Pat McAffee Story in IndyStar

[SteelCityColt]

Just now, DougDew said:

What is my opinion on Ballard?  Am I in the "like him" or "hate him" bucket there BillyBob?

 

 

You're not very impressed with him, and also seem to be offended by the "worship" of him on the boards. I mean you do mention it quite a lot.... 

[Cynjin]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The language isn't the problem. He didn't go to Chuck to tell him how much of a jerk Grigson was. By his own admission, he went and told Chuck to go bleep himself, when Chuck wasn't even aware of what happened.

 

That's different from venting to another manager, or discussing the matter with another manager or HR rep to cover your own butt. 

 

True, but I believe Pat recalled him saying if you had anything to do with this...  It was also in the heat of the moment, which in my experience in a locker room leads to a lot of foul language back and forth.  To Pagano's credit he seemed like he tried to find out what was going on.  I just don't have an issue with Pat telling off his boss when he had other options.  I would bet that Pagano probably doesn't have an issue with Pat saying what he did either.  This is all speculation on the story being accurate, but it does ring true considering other reports about Grigson.

[DougDew]

23 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

That runs counter to all the noises Ballard has made, and the moves he's made too. On what basis are you saying that? Having a franchise QB doesn't preclude building a good roster. 

I assume that the Ballard led Colts will win more games because Luck is the QB.  Does having a franchise QB not matter now because we have a new GM?

 

I didn't say it precludes building a good roster.  Yes, you should hit on 1st round picks....but many of them will be spent to replace other good players that retired, injured, left for whatever.   Not many picks are on a team for longer than 7 years.  We didn't replace Mathis or Reggie, so here we are.

 

I'm waiting to see how fast Ballard builds the roster .......outside of riding Luck to the playoffs.......when he has to replace his LT and his WR1 within 3 years.  I assume he'll have the opportunity to do it with the money Grigson left him.

 

I'm sorry, am I "defending Grigson", and "hating Ballard", by pointing out that Ballard will be signing FA (building his roster) with the money Grigson left him?  Golly, sorry to point that out.

 

 

[CamMo]

Something else I thought about after reading this story, is how much the COLTure (ha) has changed inside the locker room.

We went from “no photos in football rooms” to Kemoko Turay literally live-streaming the happenings within the locker room nearly every day. 

A lot of dancing and racing remote control cars. Hopefully happier football players = more wins.

[chad72]

Pat should let it go. He was trying to drum up similarities with how he exited the Colts while talking about his Barstool Sports exit, and in the process, he kept beating the dead snake, which he had done so a while ago himself. 

 

It definitely sounds self-serving and attention-seeking to me, and in a way, trying to stay relevant. I think Pat needs to find better material to dwell on and build upon. Just my two cents.

 

It does not change my impression of Grigson whatsoever, but it does no one any good bringing up old wounds, for the fans or the organization.

[Surge89]

27 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

  It is very different when the livelihoods of close family might be affected

     

 

Lol dramatic much?  They choose to get in those arguments I've been in a professional setting as well still the same. People make their own choices if you are gonna fret over choices others make you'll be a very stressed individual. 

[Myles]

I have no issue with Pat bringing this up.  The history of why we are where we are is still interesting to me.   Grigson was a cluster@#$% in almost every way.   We are still suffering from it.  

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, Surge89 said:

 

Lol dramatic much?  They choose to get in those arguments I've been in a professional setting as well still the same. People make their own choices if you are gonna fret over choices others make you'll be a very stressed individual. 

My parents taught for 87 years combined and for  the 1st 25 years of my life my Dad and/or I coached at least one sport 

 

   Stories like this bring back memories of changed stories of how something went down

[DougDew]

13 minutes ago, Myles said:

I have no issue with Pat bringing this up.  The history of why we are where we are is still interesting to me.   Grigson was a cluster@#$% in almost every way.   We are still suffering from it.  

And that's a reasonable interest, IMO.  But so many chime in with one sentence answers or generalizations that any interest they may have doesn't seem very deep.  Its akin to something else and it gets in the way.

[Superman]

36 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I've said this before.  I don't think that pointing out where attacks are flawed is the same thing as saying they prefer Grigson.  Its simple to throw people into a like or dislike bucket.  Also, when I point out flawed attacks, I don't feel compelled to say the "but I don't like the guy either" stuff.

