Who deserves to be in the Ring of Honor?

[scutterhawk]

My friend I was not calling you out specifically when I chose the word butt hurt. Truly. There ARE some fans out there that I do believe are. I stand by that but apologize if some members thought I was taking aim at anyone in particular. I was not. I was just speaking generally.

Ah the 'Scattergun' approach....I LIKE IT!!

 

[Lagartixa]

Athletes being p*ssed off with the ownership and management of a franchise are about as common a phenomenon as a winter cold. Let's be real. Michael Jordan absolutely despised general manager Jerry Krause and made no secret of the fact. To this day he still holds grudges toward ownership and management of the Bulls for the perceived way he was treated. There's no shortage of such examples everywhere you turn.

Some are just a bit better at either hiding it, letting others speak for them, taking more passive aggressive shots through third party sources, or some other such tactic. But it's there. These are people of immense talent, oftentimes with mountain sized egos, and sensitive temperaments about how their talents are being perceived, treated, and compensated for.

I just can't take most of this stuff too seriously when it comes to evaluating their performance or respecting and appreciating what they did for me as a fan of the team. Michael Jordan (yeah I grew up in Chicago) was a complete ass of a human being in many ways. But the joy he brought to me as a fan of the team with his play...almost beyond compare.

Jordan didn't do it alone. Keep in mind that his teammate for all six titles was also one of the top 50 players of all time, basically the creator of the "point forward" concept/position, and possibly the greatest perimeter defender the NBA has ever seen.

And Jordan wasn't the one with the biggest or most-legitimate complaints about his compensation from the Bulls. I went to college in Chicago, and that's when I got into the NBA and went back to baseball, so I ended up a fan of the Bulls and White Sox. And I was just outraged in the '90s that Ozzie Guillen was being paid more by a Satan Jerry Reinsdorf operation to utterly suck on the field and hurt the chances of the White Sox winning a World Series (in the aughts he would do a great job as manager and help them win one, but that's a different story) than Scottie Pippen was being paid to be one of the greatest players in the NBA and help make the Bulls one of the best teams in the history of the NBA.

[Side note: if you're old enough to remember the first three-peat, you also know how good Horace Grant was and how much it hurt when he went to Orlando. And Rodman, because he wasn't a scorer and did weird things with his hair, was painfully underrated through most of his career - a great defender and possibly the greatest rebounder ever. And of course Phil Jackson was amazing. There were times, especially during the second-three-peat years, when it looked like the Bulls were playing a different game than every other team. And throughout Jackson's time there, it seemed like they always had the right guys on the floor at the right time. They were never asking a three-point specialist like Hodges or Kerr to defend a top player in a key moment. They never needed a defensive specialist to make a big shot at the end of a game. ]

ObSeahawks: as others have pointed out, a bunch of players have had major issues with the Seahawks and the "business side" of the team (and this goes for all teams in all pro sports). But as wrong as it would be to exclude HoFer Kenny Easley, despite him having cut ties to the Seahawks for a long time, it would be just as wrong to exclude players as important to the Seahawks' on-field success as Earl Thomas (the key cog that made the whole defense work, because he could cover such a huge area of the field that he allowed the linebackers and other DBs to line up and cover differently) for flipping off the sideline, Richard Sherman (a complete shutdown corner with unbelievable football smarts and understanding of the NFL rules) for speaking ill of the Seahawks after going to play for the Gold Diggers, Kam Chancellor (a hard hitter and a hybrid LB/DB around whom it was tough for opposing OCs to scheme) for his holdouts, or Doug Baldwin (in my view, the second-greatest WR the Seahawks have had) or Marshawn Lynch (such an important part of the Seahawks offense in 2010-2015) because they flipped off the coach. I see Wilson's case as a little different, because he tried to go over the heads of the head coach (who is also executive VP) and general manager and do what we now know would have hurt the team. If he had succeeded, the Broncos' 2022 nightmare could have been the Seahawks' instead. So even though Wilson did the most with the QB position for the Seahawks to date and that won't change any time soon, I get why people wouldn't want to include him.

