"Why Richard Sherman can't let go"

[Sports Hernia]

Man, Darrell Bevell must be loving this offseason. He went from being undisputed public enemy #1 in Seattle, to public enemy #5, it seems, after Cable, Sherman, Carroll, and Wilson. I'm actually seeing more people "come along" to the idea that "Le Fail" was Wilson's fault for poor execution rather than Bevell's for calling the worst situational play possible. Wow, I didn't think I'd ever see this. I'm shocked.

Obviously joking, but it'd be hilarious if Bevell were behind all of these "leaks" about player turmoil and stuff, just to keep his job safe. I'd get a laugh out of that. I'd laugh just as hard when the fans all turn on him once again after he calls 4 pass plays in a row, all to Luke Willson and Jermaine Kearse, from the 1 yard line in Week 1.

The breakdown of "the play" was about execution, not design. Belichick even says that, according to the ESPN story. And Bevell has command of his position, is one of the league's best at it and ranks as the most successful coach in team history (winning %), so he's far above the juvenile tactics you describe. It's all fan fodder anyway; the powers that be as directors of our team consider it all "outside noise" and part of being in the entertainment industry and stick to their assigned tasks of devising solid gameplans.

Congrats. You managed to bring "The Play" and Bevell into this in one post when nobody was really talking about them. There was literally no reason to defend "your man" here, but somehow you found a way.

Reread the posts and tell me again who introduced what. Direct your responses accordingly.

Everyone Back on topic. The thread derailment is getting way old. If every thread starts turning into a thread about the OC or "the play" in SB49, unpaid vacations are going to start being handed out. I don't care who starts it or who continues it, if you are involved expect some time off. We are setting records (and not the good kind) here for locked and deleted threads.

Back on topic please!

 

[Aircrew]

While we can't fully understand what goes on in the locker room without being in it, I have a feeling that the rift is real but the cause is misunderstood. What I mean is, I don't think XLIX is why there is a contingent of players in Seattle that don't like Russell. It's my opinion that the Type A personalities on the team, particularly on Defense, don't respect Russell as a leader because of his personality and leadership style. I've been around guys like Russell, or what I percieve he's like since we only know the public version of him, in both the military and in commercial diving. Russell acts like a politician and seems to be more focused on his public image and who the media thinks he is rather than responsibly charting a championship course for his team. Sure, Russell wants to win Superbowls just like everybody else, but he presents himself as someone who has more than one priority. I think he's positioned himself to win, so to speak, even if the team doesn't and the players see it. I can speak from experience that when your positional "leader" is someone like that, the followers won't follow and they will then turn to the real leader in the group for direction. As it pertains to this situation, that leader is Richard Sherman and what we're publicly seeing is a reflection of it. I think Russell Wilson has a weak personality and a weak leadership style that has predictably resulted in a feeling of resentment within a group of players that don't respect him. I've lived that situation more than once and everything I've seen in the media and heard back channel remind me of it. I hope I'm wrong and/or Russell changes his appproach to leadership before it's too late.

That is a very interesting perspective. I can see how that could be possible. so I won't argue against it.

I do not agree with all of it, but very good post none the less.

Thank you. As I wrote in closing, I hope I'm wrong, but I'm worried I'm not. The reason I'm worried is because if there is a rift against Russell, the team will logically support the all too difficult position to fill which is the quarterback. We will then most likely see a purging of the antagonist group over a year or two, which has already happened once with Percy Harvin and his followers, and our competitive window would probably shrink or completely shut. Russell is a smart and articulate young man and a talented athlete, but those qualities don't necessarily translate over to leadership ability. Leadership can be a tricky thing and it incurs a unique burden that only the few who are capable of it fully appreciate. I'm hoping his intelligence and pride allow him to introspectively analyze, critique and improve that aspect of his responsibility for this team.

 

[Seymour]

LOL .... that's nonsense. No defensive player runs an offense. Sherman isn't included in any of Seattle's offensive personal groups.

