49ers Approved writers list Kaepernick's offseason?

[Marvin49]

^^^ I assume the nature of these objections of convenience are in the spirit of a conspiracy theory.

Not at all. No conspiracy.

The Cohns and Kawakami made a career on having a negative take on almost everything. That's just who they are. They get more mouseclicks for saying something controversial than just reporting straight up. Reporters like them exist in every market in the US. The only thing that makes them unique to me is that they write about the 49ers.

Skip Bayless used to work in the Bay Area. He covered the 49ers. These guys filled the vacuum of negativity when he left.

There are tons of writers here who have had negative remarks about the 49ers (like say Ann Killion in print and Damon Bruce on the air), but I read and listen to them all the time because I trust that they actually believe what they are writing/saying and not just taking an angle for more mouse clicks.

Its really not complicated. I'm SURE there are writers or radio personalities like this in Seattle. You just can't make the correlation because you aren't in THIS market.

 

[Marvin49]

Cohn, once again, reported the truth... It just happens to be the total opposite of what Niner fans wanted to hear, so Cohn is the worst reporter ever! Like I said before, the truth hurts and Niner fans can't handle the truth when it does.

Dude...I've been on this site for what...two or three years? I've ALWAYS said I can't stand Cohn and that he's a hack. Is he right sometimes? Sure...a broken clock is right 2 times a day.

The reason I don't read the Cohns is that they are ALWAYS negative and take the worst possible angle. Could they be right sometimes? Sure they could...but if I say all day that its 6 O'clock I'm bound to be right twice a day.

As for this article in particular...he's pretty much writing it to support his original negative article he wrote when Kap chose Warner to work with in the first place. Jeff Garcia also wanted to tutor Kap so in Cohn style he pretty much roasted Kap for choosing Warner when Garcia was the "obvious" pick.

Shocker. Now he reports that Warners time was wasted on Kap. Well of COURSE that's what he's saying. LOL.

Could he be right? Sure.

Doesn't mean I'm gonna lend any weight to anything he says.

BTW...trying to find the tweet, but even the players know it.

Anthony Davis said something to the effect of "My mailman has more qualifications for a press pass than this guy #stopcohn"

 

[Marvin49]

I'm tellin ya. The Cohns are total hacks.

His pop Lowell couldn't stand Harbaugh till the day he was let go. Then Jed and Baalke because the villain and poor Harbaugh was the victim.

SOOOOOOO transparent. I have no prob with negative takes if they are well thought out. I do have a problem with negative takes that are negative for no other reason than to get more mouse clicks. That's all they are.

Harbaugh was a prick and most in the media didn't like the guy, but he was winning. Jed and Baalke getting rid of a winning coach and bringing in what they brought in does seem pretty stupid to everyone outside of Santa Clara. Can you kind of see why Lowell wouldn't like Harbaugh and still think it was stupid for Jed and Baalke to run him out of town? Is it really that difficult for you?

Not at all...but you are really speaking of that which you do not know.

Lowell HATED Harbaugh. THE SECOND he was gone Harbaugh was the victim. You'd have to see him on TV to see it. Its freakin' hilarious.

Its pretty much just needing a new whipping boy to complain about. If you ever watch 49er press conferences and you hear a super annoying voice trying to "teach" the guy they are interviewing something, that's Lowell. I think Jeds reaction was something to the effect of "well thank you Lowell" after Lowell pretty much called him a bad owner for tweeting an apology to fans after the thanksgiving game.

This is really fun BTW. If ANY of you guys had any clue about the guy you are defending you'd throw up in your mouth. LOL.

 

[Marvin49]

As someone who has seen the ugly side of team journalism (Dave Pearson is a jerk) let me just let you in on a little secret.

Very few beat reporters are truly impartial. Team access is more or less granted on a reporter's willingness to pump up the team. If you start being too critical too consistently, you will find yourself officially black-balled out of job.

The Seahawks do this as much as the 49er's, and as a result you find pretty much the same stories from the same perspectives being written by different hands, and it doesn't much matter whether you are reading the Everett Herald or the Tacoma News Tribune. They are a little better than the official Seahawks reports, but not by much.

