They did choose Harvin over Tate.
It was monumentally stupid.
Harvin was a garbage human being. Plenty of talent, but the weakest-willed, most mentally pathetic human being to ever likely set foot on a football field, certainly the most pathetic Seahawk. He was the very definition of the p-word.
And for some reason, after he had problems everywhere else we traded for him. Shockingly, we had the same problems with him.
I knew damned well what that meant. It meant we were not going to keep Tate. And I was pissed.
Anyone that remembers probably remembers I never had a positive word to say about Harvin from Day 1. Hated him being traded for. Hated his pathetic weak willed version of 'football' where he avoided not only contact, but apparently any form of physical exertion.
He was like a disease.
And he infected this team. Tate and Harvin got into it. It could have cost us a freaking SB win had Tate got injured, but thankfully it didn't.
It was such a monumentally stupid move to bring Harvin here. Pete built this team into a juggernaut but then he made moves like that which cut this team off at the knees.
Tate was a hell of a returner in his own right. And had we kept him, we wouldn't have had half the problems with kick returners that we had later. Problems that cost us games and playoff slots. He was probably as good as Harvin when you figure all the games Harvin couldn't play because he was 'hurt'.
Always hated Harvin. What a piece ish. And because of him we lost Tate, which likely was the difference in a win vs loss in that 2nd SB. (Either that or not having Burley(??) in that SB...another headscratcher).
