Steve Wilks: Cardinals will be “very aggressive” in finding a quarterback

[Chopper0080]

My guess is that after we sign two vet QBs and draft a QB in the top two rounds, we will be told about aggressive we were. Which will be funny because of the fact that we will have had to do this as you want to draft a QB, but don't want to head into it with just one guy on the roster.

Now, if we trade for Phillip Rivers...that would be an aggressive move.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SoCal Cardfan]

Mitch, I really love your posts.... I may have disagreed with them once or twice (not openly that I can recall) I wish you could quit engaging the haters, I think it would make the time you spend here more enjoyable... Trust me, you have enough fans here... you don't have to debate every single thought you have....If you enjoy the debate, then by all means... disregard.

But I get the sense that you take criticism too personally, as I said...you have PLENTY of people who appreciate your efforts... Let the haters hate.

I read almost everything you write, and appreciate it all, even if I don't agree.

 

[daves]

I'm part of the Evil Triad including Mitch and Oaken1 in regards to speculating on what is (or has happened) in regards to the drama among the Cards FO and HC.

Drat, now i've run afoul of the Evil Triad(TM)!

My comments were on the observations made regarding my reading of the non-verbals and body language evident in the Wilks intro-presser with MB and SK in attendance.

See my post at #28 this thread.

I'm confident in my reading which is the reason I was not offended or put-off by yours and others criticism. I worked for many years in Management Skills consulting, Human Resources, and Cross-Cultural training and have conducted training for a wide variety of corporate clients---with non-verbal communications a major component in my classes.

I have no doubt that you have more expertise in body language interpretation than most of us here, though of course everyone has some innate ability to interpret body language. Glad you're not taking my response personally!

Some of the comments made regarding non-verbals is correct. You have to get a baseline on an individual before attempting to read the micro gestures. There is also a huge cultural component to how people present themselves in public. It is also extending the argument too far when a complete drama is constructed out of non-verbals alone and the analysis goes in the direction of novel writing without supporting behind-the-scenes facts.

Exactly - and the extrapolation of body language interpretations into flights of fancy regarding a purported backstory is what i consider to be wild, unfounded fantasy, or projections that reflect more on the person inventing the story than on reality supported by evidence.

Appreciate any feedback in regards to my list of observations. Please provide more details over just disbelief. Would appreciate hearing what you read is going on.

Your post included a number of observations that i'll concede to your expertise are accurate. For instance, you state that Keim looks uninterested and un-engaged when Wilks is speaking. Though, i again invite you to watch Arians' introductory press conference and compare Keim's demeanor there as a point of comparison, as well as other press conferences where Keim wasn't the primary speaker, to form a proper "baseline". And further, check this angle, around the 8:20 mark, where Keim looks every bit as engaged as Bidwill. Or perhaps you'd disagree.

Your post also included a number of inferences that i think are unwarranted.

(a) You suggest that Wilks seems to be accepting more than a head coaching job, but may be taking on some of the GM's responsibilities. Yes, Wilks has a commanding presence, but it makes no sense that a rookie head coach, only recently and briefly named a DC / assistant HC, who will have his hands full just fulfilling the duties of a HC, be given any more say in personnel than Arians had? Bidwill even told Wilks that, as a new HC, he was "gonna feel like you're drinking water from a fire hydrant." It's completely unrealistic to believe that Wilks will impinge on Keim's duties.

In fact, you go farther in suggesting that there is already an "alpha dog" competition unfolding between Keim and Wilks, which Bidwill needs to manage. Yet ever since Bidwill promoted Keim to GM, there has been nary a hint of disunity, nor any indication that the responsibilities of owner, GM, and HC are anything but crystal clear.

(b) You note that when Wilks talks about physicality and being smart, "it is almost like he is saying the previous HC and staff weren't doing those things." This is in direct contradiction to the picture you just painted of Wilks as a commanding presence with his own agenda. Why would he base his own priorities on a perception of what the previous HC didn't do? Virtually every HC establishes his core principles from the start. With Arians, it was "Trust, Loyalty, and Respect". And there's an additional unfounded implication that Bidwill wasn't happy with the way Arians ran things - another idea for which there is literally no evidence.

(c) You quote Keim saying that Wilks "didn't even buy me a beer" and imply that Keim didn't really want Wilks as HC, suggesting that it was a hostile, passive-aggressive comment. Yet, it's been widely reported that Wilks was on Keim's radar precisely because Keim was so impressed with Wilks at that meeting.

