I don't like the substitute teacher reference. I never respected my substitute teachers. We usually threw spit-wads at him and nobody paid attention. Not sure that's the best comparison... I also am not too excited with Nate as "the teacher". Unless he doesn't preach what he practices (breaking off routes). Maybe it'll mean more coming from him, since he has seen the ass-end of breaking off his routes.
Thanks for the find on this. I'll have to watch.
I agree with PapaHawk. I don't like the substitute teacher reference at all. I want to watch this show now to see how this comment sounded in context. I bet if Holmy hears this, he has a little talk with Nate, "sub" to "student."
Keep your foot out of your mouth, Nate. We don't need any stinking controversy.
In context, the comment doesn't sound too terribly disrespectful to me:
http://www.nfl.com/videos?
videoI...9000d5d80887115
I'm convinced Rich Eisen is clueless about the hawks.
Anyone else notice Holmgren yelling the f-word at around 2:20?
Of course Eisen was going to bring up SA 37, he had to fill some time and he is clueless about the Hawks. A short amount of research and he would have had more compelling questions. Anyway, Nate seemed pretty ready for the interview. He is a pretty good return man, I've seen him run a KO for a TD in person, and watched one bounce over his head on TV. The former was much more exciting to say the least.
Can't wait to pre-season so I can watch the NEW Hawks
Eisen looked like an idiot there. Checking his notes to make sure he got players names right. ANd what was with the camera zooming in and out all the time?
I think that Nates reference to coach as a substitute teacher is very poor indeed. A sub is NOT a leader. A sub is for lack of a better term a baby sitter. I hope Holmgren has a little ONE on ONE with the Natester. I also hope that Mora steps on Nates neck for that as well. He has it comming. I'd be pe-oed if my partner was viewed as a sub in my place. There would be a realigning of the stars.
Nate is a goofball. I dont think he meant any disrespect, but it sure was a poor choice of words.
I too agree with PapaHawk. Nate is not the best teacher, as he is only an inconsistent number 3 wr, not some cagey veteran. Bobby not being there IS a big deal.
I didnt like to hear the idea that "upper management" thinks not relying on Bobby will be good for Hasselbeck. Hass needs at least one damn WR who isnt a wuss and can do it all. If only Bobby could go deep...
The idea that WR's are expendable really ticks me off. We would have allready won a couple Super Bowls if we had drafted someone other than Robinson and not rushed D-Jacks knee recovery twice (those two are connected).
Look, even Tom Brady didnt do much without at least one top-notch WR.
Nate is a pretty good WR, he made it into the NFL he had to have done something right...
He is technically considered a "veteran" because he has been in the league a set number of years, but he probably isn't the guy the young recievers will be looking up to for long. Once they learn the routes it's going to be up to Nate to show the coaches he is ready to be a primary target. If not him, someone is going to have to take Bobby's place once he fades into the sunset (which probably won't be much longer).
Branch has been a bust (so far), Bobby will be here this season but who knows how much longer, Hack is long gone, and Nate was just kind of a special teams, 3rd option kind of guy.
The young guys will have a much greater impact than most of the NFL seems to believe, which everyone here knows otherwise. It's great the rest of the league and the analysts all believe we will be a run first type of team...
Umm, I bet Nate has a spectatcular season this year. He's fully integrated into the offense now and has Hass's confidence. He's not injured like he was in his first year here. He's ready to make the progression to being a bona fide number #2 receiver.
I'm afraid that for some reason, Nate is going to be another Seahawk player who will have detractors even when he has a great season something like how Alexander was treated in 2004 and 2005 when even after great seasons, there were guys who didn't like how he ran or didn't think he should be considered an elite RB. Some people just don't seem to like Burleson and won't acknowledge his contribution no matter how great.
About Branch. Branch isn't a bust! He's injured. Different scenario! When, healthy and having had the benefit of being through a Seahawk's training camp, he was on his way to setting records and having a great season last year. Rick Meier was a bust! Lamar King was a bust! Dan McGuire was a bust! David Green was a bust! Marcus Pollard was a bust! Even Jerry Rice was a bust when he played for us. Branch is a very good receiver when he's not playing injured. Not a bust. Definately not a bust. A bust is a player who can't play football not a player who suffered an unfortunate injury.
A player is a bust if they dont live up to thier salary and what we paid for them. Thus far, Branch = Bust.
Grant Wistrom was a bust his last three seasons here. He just wasnt worth the money. Not that he wasnt decent, but we paid a lot for not much production. Bust.
Commenting by HaloScan
