a player.

But den... Either way glad the arrow is pointing up.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

No offense taken. I'm annoyed by the discussion, as well. But I find it even more annoying when people take RKG out of context, hence the post.

I think the term has relevance primarily concerning the leaders, the core members, of the team. If you have the right core, accent pieces -- guys like Hardy, competitors with talent who may not necessarily be role models -- can contribute without upsetting the balance of the core mentality. That is, as long as there are core values/expectations in place.

 

[jday]

Yes... I agree. I have also said multiple times that RKG pretty much means anything someone wants it to mean to justify taking a player.

To be honest, I'm not exactly crazy about the idea of getting Hardy, in consideration of the allegations; I would not be disappointed at all if he left Dallas without contract. Sure, he could help the Cowboys; he is a definite upgrade over what the Cowboys presently have. But I don't see him as the only chance the Cowboys have to contend in 2015.

 

[Silver N Blue]

Good points and if Big Ben and others like him with similar issues can change Hardy deserves the same opportunities. Bring the kraken in!

 

[EST_1986]

RKG is the dumbest thing ever just get guys that can play

 

[xwalker]

Last year, in the wake of the Ro McClain signing, I felt it necessary to review exactly what Jason means when he talks about RKG. With the potential acquisition of Greg Hardy looming, it's probably a good time to review.

RKG doesn't necessarily mean choirboy, boyscout, or good Samaritan. Granted, as a general rule, guy's who are RKG's on the field are also RKG's off the field. But that doesn't necessarily mean a player has to have a perfect off-the-field persona. Truth be told, Romo/Witten, the consummate RKG's, have skeleton's in their closet...they have just done a better job than Ro, Hardy, and other character questioned players of keeping their issues in-house. But that is beside the point.

The point is RKG has very little to do with moral compass and values and everything to do with a players love and commitment to the game of football. It questions their heart. It questions their effort. It questions what type of teammate they are. It questions the work they put in to be the best they can be. It does not question rather or not they help old ladies cross the street in their spare time.

With that said, should the Cowboys acquire Hardy, it doesn't mean a departure from the RKG model or exceptions are being made for talent. It simply means the Cowboys are granting Hardy the opportunity to prove he is in RKG...because if he doesn't, he will not last long here in Dallas.

Michael Irvin.

He would be RKG but it's a fine line because he would have been suspended by Goodell often.

 

[jday]

Michael Irvin.

He would be RKG but it's a fine line because he would have been suspended by Goodell often.

Irvin is a great example of guy that Garrett describes as an RKG, who did not fit the profile most people use to describe it.

 

[khiladi]

Who cares what Garrett thinks about Irvin being an RKG? The latter was instrumental in our SB wins. JG was not. Irvin is the legend here.

 

[texbumthelife]

RKG can and does mean different things to different people/players/coaches. You can give your thoughts and definition, but you can't define it for others.

We may try to gain a better understanding of what Garrett considers "RKG" but that does not, but any means, define exactly what an RKG is to Chip Kelly or Pete Carroll.

 

[jday]

Who cares what Garrett thinks about Irvin being an RKG? The latter was instrumental in our SB wins. JG was not. Irvin is the legend here.

Well...thanks for contributing to the conversation. We are all better people for having read the above.

 

[jrumann59]

the easiest way to explain it is lunch pail guys, its one thing to have talent and work hard to achieve your ultimate goal, winning a SB its another to use your talent to only parlay it into a pay day SB be damned. Personally JG would rather have roster of average to above average talent playing their hearts out for the team and one another than have roster of Randy Mosses that pick and choose when they play.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

the easiest way to explain it is lunch pail guys, its one thing to have talent and work hard to achieve your ultimate goal, winning a SB its another to use your talent to only parlay it into a pay day SB be damned. Personally JG would rather have roster of average to above average talent playing their hearts out for the team and one another than have roster of Randy Mosses that pick and choose when they play.

I think you nailed it.