Seahawks: The dynasty that never was

[Irish Greg 2.0]

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/09/07/seattle-seahawks-dismantling-rift-russell-wilson-pete-carroll

It is hard to ever figure out where these kinds of pieces originate, or on whose agenda. I suspect most of this is from Mr. Sherman.

But, an interesting read nonetheless. Many of the concerns brought up are valid if you think about. "Something" changed the course of this organization in the last 3-4 years. The horrible Super Bowl loss is the biggest culprit, but this makes you think.

[NorthHawk]

It's an interesting article and I'm sure some of it is true - maybe most of it.
Perhaps it part of the purge and maybe Pete sees the mistakes he made and now is starting anew with a mostly new team.
Those who are left might be the ones that can get past their egos and see that it can work again if they find the right players.

[Uppercut]

The problem is the moaners! They should look in the mirror

And Bevell

[RiverDog]

Interesting article, and I agree with most of it. The SB 49 loss was devastating, and keeping a team full of alpha males focused and on task was a bigger challenge for Pete than building the team in the first place.

IMO what Pete should have done was to have fired Bevell within one or two weeks after the SB 49 loss. There are some decisions, both in life as well as football, where the consequences are so grave, that making a bad call should cost us our jobs. Additionally, although one can't lump the entire blame for the loss onto Bevell...for example, the defense gave up a two score 4th quarter lead...Pete needed to send a signal to the players that everyone, coaches as well as players, are accountable for their mistakes. Keeping Bevell around for another 3 years is quite possibly one of the root causes of the locker room rift.

I do think that the statement about Russell being a "polarizing figure" is a little bit overstated. I recall when the Panthers lost the Super Bowl in part because Cam Newton didn't dive after his own fumble because he was afraid he was going to get hurt, a number of defensive players responded that their QB would have dove through the hubs of hell to get that ball back.

But all that's in the past. This is virtually a brand new team, with just a handful of players left over from the one that nearly won two straight SB's. I can't wait for Sunday to get here!

[makena]

I just read the article and I think it's freaking awesome!
The seahawks win a SB and got enough attention that SI wrote a story about the Hawks almost being a dynasty! WOOOOT!!!

We are finally on the stage, Lets dance!!!

Mak

[idhawkman]

... with just a handful of players left over from the one that nearly won two straight SB's. I can't wait for Sunday to get here!

I can't wait for Sunday, too to see the new team. It sounds to me like Avril, Kam, Sherman, McDaniel were the main contributors to the article which is why I'm nervous about Earl coming back in. I really hope he has a Bwags attitude and not one of those guys'.

[idhawkman]

I've posted numerous times over the past few years that there was something amiss regarding the "Always Compete" mantra. Some of my observations were:

1. Competing in all 4 quarters and not just the 4th quarter of games.
2. Practices with players sitting out.
3. The fire in Beast after that SB 49 season
4. RW's performances in many games (especially the under throws on deep passes, a couple of which hurt our recievers badly.) I haven't seen so much of that in the preseason.
5. ET not hitting as hard as he did in the 2 SB seasons.

[jshawaii22]

I think most of us saw this coming. The stories about Marshawn and the "MVP" call, and going back to Percy's fight with Doug Baldwin over Russell's 'special' treatment were all clues that it wasn't clicking anymore.

Maybe it did fall a lot faster than we thought it would, but anyone who read the stories, true or not, watched Richard on the sidelines the last two years saw a downward spiral that, among other obvious issues, or any other of the stories coming out knew it wasn't going to be good.

So we Move on... we're back to 2012 again? No, unfortunately, i see this being Pete's last hurrah and if the team misses the playoffs I see him gone and not coincidentally, maybe Coach Harbaugh coming in (don't laugh) - it could happen. Timing is everything in life.

[idhawkman]

I think most of us saw this coming. The stories about Marshawn and the "MVP" call, and going back to Percy's fight with Doug Baldwin over Russell's 'special' treatment were all clues that it wasn't clicking anymore.

