That’s the exact reverse Outcome of the same known problem. Hackett let Russ cook until he, Hackett, was immolated.
So Hackett was aware of this
"known problem" of Russell not listening to his coaches which is why he let Russ cook?
IMO Russell did listen to his coaches in Seattle, at least initially, which is why he and the team were successful. Coaches and players were on the same page. Over the course of the last 4-5 years with us, he began to harbor a different opinion as to the best offense for the Seahawks to the point where the relationship was irreparable. If you want to call that "not listening to his coaches", although I wouldn't characterize it like that, I could accept it.
In Russell's first season with Denver, Hackett yearned to build his offense around his franchise quarterback, or in other words,
"Let Russ Cook" as he had done something similar with Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay and had great success. It had nothing to do with a so-called reputation for not listening to coaches. Obviously, it was an abject failure on the part of both the coach and the player.
In Russell's last season with Denver, he was subjected to a much more rigged, structured system under Sean Payton than he was used to under both Hackett and Carroll, a polar opposite philosophy to
"Let Russ Cook." It wasn't an intentional not listening so much as it was a "can't teach an old dog new tricks" sort of a thing. Russell did not fit Payton's style of offense as Russell was too used to playing a certain brand of football. It had nothing to do with insubordination as you seem to be suggesting.