| |
Leaf responsible for his own fall
Posted: Friday August 27, 1999 06:55 PM
Click here to send your NFL questions to SI's Peter King. F.J. Rainville of Groveton, N.H. , asked me a good question this week, which I decided would lead off this week's bag. F.J. writes, "I know Ryan Leaf hasn't been the model citizen, but don't you think that the media has been riding him too hard? The guy hasn't even played a full season yet." I would have sympathy for Ryan Leaf if he had shown some degree of responsibility this off-season. But he showed none. He lied to the Chargers about working with a personal trainer. He lied about attending a charity golf tournament and he lied about missing only limited time at a spring minicamp -- he actually missed several days. The bottom line is this organization cannot trust Leaf. However, they have a gigantic financial stake in Leaf and he is badly mistaken when he says privately -- and he has said it privately -- that he thinks the front office wants him to fail. As general manager Bobby Beathard told me last week, the front office folks would be idiots to want to see him fail, because if he fails it's a huge black mark against the organization and it's a huge waste of three No. 1 draft choices. My theory on Leaf? He'd better learn to start looking in the mirror and saying: "I've done a lot of things wrong and I've got to stop blaming everybody else for my problems." Now on to the rest of the questions.
This summer the owners of two NFL teams have turned their teams in for possible salary cap violations. What's their motivation for this? It seems strange to me given the penalties they might incur. Good question. In the 49ers' case, the new owner, John York , found what he considered a blatant violation of the salary cap concerning tight end Brent Jones 's final contract with the team in 1997. The NFL is investigating whether the then-49er administration, including president Carmen Policy and general manager Dwight Clark, agreed to pay Jones a $500,000 completion bonus in his contract off the books. In other words, they would agree to pay him the money but it wouldn't count against the salary cap. That is a matter now being adjudicated by a special master judge appointed by the NFL to hear such cases. In the Steelers case, Dan Rooney , the president of the club, did something similar, except he turned in his own team -- not executives who are no longer with the club -- concerning the final contract of offensive lineman Will Wolford . I don't know the particulars of this case ... but I do know that it's not nearly as serious as the case involving the 49ers. What does this all mean? I think it's a good thing that the salary cap is not going to simply become a rule that looks good on paper but that nobody really pays that much attention to. Some 49ers sympathizers, including current quarterback Steve Young , have asked me in recent weeks, basically, "Why are you making such a big deal of this?" I'm not making a big deal of it, I'm just reporting that the NFL is looking into the prospective first salary cap violation in the six-year history of the system. As long as the NFL is going to have a rule on its books mandating that each team spends no more than "X" number of dollars, any team that violates the rule ought to be penalized. Period.
What the heck is going on in Kansas City? John Tait, the Chiefs first rounder is still unsigned, Kimble Anders has been moved to starting halfback and everybody has been given a shot at returning kicks. Do I smell a trade in here somewhere? Well, Carl Peterson has never shied away from making deals. In fact, he's one of the only GMs in the league who likes to deal. But he's hamstrung now by Tait's excessive contract demands, which don't correspond to his slot in the first round. As far as what they're doing in the backfield, Gunther Cunningham wants his backfield to be big ... very big. Moving Anders from fullback to running back means this will be a deep backfield and a backfield where the top four guys will all be very good blockers. Cunningham wants to win by slugging it out. I am really wondering about the Rams. I can tell they are headed in the right direction in terms of personnel, but I just don't think Dick Vermeil is the answer as a coach, although I really liked the hire at offensive coordinator (Mike Martz) in the off-season. Are we going to continue to struggle under Vermeil or do you think that we are about to turn the corner with the moves he made in the off-season? Also, what is the deal with my man Isaac Bruce, is he hurt again?
P.S. when will you give your Rams postcard from camp? (Probably when we start winning, huh?) I won't be visiting Macomb, Ill., this year. My forays to training camp were slightly limited this year because I had to spend several days covering the Sanders retirement, and I've been preoccupied with the Cleveland Browns story. Hopefully I'll get to the Rams next year. Now, about their team. If Isaac Bruce is healthy -- and when hasn't a story about the Rams been prefaced with that over the last few years? -- then I think along with rookie receiver Torry Holt , running back Marshall Faulk and a much-better-than-people-think quarterback in Trent Green , this finally going to be a consistent, dangerous offense. But to be honest with you, I don't place a lot of stock in Bruce being able to stay healthy. His track record is that he gets dinged very easily and I don't know why that should change in 1999.
In all the preseason material on the CNNSI.com web site, there has been very little on the Buffalo Bills. Don't Doug Flutie and the Bills excite anyone? Another good question. The Bills have kind of flown under everyone's radar screen. In fact, when I was talking to Bruce Smith recently, about another matter, I mentioned this to him and he said, "Good ... let's keep it that way. It's always better when people don't think you're any good." There are three reasons Buffalo isn't sexy this year:
Having said all of this I believe Buffalo has better than 50% chance to make the playoffs. The bottom line here is that I think the AFC East, again, could have three wild card teams -- and I like the Bills' chances.
When the cut downs are done and some players are assigned to the practice squad, how available are they to other teams? Do they have to clear waivers, or can any team just go after them? A team can claim any player on another team's practice squad. At the time such a claim is made, the team owning the practice-player has choices: the team can either release the player to the acquiring team's active roster or the team can choose to place that player on its own active roster. There is no waiver process in connection with the practice squad.
Did the Lions get any closer to signing Terry Allen? He looked to be the best available back out there to replace Barry. Wouldn't the Lions do everything in their power to sign him? The Lions were talking to Allen, but his immediate future is now with the Patriots. The Lions are talking to St. Louis about Greg Hill , who's going to have a limited role now that Faulk is there. I still maintain they ought to be interested in New Orleans backup Lamar Smith , but they aren't. The Lions are in a touchy situation. If they go out and spend too much for a running back or devote too much in terms of trading draft choices or signing him to a big deal, it's almost like they're admitting they have no chance of talking Barry Sanders out of retirement or convincing him to play for them next season. So they probably will only Scotch-tape their running back situation for this year, at least in partial hope that Sanders will play for them in 2000.
I learned that Joe Johnson and William Roaf are both down -- Johnson out for the entire season. Even with Ricky Williams out until Week 3, isn't it a very good time for the Saints to try to deal Lamar Smith or Troy Davis to Detroit for some vets on the offensive and/or defensive lines? Signed: A "desperate for valid hope" Saints fan. First of all, I think Ricky Williams will play in the opener. The news out of Saints camp this week that he would miss two weeks, I believe, is the result of a second medical opinion on Williams that may indeed be mistaken. As far as dealing one of the other backs, they desperately want to do to this. They just can't find willing trade partners. They would much rather trade Smith than Davis, who is a Mike Ditka pet. I share your pain about Joe Johnson, who I happen to think is one of the most underrated players in the NFL. The sad part of this is, Johnson was injured in a limited-contact drill with only shoulder pads. Then, 35 minutes later Roaf was hurt in another freak accident on the field. Send a question to Peter King, and check back next Thursday for his latest NFL Mailbag.
Peter King is a Sports Illustrated senior writer.
| |||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 1999 CNN/SI. A Time Warner Company. Terms under which this service is provided to you.
| |||||||||||||||||