Also, I believe I am the sole poster in this thread who brought up BA's use of vulgarity with his players. I am aware of BA's hiring story in which MB/SK responded to his creative use of the 'F-word.' Not sure if MB was in disbelief or amazement. I can't find where Oaken1 or Mitch said anything about MB not liking BA's use of vulgarity in this thread. Perhaps I missed it in my reread of the thread.

Mitch has written about it ad nauseam in other threads. This seems to me to be a form of projection - because some people don't like Arians' vulgar personality, they speculate that Bidwill or the players don't like it - but all objective evidence points to the contrary.

I brought up the contrast in use of language between BA and SW. Not once did SW resort to vulgarity or sexual innuendo in his press conference and that sends a completely different message to his players. SW's non-verbal presentation at the podium and his use of language broadcast plenty regarding his future behavior toward the players.

Wilks and Arians certainly have different personalities. But i don't get what message their way of speaking sends to players regarding their expectations or behavior as coaches. Arians was known for "coaching them hard and hugging them later". Are you saying that you think that Wilks will be just as serious and stern when it comes to his expectations and coaching, without the jovial side? He definitely doesn't come across as anyone's fun uncle!

Well, i guess we will find out whether the speculations of the Evil Triad have merit as time unfolds. And perhaps the Cardinals Flight Plan will shed some light. But put me down as extremely skeptical that we'll be seeing a power struggle between Keim and Wilks, a rift between Bidwill and Keim, any indication that Wilks cares one iota how Arians ran things, any indication that Keim didn't want Wilks, that Bidwill effectively forced Arians out, or that Arians' vulgarity was not liked, or pretty much any of the flights of fancy scattered throughout this thread and others by the members of the Evil Triad have any merit.

...dave

 

[Mitch]

Mitch, I really love your posts.... I may have disagreed with them once or twice (not openly that I can recall) I wish you could quit engaging the haters, I think it would make the time you spend here more enjoyable... Trust me, you have enough fans here... you don't have to debate every single thought you have....If you enjoy the debate, then by all means... disregard.

But I get the sense that you take criticism too personally, as I said...you have PLENTY of people who appreciate your efforts... Let the haters hate.

I read almost everything you write, and appreciate it all, even if I don't agree.

Thank you SoCal. You and I don't agree all the time...none of us do. But you have always offered respectful rebuttals which deepen and extend the conversations and debates. You have also given me positive feedback and encouragement, for which I am extremely grateful. Same with so many of the posters here. Like Bucky---he and i agree on a lot of things but when we disagree we argue our points passionately, but respectfully. Bucky doesn't ridicule or mock me or my thoughts. He and I kid each other from time to time, but we don't denigrate or mock each other.

For years I have taken the shots and sat idly by. Not any more. It's all a matter of tone. If the tone is condescending, mocking, taunting, derisive or ridiculing, I will fight back---not just for me---this year I've been standing up more often for others when i see their thoughts getting ridiculed (just ask THESMEL, for example). People say, well don't take it so personally. But, you know what? It is personal. I, like many of us here, put my heart and soul into my thoughts and words---and when someone has the indecency to make a mockery of them---it's personal. There are respectful ways to disagree.

It's especially personal when I think of the number of former members of the board whom I consider good friends who no longer post here out of the same frustration and aggravation. These days i regret that i didn't do more to stand up for them. And these days i keep asking myself whether I really want to post here anymore---and the only way I can do that is to stand up for myself and for others who receive the same level of disrespect and abuse.

The last thing is---and I teach a creative writing class of 40 students---if we don't create a safe zone here where posters feel courageous enough to write from the hearts and souls, then we are missing out on the best of what this board and its membership can offer. As you know, I take a lot of risks. So do others. But many posters here are afraid of speaking their true minds for fear of ridicule. And I owe it not only to myself, but to them (some who are gone now, but I hope one day will be back) to fight for respect and fight for the chance to make this board a safe zone, where everyone can feel like he or she is a valued and respected member, especially when they write their true thoughts and take the risk of thinking outside of the box. On this board, i am sad to say, several posters here go out of their way to silence outside of the box thinking. The level of ridicule here is totally unacceptable. And when I see it---i am going to have my say. I am sick and tired of it---and it is keeping us from having the most amazing haven for Cardinals' fans on the planet.

