Bonecrusher Says Chiefs Tried To Sabotage His Career
Well, I heard mention of this yesterday and now I see it’s out there for all to read.
Hat tip to Arrowhead Pride for covering this.
Here are my thoughts. First off I am convinced this is true because of the fact that Herm had to step in and do damage control on Pollard’s behalf. No other explanation makes sense. Secondly, the fact that apparently no one of stature within the Chiefs’ new regime came to Pollard’s defense speaks volumes. Thirdly, because Pioli calls all the shots in such matters, I believe he is the one who needs to be held accountable for this.
The punishment should fit the crime. First, Pioli needs to be fired immediately for this. Next, Roger Goodell needs to ban Pioli from ever holding another job in the NFL. It’s the right message.
Do you think I am over-reacting?
Forget about what I think the NFL should do and just consider how much damage this has done to Chiefs reputation as a quality organization? Suppose you were a FA considering a change of scenery?
Would relocating to KC appeal to you after hearing this story?
DD, Thanks for posing the question.
I understand your role on this forum, and so I smile to myself a little bit when I read your posts, with a little bit of an idea about where they might be coming from.
In this instance, I’ll play the only card someone on the opposing side of the debate can play, which is to say that we will never have all of the information about Pollard’s interaction with Haley, Pioli, or anyone else at 1 Arrowhead Drive.
NFL Management is one of the most elite, exclusive clubs in the world. The men and women who live in that world are breathing rarefied air, and my guess is that more conversation happens between executives than we fans, and even the players, probably know.
As for the impact this may or may not have on free agent interest in KC as a destination, I think this kind of behavior, along with the decisive move against LJ yesterday, stand as flagposts to communicate the organization’s philosophy and boundaries.
This provides a clear picture of what being in KC might be like for any player who wears an arrowhead on his helmet. Men who want to act like boys can thrive on more than half of the teams in the league who not only tolerate, but reward negative behavior. It seems to me that KC is simply divorcing themselves from that crowd and re-establishing themselves as an organization that’s focused on integrity.
Thanks again for the post!
November 10th, 2009 at 10:36 amI have to agree with Matt on this. I believe Haley realizes his mistakes in cussing out the players, and sometimes treating them like children. I do think as fans, we have to take into consideration that most NFL players today that are grown men act like children. Therefore, Haley’s approach is probably similar to that of a HS coach or college coach. I still will not get on the bash Haley band wagon. It is to early and I am willing to give him time to learn what it is like to be an NFL coach and learn from his mistakes as well as see how his approach works in the long run.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:48 amHaley doesn’t treat his players like men. He treats them way a slaveowner would. Rarefied air or not, that type of behavior should never be allowed to fly in this world.
Any employer stupid enough and classless enough to badmouth a former employee to another prospective employer can and should be sued for everything they are worth.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:55 ammatt hill,
Not sure what you mean by my “role” and how you would happen to know where I am “coming from?” I do my best to simply call ‘em like I see ‘em. You believe otherwise?
As far as your suggestion that the Chiefs somehow acted decisively in dealing with LJ, my response to that is that their backs were against the wall. Let’s not confuse “decisiveness” with “out of options,” shall we? The last thing Clark Hunt wants to think about right now is more reasons for fans to not show up, not buy merchandise, etc.
November 10th, 2009 at 11:08 amDD,
Maybe you can clarify what you mean by your ’slavetrader’ comment a little further for us?
That’s pretty strong language in-context, and beyond hyperbole, I might go so far as to label it inappropriate, personally. Also, the assertion that litigation is the only appropriate response is questionable at best, in my opinion.
As an ombudsman, I’m surprised that you seem so quick to take the word of a player who, for one reason or another, didn’t jive with the current direction of the franchise, without consideration for the perspective of the management team, and the circumstances surrounding Pollard’s release, many of which we’ll never know.
Pollard cannot site who, if anyone, labeled him a bad locker room presence. In this country, we have the right to face our accuser. Until and unless Mr. Pollard would like to reveal any knowledge he has pertaining to the individual or individuals who ‘blackballed’ him, he has no credibility in my book.
