Raheem Acknowledges Hovan’s Leadership Value

April 30th, 2010

It’s hard to guage how much, if at all, the Bucs value leadership.

They cut longtime locker room leader Derrick Brooks and purged many other veterans last year. And despite drafting two defensive tackles, they cut Chris Hovan this week, their most experienced defensive tackle and a proven leader. The Bucs seem destined and determined to become possibly the youngest team in the NFL at all costs.

But why?

Speaking to the dean of Tampa Bay sports radio, Steve Duemig, yesterday, Raheem The Dream praised the effective leadership of Hovan without being prompted.

We started last year getting a guy like Roy Miller in here, getting him acclimated with the system. He was able to be groomed by a guy like Hovan, a guy like Hovan with toughness, a guy like what he did in practice, how he was able to push Hovan, how he was able to learn from Hovan in the classroom, and how he was able to grow from some of those guys.  But now it’s his show. And now with the two young guys that we’re bringing in here, it’s their show now. And they’ve got to drive us from the bottom up. And they’re going to have to drive us from where they come in. And they’re going to have to fill a role right away. And they look forward with it.

Joe’s excited to see Gerald McCoy and Brian Price take the field, but surely it would have been a wise, effective investment for them to have Hovan here to mentor them. Raheem The Dream all but spelled that out.

If Hovan was so beneficial to Roy Miller …

Now Team Glazer just told us ”money will never be an issue” when it comes to building the Bucs. So Joe can’t figure out why a proven leader and a healthy 10-year veteran like Hovan is gone and 30-year-old Ryan Sims, whose career has been a disppointment, is still on the roster.

Surely, the $4 million due Hovan in 2010 couldn’t have any thing to do with that. Right, Team Glazer?

101 Responses to “Raheem Acknowledges Hovan’s Leadership Value”

  1. nick Says:

    “Surely, the $4 million due Hovan in 2010 couldn’t have any thing to do with that.”

    It does have something to do with it…and don’t call me Shirley!

  2. JimBuc Says:

    An NFL team cut an aging veteran due to his contract? Wow, now that is a new story because that never happens . . .

  3. Tb_buc Says:

    Actually cutting Hovan may have more to do with sending a message that the youth movement will be served. That said, 4 million would be a lot of jack for what should be your backup early this season, so yes his contract would be a deciding factor.

  4. oar Says:

    That was the one major problem with releasing Brooks, they lost their leadership. I have said thier lack of leadership on the field is and will be a problem, especially now in these “re-building” years. Ronde does not come across as one of those “loud fire starters”, as Jimbuc put it with Nickerson. I don’t think there is anyone. They still might add a veteran, but that doesn’t mean they are gonna be a leader. Maybe one of the younger guys will step up and fill the leadership role?

  5. MichiganBucsFan Says:

    We’re talking about a roster of 70 of the most productive and best athletes from their respective college teams. There will be 3 or 4 young guys who step up and become vocal leaders you can count on that. Look for Benn to be one of those guys.

  6. MichiganBucsFan Says:

    btw love the Airplane quote nick

  7. d-money Says:

    Just because money isn’t an issue doesn’t mean you throw 4 million at a guy with declining skills to be a mentor and teacher.

  8. Eric Says:

    A whole lotta “driving” going on, from where they came in…………and they look forward to it, cause its their show.

    Awesome!

    Totally can’t wait!

    Best plan ever!

  9. JimBuc Says:

    Veteran leadership does not mean anything if the veteran is not leading by actions too. So, Hardy Nickerson was a very effective leader becasue he kicked a** on and off the filed. Brooks was an even better leader, one could argue, because he kicked a** on the field and was so highly respected (as opposed to feared) by everyone. But, even his leadership value diminishes when he cannot compete any longer. Sad, but true.

  10. BigMacAttack Says:

    Hovan played Defensive Tackle? For the Bucs? Really? I had no clue?

  11. JimBuc Says:

    Eric — all this rebuilding was unnecessary (Pay no attention to the nine guys that never played another down. Erh . . maybe its 8. Galloway still in the mix, sort of.)

    I feel you pain bro, all jacked up on “win now” juice and you suddenly find yourself with a team thinking long-term.

  12. d-money Says:

    Just wondering? Why does everyone assume that you can only be a leader if you have been playing for 10 years?

    The Bucs have plenty of players who have been around long enough to assume the role.

    Sapp, Lynch, Brooks took the role becuase they had to when guys like Hardy were gone. I’m sure the same will happen now.

  13. Louie Says:

    All I’ve got to say is they better win that Cleveland game.

  14. JimBuc Says:

    d-money — everyone does not assume that. It’s just that “they are cutting all the leaders” is # 42 on the list of “things to complain about while steadfastly refusing to acknowledge obvious improvment.”

  15. Adam Says:

    Unfortunately, Hovan is done. He has nothing left and did little for the team last year. You don’t pay $4M to somebody to ride the pine and mentor people, it makes no business sense. McCoy, Price and Miller will be just fine. Why do you have position coaches? To coach the players! Other players don’t coach players…..

    Go Bugs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  16. Eric Says:

    @jimbuc.

    Painful is a good word for it.

    When do you think it will subside?

  17. Louie Says:

    @JimBuc, “…refusing to acknowledge obvious improvement”.

    You can you only see improvement by playing the games. Last time they played they only won 3 games. I think it’s way too early to say they are “obviously improved”.

  18. JimBuc Says:

    For you Eric, when we win in the first round of the playoffs. LOL. Stock up on your favorite adult bev. It’s gonna be a while.

  19. Half full Says:

    Sapp is their mentor.

    …hopefully!

  20. Eric Says:

    @JimBuc

    Now about that, we are in total agreement my friend.

  21. nick Says:

    @Eric,

    Put some Robitussin on it

  22. d-money Says:

    @Louie… “You can you only see improvement by playing the games”

    What are you talking about? They haven’t lost a game in 4 months. I’d say thats an improvement.

  23. Louie Says:

    @d-money: LOL!!! So true!

  24. JimBuc Says:

    Louie said:

    “You can you only see improvement by playing the games.”

    Then isn’t the opposite true, Louie? In other words shouldn’t you only be able to claim decline after the Bucs start playing games? This board filled with people decrying the release of Hovan, claiming that we are worse off because we have no veterans and claiming that we are worse off because we did not give up a 5th round pick for a WR.

    Isn’t that the same thing? If we don’t know we are better by spending a 1st and 2nd round pick on DT then how do we know we are worse for not getting a guy that was not even on the team (i.e Santonio Holmes) or by letting go one of the guys that led the worst D-line in the league?

  25. JimBuc Says:

    (Crickets . . . while Louie thinks . . . .) :-)

  26. Louie Says:

    @JimBuc, are drunk on the Kool-Aid? You’re saying that we can only claim decline (worse than 3-13?) after they start playing next season? Huh? I think that’s the most convoluted logic I’ve ever heard. I’d rather not claim decline as I hope they are better than 3-13 this coming season.

    Every team thinks they’re good on paper after the draft. I’m just saying we should wait until the real bullets are flying before we ordain the Bucs as being improved, much less obviously improved. I think it’s a huge mistake to think these draft picks/rookies are going to be major contributors this season. Time will tell and I can’t wait for the Cleveland game.

  27. Louie Says:

    …crickets, while JimBuc, thinks! :)

  28. oar Says:

    Whether you are negative or positive, it goes both ways JimBuc. The only truth is time and eventually it will tell!

  29. oar Says:

    Crickets are scary!

  30. oar Says:

    I have to agree Louie.

  31. admin Says:

    Joe here,

    JimBuc – You wrote:

    “Veteran leadership does not mean anything if the veteran is not leading by actions too. So, Hardy Nickerson was a very effective leader becasue he kicked a** on and off the filed. Brooks was an even better leader, one could argue, because he kicked a** on the field and was so highly respected (as opposed to feared) by everyone. But, even his leadership value diminishes when he cannot compete any longer. Sad, but true.”

    This is a ridiculous argument and hardly a “true” statement. Last Joe checked Brooks made the Pro Bowl in 2008 and wasn’t considered teh big weakness in the defense.

    Raheem is sitting there calling Hovan an impactful veteran leader of defensive tackles, yet now the guy is gone. What gives? There’s no salary cap, Sims is 30, and the Bucs want to get the most out of their youngsters.

    If they cut Sims, Joe will understand. But otherwise this is nothing more than seemingly a foolish money move

    It’s comical that you som

  32. oar Says:

    JimBuc, BTW you also wrong about the top two positions in our college scouting being gone and having different replacements. Hickey has been our Director of College Scouting(one of those top two you mentioned) for 5yrs. Only one new lower level was replaced. So, basically it is the same scouting department.

  33. thomas Says:

    Joe:

    Jimbuc has his head in the sand or in Glazer b.s. He accuses many of us of being Rah and Dom haters but he rejects even the most obvious facts that suggest that $ is playing a part in these personell and management/coaching decisions. So there is no sense reasoning with him we have been trying for days.

    I think that the point you make is sound, so does everyone other objective person.

  34. sensiblefan Says:

    Joe from yesterday: “Veterans are one thing. Stiffs are another. Sure, Chris Hovan may have been able to help out rookies Gerald McCoy and Brian Price, but if Hovan was going to be a part-time player (at best), it was hard to justify his hefty salary.”

    Please don’t compare Hovan to Derrick Brooks. #55 was a force of nature. Hovan can’t play anymore and he’s caught in a numbers game. He can’t contribute on special teams and he’s not one of the top two on the depth chart at the 3-tech (It could be McCoy (3) and Miller (1) starting the year with Price (3) Dre Moore (1).

    Sorry. We can’t have a vet “leader” at every position.

  35. admin Says:

    Joe here,

    Sensiblefan – yesterday we were speculating the value of Hovan the leader. Now there is no more speculation after Raheem’s specificity. That’s the difference

  36. sensiblefan Says:

    Bottom line: Hovan’s leadership wasn’t worth 4 million. We’ve got vet leadership at every line of the defense: Stylez White, Rudd, and Barber. We’ll be fine without Hovan.

