Jump to content

All Things Incognito (Richie returns, signs contract)

RalphOP83

By RalphOP83
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

BackInDaDay RFA

BackInDaDay

Posted
Posted

@cathalkelly: Richie Incognito is a hateful person. Here's the case for signing him. http://t.co/7YvkrHinuY

"We spend so much time these days talking about bullying that the word is starting to lose its meaning, but this was a committed and oddly sexualized campaign of terror. Most of it was done in person. There are also hundreds of taunting texts, including an entire genre related to the proposed rape of Martins sister. This was more than cruel teasing, which happens on most teams. This was someone taking sensual pleasure in another persons suffering. It was erotic and deranged."

 

i agree with this opinion.. this cat is one twisted dude.. somebody better watch out for EJ.. Ritchie may. be looking for a new playmate

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 877
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

thebandit27 Hall of Famer

thebandit27

Posted
Posted

"We spend so much time these days talking about bullying that the word is starting to lose its meaning, but this was a committed and oddly sexualized campaign of terror. Most of it was done in person. There are also hundreds of taunting texts, including an entire genre related to the proposed rape of Martins sister. This was more than cruel teasing, which happens on most teams. This was someone taking sensual pleasure in another persons suffering. It was erotic and deranged."

 

i agree with this opinion.. this cat is one twisted dude.. somebody better watch out for EJ.. Ritchie may. be looking for a new playmate

That column sort of reeks of someone that didn't read the text exchanges between the two guys. I started out with the same opinion of Incognito's involvement in the "bullying" case; after reading the exchange, Martin was at least just as culpable if not moreso. He gave just as much as he received, and it was clear that the two were indeed very close friends. They texted and hung out all the time. IMO, Incognito was made to be the scapegoat for Martin's own immaturity.

 

Now, that doesn't mean that Incognito isn't an immature jerk; IMO he's absolutely displayed that type of behavior, repeatedly in fact. I just think that the so-called bullying of Jonathan Martin was a terribly misleading story as the mass media portrayed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GunnerBill Hall of Famer

GunnerBill

Posted
Posted

That column sort of reeks of someone that didn't read the text exchanges between the two guys. I started out with the same opinion of Incognito's involvement in the "bullying" case; after reading the exchange, Martin was at least just as culpable if not moreso. He gave just as much as he received, and it was clear that the two were indeed very close friends. They texted and hung out all the time. IMO, Incognito was made to be the scapegoat for Martin's own immaturity.

 

Now, that doesn't mean that Incognito isn't an immature jerk; IMO he's absolutely displayed that type of behavior, repeatedly in fact. I just think that the so-called bullying of Jonathan Martin was a terribly misleading story as the mass media portrayed it.

 

I disagree totally and I have read everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hapless Bills Fan Hall of Famer

Hapless Bills Fan

Posted
Posted (edited)

That column sort of reeks of someone that didn't read the text exchanges between the two guys. I started out with the same opinion of Incognito's involvement in the "bullying" case; after reading the exchange, Martin was at least just as culpable if not moreso. He gave just as much as he received, and it was clear that the two were indeed very close friends. They texted and hung out all the time. IMO, Incognito was made to be the scapegoat for Martin's own immaturity.

 

Now, that doesn't mean that Incognito isn't an immature jerk; IMO he's absolutely displayed that type of behavior, repeatedly in fact. I just think that the so-called bullying of Jonathan Martin was a terribly misleading story as the mass media portrayed it.

 

FWIW, I've read the report and the text messages, and I couldn't disagree more that Martin was "just as culpable if not more so" or "gave just as much as he received". In fact, I don't see how that's a reasonable interpretation at all.

 

Did Martin participate in workplace banter, yes. Did he have a friendship with Incognito, yes. Did he make jokes about raping Incognito's mother and sister or display physical aggression towards Incognito, or call him "my B word" in front of other players, no. Did the preponderance of evidence (eg fine book) show that Incognito knew he was pushing Martin's limits and trying to "break" him, yes. In what way was Martin "just as culpable" or "gave as much as he received"? That simply isn't credible on the face of the evidence. Is it normal bonding banter to build a tight OL? Not when it involved remarks directed at an assistant trainer of Japanese descent. Using racist language and sexualized insults towards a junior Dolphins employee who is not part of the OL kind of blows that line of defense up.

 

I thought the Wells report did a fair and balanced job of assessing the fact of the Incognito/Martin friendship and the possibility the Martin was abnormally sensitive and concluding that the preponderance of the evidence nonetheless indicated that Incognito was bullying Martin and knew it - the Fine Book assessing himself a fine for "Breaking JMart" on the day he left, the fact that other OLmen recognized that Martin was upset about remarks involving his sister and mother, the fact that both Martin and Incognito seemed to recognize a "bipolar" aspect to their association, part friends, part something else. I do think it's credible that Incognito thought he was Martin's friend and thought of him as his "little brother" and didn't intend to cause him lasting damage. But Incognito's behavior went beyond Martin, and that pattern of behavior applied to Martin too, and paints that aspect of their interaction in a different light.

