Incognito suspended indefinitely by Dolphins

[Gronk]

This whole is story and reporting process is so stupid I don't know what to think. Monday, I think Jon Martin has a point and I feel bad for his struggles (playing football is different than an office job, sure, but it's still a workplace), Tuesday I think Incognito is likely just playing to a typical NFL locker room stereotype (even if extreme in action), Wednesday I have to question whether either of the players are even at issue if the organization is involved. I guess at least the Dolphins didn't set up a PCP flophouse for their players like BB did KIDDING. I just don't think anyone who hasn't been part of an NFL team can even make an adequate judgment of what the "norm" is and how it should be maintained, and I don't think anyone who has been a part of an NFL team is necessarily being completely honest. So I expect an NFL investigation that doesn't really explain anything, and Incognito and Martin will probably both play somewhere again with varying degrees of success and no one will really give a **** either way. Unless there's somehow a way for ESPN to turn this story into a parable glorifying Peyton Manning.

 

[Ring 6]

Then why did the Dolphins do a 180 on Sunday and suspend Incognito indefinitely after first saying there was no problem for 5 days? Why would they do that without context?

Most likely to get in front of the public outrage to the content of the voicemail about to be released without context.
They didn't cut him or banish him they suspended him.
Clearly they must have done it without context because with context it looks like a questionable decision and likely an ass covering move.
You also continue to pretend to not know that the sane people who reportedly instructed him to make that call are the ones who suspended him. Certainly looks like a cya move now that we do have context.

 

[shmessy]

The Dolphins front office has now hung out to dry Martin, Incognito and all the players (who revolted against Monday's no-comment edict and let loose to the press today).

Could be far fetched, but this may end up in a players walkout at some point. The disconnect between the organization and the players is that wide. I'd put it at at least a 10% chance.

 

[BKBroiler]

People dismissed it at first, but as more of this story comes out, Incognito's response to Schefter about dragging his name through the mud is looking more and more accurate. I wouldn't be surprised if someone found out that it was someone in the Martin's camp leaking info to Schefter. And as always Schefter looks to have been more worried about being the first to report something whether or not he had the full story. To be honest, maybe this will be a wake up call to the sports media to stop worrying about being the first to report something and to start focusing on being the first to report things correctly (although I doubt it).

 

[shmessy]

People dismissed it at first, but as more of this story comes out, Incognito's response to Schefter about dragging his name through the mud is looking more and more accurate. I wouldn't be surprised if someone found out that it was someone in the Martin's camp leaking info to Schefter. And as always Schefter looks to have been more worried about being the first to report something whether or not he had the full story. To be honest, maybe this will be a wake up call to the sports media to stop worrying about being the first to report something and to start focusing on being the first to report things correctly (although I doubt it).

Incognito is not off the hook.

He may have been put up to it, but that doesn't mean he is off the hook. It only means there very well may be many others on the hook also. "Just following orders" does not mean innocence. If he did nothing wrong, then he is innocent.

 

[Fencer]

Most likely to get in front of the public outrage to the content of the voicemail about to be released without context.
They didn't cut him or banish him they suspended him.
Clearly they must have done it without context because with context it looks like a questionable decision and likely an ass covering move.
You also continue to pretend to not know that the sane people who reportedly instructed him to make that call are the ones who suspended him. Certainly looks like a cya move now that we do have context.

I doubt they instructed him to word the call that way.

To repeat my opinion: If you say something that on the face of it is wrongful, and the target indeed feels wronged, then you're to blame AT THE MINIMUM for a poor job of communicating.

When one acts as abusively as Incognito did, in the expectation that the target would actually take it well, failure to get a good response is NOT an acceptable option.

By way of contrast, I'd be surprised if McGinest or Vrabel or Wilfork or Brady or other BB-blessed locker leaders went NEARLY as far beyond BB's own way of phrasing things. Yeah, BB swears at people a lot; I have little doubt that McGinest did too. But was he a lot HARSHER than BB? I'd be shocked. (I'm using rap mogul McGinest as the example because I suspect his style was a bit harsher than, say, funny man Vrabel's, everyman Bruschi's, gentle giant Wilfork's, or metrosexual Brady's.)

 

[Deus Irae]

...To repeat my opinion: If you say something that on the face of it is wrongful, and the target indeed feels wronged, then you're to blame AT THE MINIMUM for a poor job of communicating....