  37. d-money Says:

    I still say you don’t pay a guy 4 million dollars to be a cheerleader.

    Thats Rahcel Watson’s job and she doesnt make anywhere near that.

  38. JimBuc Says:

    Louie — I have never said these guys will contribute “this season” let alone be major contributors. I simply said that the Bucs upgraded by making the changes they did (or will) at WR.

    Why is it logical to claim the the Bucs are worse without Hovan but illogical to say they are improved with McCoy or Price? Why is it logical to say the Bucs are worse for not adding guys that are not part of the team? For example, is there something magical about Brandon Marshall that makes him flawless and injury-proof and free of all other negatives such that we know — without absolute certainty — that giving up 2 second round picks for him would have been the smart move? How do we know that before he plays and Price plays and next year’s 2nd round pick plays? Get it? Most here accept the negative inference, but dismiss the positive with statements like “we don’t know.” That does not make sense absent an inclination ot accept negative over positive.

  39. d-money Says:

    I also think that Raheems point wasn’t so much about Hovans value as it was that now Roy Miller needs to take that Role with the new guys.

  40. admin Says:

    JOe here,

    d-money, sensible fan – You pay him to be a cheerleader if he’s better than the one you’ve got (Sims) and you want to get the most bang out of your buck from your big investments, McCoy and Price.

  41. JimBuc Says:

    Oar — please don’t restate my comment in your own terms and then say your version of my comment is wrong. LOL.

    I said that the top two guys making the decisions were gone. The scounting department does not draft a single player. They give info to the GM and coaches, who select the players.

  42. JimBuc Says:

    Thomas, you should never use your name and “objective” in the same sentence.

  43. JimBuc Says:

    Joe — Sims will be gone too, but you probably know that. No, you don’t pay any player to be a cheerleader, except maybe a back up QB. If Hovan is providing the leadership while getting run over on the field, no one will listen to him. If he is on the sideline providing leadership, he is a coach.

  44. d-money Says:

    The bottom line is this. Hovan, a snappy face painter and apparently a good leader and mentor, absolutely stunk up the field on sundays.

    Say what you will Joe but Its not smart to waste 4 million on a guy who is a liability on the field not matter what his leadership abilities are.

    4 million is 4 million money may not be an issue but it doesn’t mean Dom has free reign to waste money.

  45. JimBuc Says:

    Anybody pick Hovan up yet? Anybody else paying him the $4 million? The Redskins recently signed a bunch of D-Line guys including Peterson (I think). Wonder why Bruce Almighty has not taken Hovan? Certainly the Redskins could use some leadership and Snyder loves to spend money.

  46. sensiblefan Says:

    Joe,

    Yeah I think you do. Sims is younger, cheaper and just as talented (err…terrible) as Hovan. Maybe this is a straight money move. Who knows?

    I argue that Coach Wash and Sapp (if the reports that he’s coming in are true) and even Miller can provide these kids all the perspective and mentoring necessary to be successful.

  47. Radio Mushmouth Says:

    Stupid ass cheap-skates.

    The 4 million has everything to do with it.

  48. d-money Says:

    anyone else find it odd that we are arguing about someone who was supposedly a leader on a 3-13 team and one of the worst defenses in the league.

    Not exactly a ringing endorsment for his effectiveness as a leader.

  49. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Now I know why we have the current politicans in Washington…

    You guys LOVE to spend other people’s money. $4 MILLION is way too much for Hovan to be a season backup.

    Leadership skills are not necessarily gained from longevity. Look at how inspirational Rudy was to ND. Why can’t Higgans be a “leader”?

    Personally I want Price & McCoy to get as many reps as possible. Hovan will only take away from that. The way Hovan played last year there is no way he could be a leader/mentor to the newest Bucs.

    As for being a “mentor” why the heck do the coaches and all get paid for? there are line coaches, backs coach, assistant coaches, etc.,

    Those that can do…do

    Those who can’t do…teach.

    Those who can’t teach…work fo the Government.

  50. Louie Says:

    @JimBuc, I’m not talking specifically about Hovan. In general, the Bucs have cut loose their veterans and Hovan is just the latest. For this upcoming season, are the Bucs better than last season? I doubt it because they have cut loose so many veterans and people expect these rookies to pick up the slack. Eventually, they probably will, but I feel this year is likely to be very painful. In this day and age, I don’t think coaches have the luxury of a 3-5 year rebuilding plan. Free agency made that way of thinking a thing of the past. However, it seems the Bucs are trying to make that way of thinking work. Do the Glazers have the guts to stick with it?

  51. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @Louie – I agree with “most” of what you wrote but as painful as it is for me to write this I believe that YES, the Bucs are better now then they were at this time in 2009.

    Why? In a single word continuity and less controversy.