I'm not a fan at all of Art Thiel, but there is a reason he is writing from the outside these days, instead of for one of the major Seattle news outlets. His consistent negativity got him booted. I don't know that for sure, but I can pretty much guarantee it.

I guess the point is two-fold. First, 49ers fans should listen to the few dissenting voices. Likely they are speaking closer to the truth than the beat reporters who are glorified contractors for the franchise. Secondly, Seahawks fans need to recognize that our "reporters" are just as much shills for the team as the Niner's "approved list" is.

And yeah, Dave Pearson is an overbearing controlling jerk.

I hear ya....but the "approved list" is EVERYONE but the three guys I mentioned. It aint a "truth hurts" kinda thing because there are many people who say some of the same things...Ann Killion for example. I don't always agree with Ann, but I respect her.

As for Matt Maiocco and Barrows...I read them no t because I ma looking for a rosy outlook, but because all they report are FACTS. No spin one way or the other. "Kap practiced". "Bowman intercepted a pass". Those are the things they report. No spin.

Dissenting voices? Dude...we got PLENTY of those all over the area...especially now. You will note that even though the opinions of the team has changed, the "approved list" has not. Peeps keep harping on Niner fans not wanting to read them because they are preaching truth or something. If you guys had any idea what you were defending, it would turn your stomach. Feel free to read and enjoy their columns as I'm sure there will always be plenty to read from them that you'd enjoy.

Just don't tell us that WE are being unreasonable. LOL. You have no idea.

The biggest thing to note tho when you read their writing is how much they take personally when a player says something about them when they stand on their soapbox preaching. To them, they think they can say anything they want and the players who respond get attacked.

 

[Popeyejones]

I really don't see a problem with that article at all. The Globe did actually report that Kaepernick wanted a lot of money. Kaepernick did go on a bunch of shows prior to the superbowl and said what that guy reported. It was his opinion that Kaepernick was saying one thing publicly while his agent was doing just the opposite...which was true. Heaven forbid a reporter for not believng a player. I think you were just butt hurt because the reporter didn't blow smoke up your ass and spew rainbows and lollipops.

Um, I have to conclude you're just messing with me. The following sincerely isn't a backhanded compliment: you're too smart to actually be serious.

Kaepernick wanted a deal in the neighborhood of 18 APY and also claimed to want to structure it in a team friendly way.

That's the premise for the column. We absolutely agree. We can go from there.

First though let's take a brief intermission to acknowledge that these two things ended up being EXACTLY what Kaepernick did, and he took a ton of crap in the media for signing some a team friendly deal. We already know the outcome. Kaepernick was sincere and put his contract where his mouth was on both points. There's no way around that.

Okay, back to regular programming:

You're a columnist and you've got two seemingly paradoxical facts you want to work with: 1) C.K. wants a lot of money (which TBF was basically his generally accepted rate at the time), and 2) C.K. claims to not want to destroy the team's salary cap.

You can write one of two columns:

COLUMN A:

These two things are introduced as seemingly paradoxical.

The next step is to investigate if they are by looking at how all the other big money QB contracts are structured and seeing if it's possible do have the former while achieving the later.

If it is possible based on existing deals, you share how with your readers and suggest that if Kap is sincere there's a good chance that the nuts and bolts of the deal will incorporate some of those elements, and if they don't he may not be sincere on the second point.

If it doesn't seem possible based on existing deals you ask around about how it could be possible, and share back with your readers tthe wrinkles it could take to make it work. Maybe you come across salary de-escalators for anything less than elite individual or team performance as a way to pump more money back into other positions (what Kaepernick did), or something else, but you explain how it COULD be possible if it is, or conclude that it's basically impossible and that while Kaepernick is "saying" the right thing chances are he'll end up like all the other highly paid QBs and tying his team's hands at other positions.

Not a bad column, huh?


COLUMN B:

These two things are introduced as seemingly paradoxical.

Rather than doing ANY of the legwork of Column A, you take this seeming paradox and use it write:

* "if Kaepernick doesn’t get that kind of dough, he says he’ll go back to kindergarten and knock over his blocks and hold his breath until he turns blue. (even though you have to walk this back because it's idiotic in the next sentence).

