Richard Sherman and Doug Baldwin mock NFL media policies and procedures

Joey007 said:

I bet he does know that. I appreciate him making a stand though and saying something that's likely on alot of NFL players minds.

Click to expand...

Richard Sherman is interested in progressing the cause of Richard Sherman. He's not making a stand for the greater good. He's making a stand for Richard Sherman.

As mentioned, if he truly feels that strongly about it, give up all of your endorsements. All he is doing is drawing attention to an issue and quietly benefitting in the background. That sir, is hypocritical.

This was perfect

Joey007 said:

I mean this guy was a 4.0 student at Stanford. This guy knows his facts and knows what he is doing when he trash talks towards another defender. I feel like he knows how other players minds work psychologically, and he knows how to get into their heads. I actually admire him for that, it's a very clever tactic.

Click to expand...

Sherman's Stanford grades are confidential. He received a BA in Communications and his grades have never been published. Sherman had a 3.9 GPA at Dominguez HS in Compton, CA. Those are great grades and I'm sure that wasn't the easiest environment to learn in but I don't think the curriculum is comparable to say Phillips Andover. He scored a 1060 on his second try on this SATs and scored a 24 on his Wonderlic. Thats a IQ of around 113. If we are in the measuring-of-intelligence-business, its tough to say. Hes a little above average. If we are in the business of judging someones intelligence by their academic credentials, he has done extremely well.

My point, the perception of Sherman being borderline-brilliant is far-fetched. I think he is smart, has charisma, knows how to manipulate the media, says dumb things every now and then and likes to be the center of attention- which is no different than that of hundreds of other NFL players.

ausbacker said:

A 4.0 standard student should know he's biting the hand that feeds him.

Click to expand...

Sherman works for the Seattle Seahawks, not for Roger Goodell.

Roger Goodell is not Sherman's employer. Paul Allen is. And Paul Allen by all intents and purposes is one of the good guy owners in the NFL. I would say behind Kraft, he might be the best owner in the NFL.

ausbacker you seem smart

hieroglyphics said:

Sherman works for the Seattle Seahawks, not for Roger Goodell.

Roger Goodell is not Sherman's employer. Paul Allen is. And Paul Allen by all intents and purposes is one of the good guy owners in the NFL. I would say behind Kraft, he might be the best owner in the NFL.

Click to expand...

My apologies. I didn't realise that the Seahawks were without sponsors or corporate support.

ausbacker said:

My apologies. I didn't realise that the Seahawks were without sponsors or corporate support.

Click to expand...

Is Sherman's salary on the books of the Seahawks or on the books of the NFL?

Damn you have a stick up your ass, you said he's biting the hand that feeds him, which is simply untrue. If he were to criticize Paul Allen that would be biting the hand that feeds him. Either way, he has job security, and what do you care if he criticizes the NFL.

Good stuff by them.

hieroglyphics said:

Is Sherman's salary on the books of the Seahawks or on the books of the NFL?

Damn you have a stick up your ass, you said he's biting the hand that feeds him, which is simply untrue. If he were to criticize Paul Allen that would be biting the hand that feeds him. Either way, he has job security, and what do you care if he criticizes the NFL.

Click to expand...

His salary comes from Paul Allen, Seahawks owner. The Seahawks play in the NFL. Without the NFL, there are no Seahawks and Richard Sherman doesn't get to criticise the industry that is going to make him a wealthy man.

Feel free to stand up against the big bad NFL if you like. I on the other hand, despite my acknowledgement of corporate greed, understand how the world operates. Evidently, Sherman has no problem mocking the industry that is feeding him.

So yes, Sherman is biting the hand that feeds him in the pursuit of media time.

hieroglyphics said:

Is Sherman's salary on the books of the Seahawks or on the books of the NFL?

Damn you have a stick up your ass, you said he's biting the hand that feeds him, which is simply untrue. If he were to criticize Paul Allen that would be biting the hand that feeds him. Either way, he has job security, and what do you care if he criticizes the NFL.

Click to expand...

Sherman's done nothing wrong or hypocritical, and he's certainly not biting the hand that feeds him.

They don't mind whoring themselves out for millions of dollars. Is there hypocrascy in the NFL, sure. But, you wanna take that check, play by the rules and oh by the way, your body will more than likely be used up when you are done. Bread and circus people, bread and circus. I miss the old NFL.....

alvinnf said:

They don't mind whoring themselves out for millions of dollars. Is there hypocrascy in the NFL, sure. But, you wanna take that check, play by the rules and oh by the way, your body will more than likely be used up when you are done. Bread and circus people, bread and circus. I miss the old NFL.....

Click to expand...

This feels like the point where Maximus Decimus Meridius needs to go on a "are you not entertained?" tirade.

Would you turn down the money to take a stand vs the NFL?

KA- said:

Would you turn down the money to take a stand vs the NFL?

Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how much you love your craft. I am sure most of the guys in the NFL love the game they play.

KA- said:

Would you turn down the money to take a stand vs the NFL?

Click to expand...

Me? No. I have no issue with the corporatisation of sport. After all, it is one of the many choices of entertainment available to people in a competing market.

For mine, the exposure has gone a little too far but it's necessary if the players collectively bargain for increasing salary caps to move with increasing revenues and market pressures such as inflation etc.

So no, I simply wouldn't bring it up in a public forum because sponsorship dollars are a necessity.

Wildo7 said:

ausbacker you seem smart

Click to expand...

Smart ass perhaps @Wildo7.

ausbacker said:

This feels like the point where Maximus Decimus Meridius needs to go on a "are you not entertained?" tirade.

Click to expand...

Well football really is modern day gladiators

Nevertheless, Sherman and Baldwin absolutely have a point that the idea of playing 2 games in 5 days is simply ridiculous if you pretend to care about player safety. Not to mention these Thursday games are most of the time crap games anyhow.

hieroglyphics said:

Nevertheless, Sherman and Baldwin absolutely have a point that the idea of playing 2 games in 5 days is simply ridiculous if you pretend to care about player safety. Not to mention these Thursday games are most of the time crap games anyhow.

Click to expand...

No doubt. For a league that trumpets player safety, their scheduling often conflicts with this directive.

It is an interesting one though. I don't mind Thursday Night Football (it's generally Friday Morning Football for me) as it's another game to watch but I acknowledge the difficult circumstance it must be for the players with a short turn around.

ausbacker, do you have a blog i can subscribe to?