    1. Freeman has the job to loose. No QB experiments
    2. Defensive system won’t change like it did with Bates
    3. Same offensive coordinator – not firing the OC 2 weeks B4 the season starts
    4. Allowing the rookies reps and playing time (minus)
    5. Experience on the part of the HC

    So overall I’d say that the 2010 Bucs NOW look at least as good and maybe a little better than the 2009 Bucs in May 2009.

  52. JimBuc Says:

    Louie, good point. One exception, its just people on this board that are thinking only about this year. The Glazers specifically told Dom “you think long-term, we think long-term. You think short term . . .”

  53. JimBuc Says:

    Right Mr. Lucky. The Bucs stats on the filed might not show it this season (because they are very young) but they are light years ahead of last season.

    For all the people complaining about Hovan, did you also complain when the Bucs cut Dunn, Brooks, Galloway, Garcia, June, etc. Those were all veterans that never played in the league again (at least at any meaningful level). Hovan has yet to be picked up, right?

  54. thomas Says:

    @Jimbuc:

    I am and have always been objective about one thing Jimbuc – being as good as possible every year w/o concern for $ or stepping on org toes.

    You are so biased in favor of everything organizational – that you accept and defend bad football and bad decisions repeatedly as if an admission of one mistake destroys your religion, i.e belief in all things organization.

    So what it boils down to is I want winning, irrespective of who is in charge and I would sacrifice any ownership, management and coaching for winning (which is why I supported Gruden being released, and the hiring of Radio and Dom – until I watched 0-7, coordinators fired/scapegoated, the Matt Bryant/ Nugent fiasco, Lefty and Mccown, Jermaine Phillips at LB, Sabby and on and on). It was an absolute joke last year – so sorry if I lost confidence in their ability to make decisions.

    You have admitted that you will tolerate losing in 09, 10 and even 11, you say because you believe in the build through the draft philosophy (or excuse), but what it sounds like to many of us is that you are consstantly dreaming up arguments in defense of the org (even when it causes you to take senseless positions). Like: “only haters argue that we don’t know how good this draft will be until we see these guys play against NFL competition and then try to say the same applies to Brandon Marshall b/c we havent seen him play for another team – ridiculuos – Marshall has dominated nfl quality talent for 3 years of 100+ catches – there is no concern re ability to translate as a pro. Who knows what Mccoy will do? arguably he didnt dominate the Big 12.

    Also, you double talk by saying that money isnt a factor w/ the orgs decision making then point out that Hovan makes 4 mil. Who cares about the $? If the team / Mccoy and Price will be even slightly better w/ Hovan (which your buddy / cheerleader Rah seems to agree with) then keep him regardless of his pay.

    But that is okay, this is a blog and differing opinions are necessary. I love your contributions jimbuc (I am sure you can tell) because they are so easy to expose as company talking-points. (I have a feeling by week 10 next year, that you will be sailing the Jimbbuc ship alone).

  55. admin Says:

    Joe here,

    Thomas – Well done. Not a standing ovation, but very well done.

  56. Patrick Says:

    Too much money?? Give me a break! The Bucs didn’t spend a dime this offseason on anything except for Sean Jones. So I don’t see why they can’t open their wallets and keep a good character guy on the roster.

  57. JimBuc Says:

    Thomas, we all want winning but there are two types of winning. There is the Gruden/Allen approach, which got Gruden a couple games over .500 and a bunch of early exits from the playoffs. Do you want that type of winning because we could be 9-7 next season, but what about the next? And, the next? Do you want 10-6, 4-12, 9-7? Maybe you don’t realize that that is what you watched under Gruden? You get that part, right?

    The other approach, which you can see from some of the best teams in the league and you saw from the Bucs as they led up to Gruden, was to build a solid core that you can then augment with free agents. These kind of teams often have long runs of competitive. The Bucs have gone with the second approach, in case you have not noticed.

    You don’t have to agree with it, but you could at least acknowledge the obvious.

  58. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @JimBucs – with regard to Black Tuesday (2009 release of Brooks et al) I was in favor of their release – but I was adamently against HOW it was done – tasteless (esp. with Brooks).

    My comments were posted defending the decision of the Bucs on that front.

    @Thomas – what do you expect from JimBuc/Joel Glazer????

  59. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Patrick – spend $4 million on a “good character?” WTF?

    This isn’t little league where everyone gets a trophy for showing up. This isn’t intermurals.

    THIS IS THE NFL.

    When you don’t/can’t produce on the field you’re gone.

    Hovan may have 1 season left for some other team willing to pay him the league minimum but I want these higher draft picks playing/learning and getting OTJ experience.

  60. JimBuc Says:

    Thomas, you are apparently reading challenged. I said the Bucs cut Hovan for money. Can you read?

    You also appear to be math challenged. What I said about Marshall was that we do not know what impact 2 (say it with me now — 2 — ) second round draft picks would have on the team? In 1995 and 1996 those same picks would have been Brooks and Alstott. Think thye played a role in the teams success over a decade?

    “Company talking points” — Thomas, the weakest thing you can do in any debate it to try to explain away facts by assigning a false motive to the person you oppose. Very, very weak.