 

[CalgaryFan05]

Jordan didn't do it alone. Keep in mind that his teammate for all six titles was also one of the top 50 players of all time, basically the creator of the "point forward" concept/position, and possibly the greatest perimeter defender the NBA has ever seen.

And Jordan wasn't the one with the biggest or most-legitimate complaints about his compensation from the Bulls. I went to college in Chicago, and that's when I got into the NBA and went back to baseball, so I ended up a fan of the Bulls and White Sox. And I was just outraged in the '90s that Ozzie Guillen was being paid more by a Satan Jerry Reinsdorf operation to utterly suck on the field and hurt the chances of the White Sox winning a World Series (in the aughts he would do a great job as manager and help them win one, but that's a different story) than Scottie Pippen was being paid to be one of the greatest players in the NBA and help make the Bulls one of the best teams in the history of the NBA.

[Side note: if you're old enough to remember the first three-peat, you also know how good Horace Grant was and how much it hurt when he went to Orlando. And Rodman, because he wasn't a scorer and did weird things with his hair, was painfully underrated through most of his career - a great defender and possibly the greatest rebounder ever. And of course Phil Jackson was amazing. There were times, especially during the second-three-peat years, when it looked like the Bulls were playing a different game than every other team. And throughout Jackson's time there, it seemed like they always had the right guys on the floor at the right time. They were never asking a three-point specialist like Hodges or Kerr to defend a top player in a key moment. They never needed a defensive specialist to make a big shot at the end of a game. ]

ObSeahawks: as others have pointed out, a bunch of players have had major issues with the Seahawks and the "business side" of the team (and this goes for all teams in all pro sports). But as wrong as it would be to exclude HoFer Kenny Easley, despite him having cut ties to the Seahawks for a long time, it would be just as wrong to exclude players as important to the Seahawks' on-field success as Earl Thomas (the key cog that made the whole defense work, because he could cover such a huge area of the field that he allowed the linebackers and other DBs to line up and cover differently) for flipping off the sideline, Richard Sherman (a complete shutdown corner with unbelievable football smarts and understanding of the NFL rules) for speaking ill of the Seahawks after going to play for the Gold Diggers, Kam Chancellor (a hard hitter and a hybrid LB/DB around whom it was tough for opposing OCs to scheme) for his holdouts, or Doug Baldwin (in my view, the second-greatest WR the Seahawks have had) or Marshawn Lynch (such an important part of the Seahawks offense in 2010-2015) because they flipped off the coach. I see Wilson's case as a little different, because he tried to go over the heads of the head coach (who is also executive VP) and general manager and do what we now know would have hurt the team. If he had succeeded, the Broncos' 2022 nightmare could have been the Seahawks' instead. So even though Wilson did the most with the QB position for the Seahawks to date and that won't change any time soon, I get why people wouldn't want to include him.

You make some excellent points and some obscure ones about the Bulls and Jordan that I just can't even comment on. Before my time. I will try and keep it short. This response isn't necessarily directed at you/your post, but kind of a summary of others.

You know what I know? I know that I started following the hawks for the SA touchdown record, and I stayed for the character. I loved who the Hawks were, and the players the were part of it. You know what I know? I don't like douchebags. I didn't pick Ray Lewis and the Ravens. I didn't pick Green Bay and idiots like Favre, Clay Matthews and Rodgers. I didn't 'pick idiots like Ray Rice.

You know what I also know? I ran a fairly large medium range company for quite a while. > 10 employees. And I can tell you it ABSOLUTELY mattered to me the way they left. Some left amicably. Some left 'lovingly' and some left 'angrily'. I've had people leave and try and steal hundreds of thousands of dollars of business from us. Guess what? Those people wouldn't get my vote for the ROH also. The ones I had to get a lawyer for - guess what? DON'T make my ROH.

Obviously this has gone off the rails of the OP intent - it wasn't supposed to be a thread about who DIDN'T deserve the ROH.

