Russell Wilson

[RiverDog]

It looks like Russell is losing some of his special privileges, like his own office and personal coaches/trainers, a.k.a. "Team 3", that he had under Nathanial Hackett:

One of the biggest storylines was a report that Russell Wilson had his own office in the facility and his own personal performance team made up of outside trainers and physical therapists. Something Sean Payton said would be coming to an end going forward. "That's foreign to me," Payton told the Denver Post. "That's not going to take place here. I'm not familiar with it, but our staff will be here, our players will be here and that'll be it."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/se ... c5abbd1ad2

To be fair, a number of Russell's teammates were able to rationalize some of those special privileges, but when things aren't going well like they were last season, it's pretty obvious that kind of treatment could cause a rub with others not to mention create a lot of negative publicity about him and the coaching staff.

Whether you love him, hate him, or don't give a rip one way or another, it will be an interesting drama how all this plays out.

I'm still skeptical it was as bad as it was being painted, but Payton won't tolerate any outside influence. Payton runs the show. He knows how to be a head coach with a clear vision for the entire team. If Russell wants to win on offense, he'll listen to Payton.

None of us know how bad it really was, but I think we can surmise that it created a good sized rift with at least some of the players given that things were going as poorly as they were, particularly for the Denver offense. We've all been in a situation where the teacher's pet or the guy brown nosing the boss gets special treatment and how we resented them for it.

I agree with you about Payton. He has some moral authority that Hackett didn't have. IMO he's someone that Russell will listen to and respect. I'm not sure if that was the case with Hackett, that the relationship Russell had with him seemed like it was more of a co-coach rather than player-coach.

[Hawktawk]

There have been articles from as far back as 17 detailing a rift in that locker room going back years before that based on Russell receiving treatment nobody else got . I can only guess what the impact on the teams on field performance might have been without the distraction and division because it was good much of that time . Pete alone knows why he acquiesced to Russels requests for stuff like this but it hurt him , hurt Russ and hurt denver too although they made the grown up decision to allow the royal treatment he had in Seattle to continue .
I’ll be fascinated as a fan to see how this goes . I don’t rank Payton as high as some due to a lack of hardware in 15 years with Drew Brees but he’s had excellent regular season teams a number of times . He’s coached someone entirely different then Wilson . Just like Hackett . Payton will have to incorporate Russels skills in a new offense . As for Russ respecting Payton he didn’t respect Pete in the end so what’s going to be different ? I’m sceptical

He’s off to a good start kicking the posse off the property and I’d imagine closing the office unless it’s in the contract and Russ wants to fight over it . He can’t make Russ eat less or work out more , can’t tell him what to do in the off-season . He can bench him though if he doesn’t perform.
Should be fascinating .

[RiverDog]

There have been articles from as far back as 17 detailing a rift in that locker room going back years before that based on Russell receiving treatment nobody else got . I can only guess what the impact on the teams on field performance might have been without the distraction and division because it was good much of that time . Pete alone knows why he acquiesced to Russels requests for stuff like this but it hurt him , hurt Russ and hurt denver too although they made the grown up decision to allow the royal treatment he had in Seattle to continue .
I’ll be fascinated as a fan to see how this goes . I don’t rank Payton as high as some due to a lack of hardware in 15 years with Drew Brees but he’s had excellent regular season teams a number of times . He’s coached someone entirely different then Wilson . Just like Hackett . Payton will have to incorporate Russels skills in a new offense . As for Russ respecting Payton he didn’t respect Pete in the end so what’s going to be different ? I’m sceptical

He’s off to a good start kicking the posse off the property and I’d imagine closing the office unless it’s in the contract and Russ wants to fight over it . He can’t make Russ eat less or work out more , can’t tell him what to do in the off-season . He can bench him though if he doesn’t perform.
Should be fascinating .

Someone needs to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that all player contracts have to be approved by the league and the player's union, and I doubt that they would allow clauses like personal trainers and offices to be included in them.

I agree completely with your last sentence. It's going to be fascinating, especially when all we are is innocent bystanders.