 

I'm talking about the GM of a team that went to the playoffs annually then left with no worse than an 8-8 record.  The attack now is that he rode the arm of Luck and left the Colts with a terrible roster.  Well, duh, that's why you draft him #1, forgo the RG type of trade to build a team a different way, then sign him to contract that puts a big dent in your cap.  We could have had a better roster under Polian too, but we rode Manning for years and had limited draft picks at the bottom of each round.  And, Luck is part of that 8-8 roster, and Ballard will ride his arm also.

 

Polian's picks stunk too, and he left us with cap problems, but I don't hear the same kind of animus towards Polian.  Maybe the current generation doesn't know him, or they are just generally hate other people more and are more vocal about it. 

 

I don't think the discussions about Grigson even have anything to do with the Colts.  I think it has to do with validating a faith of some kind.  No other topic ever brings so much discussion.  And its just a former GM.  Weird.

 

Nah, none of this rings true. Just because you don't feel the need to say you don't like Grigson doesn't mean everyone who does offer that caveat is a conformist. Same as just because someone disagrees with the popular narrative doesn't necessarily make them a contrarian. 

 

As for Grigson's history with the Colts, it's interesting that you'd compare him to Bill Polian, a guy who was a GM for 20 years, had teams with 7 SB appearances (counting the Panthers), had a SB win, his teams won tons of games over a long period of time, etc. Polian is held in higher regard than Grigson for one very good reason -- he was better than Grigson, and his resume proves it.

 

Still, maybe you weren't around, but Polian got his share of hate among fans. Local media found him difficult to deal with, some even went on a crusade against him (which was unfair, IMO; I still don't take Kravitz seriously). The online fan base was torn on Polian for several years before he and his sons got fired, especially after The Decision of 2009. But overall, most Colts fans express appreciation for Polian because, in totality, his impact on the Colts was a positive, and he was an integral part of putting the Colts on the map in the 2000s. And as time goes by, the positives continue to outweigh the negatives.

 

In Grigson's case, the more time goes by, the more obvious it becomes that he didn't do a good job building the Colts' roster. It's the exact opposite of Polian, in that the bad outweighs the good, and it's more apparent now that we can judge with the benefit of time. His drafts were bad, his free agency approach was bad, his management style was apparently bad... and as his decisions get washed out, it leaves little to no room to defend his work as GM. 

 

Even your angle that Grigson left his successor a lot of cap space is a double edged sword. Ballard has a lot of cap space because Grigson didn't draft anyone worthy of re-signing. If he had drafted Rhodes instead of Werner, that's $14m/year; Kendricks instead of Dorsett, another $10m/year; and the ramifications of the Richardson trade leave us with another $10-15m/year surplus on the cap. That's three of his five first rounders. The Colts' cap standing is a testament to how few good players Grigson acquired.

 

But really, my beef with your angle is that you think yours is the only rational and objective viewpoint, and label anyone who disagrees with you as being a blind conformist, or as having an agenda that needs validation. And it's not just on this topic, it's in general. 

[The Fish]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

But really, my beef with your angle is that you think yours is the only rational and objective viewpoint, and label anyone who disagrees with you as being a blind conformist, or as having an agenda that needs validation. And it's not just on this topic, it's in general. 

 

This is the move, isn't it.. 

[Superman]

37 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm waiting to see how fast Ballard builds the roster

 

I don't really need him to do it fast. Building a roster takes time, because as history indicates, the best way to build a quality roster with depth is through the draft. You only get so many draft picks each year, and then young players take time to develop, if they do at all. The primary basis for whether someone is a good GM is whether they draft well, and we won't really know whether Ballard is drafting well for a couple years, at least.

 

There are other factors. Hiring coaches (Ballard gets a split decision on that from a lot of people; I personally was in favor of McDaniels so it would be hypocritical of me to hold that against Ballard), managing the cap, signing good free agents, and yes, media relations all factor in. 

 

I think it's too early to judge Ballard on most of these areas. But if everyone treats him like he's a breath of fresh air, especially the media, it just speaks to how little Grigson was liked by people who actually dealt with him. A great example is Ballard doing a film session with reporters after the draft. That's a positive interaction with the media, and that's a good thing. 

