Army Changes their mind, Lions Lose Campbell

redskingush · Post by **redskingush** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:07 am

Caleb Campbell told no NFL until 2010

Here's the link

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d ... nfirm=true

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:19 am

Short sighted policy change... I suspect that the idea came from a REMF AG dip...

Campbell playing for the Lions would be good for morale across the Army, and good for recruiting... especially if he ends up playing regularly...

Shame.

GSPODS · Post by **GSPODS** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:26 am

Countertrey wrote:Short sighted policy change... I suspect that the idea came from a REMF AG dip...

Campbell playing for the Lions would be good for morale across the Army, and good for recruiting... especially if he ends up playing regularly...

Shame.

You and I both know for fact this came from some more brass than brains Rear Echelon Mother who never had his ass in the grass ... or the sand, or the sea water, or in free fall unless it was from a rappel tower in OCS.

Any E-9 has more sense than every O- anything combined.
I should know. I was one of those O-6's. Not a brain cell amongst us.
Plenty of formal education, not a lick of sense. Just like the politicians.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:15 am

That's really a shame.

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:45 am

That is why the army is a bad career choice if you want "freedom." The army owns you until your contract is up. even then, they can still extend your tour of duty.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:24 pm

Cappster wrote:That is why the army is a bad career choice if you want "freedom." The army owns you until your contract is up. even then, they can still extend your tour of duty.

That is also hardly fair... you know how I feel about the Army's call on this... however, it's also true that Caleb Campbell has received a top quality baccalaureate education at one of the best schools of engineering in the world... an education that is worth close to 300K, all while receiving a full stipend, board, and meals, and experiences that he could not possibly purchase with his tuition at any other college.

All at the cost of a commitment of no more than 5 years of his life.
Try paying back a 300K education financed with student loans... trust me, it's going to cost a lot more than 5 years of your life.
It's not like the Army hasn't given him anything to expect a return...

The Army, as well as the Naval Service, Air Force, and Coast Guard, are all excellent career choices.

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:45 pm

Countertrey wrote:
Cappster wrote:That is why the army is a bad career choice if you want "freedom." The army owns you until your contract is up. even then, they can still extend your tour of duty.

That is also hardly fair... you know how I feel about the Army's call on this... however, it's also true that Caleb Campbell has received a top quality baccalaureate education at one of the best schools of engineering in the world... an education that is worth close to 300K, all while receiving a full stipend, board, and meals, and experiences that he could not possibly purchase with his tuition at any other college.

All at the cost of a commitment of no more than 5 years of his life.
Try paying back a 300K education financed with student loans... trust me, it's going to cost a lot more than 5 years of your life.
It's not like the Army hasn't given him anything to expect a return...

The Army, as well as the Naval Service, Air Force, and Coast Guard, are all excellent career choices.

I think the armed forces are good career choices depending who you are and how you want to live your life. A military lifestyle just isn't appealing to me, but that is just how I feel about it. Politicians need more troops on the ground so it seems to me that they changed the policy in order to get every good troop on the ground that they can. In all, the department of defense changed its policy which overrides the Army's policy.

But a subsequent Department of Defense policy has superseded the 2005 Army policy.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:43 am

In all, the department of defense changed its policy which overrides the Army's policy.

A REMF by any other name, is still a REMF...

And, it's still a bad call. The DoD can't buy the kind of marketing and publicity they could get from a contributing active player on the Lions.

DesertSkin · Post by **DesertSkin** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:56 pm

As a grad and currently serving officer, this sickens me. Caleb was to be a recruiting tool for the Army FOR FREE. And he was still going to work for the Army for two full years. Every Tuesday during the season, he's working at the Detriot recruiting office. Every offseason for the next two years, at the Detriot recruiting office. Every time he pays in a game, you'd hear about the Army and current Soldiers would have a Hero in the game. It was a win-win. And don't give me that need the bodies stuff. First, if his being in the NFL would bring two people who otherwise wouldn't have jointed, the Army would be on the plus side. Second, Caleb is branched Air Defense Artillery. It a dying speciality. Not too many planes to be shooting down right now.

I don't feel sorry for Caleb, I feel sorry for the Army.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:10 pm

Huge mistake by DOD.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:47 pm

Cappster wrote:That is why the army is a bad career choice if you want "freedom." The army owns you until your contract is up. even then, they can still extend your tour of duty.

That bad career choice let's you people sit here and have these discussions. When someone volunteers (and that's just what 100% of them do, volunteer) to serve their country, they know what they are in for. If they don't know before they sign the contract (and anyone who watches the news should know by now), they'll know soon enough. His FIRST priority was to the Army, regardless of which policy or who changes what.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:16 pm

VetSkinsFan wrote:
Cappster wrote:That is why the army is a bad career choice if you want "freedom." The army owns you until your contract is up. even then, they can still extend your tour of duty.

That bad career choice let's you people sit here and have these discussions. When someone volunteers (and that's just what 100% of them do, volunteer) to serve their country, they know what they are in for. If they don't know before they sign the contract (and anyone who watches the news should know by now), they'll know soon enough. His FIRST priority was to the Army, regardless of which policy or who changes what.

Hooah!

yupchagee · Post by **yupchagee** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:28 pm

GSPODS wrote:
Countertrey wrote:Short sighted policy change... I suspect that the idea came from a REMF AG dip...

Campbell playing for the Lions would be good for morale across the Army, and good for recruiting... especially if he ends up playing regularly...

Shame.

You and I both know for fact this came from some more brass than brains Rear Echelon Mother who never had his ass in the grass ... or the sand, or the sea water, or in free fall unless it was from a rappel tower in OCS.

Any E-9 has more sense than every O- anything combined.
I should know. I was one of those O-6's. Not a brain cell amongst us.
Plenty of formal education, not a lick of sense. Just like the politicians.

It may not have come from anyone who is or ever has been in uniform. Could be a political appointee or a career civil service employee.

GSPODS · Post by **GSPODS** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:35 pm

yupchagee wrote:
GSPODS wrote:
Countertrey wrote:Short sighted policy change... I suspect that the idea came from a REMF AG dip...

Campbell playing for the Lions would be good for morale across the Army, and good for recruiting... especially if he ends up playing regularly...

Shame.

You and I both know for fact this came from some more brass than brains Rear Echelon Mother who never had his ass in the grass ... or the sand, or the sea water, or in free fall unless it was from a rappel tower in OCS.

Any E-9 has more sense than every O- anything combined.
I should know. I was one of those O-6's. Not a brain cell amongst us.
Plenty of formal education, not a lick of sense. Just like the politicians.

It may not have come from anyone who is or ever has been in uniform. Could be a political appointee or a career civil service employee.

Usually those idiots come with a "GS" instead of an O or an E.
And they truly are the rearest of the rear echeleon mother you know whats.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:21 pm

Could be a political appointee [maybe] or a career civil service employee [extremely unlikely... they tend to be highly risk averse].

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:39 pm

VetSkinsFan wrote:
Cappster wrote:That is why the army is a bad career choice if you want "freedom." The army owns you until your contract is up. even then, they can still extend your tour of duty.

That bad career choice let's you people sit here and have these discussions. When someone volunteers (and that's just what 100% of them do, volunteer) to serve their country, they know what they are in for. If they don't know before they sign the contract (and anyone who watches the news should know by now), they'll know soon enough. His FIRST priority was to the Army, regardless of which policy or who changes what.

And different career choices give the armed forces the weapons they need to fight other armies. You don't have to be a "soldier" to help defend or support your country. The point I was trying to make is when you join the army or any other branch of service, they dictate what you can and can't do. I personally don't think it is right for any organization to change their policy midstream or have someone change it for them without honoring their original contract. Government or private organization, a policy is a policy and that guy should have a chance to play in the NFL.

Smithian · Post by **Smithian** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:14 am

I understand the argument of first committment, but this was an absolute horrible move by them. No idea what they were thinking. They just knocked off a great recruiting tool.

Imagine if he made a game winning play?

He might have made little to no impact, but wouldn't maybe just 10 extra recruits and a solid improvement to overall attitude towards the military(Already good, but still.)been better than someone who will probably serve in probably the least needed field currently? (I doubt we go to war with any nation with actual combat effective aircraft in the next four years.) If that sounds negative towards the army, it isn't meant to be.

Good job Caleb Campbell, shame on you DoD for a short sighted move.