Beyond that, in this era of media hype, and agent-induced commentary, how much credence should a story like this really receive? Particularly from a B-list player…
As an aside, Herm Edwards’ endorsement of Pollard as a good locker room guy does nothing for me as a fan, particularly given the product that Herm’s teams put onto the field for three years. He’s broadcasting for a reason – he’s not desired as a coach, which not only calls Herm’s coaching acumen into question for me, but his talent and character evaluation as well.
I certainly appreciate the objectivity you bring to these discussions, and I am in no way a Pioli/Haley apologist, however, I believe your perspective in this case to be unnecessarily vile.
November 10th, 2009 at 11:16 amDD,
My comment about ‘your role’ is based on something I thought I read about you being an ombudsman for this forum.
I intended no slight. I was merely asserting that based on my understanding of your position here, that your postings and perspective come from a place of necessary objectivity, and on occasion, combativeness, due to the responsibilities a traditional ombudsman has.
Forgive me if I have misrepresented your role.
Matt
November 10th, 2009 at 11:20 amAlright, I’ll grant you that “slaveowner” might be a little too provocative but at the same time I have great difficulty coming up with the correct metaphor to describe an employment situation where adult professional men are accorded anything less than that level of respect by their employer. How about “Indentured Servitude” instead?
November 10th, 2009 at 11:37 amI’m not one for conspiracy theories, but I think Pioli had it out for Pollard from day one.
I’m basing this around Pollard’s season-ending hit on Tom Brady last year, which is the thing Pollard is most famous for. Whether he thinks Pollard was bad publicity for the team based on the hit or whether he was just bitter because the Patriots were set back a year, I think Pioli arrived in Kansas City with a bad taste in his mouth for Bernard Pollard (if not a straight-up vendetta against him), and the Bonecrusher was doomed from that point on.
What else would explain Pollard’s shocking and untimely release? This may seem absurd, but having witnessed the mind-boggling decisions and toxic ego of the new regime, I honestly thin it’s a strong possibility.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:10 pmDouble, I think you’re letting your disdain for the current administration affect your judgment. I can understand you being mad that the Chiefs brass would dis one of your favorite players. But thinking the NFL should force an owner to fire his GM for offering his opinion on a player–”argumentative and disrespectful to [his] teammates” in Pollard’s words–is asinine.
It may make Pioli a jerk, but this league doesn’t fire people for repeated assaults on women nor vehicular manslaughter for goodness sake, and you want a GM fired for saying derogatory things about a player?
So, yes, I think you’re overreacting. (And since you backed off the ridiculous slavery allusion, I’ll let that go.)
November 10th, 2009 at 12:16 pmBy the way, the above theory is not one I formulated overnight, or even since Pollard’s release.
Since pretty much day one, I have wondered if Pioli would cut Pollard for the reasons highlighted above. I’d been praying to myself that this didn’t happen, and thought Bernard was almost in the clear (at least for the rest of the year), but then look what happens. I wasn’t even surprised when this happened, because I’d been expecting it. I simply shook my head and privately wished Bernard the best with his new team.
If my theory is correct, then I agree with you, Double D, that Pioli should be fired immediately.
And he should take that sorry excuse for a pee-wee coach, Haley, with him.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:17 pmDD come on, that seems like a pretty extreme conclusion to draw. All this seems unsubstantiated. Is negative information about a former employee “badmouthing”? What if its true? One thing I’ve learned is always get both sides before making judgments and I dont think we have both sides.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:35 pmAs every HR department knows, you can not
bad mouthmake negative comments about a former employee when asked for a reference. All you are allowed to do is verify employment. Providing anything more than that can get you into a mess of legal trouble the likes of which no company wants.Randy,
If Pollard wasn’t telling the truth, why would Herm need to do damage control? Occam’s Razor applies in this instance.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:22 pmSo, if someone calls me for information on a former employee, and I hold a poor opinion of him, I am supposed to lie or say “no comment” rather than giving the prospective employer my real opinion?
Uh…no. In fact, when someone calls me my credibility is on the line, and I am not going to sacrifice that for fear of saying something someone doesn’t like. If I am not honest, I will be viewed by other professionals as not credible.
You want to get in trouble? Withhold information you believe to be true.
Was Pollard telling the truth? Did Pioli say bad things about him? Yes, I think so. But if Pioli believed those things to be true, he was not wrong to say them.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:38 pmDD Herm is an idiot. Damage control spells “I’ve got something to do” That being said, I gotta say what does KC expect in return if they are considering a player from another team?
Max, Im with you, you withold info from another team about a player, you can at least expect the favor returned.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:50 pmMax,
If you fire somebody, you’ve gotten your pound of flesh. Many times people lose their jobs simply because the chemistry is wrong – as I strongly believe was the case in this situation. Bad chemistry does not give you license to speak negatively of someone. Doing what you can to prevent an individual from making a new start elsewhere goes beyond termination and into the realm of being vindictive. Like it or not, companies can and do get sued for volunteering negative information about former employees. Confirmation of last position held and length of employment is the standard rule for HR. No performance information, no salary information, nothing else.
No matter how you look at it, the so-called “what happens in the locker room, stays in the locker room” policy seems to be a pretty one-sided arrangement with this regime.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:53 pmDD:
There is always the official rules and unofficial rules. People can and do get blackballed in every occupation. It’s not always fair. One your larger point about the current regime having a very one-sided arrangement, I agree.
November 10th, 2009 at 3:19 pmOfficial schmofficial. Blackballing is a completely classless thing to do.
November 10th, 2009 at 3:44 pmYour feelings toward Haley will not have one ounce of difference to Haleys job in KC.
November 10th, 2009 at 3:48 pmToma said it. Haley is here for good. My question to those of you that are not happy with the current regime, what if next year somehow the Chiefs actually put it all together and we manage to be a decent or even good team? I know that’s a long shot but what if? Do you still disapprove of our current regime?
November 10th, 2009 at 4:04 pmMy Two Cents: You’re either with the program, or you are not. There can be no dissention in the ranks. What did Pollard, or anyone on the Chiefs roster the last three years do to deserve special treatment? It’s the new regime’s way or the highway.
Max you’re right. I shouldn’t have to kiss an ex-employee’s butt who has been part of my organizations problems and make him out to be something better than he is. It seems highly unlikely that an ex-employer would bad mouth and ex-employee if that ex-employee did not deserve it. Only my two cents.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:14 pmi come to this site often but rarely comment. DD posts and comments such as yours today give this site much less credibility. Not being on the Pioli/Haley bandwagon is one thing, but having them “blackballed” from the NFL is over the top.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:19 pmI will believe it when I see it. There is little doubt in my mind that last year’s team could beat this year’s team. In spite of all the talk about process and patience, I see absolutely nothing that convinces me that progress is taking place. Everything is falling apart.
Until we have grown ups in charge, nothing will change. Bottom line, we will continue to be a losing franchise and quality free agents will be reluctant to come here unless they are given a ton of money to make it worth their while.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:20 pmI think we all know that Haley wont be fired after this season is over and we shouldnt keep him as our offensive coordinator. That being said why dont we take a look at Charlie Weis? I know hes the coach at Notre Dame but hes about to lose it. There are a lot of options im suprised no one has really brought that up.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:21 pmA few things to chew on:
Pioli has been a standout executive for years and is widely respected around the league. He comes from a proud pedegree that is known for exellence and having this position here in KC is the pinnacle of his career.
Think about this, if an employer fired you without stating any real reasons why, wouldn’t you be angry? Wouldn’t you “bad mouth” your old employer? Paint them up and down as the great red satan? I would. Its the real world we live in, wake up, who doesn’t talk sh*t about their old companies?