Maybe it did fall a lot faster than we thought it would, but anyone who read the stories, true or not, watched Richard on the sidelines the last two years saw a downward spiral that, among other obvious issues, or any other of the stories coming out knew it wasn't going to be good.

So we Move on... we're back to 2012 again? No, unfortunately, i see this being Pete's last hurrah and if the team misses the playoffs I see him gone and not coincidentally, maybe Coach Harbaugh coming in (don't laugh) - it could happen. Timing is everything in life.

Maybe but that would be the last straw for me. I'd be done.

[c_hawkbob]

i see this being Pete's last hurrah and if the team misses the playoffs I see him gone

You can't possibly be serious, you really think Pete's playing for his job this year?

As for the article, some good observations but some pretty strained conclusions. He presents a single story line that fits with those observations. I'm sure some of it hits the mark, but I think there's a lot of overstatement there as well (IMO anyway). I also don't like that he seems to put everything good in the rear view mirror, as though there's no hope going forward. I don't think the final chapter of this book has been written yet.

Nice to see you poke your head in Greg, congrats on your retirement, sorry I couldn't make it there. Hope you're enjoying it!

[Aseahawkfan]

As much as I hope for another run at the Super Bowl, the realist in me believes we've seen the best days for this team and won't see them again for quite some time. A defense and complete team like we had is one of those magical events that happens once in a blue moon when everything comes together. When you have such a team, you can't make mistakes like we did in Super Bowl 49. It breaks the team and did break the team. Then afterward the lack of consequences further hurt the team. The last few years the team sold the future to go for it all and it seemed desperate, not smart. Right now we're experiencing the fruition of all the mistakes, while they attempt to rebuild around Russell.

I don't think we'll make it back myself, at least not under Pete and John, maybe not at all during Russell's career. The free agency and contract mistakes are piling up along with the sub par drafting to create a weak to middle of the road team. Does Pete have another run him? I doubt it, but will give the benefit of the doubt for now. The fact is Pete gave us a four or five years of magic with one egregious mistake more costly to him and the team than us.

The dynasty was broken with that loss. You can't have a dynasty unless you can finish it. We did not finish.

[jshawaii22]

Bob, although it certainly could happen, I didn't say he was playing for his job, in the respect that he would be fired. I'm thinking he would decide not to continue if we had a bad year and didn't see the progress level he had in the past. He isn't a spring chicken any more and could decide it's not worth it and retire.

[RiverDog]

Bob, although it certainly could happen, I didn't say he was playing for his job, in the respect that he would be fired. I'm thinking he would decide not to continue if we had a bad year and didn't see the progress level he had in the past. He isn't a spring chicken any more and could decide it's not worth it and retire.

I understood exactly what you meant. Nothing short of a 0-16 season is going to cause Pete to lose his job this season. The concern is how much longer is he going to want to coach, or more specifically, want to coach the Seahawks.

At 66, Pete is the oldest active HC in the league, and rapidly approaching a number of coaching legends in that category, like Paul Brown, Joe Gibbs, and Weeb Eubank. The oldest was Marv Levy, at 72. Age alone forces us to consider the possibility that this might be Pete's last season with us.

[NorthHawk]

A couple of times on the sidelines last year Pete looked really confused about the team. Maybe a bit lost even.
This might either make him more determined to rebuild, or it may have take a bit of the fire out of him. I hope it's the former.

[Agent 86]

Pete's reaction to the story.

https://www.thescore.com/nfl/news/1600244/pete-carroll-i-dont-care-about-seahawks-rift-story


I would be a bit worried about the timing of the story and how it could affect RW3. But I don't know if I have ever seen a man more comfortable in his own skin. He will not be affected by this. The story is certainly interesting, but not a whole lot in there that shocks me or haven't heard before, maybe a little more insight than what we had all previously heard. Reading it certainly is a bit sad because I know there is truth to it and it's just a shame that a team that was that strong for that amount of time had a bad ending like this.

Reading it just re-affirms that the purge that happened this off season was absolutely necessary.

