I get your premise and would word it differently. I take it that you're saying Seahawks fans are not overly or overtly biased. I agree. That said, and maybe I'm just nitpicking semantics, but I assume we're all biased about most everything. We don't notice it because it's in our blind spots. We care about a team and so of course we're biased. We can set aside those biases enough to not come across as insane but that doesn't make us unbiased.
I see bias as part of the human condition. It's a kind of shorthand because, without it, we'd be overwhelmed constantly. We've already decided a zillion things and don't have to revisit them. If I see a lamp post in the street, I know what it is, I know what it does, I know not to walk, ride my bike or drive my car into it. This is a sort of bias. Helpful bias. It only becomes a problem when applied inappropriately, as when one can't set it aside to see something that doesn't fit. If the lamp post is out, it may be helpful to note it's not illuminating that section of street. We all love the Seahawks but if the QB wants out and/or we don't have the tools to win big without a real rebuild, it's healthy if one can acknowledge that.
Taken to an extreme, our bias becomes bigotry. Particularly if applied to people. Then we get all sorts of unfair outcomes. But we can be blind to those biases too. Maybe we're personally educated beyond bias against black people but we care about the state of Israel and, as a result, can't recognize unfair treatment of Palestinians. Or we have a liberal bias and so we tend to think of Texans as ignorant. Or we have a Republican bias (which I won't call a conservative bias because I see it as another kind of radicalism) and so we see those from San Francisco or Seattle as ignorant. We have to watch out for our own biases because they're almost always invisible to us.
We can see this clearly in history because it's so obvious. Just yesterday I was at a beach in the extreme Northwest corner of Washington state, a place where there were once canneries. Outside a museum to the salmon canning fishery that was once on that site, there was a big cast iron machine bolted to the ground. It was labeled "100 Chinks". A plaque explained that it was patented under that name because it was believed that it would put at least 100 Chinese workers out of their jobs.
The fact that a name like that could be patented reveals the extreme racism that is part of our history. But not only ours -- racism is part and parcel of human history all around the world. Including genocide and ethnic cleansing. Try to name a society that hasn't participated in one or both. The fact that it was once common doesn't mean we should ignore it or fail to see it. In fact, the reality of that history makes it that much more essential that we educate and enlighten ourselves. Because bias is real and could lead to all sorts of tragedies.
The Holocaust that we capitalize, the one that happened in Nazi Germany, was horrid and needs to be remembered. But we mustn't act like it was unique. I mean, it was unique in the sense that the Germans applied industrial scale assembly line techniques to the slaughter. As a result, a whole lot of people died in a short period of time. But in terms of intention, it's not really different than many other slaughters, including the U.S. destruction of Native American populations -- which was premeditated and deliberate. It's estimated that there were once 8 million Native Americans in what's now the United States and, at the nadir of their oppression, we were down to something like 50,000.
It's a long way from the question of whether Seahawks fans are biased to a discussion like this. Please forgive me for my digression (and thank you if you've managed to read this far), but I think this a super important topic. It's vital that we recognize that a life without bias is not possible. Best we can do is to acknowledge the biases we see and recognize that we each have hidden or unconscious biases.
If we recognize our baises we can take them into account in our judgements. I do exactly that with the Seahawks and hopefully social issues as well. Perfect... no, but it does leave open an avenue for new information like that which Joe provides daily. The need to belong to a tribe and the willingness to act in ways that are only acceptable within that tribe is different from a simple bias. Attrocities don't occur because of bias but rather when membership is more important than personal ethics. I spend a good chunk of my time just trying not to be an asshole. Membership relieves you of that burden because you can be an asshole in the name of !xE$^r& and still feel good about yourself.
Aug 2, 2022·edited Aug 2, 2022Liked by Seaside Joe
I was in the minority on wanting a bridge QB. Not only for the valid reasons Luis G suggests, but most rookie QBs aren't ready. To have an NFL season of learning and some mop up duty seems a better way to introduce a raw young player to the NFL game. Baker probably wasn't ever going to be around for more than a year, and same should go for Jimmy G. But they would have been much better for the young player's development than these two guys who are fumbling snaps in camp.
Also, that fan's Russell jersey needs some work. It should have read 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, Lock, Harris, and Fant. The updated version would be: Cross, Walker III, 1st rounder, 2nd rounder, Lock, Harris, Fant.
I love the jersey. So much so, I've posted the photo to facebook. I sense that you're tongue is in your cheek when you say he blew it, and that your point is we got more than just two first rounders. An apt point.
I didn't say he blew it, just that he barely covered the half of it. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Fant, Harris, Walker III, and next year's 2nd aren't more valuable than the two 1sts.