[Aseahawkfan]

None of us know how bad it really was, but I think we can surmise that it created a good sized rift with at least some of the players given that things were going as poorly as they were, particularly for the Denver offense. We've all been in a situation where the teacher's pet or the guy brown nosing the boss gets special treatment and how we resented them for it.

I agree with you about Payton. He has some moral authority that Hackett didn't have. IMO he's someone that Russell will listen to and respect. I'm not sure if that was the case with Hackett, that the relationship Russell had with him seemed like it was more of a co-coach rather than player-coach.

I do not surmise that it had an effect myself. My work performance has never been affected by whether or not I like my coworkers. I go in and I do the job I'm there to do as well as I can do it or am required to do it in the case of simple, mindless jobs. Which is why I consider all this speculation to be mostly rubbish. Guys in the NFL don't decide they're going to play poorly based on their relationship with their coworkers or vice versa as in decide to play well because they like a guy. If someone is not performing, they're is something going on with that player regardless of the relationship with the coworker. Something the coach needs to figure out and correct and Hackett was bad at that which is why it went on for an entire season.

I have never thought players lost the coach's messaging or the team or they didn't like a player or what not. To me it's all about performance and if someone within the team matrix isn't performing or the strategy is shot and being exploited, then the team underperforms.

Good coaches like Carroll or a Bill B know how to fix those problems unless the problem is bad talent that can't be fixed until the offseason.

To me professional sports doesn't operate much differently from most jobs in terms of the weakest link can damage the group and you can only hide it for so long. Whether workers like each other when your job is on the line when you don't perform is so far down the list of concerns that I consider the effect negligible. A WR doesn't go out there and say, "I hate this QB. I don't plan to catch this ball or try very hard." A player like that won't even last long in the NFL. It takes everything you have just to maintain a job in the NFL and not performing or worrying about other player contract is the surest path to failure at that level of play. You need to go out there and do your best at your job so you can get paid what the market pays for your position which is still a many times more than what you could make in some private sector job.

I think the vast majority of the problem in Denver was Hackett and Russell. Both them performed terribly. Hackett couldn't fix major problems on offense. Russell performed like garbage in the red zone. Hackett was easier to get rid of. Russell not so much, so hopefully he is fixable by a coach like Payton or they're screwed. From what I heard from Payton is he has a plan for Russ and knows how to build the offense around him that works, so that has to be promising when one of the better offensive coaches in the league feels he can build an offense around your expensive QB.

[obiken]

Who cares this is Russ's defining year, he either wins 9 games or they will start to transition off of him.

[Hawktawk]

None of us know how bad it really was, but I think we can surmise that it created a good sized rift with at least some of the players given that things were going as poorly as they were, particularly for the Denver offense. We've all been in a situation where the teacher's pet or the guy brown nosing the boss gets special treatment and how we resented them for it.

I agree with you about Payton. He has some moral authority that Hackett didn't have. IMO he's someone that Russell will listen to and respect. I'm not sure if that was the case with Hackett, that the relationship Russell had with him seemed like it was more of a co-coach rather than player-coach.

" asea
I do not surmise that it had an effect myself. My work performance has never been affected by whether or not I like my coworkers. I go in and I do the job I'm there to do as well as I can do it or am required to do it in the case of simple, mindless jobs. Which is why I consider all this speculation to be mostly rubbish. Guys in the NFL don't decide they're going to play poorly based on their relationship with their coworkers or vice versa as in decide to play well because they like a guy. If someone is not performing, they're is something going on with that player regardless of the relationship with the coworker. Something the coach needs to figure out and correct and Hackett was bad at that which is why it went on for an entire season.

I have never thought players lost the coach's messaging or the team or they didn't like a player or what not. To me it's all about performance and if someone within the team matrix isn't performing or the strategy is shot and being exploited, then the team underperforms.

Good coaches like Carroll or a Bill B know how to fix those problems unless the problem is bad talent that can't be fixed until the offseason.

