While even I couldn't criticize the first few picks of the Bengals' draft, I think we can all agree that the Bernard Scott selection in the sixth round was indefenisble. To call the guy a character concern would be like calling the swine flu panic inducing.
Where, oh where, can we begin. He didn't play his senior season of high school after an off-field fighting incident. So he was 17 years old and got in a fight, no big deal, right? He's been arrested at least five times. Yeah, well, that can happen to anybody? He got kicked out of Central Arkansas for hitting a coach (which he denies). Hey, coaches can be dicks sometimes. In 2006, he was charged with stealing an iPod. Maybe he was just trying to make sure the person didn't have any illegally downloaded music. He was arrested on June 28th of last year for fleeing an officer. Maybe his foot slipped onto the gas?
Bernard Scott is obviously a candidate for Redeeming. After all, the guy has talent! Check out this quote from a former coach, "He hates school, doesn’t trust a lot of people and obviously has some anger issues. I’m hoping that he’s matured some, but he maybe is one of the best pure running backs as far as balance, skills sets, vision and elusiveness." Hey, the guy hates doing what is required of him and has some trust and anger issues, but damnit can he run! Another coach had this to say, "He’s like Barry Sanders. You can contain him, contain him, contain him, and then all of a sudden, it’s over."
Basically, there is an 85% chance this guy gets arrested at some point in Cincinnati. Somewhere around .001% of the time he'll become the next Barry Sanders. Cue Mike Brown: SO YOU'RE SAYIN' THERE'S A CHANCE?
Over at Shutdown Corner, MJD asks, "But does it always have to be the Bengals who are giving the second (or sixth) chance?" Quite simply, yes! Mike Brown is a redeemer. Not just a redeemer, he's The Redeemer. He Redeems all of those lost souls out there in draft-land (as long as they have talent). After all, he's already taken all of these risks on guys with major character concerns, and none of them have panned out. Don't you think he'd be kicking himself if he passes on the next guy with major character concerns and he actually HAS turned his life around?
MJD is absolutely right on one thing. Marvin Lewis does not have to be the patron saint of wayward football players. Mike Brown already is.
Odds of Michael Vick running the Wildcat for the Bengals in 2011?
Posted by: Who Dey NYC | April 28, 2009 at 11:38 AM
I've thought about this MikeyBoy character trait a lot recently. And my main question is "what has brought this about in him?" Has he himself been the beneficiary of a redemptive act in his life that makes him want to do the same for others? Could this possibly be related to his spiritual faith? If so, then perhaps in that respect this is admirable behavior.
However, giving someone a second chance, when it means making that person a millionaire is above and beyond the call. Hell, which one of us wouldn't jump out of our jocks for a second chance like that? But this begs another question. Does MikeyBoy treat the average Joe with this pre-emptive forebearance, or is it just football players? And if it's just football players, then isn't this just another form of greed?
Posted by: ItmightbeJB | April 28, 2009 at 11:51 AM
If you are looking to set your moral compass on Sundays than perhaps instead of going to or watching the Bengals play you could go to church? I don't care if the Bengals sign Charles Manson if he can come in and put some pressure on the quarterback.
I am less worried about the Bengals "perception" in the media than the fact that they lose every Sunday.
Case in point: In 2005 when the Bengals were on the playoff run Chad Johnson's antics were celebrated, made in to commercials and well received. Then when the tides turned and the Bengals were once again losing, the same antics were childish, immature and a distraction.
Winning changes perceptions not "character".
Rey got into a fist fight in college and because he is a Bengal he has character issues. If he were a patriot he would be a saint.
Posted by: Gambling Fool | April 28, 2009 at 12:33 PM
The problem is that these guys with character issues generally aren't that good on the field. If they were good I'd see the argument, but since they're usually not you may as well stick to drafting players less likely to end up in the police blotter.
Besides, player misbehavior has very real consequences under Goodell. I really, really dislike Goodell but it is what it is--he's shown willingness to punish frequent misbehavior. You wouldn't sign Charles Manson because he wouldn't make it onto the field in this NFL, regardless of his ability to rush the quarterback. It'd be a waste of time and money.
Posted by: themask | April 28, 2009 at 12:47 PM
With 11 picks, you take a chance.
A quote from Scott when talking about his previous issues:
"Some people might hold it against me or whatever," he said. "But it made me a better person, because I've learned from my mistakes."
The coach:
"I wouldn't have him on my team or wouldn't have him on our campus if I didn't trust the kid," Thomsen said. "I've seen him grow immensely as a football player and a person."
For some reason I value their opinion more than your Holier than thou finger pointing.