[obiken]

I think RW gets a bad rap. All QB's have bad games but he is on the top 10, of everyone's list. When guys like Sherm said he is not black enough, come on. I never liked Sherm, Bennett, Tate, or Harvin. IF Pete had sent them all packing after the SB loss, along with Bevel, he would have still controlled the narrative. Beast? I don't know, how it could have been different with him, he was a odd duck.
2018, doom. But maybe Human and ASHF are right, like Ben Franklin, I hope for the best and mentally prepare for the worst.

[RiverDog]

I don't think anyone attributed the "RW isn't black enough" rumor to Sherman. As a matter of fact, one could speculate by reading that article that Sherman was sticking up for RW if he almost got into a fight with Michael Bennett over the subject.

By Pete saying that he "took away from the article that he could improve his coaching methods", he pretty much confirms that there was considerable discontent in the locker room that contributed to the eventual break-up of the team. IMO the 'rift', if you want to call it that, started before SB 49 and can be traced back to Percy Harvin. Remember when Beast almost didn't board the bus to the airport following the news that Harvin had been traded?

The team was able to put that incident behind them, but it obviously re-surfaced after one of the most stressful losses in SB history. If it hadn't been for the Harvin fiasco, then maybe the team could have put the SB 49 loss behind them.

Especially considering the lingering effects that prevailed after he was dumped, the trade for Percy Harvin is without a doubt the worst trade the Hawks have made in the history of the franchise.

But that's all water under the bridge. 27 hours to the start of the 2018 season. My #12 flag has been raised.

[idhawkman]

I think it was Bennett who was sticking up for RW and Sherm who wanted the "intervention". That's how I read that story.

[RiverDog]

I think it was Bennett who was sticking up for RW and Sherm who wanted the "intervention". That's how I read that story.

Read what story? The story provided by 86 only provided this quote: Greg Bishop and Robert Klemko's story cites anonymous current and former Seahawks who believe the team's refusal to hold Wilson accountable led to a rift between the passer and the vaunted defense, an issue that caused an incident in which Richard Sherman and Michael Bennett "nearly came to blows."

Or is there some other story that you are referring to?

[Hawk Sista]

I believe the article is 100% true to the people who said what they said to that Wickersham dude and to Greg Bishop. I believe they are telling their version of the truth (their perception) just as they did when they said RW wasn’t black enough. Black on the outside and white on the inside...that’s how they felt. But is the accounting of Sherm (& let’s not kid ourselves, it was the disgruntled #25) true?? Probably not from Pete’s view... not to our GM, owner, star QB, media insiders, & a lot of other players and coaches. There are “sides” in my own dept. Some love me more than others and some would even say I’m too hard-driving. They aren’t necessarily wrong, but our team is successful.There will always be different points of view in any organization. Fractures, even when the stakes are high. The article highlights the fractures in the locker room that were masked by success. When the Hawks Lost 49, the players who were more me-centric needed to yell and blame, forgetting the other 58 minutes of play & forgetting that Beast Mode wasn’t great in goal to go situations.

Yeah, I’m sure RW is treated differently. So was Marshawn and so are other franchise QBs. Being mad at the brass for that and because they didn’t keep Tony McD, Kasan and others is a waste of energy. It shows a lack of getting the business side of the game. They can’t keep everyone (some could argue they kept too many for too long) and Kasan was cut from th 0-16 Browns for crying out loud and has never made it anywhere but the pre-season. Maybe PC & JS knew what they wanted to see & maybe that that does not translate to what Richard Sherman wanted to see. I’m not saying Pete, John and Wilson are perfect, but our window at success didn’t close because of any of them. It closed b/c the likes of Sherman and Lane are incredibly selfish. Not yet 30, Sherman knows how to manage it all?? Give me a break! Pete let his players bark and have voices and in the end, that liberal way of leading (letting everyone be themselves) backfired when the Ws weren’t coming as fast.