[ColtStrong2013]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Number 2 in jersey sales spoke more to the fact that the Colts had basically no marketable personalities on the team (and that's accepting as fact that he was #2 in jersey sales, which I haven't attempted to verify). My point is that whatever he was bringing in was likely a drop in the bucket, and him acting like his jersey sales were a significant part of the operation is a laugh, IMO.

 

And his personality getting national attention was kind of a two-edged sword. By this time period, he had lived down the arrest, but that was and still is his primary claim to fame. 

 

Again, I'm not knocking Pat because of his personality, his arrest, his being a punter, or anything like that. I'm saying that his own version of this story makes him look bad, the way he told it makes him look bad, and him telling it now, two years later, makes him look bad. I'm certainly not claiming this makes Pat a bad person, or any of the other nonsense that others are peddling. But my reaction to the story was 'wow, Pat, that's kind of petty and arrogant of you.'

 

And again, this is not a defense of Ryan Grigson, nor does Pat getting into an argument with Grigson bother me.

 

Pat's Jersey sales were big on the women's market. Personally, every lady in my family had a Pat McAfee jersey... accounting for as many as 20. Wearing #1 probably went a long way with that, as was his humor, but he was appealing to the female base of Colts fans. He was genius to capitalize on his charisma/humor combined with his swimming event. He built a brand, which is remarkable for a punter in the NFL. He wasn't just #2 in Colts Jersey sales... he was #17 in the league at one point in 2014. That's a fact. And that is why I am going to have to disagree with you in his Jersey sales not being a part of the operation. He brought in more revenue than anyone with his salary. He had a larger fan base than anyone with his salary. 

[Myles]

We are still suffering from the Grigson era.  Hopefully we pull out of it in a year or 2.   In judging what Ballard inherited, How many teams would you trade the entire roster with (excluding QB Luck)?

Me?   I would say 31.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Four2itus said:

 

 

I agree with all of the above. I too defended Grigson, and no longer do so. I also had my moments where I have loved the cockiness of Pat. This was not cockiness as much as unprofessional rudeness. No matter what happens to you, rise above. It is not what you experience that shapes you as a person as much as how you react to what you experience. It is my guess Pat will continue to experience things like this in his life. 

 

I have no problem with Pat dancing or celebrating after a good punt, I have no problem with him going on the radio to talk about his experiences, and I don't even have a problem with him saying he worked to be a good punter because he wanted to have clearance to speak his mind when he wanted. I'm good with all of that.

 

And I especially appreciated him standing up for his teammates after the fake punt fiasco, when none of the coaches would clarify what actually happened. That was a particular instance when he used his celebrity and personality for good.

 

But like you said, Pat's response here speaks as much about his attitude as it does Grigson's, especially the fact that this is another and entirely separate situation where he has the exact same response. 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

Pat's Jersey sales were big on the women's market. Personally, every lady in my family had a Pat McAfee jersey... accounting for as many as 20. Wearing #1 probably went a long way with that, as was his humor, but he was appealing to the female base of Colts fans. He was genius to capitalize on his charisma/humor combined with his swimming event. He built a brand, which is remarkable for a punter in the NFL. He wasn't just #2 in Colts Jersey sales... he was #17 in the league at one point in 2014. That's a fact. And that is why I am going to have to disagree with you in his Jersey sales not being a part of the operation. He brought in more revenue than anyone with his salary. He had a larger fan base than anyone with his salary. 

 

I would like some context on some of those numbers, but either way, the point is that it struck me as arrogant and petty on Pat's part. 

[DougDew]

35 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't really need him to do it fast. Building a roster takes time, because as history indicates, the best way to build a quality roster with depth is through the draft. You only get so many draft picks each year, and then young players take time to develop, if they do at all. The primary basis for whether someone is a good GM is whether they draft well, and we won't really know whether Ballard is drafting well for a couple years, at least.

 

There are other factors. Hiring coaches (Ballard gets a split decision on that from a lot of people; I personally was in favor of McDaniels so it would be hypocritical of me to hold that against Ballard), managing the cap, signing good free agents, and yes, media relations all factor in. 

 

I think it's too early to judge Ballard on most of these areas. But if everyone treats him like he's a breath of fresh air, especially the media, it just speaks to how little Grigson was liked by people who actually dealt with him. A great example is Ballard doing a film session with reporters after the draft. That's a positive interaction with the media, and that's a good thing. 

