So how should we define "damage"? That might be what this thread should be about. I don't care too much about the arguing that has happened here for 60+ pages because it's all spin anyway. I don't quite have the high marks for Flores and Grier on this one that so many want to give them. We traded a 7th round pick for this guy (yes, we are able to get it back in a year) and I don't believe any one else did have an offer for Wilson. To me, it says the Dolphins are still desperate to find talent any way possible because they still are questionable at being able to draft it. You can agree or not but that's still my take. I always feel like we overdraft players - taking them a round or two too early, drafting a position out of desperation rather than taking best player available when our time to pick comes up, etc.
Am I wrong? No one can tell me that I truly am - at best you can tell me my conclusion is incomplete - that the jury is still out on this, on Grier etc. How about free agency? Anyone loving what we did last year as much now as we seemed to like it a year ago? If you say yes, you're either fooling yourself or a liar. I actually feel better about this year as our contracts are shorter and the money much less for guys we're taking a flyer on - and yes - that's what free agency is - a flyer just like all talent acquisition turns out to be. Meanwhile, the "Dolphins" get to have their name, brand, etc. tied to Mr. Wilson for all eternity as we felt the need to tie assets to him all in the name of getting our hands on him and kicking the tires. Agree or disagree, it really doesn't matter to me. Now.......
Sorry I took a while to get to this but again, this is what this is all about....."perception" or "damage". How is it defined? It's not set in stone at all. And it's amazing to me that it's viewed so differently. It usually depends on your generation as to how you feel about something. I saw something some years ago that bothered the hell out of me and almost made be give up fandom. I think about it to this day and I'm amazed how it still makes me furious. I saw the great Odell Beckham catch a touchdown for the New York Giants in a day game at Philadelphia. He then proceeded to emulate pissing like a dog in their end zone. I was shocked at it (and have seen it happen with others since as well, but that's another matter) and couldn't believe what I had witnessed. What shocked me even more? That so many people had absolutely NO PROBLEM with his actions whatsoever. DISCLOSURE: I'm kind of old but you've probably guessed this already. I was furious and I really hoped that the Giants were equally furious and that this Beckham action got the ball rolling on Big Blue ridding themselves of this individual from their organization. Oh, he's got talent so you can't do that. --- Bullshyt! The guy should be gone! Plus it sends the proper message to the others who wear the uniform that this won't be tolerated. So he became Cleveland's problem....soon he'll be someone else's problem (I can only PRAY that it's not US but I'll hold my breath).
So again, back to the question: what is "damage"? Did Beckham cause the Giants organization, brand, etc. "damage" by acting like a urinating idiot? Many people thought that it was "cute". I continue to be stunned by this. Seeing the apathy towards what he did made me realize that I truly am old and am in the minority on how people look at things these days. Younger people will read this (or maybe they won't) and just roll their eyes that someone would care enough to write something this long on the matter. But yes folks, how you act - on the job and off - does matter. How you conduct yourself does matter, does have consequences and while it's not illegal for someone to dance on the hood of their car shirtless, it might convey to the people who you should be going out of your way to impress that you still just don't get it. OK, I'm done. I feel better now.