Dez Bryant has been in the news the last couple days after refusing to carry the pads of some veteran players.  It has caused a bit of an issue in the Dallas locker room and will only get more play as it goes on.  Is Bryant right or wrong on this?

As a former teammate I have a strong feeling on this in regards to ‘respect’.  When a younger, unproven teammate comes in and refuses to show any humility or gratitude to the players who came before them then I have a serious problem with that.  Dez Bryant signed for millions because of the other players who came before him and paved the way.  Based on that alone you take your lumps that first year and carry pads when it is asked of you. 

On the flip side, there is no code here saying that he has to carry the pads.  Bryant simply wants to play football and not be tied down to the locker room games or traditions that are taking place.  After listening to him I believe it even more.  Why should he carry someone’s pads when he is technically an equal to that person as a member of the Cowboys? 

What it boils down to in my eyes is respect.  Does he gain more respect from his teammates by acting out or by carrying the pads?  I believe you gain more respect as a teammate by carrying the pads and not putting yourself above the other pad carrying rookies or your draft status.  Other guys have earned that number and name on the back of their jersey with years of play and service and the least you can do is carry the pads for a while.  Respect will be earned much quicker that way because now it’s going to be about the vets trying to get respect from the rookie and we haven’t heard the end of this one.

They Heisman trophy IS and always has been the elite trophy in collegiate sports today.  I’m talking all sports.  It gets more hype and has more prestige than any other award in amateur athletics.  In fact, it has as much prestige as just about any other sports award for that matter.  Having said that, Reggie Bush may be giving his back very soon and I don’t know if that is the right choice.  Let’s look at the two sides.

Reggie Bush allegedly received improper benefits while at USC and as a result USC was put on probation and forced to give up some scholaships.  The team has a new unproven coach who has some big shoes to fill but it seems funny to me that we punish today’s kids for yesterday’s actions.  Nothing hits a school harder than a monetary fine but they didn’t go that route.  Instead, USC lost a bunch of scholarships and was forced to vacate a number of wins during the Bush era. Reggie still denies these events took place.

Recently the new AD at USC also took down any reference to Bush winning the heisman and even took down the replica trophy that was in the display case.  This shows how USC views the actions that took place with one of their own all time greats so what is the Heisman committee going to do?

I think the trophy is as good as gone.  I think they are going to take it back to send a strong message.  The Heisman trophy is about all that is supposed to be good about college football and not anything else.  It is the best of the best and Reggie Bush’s ‘alleged’ behavior and choices clearly show something else.  In my opinion, it is only a matter of time before they come calling for the trophy that Bush earned with his play.

That’s the flip side to this…Is the Heisman trophy about the player or the combination of the player/person?  If it is just the player then Bush deserves to keep the award.  He was the single most exciting college football player I have seen since Michael Vick and he was a leader on one of the most talented teams in the history of collegiate sports.  They won a national title during his time there and if the Heisman is about the player then he should keep it. 

Nothing in college sports is about the player, it is all about the team and the education that one should be receiving.  If it is found that the behavior was against the rules then take the trophy back and send a strong message to the youth of today.

I just don’t get it.  I write on this each and every year and I just don’t get it at all. Last season the Lions signed Matthew Stafford to a record contract and gave an unproven rookie 41.7 million in guaranteed money.  Without ever having to perform well this guy will never have to work again.  Now word is coming out that the Rams are going to shell out between 45 and 50 million in guaranteed money to a guy who is coming off a serious injury to his throwing shoulder after being tackled by a marginal college player.  No wonder teams dont’ want top picks and who would.  You’d be better off taking on a free agent and committing that amount of money on 3-5 players as compared to one guy.  Is Bradford enough to turn the franchise around?  NOT EVEN CLOSE.  Now instead of him helping the team he actually handcuffs the team by hurting them financially. 

The best part is that it isn’t even his fault.  If Bradford comes in and says “I just want to play” and pulls a Ricky Williams from a decade ago then the rest of the players are all hurt financially.  Whatever Bradford gets directly effects all the other players taken in the same round but especially the top part of the draft.  The players are trying to get as big of a piece of the pie as they can so they actually want someone to get the money, just not Bradford.  Any vet would tell you that this practice doesn’t make them happy.  You see players who are stars who weren’t even drafted and earned everything they received and worked their way up while this guy get 50 million just for getting drafted and is completely unproven. 

It’s the part of the process that is bound to change when the next collective bargaining agreement is created and I, for one, am very excited about it.  Shift the money to the players who have earned it and not to some rookies.

I’ve read speculation all over the internet about Michael Vick and if he should get the final boot from the NFL after being at a nightclub where a co defendant was shot.  I’ve got my own opinion on this one that I want to share.

Innocent until Proven Guilty…Michael Vick was there but was seen leaving minutes before the shots were fired.  He wasn’t there.  He had a birthday party and left the party.  Someone was shot and now people want Vick kicked out of the league.  No matter what or who we are in life we can’t control another person’s ability to choose for themselves.  Vick left the party yet people want to blame him for the incident or for being there.  If we find out later that Vick orchestrated the shooting or whatever then that’s a different story but if he didn’t then let’s just leave the guy alone.  He was there and he left and those are the facts of the case right now.  He has a right to live his life and was punished for his previous crimes.  He’s lost out on more money than most of us will make in our lifetimes combined and I hope he learned his lesson from it. 

By all accounts Vick was upfront with the commissioner and informed him right away of what happened and his ‘involvement’ in it.  He has met with the police and is not a suspect at all in the shooting because he wasn’t there.  I hope to see Michael Vick in uniform very soon living up to that enormous potential that he has.