Aug 2, 2022·edited Aug 2, 2022Liked by Seaside Joe
I for one, voted that the Seahawks should have added someone at QB. I wanted a reliable journeyman, someone who won't win championships, but neither will single-handedly lose games. The reasoning is that awful QB play will jeopardy the development of players in the offense and decrease morale (making the Seahawks an even less desirable free agent destination).
Actually, there's nothing really"wrong" with being biased. It's just one more facet of being a fan. Personally, I have to repeat myself) . . . 'wash, rinse, repeat' . . . as being in Nick Foles' corner. I still believe he could have 'done THIS job' and could have been the bridge over our troubled waters, until. --- 'See you on the fateful first encounter with Russell Wilson. BTW: Broncs KICK!
I have a Nick Foles bias too. He was my quarterback when I was a law student at the University of Arizona. He frustrated me there, as he's frustrated NFL fans throughout his career. But he certainly had a few shinning moments. One of 'em historic.
Don't imagine he'd do anything similar for Seattle. I don't share his religious fanaticism (though I respect his right to whatever faith feels right to him). I admire the man for his strong character. Whatever happens in his life, he seems to maintain a very even keel. No doubt in part because of his strong religious faith.
I live in Tucson, so we all had that 'Nick' thing going on! Not as many know of his religious thoughts ... nor do they much care ... but he was all set to become a chaplain for a team and would have been content to leave football. I went bonkers over his time with the EAGLES ... which is why I thought he'd be a perfect fit for what Seattle needed in this in-between time of muddling around with QBs. I'm seriously old, and really am a baseball fan ... but I will be checking in with Russell Wilson and the BRONCOS. I was a John Elway fan and ... before him ... grew up in NJ and NYS and was a Joe Namath fan. Both games now are too different from what I knew in the good ol' days!
You and I share a few similarities. Lived in Tucson for 18 years. Grew up in New York. Superbowl 3 happened when I was 5 so I wasn't really present for it, though I do have memories of adults talking about it in an excited way. I remember Joe Namath and his impact on New York. Looking back, I see how he was iconic in his impact on the NFL and pro sports in general. The era of the superstar began then. Not saying Joe was the impetus. Rather, it was changes in our culture. But Namath was among the first to ride that train.
As for Foles, in many ways he's the anti-Namath. I've long liked his down-to-earth earnestness. I'd have been happy if he came to Seattle for a year or two. Was sorry when it didn't happen. When Wilson was originally traded, I told my wife I hoped we would get Foles as a caretaker. She agreed. She's from Philly. Her whole family are extreme Eagles fans. She was elated (as was I) when Foles beat Tom Brady in the Superbowl. Thought it was a miracle, which is ironic since Nick's quite the holy roller. Who would have expected that result? And the way it happened? With Nick catching the winning touchdown and Brady trying to same trick but coming up short.
We must be cousins! --- BTW: I don't think that ANYONE "expected THAT result!" That's when really great sports competitions advance beyond fun! 1969 was insane in the tri-state area: METS won the World Series. RANGERS won the Stanley Cup. Basketball team won their league (whatever it was, then). JETS won the Super Bowl . . . and Namath was the only one who thought THAT would happen! In fact, he famously 'guaranteed' it. --- Namath played back in the day when other players were suggesting that QBs 'wear skirts', re: all of the worry about protecting QBs. Joe Namath suffered too many clipping injuries and retired "old before his time," due to crippling injuries. He was an intense young man, a better-than-average QB, and a brash believer in himself! None of those qualities hurt his game or his team!
I think the team will work really hard to off-set what is lacking in the QBs. Everything I have seen shows a group of newbies (trades and rookies) who are so pumped to show their skills that we will have a most entertaining season with more wins than expected. Then, I am just hoping.
Yes, I'd say that's pretty optimistic. I'd not be at all surprised by a two-win season. Unless Lock shows more than he's shown with Denver. If Geno's under center, two to four sounds about right.
You were going to win the billion dollars? Hey, I was gonna win the billion bucks! That's my money you're angling for. You and me, brother, we need to talk!
I gave the off-season a 4 because in my biased mind, the off-season began after The Trade. Chronologically inaccurate—I get that—but psychologically I see The Trade as the final play of the 2021 season. This helps with acceptance!
Plus, there’s no point in brooding over the past. This is a new team. I’m going to judge PCJS how effectively they build it. They’re off to a promising start.
I am not biased and I predict that the Seahawks will go 20-0.
It’s not that I think that 20-0 is the most likely outcome. It’s that if my prediction comes true, it would be crazy awesome.
Seahawks 20-0. Go Hawks!
I get your premise and would word it differently. I take it that you're saying Seahawks fans are not overly or overtly biased. I agree. That said, and maybe I'm just nitpicking semantics, but I assume we're all biased about most everything. We don't notice it because it's in our blind spots. We care about a team and so of course we're biased. We can set aside those biases enough to not come across as insane but that doesn't make us unbiased.