*You take Kaepernick saying he won't hold out as he'll "negotiate after next season instead of settling for what he considers a contract unworthy of his eminence." (Saying he'll be in camp and won't hold out for a new deal is a sign of his entitlement? Huh?)

* You say "Someone should slap a Boston cream pie in Kaepernick’s smug face."

*You conclude that this seeming paradox is really him saying “To hell with the team. I want mine,” and close with "There are words to describe his position starting with “hypocrite” and ending with “phony.” You can fill in words in between."


Look, that Cohn could hot have been more wrong about any of this is almost even beside the point. The point is that he was even wildly uninformative while doing so.

If you say you prefer Column B to Column A, quite frankly, I don't believe you.

You and I would be making fun of Column B together if some fool wrote it as a post on this board.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

In general, journalism-wise, think of a pie graph. Each slice represents a niche in a given media market. A generation ago there were 5 or 6 wedges; now there's 50 or 60.

Some of the old-timers, the John Claytons, have been on the NFL beat since before the 24-hour news cycle. It's hard to believe, but cable only made that a thing in the past 30 years. More coverage, more competitive media voices = more niches. Fewer reporters can just "cover a team" much less a whole division these days. They have to carve a niche and fill a more specific role.

With the advent of blogs and message boards in the past 10 years, the niches have become even smaller and more specialized out of necessity. The Seahawks Draft Blog is a great example among many. A couple decades ago, two or three people provided all the coverage for a team from draft to season's final down. There was very little offseason chatter, aside from trades, signings, cuts, firings, and hirings.

So we now have a media landscape wherein anyone determined to make a living covering sports needs to either develop a specific tone, approach, or angle... or they need friends in influential places. The latter is my running theory for Terry Blount.

Don't put it past a lot of the more polarizing figures to be calculating the balance between clever troll and professional writer, radio, or TV host. Being the constant counterpoint, the fodder for opposing fans' comment sections, is a newish piece of the pie. As was mentioned by others, some pros are merely glorified message board posters.

At the very least, all media people are aware of their public image and will in some way foster that toward an identity that will garner them an audience. They will develop their niche.

 

[Jville]

^^^ Nice. It is not as if there is one monolithic audience. Authors are free to chose a target audience.

If some have a problem with the work of a specific 49er coverage that gets under their skin, that is their hangup and self imposed liability. To my knowledge no self appointed critic (excludes the founders, owner and administrators) has any censorship authority at seahawks.net

The obvious value in these creative, convoluted and presumptive responses towards a presumed defending of implied 49er honor lies in the laughter it generates. There clearly is a continuing interest in such entertainment. And fortunately, most here fell at liberty to post from multiple sources representing multiple views .... including those sources that generate so much reactionary entertainment.

 

[Marvin49]

In general, journalism-wise, think of a pie graph. Each slice represents a niche in a given media market. A generation ago there were 5 or 6 wedges; now there's 50 or 60.

Some of the old-timers, the John Claytons, have been on the NFL beat since before the 24-hour news cycle. It's hard to believe, but cable only made that a thing in the past 30 years. More coverage, more competitive media voices = more niches. Fewer reporters can just "cover a team" much less a whole division these days. They have to carve a niche and fill a more specific role.

With the advent of blogs and message boards in the past 10 years, the niches have become even smaller and more specialized out of necessity. The Seahawks Draft Blog is a great example among many. A couple decades ago, two or three people provided all the coverage for a team from draft to season's final down. There was very little offseason chatter, aside from trades, signings, cuts, firings, and hirings.

So we now have a media landscape wherein anyone determined to make a living covering sports needs to either develop a specific tone, approach, or angle... or they need friends in influential places. The latter is my running theory for Terry Blount.

Don't put it past a lot of the more polarizing figures to be calculating the balance between clever troll and professional writer, radio, or TV host. Being the constant counterpoint, the fodder for opposing fans' comment sections, is a newish piece of the pie. As was mentioned by others, some pros are merely glorified message board posters.

At the very least, all media people are aware of their public image and will in some way foster that toward an identity that will garner them an audience. They will develop their niche.