 

Where I don't find the Wells report credible is in assessing the extent to which the Dolphins coaches and front office were aware of the behavior and exercised or failed to exercise "due diligence" to maintain a workplace consistent with their own anti-harassment policy. In other places, Wells and his investigators are clear and explicit about how they evaluated conflicting testimony between players and decided which was more credible. Turner (OL coach) denied knowing about the harassment of Player A and they decided his denial was not credible based on evidence of different "Christmas Stockings" he gave. Yet they give him a free pass on whether he had a role in telling Incognito to "toughen Martin up" or the like and completely sweep under the rug any issue of whether he, as a coach, had a duty to act to inform OC and HC about the harassment of the assistant trainer (that's to me, the most troubling target). Other players have commented that when stuff is going on, the coaches know. Of course they know. Turner's only on the record action was to send a bunch of texts to Martin after he hospitalized himself exhorting him to be a man and clear Incognito publically, which even the Wells report notes as inappropriate. Ireland also gets a free pass about the question of whether or not he had conversations with Martin where he told him to punch Incognito. And Philbin gets a total pass. I don't find any of that credible.

 

IMO, the Wells report is a whitewash in that regard, placing clear blame for "crossing a line" on Incognito and two other players, while exonerating or ignoring the responsibility the Dolphins FO and coaches had to monitor the locker room and maintain discipline/enforce their own anti-harassment policy and glossing over any role they may have had in tacitly accepting the behavior as "normal" or even encouraging the behavior as a means to a desirable end.

 

JMO of course.

Edited by Hopeful
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hapless Bills Fan Hall of Famer

Hapless Bills Fan

Posted
Posted

@ChrisBrownBills: What Richie Incognito said to convince the Pegulas - #Bills

http://t.co/rsIEM286YJ

 

References this

http://www.buffalobills.com/video/audio/Jeff-Darlington-Incognito-a-statement-signing/f302d936-21a4-47e7-a344-73573a440c6a

 

What I find most hopeful is the information that he actually spent 6 weeks in an inpatient treatment program at the McLean Institute in Boston after he smashed up his Lamborgini when the Wells report was released. Saying you've realized stuff and changed is one thing, actually investing 6 weeks of your life full time to effect change is more promising especially when someone who knows him (Darlington) says that he saw a big change and when it had to have been a personal choice, there was no team requiring him to do that. Interesting comment from Darlington that Incognito didn't realize that he didn't understand or realize that he was having "this sort of emotional effect" on Jonathan Martin and "it really twisted his head up" (leading to the Lamborgini incident/6 week McLean inpatient stint which reportedly produced change).

 

Talk is cheap, especially talk during a job interview.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted

 

References this

http://www.buffalobills.com/video/audio/Jeff-Darlington-Incognito-a-statement-signing/f302d936-21a4-47e7-a344-73573a440c6a

 

What I find most hopeful is the information that he actually spent 6 weeks in an inpatient treatment program at the McLean Institute in Boston after he smashed up his Lamborgini when the Wells report was released. Saying you've realized stuff and changed is one thing, actually investing 6 weeks of your life full time to effect change is more promising especially when someone who knows him (Darlington) says that he saw a big change and when it had to have been a personal choice, there was no team requiring him to do that. Interesting comment from Darlington that Incognito didn't realize that he didn't understand or realize that he was having "this sort of emotional effect" on Jonathan Martin and "it really twisted his head up" (leading to the Lamborgini incident/6 week McLean inpatient stint which reportedly produced change).

 

Talk is cheap, especially talk during a job interview.

a 6 week program is more than just talk - ill give credit there. doesnt prove it solved anything, but i think its some action you can point at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YoloinOhio Hall of Famer

YoloinOhio

Posted
Posted

 

References this

http://www.buffalobills.com/video/audio/Jeff-Darlington-Incognito-a-statement-signing/f302d936-21a4-47e7-a344-73573a440c6a

 

What I find most hopeful is the information that he actually spent 6 weeks in an inpatient treatment program at the McLean Institute in Boston after he smashed up his Lamborgini when the Wells report was released. Saying you've realized stuff and changed is one thing, actually investing 6 weeks of your life full time to effect change is more promising especially when someone who knows him (Darlington) says that he saw a big change and when it had to have been a personal choice, there was no team requiring him to do that. Interesting comment from Darlington that Incognito didn't realize that he didn't understand or realize that he was having "this sort of emotional effect" on Jonathan Martin and "it really twisted his head up" (leading to the Lamborgini incident/6 week McLean inpatient stint which reportedly produced change).