That is the part I also did not agree with, but I took that as more "off the field" direction than on the field.

 

[Aircrew]

While we can't fully understand what goes on in the locker room without being in it, I have a feeling that the rift is real but the cause is misunderstood. What I mean is, I don't think XLIX is why there is a contingent of players in Seattle that don't like Russell. It's my opinion that the Type A personalities on the team, particularly on Defense, don't respect Russell as a leader because of his personality and leadership style. I've been around guys like Russell, or what I percieve he's like since we only know the public version of him, in both the military and in commercial diving. Russell acts like a politician and seems to be more focused on his public image and who the media thinks he is rather than responsibly charting a championship course for his team. Sure, Russell wants to win Superbowls just like everybody else, but he presents himself as someone who has more than one priority. I think he's positioned himself to win, so to speak, even if the team doesn't and the players see it. I can speak from experience that when your positional "leader" is someone like that, the followers won't follow and they will then turn to the real leader in the group for direction. As it pertains to this situation, that leader is Richard Sherman and what we're publicly seeing is a reflection of it. I think Russell Wilson has a weak personality and a weak leadership style that has predictably resulted in a feeling of resentment within a group of players that don't respect him. I've lived that situation more than once and everything I've seen in the media and heard back channel remind me of it. I hope I'm wrong and/or Russell changes his appproach to leadership before it's too late.

LOL .... that's nonsense. No defensive player runs an offense. Sherman isn't included in any of Seattle's offensive personal groups.

And you have managed to completely miss the point of my post.

 

[Aircrew]

LOL .... that's nonsense. No defensive player runs an offense. Sherman isn't included in any of Seattle's offensive personal groups.

That is the part I also did not agree with, but I took that as more "off the field" direction than on the field.

A football team is more than it's personnel groups, it's a collective identity, which is why I referred to it as "the locker room". Sure, offense and defense have their respective leaders as it pertains to on the field play, but there is a collective leader that represents the overall team. When Marshawn was here, the offense, defense and special teams thrived off of his toughness, which is why he was the perceived leader during his tenure. Marshawn earned that, whereas Russell has had it handed to him because he's the quarterback and now he's trying to grow into it. A tough spot to be in and an even tougher act to follow, but as they say, heavy lies the crown.

 

[Jville]

While we can't fully understand what goes on in the locker room without being in it, I have a feeling that the rift is real but the cause is misunderstood. What I mean is, I don't think XLIX is why there is a contingent of players in Seattle that don't like Russell. It's my opinion that the Type A personalities on the team, particularly on Defense, don't respect Russell as a leader because of his personality and leadership style. I've been around guys like Russell, or what I percieve he's like since we only know the public version of him, in both the military and in commercial diving. Russell acts like a politician and seems to be more focused on his public image and who the media thinks he is rather than responsibly charting a championship course for his team. Sure, Russell wants to win Superbowls just like everybody else, but he presents himself as someone who has more than one priority. I think he's positioned himself to win, so to speak, even if the team doesn't and the players see it. I can speak from experience that when your positional "leader" is someone like that, the followers won't follow and they will then turn to the real leader in the group for direction. As it pertains to this situation, that leader is Richard Sherman and what we're publicly seeing is a reflection of it. I think Russell Wilson has a weak personality and a weak leadership style that has predictably resulted in a feeling of resentment within a group of players that don't respect him. I've lived that situation more than once and everything I've seen in the media and heard back channel remind me of it. I hope I'm wrong and/or Russell changes his appproach to leadership before it's too late.

LOL .... that's nonsense. No defensive player runs an offense. Sherman isn't included in any of Seattle's offensive personal groups.

And you have managed to completely miss the point of my post.

Don't worry :177692: you'll get your wish ..... about hoping to be wrong.

 

[Uncle Si]

This thread... my goodness

 

[Jerhawk]

This thread... my goodness

This is exactly the kind of bulletin board material this team needs imo. This team does so much better when doubted and picked against.