Nice Post.

Especially agree with the bolded part. That's kinda what I've been trying to say. Lowell Cohn has been that "grumpy old man" writer in the Bay Area for a LONG time. His son is a less talented version of Lowell and I think got the job based on his fathers name.

Lowell is annoying and I can't stand his entire "the athletes owe me something because I'm a reporter" attitude...but Grant is a god-awful. Just completely unworthy reading on any topic and EASILY offended when anyone responds to what he says, athletes and posters alike.

Kawakami is a different beast. My biggest problem with Tim is not so much that he's negative, tho he often is...it's that he really takes small mounts of data and concocts huge dramatic stories based on them and then passes them off as fact. Its just fiction. It aint real. True, he was right in many ways on Harbaugh/York/Baalke, but he also wrote that Aldon would never play another down as a 49er and then grilled Harbaugh on the topic when he was wrong.

What this is all about isn't just finding positive things to read about the team. Its about reading CREDIBLE writers that are worth investing the time to read their words. The Cohns and Kawakami have proven time and time again that they aren't credible. Peeps here say "well they were right this time" but its like me saying "The Seahawks will suck next year" simply because I want it to be true and then when something happen to MAKE that come true (injury or whatever) then claiming that I should always be listened too because I was right about my WISH coming true, not any real prediction

 

[Marvin49]

^^^ Nice. It is not as if there is one monolithic audience. Authors are free to chose a target audience.

If some have a problem with the work of a specific 49er coverage that gets under their skin, that is their hangup and self imposed liability. To my knowledge no self appointed critic (excludes the founders, owner and administrators) has any censorship authority at seahawks.net

The obvious value in these creative, convoluted and presumptive responses towards a presumed defending of implied 49er honor lies in the laughter it generates. There clearly is a continuing interest in such entertainment. And fortunately, most here fell at liberty to post from multiple sources representing multiple views .... including those sources that generate so much reactionary entertainment.

...and there ya go again.

Ya keep insisting that 49er fans don't read the Cohns because they don't want to read differing opinion. That's horsepucky.

Its because there is nothing to be gained from a knowledge perspective by reading anything they write because I already know what I'm going to see when I get there. There is nothing WORTH reading. There is no opinion informed enough to be worth my time reading it.

I read all sorts of opinions both positive and negative. I listen to Damn Bruce every single day even though he's started calling the 49ers the 39ers and absolutely hates everything about Levis Stadium. The difference is that while I might disagree with him, I know he's actually coming from a somewhat informed place to form that opinion and isn't all butt-hurt because the coach or a player didn't respect him the way he thinks he is supposed to be respected.

You should have read the stuff Ann Killion wrote about York after the Ray McDonald situation.

Both Ann Killion and Lowell Cohn BTW tried to destroy Damn Bruces career over his supposedly taking pictures of the wives of Giant players and after Bruce was rehired Cohn wrote a huge article slamming 95.7 the Game for even hiring him.

 

[Jville]

^^^ Nice. It is not as if there is one monolithic audience. Authors are free to chose a target audience.

If some have a problem with the work of a specific 49er coverage that gets under their skin, that is their hangup and self imposed liability. To my knowledge no self appointed critic (excludes the founders, owner and administrators) has any censorship authority at seahawks.net

The obvious value in these creative, convoluted and presumptive responses towards a presumed defending of implied 49er honor lies in the laughter it generates. There clearly is a continuing interest in such entertainment. And fortunately, most here fell at liberty to post from multiple sources representing multiple views .... including those sources that generate so much reactionary entertainment.

...and there ya go again.

Ya keep insisting that 49er fans don't read the Cohns because they don't want to read differing opinion. That's horsepucky.

Its because there is nothing to be gained from a knowledge perspective by reading anything they write because I already know what I'm going to see when I get there. There is nothing WORTH reading. There is no opinion informed enough to be worth my time reading it.

I read all sorts of opinions both positive and negative. I listen to Damn Bruce every single day even though he's started calling the 49ers the 39ers and absolutely hates everything about Levis Stadium. The difference is that while I might disagree with him, I know he's actually coming from a somewhat informed place to form that opinion and isn't all butt-hurt because the coach or a player didn't respect him the way he thinks he is supposed to be respected.