I think previous drafts by Polian and Grigson show that you have to generally get players that are good enough to stay in the league, and are not total washouts.  It can even out too.  Some players picked high, like Quincy Wilson, may struggle to warrant their draft slot, and others like Hairston can out play it.  I think all GMs deal with that.  

 

What they can't do is miss on their 1st rounders, or else there is no steady pool of players with which to build around, or to replace the good players that leave. 

 

I'm trying to leave names in the past as far as blame, but the reason the Colts did not continue to achieve is because there were no replacements for Mathis and Wayne.  Those were two highly impactful players that were not replaced, and generally, that level of talent could only be replaced with first round talent, IMO.  And the two players pegged for that, Werner and Dorsett, did not live up to that, even far worse.

 

My concern is that we have not yet replaced those positions, or added impactful players elsewhere.  I simply don't think a FS or a G can measure up to that, and we will be having to replace TY and AC soon, which could lead to us merely churning the talent on the roster and not adding to it.  Its nice that we have meaningful starters with our two first rounders, but we need to add talent at important positions while also replacing the talent at other important positions along the way.  Its going to make the rebuild slower.  Hopefully, Luck will still be in his prime. 

[braveheartcolt]

He's always had an overinflated opinion of himself. As a player. A television personality. As a swimmer. This article just cements his overinflatedness. 

[Four2itus]

1 hour ago, Cynjin said:

I would bet that Pagano probably doesn't have an issue with Pat saying what he did either.  

I would take that bet. Not all things said in the heat of the moment are forgivable.

 

We will never know, but for me....I would not forgive someone blindly cussing me off. I would work with them if required, but would not feel the same. 

[PrincetonTiger]

19 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

He's always had an overinflated opinion of himself. As a player. A television personality. As a swimmer. This article just cements his overinflatedness. 

Ouch

[shasta519]

16 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

He's always had an overinflated opinion of himself. As a player. A television personality. As a swimmer. This article just cements his overinflatedness. 

 

Yep. I understand getting angry when someone is messing with your money...but he seems to have a knack for making it all about himself. He says he was done "making money for them"...seems like his teammates weren't part of the equation...just him and what he does.

 

I liked Pat when he was playing, but I just don't share the love that some many have for him. He was definitely an interesting dude...and I respect him for his success...but I couldn't care less about yet another time where he told Grigs to # off.

[Coffeedrinker]

You know I tell my kids, if they have an issue with one person, then the other person is at fault, if they have the same issue with 2 or more people then the issue could very well be with them.

 

I like Patty Mac, I don't think he's very funny but he was a whale of a punter and the charity work he did (and probably still does) seemed genuine and heart felt.  But yeah, he comes off as a bit of whiner in this one.

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

You know I tell my kids, if they have an issue with one person, then the other person is at fault, if they have the same issue with 2 or more people then the issue could very well be with them.

 

I like Patty Mac, I don't think he's very funny but he was a whale of a punter and the charity work he did (and probably still does) seemed genuine and heart felt.  But yeah, he comes off as a bit of whiner in this one.

Great post

[Cynjin]

1 hour ago, Four2itus said:

I would take that bet. Not all things said in the heat of the moment are forgivable.

 

We will never know, but for me....I would not forgive someone blindly cussing me off. I would work with them if required, but would not feel the same. 

 

Not all things, but in a locker room, there are a lot of things said in a locker room that are water under the bridge.  They are soon forgotten.

[ColtStrong2013]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I would like some context on some of those numbers, but either way, the point is that it struck me as arrogant and petty on Pat's part. 

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/11/07/Marketing-and-Sponsorship/McAfee.aspx

 

I doubt we'll ever see context of Jersey sales. But here is an article that quotes the Indianapolis business journal saying McAfee's sales helped an 8 % growth for colts pro shop ecommerce and 9% for their brick and mortar stores. 

 

I understand why people see it as arrogant, but I see it in a different fashion. He had hard proof that he was valuable to the organization, extremely valuable in my own opinion (on the field, salary to revenue potential, and off the field in his media relations/charitable work) and he was completely underappreciated by management while Grigson was at the helm. No way that the Irsay family is proud of that, as they have always been appreciative of the players that help make their Billion dollar empire what it is. 