So for that I love this article and thread

 

[theincrediblesok]

While we can't fully understand what goes on in the locker room without being in it, I have a feeling that the rift is real but the cause is misunderstood. What I mean is, I don't think XLIX is why there is a contingent of players in Seattle that don't like Russell. It's my opinion that the Type A personalities on the team, particularly on Defense, don't respect Russell as a leader because of his personality and leadership style. I've been around guys like Russell, or what I percieve he's like since we only know the public version of him, in both the military and in commercial diving. Russell acts like a politician and seems to be more focused on his public image and who the media thinks he is rather than responsibly charting a championship course for his team. Sure, Russell wants to win Superbowls just like everybody else, but he presents himself as someone who has more than one priority. I think he's positioned himself to win, so to speak, even if the team doesn't and the players see it. I can speak from experience that when your positional "leader" is someone like that, the followers won't follow and they will then turn to the real leader in the group for direction. As it pertains to this situation, that leader is Richard Sherman and what we're publicly seeing is a reflection of it. I think Russell Wilson has a weak personality and a weak leadership style that has predictably resulted in a feeling of resentment within a group of players that don't respect him. I've lived that situation more than once and everything I've seen in the media and heard back channel remind me of it. I hope I'm wrong and/or Russell changes his appproach to leadership before it's too late.

That is a very interesting perspective. I can see how that could be possible. so I won't argue against it.

I do not agree with all of it, but very good post none the less.

Thank you. As I wrote in closing, I hope I'm wrong, but I'm worried I'm not. The reason I'm worried is because if there is a rift against Russell, the team will logically support the all too difficult position to fill which is the quarterback. We will then most likely see a purging of the antagonist group over a year or two, which has already happened once with Percy Harvin and his followers, and our competitive window would probably shrink or completely shut. Russell is a smart and articulate young man and a talented athlete, but those qualities don't necessarily translate over to leadership ability. Leadership can be a tricky thing and it incurs a unique burden that only the few who are capable of it fully appreciate. I'm hoping his intelligence and pride allow him to introspectively analyze, critique and improve that aspect of his responsibility for this team.

Russell had arrange a trip with offense and defense to get over that SB loss in Hawaii, that's what leaders do. Here's an article about it. https://www.si.com/nfl/2015/09/01/seatt ... ell-wilson

If Sherman still can't get over it then it's on him, but to take it out on his own teammate is not the way to go. This team as a whole will need to look deep down inside and to LOB (Love Our Brothers) again.

 

[Aircrew]

While we can't fully understand what goes on in the locker room without being in it, I have a feeling that the rift is real but the cause is misunderstood. What I mean is, I don't think XLIX is why there is a contingent of players in Seattle that don't like Russell. It's my opinion that the Type A personalities on the team, particularly on Defense, don't respect Russell as a leader because of his personality and leadership style. I've been around guys like Russell, or what I percieve he's like since we only know the public version of him, in both the military and in commercial diving. Russell acts like a politician and seems to be more focused on his public image and who the media thinks he is rather than responsibly charting a championship course for his team. Sure, Russell wants to win Superbowls just like everybody else, but he presents himself as someone who has more than one priority. I think he's positioned himself to win, so to speak, even if the team doesn't and the players see it. I can speak from experience that when your positional "leader" is someone like that, the followers won't follow and they will then turn to the real leader in the group for direction. As it pertains to this situation, that leader is Richard Sherman and what we're publicly seeing is a reflection of it. I think Russell Wilson has a weak personality and a weak leadership style that has predictably resulted in a feeling of resentment within a group of players that don't respect him. I've lived that situation more than once and everything I've seen in the media and heard back channel remind me of it. I hope I'm wrong and/or Russell changes his appproach to leadership before it's too late.

That is a very interesting perspective. I can see how that could be possible. so I won't argue against it.

I do not agree with all of it, but very good post none the less.