 

[clif]

Thank you SoCal. You and I don't agree all the time...none of us do. But you have always offered respectful rebuttals which deepen and extend the conversations and debates. You have also given me positive feedback and encouragement, for which I am extremely grateful. Same with so many of the posters here. Like Bucky---he and i agree on a lot of things but when we disagree we argue our points passionately, but respectfully. Bucky doesn't ridicule or mock me or my thoughts. He and I kid each other from time to time, but we don't denigrate or mock each other.

For years I have taken the shots and sat idly by. Not any more. It's all a matter of tone. If the tone is condescending, mocking, taunting, derisive or ridiculing, I will fight back---not just for me---this year I've been standing up more often for others when i see their thoughts getting ridiculed (just ask THESMEL, for example). People say, well don't take it so personally. But, you know what? It is personal. I, like many of us here, put my heart and soul into my thoughts and words---and when someone has the indecency to make a mockery of them---it's personal. There are respectful ways to disagree.

It's especially personal when I think of the number of former members of the board whom I consider good friends who no longer post here out of the same frustration and aggravation. These days i regret that i didn't do more to stand up for them. And these days i keep asking myself whether I really want to post here anymore---and the only way I can do that is to stand up for myself and for others who receive the same level of disrespect and abuse.

The last thing is---and I teach a creative writing class of 40 students---if we don't create a safe zone here where posters feel courageous enough to write from the hearts and souls, then we are missing out on the best of what this board and its membership can offer. As you know, I take a lot of risks. So do others. But many posters here are afraid of speaking their true minds for fear of ridicule. And I owe it not only to myself, but to them (some who are gone now, but I hope one day will be back) to fight for respect and fight for the chance to make this board a safe zone, where everyone can feel like he or she is a valued and respected member, especially when they write their true thoughts and take the risk of thinking outside of the box. On this board, i am sad to say, several posters here go out of their way to silence outside of the box thinking. The level of ridicule here is totally unacceptable. And when I see it---i am going to have my say. I am sick and tired of it---and it is keeping us from having the most amazing haven for Cardinals' fans on the planet.

I’m pretty sure who ever you’re referring to does not include myself however I did want to respond to you and address the larger issue of what I like to call “snipers”.

One, I personally probably have disagreed with you more if not the most out of any person on here over the years, but you probably don’t know that because I rarely engage you or post. I come back to, well that’s his opinion and i won’t add any substance to the argument, or the point is so trivial it’s not worth it. Not because I respect you (I do) or don’t like you (I do), I, like you and others have seriously reduced my time spent here (and other MB’s) because the same types find their way to these places, not to have open discussion, but to try and indoctrinate others in their beliefs and attack others or “snipe” other posters or their opinions.

Disagree with my view all you want. Hell im ok with you coming back at me. What I don’t like is people who go thread to thread shouting the same talking point but are unable to eloquently share it or defend it so they resort to attacks and or disappear altogether but again resurface in another thread talking the same crap as if no one saw what they posted.

In my Master P voice (a rapper for those that don’t know. Google him)
I’m bout it, bout it. So bring it on until I get bored and decide to move on.

 

[clif]

Sniping = trolling, IMO

 

[Mitch]

I’m pretty sure who ever you’re referring to does not include myself however I did want to respond to you and address the larger issue of what I like to call “snipers”.

One, I personally probably have disagreed with you more if not the most out of any person on here over the years, but you probably don’t know that because I rarely engage you or post. I come back to, well that’s his opinion and i won’t add any substance to the argument, or the point is so trivial it’s not worth it. Not because I respect you (I do) or don’t like you (I do), I, like you and others have seriously reduced my time spent here (and other MB’s) because the same types find their way to these places, not to have open discussion, but to try and indoctrinate others in their beliefs and attack others or “snipe” other posters or their opinions.

Disagree with my view all you want. Hell im ok with you coming back at me. What I don’t like is people who go thread to thread shouting the same talking point but are unable to eloquently share it or defend it so they resort to attacks and or disappear altogether but again resurface in another thread talking the same crap as if no one saw what they posted.

In my Master P voice (a rapper for those that don’t know. Google him)
I’m bout it, bout it. So bring it on until I get bored and decide to move on.