No........

Not in general, and not as applies in this case (at least not necessarily).

First, it presupposes something spoken to be wrongful on its face.

Second, it ignores secondary factors, such as mood.

 

[Fencer]

No........

Not in general, and not as applies in this case (at least not necessarily).

First, it presupposes something spoken to be wrongful on its face.

Second, it ignores secondary factors, such as mood.

Your second point has some small validity, as a modifier to my concept of "wrongful on its face". As for the first -- a spoken threat of violence can easily be construed as the crime of assault (not battery, however), and in my opinion that's a good law. Football being as it is, it would take great creativity to say something so bad you get jailed for it. But suffering professional difficulties because of what you say? That's a lower hurdle.

If you attack somebody, it's your duty to ensure that the context is such that the attack isn't wrongful. Incognito obviously failed at that duty.

 

[Deus Irae]

Your second point has some small validity, as a modifier to my concept of "wrongful on its face". As for the first -- a spoken threat of violence can easily be construed as the crime of assault (not battery, however), and in my opinion that's a good law. Football being as it is, it would take great creativity to say something so bad you get jailed for it. But suffering professional difficulties because of what you say? That's a lower hurdle.

If you attack somebody, it's your duty to ensure that the context is such that the attack isn't wrongful. Incognito obviously failed at that duty.

Again, no. I can say the exact same thing to someone, including a 'spoken threat of violence', 100 times, with effect "A". Time 101 can lead to effect "B" for any number of reasons, and not all of them need be a failure of communication on the part of the speaker.

 

[Christiancat]

Ryan Tannehill: Jonathan Martin and Incognito were best friends - CBSSports.com

I like Ryan Tannehill for many reasons. However, his statements about the bullying situation is questionable. I don't buy the whole Martin and Incognito were like brothers story.

 

[Fencer]

Again, no. I can say the exact same thing to someone, including a 'spoken threat of violence', 100 times, with effect "A". Time 101 can lead to effect "B" for any number of reasons, and not all of them need be a failure of communication on the part of the speaker.

As long as SOME of the reasons are the fault of the speaker, my point stands.

Anyhow, if you think that the responsibility for communication rests solely on the listener -- well first, that would explain a lot of your posting style, and second, I feel pity for any family, friends or coworkers you may have.

 

[doesntmatter1]

Martin is an evil genius. Instead of nipping this in the butt with a swift punch he got back at Incognito tenfold. Martin had to endure for awhile, but Incognito may be done in the NFL altogether and he has no one to blame but himself. Touche Mr. Stanford.

Honestly, I'm loving this situation. Everyone is getting their feathers ruffled by the bullying angle(he's physically fine so it doesn't register with me), but all I see are potential Dolphin losses due to their offensive line dysfunction.

 

[shmessy]

**** I know Jonathan Martin now has a huge scarlet letter on him. And from all reports, Martin has not performed well with the Dolphins the past year and a half.

However, although many claim Martin cannot be a good OL and that he came to the Dolphins as soft or damaged goods, there's the possibility it may have been the environment there that drove him down. With a different team and a different environment (one that needs depth at RT? ) he could thrive.

This was eye opening:

Miami Dolphins: Jonathan Martin exhibited no warning signs in pre-draft psychological tests - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN


"..Martin registered extremely high marks on the testing conducted by the North Carolina-based scouting service Human Resource Tactics that is used by several NFL teams. A copy of the report obtained by FOX Sports showed Martin scored a perfect 10 for his overall profile as well as two subcategories of testing – affective commitment and combative attitude. He scored a 9 for dedication, self-efficacy and receptivity to coaching.

Martin’s lowest grades were given for social maturity (6), focus (7) and interpersonal style (7). Even so, those marks were well above those posted by most of Martin’s peers in the 2012
draft.....
.......Martin enjoys man-to-man challenges and the chance to compete,” the report said. “During games he will demonstrate a tough, no-holds-barred aggressive attitude that will help bring out the competitive spirit in his teammates. Martin has a very high level of dedication and desire to reach his full potential as a player, and he will set a good example of getting the most of one’s ability. He takes practices seriously and will work hard to improve his skills and technique. He has a strong passion for the game and being a good football player is a very high priority for him....."

 

[Tunescribe]

I doubt they instructed him to word the call that way.

To repeat my opinion: If you say something that on the face of it is wrongful, and the target indeed feels wronged, then you're to blame AT THE MINIMUM for a poor job of communicating.

