The CardBoard
Richard Sherman = classless - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Richard Sherman = classless (/thread-6628.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - FarmBoy - 01-20-2014

OF - I'm not sure I would savage him, as I don't make a habit of following and commenting on the likes of DeSean Jackson, Marshawn, or any other non-Stanford athlete. I'd probably role my eyes at him during interviews by grudgingly respect his ability, as I do Marshawn, who by all accounts is also a good member of his community.

The reality is that Stanford football can't stay elite if we have "uncompromising standards" when it comes to things like personality. I don't want anyone who's dirty, cheats, or doesn't take school seriously. But I'm open to a wide range of personalities and characters on the team, as long as they are bought in on the team concept, as a I think Sherman is. You need to be able to combine and balance the gravitas and humility of an Andrew Luck with the brashness and rawness of a Richard Sherman. THey grew up in different circumstances and developed very different skills to survive/thrive. Stanford football should respect and value the diversity they bring.

And in the end, what was so bad about what Richard Sherman did? He just said on camera what 99% of players will say to the opponent. Does it make Richard worse because he was honest and public? If you found out that Andrew Luck had said something like that to an opposing corner off camera, would you lose all respect for him? It's a boast made in the heat of the moment. What's the big deal? (Again, that's not the behavior I model for my kids, but in the professional arena, is it really that out of bounds?)

Re: Richard Sherman = hayoka - Bruce Wang - 01-20-2014

(01-20-2014, 08:10 AM)CornFed link Wrote:To those who believe this might enhance our recruiting efforts with those who are disadvantaged who are impressed that Stanford embraces/empathizes with outbursts such as this, I would ask if they would like a team comprised of Richard Shermans behaving as he has behaved throughout his pro career.

That's a slippery slope argument.  I don't think a team full of Richard Shermans is in our cards.  I would welcome some talented, brash, outspoken, and funny guys to the team and the Stanford community.  Richard's antics reminds me of what Phil Jackson's description of Dennis Rodman's contribution to the Bulls as a court jester.

Please do not carry my example of Rodman to the logical extreme.  I do not want any Stanford person becoming a self-appointed ambassador to North Korea in the way that Dennis Rodman has.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - CornFed - 01-20-2014

(01-20-2014, 08:56 AM)Publius link Wrote:[quote author=CornFed link=topic=9438.msg82222#msg82222 date=1390230653]
To those who believe this might enhance our recruiting efforts with those who are disadvantaged who are impressed that Stanford embraces/empathizes with outbursts such as this, I would ask if they would like a team comprised of Richard Shermans behaving as he has behaved throughout his pro career.

I do not want any Stanford person becoming a self-appointed ambassador to North Korea in the way that Dennis Rodman has.
[/quote]

Despite my qualms about Sherman's personality, my instinct tells me that I would prefer Sherman to Rodman in that role.  ;D

FWLIW Sherman at Stanford - Redrum - 01-20-2014

was a much quieter guy. Quieter.  A fun and funny, outgoing personality,  but little of what we've saw last night.  Maybe that comes with the spotlight, the NFL fan/player echo-chamber and being surrounded by some of the same types of players.  His postplay/ postgame act sucks,  but after last night, I bet Denver will be even more cautious in testing him.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - Renaissance Man - 01-20-2014

Sherman's "rant" and calling out his opponent reminded me very much of Ali in his prime, as did the national response.  I had no problem with it (the rant, I had a problem with a lot of the responses).  I am fine with Andrew being Andrew and Richard being Richard.  I DID lose a lot of respect for Dave Lombardi after his long series of tweets aggressively attacking Sherman and tweeting several times that Sherman's behavior is caused by PED use.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - PrinceLightfoot - 01-20-2014

Richard Sherman responds to last night in his own words.

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/01/20/richard-sherman-interview-michael-crabtree/

For those wondering about the previous altercation with Crabtree he mentions in the article:

Quote:Sherman has been upset with Crabtree since last summer. Both attended Arizona star receiver Larry Fitzgerald’s charity event. While there, Sherman went to shake Crabtree’s hand, and Crabtree tried to start a fight, according to Sherman’s older brother, Branton.