As for the Super Bowl, had we scored a TD then, is there anyone here who doesn’t think Brady would have marched his squad down the field and gotten the Pats into FG range, at the very least? We had a 10 point 4th Q lead that the D let slip away. Yes, I remember Cliff went out (Jeremy too). But let’s imagine that happened and the Pats scored after we did and won. Would Russ have blamed DQ and Sherman publicly? Has he ever said boo about how the D let the effin’ Pats back in the game? NO. What about the Atlanta game? Keep em out of FG range for 31 seconds and we advance to the NFC championship game. The D couldn’t do it and we lost. RW was as positive as he could be. The team’s ultimate unraveling came behind Sherman’s big mouth and pervasive immaturity, low emotional IQ. He/others became destructive.

Here’s one thing I disagree w/ Pete on... I’d have sat Sherm on the bench for yelling at Bev in public and for threatening to end Jim Moore’s career and then lying about what we all saw on tape.

[idhawkman]

I think it was Bennett who was sticking up for RW and Sherm who wanted the "intervention". That's how I read that story.

Read what story? The story provided by 86 only provided this quote: Greg Bishop and Robert Klemko's story cites anonymous current and former Seahawks who believe the team's refusal to hold Wilson accountable led to a rift between the passer and the vaunted defense, an issue that caused an incident in which Richard Sherman and Michael Bennett "nearly came to blows."

Or is there some other story that you are referring to?

The original link that IG posted has the below quote in it. I think it is under the quote you posted above.

I would hope that you leave the "OFF TOPIC" issues in the OFF TOPIC forum where I addressed your snide comment but I guess if you can't read and comprehend a simple article.... (does it make it better if I put the emoticon after my snide comment?)

Players who lamented the shift focused on Wilson, which other Seahawks believed was unfounded and unfair. Did Thomas still have to earn his spot? they ask. Did Sherman? The week following a December 2016 loss to the Packers, Sherman and Bennett nearly came to blows over Wilson. The quarterback threw five interceptions against a defense that finished 31st in passing yards allowed that season, and Sherman, a member of the unofficial player leadership huddle of which Wilson was not a part, proposed confronting Wilson in a private setting to ask what the issue was, as they'd routinely do with other players when performance dipped. “That was a common thing to do, because often it was some outside factor affecting guys, family stuff, and you’d work through that,” one former player says. But Bennett took issue, reminding Sherman that they only had one quarterback. The confrontation escalated to the point where the two needed to be separated. Toward the end of that ’16 season, Sherman’s complaints became louder and more public, and they clearly dated back to what had happened in the Super Bowl defeat. In private, what he said was even worse.

[RiverDog]

Alright, IdHawk, I see what your were referencing. However, my original comment was in reply to Obi's opinion that Sherman was the one that started the "RW isn't black enough" issue, and I still don't see where race entered into the discussion in either the article IG posted or the one 86 posted, although admittedly, one can see where someone might have made a reasonable inference that it came from Sherman.

How much of the article is true, who knows. But almost unquestionably, there was some major problems with locker room unity both before and after SB 49. Where there's smoke, there's fire.

And ASF, I'm sure that you're going to object, but if you remember back in 2010 our discussions about Pete's management style and how I felt it was less appropriate for more mature adults in the NFL than it was for youngsters in college, this article, if you put any weight in it, bears out at least some of the points of which I was arguing. I don't think this team would have disentigrated under a management style such as Mike Holmgren had. There is absouletly no doubt in my mind that Holmgren would have called out Russell's mistakes just as he did Hasselbeck's and every other QB that played for him. No one would ever accuse The Walrus of coddling his QB in the way that Pete is suggested to as having done.

That doesn't mean that I think hiring Carroll was a mistake, to the contrary, I was wrong about that decision and I'm to this day still on the Pete Carroll bandwagon. But you'll have to admit that there's a downside to his style.

[Aseahawkfan]

And ASF, I'm sure that you're going to object, but if you remember back in 2010 our discussions about Pete's management style and how I felt it was less appropriate for more mature adults in the NFL than it was for youngsters in college, this article, if you put any weight in it, bears out at least some of the points of which I was arguing. I don't think this team would have disentigrated under a management style such as Mike Holmgren had. There is absouletly no doubt in my mind that Holmgren would have called out Russell's mistakes just as he did Hasselbeck's and every other QB that played for him. No one would ever accuse The Walrus of coddling his QB in the way that Pete is suggested to as having done.