You should have read the stuff Ann Killion wrote about York after the Ray McDonald situation.

Both Ann Killion and Lowell Cohn BTW tried to destroy Damn Bruces career over his supposedly taking pictures of the wives of Giant players and after Bruce was rehired Cohn wrote a huge article slamming 95.7 the Game for even hiring him.

Reactionary behavior is hilarious.

 

[Marvin49]

^^^ Nice. It is not as if there is one monolithic audience. Authors are free to chose a target audience.

If some have a problem with the work of a specific 49er coverage that gets under their skin, that is their hangup and self imposed liability. To my knowledge no self appointed critic (excludes the founders, owner and administrators) has any censorship authority at seahawks.net

The obvious value in these creative, convoluted and presumptive responses towards a presumed defending of implied 49er honor lies in the laughter it generates. There clearly is a continuing interest in such entertainment. And fortunately, most here fell at liberty to post from multiple sources representing multiple views .... including those sources that generate so much reactionary entertainment.

...and there ya go again.

Ya keep insisting that 49er fans don't read the Cohns because they don't want to read differing opinion. That's horsepucky.

Its because there is nothing to be gained from a knowledge perspective by reading anything they write because I already know what I'm going to see when I get there. There is nothing WORTH reading. There is no opinion informed enough to be worth my time reading it.

I read all sorts of opinions both positive and negative. I listen to Damn Bruce every single day even though he's started calling the 49ers the 39ers and absolutely hates everything about Levis Stadium. The difference is that while I might disagree with him, I know he's actually coming from a somewhat informed place to form that opinion and isn't all butt-hurt because the coach or a player didn't respect him the way he thinks he is supposed to be respected.

You should have read the stuff Ann Killion wrote about York after the Ray McDonald situation.

Both Ann Killion and Lowell Cohn BTW tried to destroy Damn Bruces career over his supposedly taking pictures of the wives of Giant players and after Bruce was rehired Cohn wrote a huge article slamming 95.7 the Game for even hiring him.

Reactionary behavior is hilarious.

So is total BS when peeps speak of what they do not know and criticize others for being critical on topics they DO know.

Its really comical.

I don't know any Seattle writers or radio hosts, but if there were one that were totally over the top critical and you told me that I certainly wouldn't be trying to sell you on the fact that the writer is in fact just fine and you were the issue. I'd trust that YOU know the market better than I do. I wouldn't try to paint a picture that that guy was the one guy who was willing to tell the TRUTH to you Seattle fans.

On top of that ALL NINER FANS here are saying the EXACT same thing I am. What do you think is more likely: MAYBE we know what we are talking about, or that you guys are just cool enough to figure out what we cannot and we just want to put our heads in the sand.

Wait...don't answer that. I already know the answer.

 

[Jville]

^^^ Nice. It is not as if there is one monolithic audience. Authors are free to chose a target audience.

If some have a problem with the work of a specific 49er coverage that gets under their skin, that is their hangup and self imposed liability. To my knowledge no self appointed critic (excludes the founders, owner and administrators) has any censorship authority at seahawks.net

The obvious value in these creative, convoluted and presumptive responses towards a presumed defending of implied 49er honor lies in the laughter it generates. There clearly is a continuing interest in such entertainment. And fortunately, most here fell at liberty to post from multiple sources representing multiple views .... including those sources that generate so much reactionary entertainment.

...and there ya go again.

Ya keep insisting that 49er fans don't read the Cohns because they don't want to read differing opinion. That's horsepucky.

Its because there is nothing to be gained from a knowledge perspective by reading anything they write because I already know what I'm going to see when I get there. There is nothing WORTH reading. There is no opinion informed enough to be worth my time reading it.

I read all sorts of opinions both positive and negative. I listen to Damn Bruce every single day even though he's started calling the 49ers the 39ers and absolutely hates everything about Levis Stadium. The difference is that while I might disagree with him, I know he's actually coming from a somewhat informed place to form that opinion and isn't all butt-hurt because the coach or a player didn't respect him the way he thinks he is supposed to be respected.

