HawkShack.com

Did you guys see how Travis Kelce shoved Andy Reed on the sidelines after that KC fumble in the second quarter? He was upset because Reed didn't have him in on that play. And it was a big shove. Big enough that Reed almost lost his balance. But Reed never even said a peep to Kelce. I couldn't believe it! Is this where we are in the NFL today that the game has become so player-centered that disrespect of the head coach in a violent, physical form is just shrugged off? The TV play by play guys dismissed it as competitive intensity. Bologna!

The adults are in charge…..

Competitive intensity is exactly what I told my wife it was in real time. Would you have had Andy blow up back at him? Pulled him from the game?

From what I could tell Andy was so focused on the game that Kelce could have punched him in the face, killed someone next to him, and ran up to him naked with a clown hat on and Reid would have stayed focused on the game.

I'm sure Kelce will hear it after the game.

And if you want some comedy, just make up what he said in your mind. I ilke, "Coach, Coach...Taylor said I get nothing if we don't win this game. WE GOTTA WIN THIS GAME or I'm on the couch."

c_hawkbob wrote:Competitive intensity is exactly what I told my wife it was in real time. Would you have had Andy blow up back at him? Pulled him from the game?

Yes! Besides disrespecting the leadership of the team, Kelce was saying, "Hey, I'm so good that if I had been in the game for that play I would have blocked him and it wouldn't have happened." Ego, ego. Sorry, I'm just old school. Kelce was doing his best Metcalf imitation today.

I didn't see the Kelce-Reid incident live, but I've sure heard about it. I'd have to know a little more about the circumstances and what was said before I could conclude that Kelce was upset about being taken out of the game. Even though Reid was focused on his game calling, I still find it hard to believe that he wouldn't have shown some sort of reaction if Kelce was that upset at him.

As far as the game itself goes, it seems a bit sloppily played, especially in the first half. A lot of penalties, turnovers, bad snaps, a missed XP, shoot yourself in the foot types of stuff. I didn't really care who won as I don't like the over exposure the Chiefs have been attracting, the obsession with the Kelce-Swift romance, the over exposure the Chiefs have been getting, etc. They're getting too close to being a dynasty. I would have much rather see a team like the Lions. But neither was I rooting for the Niners. It's near sacrilegious to root for a divisional opponent.

And for the conspiracy theorists...where's Hawktawk? I thought the game was very well officiated, with neither side being the victim of multiple bad calls.

c_hawkbob wrote:Competitive intensity is exactly what I told my wife it was in real time. Would you have had Andy blow up back at him? Pulled him from the game?

trents wrote:Yes! Besides disrespecting the leadership of the team, Kelce was saying, "Hey, I'm so good that if I had been in the game for that play I would have blocked him and it wouldn't have happened." Ego, ego. Sorry, I'm just old school. Kelce was doing his best Metcalf imitation today.

If you seriously expected Andy to take that bullet out of his gun during the Super Bowl you misunderstand coaching! Winning the SB is the entire point of everything you've done for the year, not gaining subservience from all the alphas on your team.

Kelce's behavior can be explained but not excused. Andy Reid also did right by maintaining his focus on the game instead of getting into with Kelce. I would guess a come to Jesus with Kelce is coming if it hasn't happened already.

Andy Reed behaved like an adult and remained focused on the game. But he should have sat Kelce on the pines for the remainder of the quarter and then there should have been further repercussions decided in the offseason. There are some thing more important than winning a superbowl. Overlooking such a gross act of disrespect for authority will become a cancer in a team in the long run.

trents wrote:Andy Reed behaved like an adult and remained focused on the game. But he should have sat Kelce on the pines for the remainder of the quarter and then there should have been further repercussions decided in the offseason. There are some thing more important than winning a superbowl. Overlooking such a gross act of disrespect for authority will become a cancer in a team in the long run.

Not when you're in the middle of it. There's 52 other guys on the team as well as the staff and the fans and team ownership to consider. Reid could probably get ownership involved if need be.

Yes, in the middle of it. Until Kelce realizes that such inappropriate conduct bears consequences for others as well as himself he will not be motivated to change. Being fined a few thousand dollars means nothing to these overpaid, pampered athletes. Kelce has gotten too big for his breeches.

No way would I sit one of my best players during a tight Super Bowl. The NFL is a game where the entire point is to win the Super Bowl, especially a game that is a back to back Super Bowl.

I as a coach would understand emotions high in a game that meaningful. A back to back Super Bowl is not a common occurrence and your guys want to win. No way I play Mr. Discipline in that game possibly ruining the chance for guys that put everything they had for you into accomplishing this task for the entire season.

Your guys would lose respect for you and completely despise you on top of risking your job if you turned into some guy wanting to prove some point during the biggest game of the season when in a back to back Super Bowl that occurs once in a lifetime.

That would be such a breach of your duty as a coach and so incredibly selfish that I can't even imagine it.

I'm with you asea and Mack. You've got livelihoods, legacies, and chances to bolster arguments for Canton on the line. If this were high school or college, then I'm with trents 100%. Even with NIL rules, those are still students, and athletics ought to serve the educational function of those institutions. So then you'd teach Kelce a lesson.

But in the pros a coaches job isn't to teach character. It's to win. If he thought that he had to bench Kelce to teach a lesson and that lesson had to be taught to keep discipline of the team, then fine. Even in that situation, though, Reid would have to think that benching Kelce would result in better odds of winning. Clearly, Kelce is more valuable as a player than as an example, so Reid did the right thing.

And Kelce will of course have to accept whatever discipline is levied behind closed doors.

I've since seen the incident, and I agree with the consensus, that Kelce was way out of line, but that Reid did the right thing by ignoring him. Reid could have pulled a Mike Singletary, showed him who the boss was and sent him to the locker room, but he swallowed his pride and let him rant. To Kelce's credit, he did apologize to Reid shortly after the incident. Apologizing doesn't excuse it, but it's an indication that he understands that he was in the wrong and that discipline probably isn't necessary. I don't think Reid needs to worry about other players challenging is authority due to Kelce's blow-up.

And Kelce was pretty key in that win. You remove him, you likely lose that game. That would be a worse breach of behavior than what Kelce did. You absolutely do not ruin people's chance at history.

Aseahawkfan wrote:And Kelce was pretty key in that win. You remove him, you likely lose that game. That would be a worse breach of behavior than what Kelce did. You absolutely do not ruin people's chance at history.

And it was more than just about ruining Kelce's chance at history, it was about the other players on the team getting their rings. You act like a boot camp drill sergeant you screw everyone else on the team who may never get that opportunity again.

As a rule, I'm a lot more of a disciplinarian than what I've demonstrated in this thread, but that was a unique situation: Last game of the season in the heat of battle, aging veteran who might retire, and aging coach, both first ballot HOF'ers.