[ColtStrong2013]

2 hours ago, braveheartcolt said:

He's always had an overinflated opinion of himself. As a player. A television personality. As a swimmer. This article just cements his overinflatedness. 

He had an overinflated opinion of himself as a player? Not sure on that one. He knew his self worth as a punter, especially with an offense that often stalled and relied on his field position magic to stay in ball games. He truly helped win some games with his brilliant onside game (2 in the same Houston game if I remember correctly.) 

 

He also took the damage of kickoffs so Vinny could have an extended career (would love to hear his take on Pat on this forum... would undoubtedly be more positive than most on here.) 

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/11/07/Marketing-and-Sponsorship/McAfee.aspx

 

I doubt we'll ever see context of Jersey sales. But here is an article that quotes the Indianapolis business journal saying McAfee's sales helped an 8 % growth for colts pro shop ecommerce and 9% for their brick and mortar stores. 

 

I understand why people see it as arrogant, but I see it in a different fashion. He had hard proof that he was valuable to the organization, extremely valuable in my own opinion (on the field, salary to revenue potential, and off the field in his media relations/charitable work) and he was completely underappreciated by management while Grigson was at the helm. No way that the Irsay family is proud of that, as they have always been appreciative of the players that help make their Billion dollar empire what it is. 

Just pointing out, but I think the overall comment by Pat wasn't part of a sincere discussion about his value to the company, it sounded like he was just digging at Grigson because Grig was about to call him out for some conduct policy.  As was Pat's comment about RG being responsible for not protecting the QB.

 

I'd think his value to the Colts would come up calmly by his agent during contract talks, not in this particular heated conversation.

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Just pointing out, but I think the overall comment by Pat wasn't part of a sincere discussion about his value to the company, it sounded like he was just digging at Grigson because Grig was about to call him out for some conduct policy.  As was Pat's comment about RG being responsible for not protecting the QB.

 

I'd think his value to the Colts would come up calmly by his agent during contract talks, not in this particular heated conversation.

I don't dispute that. He consistently has dug at Grigson since his abrupt retirement... He has repeatedly said Grigson flat out told him from day 1 he was the low man in the organization and he'd be gone/replaced if it weren't for Jim Irsay. Problem is with an organization this size, you don't get direct privileges with the owner... you get them with the manager. And in this case the manager was looking for anything and everything to justify his case of getting rid of Pat. You and I would both take issue with that. 

[ColtStrong2013]

As I said before, I won't defend Pat any longer, as he isn't a member of this team. But I sure appreciated him while he was here. For many reasons. I support the Colts and the players that make it what it is. I supported Grigson while he was here. I cannot support him any longer. 

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I don't dispute that. He consistently has dug at Grigson since his abrupt retirement... He has repeatedly said Grigson flat out told him from day 1 he was the low man in the organization and he'd be gone/replaced if it weren't for Jim Irsay. Problem is with an organization this size, you don't get direct privileges with the owner... you get them with the manager. And in this case the manager was looking for anything and everything to justify his case of getting rid of Pat. You and I would both take issue with that. 

Why do you say that....that RG was looking for a reason?  That RG harbored some sort of animus towards Pat and would replace him with less of a punter because of that?  At the expense of the team on the field?

 

Maybe RG sincerely thought he was the easiest to replace.  Our current punter is pretty good.  Maybe Pat wasn't replaceable at the time, but I assume that's what Grigson thought.

 

[imacoltfan]

Would have been nice to kick the ball out of the end zone in the 2010 playoff game vs. the Jets. Short kick, 50+ yard return set the Jets up nicely. But he, he has swagger for a kicker and speaks his mind!

[Superman]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/11/07/Marketing-and-Sponsorship/McAfee.aspx

 

I doubt we'll ever see context of Jersey sales. But here is an article that quotes the Indianapolis business journal saying McAfee's sales helped an 8 % growth for colts pro shop ecommerce and 9% for their brick and mortar stores. 

 

I understand why people see it as arrogant, but I see it in a different fashion. He had hard proof that he was valuable to the organization, extremely valuable in my own opinion (on the field, salary to revenue potential, and off the field in his media relations/charitable work) and he was completely underappreciated by management while Grigson was at the helm. No way that the Irsay family is proud of that, as they have always been appreciative of the players that help make their Billion dollar empire what it is. 