That doesn't mean that I think hiring Carroll was a mistake, to the contrary, I was wrong about that decision and I'm to this day still on the Pete Carroll bandwagon. But you'll have to admit that there's a downside to his style.

I still don't put anything in it.

The simple truth is that if we had won that Super Bowl, the team would have been more likely to be motivated to stick together. They lost and in a truly awful fashion and people are looking for excuses. When you don't win again quick, the loss continues to burn like acid. All I read in this article is some disgruntled players that let their heads get too big bitching to a reporter. I don't consider it any kind of question or anything of Pete's coaching style or management.

Not sure why you try to push your idea about Pete's management style being some kind of negative. His management style has brought you and all Seahawk fandom a Hall of Fame, record setting defense, two trips to the Super Bowl, one absolutely dominant and amazing win, the best QB in franchise history, one of the most entertaining to watch run games of the past few decades with Beastquake nicknames, a Legion of Boom defensive nickname that is now legendary, and overall the best football in Seahawks history. You want to give that up to have your preferred management style on the sidelines because it suits your sensibilities, have at it. Maybe they'll hire some coach that does things the way you want,but isn't near as successful. See how much you enjoy it.

I will never use some kind of 20/20 hindsight because of some stupid story written to generate NFL buzz as some reason to validate an opinion of Pete's management style that is absolutely false. Pete's style of managing a team is not so different from everyone else as people make it. His football knowledge is far more important than his management style and his knowledge is on par with almost any coach in the league. He has the respect of his peers. Some disgruntled players that let the popularity of being an NFL Super Bowl winner go to their head isn't going to change that. Fact is all the guys commenting in the article at some point are going to look back and remember how much fun and how great a time they had playing for Pete Carroll. It will be a golden moment in their mind as it was for all of us watching. So few franchises ever get such an amazing period of football and I will always savor it even as I see it end. Pete Carroll is our greatest coach until someone beats what he did.

[RiverDog]

I still don't put anything in it.

Well, Pete apparently does, at least to some extent. When asked what he took away from the article, here's what he said: Only that obviously I didn't do a very good job of teaching, because one of the main principles in our teaching is that we're not going to worry about what's happened; all our focus goes on what's coming right now," Carroll said, according to ESPN's Brady Henderson. "And so that's a discipline that we learn, and I just haven't taught it well enough. Whether you win or whether your lose or whatever happens, you need to move forward and leave stuff behind and go. So other than that, I don't care about it."

The simple truth is that if we had won that Super Bowl, the team would have been more likely to be motivated to stick together. They lost and in a truly awful fashion and people are looking for excuses. When you don't win again quick, the loss continues to burn like acid.

Agreed. Winning cures everything, losing brings out the worst in everyone.

Not sure why you try to push your idea about Pete's management style being some kind of negative. His management style has brought you and all Seahawk fandom a Hall of Fame, record setting defense, two trips to the Super Bowl, one absolutely dominant and amazing win, the best QB in franchise history, one of the most entertaining to watch run games of the past few decades with Beastquake nicknames, a Legion of Boom defensive nickname that is now legendary, and overall the best football in Seahawks history. You want to give that up to have your preferred management style on the sidelines because it suits your sensibilities, have at it. Maybe they'll hire some coach that does things the way you want,but isn't near as successful. See how much you enjoy it.

You're putting words into my mouth. Where was it that I said that his coaching style was a negative? What I said was that there was a downside to it, as there is to just about any management style. Additionally, I did not say that I preferred Holmgren's style to Pete's. There's obviously plusses and minuses to each. But clearly, Pete's style wasn't made for the type of locker room situation that apparently existed over the past couple of seasons.

And did you read my last paragraph? In it I admitted that I was wrong about hiring Pete and that I am not jumping off the Pete bandwagon. If given a choice between Pete and Holmgren, I'll take Pete every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Someone said it best when they noted that Pete's style was more suited to building a team than it was maintaining one, and I agree.