 

Talk is cheap, especially talk during a job interview.

that is the same place Brandon Marshall went to. Hope it works out as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
John from Riverside Hall of Famer

John from Riverside

Posted
Posted

 

FWIW, I've read the report and the text messages, and I couldn't disagree more that Martin was "just as culpable if not more so" or "gave just as much as he received". In fact, I don't see how that's a reasonable interpretation at all.

 

Did Martin participate in workplace banter, yes. Did he have a friendship with Incognito, yes. Did he make jokes about raping Incognito's mother and sister or display physical aggression towards Incognito, or call him "my B word" in front of other players, no. Did the preponderance of evidence (eg fine book) show that Incognito knew he was pushing Martin's limits and trying to "break" him, yes. In what way was Martin "just as culpable" or "gave as much as he received"? That simply isn't credible on the face of the evidence. Is it normal bonding banter to build a tight OL? Not when it involved remarks directed at an assistant trainer of Japanese descent. Using racist language and sexualized insults towards a junior Dolphins employee who is not part of the OL kind of blows that line of defense up.

 

I thought the Wells report did a fair and balanced job of assessing the fact of the Incognito/Martin friendship and the possibility the Martin was abnormally sensitive and concluding that the preponderance of the evidence nonetheless indicated that Incognito was bullying Martin and knew it - the Fine Book assessing himself a fine for "Breaking JMart" on the day he left, the fact that other OLmen recognized that Martin was upset about remarks involving his sister and mother, the fact that both Martin and Incognito seemed to recognize a "bipolar" aspect to their association, part friends, part something else. I do think it's credible that Incognito thought he was Martin's friend and thought of him as his "little brother" and didn't intend to cause him lasting damage. But Incognito's behavior went beyond Martin, and that pattern of behavior applied to Martin too, and paints that aspect of their interaction in a different light.

 

Where I don't find the Wells report credible is in assessing the extent to which the Dolphins coaches and front office were aware of the behavior and exercised or failed to exercise "due diligence" to maintain a workplace consistent with their own anti-harassment policy. In other places, Wells and his investigators are clear and explicit about how they evaluated conflicting testimony between players and decided which was more credible. Turner (OL coach) denied knowing about the harassment of Player A and they decided his denial was not credible based on evidence of different "Christmas Stockings" he gave. Yet they give him a free pass on whether he had a role in telling Incognito to "toughen Martin up" or the like and completely sweep under the rug any issue of whether he, as a coach, had a duty to act to inform OC and HC about the harassment of the assistant trainer (that's to me, the most troubling target). Other players have commented that when stuff is going on, the coaches know. Of course they know. Turner's only on the record action was to send a bunch of texts to Martin after he hospitalized himself exhorting him to be a man and clear Incognito publically, which even the Wells report notes as inappropriate. Ireland also gets a free pass about the question of whether or not he had conversations with Martin where he told him to punch Incognito. And Philbin gets a total pass. I don't find any of that credible.

 

IMO, the Wells report is a whitewash in that regard, placing clear blame for "crossing a line" on Incognito and two other players, while exonerating or ignoring the responsibility the Dolphins FO and coaches had to monitor the locker room and maintain discipline/enforce their own anti-harassment policy and glossing over any role they may have had in tacitly accepting the behavior as "normal" or even encouraging the behavior as a means to a desirable end.

 

JMO of course.

This is why he was suspended and deservingly so.

 

but

 

When suspensions end then the player should be allowed a chance to prove they wont do it again

 

This is def the cogs last stop if this happens again

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebandit27 Hall of Famer

thebandit27

Posted
Posted

 

FWIW, I've read the report and the text messages, and I couldn't disagree more that Martin was "just as culpable if not more so" or "gave just as much as he received". In fact, I don't see how that's a reasonable interpretation at all.

 

Did Martin participate in workplace banter, yes. Did he have a friendship with Incognito, yes. Did he make jokes about raping Incognito's mother and sister or display physical aggression towards Incognito, or call him "my B word" in front of other players, no. Did the preponderance of evidence (eg fine book) show that Incognito knew he was pushing Martin's limits and trying to "break" him, yes. In what way was Martin "just as culpable" or "gave as much as he received"? That simply isn't credible on the face of the evidence. Is it normal bonding banter to build a tight OL? Not when it involved remarks directed at an assistant trainer of Japanese descent. Using racist language and sexualized insults towards a junior Dolphins employee who is not part of the OL kind of blows that line of defense up.

 

I thought the Wells report did a fair and balanced job of assessing the fact of the Incognito/Martin friendship and the possibility the Martin was abnormally sensitive and concluding that the preponderance of the evidence nonetheless indicated that Incognito was bullying Martin and knew it - the Fine Book assessing himself a fine for "Breaking JMart" on the day he left, the fact that other OLmen recognized that Martin was upset about remarks involving his sister and mother, the fact that both Martin and Incognito seemed to recognize a "bipolar" aspect to their association, part friends, part something else. I do think it's credible that Incognito thought he was Martin's friend and thought of him as his "little brother" and didn't intend to cause him lasting damage. But Incognito's behavior went beyond Martin, and that pattern of behavior applied to Martin too, and paints that aspect of their interaction in a different light.