 

The article points to an 8% increase in web traffic for the pro shop, not 8% growth in revenue. It points to a 9% increase in sales at brick and mortar stores. However, it's impossible to tie either of those increases to McAfee alone. In 2014, the Colts were looking like the next AFC contender. The article also doesn't speak to any increases in sales for other players. With McAfee being #2 on the team in jersey sales, it's fair to include him as a reason for an increase. It's not reasonable to conclude that he was THE reason for the increase, and we have no data with which to reach a reasonable conclusion on that. 

 

It is true that McAfee represented a financial gain for the Colts. I'm not suggesting he didn't have value to the team, on and off the field. I also agree that I don't think the Irsays would appreciate or condone having their players treated that way. But I don't think that his value to the team was relevant in that discussion. 

 

If any player knowingly violated team rules, it doesn't matter whether they were a cash cow or team MVP, they should be held accountable. This was petty of Grigson, but that's not because McAfee was #2 on the team in jersey sales or because he was a good punter. Grigson probably treated him this way because he disliked him, which is wrong coming and going. But anyone acting like they are beyond being fined because they have good jersey sales is missing the point. Grigson was wrong to be a jerk to any player, jersey sales notwithstanding. I feel like Pat's response about his value and making money for the team is somewhat arrogant and a little conceited. 

[ColtStrong2013]

49 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The article points to an 8% increase in web traffic for the pro shop, not 8% growth in revenue. It points to a 9% increase in sales at brick and mortar stores. However, it's impossible to tie either of those increases to McAfee alone. In 2014, the Colts were looking like the next AFC contender. The article also doesn't speak to any increases in sales for other players. With McAfee being #2 on the team in jersey sales, it's fair to include him as a reason for an increase. It's not reasonable to conclude that he was THE reason for the increase, and we have no data with which to reach a reasonable conclusion on that. 

 

It is true that McAfee represented a financial gain for the Colts. I'm not suggesting he didn't have value to the team, on and off the field. I also agree that I don't think the Irsays would appreciate or condone having their players treated that way. But I don't think that his value to the team was relevant in that discussion. 

 

If any player knowingly violated team rules, it doesn't matter whether they were a cash cow or team MVP, they should be held accountable. This was petty of Grigson, but that's not because McAfee was #2 on the team in jersey sales or because he was a good punter. Grigson probably treated him this way because he disliked him, which is wrong coming and going. But anyone acting like they are beyond being fined because they have good jersey sales is missing the point. Grigson was wrong to be a jerk to any player, jersey sales notwithstanding. I feel like Pat's response about his value and making money for the team is somewhat arrogant and a little conceited. 

 

Hence the reason I said there will never be context that shows what he brought financially. #2 in Jersey sales with a 9% growth in sales tells me he was pretty valuable. 

 

It does have a lot to do with the discussion, you just continue to disagree and repeatedly say that it had no correlation. 

 

"I feel like Pat's response about his value and making money for the team is somewhat arrogant and a little conceited."   Yeah, you have said that several times now. 

[ColtStrong2013]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Why do you say that....that RG was looking for a reason?  That RG harbored some sort of animus towards Pat and would replace him with less of a punter because of that?  At the expense of the team on the field?

 

Maybe RG sincerely thought he was the easiest to replace.  Our current punter is pretty good.  Maybe Pat wasn't replaceable at the time, but I assume that's what Grigson thought.

 

If this story is true, and not one former player has come out and stood behind Grigson yet (we can wait if you'd like) then I would say it is pretty apparent he was looking for a reason to fine him, make a case for firing him/driving him out of the business.

 

It was well known that Grigson wanted Pat McAfee off the team and bring his own, cheap alternative in from the start. Read between the lines.

[ColtStrong2013]

...and with that, I am done talking about Ryan Grigson. 

 

He was bad. He got fired. For good reason. And he's gone forever. 

 

Moving on. 

[DougDew]

43 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

If this story is true, and not one former player has come out and stood behind Grigson yet (we can wait if you'd like) then I would say it is pretty apparent he was looking for a reason to fine him, make a case for firing him/driving him out of the business.