Well said, Clif. It is very upsetting to hear that you spend less time here or don't post as often because of the snipers. This is exactly what has to change. Disagreeing is a good thing---it makes for great conversations and debates. But the first rule of debating is: "respect your opponent." I respect you, Clif. And I hope you will post more---the board needs your insights. I and others will have your back. Let's bout it as a team.

 

[MrYeahBut]

I consider myself a sniper because I don't do stats or X's & O's or DVOA (whatever that is) and because of that I generally don't get into a back and forth with anyone as I'm, admittedly, ignorant of facts. I just throw in comments here and there. I try not to do it in a mean-spirited way, though I have on occasion.

The second I take anything as personal, I'm toast... here or in my life in general.

I'll add nothing substantive as usual with a mean-spirited snipe... Hey @cheesebeef and @SeattleCard , will you guys make an avatar bet with someone other than each other and lose because I hate both of your avatars!!!

Gracias en antemano

 

[GimmedaBall]

Daves,

Thanks for giving a second look at my comments regarding the SW press conference.

You chimed in on the discussion regarding the internal drama and politics surrounding the Card’s FO at post #36 of this thread. Up to that point, we had several posters talking about what being ‘aggressive’ means, some offering QB moves, and some speculating on the dynamics of the main actors in the FO.

I think you would agree that this forum is a place for SPECULATION about our chosen NFL team. A large part of that speculation is based on a FANTASY of what we ourselves would do if only given a chance to run things, call the plays, draft players, throw the winning TD pass, etc.

There is little distinction between constructing a narrative to explain the in-house politics and one based on shuffling the entire roster for the upcoming season. Both involve a good deal of imagination and conjecture. A requirement to participate in the fantasy that is the core of this site is to allow fellow posters to give their take even if it seems ridiculous or preposterous to your own sensibilities. That is the basic unwritten contract between forum members—respect for the opinion of others even as you post your own FANTASY on how things happened or should proceed.

Here’s your post #37 in italics and my comments:

This thread should be renamed, "Wild fantasies pulled from the nether regions" or "Projecting our own thoughts onto others via creative body language interpretation."

You lead off with an insult and a vulgar reference—by ‘nether regions’ I assume you are alluding to ‘pulling things out of the ass.’ You also demean the whole science of Non-verbal communications and body language by referring to simple observations as projecting and creative interpretation.

Maybe Bidwill just got laid the morning of the press conference and Keim was constipated from a couple weeks of rich meals wining and dining the HC Candidates.

More vulgarity and bowel movement references as an explanation of what is going on in-house and at the press conference. You are going for the same effect BA gets when he drops 'F-bombs' on a player---shock value and it puts the guy on the receiving end on the defensive. Is it any wonder then that you later defend BA’s vulgarity and assume that it didn’t effect MB—a mistake since the reference you were referring to was my comment that was in reference to BA’s vulgarity and his players.

I'm confident that Bidwill & Keim came to a mutual team decision on Wilks, and that Bidwill would not have hired someone that Keim didn't like, then give Keim an extension as some bizarre form of "appeasement". How incredibly dysfunctional that would be!

Here you are building up your fantasy and explanation of the internal dynamics. Your assumptions are different than those offered up by Mitch/Oaken1/myself—but they are still your construction based on your imagination of what you think has happened. You are engaging in as much conjecture as anything put up by the Evil Triad.

The preponderance of actual evidence is that Bidwill gave Keim an extension because he is pleased with the job Keim has done and enjoys working together to come to "Cardinals" decisions, and that hiring Wilks was one of those decisions.

Again, your fantasy as to what happened. We know that SK got a new contract—that is a single fact not some collection or preponderance of actual evidence. We also don’t know how MB came to the point of the new contract. In your fantasy, MB is “pleased with the job Keim has done and enjoys working together . . .”

Were you privy to the internal thinking of MB to project that he was ‘pleased with Keim’ or that ‘he enjoys working together?’ That is how you would have liked it to play out and you can ASSUME based on the new contract that that is the case but without actual evidence you are fantasizing based on what you think happened and/or what you would like to believe happened. Some things that are unknown to most of us: Did MB consider hiring a new GM after BA and CP retired? Did MB get in touch with other GM candidates to feel out their interest in the job? Did MB ‘settle’ on SK because there wasn’t anyone else out there willing to take the job? (that is a decision that happens plenty in the corporate world.) What did MB discuss with BA during an exit interview and did that impact the new contract with SK? Was there any shuffling of the organizational structure with a reduction (or increase) in SK’s role even as he got a contract extension (another thing that happens in the corporate world)? Also, how do you know that it was SK’s decision to hire SW? You speculate that yet you don’t have any evidence let alone a preponderance of evidence. Cards went through numerous candidates and how MB/SK arrived at SW is an unknown open for speculation (yours and Mitch’s). You can choose to believe the ‘Kumbaya’ sing-along at the press conference—but that may well be different than what actually occurred—or it may be exactly what occurred.