“I’m going to make a play and embarrass him,” Richard Sherman vowed that day.

(via http://seattletimes.com/html/jerrybrewer/2022711709_brewercolumnseahawks20xml.html)


Re: Richard Sherman = classless - needle - 01-20-2014

From Sherm's column:

Quote:It was loud, it was in the moment, and it was just a small part of the person I am.

That really sums it up, doesn't it?

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - ahuang06 - 01-20-2014

I certainly had more than a few Stanford classmates that were boastful, arrogant pricks (that were usually wildly smart or talented - damn them!) - it's kind of ridiculous to want our football team to be a team of Andrew Lucks. Any school of reasonable size is going to have a lot of different personalities - some you like, some you don't, and some you only like some of the time. Being embarrassed/disagraced/what-have-you by that seems like an overreaction.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - stupac2 - 01-20-2014

(01-20-2014, 08:19 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:If Sherman went to Low APR U or University of Spoiled Children , wouldn't people here be pillorying him in a savage way for his interview?  Nobody would be considering how great a guy he might be off the field, would they?

What's odd is this whole "we've never walked in his shoes so we can't judge him" attitude sounds far more UC-like than Stanford-like.  Whatever happened to uncompromising standards?  Would Sherman have been admitted to Stanford if that post-game rant were part of his application?

There are many good people who do bad things, but just because people to a lot of good, we don't as a society let bad deeds go unpunished.  There many people in prison who have done many good things.

I was defending Winston's post-game interview against similar inane accusations. I just don't think this is a big deal either way.

Also, I've definitely previously posted that I'm ambivalent about him, but I think this reaction is seriously overblown.

Great find, great comments - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-19-2014, 08:44 PM)FarmBoy link Wrote:I turned it off after the interception. Was there anything beyond the choking motion he made?

I was watching the game with my son and pointing out Baldwin adn Sherman as they made impact plays. It was a great lesson at the end of the game that great players are not necessarily great people. In the end, he's human. He does some good (the work with kids in Compton) and some bad (the way he acted playing New England for example.)

Here's an interesting take on Harbaugh vs. Carroll: http://nfl.si.com/2014/01/18/doug-baldwin-richard-sherman-jim-harbaugh-pete-carroll/

It seems Carroll let's Sherman "be himself." I can see why Harbaugh would try to bottle some of that up...

Really liked this post, farmboy.  Feel exactly the same way.  And while we're on the topic, let me offer a slightly alternative thought.

I didn't attend Stanford, though I've been a fan of Stanford football and Stanford sports for more than forty years.  One of the proudest days of my life was when a coach at Stanford told my son a spot on the team was his if he wanted it, and one of the saddest days came when he told me he wanted to be at least 500 miles away from the family home.  ;)

Still, I understand the comments on Sherman, particularly from Stanford alums. You went to school with these people, virtually all the Stanford folks I've met are really great  people (personally and professionally), and it's important to all of you that those athletes fit the same profile.  I feel the same way about Santa Clara alums, I like to see good people like Nash and it makes me cringe when a former Santa Clara athlete acts badly in public.

Virtually all of the Stanford athletes act in a conventionally "classy" manner in public, so we're tempted to want to put them all in that category.  We want everyone to be Andrew Luck.  And that's fine, but for me, I distinctly remembered the personalities of the great athletes I knew growing up, and most were dirtbags, to be candid.

When I was 12, I loved basketball and the Warriors won the NBA championship.  Rick Barry was my favorite player.  My dad and I went to the SF airport  to pick up my stepmother who was returning from Phoenix.  In the pre-charter flight days, the W's flew commercial, and Barry walked out wearing a knee length rabbitskin coat...probably 100 rabbitskins, all different colors (it was 1975 after all).  My dad suggested I get his autograph, but he had a well-deserved reputation even then as being a jerk...and I wasn't an autograph seeker in any event.

