Jeffrey Simmons

[Fluke_33]

I posted this in another discussion on Simmons but it is a pretty objective article:

 

https://247sports.com/Article/Jeffery-Simmons-and-the-murky-question-of-second-chances-120993034/

 

[HarryTheCat]

2 hours ago, Fluke_33 said:

I posted this in another discussion on Simmons but it is a pretty objective article:

 

https://247sports.com/Article/Jeffery-Simmons-and-the-murky-question-of-second-chances-120993034/

 

"I haven’t met one person who’s had a perfect life,” Simmons said.

 

OK. I haven't met anyone with a perfect life either. I'm certainly not perfect, but like most men, I've never punched a woman. Never. But a 6-4/301 defensive tackle, using a woman who is already face-down on the ground for a punching bag simply isn't excusable under any circumstances. Even if he was, as he asserted, defending his sister, those punches continued long after any threat that she posed had been stopped. 

 

Sorry. Hard pass on this one.

[Zoltan]

6 hours ago, HarryTheCat said:

"I haven’t met one person who’s had a perfect life,” Simmons said.

 

OK. I haven't met anyone with a perfect life either. I'm certainly not perfect, but like most men, I've never punched a woman. Never. But a 6-4/301 defensive tackle, using a woman who is already face-down on the ground for a punching bag simply isn't excusable under any circumstances. Even if he was, as he asserted, defending his sister, those punches continued long after any threat that she posed had been stopped. 

 

Sorry. Hard pass on this one.

 

Honestly I'm all for him, and as for the incident he payed his fine, and admits his guilt. It seems he was put in a hard position and overreacted, while I don't condone his actions I am for giving someone a second chance so if I was a scout/GM I wouldn't hold this against him.

 

Although I will admit, I will give someone a second chance to a fault

[Coffeedrinker]

15 hours ago, Fluke_33 said:

This is not true.  The video shows a woman (his sister?) knocking another woman to the ground.  Then he pummels that woman, while she is on the ground, several times in the head.

 

The rest of what you say may be true but that is not.  

From what I remember reading, that video does not tell the entire story, his sister was getting beat pretty badly.  

That being said, you have a good point.

[Fluke_33]

6 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

From what I remember reading, that video does not tell the entire story, his sister was getting beat pretty badly.  

That being said, you have a good point.

I hear that.  I don’t know what led up to the video and it does sound like he’s been incident free since.  

 

I wonder if from a marketing stand point some teams will be reluctant to take him in the first.   1st rounders are the face of the franchise for a short period at least.  (Just a thought). 

[Coffeedrinker]

1 minute ago, Fluke_33 said:

I hear that.  I don’t know what led up to the video and it does sound like he’s been incident free since.  

 

I wonder if from a marketing stand point some teams will be reluctant to take him in the first.   1st rounders are the face of the franchise for a short period at least.  (Just a thought). 

I'm sure some teams have taken him completely off their board because of the incident.  In today's society the court of public opinion, for some, has more meaning than facts.

 

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that towards you, I'm saying that towards some teams and a lot of people.

[Fluke_33]

5 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I'm sure some teams have taken him completely off their board because of the incident.  In today's society the court of public opinion, for some, has more meaning than facts.

 

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that towards you, I'm saying that towards some teams and a lot of people.

That’s for sure.  

 

I do believe in second chances and I tend to believe that he says he blacked out and doesn’t remember it and when he sees the video he’s shocked it was him.   

 

That video is just so bad.  

[Hoose]

Just a question here: I haven't watched the video but accept, for sake of discussion, that Simmons was terribly wrong in what he did. No issue. 

Correspondingly, for the sake of discussion, haven't there been a number of reports that this guy has been a model citizen since that time, including doing numerous acts of community service and being a highly respected leader on his football team?

 

I'm not an advocate of choosing Simmons, but that is because I worry about his knee injury. 

However, if the reports of his behavior since the incident are also true, it would seem to me that he has owned his mistake, learned from it, and become a better man for it. 

That is exactly what you want to see from a young person who has made a bad mistake.

 

If all of the above is true, Simmons should not be shunned by any team on draft day because of his character. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 3/25/2019 at 11:23 PM, Moosejawcolt said:

Could u see Ballard drafting him with our 1st Pick?

 

Probably not, but due diligence in case he drops far (which I do not see...)

 

On 3/26/2019 at 9:47 AM, Superman said:

Not a chance.