As for Bidwill or players being turned off by Arians' vulgar language, Bidwill has joked about bonding with Arians over the dinner where Arians used the 'F' word as a noun, verb, and adjective. And locker rooms are probably the last place where anyone would be surprised or offended by vulgar language.

Here, you have added Bidwill into my observation that BA’s vulgarity may have insulted some of his players. Also, maybe Bidwill did ‘bond’ with BA over ‘F-bombs. My memory of that report was that Bidwill was more shocked/amazed at BA’s language over any bonding going on. My comment concerning vulgarity is that SW did not include vulgarity or sexual innuendo in his presser introduction. In a later post, you do not include the ‘player’ aspect but instead focus on MB’s reaction alone. Sure looks like a defense of vulgar language—refer to you opening comments on the issue at the top of the conversation. To what extent do you use vulgarity in your routine conversations and in the work place?

When you make the statement that ‘locker rooms are probably the last place where anyone would be surprised of offended by vulgar language’ you are making an assumption based on your own fantasy of how the guys in a pro-football locker room talk. You might be right—you might be wrong. It is one thing for the players to use vulgarity between themselves and a whole different dynamic when it is directed at you from the HC/boss. For a lot of reasons, using vulgarity with grown men has a price. A lot of players who make it to the NFL did so because they had strong family values and a religious upbringing. You demean these players by assuming that they are not surprised or offended. All it takes for me to be right is one offended player who had to tolerate BA’s vulgarity because they wanted to play in the NFL.

I could go on but I guess there's no point debating baseless conspiracy theories with true believers. What a brave soul you are to have confronted all the true believers. Your theory about how the FO functions is as much a ‘baseless conspiracy theory’ as anything put up by the Evil Triad. The only difference is that you think your fantasy is totally logical and correct and the rest of use are pulling things out of our nether regions. And, if you give the Evil Triad a close reading, you will see that we differ on many points. Mitch’s theory and Oaken1's theory are opposite of my own on many points. LOL.

FYI, you body language experts might enjoy comparing and contrasting with Arians' introductory presser. Check Keim's expression at the 17:00 mark and his "excitement" when he answers questions a bit later.

I mentioned in a later post that it is important to get a baseline on any given individual regarding their non-verbals and body language. For the most part, SK is pretty stoic and sits at attention during press conferences. He normally makes little eye contact and seldom smiles.

One thing I have never seen SK do before was the disrespect—as measured by his non-verbal/body language— at the end of SW’s comments to the press. SK moves to the far end of the stage but stays in view and goes for his cell phone and checks his messages. SK is still in full view but as far away from SW as he can get. This is going on at the same time that SW is bringing his family to the front and helping his son hold up the Cardinal helmet for a family portrait. That moment was a highlight for SW—to get a job as a NFL HC and to have his family with him to share the moment. SK did not even give him a second of his attention or the courtesy to leave the stage and play with his phone messages out-of-sight as SW and family got their moment.

For the occasion, SK wears his colorful sneakers with his dress suit—he didn’t bother to slip into his dress shoes for SW’s intro. Now, you can dismiss that observation as meaning nothing . . . or you can ask yourself how you would read it if a fellow worker/supervisor/or child did that same thing to you. It gains more importance when you pair that with SK’s normal baseline demeanor—he knows full well the accepted protocol in the business world—dress shoes, giving attention to another, not dismissing someone so you can check phone messages. That single non-verbal interaction by SK is simply RUDE. What it means outside the presser and inside the FO is open for conjecture but it doesn't indicate that all is well.

Daves—whether you meant to or not—you went overboard in your reaction to Mitch’s post and his fantasy explanation of the FO drama. Mitch called it his 'theory.'

You owe him an apology. You put together you own explanation from a different perspective but it was still based on your FANTASY and SPECULATION and piecing together your read of the ‘facts.’ You broke the unwritten contract that keeps open forums functional—you went overboard with your dismissive content and attack. Mitch is dedicated to the Cards and puts in a lot of work to share his ideas and his research—that earns some basic respect and courtesy—even if you disagree 100% with everything single thing he posts.