I see bias as part of the human condition. It's a kind of shorthand because, without it, we'd be overwhelmed constantly. We've already decided a zillion things and don't have to revisit them. If I see a lamp post in the street, I know what it is, I know what it does, I know not to walk, ride my bike or drive my car into it. This is a sort of bias. Helpful bias. It only becomes a problem when applied inappropriately, as when one can't set it aside to see something that doesn't fit. If the lamp post is out, it may be helpful to note it's not illuminating that section of street. We all love the Seahawks but if the QB wants out and/or we don't have the tools to win big without a real rebuild, it's healthy if one can acknowledge that.
Taken to an extreme, our bias becomes bigotry. Particularly if applied to people. Then we get all sorts of unfair outcomes. But we can be blind to those biases too. Maybe we're personally educated beyond bias against black people but we care about the state of Israel and, as a result, can't recognize unfair treatment of Palestinians. Or we have a liberal bias and so we tend to think of Texans as ignorant. Or we have a Republican bias (which I won't call a conservative bias because I see it as another kind of radicalism) and so we see those from San Francisco or Seattle as ignorant. We have to watch out for our own biases because they're almost always invisible to us.
We can see this clearly in history because it's so obvious. Just yesterday I was at a beach in the extreme Northwest corner of Washington state, a place where there were once canneries. Outside a museum to the salmon canning fishery that was once on that site, there was a big cast iron machine bolted to the ground. It was labeled "100 Chinks". A plaque explained that it was patented under that name because it was believed that it would put at least 100 Chinese workers out of their jobs.
The fact that a name like that could be patented reveals the extreme racism that is part of our history. But not only ours -- racism is part and parcel of human history all around the world. Including genocide and ethnic cleansing. Try to name a society that hasn't participated in one or both. The fact that it was once common doesn't mean we should ignore it or fail to see it. In fact, the reality of that history makes it that much more essential that we educate and enlighten ourselves. Because bias is real and could lead to all sorts of tragedies.
The Holocaust that we capitalize, the one that happened in Nazi Germany, was horrid and needs to be remembered. But we mustn't act like it was unique. I mean, it was unique in the sense that the Germans applied industrial scale assembly line techniques to the slaughter. As a result, a whole lot of people died in a short period of time. But in terms of intention, it's not really different than many other slaughters, including the U.S. destruction of Native American populations -- which was premeditated and deliberate. It's estimated that there were once 8 million Native Americans in what's now the United States and, at the nadir of their oppression, we were down to something like 50,000.
It's a long way from the question of whether Seahawks fans are biased to a discussion like this. Please forgive me for my digression (and thank you if you've managed to read this far), but I think this a super important topic. It's vital that we recognize that a life without bias is not possible. Best we can do is to acknowledge the biases we see and recognize that we each have hidden or unconscious biases.
If we recognize our baises we can take them into account in our judgements. I do exactly that with the Seahawks and hopefully social issues as well. Perfect... no, but it does leave open an avenue for new information like that which Joe provides daily. The need to belong to a tribe and the willingness to act in ways that are only acceptable within that tribe is different from a simple bias. Attrocities don't occur because of bias but rather when membership is more important than personal ethics. I spend a good chunk of my time just trying not to be an asshole. Membership relieves you of that burden because you can be an asshole in the name of !xE$^r& and still feel good about yourself.
I was in the minority on wanting a bridge QB. Not only for the valid reasons Luis G suggests, but most rookie QBs aren't ready. To have an NFL season of learning and some mop up duty seems a better way to introduce a raw young player to the NFL game. Baker probably wasn't ever going to be around for more than a year, and same should go for Jimmy G. But they would have been much better for the young player's development than these two guys who are fumbling snaps in camp.
Also, that fan's Russell jersey needs some work. It should have read 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, Lock, Harris, and Fant. The updated version would be: Cross, Walker III, 1st rounder, 2nd rounder, Lock, Harris, Fant.
I love the jersey. So much so, I've posted the photo to facebook. I sense that you're tongue is in your cheek when you say he blew it, and that your point is we got more than just two first rounders. An apt point.
I didn't say he blew it, just that he barely covered the half of it. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Fant, Harris, Walker III, and next year's 2nd aren't more valuable than the two 1sts.
The first question should go national !!!!!
I for one, voted that the Seahawks should have added someone at QB. I wanted a reliable journeyman, someone who won't win championships, but neither will single-handedly lose games. The reasoning is that awful QB play will jeopardy the development of players in the offense and decrease morale (making the Seahawks an even less desirable free agent destination).
And jumping the gun: I don't hate the whiners.
