XFLnewshub is reporting that the Wildcats are bringing Shawn Oakman back into their 52 man roster.
According to HC Moss, Oakman was released (waived) because of behavior in the locker room.
I guess they are giving Oakman another chance??? Actually, when you consider Oakman’s story, he probably has earned a second chance for everything he does.
Oakman
- HVGuardian
- Receiver
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 1:43 pm
Re: Oakman
I’m not really familiar with his story but I just read his Wikipedia article and he doesn’t strike me as someone who has necessarily earned a second chance. What am I missing?
- LeoNY
- Head Coach
- Posts: 1006
- Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 8:20 pm
Re: Oakman
I am not as excited about this possibility as others are.
Oakman didn’t earn a roster spot. He’s talented and maybe he has made amends with his staff but he’s lucky to even get a second chance at this point.
Oakman didn’t earn a roster spot. He’s talented and maybe he has made amends with his staff but he’s lucky to even get a second chance at this point.
- johnnyangryfuzzball
- Head Coach
- Posts: 1930
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2019 8:22 pm
Re: Oakman
Perhaps it's the need for better/more recognizable talent, nothing more, nothing less.HVGuardian wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:03 pm I’m not really familiar with his story but I just read his Wikipedia article and he doesn’t strike me as someone who has necessarily earned a second chance. What am I missing?
Of course, you look at how many Baylor players from the Art Briles era have legal problems, especially sex crimes, and you have to wonder how much of a toxic environment Briles had fostered there, and whether it's worth touching anyone from those teams. I mean, Briles is banned* from the CFL just like Manziel.
*(De facto, anyway; the commissioner strongarmed June Jones into rescinding the hire when he tried to hire Briles as his OC in Hamilton.)
-
- UFLBoard Correspondent
- Posts: 2184
- Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 8:09 pm
Re: Oakman
Odd if true. You’d think LA would want a guy like Oakman, who has not played a lot of high-level pro football, to be in camp and get reps against some top talent. Cutting him and basically allowing him to skip training camp before bringing him back seems counterproductive regardless of the motivation.
@gregmparks
- HVGuardian
- Receiver
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 1:43 pm
Re: Oakman
Doesn’t sound like the type of player we need in the XFL. Not like he has enough name recognition to bring in casual NFL fans and honestly, from what I read on his wiki, the guy has constantly had legal trouble.johnnyangryfuzzball wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:50 pmPerhaps it's the need for better/more recognizable talent, nothing more, nothing less.HVGuardian wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:03 pm I’m not really familiar with his story but I just read his Wikipedia article and he doesn’t strike me as someone who has necessarily earned a second chance. What am I missing?
Of course, you look at how many Baylor players from the Art Briles era have legal problems, especially sex crimes, and you have to wonder how much of a toxic environment Briles had fostered there, and whether it's worth touching anyone from those teams. I mean, Briles is banned* from the CFL just like Manziel.
*(De facto, anyway; the commissioner strongarmed June Jones into rescinding the hire when he tried to hire Briles as his OC in Hamilton.)
-
- MVP
- Posts: 3498
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:42 pm
Re: Oakman
Let's not forget the guy was acquitted. I know I know everybody from OJ to Tyreek Hill (and probably AB next) but if they can't get a guilty verdict that's on them. It's not the league's job to be legal authority, and if the guy who effectively sacrificed his job to tell the truth about Aaron Rodgers has an understanding then it's a non-issue.
Besides, the guy was reduced to playing in the circus known as the AAL (a bit of a drop from being a potential first round pick) he's done some penance.
Besides, the guy was reduced to playing in the circus known as the AAL (a bit of a drop from being a potential first round pick) he's done some penance.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 2907
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:15 pm
Re: Oakman
Even after he was acquitted, no NFL teams wanted to sign him to at least give him a look in the pre-season. He was acquitted at the end of February 2019 and I don't think he even got a single NFL tryout. I would have thought that after his acquittal, that he would have at least been in a mini camp tryout, but I recall that he didn't get any. I consider that a huge red flag: when none of the 32 NFL teams would even consider giving him a tryout even after he was acquitted.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 3498
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:42 pm
Re: Oakman
Think the (pay)MeToo lobby sure to go on about Hill and Frank Clark all next week might answer that. Other than that, WGAF he wasn't in a camp? I mean hell let's go the AAF route and every other word being NFL this NFL that. That totally worked right?GDAWG wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 3:12 pm Even after he was acquitted, no NFL teams wanted to sign him to at least give him a look in the pre-season. He was acquitted at the end of February 2019 and I don't think he even got a single NFL tryout. I would have thought that after his acquittal, that he would have at least been in a mini camp tryout, but I recall that he didn't get any. I consider that a huge red flag: when none of the 32 NFL teams would even consider giving him a tryout even after he was acquitted.
-
- Quarterback
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 10:10 pm
Re: Oakman
I’m a supporter of Oakman, and from the look of this thread I may be the only one. I’d be thrilled to see this transaction come to fruition. He still has two weeks of practices before the first game.