I don’t agree with everything Pioli/Haley have done thus far. Cutting Pollard makes no sense to me and neither did the draft. Then again, I don’t call the shots. I think Haley’s attitude could be a negative as far as FA’s go, But Pioli’s rep has been rock solid though. Part of why I think Pollard is going after him.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:35 pmSomething else to note. Pioli has stockpiled some serious cash and I don’t think its for Christmas bonuses. We have several picks this year in higher rounds creating some semblance of leverage for the offseason, and I’ll be surprised if some big moves are not made in FA next year. There is a reason for everything, whether we agree with it or not.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:36 pmQuaz,
The smoking gun on this whole deal is Herm’s intervention on Pollard’s behalf. If what Pollard is saying were not the truth, then Herm would not have had any reason to make all those calls to GMs around the league. It’s the sine qua non.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:43 pmDouble D, Ramblefrog is right you are way over the top, With your hatred of this regime. Slaveowner for petes sake ,Blacklisting you are starting to sound like Whitlock …And I quit reading his ridiculous crap a while back…
November 10th, 2009 at 5:15 pmThe Pioli/Haley A-Hole approach is a good plan for certain talent rich teams (Cincinnati,Oakland,San Fran), and has a place in the NFL for teams that are underachieving. It doesn’t have a place on a team which had 6 wins in two seasons. This is minor in comparison to their first off season in command. Pioli has a lot to accomplish this off season. If he cruises through FA with little acquisitions and completes another sub par draft, he should be shown the door mid season 2010.
Anyone notice that over the last two years we have shed J. Allen, Tony G.,LJ,Pollard,Wiegman.Next year we lose DJ and maybe Waters
November 10th, 2009 at 5:16 pmDD,
You are wrong about giving your opinion. I just went through a Contemporary Business Law class and NOT giving information is what will get you into trouble. On the same aspect if you intentionally give FALSE information about someone to black ball them, then yes you can get into trouble. However, I have not seen anything from Haley or Pioli that would suggest they would submit FALSE information to anyone. They may say I am not going to talk about that now or no comment, but they wouldn’t give false info to or about anyone. THAT is what can legally get you into trouble for.
And I do have to agree that Pioli had a bad taste in his mouth for Pollard, he hurt the NFL’s precious little favorite QB, Brady. But if Pollard was playing well then he would have had not choice to keep him. I was absolutely surprised to see him cut. I didn’t realize he played any worse than freaking Leggitt has!
November 10th, 2009 at 5:42 pmNo offense DD but what job did you get black balled at? This seems to have hit a sore spot with you. I have been reading this site for a couple of years now and have never heard you so vehemently in an uproar. I am actually concerned.
November 10th, 2009 at 5:46 pmVrod,
Never been black-balled. This is not so much about Pollard as it is about principle. If Pollard is such a cancer why are the Texans raving so much about him?
More thoughts on this tomorrow. Stay tuned.
November 10th, 2009 at 6:14 pmDD you have an excellent mind. I don’t get this post.
November 10th, 2009 at 6:44 pmI agree with DD, 100 percent!
Fire Pioli! Fire Haley! Fire everyone on that staff!
They are no good, evil men, with no talent at all. They manipulate others into thinking they are better than they really are and take credit for others hard work. It’s a shame that people like this are working within the chiefs organisation….
November 10th, 2009 at 7:30 pmThe last 2 seasons we were 6-28. Not a team on the cusp of greatness. There were many problems, including fundamental play. Fixing the fundamentals will increase our chances of success, but not everything can be fixed at once.
I cannot believe a team with the numerous problems we have would take the time or energy to try and “blackball” a former player. First, its a bit Drakonian and over the top. Secondly, its childish and emtionally weak. My percepyion of Pioli is that of a business professional not taken with wasting effort on someone no longer their concern.