You should have read the stuff Ann Killion wrote about York after the Ray McDonald situation.

Both Ann Killion and Lowell Cohn BTW tried to destroy Damn Bruces career over his supposedly taking pictures of the wives of Giant players and after Bruce was rehired Cohn wrote a huge article slamming 95.7 the Game for even hiring him.

Reactionary behavior is hilarious.

So is total BS when peeps speak of what they do not know and criticize others for being critical on topics they DO know.

O' Snap

 

[Popeyejones]

I couldn't help it lol

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a strong distaste for all things 9er. That article made me smile though. Then I took a gander on the forums and saw all the hype

"Kaep is the most dangerous QB in the league when given time"

Kaep is the 3rd best QB in the league, I'd like to see someone name 5 QB's better than him
(Wilson, Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Luck) for starters...... I don't see how the above poster couldn't see that....

Yeah, reading Grant Cohn is as dumb as reading the idiotic posts from true blue homers that you went and read next. They're opposite sides of the same coin. They both start with their conclusions and work back from there, and just keep hitting on that same thing over and over again no matter how ridiculous it is. They're equally valueless, IMO. If Grant Cohn wasn't born into a byline he'd be getting made fun of on a messageboard rather than in his own comments section.

Again though, I was sincere in saying I actually like the little rascal, just because he's such a try-hard and such a goof. For whatever reason I find Grant's mix of bravado and hackishness to be more entertaining than Kawakami's or his father's. Maybe it's just because he's younger, and unlike the other two, he's needy for validation while doing it in a way that's just kind of adorable and endearing. I'd guess Marvin and I probably differ on this, though.

But in all actuality it really is hard for QB's to change something they have done their whole life. Especially when live practice starts. I guess we will see... I have to hope that he is the same player as before and that he didn't get better.

Oh yeah, absolutely agreed on the first point, although we obviously disagree in our hopes. :th2thumbs:

 

[Marvin49]

I couldn't help it lol

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a strong distaste for all things 9er. That article made me smile though. Then I took a gander on the forums and saw all the hype

"Kaep is the most dangerous QB in the league when given time"

Kaep is the 3rd best QB in the league, I'd like to see someone name 5 QB's better than him
(Wilson, Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Luck) for starters...... I don't see how the above poster couldn't see that....

Yeah, reading Grant Cohn is as dumb as reading the idiotic posts from true blue homers that you went and read next. They're opposite sides of the same coin. They both start with their conclusions and work back from there, and just keep hitting on that same thing over and over again no matter how ridiculous it is. They're equally valueless, IMO. If Grant Cohn wasn't born into a byline he'd be getting made fun of on a messageboard rather than in his own comments section.

Again though, I was sincere in saying I actually like the little rascal, just because he's such a try-hard and such a goof. For whatever reason I find Grant's mix of bravado and hackishness to be more entertaining than Kawakami's or his father's. Maybe it's just because he's younger, and unlike the other two, he's needy for validation while doing it in a way that's just kind of adorable and endearing. I'd guess Marvin and I probably differ on this, though.

But in all actuality it really is hard for QB's to change something they have done their whole life. Especially when live practice starts. I guess we will see... I have to hope that he is the same player as before and that he didn't get better.

Oh yeah, absolutely agreed on the first point, although we obviously disagree in our hopes. :th2thumbs:

Yup.

I think we are seeing the exact same behavior though and just respond to it differently. To me, he's just a clueless hack striving to be important and as famous as his father, but the only thing he's good for is uninformed babble.

 

[hawknation2015]

I couldn't help it lol

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a strong distaste for all things 9er. That article made me smile though. Then I took a gander on the forums and saw all the hype

"Kaep is the most dangerous QB in the league when given time"

Kaep is the 3rd best QB in the league, I'd like to see someone name 5 QB's better than him
(Wilson, Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Luck) for starters...... I don't see how the above poster couldn't see that....