So I appreciate the athletic skills of Richard Sherman, and Jim Harbaugh, and Rick Barry, and Pete Rose and all the other great athletes I've seen over the years.  But both my admiration and any personal concern absolutely stops when the game clock hits 0:00.  I'm quite certain that everyone on this board has had personal experiences with athletes that were, shall we say, different from their public reputations.

Charles Barkley said the only hero you need is the one at the dinner table (or words to that effect).  I've always felt that.  So I'll always admire Richard Sherman the athlete, and I appreciated what he did at Stanford, but I couldn't care less about Richard Sherman the person.  After all, I'm not hiring him to teach my kids etiquette...

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-19-2014, 09:24 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:It was rather classless, but it was enhanced by a complete lack of respect displayed by the 49ers for the best CB in the NFL, or at least their division.

Why is that a lack of respect?  Are the 49ers not allowed to throw to his side of the field? 

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-19-2014, 09:24 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:In the post game Colin was very clear that it did not matter who was on Crab, he was going to throw it to him since the coverage was man to man, one on one.

It was one on one coverage?  Sherman only knocked the ball up, he didn't intercept it.  If it was just the two of them, the ball falls and the Niners get another play.  There were two guys on Crabtree, the other one got the actual interception.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-19-2014, 09:50 PM)Leftcoast link Wrote:Yeah, he's the type of player who turns the thinnest of slights into intense motivation. 

I know a red-and-gold wearing QB who does this too...

Re: Amazing this focus on Sherman being Sherman - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-20-2014, 08:22 AM)Redrum link Wrote:There must be more than a million things in the lives of each person here that are more important than Richard Sherman and his outburst.  Your spouse, your kids, your God, Stanford football, your honor,  your commitments, your health, sex,  drought, endless foreign wars, a Congress and President on stupid pills, the homeless guy begging at the stoplight, your abs,  that funny knocking noise when your car starts cold in the morning, moles in your lawn,  moles in the CIA, your mortgage, Dish vs. Comcast,  getting your kids to the soccer game on time...

There are.  And I wouldn't write about a single one of them on this board...;)

Put yourself in Sherman's shoes - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-19-2014, 09:53 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Oh come on guys. I was on a plane and couldn't watch te second half of the game, but he's clearly just amped after winning. Sherman obviously isn't the most polished speaker in the world, but so what? He made a great play over a very good receiver who had previously been trashing him in public. What do you want him to do?

Actually, I'd take it a little farther than that.  Not only did he make a great play over a great receiver who had trashed him in public; if he doesn't make that play, the Seahawks lose the game and don't get to the Super Bowl.  He's in his home stadium, makes the play of his life, and he vents seconds after it happens on national TV.

And let's not forget this one little crucial fact...if we were in RS's shoes, we might not have said what he said (at least not in the same way), but sure as taxes would we be thinking it.

And candidly, after watching the review a few times...I think part of RS's enthusiasm is relief at having made the play.  Because another foot or two farther, and it's TD 49ers, and the Seahawks stay home.  A better pass wins it for SF.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - Mick - 01-20-2014

(01-20-2014, 09:50 AM)garvin link Wrote:Why is Crabtree's refusal to shake Sherman's hand understandable, but Sherman's rant a cold-blooded act of evil? What's the difference? They dissed one another. Not my favorite mode of post-game behavior, but unlike, say, writing an op-ed column urging fans to assault an opposition mascot, not anything that truly upsets me.

Because I prefer red-and-gold laundry over green-and-blue laundry.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - OutsiderFan - 01-20-2014

I'll be the first to admit Michael Crabtree is not winning any congeniality contests.  My cousin had a run-in with him several years ago.  She said the guy was full of himself and a real prick.  She also met Patrick Willis, who she said was the polar opposite of Crabtree, humble, and a total gentleman.  So this story about Crabree and Sherman last Summer doesn't surprise me.  In other words, I'm sure Crabtree wasn't the best sport after the game clinching play.