Finally, to suggest that the Brady injury was the underlying reason is just out there. The video of the play was seen by EVERYONE. It was not a maliscious hit but really incidental. Look it up, its online. If you believe Pioli was chomping at the bit to axe Pollard for hurting Brady, you might also be wearing a foil hat to prevent the (fill in the blank) from taking control of your mind. Come on, get real.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:25 pmI agree with DD, But i dont think that it was so much Pioli’s part, I believe Haley didnt like that Pollard wasnt willing to more or less bow down to him.
I like Pioli, and I liked Haley, but he is out of control with how he treats the players. He makes Bill Parcells look like Herm!
And thats another thing, if there werent negative comments being leaked about Pollard why would he need to get Herm?
November 10th, 2009 at 10:31 pmI have also read complaints about the way press conferences are ran; the seeming lack of information dispensed. Yet behind the scenes our front office is trying to intentionally ruin the career of a person no longer on our payroll?
Haley won’t talk about his conversations with his players, won’t talk about players on other teams, won’t talk about former players; but the front office part of the team is back there talking trash about Pollard?
Now all of a sudden, Herm Edwards “vouching” for a released player is news? It all seems a bit contrived and intentionally salascious.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:38 pmAfter further thought, I am now not so sure that this trashing of Pollard was as much about vindictiveness as it was about spin-control. I think it is entirely possible that Pioli & co felt they needed to do whatever they could to prevent Pollard from playing anywhere else for fear that he might play well and thus make them look like fools in their decision to cut him. All of which leads me to wonder just how many other players cut by the Chiefs this year have been unable to secure jobs elsewhere as a result of the Chiefs post-employment tactics?
I suspect the last thing Pioli wants to see happen is having his reputation for genius be tarnished in any way. If I were the GM of another team that banked on Pioli’s opinion in such cases, I would be very tempted to take a hard look at out-of-work former Chiefs right about now.
Lastly, those of you accusing me of having it in for Pioli are dead wrong. I was in love with this hire. Now that I understand how Pollard was handled, I am left feeling regretful of giving that support blindly and overall quite jaded about the style and motives of this new regime.
November 11th, 2009 at 7:35 amDouble D, I am not thinking you have it “in” for the new management team. I am thinking that after having 2 abysmal seasons and looking down the barrel of a 3rd, we are all over anxious.
The turn arounds by Miami and Atlanta last season have wet our appetites for success. While I believe these teams are an anomoly in the NFL, they have left us questioning, even subconsciously, why not us. Wondering if the changes have been made for the sake of change and nothing else as these changes have not yet transferred to wins.
I listened to the Herm interview and I came away with a different meaning. To me Herm wasn’t helping Pollard overcome a blackball stigma perpetrated by the Chiefs, but hesitancy by other teams because Pollard was released by a 2-14 team; i.e. if he’s not good enough for them why would we want him kind of thing.
Herm also stated that at one point he was deemed “uncoachable” and was in a sense blackballed by NFL scouts. I just don’t see anything sinister here like that.
Pollard may have been our Defensive MVP last year, but that was on a team with 11 total sack for the season. A team performing at or near the bottom of the NFL. In a sense, he might have been the best of the worst. Now that he is gone are we to recall his efforts with rose colored glasses? He wasn’t a fit the management wan’t to try and make work. With so much to fix already, why have to spend even more effort to work in a noisy, hit and miss player?
November 11th, 2009 at 9:54 amsgt,
It is one thing to be let go because you are not the right fit. I get that.
It is totally another thing to have your former employer do their best to personally destroy you just because you were not the right fit for them.
That’s the real problem I see here which actually brings me to my second point that we haven’t really discussed much yet. Namely, suppose you are a free agent considering whether or not to come play for the Chiefs? The first thing that would probably factor into your decision is the message to new players that comes from the Chiefs – we are only interested in players who are the “right 53,” who don’t argue with or second guess their coach, who are willing to put aside their manhood/pride if need be, who care only about playing football and who don’t care about making money. The second thing you would probably want to consider is what might happen to you should the Chiefs decide you are not among the “right 53?” Could your stint with the Chiefs be the last of your NFL career because Scott Pioli leads the rest of leagues GMs to believe you are, for whatever reason, a problem player? Oh and don’t kid yourself, players do talk to other players around the league and find out what it’s like to play for the Chiefs.