You know what I know further? The only two people that I actually CARE about being in the ROH are already there! Granted, their acceptance speeches were horribly covered during the broadcasts - but Homey and Hass are doing just fine!!!!!!

If the question is who 'should' be in it. And if the question is MY vote? I factor in douchebaggness at about 1/2 of 'great stats' and arrive at a combined result. So:

Wilson. F No. You don't shit where you eat. You also don't attempt to destroy things as you leave.
Lynch. Yes - I'd say by 55% - I don't like what he did with tantrums at the end either - or the Kam holdout.
Baldwin. F Yes. He had a couple problems - watch the Vikings playoff game. Watch him tell Russ: "you're our leader. lead us and we will follow." THAT's a guy you want to play with. The rest of ADB's problems (if there were any) were all from Sherman anyhow.
Earl. F No. Jackass.
Josh Brown. F No. Jackass. (not that anyone nominated him).
Bwags. Yes. He got burned, still shut up and came back. Just keeps his head down and works.
Sherman. Nope - but just freaking barely 49%. Okay - maybe. Jury's still out on this one.
Browner. Nope. (and he had my favorite hit of all time on welker!) (and i did kinda like his prison interview - of all things)

Anyhow - I'll shut up about it now. Not trying to be involved in/start a holy war. But a person's reputation can get ruined how they leave a situation. I'm sure some people here have x-GF and wives that fit into the same category possibly. I know I've got 1 kid that does.

To me character matters. How you leave things matters. Most of the time, in my estimation, it matters more than your raw stats. Yup, there's some good players on the list I just 'dissed'. I'm okay with that. It's just my vote. I liked Aros' comment the other day - that's just my opinion - that and $2.75 will probably get you a cup of coffee

As a final comment - I'd have to say that other than Josh Brown and ME3 - the rest of the list is completely objective - and I get how others would think differently. But it's not as easy for me - I can't separate player performance from player easily.

Have a nice day I'm going to get my dog a haircut

 

[Seahawker]

Wagner with a strong finish in Seahawk blue, everyone else is just under the qualifying threshold for various reasons.

 

[RiverDog]

To me character matters. How you leave things matters. Most of the time, in my estimation, it matters more than your raw stats. Yup, there's some good players on the list I just 'dissed'. I'm okay with that. It's just my vote. I liked Aros' comment the other day - that's just my opinion - that and $2.75 will probably get you a cup of coffee

Character matters in a lot of things, and there's also degrees of character to be considered as well. But IMO you're attaching too much weight to character as it relates to the ROH.

If a player was convicted of a felony, such as Brandon Browner being convicted of attempted murder, then I could understand making character an issue. But when you start disqualifying Wilson for wanting out and Earl for flipping off his coaches, then you start heading down a vey slippery slope.

Do we not admit Beast because he grabs his balls or got a DUI? Or how about Doug Baldwin for 'crapping' a football, or Michael Bennett for his anthem protest? Do we not admit Hutch because of the poison pill? Or how about not considering Geno because he told a cop that he has little dick syndrome? Or why would we ever consider admitting Kenny Easley when he cut all ties and sued the Seahawks?

For the most part, and I agree that there are exceptions such as Browner, the ROH should be about their contributions to Seahawk football and not about their character. It's way too opinionated for us to consider. What you might think is a character issue I might not think is an issue at all.

 

[morgulon1]

Character matters in a lot of things, and there's also degrees of character to be considered as well. But IMO you're attaching too much weight to character as it relates to the ROH.

If a player was convicted of a felony, such as Brandon Browner being convicted of attempted murder, then I could understand making character an issue. But when you start disqualifying Wilson for wanting out and Earl for flipping off his coaches, then you start heading down a vey slippery slope.

Do we not admit Beast because he grabs his balls or got a DUI? Or how about Doug Baldwin for 'crapping' a football, or Michael Bennett for his anthem protest? Do we not admit Hutch because of the poison pill? Or how about not considering Geno because he told a cop that he has little dick syndrome? Or why would we ever consider admitting Kenny Easley when he cut all ties and sued the Seahawks?

