- Thread starter
- #1
That is a silly article. Are the Brown's supposed to keep a guy around, who is only average at best, just because they feel sorry for his personal tragedy? I feel bad for the guy, but if he's not performing up to NFL or Cleveland Brown team standards then the team has every right (even a duty really) to move on from him and replace him with a better player.
The article itself even concedes that Smith wasn't a great player, but they kind of imply that because he was good man and good team mate that should be enough to keep him on the roster. That may be a nice gesture and I'm sure they mean well, but the reality is the NFL is a business and they have a job to do. There are literally hundreds of players that probably have hard luck and sad stories from their personal lives. That doesn't earn them an exemption from playing poorly and not getting fired. That's just the way it is. Not just for football players either, but anyone in any job that under performs risks being terminated. That's life man.
Feel bad for him, but, I mean, sometimes you gotta eat a shit sandwich in life.
No no no no...Not the Browns problem. Maybe some liberal should house him.
Exactly spot on. The reporter that wrote this piece is just another lazy journalist writing a puff piece to tug at the heart strings and sell copy. Pretty much everything that is wrong in today's journalism is summed up right there, imo. The guy suffered a tragedy but guess what, hundreds of thousands of regular people suffer tragedies daily. If you are unable to perform your job at a suitable level, your employer should not be obligated to just let you "hang around" out of pity. Honestly, that does the person's psyche more harm than good. And the dude will be fine. Football is a very small part of these guys lives in the big scheme of things anyway. He already lived his dream and got paid quite well to do it.That is a silly article. Are the Brown's supposed to keep a guy around, who is only average at best, just because they feel sorry for his personal tragedy? I feel bad for the guy, but if he's not performing up to NFL or Cleveland Brown team standards then the team has every right (even a duty really) to move on from him and replace him with a better player.
The article itself even concedes that Smith wasn't a great player, but they kind of imply that because he was good man and good team mate that should be enough to keep him on the roster. That may be a nice gesture and I'm sure they mean well, but the reality is the NFL is a business and they have a job to do. There are literally hundreds of players that probably have hard luck and sad stories from their personal lives. That doesn't earn them an exemption from playing poorly and not getting fired. That's just the way it is. Not just for football players either, but anyone in any job that under performs risks being terminated. That's life man.
I mean, Pittsburgh for example still carries Shazier's contract so he gets paid and gets medical care. And he's not gonna play again.That is a silly article. Are the Brown's supposed to keep a guy around, who is only average at best, just because they feel sorry for his personal tragedy? I feel bad for the guy, but if he's not performing up to NFL or Cleveland Brown team standards then the team has every right (even a duty really) to move on from him and replace him with a better player.
The article itself even concedes that Smith wasn't a great player, but they kind of imply that because he was good man and good team mate that should be enough to keep him on the roster. That may be a nice gesture and I'm sure they mean well, but the reality is the NFL is a business and they have a job to do. There are literally hundreds of players that probably have hard luck and sad stories from their personal lives. That doesn't earn them an exemption from playing poorly and not getting fired. That's just the way it is. Not just for football players either, but anyone in any job that under performs risks being terminated. That's life man.