Thank you. As I wrote in closing, I hope I'm wrong, but I'm worried I'm not. The reason I'm worried is because if there is a rift against Russell, the team will logically support the all too difficult position to fill which is the quarterback. We will then most likely see a purging of the antagonist group over a year or two, which has already happened once with Percy Harvin and his followers, and our competitive window would probably shrink or completely shut. Russell is a smart and articulate young man and a talented athlete, but those qualities don't necessarily translate over to leadership ability. Leadership can be a tricky thing and it incurs a unique burden that only the few who are capable of it fully appreciate. I'm hoping his intelligence and pride allow him to introspectively analyze, critique and improve that aspect of his responsibility for this team.

Russell had arrange a trip with offense and defense to get over that SB loss in Hawaii, that's what leaders do. Here's an article about it. https://www.si.com/nfl/2015/09/01/seatt ... ell-wilson

If Sherman still can't get over it then it's on him, but to take it out on his own teammate is not the way to go. This team as a whole will need to look deep down inside and to LOB (Love Our Brothers) again.

I agree, that is what leaders do. However, it's only one instance and it's far easier to buy plane tickets to paradise and promote synergy than to do the truly hard work and lead by example. Marshawn did exactly that and everyone followed him, including Russell. Now Russell is the onointed one. There's discord in the ranks. The brass tried moving a future HOF DB. The same DB asked to be traded. A comprehensive article sufaces from a local reporter describing said rift. Coincidence? The elephant in the room is that the 2016 version of Russell Wilson was an insufficient leader. On top of that, Pete didn't publicly hold him accountable and it now appears that carried over to the VMAC. As a result, according to said article, players are now questioning Pete and Russell's credibility. Come to think of it, this really falls more on Pete than Russell. Russell being an unflinching company man/teacher's pet politician only exacerbates situation. Not to mention, it's easier for a player to take out their frustration on a fellow player than the HC who controls their employment. This really is starting to smell like a festering wound that stems from Pete/Darrell and in small part Russell not owning what happened in XLIX. On a team that's foundation is based on accountability, the founder not taking responsibility for his own decisions/actions destroys their credibility and will inevitability tear it all down from the inside. I think I just came full circle and changed my hypothesis. This does indeed trace back to XLIX and falls primarily on Pete not taking responsibility to the very players who only know him holding them accountable. Wow. This team may very well have even bigger issues than even I realized this morning.

Does Pete need to go?

 

[Anthony!]

I agree, that is what leaders do. However, it's only one instance and it's far easier to buy plane tickets to paradise and promote synergy than to do the truly hard work and lead by example. Marshawn did exactly that and everyone followed him, including Russell. Now Russell is the onointed one. There's discord in the ranks. The brass tried moving a future HOF DB. The same DB asked to be traded. A comprehensive article sufaces from a local reporter describing said rift. Coincidence? The elephant in the room is that the 2016 version of Russell Wilson was an insufficient leader. On top of that, Pete didn't publicly hold him accountable and it now appears that carried over to the VMAC. As a result, according to said article, players are now questioning Pete and Russell's credibility. Come to think of it, this really falls more on Pete than Russell. Russell being an unflinching company man/teacher's pet politician only exacerbates situation. Not to mention, it's easier for a player to take out their frustration on a fellow player than the HC who controls their employment. This really is starting to smell like a festering wound that stems from Pete/Darrell and in small part Russell not owning what happened in XLIX. On a team that's foundation is based on accountability, the founder not taking responsibility for his own decisions/actions destroys their credibility and will inevitability tear it all down from the inside. I think I just came full circle and changed my hypothesis. This does indeed trace back to XLIX and falls primarily on Pete not taking responsibility to the very players who only know him holding them accountable. Wow. This team may very well have even bigger issues than even I realized this morning.

Does Pete need to go?