 

It was well known that Grigson wanted Pat McAfee off the team and bring his own, cheap alternative in from the start. Read between the lines.

What do you and NCF not understand about what I write?  Then make some comment that I'm dumb or don't get it.

 

I basically said the same thing as your last paragraph, that he wanted to find a cheaper alternative at punter.

 

When you say he wants to "make a case for firing him", that implies Grigson wants Pat off the team because he doesn't like his personality, despite thinking he's a good punter worth the money. 

 

No.  Grigson is saying that he doesn't think Pat is worth the money (the basis of the contract dispute prior to this) and the only reason Pat is on the team is because Irsay likes his personality. 

 

  

 

 

[Defjamz26]

Why it is pretty much confirmed by most of his former players that Grigson was a scumbag who no one liked, this is an interesting view of what fans couldn’t see. It doesn’t make him look any worse as he’s already cemented his legacy as one of the worst GMs of this decade. It does help paint a picture. 

 

The story from Reggie was that he went months without ever speaking to him in 2012 when he got hired. The report from the guy who used to work with him in Philly was that the guy thought he invented the football and knew more than everyone else. Now Pat is telling us that he basically tries to fine him for several small things and put the losing on everyone else. Not to mention the reports that he was meddling in coaching decisions. Where there’s smoke there’s fire.

 

What a shame it was that he ever represented the horseshoe.

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Why it is pretty much confirmed by most of his former players that Grigson was a scumbag who no one liked, this is an interesting view of what fans couldn’t see. It doesn’t make him look any worse as he’s already cemented his legacy as one of the worst GMs of this decade. It does help paint a picture. 

 

The story from Reggie was that he went months without ever speaking to him in 2012 when he got hired. The report from the guy who used to work with him in Philly was that the guy thought he invented the football and knew more than everyone else. Now Pat is telling us that he basically tries to fine him for several small things and put the losing on everyone else. Not to mention the reports that he was meddling in coaching decisions. Where there’s smoke there’s fire.

 

What a shame it was that he ever represented the horseshoe.

Not disputing what you are saying or your conclusion, but

 

when Grigson did not speak to Reggie, was that the problem, or was it that he didn't speak to other players too?  

 

I'm just trying to figure out why Reggie thought it was so important for the GM to speak to him, but not so much to other players.  

 

Do you get the question?

[ColtStrong2013]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

What do you and NCF not understand about what I write?  Then make some comment that I'm dumb or don't get it.

 

I basically said the same thing as your last paragraph, that he wanted to find a cheaper alternative at punter.

 

When you say he wants to "make a case for firing him", that implies Grigson wants Pat off the team because he doesn't like his personality, despite thinking he's a good punter worth the money. 

 

No.  Grigson is saying that he doesn't think Pat is worth the money (the basis of the contract dispute prior to this) and the only reason Pat is on the team is because Irsay likes his personality. 

 

  

 

 

 

I understand what you write... I dont agree with it.

 

Grigson didn't think he was worth it from a football perspective solely. Irsay realized that his personality and his play brought money to the organization in form of merchandise and possibly even ticket sales (because let's face it, when #12 was out, there was very little to look forward to on the field... and Pat McAfee was it for some people.) You guys can't grasp this. He was valuable, on the field for the team and for the organization in media relations, fan base, merchandise sales, etc.  He felt that his value to the team was a lot more than the nothing thag Grigson thought he was worth (and subsequently treated him like)

[DougDew]

Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I understand what you write... I dont agree with it.

 

Grigson didn't think he was worth it from a football perspective solely. Irsay realized that his personality and his play brought money to the organization in form of merchandise and possibly even ticket sales (because let's face it, when #12 was out, there was very little to look forward to on the field... and Pat McAfee was it for some people.) You guys can't grasp this. He was valuable, on the field for the team and for the organization in media relations, fan base, merchandise sales, etc.  He felt that his value to the team was a lot more than the nothing thag Grigson thought he was worth (and subsequently treated him like)

I can grasp it.  But the comment cited was that "the only reason you're here is because the owner wants you", makes it sound spiteful, and not being based on a football decision.

 

So maybe Grigson thought he could spend less for a punter and that those few million dollars saved would offset the lost profit on Jersey sales.

 

Or do we just want to keep going with spite being the reason?