Posted by: Darren Hollywood | April 28, 2009 at 12:52 PM
what a crock of corn filled bullshit, 'troubled players never make it on the field or are any good'...you lose all credibility with that one, champ. ray lewis, albert haynesworth, t.o., jamal lewis, etc. even chris henry produces - you can't count last years stats, no one did a damn thing.
we all can't pretty much agree that it's indefensible. i think it's as legit as hell. who doesn't make the field are 5th and 6th and 7th round players usually, so that would be the reason. also, you just don't have a clue or understand how football works if you think this guy is going to get a million dollar second or sixth chance here. he's a 6th round pick with 'character flaws'. signing bonus is minimum and his contract isn't guaranteed. calm yourselves....and btw's - none of his arrests or bad actions are carrying any weight in a court of law, but it's been said that some of you clowns are lawyers, so perhaps you are trying to wear your big boy pants and step up to judge judy style convictions.
who cares as long as he doesn't hurt anyone or damage any property. i don't care if he even plays, but if he does play and pops one from the backfield or in the return game, i'm sure all you suckers will decide to care then.
Posted by: take the piss and moan | April 28, 2009 at 01:53 PM
agreed piss and moan
not very good must mean 4,321 yards and 63TD's in 2 years in college.
on the field.
Posted by: Gambling Fool | April 28, 2009 at 01:57 PM
Piss and moan - I don't normally respond to commenters but I feel like I have to in this case. Where did I say "troubled players never make it on the field or are any good?" Maybe you're attempting to paraphrase the post, but I never made any generalizations. All of my words were specific to Bernard Scott.
None of his arrests or bad actions are carrying weight in the court of law? Can you explain why he's still on 18 months of probation, then? They don't exactly hand that stuff out down at the courthouse. And by the way, while some writers here at WDR may in the field of law, I'm not one of them.
You also say, "who cares as long as he doesn't hurt anyone or damage any property?" While I'll agree he hasn't hurt anyone or damaged property thusfar in Cincinnati, can you honestly say, after looking at his track record, you'd be surprised if he did?
I mean, isn't this the exact type of guy we've been preaching about not picking up for as long as this blog has existed? Talented but so troubled that he could never be successful long term?
I totally get it if this blog and/or my posts are not your cup of tea, and that's fine if that's the case. I just don't know why you'd continue to read if that's so.
Posted by: Showtime | April 28, 2009 at 06:29 PM
I think he was also responding to a commenter.
The line I like was this one: "I don't normally respond to commenters but I feel like I have to in this case."
Thanks for taking the time out of your day to respond to a lowly commenter. You know, the little guy.
Posted by: me | April 28, 2009 at 07:32 PM
hey me, thanks for pointing out that to mr. fancy pants blogger. i was responding to other disgraceful logic in the comments section as well as his own. to the writer of this post, if you don't want people to read your blogs, why write them? are you that insecure that you need everyone to swallow what you shoot out every load. forgive me, but this is a time where you spit. how weak are you with garbage 85% chance forecasts that he gets arrested? and get over the track record media swill. i'm sure you've grown up a bit in your life. this kid has had over a year and a half clean. he's mid-20's. more mature. if he does mess up, it's no big deal. our society has screw-ups. this one doesn't hurt our team in the least except some tired story to bring up. this blog should get out of the business of preaching about these kinds of players to begin with. it's so damn hypocritical anyway. so many of you wanted us to sign ray lewis or would have been fine with jamal lewis. or if he was younger, marvin harrison. if you're investing guaranteed money in a player that gives you a lot or warning signs, then take a moments pause, only for the negative business impact it has, not for the moral ramifications of it. we have courts and laws for a reason. the nfl is not the place for our own brand of self-righteousness. and just to answer since you asked. all charges were dismissed, and for one he was given probation (which he has served flawlessly) as a plea including the guarantee that it would be expunged from his record upon completion. hence it won't exist or carry weight. of course you're not a lawyer.
Posted by: take the piss and moan | April 28, 2009 at 08:13 PM
The quote you predicted from Mike Brown was from the movie Dumb and Dumber. Coincidence? I think not.
Posted by: Ashley | April 29, 2009 at 01:09 AM
I hope that Bernard Scott has put his past behind him, makes the team and is a great Bengal for many years to come. He has a website at bernardscottfootball.com
Posted by: beng12 | April 29, 2009 at 02:18 AM
hehe now that's funny! Has not even played one professional down in football and he is already a 'redeemer'! Nice going MBB!
Just out of curiosity, how many 'redeemers' have actually made something of themselves after playing with the Bengals?
Posted by: WCH | April 29, 2009 at 07:30 AM
I am not happy they took another player with "issues" but at least it was in round six. Not one, two, or three. Players taken in round six do not always make the team, anyway, so reaching here will not hurt them if he hasn't matured. On the other hand, if he is the next Barry Sanders and has put his past behind him, he could be a draft steal. This pick comes with a very low signing bonus and low salary, compared to earlier rounds. If it doesn't work out, it will not impact the team the way Odell Thurman did, when they spent a second round pick to take him.
Posted by: Robinsgr | April 29, 2009 at 08:46 AM