  61. Patrick Says:

    @ Mr. Lucky

    Hovan could’ve been kept as a backup. I do agree that Hovan hasn’t produced enough recently, but it’s true that we have NO depth or leadership on this team.

    I have a question for you Mr Lucky. Why is Sims still on the team and Hovan isn’t? Sims has played far worse than Hovan. Do you think Sims has produced? Money is obviously the reason for Hovan’s departure and I think it’s ridiculous.

    Like I mentioned above, we haven’t even spent any money this offseason except for the signing of Sean Jones. So why not spend a little money to keep on the roster?

    I think we drafted two great lineman last week in Gerald McCoy and Brian Price. I know they’re definitely going to be our starters, but a little competition would’ve also been good for those two guys. Even if it’s with Hovan.

  62. JimBuc Says:

    Why is everyone so upset about Hovan’s departure being driven by money? HELLO . .. veterans get cut due to their contracts. That is not unique to the Bucs, right? Do you think Hovan offered to take a cut? Hmm..

  63. JimBuc Says:

    Curious — does anyone think the Bucs will sign anyone after June 1?

  64. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @Patrick – let’s see Hovan vs. Sims; why cut Hovan?

    Maybe it’s because the Bucs are racists? Maybe Raheem wants to keep a brother and let the white boy go?

    Maybe the Bucs will save more $ by letting Hovan go and keeping Sims around.

    Is there really any difference between the two in their level of play?

    I don’t know; I’m just a fan.

    What LEADERSHIP does Hovan possess that is worth $4 million? Hovan has been, at his best year, average. He wasn’t a Sapp, Brooks, Lynch, etc.,

    To say that you’re upset over his release because the Bucs are being cheap is really a silly argument

  65. Patrick Says:

    I think the Bucs would be wise if they decided to bring some retired Buccaneer players back to the organization in some way where they can help in the youth movement? You know, mentoring?

    Guys like Brooks and Lynch.

    I’m not saying sign them to the roster or anything like that. But maybe bring them to Tampa during the workouts, training camp, and regular season practices to help out the young guys.

    Brad Johnson would be a could mentor to Josh Freeman. He was a great QB for us during his 4 years in Tampa, especially during the Super Bowl season!

    It seems like Sapp is in favor of helping both McCoy and Price. I’m happy to hear that.

    I was also in favor of having Galloway around as a mentor for Arrelious Benn and Mike Williams. But he recently signed with the Washington Redskins.

  66. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Oh BTW – the most important thing Hovan was costing the Bucs?

    A POSITION ON THE ROSTER.

    With over 70 rookies in town maybe, just maybe, there is an undrafted diamond in the rough who might make it because the Bucs let Hovan go.

  67. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Patrick

    This isn’t fantasy football. Your idea “sounds” good but it’s impractical.

    How many teams bring backs their “hero’s” to mentor their rookies? NONE.

    These are football players, most of whom has spent years honing their skills.

  68. thomas Says:

    @Jimbuc:

    You have argued for weeks that the Bucs decisions in general have no relationship to finances and as support for that argument you have cited what the Glazers have said publicly.

    Ad nauseum we have argued with you to read behind their words and analyze their actions – many of the decisions are grounded on saving $ not what would be the best for the roster. That is where many of us have admittedly speculated (but there is reason to) that the Manu situation is related. You have argued with me over and over again that $ isnt the primary factor that the Glazers selected build through the draft versus build through the draft and free agency.

    In response to the 9-7, 10-6, 5-11 (the year Simms and Griese were hurt and we started a rookie Gradkowski for 11 games) and only winning division titles every other year. Yes, Yes I long for those years. BTW – since 1999 there have been 5, that is right 5, wild card teams win the super bowl. That is why you play for a ticket to the dance baby and once you get one anything can happen. Ask my wife? I am living proof that 9-7 teams (more like 7-9) can win it all..

  69. thomas Says:

    and also, you point re attack motivations to defeat the argument – dont you refer to me as hater?

  70. Patrick Says:

    @ Mr. Lucky

    I like the arguments you have made. Maybe Hovan did cost too much. Still, I wonder if Raheem even asked Hovan if he would take a pay cut. I think he would’ve been open to that, because he knows that if he goes somewhere else, his situation won’t be any better. I think there’s a chance he might not even get another job.

  71. thomas Says:

    Finally, I would say that 4 million to cheerlead is a lot seeing that we are paying rah about 700k to do the same – there can only be 1 head cheerleader. And Hovan is to fat to chest bump.

  72. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @Patrick

    I agree with you that Hovan wasn’t asked to take a cut. If asked he probably would have because I doubt he has anything else lined up.

    But that is “charity” and only done for players like Brooks/Dunn and the Glazers didn’t extend that courtesy to them. Hovan? Not a chance in hell.

    Plus that would give more and more people ammo to say the Bucs are cheap. Are they? Yes! But the way they did it (cutting Hovan) keeps their illusion alive.

    It’s about $ folks. This IS the NFL and it’s big business – no different than Exxon or BP

  73. JimBuc Says:

    Thomas — you would save everyone a lot of time if you just went back and read what I actually said. For example, I never said this:

    “the Bucs decisions in general have no relationship to finances”

    To the contrary, I said the Bucs low payroll relates to ManU, the economy, poor drafting and a lockout and I said that Hovan was cut for money.