 

[Solar7]

I'm confident that Bidwill & Keim came to a mutual team decision on Wilks, and that Bidwill would not have hired someone that Keim didn't like, then give Keim an extension as some bizarre form of "appeasement". How incredibly dysfunctional that would be!

Here you are building up your fantasy and explanation of the internal dynamics. Your assumptions are different than those offered up by Mitch/Oaken1/myself—but they are still your construction based on your imagination of what you think has happened. You are engaging in as much conjecture as anything put up by the Evil Triad.

The preponderance of actual evidence is that Bidwill gave Keim an extension because he is pleased with the job Keim has done and enjoys working together to come to "Cardinals" decisions, and that hiring Wilks was one of those decisions.

Again, your fantasy as to what happened. We know that SK got a new contract—that is a single fact not some collection or preponderance of actual evidence. We also don’t know how MB came to the point of the new contract. In your fantasy, MB is “pleased with the job Keim has done and enjoys working together . . .”

Were you privy to the internal thinking of MB to project that he was ‘pleased with Keim’ or that ‘he enjoys working together?’ That is how you would have liked it to play out and you can ASSUME based on the new contract that that is the case but without actual evidence you are fantasizing based on what you think happened and/or what you would like to believe happened. Some things that are unknown to most of us: Did MB consider hiring a new GM after BA and CP retired? Did MB get in touch with other GM candidates to feel out their interest in the job? Did MB ‘settle’ on SK because there wasn’t anyone else out there willing to take the job? (that is a decision that happens plenty in the corporate world.) What did MB discuss with BA during an exit interview and did that impact the new contract with SK? Was there any shuffling of the organizational structure with a reduction (or increase) in SK’s role even as he got a contract extension (another thing that happens in the corporate world)? Also, how do you know that it was SK’s decision to hire SW? You speculate that yet you don’t have any evidence let alone a preponderance of evidence. Cards went through numerous candidates and how MB/SK arrived at SW is an unknown open for speculation (yours and Mitch’s). You can choose to believe the ‘Kumbaya’ sing-along at the press conference—but that may well be different than what actually occurred—or it may be exactly what occurred.

This is a conversation between you and daves, so I'm not going to cut in and reply to the whole post, but this is where the speculation bothers me. In what organization do you get a contract extension from a boss that doesn't like you? Especially when you have remaining time on your deal, and the "rift" can be settled with the expiration of the contract? Or what employee was overruled by his boss and then accepts a contract extension in the middle of a rift, especially when said boss is going nowhere anytime soon?

A contract extension or raise 99% of the time implies that you're happy with the direction of the organization under that person's leadership.

Lastly, I believe in the "where there's smoke, there's fire" adage, and none of the media whose job it is to report on this and be on the pulse of the team, have reported any kind of rift or dissension in this process. With the exception of you, Gimmedaball, as I don't know your location, all of the writers are closer to the organization than any of the "evil triad," and I don't think anyone is going to bury the lead on a juicy story involving front office drama.

As to everyone's overall points here, man, there's a lot of drama here. This is one of the softest, easiest places to post on the internet in my experience, outside of maybe the occasional example a couple times a year. I can't believe anyone would feel "attacked" enough that they're afraid to share their opinions, even if others disagree vehemently.

 

[oaken1]

This is a conversation between you and daves, so I'm not going to cut in and reply to the whole post, but this is where the speculation bothers me. In what organization do you get a contract extension from a boss that doesn't like you? Especially when you have remaining time on your deal, and the "rift" can be settled with the expiration of the contract? Or what employee was overruled by his boss and then accepts a contract extension in the middle of a rift, especially when said boss is going nowhere anytime soon?

A contract extension or raise 99% of the time implies that you're happy with the direction of the organization under that person's leadership.

Lastly, I believe in the "where there's smoke, there's fire" adage, and none of the media whose job it is to report on this and be on the pulse of the team, have reported any kind of rift or dissension in this process. With the exception of you, Gimmedaball, as I don't know your location, all of the writers are closer to the organization than any of the "evil triad," and I don't think anyone is going to bury the lead on a juicy story involving front office drama.