Yeah, reading Grant Cohn is as dumb as reading the idiotic posts from true blue homers that you went and read next. They're opposite sides of the same coin. They both start with their conclusions and work back from there, and just keep hitting on that same thing over and over again no matter how ridiculous it is. They're equally valueless, IMO. If Grant Cohn wasn't born into a byline he'd be getting made fun of on a messageboard rather than in his own comments section.

Again though, I was sincere in saying I actually like the little rascal, just because he's such a try-hard and such a goof. For whatever reason I find Grant's mix of bravado and hackishness to be more entertaining than Kawakami's or his father's. Maybe it's just because he's younger, and unlike the other two, he's needy for validation while doing it in a way that's just kind of adorable and endearing. I'd guess Marvin and I probably differ on this, though.

But in all actuality it really is hard for QB's to change something they have done their whole life. Especially when live practice starts. I guess we will see... I have to hope that he is the same player as before and that he didn't get better.

Oh yeah, absolutely agreed on the first point, although we obviously disagree in our hopes. :th2thumbs:

Yup.

I think we are seeing the exact same behavior though and just respond to it differently. To me, he's just a clueless hack striving to be important and as famous as his father, but the only thing he's good for is uninformed babble.

Once again, you are focusing too much on the character of the speaker without addressing the validity of his argument.

Attempting to radically alter a QB's throwing mechanics is almost always a controversial move. That is a perfectly reasonable argument to make. We will just have to wait and see how it pans out in this case, i.e. whether Kaepernick can stick with it to improve his accuracy or whether it will lead to even more overthinking on his part.

His greatest challenge, IMO, has always been the mental side, especially at the end of games, not his unorthodox throwing mechanics.

 

[Marvin49]

I couldn't help it lol

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a strong distaste for all things 9er. That article made me smile though. Then I took a gander on the forums and saw all the hype

"Kaep is the most dangerous QB in the league when given time"

Kaep is the 3rd best QB in the league, I'd like to see someone name 5 QB's better than him
(Wilson, Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Luck) for starters...... I don't see how the above poster couldn't see that....

Yeah, reading Grant Cohn is as dumb as reading the idiotic posts from true blue homers that you went and read next. They're opposite sides of the same coin. They both start with their conclusions and work back from there, and just keep hitting on that same thing over and over again no matter how ridiculous it is. They're equally valueless, IMO. If Grant Cohn wasn't born into a byline he'd be getting made fun of on a messageboard rather than in his own comments section.

Again though, I was sincere in saying I actually like the little rascal, just because he's such a try-hard and such a goof. For whatever reason I find Grant's mix of bravado and hackishness to be more entertaining than Kawakami's or his father's. Maybe it's just because he's younger, and unlike the other two, he's needy for validation while doing it in a way that's just kind of adorable and endearing. I'd guess Marvin and I probably differ on this, though.

But in all actuality it really is hard for QB's to change something they have done their whole life. Especially when live practice starts. I guess we will see... I have to hope that he is the same player as before and that he didn't get better.

Oh yeah, absolutely agreed on the first point, although we obviously disagree in our hopes. :th2thumbs:

Yup.

I think we are seeing the exact same behavior though and just respond to it differently. To me, he's just a clueless hack striving to be important and as famous as his father, but the only thing he's good for is uninformed babble.

Once again, you are focusing too much on the character of the speaker without addressing the validity of his argument.

Attempting to radically alter a QB's throwing mechanics is almost always a controversial move. That is a perfectly reasonable argument to make. We will just have to wait and see how it pans out in this case, i.e. whether Kaepernick can stick with it to improve his accuracy or whether it will lead to even more overthinking on his part.

His greatest challenge, IMO, has always been the mental side, especially at the end of games, not his unorthodox throwing mechanics.

...and once again you are missing the fact that I'm not dismissing that he might be correct and stating that I don't value his opinion in the first place. If someone else were saying it, I'd lend it more credence.

If I tell you Wilson is too short to play QB and that the league has figured out how to rush him by slow rushing and getting their hands in the air, do you HAVE to lend my opinion any credence? Of course not. You don't value my opinion regardless of what it is.

 

[Jville]

On top of that ALL NINER FANS here are saying the EXACT same thing I am.

Delusions of mind control perhaps?

Its should be mentioned that quoted statement is false.