    I did not cite the Glazers comments on finances, but rather on the notion of building through the draft. Specifically, I quoted Joel Glazer’s March 09 press conference. Has nothing to do with finances.

    I have said that money isnt the motivating factor behind building through the draft. You got one right! (Thomas — do you realize that there really was no free agency this year. Most of the people that everyone talks about were RFAs, right. You cannot “build through the draft” by giving up picks. In this thread you will find a reasonable example. Two 2nd round picks is like losing Brooks and Alstott)

    Like I said, if you are happy with the Gruden years (I like how you try to explain the Gruden down years way by mentioning Simms and Grads. You realize the irony right? Down years due to no franchise QB, right?) and you apparently are, so be it. I guess you are going to have a few years of angst (if it is even possible to have more than you have now). Good luck.

  74. thomas Says:

    @Mr. Lucky:

    I usually respect your opinions but whoa, whoa in re this is”no different than Exxon or BP.” These 2 companies are responsible for arguably two of the biggest environmental disasters in US history (Alaska and our Gulf). Arguably, that is the harm that flows from their greed.

    We love our bucs for entertainment purposes and we feel that our loyalty should be repaid by the team balancing and truly prioritizing winning in order to earn our money but the Glazers being cheap wont hurt our environment. Although if they dont do something fast (like sell in England with Manu it may get environmentally ugly. BTW – is it just a coincidence that both the Manuers and most of us here are frustrated with the Glazers running of our franchises since Malcolm got sick??

    So Lucky, I get what your saying – they are alll businesses bbut you can probably find better examples.

  75. JimBuc Says:

    Thomas — at least you provide a lot of comic relief. You call me out for calling you a “hater” and then go and prove that I am correct by taking a gratuitous shot at Morris. LMAO Not only are you a “hater,” as I pointed out before – and you proved again here tonight — you are the worst kind of “hater,” a jilted Gruden lover who thinks the rebuilding is unnecessary because the Bucs were actually pretty good.

    BTW — I am a big Gruden fan, but I am not blind. I can see all the failed draft picks, the late-season collapse and all the veteran players that were cut that never played again.

  76. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Hahahah – I didn’t even REALIZE the implication with Exxon & BP – they were just the first 2 Fortune 500 companies that came to mind. You got my point in that the Glazers just treat the Bucs like a business – profit is their only goal – unlike say the Roonies or even JJ in Dallas.

    God what I wouldn’t give to have an owner who understood the fan’s connection to their teams (are U listening DeBartola?)

    On the other hand maybe the Glazers ARE like Exxon and BP – cutting costs and causing an emotional oil slick for Bucs fans that if allowed to continue will poison the environment (Tampa) for years to come.

  77. JimBuc Says:

    I doubt that Hovan was given a chance to take a pay cut. He probably would have knowing him.

  78. JimBuc Says:

    Mr. Lucky — you are right, profit is the Glazers only goal and I would respectfully submit that that is a good thing for all of us. The Glazers are smart enough to know that the MOST PROFITABLE route is to have a consistently competitive team. I know that is an opinion that is in the distinct minority here.

  79. Mr. Lucky Says:

    JimBucs – i think one of the biggest insults people hurl is calling other’s haters because we disagee with them. Calling a football fan who is discontented a hater is like Jessie Jackson calling everyone who didn’t vote for Barak a racist! It leaves a really bad taste in your mouth.

    I was one who called for Gruden’s head at the end of the 2008 season. I couldn’t believe they lost their final 4 and missed the playoffs.

    When they fired Jon I didn’t feel that the team was THAT bad and needed to be “blown up”.

    I was wrong about Gruden. I realize that now. He managed to keep the Bucs competitive with band-aids and chewing gum. Rah didn’t have that experience.

    While I understand the Glazer’s plan of rebuilding and restocking (look at how the Rays have run their team since 2005) I don’t think you have to take that much of a long-term outlook. I’m not patient enough to wait until 2012 for the bucs to be division contenders.

  80. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @ JimBuc/Joel G.

    “MOST PROFITABLE route is to have a consistently competitive team. I know that is an opinion that is in the distinct minority here”.

    Tell that to those sissy baseball boys across the Gandy.

  81. Bucked up Says:

    I agree with Mr. Lucky for the most part.
    Hovan was most likely shown the door because he was a key factor in the bucs inability to stop the run and rarely even lucked into a sack. Ruud had way too many tackles in the area four to six yards past the line of scrimmage thanks to all the breakouts thru the D-line. Money issue or not, Hovan just wasn’t getting the job done and had no presence in that position.
    They are obviously making an effort to address the run defense. As a fan thats had to walk out of the CITS after spending good money to watch our former standout defense get pummelled by what could be called average running attacks, over and over again, I personally am ready for that kind of change.
    Lets face it, From a strictly business perspective, The fact that the Rays are proving that winning isnt going to fill a stadium in this economy, might also have an effect on monetary decisions that the Glazers are going to make over the next couple of weeks.