 

Where I don't find the Wells report credible is in assessing the extent to which the Dolphins coaches and front office were aware of the behavior and exercised or failed to exercise "due diligence" to maintain a workplace consistent with their own anti-harassment policy. In other places, Wells and his investigators are clear and explicit about how they evaluated conflicting testimony between players and decided which was more credible. Turner (OL coach) denied knowing about the harassment of Player A and they decided his denial was not credible based on evidence of different "Christmas Stockings" he gave. Yet they give him a free pass on whether he had a role in telling Incognito to "toughen Martin up" or the like and completely sweep under the rug any issue of whether he, as a coach, had a duty to act to inform OC and HC about the harassment of the assistant trainer (that's to me, the most troubling target). Other players have commented that when stuff is going on, the coaches know. Of course they know. Turner's only on the record action was to send a bunch of texts to Martin after he hospitalized himself exhorting him to be a man and clear Incognito publically, which even the Wells report notes as inappropriate. Ireland also gets a free pass about the question of whether or not he had conversations with Martin where he told him to punch Incognito. And Philbin gets a total pass. I don't find any of that credible.

 

IMO, the Wells report is a whitewash in that regard, placing clear blame for "crossing a line" on Incognito and two other players, while exonerating or ignoring the responsibility the Dolphins FO and coaches had to monitor the locker room and maintain discipline/enforce their own anti-harassment policy and glossing over any role they may have had in tacitly accepting the behavior as "normal" or even encouraging the behavior as a means to a desirable end.

 

JMO of course.

I agree that the Wells report showed a ton of inappropriate behavior from RI; never said otherwise (as I'm sure you know).

 

To say that JM didn't return fire in a similar tenor would be, IMO, inaccurate...

 

"Ima egg your house & light a bag of **** on fire then ring your doorbel"

"I'm gonna give McDonald bath salts & lock him in your house with a tranquilizer gun & a box of sand paper condoms"

 

and a photo that reads "I will murder your whole [expletive] family"

 

I realize that RI went too far, and I blame him exclusively for that. It doesn't, however, become anywhere near as big an issue if Martin doesn't (a) encourage the objectionable behavior and (b) return with similar behavior.

 

Also JMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted

I agree that the Wells report showed a ton of inappropriate behavior from RI; never said otherwise (as I'm sure you know).

 

To say that JM didn't return fire in a similar tenor would be, IMO, inaccurate...

 

"Ima egg your house & light a bag of **** on fire then ring your doorbel"

"I'm gonna give McDonald bath salts & lock him in your house with a tranquilizer gun & a box of sand paper condoms"

 

and a photo that reads "I will murder your whole [expletive] family"

 

I realize that RI went too far, and I blame him exclusively for that. It doesn't, however, become anywhere near as big an issue if Martin doesn't (a) encourage the objectionable behavior and (b) return with similar behavior.

 

Also JMO

I'm somewhere between on this.... A hypothetical- if Martin was an all pro free agent signing, or established with the team pre-Richie, do you think the relationship would've been as outrageous in content? ie was Martin a rookie trying to not be singled out or was he a guy that was all about the behavior? I'm guessing he wasn't squeeky clean before Richie - boys will be boys- but was he succumbing to peer pressure texting stuff like that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C.Biscuit97 Hall of Famer

C.Biscuit97

Posted
Posted

He's a POS, he was a POS long before the Martin thing. But he was out of the league for a year and a half. He served his time and has a year to prove himself. I still think he is a POS but if he is not completely brain dead, he will shut his mouth and just worry about football.

 

Side note, I saw him at a breakfast spot in Phoenix during SB week. My Bills hat must have made an impact. :) That said, he lost a lot of weight. He needs to get back on his "lifting program" before camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hondo in seattle All Pro

hondo in seattle

Posted
Posted

I really don't care about the Martin incident anymore. Besides, Richie's past misbehavior includes far more than bullying Martin. Reading his rap sheet, so to speak, makes me regret that I celebrated RI's signing.

 

But the other side is that Richie convinced the Pegulas that he's a changed man and maybe he is.

 

Being so desperate for a talented guard (and PFF had him ranked #9 in the NFL after 8 games in 2013), we all want to believe that Richie has turned a corner in his life.

 

Clearly, he's been an a**hole in the past. I'm ready to call that water under the bridge. I'm hoping as a Bill he's going to be a bully on the field and a model citizen off it.

 

If he's not, I hope Rex, Whaley, or the Pegulas quickly make the right decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...