Sounds like Woolen is being benched

[pmedic920]

I mean.... That was just me stating my opinion on what it sounded like.

I never tried to pass it off as being true, though. (it's the whole "eye of the beholder" thing)


But anyway, hearing that Kendrick will be getting more of an opportunity is a good thing, though I do agree with you on the "right to compete" comment.

Remember that this was a question asked and not MacDonald saying verbatim the "right to compete" thing.

Sometimes our media asks very odd questions.


BTW, I believe "click bait" around here is simply a new thread.

Ok, based on other questions you’ve asked recently, I’ll elaborate or explain a little bit.
I say other questions because you eluded to not knowing how things go around here.

When someone titles a thread as you did (sounds like woolen is being benched) we fully expect to click on your thread and find some information that is linked to Woolen actually being benched. There was absolutely nothing to suggest that woolen is being benched.

Anyway, in terms of “click bait” I was referring to the tweet/x you posted not your thread. The fact remains however your thread could easily be considered as click bait by some folks.

FYI, terms like “speculation” , “rumor”, or IMO go a long way toward people understanding and respecting what you’re talking/posting about.

 

[glenwo2]

Ok, based on other questions you’ve asked recently, I’ll elaborate or explain a little bit.
I say other questions because you eluded to not knowing how things go around here.

When someone titles a thread as you did (sounds like woolen is being benched) we fully expect to click on your thread and find some information that is linked to Woolen actually being benched. There was absolutely nothing to suggest that woolen is being benched.

Anyway, in terms of “click bait” I was referring to the tweet/x you posted not your thread. The fact remains however your thread could easily be considered as click bait by some folks.

FYI, terms like “speculation” , “rumor”, or IMO go a long way toward people understanding and respecting what you’re talking/posting about.

In other words, if I had put in my Thread title "Speculation : Woolen to be benched?", would that have helped?

 

[glenwo2]

Speaking of Woolen :



Let's see if this works out. lol

 

[pmedic920]

In other words, if I had put in my Thread title "Speculation : Woolen to be benched?", would that have helped?

Sure.

It’s kinda common sense.

The goal is to post quality content, not crazy titles to get people to come take a look (click).

You do you, build the kind of relationships here that you want.
Folks round here a pretty dam savvy, they will figure you out.

(One way or another)

Cheers

 

[RiverDog]

Sure.

It’s kinda common sense.

The goal is to post quality content, not crazy titles to get people to come take a look (click).

You do you, build the kind of relationships here that you want.
Folks round here a pretty dam savvy, they will figure you out.

(One way or another)

Cheers

JHMO and perhaps it's none of my business, but I think we should cut @glenwo2 a little slack. Sure, it wasn't the most appropriately titled thread, but there's a lot of threads in this forum that creates a "WTF" with their title. Here's just a sample from the very same Seahawks forum:

Why us?​

Well...this should cause some "reaction"​

How the heck does anyone know what the general content of the thread is with those kinds of titles? Do those titles not fall into the category of click bait?

At least we knew from the title of this thread that the subject was the possible benching of Woolen. I can't say anything remotely similar about the other two thread titles.

Anyway, I know it's none of my business, but I couldn't help it. I had to come to the defense of a fellow Hawk fan.

 

[olyfan63]

I think Kendrick will get some snaps to feed the competition but Woolen will still play a bunch.

Kendrick looks like he has "earned more snaps", my take. Some will be at Woolen's expense, some may be at Spoon's expense, or Jobe's, or others, I don't see it as a demotion so much as keeping good and fresh corners on the field against teams with good passing games.

Yes, Kendrick would have a couple more picks if he could freaking catch the ball, but, as I always say, that's why he's a DB and not a WR. But he's putting himself in position and that's a beautiful thing.

The Hawks should KEEP Woolen through the season. Decent NFL CBs are a scarce commodity, and bad DB depth has cost Seattle TWO Lombardis. Tharald "Toast" Simon anyone? Etric Pruitt? If there's no Knocks-JS-On-His-Butt offer for Woolen during the season, let him test the market after the season, and some other team can overpay him if they outbid the Hawks.

 

[Trackhawk]

FWIW, I’ve been pretty impressed with @glenwo2. He’s has some good context to add, and I can totally see interpreting MM’s word as a shot across Woolen’s bow/ a threat to bench him.

These coaches always speak in code, and it’s left to us to interpret. It’s a reasonable interpretation, even if it’s “inconclusive on review.’

Just the opinion of someone who has been here a lot longer than my user stats would suggest. I had to kill my previous account due to reasons unrelated to this forum. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[glenwo2]

Sure.

It’s kinda common sense.

The goal is to post quality content, not crazy titles to get people to come take a look (click).

You do you, build the kind of relationships here that you want.
Folks round here a pretty dam savvy, they will figure you out.

(One way or another)

Cheers

That sounds ominous. ngl.

But yeah I agree that from the conversations I've had with *most* here, they seem to be very knowledgeable (even if I disagree with some of their points).

 

[glenwo2]

JHMO and perhaps it's none of my business, but I think we should cut @glenwo2 a little slack. Sure, it wasn't the most appropriately titled thread, but there's a lot of threads in this forum that creates a "WTF" with their title. Here's just a sample from the very same Seahawks forum:

Why us?​

Well...this should cause some "reaction"​

How the heck does anyone know what the general content of the thread is with those kinds of titles? Do those titles not fall into the category of click bait?

At least we knew from the title of this thread that the subject was the possible benching of Woolen. I can't say anything remotely similar about the other two thread titles.