[hoxgmp]

Greg, nice to see you back. While the article was an interesting read, it didn't say anything that we didn't already know. I want to move forward rather than rehash the past.

To Pete's credit, he not only got rid of the players but also some of the assistant coaches. I didn't think he would do that but he did. He then turned around and brought a coach whose pedigree is built on running the ball. Bringing back Solari was also a great move. This time it appears that Pete is really trying to do what his philosophy demands. Run the ball, play great defense, and have a strong Special Teams.

Do we have the players? We are getting there. What is important is that Pete has got the assistant coaches he wants that will hold the players accountable. I am not sure that RW will escape scrutiny if he were to screw up at key points in a game. You want those discussions to happen privately between a player and his coach. You don't want a player to be publicly berated by other team members when he falters. That's the organizational change in philosophy of Pete that I am most encouraged by. The assistant coaches have the personality to make that happen.

Bevel seemed to be in awe of RW most of the time. Brian Schottenheimer doesn't appear to be that way. Schottenheimer also never really had a QB with the skillset of RW to work with. The playcalling on offense will be done by one coach and not split between two assistants. Once the O-line and the running game start clicking, RW will get more freedom to provide input. it will be interesting to see if RW is allowed to call plays in certain situations and not just the audibles on the line.

I want to see how Kenny Norton calls the defense, though one thing is sure that the players on defense will not be able to run over Kenny as he has the personality that will never allow that to happen. Kenny will be in control, much like Shottenheimer and Solari.

Our Special Teams should be much better, especially since acquiring Michael Dickson in the draft and certainly the kicking game should be much improved also. Not concerned about the two missed extra points in pre-season.

All in all, if not this year, at least by next year, we should be a contender.

[Hawktawk]

Like Baldwin said the other day "its been written before, its the same story. It is what it is". Wilson can be a bit annoying with his pat answers, his outwardly always cheery image despite what happens, so charmin its alarmin so to speak. I believe he has become a little too business oriented. Although I can't exactly recall what he said after the divisional loss to Atlanta in 2017 it came at the end of a press conference where he hadn't really expressed much disappointment or accepted much accountability for it being the offseason then made some comment about an off field venture before leaving the podium.

His bad games can be really bad, I wanted to fight him after that horrible performance in GB, especially since I had the bad judgement to watch it at a friends house who is a huge packers fan so Sherm wanting to challenge him isn't at all surprising.Maybe the Packers uniforms blind him because it seems half his career picks come against them as he really isn't much of an interception machine generally.

The pass interception to end 49 was ultimately his fault although he said as much. Bad call yes. As Brock Huard said recently you can't expect a personnel grouping of Kearse and Lockette to have success on a pick play with Teradaktel arms Browner on Kearse and Bevell should have known that as should PC. But Huard added that as soon as the obvious happened which was Browner welding Kearse to the one taking away the chip on Butler it had to be mission abort for Wilson, take off or throw it away, don't chance it.

Ok thats the bad. But Russ owns numerous NFL firsts, records etc. He was perfect in 48, a much bigger part of the blowout win than he gets credit for because he ran an offense so efficient the Hawks didn't punt until late in the second half. The best way to contain Manning was to keep him on the sidelines as much as possible. And Russ did it despite poor line play and Lynch rushing for a pedestrian 38 yards with almost 20 on one play.He never misses practice much less games despite being badly hurt the entire 2016 season. He's the first guy in the building and last guy out. He's never embarrassed the team or fans off the field and does public service visiting hospitals. Hes one of a handful of certain or potential HOF QBs in the league and gets more respect from opposing players than his own based on his top 100 ranking. Give me Russ 7 days a week and twice on Sunday. Nobody's perfect and he'd be the first to admit he isn't but who is Seattle going to get that's better? If Russ is allowed to hit free agency or force a trade in a couple of years he would be the most sought after QB in the history of the league.

GO HAWKS!!!!