LOL I just love a good piece of fiction. LOL I mean let's forget he always takes the blame, let's forget he played with three big injuries last year. Let's forget how he gets the offense together every year to practice and work on things in the offseason, let's forget how he has not lowered himself even acknowledge these BS click bait articles, these are things a leader does. let's forget how Bennet and others have numerous times come to his defense and how RS himself called this BS. Let's not forget how Lynch himself told Wilson to take over and win the game and oh he did. like I said fiction it great and this one made me laugh. LOL

 

[Popeyejones]

Nice piece of deep reporting by Wickersham.

If people don't know him, he's very respected as a sports journalist, and he also did the investigative deep dive on the end of the Harbaugh 9ers that everyone rightly thought was so good.

TBF in terms of discord I also thinks there's a fair number of things he could have brought up but didn't bring up. This is far, far, far from the hit job some are making it out to be, IMO.

Wickersham does good work.

His flair and writing style are impressive, sure, but the substance of the story is full of inuendo and anonymous sources. Pretty flimsy if you ask me. It's sensational journalism TMZ style that exacerbates a very small dynamic in our locker room that is no different than a dozen locker rooms across the NFL landscape.

Investigative pieces on the inner workings of organizations always rely on anonymous sources. That's not TMZ, it's a reality of journalism that has always existed.

He got Smith to use his name, but all the sources actively in Hawks org relied on anonymity to explain what's going on, as is nothing if not standard.

It was the same deal with his piece on Harbaugh and the 9ers, and the same deal for deep investigative dives in whatever publication doing long form investigative work you do respect.

For anonymous sources you have to place some trust in the reporter, sure, but it's why Wickersham having built up a really strong reputation over his career is important here. If he had a reputation for sensationalistic smear jobs it would be another story, but he doesn't. He has the reputation for the opposite of that.

Again, if he was just opportunistically pushing a narrative I think there's much more scandalous piblically available stuff that he could have included to push that narrative, but he didn't, because he made this a piece on Sherman and trying to contextualize and explain what's going on with the Hawks in relation to the actions of Sherman, rather than a broader narrative about the Hawks, which is really just the context for the Sherman story in this piece.

TL;DR If people want to dismiss this reporting because they don't like that it's not flattering to their interests that's totally fine and pretty typical, but I think the justifications for that dismissal are really thin. 9ers fans did the same thing to his investigation of the Harbaugh situation (people here celebrated it, of course and thought it was great), but TBF the Harbaugh piece was a lot more damning because that situation was a lot more damning, and he's a good reporter. :2thumbs:

 

[Siouxhawk]

Nice piece of deep reporting by Wickersham.

If people don't know him, he's very respected as a sports journalist, and he also did the investigative deep dive on the end of the Harbaugh 9ers that everyone rightly thought was so good.

TBF in terms of discord I also thinks there's a fair number of things he could have brought up but didn't bring up. This is far, far, far from the hit job some are making it out to be, IMO.

Wickersham does good work.

His flair and writing style are impressive, sure, but the substance of the story is full of inuendo and anonymous sources. Pretty flimsy if you ask me. It's sensational journalism TMZ style that exacerbates a very small dynamic in our locker room that is no different than a dozen locker rooms across the NFL landscape.

Investigative pieces on the inner workings of organizations always rely on anonymous sources. That's not TMZ, it's a reality of journalism that has always existed.

He got Smith to use his name, but all the sources actively in Hawks org relied on anonymity to explain what's going on, as is nothing if not standard.

It was the same deal with his piece on Harbaugh and the 9ers, and the same deal for deep investigative dives in whatever publication doing long form investigative work you do respect.

For anonymous sources you have to place some trust in the reporter, sure, but it's why Wickersham having built up a really strong reputation over his career is important here. If he had a reputation for sensationalistic smear jobs it would be another story, but he doesn't. He has the reputation for the opposite of that.

Again, if he was just opportunistically pushing a narrative I think there's much more scandalous piblically available stuff that he could have included to push that narrative, but he didn't, because he made this a piece on Sherman and trying to contextualize and explain what's going on with the Hawks in relation to the actions of Sherman, rather than a broader narrative about the Hawks, which is really just the context for the Sherman story in this piece.