To me professional sports doesn't operate much differently from most jobs in terms of the weakest link can damage the group and you can only hide it for so long. Whether workers like each other when your job is on the line when you don't perform is so far down the list of concerns that I consider the effect negligible. A WR doesn't go out there and say, "I hate this QB. I don't plan to catch this ball or try very hard." A player like that won't even last long in the NFL. It takes everything you have just to maintain a job in the NFL and not performing or worrying about other player contract is the surest path to failure at that level of play. You need to go out there and do your best at your job so you can get paid what the market pays for your position which is still a many times more than what you could make in some private sector job.

I think the vast majority of the problem in Denver was Hackett and Russell. Both them performed terribly. Hackett couldn't fix major problems on offense. Russell performed like garbage in the red zone. Hackett was easier to get rid of. Russell not so much, so hopefully he is fixable by a coach like Payton or they're screwed. From what I heard from Payton is he has a plan for Russ and knows how to build the offense around him that works, so that has to be promising when one of the better offensive coaches in the league feels he can build an offense around your expensive QB.[/quote]

"HT
Very good breakdown of the issue in denver scoring. Lets face it if they could score Hackett would be there. Hackett wasn't coaching great and Russ was doing what he wanted anyway. I saw enough wide open guys get overlooked or missed in the first few weeks to have totally changed the narrative but after than it was a snowball rolling downhill.

Id have kept the special team guy myself and saved 20 million a year. He had Russ playing better than anyone, hard ass on the team old school rally the troops, barely lost week 17,kod the chargers to F up our draft pick. Just saying.

but Penners had to have a name guy and they got the best there is out there. His comments make it seem as he is well aware hes got to design an offense around what Russ does well and as he said "minimize things he doesn't do as well".
It only matters if we play them or need them to beat someone but tip of the cap to Payton if he pulls it off. If he doesn't it's gonna take work keeping a straight face picking up all those Wal Mart gifts. For my denver friends I hope it doesn't come to that because Pete and John are sort of responsible .

[RiverDog]

None of us know how bad it really was, but I think we can surmise that it created a good sized rift with at least some of the players given that things were going as poorly as they were, particularly for the Denver offense. We've all been in a situation where the teacher's pet or the guy brown nosing the boss gets special treatment and how we resented them for it.

I agree with you about Payton. He has some moral authority that Hackett didn't have. IMO he's someone that Russell will listen to and respect. I'm not sure if that was the case with Hackett, that the relationship Russell had with him seemed like it was more of a co-coach rather than player-coach.

I do not surmise that it had an effect myself. My work performance has never been affected by whether or not I like my coworkers. I go in and I do the job I'm there to do as well as I can do it or am required to do it in the case of simple, mindless jobs. Which is why I consider all this speculation to be mostly rubbish. Guys in the NFL don't decide they're going to play poorly based on their relationship with their coworkers or vice versa as in decide to play well because they like a guy. If someone is not performing, they're is something going on with that player regardless of the relationship with the coworker. Something the coach needs to figure out and correct and Hackett was bad at that which is why it went on for an entire season.

I have never thought players lost the coach's messaging or the team or they didn't like a player or what not. To me it's all about performance and if someone within the team matrix isn't performing or the strategy is shot and being exploited, then the team underperforms.

Good coaches like Carroll or a Bill B know how to fix those problems unless the problem is bad talent that can't be fixed until the offseason.

To me professional sports doesn't operate much differently from most jobs in terms of the weakest link can damage the group and you can only hide it for so long. Whether workers like each other when your job is on the line when you don't perform is so far down the list of concerns that I consider the effect negligible. A WR doesn't go out there and say, "I hate this QB. I don't plan to catch this ball or try very hard." A player like that won't even last long in the NFL. It takes everything you have just to maintain a job in the NFL and not performing or worrying about other player contract is the surest path to failure at that level of play. You need to go out there and do your best at your job so you can get paid what the market pays for your position which is still a many times more than what you could make in some private sector job.

I think the vast majority of the problem in Denver was Hackett and Russell. Both them performed terribly. Hackett couldn't fix major problems on offense. Russell performed like garbage in the red zone. Hackett was easier to get rid of. Russell not so much, so hopefully he is fixable by a coach like Payton or they're screwed. From what I heard from Payton is he has a plan for Russ and knows how to build the offense around him that works, so that has to be promising when one of the better offensive coaches in the league feels he can build an offense around your expensive QB.

