Dome Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Galette had two different incidents where he was filmed fighting women. I don’t think it’s fair to mention them in the same breath just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodatworm23 Posted March 28, 2021 Author Share Posted March 28, 2021 1 hour ago, Dome said: Galette had two different incidents where he was filmed fighting women. I don’t think it’s fair to mention them in the same breath just yet. Not saying their the same but making dumb decisions like this has got to be a red flag. Their were minor red flags like this with Galette early on but the Saints opted to ignore them and they paid for it. Can't make those mistakes again. Might not be popular because Lattimore is a good player and should be a core member of the team moving forward but the Saints need to decide whether of not this is an isolated incident or something that could develop into a pattern. Obviously Lattimore is still close with his boys, the details of the situation appear odd. I question why he'd even put himself in that position in the first place which forces me to question his intelligence and priorities. It'd be different if he was a lesser player but the fact thats he's a talented player entering the final year of his deal with trade value causes you to determine if he's better of and more valuable to the team via trade than he is on the field or in the lockerroom moving forward. In any case its a conversation that has to be had within the Saints upper management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammymvpknight Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 Lattimore is a high risk signing. Fantastic talent...and he has shown the ability to play. The problem is has been incredibly inconsistent, and hasn't been as good as his rookie season. I have the fear that he gets signed...and loses motivation. He has already showed concerns with his motivation level as it is. This doesn't help his cause at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodatworm23 Posted March 30, 2021 Author Share Posted March 30, 2021 5 hours ago, sammymvpknight said: Lattimore is a high risk signing. Fantastic talent...and he has shown the ability to play. The problem is has been incredibly inconsistent, and hasn't been as good as his rookie season. I have the fear that he gets signed...and loses motivation. He has already showed concerns with his motivation level as it is. This doesn't help his cause at all. I think Lattimore will be on a year to year deal for the next couple seasons... Loomis will make him prove himself on and off the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Iowa Posted March 30, 2021 Share Posted March 30, 2021 (edited) Trade him to Cleveland <removed> I just don't have patience for someone who has so much going for him, only to do something so selfish and stupid. The NFL is a 365 day job for the duration of your career, and you're financially rewarded accordingly. This is just moronic! Next! Edited April 1, 2021 by Raves The last part lacks any evidence and should be kept to yourself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMG5 Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 It was a stupid decision, but this isn't a huge deal. This is his first screw up and very well could've been a misunderstanding on his part. We don't know all of the details. To immediately jump to trading him is a bit of an overreaction. That being said, he certainly cost himself some money. He lost some leverage with this incident and his guaranteed money in his next contract will reflect that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMG5 Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 3/29/2021 at 1:48 PM, sammymvpknight said: Lattimore is a high risk signing. Fantastic talent...and he has shown the ability to play. The problem is has been incredibly inconsistent, and hasn't been as good as his rookie season. I have the fear that he gets signed...and loses motivation. He has already showed concerns with his motivation level as it is. This doesn't help his cause at all. This is more of a reason to trade him than this incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) On 3/30/2021 at 6:28 PM, Mid Iowa said: Trade him to Cleveland <removed> To be fair, there’s an equal amount of evidence to say he was simply headed to a BBQ. Edited April 1, 2021 by Raves Removing statements that should've have been made. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 26 minutes ago, Dome said: To be fair, there’s an equal amount of evidence to say he was simply headed to a BBQ. Also did it get reported yet whether he had the gun on him or whether it was someone in the car and they were all charged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Just now, Raves said: Also did it get reported yet whether he had the gun on him or whether it was someone in the car and they were all charged? It hasn’t been reported where the gun was found other than with the guys in the truck. I’m assuming it was on Lattimore or under his seat to get linked to him specifically. Neither of which is damning regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Iowa Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 1 hour ago, Dome said: To be fair, there’s an equal amount of evidence to say he was simply headed to a BBQ. With a loaded, stolen gun? If it was on his person, gone. If it was on someone else and this is a headline digging "guilt by association" type issue, then I'd be way more forgiving. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 22 minutes ago, Mid Iowa said: With a loaded, stolen gun? You’re making the assumption that because they have a gun, that the gun was related to, or needed for whatever they were doing. There’s zero evidence of that. 24 minutes ago, Mid Iowa said: If it was on his person, gone. Even though it’s likely a misdemeanor at worse? 24 minutes ago, Mid Iowa said: If it was on someone else and this is a headline digging "guilt by association" type issue, then I'd be way more forgiving. And what if it was on him because and he was borrowing it for protection and, even if he purchased it, the guy he got it from told him it was his gun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlowe22 Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, Raves said: Also did it get reported yet whether he had the gun on him or whether it was someone in the car and they were all charged? Seems like he had the gun on him, because everyone else in the car was charged for having their own weapons. Two because of some disability(which I didn't even know that law existed...maybe certain disabilities I could see, but seems strange at first glance), and the driver was improperly handling his own firearm or something, I assume maybe had it loaded and in a dangerous spot. Bottom line, seems like they were all being idiots, and it does sound like Marshon did have the stolen gun in his possession. Combine this with the fact they didn't even have working tailights, and I mean at best, you got a car load of idiots. Edit: Ah, I see what they mean. Possessing weapon under disability is referring to being a convicted felon, drug rehab, or mental patient, etc. Sounds like excellent company. Edited March 31, 2021 by Jlowe22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Iowa Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 7 hours ago, Dome said: You’re making the assumption that because they have a gun, that the gun was related to, or needed for whatever they were doing. There’s zero evidence of that. Dome, I honestly have no idea what you mean here, or what you're trying to say. There was a loaded, stolen gun. End of sentence. I'm not trying to go to battle with you, I'm just stating that if you're trying to jockey for a mega contract, and your game has been wishy washy, maybe you shouldn't be dicking around with your old buddies with guns and who knows what else. I'd like to think that at age 24 and 4 years in a professional setting, maybe a guy has learned something. Maybe a guy has heard about how to straighten his crap out, or has learned a little about what's frowned upon these days. That's all. I just wish some of these dudes would use their heads a bit more. But maybe I don't understand 24 year old pro athlete testosterone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 (edited) 13 hours ago, Mid Iowa said: Dome, I honestly have no idea what you mean here, or what you're trying to say. There was a loaded, stolen gun. End of sentence. If that really was the end of your sentence that would be fine and I wouldn't have said much to it, but that wasn't all you had to say. On 3/30/2021 at 6:28 PM, Mid Iowa said: Trade him to Cleveland <Removed> <removed> If you had said "there was a loaded, stolen gun" and that was truly the end of your sentence I wouldn't have argued. But you took it a step further, that wasn't actually the "end of sentence" statement you originally made so I just wondered what inside info you had. 13 hours ago, Mid Iowa said: I'm not trying to go to battle with you, I'm just stating that if you're trying to jockey for a mega contract, and your game has been wishy washy, maybe you shouldn't be dicking around with your old buddies with guns and who knows what else. I'd like to think that at age 24 and 4 years in a professional setting, maybe a guy has learned something. Maybe a guy has heard about how to straighten his crap out, or has learned a little about what's frowned upon these days. That's all. I just wish some of these dudes would use their heads a bit more. But maybe I don't understand 24 year old pro athlete testosterone. "Battle" ?? - We're just talking, that's what this forum is for. Now you're saying all this, yeah it all makes sense. But you weren't saying that before. <removed> That was reactionary and unfounded, that's all my problem was with what you were saying. It appears to have been remedied. Edited April 1, 2021 by Raves Your point was made valid but removing area I don't want to continued to be discussed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts