DavidSeven":yq1a3369 said:
But what is there to "be aware" of? I don't think it would come as a surprise to anyone that Lynch doesn't see eye-to-eye with management. Does that mean they'd move him after the season? I'm not even sure they know that yet, but even if they did, it would confirm what a majority of this message board was predicting anyway. None of that info is new and is only being repeated now because it conveniently pushes the "downfall" narrative.
The players have confirmed reports of Harvin fights. Those reports likely came from the Seahawks PR camp to justify the trade. A subsequent report came out about Wilson being a divisive figure in the locker room. Who stands to gain from that? Probably the guy whose character has been assassinated and who also has no more guaranteed money coming due (i.e. Harvin -- "I'm not the one with issues!"). His camp also stands to gain from releasing any other piece of info that paints Seattle as an organization in disarray. How do you do that? You leak info that suggests Seattle's two biggest offensive stars are causing their own issues in the lockerroom and that the Seahawks FO has no idea how to fix it.
Simply put, there are camps with axes to grind and things to gain from leaking selective info. The media, sniffing a juicy narrative, is more than willing to oblige them. Being open-winded and aware is definitely important. In this case, however, we need to be aware and mindful of the timing of these reports and who stands to gain from them.
I agree with you about media pushing things. Part of that is sniffing around where they weren't sniffing around before. Part of that is blowing true statements out of proportion, because they've got a column to fill. I get where you are coming from.
As far as the first paragraph quoted, yes, we've been aware of Lynch being unhappy with his contract in the past, but the concession PC/JS gave him should have fixed that, or at least put a band-aid on it that would have lasted longer than 8 weeks. Mortensen's report that Lynch isn't talking to coaches
and that the feeling of weariness is mutual in the FO is DEFINITELY new information though. Doesn't mean it's true (although Mort is pretty dependable and claims team sources), but it's something to be aware of. It's a significant detail that we did not hear of previously.
As far as the "downfall narrative," this is where I must differ. Seattle is 4-3 and is a couple of clutch Wilson drives away from being 2-5. Seattle's play on the field would drive this narrative more than anything else. I actually think the media has been very kind to Seattle given their rocky performance. The cover of SI linked today said as much, that Seattle is not as bad as they've looked. They continue to be a high ranked team in power polls, and they are still in the mainstream media discussion for the NFC's best team.
Rather than a downfall narrative, I think we're simply experiencing 90's Cowboys type attention with the bad luck of having some very real scandals and issues in our locker rooms at the exact same time. It is part of the cost that comes with success. When the 49ers looked like the NFL's best team, really petty stuff like Kaep wearing a Dolphins hat got blown out of proportion. You had all the Romo love-life non-sense when Parcells made Dallas a force. My feeling is that a lot of this is not the media hating us, but because the Hawks are a big ticket item and even a small issue for us would be a big story. And we just happen to have a lot of interesting things going on since mid-January. A perfect storm for the media.
