PurpleKoolaid wrote:I mean by reading the reports of how it was handled, i dont need the spin facts from Spielman or his spokesman.
You mean the other side of the story?

A question: what makes Winfield's camp any more believable than Speilman's? I know I'm not comfortable with calling Winfield's camp "truth" and Spielman's "spin." We're all basing this on what we read. Both sides have said things. It could all be true, or none. The truth likely lies somewhere in the middle. We'll likely never know.
My whole point was, thats not how you handle vets. Thats not how a GM handles a PH type of player. Thats not how a HC should handle a McKinney situation (who now has a SB ring, I guess he should be thanksing Fraizer for his mistake).
We really don't know how other GMs would've handled those situations. We only know what OUR GM did. In retrospect the 400-lb McKinnie was probably handled properly and we now have Kalil, who will likely already is as good or better than McKinnie ever was. Time will tell if we did right with Percy. We don't know the behind-the-scenes stuff and from all reports the compensation we got for him was pretty fair. Honestly, Percy probably forced our hand in that situation. I'm sure nobody really
wanted to trade him.
Vets need to be treated better. NFL stars like Moss and PH should have been handled better then Childress did (i know, they were cancers yada yada).
Vets aren't untouchable creatures to be handled with kid gloves. No one person should be bigger than the team. When you start giving preferential treatment, it has the potential to be quite detrimental to your team as a whole.
And mainly Winfield was one of the few class acts on and off the field. We even lost Birk, a future HoF, because he couldnt stand Childress. Its just a pattern under the Wilfs.
I don't think you can blame the Wilfs for football decisions. And it's difficult to blame Spielman for Birk's departure. Difficult, but not impossible