  82. JimBuc Says:

    Mr. Lucky — as I use the term, a “hater” is not someone with whom I disagree, it is a person who, because of their anger, refuses to acknowledge the obvious. Someone, like Thomas, who has a keen hatred of Morris and so everything Morris does is bad, who hates the Glazers so everyhting they do is solely motivated by money or nefarious desires.

    The world does not work that way. No one person is totally incompetent or totally infallable. People don’t set rules, they make judgments on a case-by-case basis.

  83. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @JimBuc wrote: No one person is totally incompetent or totally infallable.

    You obviously never met RadioMushMouth have you? ;)

  84. thomas Says:

    1) brooks was a first rounder;
    2) for every alstott there are a Dexter Jackson, Marquis Cooper RIP and Aaron Sears;
    3) for every Warren Sapp and Derrick Brooks there are a Reidel Anthony, Jaquez Green, Kenyatta Walker, Gaines Adams RIP, Michael Clayton.

    We technically agree on one or two things:
    1) that there was very limited UFA this year due to the CBA situation, there were a few FA’s due to mutual agreement that hit the market. I am the one who pointed that out to you previously;
    2) that a franchise qb is preferrable (although not necessary – see Dilfer, Brad Johnson, doug williams,warner, rypien, hostettler.

    You act like draft picks are platinum: I would trade a 5th for holmes all day/every day, and Boldin for a 3rd and 4th all day and twice on Sunday.

    BTW: check this out re statistics of first rounders succeeding in the league in 5+ years (just first rounders). I didnt realize that the draft was this much of a crapshoot! OMG I have re-considered – trade draft picks more willingly my goodness.
    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/74206-what-are-an-nfl-first-round-picks-odds-for-success

  85. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Thomas – regarding draft picks.

    Considering what teams have to pay their 1st round picks I would personally trade my Round 1 pick for a proven player EVERY year. The contracts would be in the same vacinity but you get a proven commodity vs. potential (I HATE that word when applied to draft picks/players)

    It is only in the 3 round and later that players are value for their owners. Their contracts are a lot less and if they workout can be on a team for 4 years.

    Not taking Holmes for a 5th rounder was a BIG mistake, in my opinion.

  86. Patrick Says:

    @ Mr. Lucky

    Agreed. Even though we had a bad finish to the 2008 season, we were still a pretty good team in my opinion. Not great, but good. We weren’t bad. We were a playoff caliber team that was better than it’s record of 9-7.

    I’m a big Gruden fan and was very upset when he was fired. Though I was anxious to see who our head coach would be. And when I found out it would be Raheem, it made the firing even worse. If you fire a guy like Gruden, you upgrade. To this day, I never understood why they hired him. He really hadn’t done anything to deserve a head coaching job, and really just had it given to him. He had only been a defensive backs coach for two years, and had no resume to show, nor did he have any experience. You ask the question ” What has he done?”

    In 2008, the Bucs went 9-7. The Detroit Lions went 0-16 and had the worst NFL season ever. A year later in 2009, our record is only 1 game better than theirs. We went 3-13, they went 2-14. Pretty sad. The team didn’t need to be blown to pieces. I do agree that we needed to get younger, but you just don’t go from 9-7 (we were better than that) to 3-13.

    I think Gruden was, and will always be a better coach than Raheem will ever be. I think it was just his method of building the team that led to his departure, such as signing old guys and not focusing enough on young guys.

    If Gruden was the head coach of the Bucs today, with Josh Freeman and all the other young and talented guys that we have (Benn, Williams, Stroughter, McCoy), I think he would do great. I think he would’ve done good with developing Freeman.

    You guys also have to remember that he did try to develop a young QB. Years ago, he tried to develop Chris Simms, and he was playing great for us. Then he had a near fatal injury that ended his career in Tampa. He was really the only young QB he had to work with.

  87. thomas Says:

    Patrick:

    excellent points! Except that rumor has it that Gruden was not a big Simms guy bbut felt stuck with him b/c the Glazers liked him. Joe may know something about this.

  88. JimBuc Says:

    Patrick:

    Good points but a couple things:

    1) Gruden did not want/like Simms. McKay chose Simms (I think). Gruden even joked (complained) about changing the offense for a lefty.

    2) You are like many people that think the 2008 team was good. It was not good. Gruden was good, winning with smoke and mirrors. All of the veterans that were cut (Mr. Lucky I agree on Brooks release) never playerd again and we were plaing with a D-Line that consisted of a bust, a KC castoff, a declining Hovan and a former arena league player.