When one acts as abusively as Incognito did, in the expectation that the target would actually take it well, failure to get a good response is NOT an acceptable option.

By way of contrast, I'd be surprised if McGinest or Vrabel or Wilfork or Brady or other BB-blessed locker leaders went NEARLY as far beyond BB's own way of phrasing things. Yeah, BB swears at people a lot; I have little doubt that McGinest did too. But was he a lot HARSHER than BB? I'd be shocked. (I'm using rap mogul McGinest as the example because I suspect his style was a bit harsher than, say, funny man Vrabel's, everyman Bruschi's, gentle giant Wilfork's, or metrosexual Brady's.)

You're making the mistake I alluded to earlier of evaluating this affair from the perspective of adult behavior. This is what has everyone fooled. These are man-children living in an alternate reality; our commonly accepted societal frames of reference do not apply.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

**** I know Jonathan Martin now has a huge scarlet letter on him. And from all reports, Martin has not performed well with the Dolphins the past year and a half.

However, although many claim Martin cannot be a good OL and that he came to the Dolphins as soft or damaged goods, there's the possibility it may have been the environment there that drove him down. With a different team and a different environment (one that needs depth at RT? ) he could thrive.

This was eye opening:

Miami Dolphins: Jonathan Martin exhibited no warning signs in pre-draft psychological tests - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN


"..Martin registered extremely high marks on the testing conducted by the North Carolina-based scouting service Human Resource Tactics that is used by several NFL teams. A copy of the report obtained by FOX Sports showed Martin scored a perfect 10 for his overall profile as well as two subcategories of testing – affective commitment and combative attitude. He scored a 9 for dedication, self-efficacy and receptivity to coaching.

Martin’s lowest grades were given for social maturity (6), focus (7) and interpersonal style (7). Even so, those marks were well above those posted by most of Martin’s peers in the 2012
draft.....
.......Martin enjoys man-to-man challenges and the chance to compete,” the report said. “During games he will demonstrate a tough, no-holds-barred aggressive attitude that will help bring out the competitive spirit in his teammates. Martin has a very high level of dedication and desire to reach his full potential as a player, and he will set a good example of getting the most of one’s ability. He takes practices seriously and will work hard to improve his skills and technique. He has a strong passion for the game and being a good football player is a very high priority for him....."

Says more about the test and the experts doesn't it. I mean can we conclude from Brady's combine reports he's secretly not a very good QB, or that the experts were flat out wrong?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Ryan Tannehill: Jonathan Martin and Incognito were best friends - CBSSports.com

I like Ryan Tannehill for many reasons. However, his statements about the bullying situation is questionable. I don't buy the whole Martin and Incognito were like brothers story.

And another Phins player, a former OL checks in…

http://mmqb.si.com/2013/11/07/richie-incognito-jonathan-martin-dolphins-lydon-murtha/

 

[Deus Irae]

As long as SOME of the reasons are the fault of the speaker, my point stands.

Anyhow, if you think that the responsibility for communication rests solely on the listener -- well first, that would explain a lot of your posting style, and second, I feel pity for any family, friends or coworkers you may have.

I think that your claim that there becomes an automatic MINIMUM is erroneous, and you clearly see that now, since you're backtracking from your initial spot. I also find it amusing that you decided to attack me personally the way you just did here, given the particulars of this thread and the harshest word I used in replying to you was the word "no".

 

[Fencer]

I think that your claim that there becomes an automatic MINIMUM is erroneous, and you clearly see that now, since you're backtracking from your initial spot. I also find it amusing that you decided to attack me personally the way you just did here, given the particulars of this thread and the harshest word I used in replying to you was the word "no".

Not backtracking.

 

[Deus Irae]

Not backtracking.

You backtracked in your post, with this obviously incorrect fall back:

As long as SOME of the reasons are the fault of the speaker, my point stands.

although I guess it's possible that you just can't communicate your points well.


Must be your fault.

 

[Fencer]

You're making the mistake I alluded to earlier of evaluating this affair from the perspective of adult behavior. This is what has everyone fooled. These are man-children living in an alternate reality; our commonly accepted societal frames of reference do not apply.

I don't think I'm making that mistake at all.

If we were viewing this like an ordinary adult workplace disagreement, Incognito would have been fired long ago, rather than suspended this week.