There are plenty of niner posters who express independent thoughts and opinions.

 

[Marvin49]

On top of that ALL NINER FANS here are saying the EXACT same thing I am.

Delusions of mind control perhaps?

Its should be mentioned that quoted statement is false.

There are plenty of niner posters who express independent thoughts and opinions.

Sigh.

Of course there are. I'm referring to my opinion on the Cohns and referring the the Niner posters on this board.

 

[hawknation2015]

I think we are seeing the exact same behavior though and just respond to it differently. To me, he's just a clueless hack striving to be important and as famous as his father, but the only thing he's good for is uninformed babble.

Once again, you are focusing too much on the character of the speaker without addressing the validity of his argument.

Attempting to radically alter a QB's throwing mechanics is almost always a controversial move. That is a perfectly reasonable argument to make. We will just have to wait and see how it pans out in this case, i.e. whether Kaepernick can stick with it to improve his accuracy or whether it will lead to even more overthinking on his part.

His greatest challenge, IMO, has always been the mental side, especially at the end of games, not his unorthodox throwing mechanics.

...and once again you are missing the fact that I'm not dismissing that he might be correct and stating that I don't value his opinion in the first place. If someone else were saying it, I'd lend it more credence.

If I tell you Wilson is too short to play QB and that the league has figured out how to rush him by slow rushing and getting their hands in the air, do you HAVE to lend my opinion any credence? Of course not. You don't value my opinion regardless of what it is.

Actually, you just confirmed exactly what I said.

If you made that claim, I would happily refute the substance of it by pointing out that Wilson is one of the league's most effective passers under pressure. He faced pressure a league-high 44.9% of the time last season, yet managed a 95 QB rating. While being short is a disadvantage, Wilson has managed to overcome it, becoming the league's premier passer on the run and giving himself a league-high 3.18 seconds per pass attempt. The league has "figured it out" en route to two consecutive NFC titles and Super Bowls, while Wilson has maintained the 2nd best career QB rating in NFL history.

We know you don't like the author; that doesn't mean you should refrain from discussing the substance of his arguments. Do you believe reforming Kaepernick's throwing mechanics was wise? Do you think it will prove to be successful? That's what the discussion is really about.

 

[Popeyejones]

Once again, you are focusing too much on the character of the speaker without addressing the validity of his argument.

Attempting to radically alter a QB's throwing mechanics is almost always a controversial move. That is a perfectly reasonable argument to make. We will just have to wait and see how it pans out in this case, i.e. whether Kaepernick can stick with it to improve his accuracy or whether it will lead to even more overthinking on his part.

Umm, just as a point of clarification, who precisely has disagreed with the part of Grant Cohn's argument that that you're highlighting? Name names. In my very first post in this thread I AGREED with that part of his argument. :lol:

I objected to two things:

1) him selectively deleting out the middle of the quote as it directly contradicted an argument he was trying to make about there being dissension within the org about Kap attending (it was actually the EXACT opposite), and furthermore not linking to the quote (as is the convention) to cover his tracks.

2) him, once again, in his own comments section dramatically walking back a claim which he used to support his overall argument in the column.

How are these things not fundamentally related to the validity of his argument?

His character is only called into question because this type of stuff is totally routine with him; he takes a trivial and non-objectionable observation like the difficulty QBs have in changing their mechanics and BSs his way into chicken little hysteria.

Again, if a writer spends an entire off-season having histrionic fits about a QB not working with a QB coach in the off-season and then spends the next off-season having histrionic fits about a QB working with a QB coach in the off-season, literally ANYBODY who regularly reads him would draw his character into question, even if they weren't well informed enough to know that he's selectively deleting from quotes to reach his end-goal, or walking back his own claims within a matter of hours.

That a QB changing his mechanics is a long process that might never bare fruit is a banal observation. If he simply wrote a column about that and took the time to research and talk about the history of it neither I nor Marvin would even remotely object to it (in fact, it would be pretty informative and good journalism!). The problem is that unlike a good writer who investigates his idea or even a "boring" beat reporter who just makes the observation, he guilds the lily with complete BS that's easily repudiated. It is behavior itself which begets the reputation.