As to everyone's overall points here, man, there's a lot of drama here. This is one of the softest, easiest places to post on the internet in my experience, outside of maybe the occasional example a couple times a year. I can't believe anyone would feel "attacked" enough that they're afraid to share their opinions, even if others disagree vehemently.

I think some things got blown out of proportion. It was me who "suggested" that Bidwill chose Wilks... but that does not suggest a "rift"... just an over ruling.

any of you dudes married?? Go to buy a new car, and you really want the Mustang...but the wife makes you buy the Voyager instead?? Does that create a "Rift"? No. but it doesnt mean she wont do something extra special for you when she gets home...to show she still loves you and help you feel better about it.

I never suggested Bidwill dislikes Keim... quite the opposite in fact... I think they are quite chummy,... but that type of personal relationship is exactly why it can hurt when disagreements happen. When a relationship is strictly professional it is pretty easy to chalk it up to "Business is Business, and he is the boss"

I wouldnt place any stock in local media though. The Redbirds have kept a pretty tight ship since Mike took over... even if there were a "rift" nobody would hear about it until management wanted them to. You cant even get any information out of those guys about players and thats what they were hired to do..

 

[Solar7]

I think some things got blown out of proportion. It was me who "suggested" that Bidwill chose Wilks... but that does not suggest a "rift"... just an over ruling.

any of you dudes married?? Go to buy a new car, and you really want the Mustang...but the wife makes you buy the Voyager instead?? Does that create a "Rift"? No. but it doesnt mean she wont do something extra special for you when she gets home...to show she still loves you and help you feel better about it.

I never suggested Bidwill dislikes Keim... quite the opposite in fact... I think they are quite chummy,... but that type of personal relationship is exactly why it can hurt when disagreements happen. When a relationship is strictly professional it is pretty easy to chalk it up to "Business is Business, and he is the boss"

I wouldnt place any stock in local media though. The Redbirds have kept a pretty tight ship since Mike took over... even if there were a "rift" nobody would hear about it until management wanted them to. You cant even get any information out of those guys about players and thats what they were hired to do..

Thanks for the clarification.

I'm not married, and while I understand the analogy, I have a tendency to look at this more from a business perspective... because while your wife may want the Voyager instead of the Mustang so you can efficiently move the kids around, both in business and the NFL, you're looking to make money and put out a product. If my boss drastically overruled me to hire a counterpart at my position that I felt was not equipped for the role, and was going to affect my job, I wouldn't take an extension. I'd politely explain that I'd like to see how this relationship goes and reapproach at the end of my deal.

But I kind of jumped to conclusions from your post because I've inferred from your previous posting that you're not exactly head of the Steve Keim Fan Club.

 

[GimmedaBall]

This is a conversation between you and daves, so I'm not going to cut in and reply to the whole post, but this is where the speculation bothers me. In what organization do you get a contract extension from a boss that doesn't like you? Especially when you have remaining time on your deal, and the "rift" can be settled with the expiration of the contract? Or what employee was overruled by his boss and then accepts a contract extension in the middle of a rift, especially when said boss is going nowhere anytime soon?

I never made the assertion that MB doesn't like SK yet still gave him an extension. I believe that was part of Mitch's theory on what is going on in the FO.

A contract extension or raise 99% of the time implies that you're happy with the direction of the organization under that person's leadership.

Where did you come up with the 99% number?

Lastly, I believe in the "where there's smoke, there's fire" adage, and none of the media whose job it is to report on this and be on the pulse of the team, have reported any kind of rift or dissension in this process. With the exception of you, Gimmedaball, as I don't know your location, all of the writers are closer to the organization than any of the "evil triad," and I don't think anyone is going to bury the lead on a juicy story involving front office drama.

The local media (including both the AZ Republic and the local TV talking heads) seldom if ever go digging into the internal workings behind the scenes of the Cards and their Front Office. Can you point to a critical report into the internal behind-the-scenes drama with the Cards? I can't.

In other media markets, the reporters are relentless in digging up the 'scoop' of the local teams. Radio talking heads are constantly trying to one-up each other. Tune into some of the radio commentary in New York.

Perhaps that is an editorial decision for our local media. We get 'fan friendly' reports on the team but seldom the dirty laundry. Nothing wrong with that---except when trying to figure what is going on and need some dirty laundry for clues.

As to everyone's overall points here, man, there's a lot of drama here. This is one of the softest, easiest places to post on the internet in my experience, outside of maybe the occasional example a couple times a year. I can't believe anyone would feel "attacked" enough that they're afraid to share their opinions, even if others disagree vehemently.