That's your feelings on the subject, and I'm sure that there are a number of players in the Denver locker room who feel much the same way. But there are 52 other players on that team along with a number of coaches and support personnel, and they have a range of thoughts and impressions on the subject of favoritism that almost certainly don't align with those of which you harbor and that have to be acknowledged and dealt with. We saw evidence of that frustration several times on the Broncos sidelines during the game late in the season.

I agree with your last paragraph. Even though we no longer have any skin in the game, it will still be an intriguing drama to see how it all unfolds.

[NorthHawk]

I don't know if it's already been said, but Payton has banned "Team 3" from the facilities and taken away Wilson's office.
It's a power move he had to do to let him and the team know who is in charge and that things are going to be run his way.
He also went on to say that their Offense is going to do the things that Wilson does best - and I would think that he will discover other things that Russ hasn't done in the past but does well, too and add them in.
I just hope they are competitive in the AFC West and make it the exciting division we all expected last year. But they should even be better this year simply by better organization, focus, and readiness.

[Aseahawkfan]

That's your feelings on the subject, and I'm sure that there are a number of players in the Denver locker room who feel much the same way. But there are 52 other players on that team along with a number of coaches and support personnel, and they have a range of thoughts and impressions on the subject of favoritism that almost certainly don't align with those of which you harbor and that have to be acknowledged and dealt with. We saw evidence of that frustration several times on the Broncos sidelines during the game late in the season.

I agree with your last paragraph. Even though we no longer have any skin in the game, it will still be an intriguing drama to see how it all unfolds.

I don't care how the player feels. You don't last in the NFL basing your performance on your feelings. If that is how you think players operate, we definitely disagree. Performance in the NFL is mandatory and pay and the job is based on performance. Any player developing a reputation as someone that only performs based on how well they like their QB or coach will not make it in the NFL for very long. It's a self-policing organization where performance is nearly everything for awards, for money, and for how long you keep your job.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

I don't think Russell has a bad attitude or acting in ways that would make him locker room cancer, but I could see his underperforming his contract while having special treatment as a sore spot. That could all be tolerated if you're playing at a high level and the team is winning. With the way Wilson was playing, it didn't matter how much his teammates gave; they had a quarterback that wasn't delivering.

[RiverDog]

I don't think Russell has a bad attitude or acting in ways that would make him locker room cancer, but I could see his underperforming his contract while having special treatment as a sore spot. That could all be tolerated if you're playing at a high level and the team is winning. With the way Wilson was playing, it didn't matter how much his teammates gave; they had a quarterback that wasn't delivering.

Yeah, Russell's not a locker room cancer in the same sense as a Percy Harvin A-hole. And just the fact that the quarterback is so grossly overpaid relative to other positions is going to put an underperforming one in a very difficult position with his teammates no matter how great of a guy they are.

But the special perks, the office no one else has, the individual coaches being allowed access, the home with 12 bathrooms, his private jet taking him to Cabo during the bye, etc, makes it worse, makes him look arrogant, stuck up, snobish. It's not a good look for someone that's supposed to be a team leader. He really needs to take inventory of himself and imagine what he might look like to others. If I'm Sean Payton, I'd have a long sit down with him about his personal behavior.

[NorthHawk]

He already has.
All his special perks are gone as per my post above.

[TriCitySam]

I don't know if it's already been said, but Payton has banned "Team 3" from the facilities and taken away Wilson's office.
It's a power move he had to do to let him and the team know who is in charge and that things are going to be run his way.
He also went on to say that their Offense is going to do the things that Wilson does best - and I would think that he will discover other things that Russ hasn't done in the past but does well, too and add them in.
I just hope they are competitive in the AFC West and make it the exciting division we all expected last year. But they should even be better this year simply by better organization, focus, and readiness.

Not sure what all Payton has banned, but the guy I've pointed the finger at for the past 2 or 3 years is definately out: Jake Heaps.