The greater issue here, that applies to everyone, is, you have two ways to go when someone does something upsetting.  You can take the high road and elevate yourself, or you can sink to the other's level.  By doing what he did, Sherman shrank to Crabtree's level. 

I had a good friend today tell me she looked up where Sherman went to school after reading a story about his post-game rant.  Suffice it to say Stanford went down a notch in her book, and I'm sure she isn't the only one.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - SUBuddha - 01-20-2014

(01-20-2014, 09:29 AM)Renaissance Man link Wrote:Sherman's "rant" and calling out his opponent reminded me very much of Ali in his prime, as did the national response.  I had no problem with it (the rant, I had a problem with a lot of the responses).  I am fine with Andrew being Andrew and Richard being Richard.  I DID lose a lot of respect for Dave Lombardi after his long series of tweets aggressively attacking Sherman and tweeting several times that Sherman's behavior is caused by PED use.

Exactly this. Sherman uses ALi as a model for his public persona. Lombardi also lost many points with me as well.

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - jeboody - 01-20-2014

FYI: y'all (CornFed, LeftCoast, Garvin) are being quoted in SFGate

http://blog.sfgate.com/stanfordsports/2014/01/20/richard-sherman-an-embarrassment-to-stanford/

Re: Richard Sherman = classless - washingtonismoney - 01-20-2014

It's always funny to me how these standards change. Ali's been brought up a few times, yet he's in "living national treasure" these days. But it's not really remembered that his trash talk -- while often hilarious -- also went welllllll over the line, for example his implying Joe Frazier was an Uncle Tom. Erased and forgotten; I bet if you did a national survey on "Ali's trash talk," you'd get positive responses and memories.

Anyone who's been exposed to youth tennis knows there are a few too many people who are enamored with John McEnroe's antics. Michael Jordan, of course, was an infamous trash talker. People are still talking about Pippen's "Mailman don't deliver on Sundays" crack to Karl Malone. And so on. These things change; the "classiness!" brigade will flip-flop on a few athletes before their lives are done, even if it's not Sherman specifically. (My guess is, in twenty years, Manziel's remembered as a lovable rogue.)

The odd thing here is the Stanford angle and its role. A few people on this thread seem to think Stanford fans are taking special umbrage or something, but I don't think that's the case at all. Far as I can tell, everyone's talking about Sherman today, whether cardinal-and-white or not. I bet Sherman's alma mater does give the taunts a special charge, though; if he were, say, an Indiana grad it might get less attention. At any rate, to ignore Stanford's recent contributions to poor sportsmanship and trash talking is a bit rich: we are the guys who gratuitously challenged a fumble up 30 in the fourth quarter against Wake; we are the guys who went for two to get to 50 against SC; we are the guys who immediately took to Twitter to taunt DeAnthony Thomas about the "we should score 40" prediction; we are the defense which finger-wags, poses, and dances after good plays. In fact, there was a recent debate on this board that the big problem with David Shaw is that he is insufficiently dickish to his opponents.

And it's amusing to me, to see on twitter and facebook or wherever, jokes about Sherman's communications degree or a "lack of articulateness" or whatever. Replay that speech -- there's barely any hesitation to it. That is smoothly delivered. To say that, on the spot -- after three hours of grueling, physical play? There's a word for that, and "articulate" is one of them. You might not like the message, but that is fine public speaking. No one said effective communication had to be of a message you liked. Purely in an instrumental sense, Sherman did his degree proud.

The general hullabaloo is still really weird to me. It's weird that people are all worked up about it; Sherman's words really meant nothing of consequence for really anything. Yet people are freaked out about it. It says something about a society, when it can't handle a dude speaking a message of no particular social importance for approximately 30 seconds. I'm not sure what it says, but it's not good.

Personally I enjoy a few villains and trash-talkers in sports. I guess there's a point when there are too many, but I don't think that's the case right now. Tastes might vary, but trash talking is fun, in moderation. I've done it myself! If you're honest, you probably have too.