Anyway, I know it's none of my business, but I couldn't help it. I had to come to the defense of a fellow Hawk fan.

uhh..... That 2nd title was......mine.




Yeahh.... Going to be a bit more clear in my future Thread Titles going forward. Yesiree, bob.

 

[pmedic920]

JHMO and perhaps it's none of my business, but I think we should cut @glenwo2 a little slack. Sure, it wasn't the most appropriately titled thread, but there's a lot of threads in this forum that creates a "WTF" with their title. Here's just a sample from the very same Seahawks forum:

Why us?​

Well...this should cause some "reaction"​

How the heck does anyone know what the general content of the thread is with those kinds of titles? Do those titles not fall into the category of click bait?

At least we knew from the title of this thread that the subject was the possible benching of Woolen. I can't say anything remotely similar about the other two thread titles.

Anyway, I know it's none of my business, but I couldn't help it. I had to come to the defense of a fellow Hawk fan.

He is being cut “slack”.

Hence my multiple comments trying to get him up to speed on how things work round these parts

I haven’t seen anyone being exceptionally hard on the beaver.

If I’ve missed something by all means point it out.

 

[glenwo2]

He is being cut “slack”.

Hence my multiple comments trying to get him up to speed on how things work round these parts

I haven’t seen anyone being exceptionally hard on the beaver.

If I’ve missed something by all means point it out.

There's a dirty joke in there somewhere....

 

[GemCity]

My next thread title: Seahawks TIDDAYS.

Get ready to see me naked yall.

Btw…trade Woolen John!

 

[Aircrew]

JHMO and perhaps it's none of my business, but I think we should cut @glenwo2 a little slack. Sure, it wasn't the most appropriately titled thread, but there's a lot of threads in this forum that creates a "WTF" with their title. Here's just a sample from the very same Seahawks forum:

Why us?​

Well...this should cause some "reaction"​

How the heck does anyone know what the general content of the thread is with those kinds of titles? Do those titles not fall into the category of click bait?

At least we knew from the title of this thread that the subject was the possible benching of Woolen. I can't say anything remotely similar about the other two thread titles.

Anyway, I know it's none of my business, but I couldn't help it. I had to come to the defense of a fellow Hawk fan.

Interesting opinionated opinion, Ace. Meanwhile, Mods have tongue lashed us for having overly wordy titles.

Since you seem to have all the answers, I hereby nominate you to be the .net Dictator. Set the rules and we shall follow your divine guidance into the promised land, excellency.

 

[FortWorthSeahawk]

Sure.

It’s kinda common sense.

The goal is to post quality content, not crazy titles to get people to come take a look (click).

You do you, build the kind of relationships here that you want.
Folks round here a pretty dam savvy, they will figure you out.

(One way or another)

Cheers

Thank you for this post.

 

[Ostatehawk]

My next thread title will be


Glenwo2 Benched?

 

[RiverDog]

He is being cut “slack”.

Hence my multiple comments trying to get him up to speed on how things work round these parts

I haven’t seen anyone being exceptionally hard on the beaver.

If I’ve missed something by all means point it out.

Well, I did point two of them out.

You're right, that particular one could have been worded a little differently. I just think there's worse offenders and that he was being singled out. I'm all for educating posters about proper forum etiquette. Perhaps if the staff were to provide some examples.

It's not a subject worth getting our briefs in a wad, so I'll leave it at that and bow out of the discussion.

 

[pmedic920]

Thank you for this post.

Well, I did point two of them out.

You're right, that particular one could have been worded a little differently. I just think there's worse offenders and that he was being singled out. I'm all for educating posters about proper forum etiquette. Perhaps if the staff were to provide some examples.

It's not a subject worth getting our briefs in a wad, so I'll leave it at that and bow out of the discussion.

It takes the whole community.

This place has come a long ways and evolved positively in the last 2-3 years.
That’s mostly in part because of everyone talking a bit of ownership and helping out.
My particular interest in this member is mainly due to him/her asking a serious of questions indicating that they wanted to fit in and “learn the ropes” so to speak.

If you personally see things that are egregious or you feel are out of line, I/we encourage you to use the report feature so that we have an opportunity to review and address BEFORE things get out of hand and end up in a suspension or ban for someone.

Personally I appreciate you taking interest and speaking up on another’s behalf.
Looking out for one another is something that all good communities have in common (real life or online).

ETA
You are correct in the two examples you gave, nobody knows what the context of the thread is going to be. On the flip side, nobody is going to open those threads with a specific expectation.

Distinctly different from something like this.

 

[glenwo2]

My next thread title will be


Glenwo2 Benched?

I think that's a wise move......for humanity's sake.

 

[Mase]

-- I don't see the value in pushing Spoon outside. Keeping him closer to the LOS allows them to be more creative with him. Kendrick is playing great as a rotational bench corner, let's not ask him to do more than he might be capable of.

-- I realize the pitch forks are out for Woolen, but let's not risk a negative domino effect to get him off the field. And as mentioned before, of course Kendrick has the right to compete. By earning a roster spot you have the right to compete.

Mase

 

[pmedic920]

-- I don't see the value in pushing Spoon outside. Keeping him closer to the LOS allows them to be more creative with him. Kendrick is playing great as a rotational bench corner, let's not ask him to do more than he might be capable of.

-- I realize the pitch forks are out for Woolen, but let's not risk a negative domino effect to get him off the field. And as mentioned before, of course Kendrick has the right to compete. By earning a roster spot you have the right to compete.

Mase

Reasonable take IMO.