Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Stephen Pitell's avatar

I haven't finished the article yet, but I am ready to comment and recommend. I'm actually drooling over the thought that there is more to drool over, but I have two comments to make already, but I have forgotten one already, that is why I am not waiting to comment.

It should be spelled Reek the Freak just going by normal rules of English which are arbitrary and confusing to non-native speakers of English, who might wonder why we don't spell "reek" "reak"? or why we don't spell "freak" "freek"? and we should, but we don't ... yet, since we could, we just don't and we don't have an explanation that is commonly known or purposeful, I am sure.

Reek the Freak is perhaps too circus sounding, though, and with names as with genders I am committed to conforming to whatever the preference is of the subject. In this case, Tariq Woolen. And he prefers simply Riq. Or maybe Riq the freak. I think he may warm to the nickname, but maybe not. Just like genders and TOP SECRET documents, they can change just by thinking it.

As stated earlier, I like this article. I like it because it is fun, and I am more likely to "like" a story I am having fun with more often than a more serious article that is about "X's and O's" or the like. But that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the serious articles. I do.

I really, really like your attempt to be real and accessible and embracing feedback and even criticism with an eye towards improving the product. Coming from a starving writer (a little hyperbole there) those attitudes are almost expected, but what about when you go viral? Will you still embrace us then? Will you remember us little people when you are rich and famous? That will be a true test of your honor. I actually have faith in you that you WILL remain humble and accessible.

Expand full comment
Mike A.'s avatar

Thanks Ken. I'm all about patiently waiting til next year - aka rebuild+1. Pete's trying to break his addiction to signing scrap-heap guys and pretending they're an O line. 2019-'21 Russ got pounded & got sick of it. Now Geno gets pounded. If he's available to start all games, it's a miracle. Blythe seems better than post-Britt speed bump centers thus far. Especially if he's hurt, the line is too inexperienced individually and as a unit to compensate. 2 rookie tackles does not a rebuild make.

Penny/Walker run-game potential is talked about. What runs have Hawks tried? Mostly the usual Hawk up the middle and guard-tackle runs, in "run" situations against a stacked box. It's probably because Hawks MUST keep training wheels on the O game plan, due to individual & play-as-a-unit inexperience. My 2022 "Hawk good/bad criteria" is weekly improvement:1. individually, 2. as-O&D-units, 3. (most importantly?) as-a-game-planning-coaching staff. PC & coaches are learning individual strengths & weaknesses on-the-fly. They'll coach players up BUT also adapt game plans to guys they have AND DON'T HAVE. It all starts with the O & D line quality & depth. Hawks have neither O or D line quality or depth. 2022 is our 2016-2021 "win-now" hangover team. We rode with PC through one & done "impact-players", "off-the-radar-rookies", key injuries, Crazy Earl, etc. Assuming PC is retained and has rebuild luck, I think it's wait'll 2024.

Finally, I know everyone's chomping at the bit for the next lightning-in-a-bottle QB. Unless he's a very fast, very lucky RPO guy, Hawk 2023 O-line won't be gelled/good enough to keep him healthy.

So, prayers for Geno - seriously.

Expand full comment
29 more comments...

No posts