Finally an explanation that makes sense of the incredibly stupid, dumber-than-dirt, worst play call in Superbowl history. The coaches are all smart, so it wasn't just a mistake, but rather a carefully calculated business decision that was nothing personal, but just a good business practice.
Dave Zirin published on Tuesday a provocative piece in The Nation based upon reports from the Seahawks' locker room. His report makes sense to me, and I wonder if it makes sense to others here. You can read it here: http://m.thenation.com/blog/196697-cons ... -last-play . Here are some quoted excerpts:
Conspiracy theories sprouted: "I'm talking about people inside Seattle's own locker room. I'm talking about texts I received from mainstream writers who don't want to deal with the backlash that would come with writing it up."
"The theory goes that there were major financial, public relations and football reasons for Russell Wilson and not Lynch to be the one who ends the game in glory. If he throws that touchdown for the victory, Wilson is almost certainly the Super Bowl MVP. He gets the commercial. He gets to stand with the commissioner. And oh, by the way, he also gets his new contract, one that will fasten his prime, at only 26 years old, to the Seattle franchise. Marshawn Lynch is also due a new contract. Marshawn Lynch, had he punched that ball over the goal line, would probably get to be the one handed the MVP trophy. Marshawn Lynch also maybe gets on the mic to say Lord knows what."
"The conspiracy theory lies in the fact that Seahawks coach Pete Carroll believed that the last yard the Seahawks needed for that Super Bowl victory was a gimme and, all things being equal, much better to have the iconic Super Bowl moment go to Russell Wilson than to Marshawn Lynch. Coaches setting certain favored players up for glory is as old as football itself. In addition, the politics of race, respectability, public relations, and what's in the best interest of a $2 billion corporation all played into this. That's the theory."
"I contacted someone inside that locker room and they said to me as if on repeat: "Can't believe it. We all saw it. They wanted it to be Russ. They didn't want Marshawn to be the hero.""
"People in the Seattle locker room are saying it. People in the sports media are texting it to me. Only a few people are writing about it. But the fact that people on the inside are even thinking it, in a locker room that earlier this season, as Mike Freeman reported, was roiled by these very kinds of divisions, makes it story enough."
"But does it hold actual weight? Would Pete Carroll risk the Super Bowl for public relations? Who the hell knows?"
--------------------------------
Well I think I know. I saw something not quite right in Pete's facial expressions after the interception. Please review the images yourselves, and tell me what you see. He usually looks quite upset after a turnover, but this time his 'upsetedness' seemed strangely muted. Later, after the game, I thought that I saw something strange in his facial expressions in his comments to the press, which I initially ascribed to Pete protecting Bevell.
Russell said recently that he wants to stay with the Seahawks forever, and earlier said that he wants to eventually own a football team. What better way to do this than throw a pass to win the game, become MVP, earn enormous income from commercial endorsements thereby enabling him to accept a shockingly low, and extremely team-friendly, contract? This minimizes his impact upon the salary cap, which in turn allows us to pay more to keep more good players, to maximize the strength of the team, and maximize the winning of more superbowls.
Corporatism trumps meritocracy, right?
What do you think? I set up a poll below to find out quantitatively, and I look forward to your comments as usual. You can revote at any time as you learn more, and have more time to think about this.
How do you put the poll after the post? Anyone know?
Dave Zirin published on Tuesday a provocative piece in The Nation based upon reports from the Seahawks' locker room. His report makes sense to me, and I wonder if it makes sense to others here. You can read it here: http://m.thenation.com/blog/196697-cons ... -last-play . Here are some quoted excerpts:
Conspiracy theories sprouted: "I'm talking about people inside Seattle's own locker room. I'm talking about texts I received from mainstream writers who don't want to deal with the backlash that would come with writing it up."
"The theory goes that there were major financial, public relations and football reasons for Russell Wilson and not Lynch to be the one who ends the game in glory. If he throws that touchdown for the victory, Wilson is almost certainly the Super Bowl MVP. He gets the commercial. He gets to stand with the commissioner. And oh, by the way, he also gets his new contract, one that will fasten his prime, at only 26 years old, to the Seattle franchise. Marshawn Lynch is also due a new contract. Marshawn Lynch, had he punched that ball over the goal line, would probably get to be the one handed the MVP trophy. Marshawn Lynch also maybe gets on the mic to say Lord knows what."
"The conspiracy theory lies in the fact that Seahawks coach Pete Carroll believed that the last yard the Seahawks needed for that Super Bowl victory was a gimme and, all things being equal, much better to have the iconic Super Bowl moment go to Russell Wilson than to Marshawn Lynch. Coaches setting certain favored players up for glory is as old as football itself. In addition, the politics of race, respectability, public relations, and what's in the best interest of a $2 billion corporation all played into this. That's the theory."
"I contacted someone inside that locker room and they said to me as if on repeat: "Can't believe it. We all saw it. They wanted it to be Russ. They didn't want Marshawn to be the hero.""
"People in the Seattle locker room are saying it. People in the sports media are texting it to me. Only a few people are writing about it. But the fact that people on the inside are even thinking it, in a locker room that earlier this season, as Mike Freeman reported, was roiled by these very kinds of divisions, makes it story enough."
"But does it hold actual weight? Would Pete Carroll risk the Super Bowl for public relations? Who the hell knows?"
--------------------------------
Well I think I know. I saw something not quite right in Pete's facial expressions after the interception. Please review the images yourselves, and tell me what you see. He usually looks quite upset after a turnover, but this time his 'upsetedness' seemed strangely muted. Later, after the game, I thought that I saw something strange in his facial expressions in his comments to the press, which I initially ascribed to Pete protecting Bevell.
Russell said recently that he wants to stay with the Seahawks forever, and earlier said that he wants to eventually own a football team. What better way to do this than throw a pass to win the game, become MVP, earn enormous income from commercial endorsements thereby enabling him to accept a shockingly low, and extremely team-friendly, contract? This minimizes his impact upon the salary cap, which in turn allows us to pay more to keep more good players, to maximize the strength of the team, and maximize the winning of more superbowls.
Corporatism trumps meritocracy, right?
What do you think? I set up a poll below to find out quantitatively, and I look forward to your comments as usual. You can revote at any time as you learn more, and have more time to think about this.
How do you put the poll after the post? Anyone know?