[idhawkman]

Alright, IdHawk, I see what your were referencing. However, my original comment was in reply to Obi's opinion that Sherman was the one that started the "RW isn't black enough" issue, and I still don't see where race entered into the discussion in either the article IG posted or the one 86 posted, although admittedly, one can see where someone might have made a reasonable inference that it came from Sherman.

No worries. I was more responding to this part of that post you had.

As a matter of fact, one could speculate by reading that article that Sherman was sticking up for RW if he almost got into a fight with Michael Bennett over the subject.

I think they were two separate incidents where Sherm wanted to treat RW as the rest of the guys but Bennett didn't. I think the "Not Black Enough" was a different situation.

That all said, I don't think Sherm was being "anti-Russell". I don't know what was actually in his mind but to me I think he was trying to resolve the situation so they could move on. Others didn't need resolution to move on and that's where I see the rub and division that occured (if you beleive the article) in the locker room.

[RiverDog]

Like Baldwin said the other day "its been written before, its the same story. It is what it is". Wilson can be a bit annoying with his pat answers, his outwardly always cheery image despite what happens, so charmin its alarmin so to speak. I believe he has become a little too business oriented. Although I can't exactly recall what he said after the divisional loss to Atlanta in 2017 it came at the end of a press conference where he hadn't really expressed much disappointment or accepted much accountability for it being the offseason then made some comment about an off field venture before leaving the podium.

Agreed. Russell's pure as the wind driven snow, always politically correct attitude makes for great film clips and us fans eat ho his canned responses, but if I were a player, I can certainly see where it could be very annoying if you were exposed to it 24/7. And if what was said in the article is true, that Pete and the coaching staff never call out Russell, coupled with what others could see as brown nosing the boss, I can see where he could cause teammates to start taking sides.

His bad games can be really bad, I wanted to fight him after that horrible performance in GB, especially since I had the bad judgement to watch it at a friends house who is a huge packers fan so Sherm wanting to challenge him isn't at all surprising.Maybe the Packers uniforms blind him because it seems half his career picks come against them as he really isn't much of an interception machine generally.

The pass interception to end 49 was ultimately his fault although he said as much. Bad call yes. As Brock Huard said recently you can't expect a personnel grouping of Kearse and Lockette to have success on a pick play with Teradaktel arms Browner on Kearse and Bevell should have known that as should PC. But Huard added that as soon as the obvious happened which was Browner welding Kearse to the one taking away the chip on Butler it had to be mission abort for Wilson, take off or throw it away, don't chance it.

Another thing that Huard said about Russell's accountability for the SB 49 pick was if the coach sends in a skunk of a play, it's up to the quarterback not to let it stink. If Kearse's beating Browner was a critical component on that play like everyone says it was, then Russell should have recognized it immediately and gone somewhere else with the ball. You don't want to make mistakes in the middle of a congested field.

Ok thats the bad. But Russ owns numerous NFL firsts, records etc. He was perfect in 48, a much bigger part of the blowout win than he gets credit for because he ran an offense so efficient the Hawks didn't punt until late in the second half. The best way to contain Manning was to keep him on the sidelines as much as possible. And Russ did it despite poor line play and Lynch rushing for a pedestrian 38 yards with almost 20 on one play.He never misses practice much less games despite being badly hurt the entire 2016 season. He's the first guy in the building and last guy out. He's never embarrassed the team or fans off the field and does public service visiting hospitals. Hes one of a handful of certain or potential HOF QBs in the league and gets more respect from opposing players than his own based on his top 100 ranking. Give me Russ 7 days a week and twice on Sunday. Nobody's perfect and he'd be the first to admit he isn't but who is Seattle going to get that's better? If Russ is allowed to hit free agency or force a trade in a couple of years he would be the most sought after QB in the history of the league.

GO HAWKS!!!!

Agreed with everything except for the underlined sentence. Russell would have to go a long ways to beat the free agency of Peyton Manning. But we'd better damn well not ever let him hit free agency. If we're not going to resign him in 2020 or before, then trade him in 2019.