Per Payton: "Asked if Wilson could continue to have a personal quarterback coach -- Jake Heaps -- as well as other support personnel to work with the quarterback in the building, Payton was clear on where he stood.

"I'm not too familiar with that,'' Payton said when asked about Wilson having Heaps in the building with access this past season. "That's foreign to me -- that's not going to take place. I'm unfamiliar with it. Our staff will be here, our players will be here and that will be it.''

[RiverDog]

He already has. All his special perks are gone as per my post above.

He's removed the perks at the training facility, but has he sat down and spoken with him about his off-field behavior/lifestyle that I referred to earlier, ie the trips to Cabo during bye weeks, park his private jet, think about what he posts on Twitter (knee highs on the flight to Europe), quit acting so uppity? All that stuff has a cumulative effect. IMO he needs to be taken down a peg or two.

[c_hawkbob]

He already has. All his special perks are gone as per my post above.

He's removed the perks at the training facility, but has he sat down and spoken with him about his off-field behavior/lifestyle that I referred to earlier, ie the trips to Cabo during bye weeks, park his private jet, think about what he posts on Twitter (knee highs on the flight to Europe), quit acting so uppity? All that stuff has a cumulative effect. IMO he needs to be taken down a peg or two.

Control freak much? Most of that is none of the coach's business. Russ is free to be as weird as he wants on social media and in his personal life. Peyton's a coach, not a life counselor. There are a lot of characters in the NFL, always have been.

[RiverDog]

He already has. All his special perks are gone as per my post above.

He's removed the perks at the training facility, but has he sat down and spoken with him about his off-field behavior/lifestyle that I referred to earlier, ie the trips to Cabo during bye weeks, park his private jet, think about what he posts on Twitter (knee highs on the flight to Europe), quit acting so uppity? All that stuff has a cumulative effect. IMO he needs to be taken down a peg or two.

Control freak much? Most of that is none of the coach's business. Russ is free to be as weird as he wants on social media and in his personal life. Peyton's a coach, not a life counselor. There are a lot of characters in the NFL, always have been.

That's a legitimate POV and management style. It's good advice for handling 99+% of the players and employees within the franchise, and I'm sure that Nathanial Hackett subscribed to your approach.

But we're not talking about a reserve offensive guard. No one cares about what they do off the field. We're talking about the face of the franchise, the singular player of whom the team is very heavily invested in and of whom they have few options but to make it work. Russell is going to be asked to set the tone for not only the guys on the field, but everyone associated with the franchise. He has a higher standard that he needs to live up to, and IMO his off-field behavior/lifestyle is a legitimate subject and area of concern for a new head coach.

And it doesn't have to, and IMO shouldn't be, approached in a control freak, my way or the highway manner. It could be a heart to heart, think about it rational type of conversation that appeals to Russell's logic.

[NorthHawk]

I haven't heard that they have had those conversations, but I haven't heard that they hadn't either. There's a lot of time before the season starts.
The taking away of privileges sends a pretty strong message on its own, namely that the QB isn't bigger than the team and Payton is running the show.
It can't help but have some repercussions outside of the team, including the influence of Jake Heaps and his entourage.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Control freak much? Most of that is none of the coach's business. Russ is free to be as weird as he wants on social media and in his personal life. Peyton's a coach, not a life counselor. There are a lot of characters in the NFL, always have been.

I subscribe to this philosophy at my job with the younger engineers. Do your job which ultimately means delivering the project to the client on time and under budget, and you won't hear a word out of me. Right now, Wilson isn't doing the equivalent of being on time and under budget. It calls into question his priorities and warrants a hard discussion about how he spends his time.

Payton can't force Wilson to do anything with Wilson doesn't want to do, but he sure can bench him if he isn't getting it done.

[Hawktawk]

Control freak much? Most of that is none of the coach's business. Russ is free to be as weird as he wants on social media and in his personal life. Peyton's a coach, not a life counselor. There are a lot of characters in the NFL, always have been.

