English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I thought they had every right to do what they did; he was an embarrassment to their franchise and he was potentionally dangerous but those are just personal opinions...

did they have a right to release him based on that and
do you think it was the right choice?

2007-06-25 12:42:02 · 22 answers · asked by Tori 2 in Sports Football (American)

22 answers

Yes, they gave him another second chance and all he had to do was keep a clean nose. He nullifed the deal so the team released him. Teams can release a player anytime they want. Contracts are not solid. Yes, I think it was the right decision in personal opinion too. The NFL needs to keep being tough on these players. There has been a rash of player crimes the last year and it needs to stop. Misbehaving players are going to have to punished to get the NFL's image back in tact. I love football and I don't want it to become known as the league of thugs. Its a hard truth that once they sign with an NFL that they are under a microscope. But to play in the NFL is a rare opportunity. For every guy that is an NFL player there are thousands upon thousands of guys that just wished they had that opportunity......I think of all the guys in NFL Europa or Arena football that would just kill to have be a player in the NFL. Its a privilege to play in the NFL but several players today are just blowing it all away. .Everybody deserves a second chance. But once you blow that....Its over........Look at Pacman Jones, all that incredible increduble talent and look what is happening.........

2007-06-25 12:56:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes they are, but as a Bears fan it's too bad to see it end this way. Tank did all the right things on the field and gave 100% effort. Unfortunately, he did not understand the concept of staying within the law, and the Bears let him go.

I'd like to see the other NFL teams send a message to all these thugs who are getting suspended: Now that Tank has been cut, I would love to see nobody sign him. Owners, send these punks a message that if they pull this crap more than once, they're going to be blackballed from the NFL. Too bad it would never happen. There's always going to be an owner or two that will take a chance on a player because of his ability.

2007-06-25 22:38:22 · answer #2 · answered by D-Low 3 · 1 0

Yes they had the right and yes they made the right choice. Whenever one of your players gets in trouble with the law, it makes the team and the organization look bad. Look at the Cincinnati Bengals last year, they had more arrests than wins. Tank Johnson clearly lacks commitment, character, and class, all of which are necessary components of a championship caliber football team. The Bears decided to cut their losses now and focus on building a great team for next season without having to deal with Tank Johnson. It is good for the team and good for the business.

2007-06-25 19:48:06 · answer #3 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0 0

Absolutely they were justified in their action. His actions were ridiculous and dangerous. Tank Johnson is simply another one of those spoiled millionaires who feel that they have the right to do what ever they want. These are adults who act like little children. The Bears were absolutely right in their choice.

2007-06-25 20:06:33 · answer #4 · answered by Big_Cecil 2 · 0 0

The commissioner's new behavioral rules would have cost the team big bucks for his actions related to the character rules. He had been suspended for one or two games during the post season. The owner had every right to release him since he was already going to be out for eight games anyway.

2007-06-25 20:15:17 · answer #5 · answered by Jeffrey W 3 · 0 0

they should not have released tank johnson. Just put yourselves in his shoes. He is tired and sleepy, its 3 AM and there is no one on the road. He wants to get home soon so he goes over the speed limit. Antybody who drives and comes home as late as he has would speed. Even i speed when it is really late and im coming home from work or whatever. Tank got released on something so dumb. If you want to release him, they should have released him for the first thing not for speeding. I think they used this speeding thing as an excuse for releasing him. I think they had the intention of doing it before. Because they released him, how do the titans look for not releasing pac man. They made the titans look desperate because of this move. The police didn't even book Johnson. The Bears are just gonna release their entire defense. (Lance Briggs is holding out and they might release him too).Tough luck all you bears fans, but witha defense that will be eventually completely released, i dont think ne1 will see you guyz in the playoffs anytime soon.

2007-06-25 20:16:20 · answer #6 · answered by pilot3009 1 · 0 3

Of course people will think the Bears was justified since Tank is black. However, when the question was posed about Imus getting fired for making racial comments, the firing was not justified according to many many whites. These same white people will say, the Bears were right.

2007-06-26 01:07:15 · answer #7 · answered by K 3 · 0 2

I like the idea of the league and the teams cleaning up the image of the NFL, but this case sounds like it goes deeper than what the Bears are actually telling us. It seems like they wanted to get rid of him and an opportunity arose so they took it. From what I've heard the situation wasn't that bad.

2007-06-25 20:34:15 · answer #8 · answered by None Profound 5 · 0 1

They certainly did. They had every reason to cut him before his last arrest. But they talked to him and they gave him another chance. They had him on a short leash and his arrest showed the Bears that he hasn't cleaned up his act. I'm not a Bears fan, but I applaud the efforts they took with Tank and that they decided to move on.

2007-06-25 20:38:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

They dont have to have a reason to release him. They could have released him the second he got arrested for having enough guns in his house to start a war. But they didnt. They gave him a second chance. Just the fact that he possibly could have involved in another misconduct, is enough for me to release him.

2007-06-25 20:03:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers