There is no better way to make me a “fan” of a team I don’t really care about by essentially disparaging that team and its players by implying that their opponent lost because they didn’t play up to their own “standards.” Part of that included spending all day after about either Richard Sherman or Colin Kaepernick. Outside of true football fans like ESPN’s Mike and Mike, the talk about Sherman was unrelievedly negative. First off, Brian Billick can call Sherman “bush league” all he wants, but Michael Crabtree isn’t the most popular player in league either—in fact, a few years ago he was voted by other players has the eighth most overrated player in league. Tom Brady “illuminated” his thoughts on Sherman; frankly, he ought to just go home with his super model wife and stop whining and throwing teammates under the bus like he has all season. And people thinks he is “class”? He’s a diva. Then the Packers’ A.J. Hawk weighed in about Sherman; I wish he’d worry more about his own lack of production these last few years. Hawk has never really lived-up to his hype since leaving Ohio State. Any idea that he is “good” depends upon whether a real Pro Bowler like Clay Mathews is around for people not to notice that Hawk is not really that special.
I don’t have a problem with what Sherman did or said; I
think that the main problem was his violent tone during his postgame
“interview” with Erin Andrews. The “you” he accused of disrespect was not Andrews
of course, but Crabtree; but he might as well have been putting the media in
his sights as well. There was an expectation from virtually everyone on ESPN
and elsewhere that San Francisco was going to win the game, that they were the “better”
team with “superior” playmakers like Anquan Boldin, Vernon Davis, Frank Gore
and Crabtree. Chris Carter (who never played in a Super Bowl) was particularly
offensive in his disparaging comments about who was on the other side. The
Vegas line even had it “even” despite the clear advantage the Seahawks had
playing at home, and seemingly ignoring the fact that the 49ers were playing a
less banged-up (Green Bay) and more balanced team this time around, certainly
more than Carolina—five of its last seven wins were by a combined 14 points.
After the loss, Kaepernick was praised for being “big” by
putting the loss on himself, and the media agreeing that he will need to
improve and “will,” but I’m not buying this potential “superstar” business. A quarterback
as limited as he is bound to have problems facing a secondary like the Seahawks.
Is he “smart” enough to overcome his inability to read defenses? Can he
overcome his tunnel vision that is like red meat for top defenses? Consider: Boldin
and Davis combined for 137 of Kaepernick’s
243 completions during the regular season, 2029 of his 3197 yards—and rather shockingly, 20 of his 21 touchdown passes;
Crabtree had the lone remaining touchdown catch in the five games he played. What
does this suggest? That when the 49ers did pass the ball a league low 417, it
was predictable who Kaepernick’s was going to throw it to. It is easy to be a “playmaker”
if you have a quarterback whose field of vision and decision-making is limited
to you as the first—and only—“option.”
Kaepernick may be physically "gifted," but is that sufficient to overcome what is between his ears? What is he listening to with those headphones anyways? I personally think
that 49ers with Kaepernick as quarterback will have a brief window of Super
Bowl-caliber potential.
No comments:
Post a Comment