“ I subscribe to this philosophy at my job with the younger engineers. Do your job which ultimately means delivering the project to the client on time and under budget, and you won't hear a word out of me. Right now, Wilson isn't doing the equivalent of being on time and under budget. It calls into question his priorities and warrants a hard discussion about how he spends his time.

Payton can't force Wilson to do anything with Wilson doesn't want to do, but he sure can bench him if he isn't getting it done.[/quote]
I think that’s the difference with Payton . Hackett tried to get control , holding Wilson a game after he was cleared on the concussion and yanking him mid game after 3 picks in a rout .

I believe he was fired the following day . I’m sure Payton has an agreement , probably contractual that he will make personnel decisions based on performance and his fate will not be tied to Wilson .

He will outlast Wilson imo . I’ll put him a scale up on my current “ very good coach “ to great if he makes it work next year . I’ve heard him described as from the Parcells tree. A bit nastier . Let’s see . They might be missing special teams guy

[TriCitySam]

I haven't read anything regarding Payton talking to RW about off the field stuff, but Payton IS in the mold of Parcells, and that IS having control. The Denver press has said the special treatment and entourage in the building are out, and that it's "More us and less Russ". The example of the player who decided to challenge Payton was Donte Stallworth who was constantly late for meetings and said "Just fine me, whatever..." "Whatever" turned out to be that Payton sent him down the road.

[Aseahawkfan]

I think Payton will find Russ much more team-oriented and amenable to his direction than the rumors indicate. Russ has never been a "me" guy from what I've seen. He wants to win. He is usually one of the guys organizing offseason activities for training and the like with his receivers. He's always working out to stay in shape. He never misses a game unless he is forced to. I think Russ has a great deal of respect for Sean Payton due to his association with Drew Brees. I think this is Russ's dream coach and he's going to work hard to succeed with Payton.

[Stream Hawk]

Not sure if this has been discussed yet today, but now this:
https://athlonsports.com/nfl/disturbing ... foundation
Apparently, Russ has some shady business practices as well. Embezzling his charity money to pay anything but the charity. Or 75% went elsewhere. Glad he’s not our problem anymore!

[govandals]

This article is a little more in depth:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/r ... r-AA17fLHK

Not a good look for RW. I wonder how much he knows what's going on.

[Aseahawkfan]

I read that article. Is that different for other charities? The article didn't indicate if this is standard operating practice for a charity or not.

The salaries for administering do seem very high.

There was no accusations of embezzlement, so not sure where that is coming from.

[Hawktawk]

I read that article. Is that different for other charities? The article didn't indicate if this is standard operating practice for a charity or not.

The salaries for administering do seem very high.

There was no accusations of embezzlement, so not sure where that is coming from.

Its got to be pretty blatant before law enforcement steps in . There are charities who keep more than they give away paying people to administer them.
This is bad though. To me Id guess its someone or ones in his circle taking advantage of it like a piggy bank. Trump did the same and got fined 2 million and told to shut it down but that's bad company to be in.

Bad look, the one unassailable part of Russ which is his charitable side took a big hit there.

[Aseahawkfan]

It wouldn't be the first time an athlete trusted the wrong people. Most athletes don't administer their own charitable organizations. They are the face, but not the manager. Sounds like Russ has some vultures picking up big scraps of charity meat around him unless that is standard pay for these types of positions. I have no idea.

[RiverDog]

I read that article. Is that different for other charities? The article didn't indicate if this is standard operating practice for a charity or not.

The salaries for administering do seem very high.

There was no accusations of embezzlement, so not sure where that is coming from.

Hawktawk is likely correct, that law enforcement probably isn't going to step in on something like this, at least not at this point.

To answer your question about the expenses of charitable organizations, on average, 37% of donations go to fund operating expenses:

In the U.S., nonprofits spend almost 37 percent of their funds on operating costs. CharityWatch.com said it is within reason for nonprofits to spend up to 40 percent of their budget on overhead expenses. That means only 60 percent of the organization’s money goes towards promoting their cause — much less than what donors expect.

https://www.givingloop.org/blog/fundrai ... s%20expect.

That means that Russell's organization is spending nearly 3 times more than the average charitable organization on operating expenses. Not a good look is an understatement.