For the most part, and I agree that there are exceptions such as Browner, the ROH should be about their contributions to Seahawk football and not about their character. It's way too opinionated for us to consider. What you might think is a character issue I might not think is an issue at all.

So you're saying that the criteria for ROH is from the play on the field only ? Of course being in prison for attempted murder will disqualify a player.

I disagree . I think the play on the field should be excellent but their character
Should be even better. Yes Wilson was good , very good but he also had limitations and benefited from a once a generation defense , the perfect RB , and scrappy underrated WRs. He certainly knows how to run a profitable charity .

He tried to get the general manager and VP of football operations fired !!!!

The Seahawks ignored the consensus and took a chance on him.
Then the Seahawks chose him rather than keeping the defense together .

Remember the Denver press conference where lil russy said " he was glad he didn't have to carry the team on his back"? Or " I'm glad to be in a city that wants to win" ?

Ok , the last quote was paraphrased. I think he said " let's ride" too

 

[pmedic920]

Russ deserves to be in the Ring.....eventually. He should get there after the many worthy defensive players are in it.

Yea kinda my thoughts.
Someday, but there are certainly others that I’d like to see first.

 

[RiverDog]

So you're saying that the criteria for ROH is from the play on the field only ? Of course being in prison for attempted murder will disqualify a player.

I disagree . I think the play on the field should be excellent but their character
Should be even better. Yes Wilson was good , very good but he also had limitations and benefited from a once a generation defense , the perfect RB , and scrappy underrated WRs. He certainly knows how to run a profitable charity .

He tried to get the general manager and VP of football operations fired !!!!

The Seahawks ignored the consensus and took a chance on him.
Then the Seahawks chose him rather than keeping the defense together .

Remember the Denver press conference where lil russy said " he was glad he didn't have to carry the team on his back"? Or " I'm glad to be in a city that wants to win" ?

Ok , the last quote was paraphrased. I think he said " let's ride" too

The accusation that Russell tried to get the HC and GM fired is an unsubstantiated rumor. Neither Pete, JS, or anyone in Seahawk management confirmed it. It's not that I doubt that it's true, just that it shows how subjective and opinionated value judgments on a player's character are. You and I may believe the reports. Someone else might not.

Same with his very cryptic statements he made to the Denver press following the trade. They are open to the interpretation of the reader.

Russell's not the first professional athlete to leave his team under some controversial circumstances, and he won't be the last. Aaron Rodgers, for example, left the Packers in what in my opinion was a lot worse circumstances than Russ left the Seahawks, but I'll bet you that the Packers honor Rodgers' contributions to their history and that they won't attempt to re-write it, pretending that he didn't exist.

 

[NoGain]

This has been an interesting thread. I have my opinions on the matter, but I can clearly respect the opinions others have put out there. Character and the quality in how someone conducts themselves is something I personally value highly. But I have to take into consideration that other people don't value such things as highly as I do, that performance and the excellence at one's craft that one's displayed is in most cases the acceptable standard for making such judgements.

I'd love it if athletes whom I've respected, admired, and received a lot of joy from as a fan were also people I respected, admired, and been very fond of as decent human beings on that emotionally empathetic level. But I realize that's uncomfortably not the case often enough. At some point, it's not just about me, my opinion, my values, my preferences.

This is actually a big topic in our new morally woke universe. Some of the greatest writers, musicians, performers, innovators, heroes, etc... of the past are now having their life's work reevaluated by the moral and ethical standards of people today, works of theirs that were oftentimes mind-blowingly incredible and impactful for generations to come. Do we ignore such achievements based upon our present day standards for judgement? Do we not separate the artist, for example, from their work?

It's an interesting point for debate and discussion. I guess it's all about where an individual draws their personal red line.

 

[Rat]

Suggesting that Sherm might not get in is absolute lunacy. It's not like he forced his way out; he got hurt and the team didn't want to gamble on him returning to form while on a high salary at a relatively advanced age (as far as CBs are concerned anyway). I don't care that he chose the Niners. Most would if that was who was offering the most money.

ET is an easy yes for me too, but I can at least see the argument. He'll be inducted into the HOF anyway.

 

[morgulon1]

The accusation that Russell tried to get the HC and GM fired is an unsubstantiated rumor. Neither Pete, JS, or anyone in Seahawk management confirmed it. It's not that I doubt that it's true, just that it shows how subjective and opinionated value judgments on a player's character are. You and I may believe the reports. Someone else might not.

Same with his very cryptic statements he made to the Denver press following the trade. They are open to the interpretation of the reader.

Russell's not the first professional athlete to leave his team under some controversial circumstances, and he won't be the last. Aaron Rodgers, for example, left the Packers in what in my opinion was a lot worse circumstances than Russ left the Seahawks, but I'll bet you that the Packers honor Rodgers' contributions to their history and that they won't attempt to re-write it, pretending that he didn't exist.

Fair enough.

We just disagree . That's all. I take the statements he made walking out the door for what they were. Of course Pete Carroll and John Schneider and the Seahawks aren't going to speak publicly
about it. They are a classy organization.

My gut feeling is he'll be in the ROH someday. I'm sure most people will be over the split by then. It was a shitty break up.

 

[morgulon1]

This has been an interesting thread. I have my opinions on the matter, but I can clearly respect the opinions others have put out there. Character and the quality in how someone conducts themselves is something I personally value highly. But I have to take into consideration that other people don't value such things as highly as I do, that performance and the excellence at one's craft that one's displayed is in most cases the acceptable standard for making such judgements.

I'd love it if athletes whom I've respected, admired, and received a lot of joy from as a fan were also people I respected, admired, and been very fond of as decent human beings on that emotionally empathetic level. But I realize that's uncomfortably not the case often enough. At some point, it's not just about me, my opinion, my values, my preferences.

This is actually a big topic in our new morally woke universe. Some of the greatest writers, musicians, performers, innovators, heroes, etc... of the past are now having their life's work reevaluated by the moral and ethical standards of people today, works of theirs that were oftentimes mind-blowingly incredible and impactful for generations to come. Do we ignore such achievements based upon our present day standards for judgement? Do we not separate the artist, for example, from their work?

It's an interesting point for debate and discussion. I guess it's all about where an individual draws their personal red line.

Great post.

I can see both sides of the argument. It's true that a lot of our favorite actors, athletes, musicians were in fact horrible people , abusers, psychos, thieves etc..

 

[RiverDog]

Fair enough.

We just disagree . That's all. I take the statements he made walking out the door for what they were. Of course Pete Carroll and John Schneider and the Seahawks aren't going to speak publicly
about it. They are a classy organization.

My gut feeling is he'll be in the ROH someday. I'm sure most people will be over the split by then. It was a shitty break up.

I don't like the way Russell left anymore than you do. Nothing that comes out of that man's mouth has any credibility with me whatsoever. The man is so obsessed with his image that he'll say whatever it is he thinks the audience he's talking to wants to hear at that moment. He's a slick snake oil salesman. And, I don't like the subtle little jabs he's been taking at us since he's been in Denver. I'm not actively rooting for him to fail, but I have to admit that I get a little chuckle out of it every time his team loses and he plays poorly.

But I also didn't like the way Kenny Easley left, or Hutch. As you said, time heals all wounds. It's going to be 10 years before Russell will be considered for the ROH. The venom in our attitudes will be considerably weaker by then.

 

[RiverDog]

This has been an interesting thread. I have my opinions on the matter, but I can clearly respect the opinions others have put out there. Character and the quality in how someone conducts themselves is something I personally value highly. But I have to take into consideration that other people don't value such things as highly as I do, that performance and the excellence at one's craft that one's displayed is in most cases the acceptable standard for making such judgements.

I'd love it if athletes whom I've respected, admired, and received a lot of joy from as a fan were also people I respected, admired, and been very fond of as decent human beings on that emotionally empathetic level. But I realize that's uncomfortably not the case often enough. At some point, it's not just about me, my opinion, my values, my preferences.

This is actually a big topic in our new morally woke universe. Some of the greatest writers, musicians, performers, innovators, heroes, etc... of the past are now having their life's work reevaluated by the moral and ethical standards of people today, works of theirs that were oftentimes mind-blowingly incredible and impactful for generations to come. Do we ignore such achievements based upon our present day standards for judgement? Do we not separate the artist, for example, from their work?

It's an interesting point for debate and discussion. I guess it's all about where an individual draws their personal red line.

Excellent post, and I especially like your 3rd paragraph. I alluded to a similar thought earlier in the thread by saying that if we disqualified Russell from our ROH, that it would be equivalent to re-writing history, expunging his name and pretending that he wasn't a critical component of the best period of Seahawk football in franchise history.

When I take my grandson to his first Seahawks game 12-15 years from now, I want him to be able to see Russell's name in the ROH and for him ask me who he was. Then I can tell him what a jerk Russell was, all the gory details of how he left our team. Without his name in the ROH, that conversation might not take place.

 

[Hawkmode]

With very few names thus far...it's a rare privilege to be honored in the ROH so names who embody the honor of playing and representing the team will be somewhat limited. I think for the Post-Hasselbeck era Kam Chancellor or Marshawn Lynch reach that threshold.

 

[BASF]

It took them sixteen years to add Alexander to the RoH and he was a much better person than Wilson. He was also more integral to our first Super Bowl appearance than Wilson was to either of other two appearances. If they made him wait so long with no real beef with the Seahawks apart from the one carry about the rushing title, chances are that most of us (considering our seeming demographic here) will not live to see Wilson in the RoH.

 

[Rat]

It took them sixteen years to add Alexander to the RoH and he was a much better person than Wilson. He was also more integral to our first Super Bowl appearance than Wilson was to either of other two

Russ mostly lost my admiration years ago, and I have stated numerous times on here that I think SA gets way too much undeserved hate from Hawks fans, but that second sentence is absurd. We MUCH more likely still go to the SB in '05 with a league-average RB than we do in '13 and '14 with a league-average QB.

 

[morgulon1]

Russ mostly lost my admiration years ago, and I have stated numerous times on here that I think SA gets way too much undeserved hate from Hawks fans, but that second sentence is absurd. We MUCH more likely still go to the SB in '05 with a league-average RB than we do in '13 and '14 with a league-average QB.

For a 3-5 season span , Mr Hasselbeck was a bad MF. Alexander was excellent for about 4 years? Maybe 5? It's hard to say.

Seattle doesn't go to the owl without Beastmode

 

[FPD]

For a 3-5 season span , Mr Hasselbeck was a bad MF. Alexander was excellent for about 4 years? Maybe 5? It's hard to say.

Seattle doesn't go to the owl without Beastmode

Seattle doesn't make it to XL without Mack Strong blocking for Alexander.

From The Curious Case of Shaun Alexander :

"...as Alexander's lead blocker left the franchise, so too did his hopes of returning to his old, record-breaking form"

 

[CalgaryFan05]

Character matters in a lot of things, and there's also degrees of character to be considered as well. But IMO you're attaching too much weight to character as it relates to the ROH.

If a player was convicted of a felony, such as Brandon Browner being convicted of attempted murder, then I could understand making character an issue. But when you start disqualifying Wilson for wanting out and Earl for flipping off his coaches, then you start heading down a vey slippery slope.

Do we not admit Beast because he grabs his balls or got a DUI? Or how about Doug Baldwin for 'crapping' a football, or Michael Bennett for his anthem protest? Do we not admit Hutch because of the poison pill? Or how about not considering Geno because he told a cop that he has little dick syndrome? Or why would we ever consider admitting Kenny Easley when he cut all ties and sued the Seahawks?

For the most part, and I agree that there are exceptions such as Browner, the ROH should be about their contributions to Seahawk football and not about their character. It's way too opinionated for us to consider. What you might think is a character issue I might not think is an issue at all.

You make a valid point(s).