PA Season Ticket Holder
06-16-2003, 01:05 PM
Reaction has been pouring in from various league insiders regarding the decision of Saints G.M. Mickey Loomis and coach Jim Haslett to engage former tackle Kyle Turley in a tit-for-tat insult exchange, which resulted in a feature article on SI.com that was quoted extensively in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
One league source opined that the decision of Loomis and Haslett to respond to Turley via e-mails sent to SI.com writer Michael Silver "makes them look like a couple of amateurs."
(By the way, Mike, nice glasses. We wouldn't recommend wearing those around Garrison Hearst or Jeremy Shockey.)
Another insider was more pointed in his criticism -- "They'd better get their quotes in now, because if the Saints choke like they did the past two years Loomis and Haslett will be out after this season."
The decision of disgruntled players to call out their former team is nothing new. But other coaches, such as Dave Wannstedt and Bill Cowher, typically bite their tongues when faced with such attacks. Loomis and Haslett, in our opinion, should have done the same thing.
Then again, the Turley story made for interesting reading -- maybe we like it when coaches and G.M.'s decide to rumble verbally with former players.
Here's a sample of the exchange.
Said Turley, regarding Loomis: "Two guys, [former G.M.] Randy Mueller and [coach] Jim Haslett, were coming up on the end of their contracts, and Mr. Benson wasn't going to pay both of them, because that's not how he works. So he fired Randy Mueller, and he had a very, very valuable in-house candidate to replace him in Charles Bailey, who knows football. With all the racial things going on right now, and the push to hire minorities, which I agree with, how could this guy get passed over in favor of a guy like [Mickey] Loomis?"
Responded Loomis: "To be honest with you, I don't really give a damn about Kyle Turley. He's the Rams' problem now."
Said Turley: Loomis "knows nothing about football. The guy spent 14 years in a back room, and now all of a sudden he's a GM? He has no clue about a 40-yard dash, a pass set, a tackle or a throw."
Responded Loomis: "Kyle believes he can coach and manage the team better than the head coach and GM, but in reality he has trouble managing himself," Loomis added, via electronic mail to Silver. "We determined that he was a cancer on our team and we simply got rid of him. It was a unanimous decision of our coaches, personnel department and administration."
Said Turley, regarding Haslett: "A lot of players stood up for Jim Haslett when he was negotiating his contract. We told management, 'We're not gonna sign here until he gets taken care of, because we want him to be the coach.' But when it came time for him to stand up for the players who had his back, he stayed out of it. His answer was, 'I don't get involved with contract negotiations.' But that's weak.
Responded Haslett: "They tell me that 10 percent of the population is miserable and unhappy all the time and Kyle definitely falls in that 10 percent. Following last season, and after meeting with the entire team one-on-one, the vast majority of our players wanted to see him gone."
http://profootballtalk.com/monrumors.htm
One league source opined that the decision of Loomis and Haslett to respond to Turley via e-mails sent to SI.com writer Michael Silver "makes them look like a couple of amateurs."
(By the way, Mike, nice glasses. We wouldn't recommend wearing those around Garrison Hearst or Jeremy Shockey.)
Another insider was more pointed in his criticism -- "They'd better get their quotes in now, because if the Saints choke like they did the past two years Loomis and Haslett will be out after this season."
The decision of disgruntled players to call out their former team is nothing new. But other coaches, such as Dave Wannstedt and Bill Cowher, typically bite their tongues when faced with such attacks. Loomis and Haslett, in our opinion, should have done the same thing.
Then again, the Turley story made for interesting reading -- maybe we like it when coaches and G.M.'s decide to rumble verbally with former players.
Here's a sample of the exchange.
Said Turley, regarding Loomis: "Two guys, [former G.M.] Randy Mueller and [coach] Jim Haslett, were coming up on the end of their contracts, and Mr. Benson wasn't going to pay both of them, because that's not how he works. So he fired Randy Mueller, and he had a very, very valuable in-house candidate to replace him in Charles Bailey, who knows football. With all the racial things going on right now, and the push to hire minorities, which I agree with, how could this guy get passed over in favor of a guy like [Mickey] Loomis?"
Responded Loomis: "To be honest with you, I don't really give a damn about Kyle Turley. He's the Rams' problem now."
Said Turley: Loomis "knows nothing about football. The guy spent 14 years in a back room, and now all of a sudden he's a GM? He has no clue about a 40-yard dash, a pass set, a tackle or a throw."
Responded Loomis: "Kyle believes he can coach and manage the team better than the head coach and GM, but in reality he has trouble managing himself," Loomis added, via electronic mail to Silver. "We determined that he was a cancer on our team and we simply got rid of him. It was a unanimous decision of our coaches, personnel department and administration."
Said Turley, regarding Haslett: "A lot of players stood up for Jim Haslett when he was negotiating his contract. We told management, 'We're not gonna sign here until he gets taken care of, because we want him to be the coach.' But when it came time for him to stand up for the players who had his back, he stayed out of it. His answer was, 'I don't get involved with contract negotiations.' But that's weak.
Responded Haslett: "They tell me that 10 percent of the population is miserable and unhappy all the time and Kyle definitely falls in that 10 percent. Following last season, and after meeting with the entire team one-on-one, the vast majority of our players wanted to see him gone."
http://profootballtalk.com/monrumors.htm