TL;DR If people want to dismiss this reporting because they don't like that it's not flattering to their interests that's totally fine and pretty typical, but I think the justifications for that dismissal are really thin. 9ers fans did the same thing to his investigation of the Harbaugh situation (people here celebrated it, of course and thought it was great), but TBF the Harbaugh piece was a lot more damning because that situation was a lot more damning, and he's a good reporter. :2thumbs:

I just don't share your enthusiasm for the writer. He fills in too many unknowns with his own suppositions, especially when interpreting the collective mindset of the defense, making this as much of an op-ed piece as it is investigative journalism.

Anonymous sources are fine when the understanding is that it's used primarily to shine a light on a topic and that initial exposure will lead to some sort of upheaval -- and subsequent follow-up stories with attributable direct quotes. This piece offered none of that and what's worse is that primary figures on that Hawks defense, Sherman and Bennett, both came out on the record and said the story was garbage. So we have a scenario where the writer was using his own imagination to fill in the blanks as to the the thought process of our defense vs. two key members of our defense saying on record that the depictions in the story were a flat out lie.

It became TMZ style when the editorial decision was made to allow the writer to make educated guesses about the mood of our locker room and to not get any of these so-called sources to go on the record. As others have said, it's a nice essay-style attempt at filling in the blanks with a detailed history of the team culled from many hours spent reviewing other news reports and accounts, but it misses the mark of high quality investigative journalism work. And to be refuted the way it has by Sherman. Bennett and maybe others that I don't know about, it's perfectly reasonable for Hawks fans to cast doubt on the authenticity and intent of the details crammed into the piece.

 

[Uncle Si]

He knows this Sioux. Supporting the narrative however gives him a chance to decry "homerism." It's a not so subtle wind up on his part, going as far as "he did it to the 9ers too" as some validation. It has nothing to do with it not being flattering. He's excusing a lack of facts, flimsy connections and real quotes attributing what he's alleging as "investigative." It also ignores that this story existed months ago with the blame squarely on Bevell. When that story didn't latch on it's been turned to Wilson. A 9er fan claims that's deep digging. Logic tells you it's fishing. If the story doesn't work whos next? Carroll? Allen?

The authors primary story is one from 2014. Many of his insights can quickly be discounted using basic interpretations of facts. It's a spin on events, not a conclusion of facts.

9er fans supporting it as such to this degree illustrates it's intended audience.

Clearly Sherman is disgruntled. He's always been.

 

[Siouxhawk]

I get it Si. The story did offer up some insight that offered a little peek behind the curtain, such as the dust-up with Ifedi during a rookie hazing moment (although, there again, it's all second-person narrative since the writer wasn't there and it's reliant on anonymous source recounts). Like you said, though, it has to be taken with a grain of salt and the whole premise behind it is a rather benign storyline hinged on Sherman being a fiery dude, a trifle of jealousy toward Russ and a culture facilitated by Pete that allows for strong personalities in the locker room. Earth-shattering stuff!

 

[Uncle Si]

I get it Si. The story did offer up some insight that offered a little peek behind the curtain, such as the dust-up with Ifedi during a rookie hazing moment (although, there again, it's all second-person narrative since the writer wasn't there and it's reliant on anonymous source recounts). Like you said, though, it has to be taken with a grain of salt and the whole premise behind it is a rather benign storyline hinged on Sherman being a fiery dude, a trifle of jealousy toward Russ and a culture facilitated by Pete that allows for strong personalities in the locker room. Earth-shattering stuff!

I have no doubt there are dust ups behind the scenes at the Seahawks training center. Just as there would be at any NFL facility.

Drawing the connection that the team's leaders on defense resent the QB to the degree it is front page news is my issue with the article. Defending it as investigative journalism (it's not, its story telling) and implying those who think it's nonsense are not being rationale is both simple provocation and hypocrisy.