[c_hawkbob]

That means that Russell's organization is spending nearly 3 times more than the average charitable organization on operating expenses.

3 x 37% = 111% so it's not likely he's meeting that mark. And embezzlement is a bit of a stretch as well. I think what he's doing is overpaying people within his circle with charity funds, which smells just as bad whether it meets the level of criminality or not.

[RiverDog]

That means that Russell's organization is spending nearly 3 times more than the average charitable organization on operating expenses.

3 x 37% = 111% so it's not likely he's meeting that mark. And embezzlement is a bit of a stretch as well. I think what he's doing is overpaying people within his circle with charity funds, which smells just as bad whether it meets the level of criminality or not.

63% of the average charitable organization donations goes to the stated cause. According to the link in this thread, in 2020, Russell's organization was at 21.3%. 3 times 21.3 is 63.9, so as I said, it's nearly 3 times.

I agree that it's not embezzlement and probably doesn't meet the threshold of a criminal act. But as you indicated, it is at the very least highly unethical and most likely in violation of IRS regulations that govern nonprofits.

Russell almost certainly didn't have anything to do with the day-to-day management of his charity, but he is the president of it and as such bears at least some of the responsibility. It's sure been a bad 6 months for Team 3, hasn't it?

[c_hawkbob]

63% of the average charitable organization donations goes to the stated cause. According to the link in this thread, in 2020, Russell's organization was at 21.3%. 3 times 21.3 is 63.9, so as I said, it's nearly 3 times.

No, that's one third of, not three times.

[RiverDog]

63% of the average charitable organization donations goes to the stated cause. According to the link in this thread, in 2020, Russell's organization was at 21.3%. 3 times 21.3 is 63.9, so as I said, it's nearly 3 times.

No, that's one third of, not three times.

If you want to be that picky, then have it your way. It does not diminish the effect of what I said one iota.

[Hawktawk]

It’s a bad look . As bad a piece of publicity as anything that’s come out . Mike Salk expressed some sympathy for “tragic figure “ Wilson after this last one . Can it get any worse ?

[RiverDog]

It’s a bad look . As bad a piece of publicity as anything that’s come out . Mike Salk expressed some sympathy for “tragic figure “ Wilson after this last one . Can it get any worse ?

When it rains, it pours.

At some point, we have to be concerned about Russell's emotional wellbeing. I'm sure he established that charity with the best of intentions, now it's being revealed as a vehicle to scratch the backs of his cronies. The people he trusted to run it sure let him down.

[Hawktawk]

It would be interesting to see what some other celebrities charities look like . I recall being confronted with charitable giving as being proof Russ isn’t the least bit disengenuous in his dealings .
My point then and now is that many pro athletes are encouraged by their managers to start charities . It’s an easy way to give back to the community and it’s good PR until something like this happens . Even people who administer a charity must be paid . If revenues drop they need paid . In the case of Trump and his kids they were physically writing checks for personal items including a full size mural of Tebow and also himself for Don . There’s no suggestion of this happening here , just overpaying employees without oversight . Russ should focus on football anyway next couple of years . Stump for charity all you want but get your name off this and all the other off field stuff .

[NorthHawk]

I had a class in the early '80s and the MBA that was teaching it was a long time CPA and he stressed that you never mix business (money) with family or friends because it changes people.
He had seen very wealthy close knit families fall apart over just a few thousand dollars and long time friendships destroyed for the same.
Maybe Russell was/is too trusting of those around him handling his charities as he doesn't strike me as the type who would gravitate toward the seemy side of charitable work.
But you never know, I guess.

[RiverDog]

Stump for charity all you want but get your name off this and all the other off field stuff.

Lots of NFL players sponsor charities. But if anyone is going to put their name on it as president, they need to do a little homework and get an idea how things should work, and it wouldn't have taken very much effort. A one hour visit with a tax consultant that specializes in nonprofits would be all that it takes to get a general idea of how the business should operate, like how to pay employees.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Math hammer time:

_________________To Recipients________To the Charity Operating Costs

U.S. Avg ____________63%_____________________37%
R. Wilson___________21.3%____________________78.7%

So, as a percentage of donations, Wilson is spending a little over double what the average US charity spends on operating costs (or the average US charity spends half of what he does), and the average US charity sends 3 times more of their donations to the charity recipients as Wilson does (or he sends 1/3 of what they do).

