How much should Belichick consider these character issues of its players in its consideration of building a 53 man roster.
Even if Bolden and Cunningham are clean now, it seems that there is a future risk of suspension (greater than other players). Might Belichick simply choose to move on to Blount and Benard?
With regard to Dennard, Belichick already has him playing with the second team. Surely, we need to prepare for time without him.
MY BOTTOM LINE
If Blount and Benard are close, I would say goodbye to Bolden and Cunningham. Keeping marginal players with risks isn't worth a roster spot.
Dennard was a known risk from the beginning. Given that he is a starting quality player, the pats have reasonably announced that he will stay with the team. He is clearly worth keeping, even if only plays a few games.
I don't think that any of us can possibly know enough about the three players you name (Bolden, Cunningham and Dennard), or any players for that matter, to give a clear answer to your question.
Like most of us, I completely missed what was "really" going on with Hernandez, who, it turns out, is, if the authorities in several jurisdictions are right, responsible for multiple homicides. So, it is idiotic for me or anyone to think we know what might or might not be "really" going on with other players.
As close as I can come to answering your question is that there have been, among others, two mainstays of the Patriots' success over the last 13 years. However, those two mainstays both brought with them clearly identifiable downsides and the inevitability that, at some point, the Patriots would have to "pay the piper."
The first mainstay is a willingness to take risks on players out of a firm conviction that there is enough veteran leadership in the lockerroom to keep guys with discipline or attitude issues in line. That worked very well in several noteworthy cases like Dillon and Moss. However, that particular piper has now demanded to be paid in the person of Aaron Hernandez.
The second is a conviction that the Patriots organization is about building a team around a cadre of strong players and not about paying up for "stars" (beyond Brady and Wilfork at this point). Based on that conviction, the Patriots let Wes Welker go rather than pay the relatively small differential between the deal that Welker wanted and the deal they were willing to sign. In the meantime, injuries and criminal charges have resulted in the possibility that none of Tom Brady's top targets from last year (with the possible exception of Gronk) will be available on opening day. Another piper is, after many successful years, now asking for payment.
My bottom line is that the Patriots really have no choice but to continue with the strategy that worked so well throughout the Belichick Brady era.
The Patriots' strategy was and is a solid strategy, but with well-known risks, which have now come home to haunt them. That doesn't mean that the strategy was or is bad; it just means that, eventually, a team that follows it will have to take the bad with the good and pay the price. That looks like it's happening now, but the strategy has sure given us 13 great years and will possibly give us yet others before Belichick and Brady ride off into the sunset.