    In any event, you are the type of person that must take all of this the hardest because it must seem unnecessary. See Thomas as an example, except Thomas is like you on steroids (or something else) :-)

  89. JimBuc Says:

    Patrick — to be fair to Gruden his failure to develop a QB was also a function of the way the Bucs won the SB. How many premium picks did the Bucs give up to win a SB? Two 1st rounders for Key. How many picks for Gruden? Without premium picks, you don’t get a franchise QB

    Thomas — Brooks was a late first rounder but we traded up to get him. Look at your example of drafting. The one thing you don’t seem to get is where the Bucs are right now on the curve (due to your thought that they were only a player or two away in 2008). At this point the draft picks are way more valuable than the FAs

  90. Greg Says:

    All of you guys are full of shit, if I had an extra $4 million to spend on Rachel Watson cheering me up, you better f’ing believe I’d be spending it on that worthy cause! Joe, your site is my crack cocaine, I can’t help but come back!

  91. Greg Says:

    You know, it would be nice if us independants could find a happy medium between the conservative refuckems (Eric and Thomas) and the “this world is nothing but a happy meal” democrats (Jimbuc) on this site! Maybe we can just pull a “Charlie” and switch mid-sentence to whatever party gives us the best chance of continuing to suck off the public teat!!!

  92. Mr. Lucky Says:

    @Greg – who says you have to be one or the other? Any what’s that bout a public teat? The the nw cheerleaders going to do something different?

    It all comes down to one underlying principle:

    Do you want to see the Bucs win – NOW?

    While 90% of fans would look at me and say, Duh!!! there is a price to pay and the current ownership isn’t willing to go down that road.

    Jon Gruden was an expert at holding his team together with rubber bands and chewing gum. Look what happened when he was canned? Going from a 9-7 team that was 1 win away from the playoffs to a 3-13 season in which the management did everyhing wrong and was the laughing stock of the NFL.

    I was one advocating for bringing in Coher to rebuild because I think that someone like Bill would be able to make the Bucs competitive quicker than Rah-Rah who is basically playing it by ear.

    The other problem with the Bucs is this: The Glazers are businessmen who run their football team like a Fortune 500 business and to most fans who aren’t business owners this sucks. Football fans want to see their favorite players on the team. Forget the fact that it’s not a sound business decision.

    The problem is this – football fans are just like our elected officials; when it’s not your money you wan to spend it and spend it. That’s how come Washington racked up TRILLIONS in debt. Football teams, run by fans or irresponsible owners, rack up too much debt as well.

  93. JimBuc Says:

    JimBuc is not a democrat and I don’t like happy meals :-)

    I also think Morris made too many blunders to count last year, so did Dom, and I alos think the Glazers are restricting the money to the Bucs, I just believe it is temporary because that is what makes the most business sense. I also belive that Glazers overreacted in firing Gruden and we all saw that with 3-13.

    Funny thing is you don’t get to hear most of my negative views because the prevailing view that I am responding to is negative (in some instance so negative its silly) or so ridiculously absolute (i.e the Bucs are hypocrites because they said character guys but took Williams) that there is not other response.

  94. Greg Says:

    @ Mr. Lucky:

    Your comparison of football fans wanting to waste owners money to our politicians today is spot on!!

    @ JimBuc:

    Didn’t really suspect you of being a democrat, but here lately, the views between you, Eric, Thomas and RM have been one extreme to the other–kinda like the idiots running our country right now!!

  95. Greg Says:

    @ Mr. Lucky

    If I hear any inside scoop about the Bucs cheerleaders allowing sucking at the teat, you’ll be the first I’ll let know!

  96. Mr. Lucky Says:

    Greg – a sign of true friendship; thanks :)

    BTW – Is it just me or does anyone else think that Hovan, while average on the field, wasn’t a team leader?

    does anyone have any stories of anything Hovan did off the field that would be “leadership” skills?

    anyone……(crickets…..crickets)

  97. Eric Says:

    Hovan is a small issue.

    Now getting rid of 55 when he was willing to play the mentor role – catastrophically stupid.

  98. JimBuc Says:

    Mr. Lucky, could I at least get some credit when you use my cricket joke? :-)

  99. Greg Says:

    @ Mr. Lucky

    I can’t give you a specific instance where Hovan came through as a leader, although I got to meet him a couple of times at a friend of mine’s restaurant, but at least Chris was man enough to try and take on a leadership role last year when there were really no other veterans to take on that role. Hovan played his ass of for us while he was here, unfortunately, his best wasn’t nearly good enough. Personally, I love the guy, and wish the Bucs could have kept him here vice Ryan Sims, but money talks, and even I can understand why the Glazers would want to walk away from paying a part time backup $4 million. Although, I still say if I had $4 million sitting around, I’d much rather pay Rachal Watson to perform for me!

  100. Greg Says:

    @ Mr Lucky

    To tell you the truth, I don’t really have anything against Eric, the two of us have both pressed Joe for more pics of our cheerleaders (as well as Joe’s secret stash!) to no avail. While Eric can be a little negative from time to time, he’s a good dude who wants exactly what the rest of want, a team we can all be proud of and support 100%!!

  101. Greg Says:

    @ JimBuc

    I’m with you my friend, you’ve stood alone against an onslaught of bullshit from all comers, yet you’ve maintained your support for the Bucs throughout, and I salute you for that. I still think you have democratic tendencies, but I respect you much more than those assholes in DC!!

 
 

Leave a Reply

Current month ye@r day *