 

That would be the best guess, but ...

 

On 3/26/2019 at 10:15 AM, Colts_Fan12 said:

doubt it but could definitely see it st 34 if he is there 

 

I'm almolst sure he won't be there.  There will probably be a team that gets him before even #26 is my guess.

 

On 3/26/2019 at 12:40 PM, shastamasta said:

 

Big dudes and lower leg injuries aren't a combination that I like. So no thanks in the 1st round. I think Ballard would agree...but who knows.

 

Provided he can come back and play a full game without incident, then he has a >90% chance to return to form with little/no talent reduction.

 

Quote

And this doesn't even consider the other red flag.

 

Here's the deal. Teams will spend tons of money investigating these types of issues and any unreported others for high ranking 1st rounders as necessary, talking to everyone involved, reading all reports.  And the Colts also have Brian Decker character evaluation of the player.  Clubs do this because of the huge investment a round 1 player (especially of that caliber) is.  They will spend more to make sure what they will spend will be well spent.

 

I think the ACL isn't near the concern Jaylon Smith's injury was. There will be a team that will take him in round 1, I feel.  I might be wrong but I bet he still gets taken fairly high, if Dr's prognosis was good and player seems to be motivated in rehab, and no other character red flags are found on top of what they find in the old incident investigation.

 

Never say never, but signs aren't pointing Colts direction, IMHO.

 

 

[Superman]

49 minutes ago, Hoose said:

However, if the reports of his behavior since the incident are also true, it would seem to me that he has owned his mistake, learned from it, and become a better man for it. 

That is exactly what you want to see from a young person who has made a bad mistake.

 

If all of the above is true, Simmons should not be shunned by any team on draft day because of his character. 

 

I'm fine with any team doing their due diligence on him and determining that they're fine with drafting him.

 

I'm also fine with any team deciding 'nah, we don't want to draft a player with that kind of history.' 

[Hoose]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I'm fine with any team doing their due diligence on him and determining that they're fine with drafting him.

 

I'm also fine with any team deciding 'nah, we don't want to draft a player with that kind of history.' 

I don't disagree with what you're saying. But my point was that with the amount of time that has passed, if he has turned his life around and has a pattern of solid behavior since the incident, his character shouldn't be in question. That said, I fully understand that with so much at stake in the draft, some teams just won't take that risk. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Hoose said:

his character shouldn't be in question.

 

This is probably pedantic, but every player's character is in question, especially if you're thinking about using a premium pick on him. The extent to which a player's character is evaluated depends partly on whether that player has ever been in trouble before.

 

In this situation, I think a serious evaluation of the player is in order. I don't have a leaning one way or the other because I haven't looked into him or his actions beyond just reading what supposedly happened. But I would look at it as more than just a youthful transgression, and the reason why is because I think what he did indicates a lack of moral principles. I understand someone being provoked, angry, losing control, but I don't think any of that excuses his reaction. I understand that young people make mistakes, but there are some actions that are more than just being young and dumb.

 

I also believe very strongly in rehabilitation, growth, moral development, forgiveness, and second chances. So while I'm very bothered by what Simmons did, I definitely don't think it would be right to blacklist him for the rest of his life on the basis of his earlier issues. 

 

Some teams will walk away immediately, and in this case it will probably be because they don't want the bad PR. And from a team-building standpoint, that's okay. There are a lot of really good players in every draft who don't have significant red flags, and a team could theoretically say 'we're not drafting anyone with character or injury issues' and still field a really good team. 

 

Other teams will do their due diligence, and then make a decision. And that's what I would do, as it pertains to his character. (I wouldn't draft Simmons for the Colts in the first two rounds, but that's due to his injury and the state of the Colts roster, not his character.) Those teams might come across information that makes them wonder whether Simmons really has grown as a person, or if he's just kept his nose clean for long enough to get drafted. Or they might be fully convinced that he's a solid person who deserves a second chance. That's part of the evaluation.

 

I think it would be a mistake for any team to greenlight any player with this kind of past without first doing a serious evaluation, and then making sure everyone in the building is on board.

[Hoose]

Well said. I don't disagree. 

And as to the point that everyone's character is in issue until reviewed, no argument there either.

 

My point was that if it was true that he had been an upstanding, repentant guy ever since the incident (which of course requires due diligence on a team's part to confirm), then the incident itself shouldn't be used to give him a poor character rating. Just my opinion. Of course, its the right opinion.