This is the kind of stuff that worries the heck out of me about the direction of this team and it’s ability to attract talent. And don’t tell me we don’t need to attract talent because at this point you would be hard pressed to show me many, if any at all, examples of talent being developed organically from the current roster (which in and of itself raises a whole other concern about the quality of our coaching).
November 11th, 2009 at 10:34 amSo your second point, while a valid concern, is based upon the accusations of a former player. A player who stated he had no idea why he was released. A player Herm called “highly emotionally charged”. I take what Pollard says with a grain of salt.
If any of this supposition has merit, I would be worried too. But at this point it seems all supposition. Every team is looking for the “right 53″ goes about it in their own way. some more successfully than others.
Look at the Seymore trade. Remember when Junior Seau came out of retirement? I understand your concern but am also seeing some “Patriot-like” activities happening here. I think it’s curious to see some of the parallels here. Some folks scratch thier heads and wonder at the moves the Patriots make but give them the benefit of the doubt because they are winning now.
What if Drew Bledsoe hadn’t been injured? Think about that. If Brady hadn’t been injured the world would have never known about Cassel.
I don’t think we will have a problem attracting talent, our problem has been been selecting talent. And we do need talent, you are very correct there. I think our problem attracting talent went away with Carl.
I do agree with your point on developing talent. I am not sold on Pendergast. We also need an OC, to not have one is not smart. But your perception of what the “right 53″ entails by our team’s standards might be scewed, again based upon the statements of a former player. I know players talk, Coach Tomlin benched his #2 RB because he didn’t like the way he was doing stuff. Mendenhall has now gotten on board and is “out of the doghouse”. The team is successful so the benching is just business. But because we aren’t successful yet Haley doesn’t get a pass at running the team.
I say this, we are close to winning. Our guys are not giving up. We need more talent, yes, but future players could be part of something big here. We are not the Lions, we are not the Browns, we are the Chiefs. I believe Clark Hunt loves K.C. and his father’s legacy. I believe Scott is a professional and very intelligent person doing his very best to make this team a winner. I believe Todd can lead us to success if given a chance.
If thats drinking the koolaid, so be it. But again I ask, if we had beaten Dallas in overtime, would we even be having this conversation?
November 11th, 2009 at 11:22 amThere is one other highly important thing (which I forgot to mention) that a free agent will also consider:
What is the likelihood that should I join this team, it will be in a position to realistically compete for a championship while I am there?
November 13th, 2009 at 9:46 amDD:
Excellent question, free agents selected a team for three possible reasons: money (the most important reason), to win a Super Bowl, or playing time. So, short of overpaying (something Pioli doesn’t like to do) we are regulated to giving somone an opportunity for playing time. It’s not a situation given to attracting high level free agents.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:55 pmI tend to break down free agents along the following types:
1. Truly talented players who appear to have adequate mileage left on the tread who realize that there are teams willing to pay almost anything for their services.
2. Players perceived as talented because they played for a successful team and who are now seeking to make bank off of that perception.
3. Historically successful players in the twilight of their careers whose primary interest is simply one last paycheck. They consider landing with a contender to be a nice, but unessential, bonus.
4. Veteran players, unhappy with their current circumstances, who are looking to play for a team they consider to be contender. Money is important but of secondary concern.
5. Inexperienced, untalented, overlooked, discarded, or “problem” players who are looking for an opportunity to prove themselves. Money is typically of very little concern to these guys.
Which of these 5 categories would you guess the Chiefs are most interested in at present?
November 13th, 2009 at 1:36 pmDD:
I’ll go with primarily #5 with a dose of #3. I still think money rules in FA, players say otherwise, but they almost always go where the money is.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:47 pmMerlin , Of course money has a lot to do with it . If not how the heck would Cleveland ever get even one free agent.(after all it is the a$$hole of the universe).
November 13th, 2009 at 5:01 pm