Thought the Seahawks would make a play for a Jimmy or a Jared, but at this point the ship has sailed and this is definitely what we're left with.
Actually, there's nothing really"wrong" with being biased. It's just one more facet of being a fan. Personally, I have to repeat myself) . . . 'wash, rinse, repeat' . . . as being in Nick Foles' corner. I still believe he could have 'done THIS job' and could have been the bridge over our troubled waters, until. --- 'See you on the fateful first encounter with Russell Wilson. BTW: Broncs KICK!
Agreed and I did write that in the initial article for the survey, that fans should be biased and it makes it more fun.
I'm two or three chapters behind on the survey stuff. :)
I have a Nick Foles bias too. He was my quarterback when I was a law student at the University of Arizona. He frustrated me there, as he's frustrated NFL fans throughout his career. But he certainly had a few shinning moments. One of 'em historic.
Don't imagine he'd do anything similar for Seattle. I don't share his religious fanaticism (though I respect his right to whatever faith feels right to him). I admire the man for his strong character. Whatever happens in his life, he seems to maintain a very even keel. No doubt in part because of his strong religious faith.
I live in Tucson, so we all had that 'Nick' thing going on! Not as many know of his religious thoughts ... nor do they much care ... but he was all set to become a chaplain for a team and would have been content to leave football. I went bonkers over his time with the EAGLES ... which is why I thought he'd be a perfect fit for what Seattle needed in this in-between time of muddling around with QBs. I'm seriously old, and really am a baseball fan ... but I will be checking in with Russell Wilson and the BRONCOS. I was a John Elway fan and ... before him ... grew up in NJ and NYS and was a Joe Namath fan. Both games now are too different from what I knew in the good ol' days!
You and I share a few similarities. Lived in Tucson for 18 years. Grew up in New York. Superbowl 3 happened when I was 5 so I wasn't really present for it, though I do have memories of adults talking about it in an excited way. I remember Joe Namath and his impact on New York. Looking back, I see how he was iconic in his impact on the NFL and pro sports in general. The era of the superstar began then. Not saying Joe was the impetus. Rather, it was changes in our culture. But Namath was among the first to ride that train.
As for Foles, in many ways he's the anti-Namath. I've long liked his down-to-earth earnestness. I'd have been happy if he came to Seattle for a year or two. Was sorry when it didn't happen. When Wilson was originally traded, I told my wife I hoped we would get Foles as a caretaker. She agreed. She's from Philly. Her whole family are extreme Eagles fans. She was elated (as was I) when Foles beat Tom Brady in the Superbowl. Thought it was a miracle, which is ironic since Nick's quite the holy roller. Who would have expected that result? And the way it happened? With Nick catching the winning touchdown and Brady trying to same trick but coming up short.
We must be cousins! --- BTW: I don't think that ANYONE "expected THAT result!" That's when really great sports competitions advance beyond fun! 1969 was insane in the tri-state area: METS won the World Series. RANGERS won the Stanley Cup. Basketball team won their league (whatever it was, then). JETS won the Super Bowl . . . and Namath was the only one who thought THAT would happen! In fact, he famously 'guaranteed' it. --- Namath played back in the day when other players were suggesting that QBs 'wear skirts', re: all of the worry about protecting QBs. Joe Namath suffered too many clipping injuries and retired "old before his time," due to crippling injuries. He was an intense young man, a better-than-average QB, and a brash believer in himself! None of those qualities hurt his game or his team!
Sounds like you have distinct memories of that time. How old were you in "69?
Don't know what happened to the reply I was writing. I was 38 . . . but wrote a whole thing that went 'disappear-o.'
Bias is just rationalized lying to yourself and without it we'd all be batshit crazy...er.
I think the team will work really hard to off-set what is lacking in the QBs. Everything I have seen shows a group of newbies (trades and rookies) who are so pumped to show their skills that we will have a most entertaining season with more wins than expected. Then, I am just hoping.
Yes, I'd say that's pretty optimistic. I'd not be at all surprised by a two-win season. Unless Lock shows more than he's shown with Denver. If Geno's under center, two to four sounds about right.
Yes, well, I was also sure I was going to be the winner of the billion dollar MegaMillions 🤣🤣
Actually, you did win but Jeff and Elon decided you weren't suitable for the club so they changed the results.
You were going to win the billion dollars? Hey, I was gonna win the billion bucks! That's my money you're angling for. You and me, brother, we need to talk!
I gave the off-season a 4 because in my biased mind, the off-season began after The Trade. Chronologically inaccurate—I get that—but psychologically I see The Trade as the final play of the 2021 season. This helps with acceptance!
Plus, there’s no point in brooding over the past. This is a new team. I’m going to judge PCJS how effectively they build it. They’re off to a promising start.