 

[Popeyejones]

I get it Si. The story did offer up some insight that offered a little peek behind the curtain, such as the dust-up with Ifedi during a rookie hazing moment (although, there again, it's all second-person narrative since the writer wasn't there and it's reliant on anonymous source recounts). Like you said, though, it has to be taken with a grain of salt and the whole premise behind it is a rather benign storyline hinged on Sherman being a fiery dude, a trifle of jealousy toward Russ and a culture facilitated by Pete that allows for strong personalities in the locker room. Earth-shattering stuff!

In your post two posts above this one you say it's yellow journalism and the writer is just opinionating out of the air.

In this post you say it fails because it's not uncovering any dynamics that people don't already know about.

Which one is it? Do the attributed Smith quotes not count either, or just all of the quotes that are anonymously sourced?

Likewise, Si, I won't bring it up again but I'd hope we can talk about the merits or lack thereof of the story without you derailing by spending a whole paragraph on an off-topic attack on me and my character. Just to say it, as a moderator I think you in particular would prefer that we disagree on the actual topic rather than devolving into personal attacks. If you think I'm trash and my opinions are unworthy of being considered, I'd prefer you just ignore me. Thanks.

Just to reiterate my thoughts on the piece, I think it's a good investigative piece inside the organization, and not a particularly damning one, nor was it intended to be.

 

[brimsalabim]

The best all around corner in the game was just shopped to the entire NFL and got 0 takers.

 

[Hyak]

I have no doubt that there are some personality clashes at play at VMAC and as many point out probably in every locker room just like in most work environments. I also have no doubt that plenty of people can be suffer delusional behavior and confirmation bias to support perceived favoritism or true accountability. In fairness to Pete, the article in question does point out how he treats everyone the same.

I think the big issue at play comes down to this. Some of the defensive stars know that their time left is dwindling in terms of getting another big contract here meanwhile seeing RW here for the long haul. They perceive that they are better at their position than Russell is at his - thinking Bennett, ET, Kam, Sherman, and Wagner. I also think there is lingering resentment that the team essentially chose RW for the long haul at the expense of Lynch, a far more popular teammate and an emotional leader. Taking the "play" aside, there were cracks in the damn in terms of Lynch's happiness once the coaches opened up the offense late in 2012.

That all said, those views ignore reality in today's NFL. QB by far is the most critical element in contending for SB's year in and year out. It's the hardest position to fill with a top tier guy. RW is not the best QB but he's arguably top 5. That probably kills a type like Sherman who is top 2 as a CB but about to hit 30 before his 3rd contract.

 

[Siouxhawk]

I get it Si. The story did offer up some insight that offered a little peek behind the curtain, such as the dust-up with Ifedi during a rookie hazing moment (although, there again, it's all second-person narrative since the writer wasn't there and it's reliant on anonymous source recounts). Like you said, though, it has to be taken with a grain of salt and the whole premise behind it is a rather benign storyline hinged on Sherman being a fiery dude, a trifle of jealousy toward Russ and a culture facilitated by Pete that allows for strong personalities in the locker room. Earth-shattering stuff!

In your post two posts above this one you say it's yellow journalism and the writer is just opinionating out of the air.

In this post you say it fails because it's not uncovering any dynamics that people don't already know about.

Which one is it? Do the attributed Smith quotes not count either, or just all of the quotes that are anonymously sourced?

Likewise, Si, I won't bring it up again but I'd hope we can talk about the merits or lack thereof of the story without you derailing by spending a whole paragraph on an off-topic attack on me and my character. Just to say it, as a moderator I think you in particular would prefer that we disagree on the actual topic rather than devolving into personal attacks. If you think I'm trash and my opinions are unworthy of being considered, I'd prefer you just ignore me. Thanks.

Just to reiterate my thoughts on the piece, I think it's a good investigative piece inside the organization, and not a particularly damning one, nor was it intended to be.

It's both. He opines with speculative reaches to fill in the cracks and he builds a chronological essay with rehashed news that many of us knew about 4 years ago. As Si said, the Hawks' locker room dynamics are typical of most around the league.