Let's say he got down to 40% and 60%; he be sending 2/3 to his recipients compared to the US avg while spending 1.62 times (or 62% more than) the US average.

It isn't a good look for him, regardless, but, as others have stated, he won't be the first person of wealth to have his entourage misspend under his umbrella. Pretty Wilson has the equivalent of Elvis' Memphis Mofia. I would be shocked to find he's the one directing his charity administrators to take such high fees.

[RiverDog]

Math hammer time:

_________________To Recipients________To the Charity Operating Costs

U.S. Avg ____________63%_____________________37%
R. Wilson___________21.3%____________________78.7%

So, as a percentage of donations, Wilson is spending a little over double what the average US charity spends on operating costs (or the average US charity spends half of what he does), and the average US charity sends 3 times more of their donations to the charity recipients as Wilson does (or he sends 1/3 of what they do).

Let's say he got down to 40% and 60%; he be sending 2/3 to his recipients compared to the US avg while spending 1.62 times (or 62% more than) the US average.

It isn't a good look for him, regardless, but, as others have stated, he won't be the first person of wealth to have his entourage misspend under his umbrella. Pretty Wilson has the equivalent of Elvis' Memphis Mofia. I would be shocked to find he's the one directing his charity administrators to take such high fees.

Thanks for the homemade graphics on the recipient benefits vs. operating costs.

Team 3 released a statement regarding this scandal:

Former Seattle Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson's Why Not You Foundation released a statement praising its accomplishments following a USA TODAY investigation that alleges that less than half the money it raises goes to charity.

According to the statement, the foundation has delivered more than $13 million that benefits "education, pediatric cancer research and hunger prevention." One of the highlights is the Why Not You Academy, which opened in 2020 despite the COVID-19 pandemic.

The "Why Not You Foundation has been a generous partner and raised over $700,000 to support launching the school and another $1 million committed for 2023," academy CEO Scott Canfield said as part of the statement. "The positive impact we are making in the community would not be possible without the steadfast support and commitment of the Why Not You Foundation."

Between 2014 and 2021, less than half of the foundation's revenue has gone toward services in five of eight of those years, according to the Washington Secretary of State.

In 2021, for example, the foundation's revenue was $1.7 million, while $365,147 was spent on services. Another $1.4 million was used for expenses. That means just 25% went to program services.

In 2019, $612,387 went to services, while $319,008 went to salaries and other employee compensation, according to tax return documents. In total, the foundation's expenses in 2019 were almost $1.6 million.

In the statement from the foundation, leadership states its partnership with Seattle Children's and Safeway Albertsons continued, despite the COVID-19 pandemic. Citing a statement from Seattle Children's the partnership has led to more than $10 million in donations. Ciara and Russell Wilson have been "compassionate visitors to our patients and families in the hospital," the statement reads.

https://www.9news.com/article/sports/nf ... 6af837774f

The full statement is here: https://whynotyoufdn.org/ It's Interesting that they don't say a damn thing about the issues raised in the USA Today article.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Figure they just state the good they have done. Of course that doesn't mean they did it right. I could accept $100 million in donations and only payout $20 million to services. As long as I only tell the press I gave out $20 million to support X cause, it looks like I did something very good. Not super impressed with this statement.

[RiverDog]

Figure they just state the good they have done. Of course that doesn't mean they did it right. I could accept $100 million in donations and only payout $20 million to services. As long as I only tell the press I gave out $20 million to support X cause, it looks like I did something very good. Not super impressed with this statement.

Yeah, that wasn't a response, it was an advertisement and, in my view, did more harm than good. Their complete ignorance of what was said in the article and not giving even the slightest explanation or objection to the information presented in it is one of those silence means approval sort of things. If it weren't true or was misinterpreted, they'd be yelling their fool heads off.