I think there are a lot of people interested in the team who log on and read but don't post an opinion. Those of us with verbal diarrhea (such as you and I Solar7) have no restraints on going public. Just check the posts and the views on a given topic. You'll see a handful of people debating, arguing with many times more people logging in and viewing the topic without posting anything.

I inserted my comments within Solar7's comments. Click to expand his post.

 

[Zeno]

http://www.newyorkupstate.com/buffa..._is_wrong_about_josh_allen_lamar_jackson.html

The more I read about Lamar Jackson the more I am hoping he is the Cardinals pick.

 

[cardncubfan]

Geez, can we close this thread already? It's still much ado about nothing. smh

 

[Solar7]

I never made the assertion that MB doesn't like SK yet still gave him an extension. I believe that was part of Mitch's theory on what is going on in the FO.

No, but you did question if MB went out and recruited other GMs, and that SK might have been extended because "no one else was willing to take the job." That's essentially the implication of your post.

Where did you come up with the 99% number?

Just a colloquial use of the term. I could have used "most," or "the vast majority," but I was typing off the cuff.

Lastly, I believe in the "where there's smoke, there's fire" adage, and none of the media whose job it is to report on this and be on the pulse of the team, have reported any kind of rift or dissension in this process. With the exception of you, Gimmedaball, as I don't know your location, all of the writers are closer to the organization than any of the "evil triad," and I don't think anyone is going to bury the lead on a juicy story involving front office drama.

The local media (including both the AZ Republic and the local TV talking heads) seldom if ever go digging into the internal workings behind the scenes of the Cards and their Front Office. Can you point to a critical report into the internal behind-the-scenes drama with the Cards? I can't.

In other media markets, the reporters are relentless in digging up the 'scoop' of the local teams. Radio talking heads are constantly trying to one-up each other. Tune into some of the radio commentary in New York.

Perhaps that is an editorial decision for our local media. We get 'fan friendly' reports on the team but seldom the dirty laundry. Nothing wrong with that---except when trying to figure what is going on and need some dirty laundry for clues.

In a cursory search I can't find any stuff, but it's been a while since anyone high profile got fired. I tried to look back at the release of Whisenhunt and Graves, but pulling news articles from six years ago isn't helping much. I think if there were something to report, it would leak, but we've been a classy organization for at least a decade or so now, both on and off the field (with exceptions that were dealt with swiftly regarding a few players).

But for effect, here's the AZ Republic ripping the Suns and certainly not hiding any dirty laundry as they attack ownership. https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...donough-earl-watson-eric-bledsoe-z/799211001/

I don't think the Cardinals are an exception to that reporting, I just think they have a pretty cleanly run org. I have a personal friend who is a personal friend of someone in senior leadership over there and they have nothing bad to say.

I think there are a lot of people interested in the team who log on and read but don't post an opinion. Those of us with verbal diarrhea (such as you and I Solar7) have no restraints on going public. Just check the posts and the views on a given topic. You'll see a handful of people debating, arguing with many times more people logging in and viewing the topic without posting anything.

That happens on tons of message boards - lurkers that don't post, whether it's because of their fear they don't have interesting input, or if they're just here to read and not contribute. I was one of those lurkers for a long time. Check my registration date and post count... I've been here so long without activity that I only average 13 posts a month here since I was registered.

 

[Arz101]

Geez, can we close this thread already? It's still much ado about nothing. smh

Cardinal's fan cardncubfan wants to be "aggressive" in finding a closure to this thread

 

[Mitch]

For the record: I have never thought or said that MB doesn't like SK. Quite the reverse.

I, myself, am very undecided about Keim. I think he cow-towed to BA and didn't hold BA and even more so certain members of BA's staff accountable. On the other hand, Keim pulled off some big trades and made some pretty fruitful bargain signings. I still think the lack of player development is more on the coaches than Keim. But, let's see what Steve Wilks and the new staff do with the youth on the roster and this year's draft picks.

I think Gimmedaball makes some good points about Keim's demeanor at SW's introductory press conference. This bothered me as well.

My thread "Keim Vindicated" was based on the inference that seeing as SK was still under contract for 2 more years, the timing of his new contract signifies that Bidwill does not blame Keim for the shortcomings of the past two years---in fact, it's quite a strong statement of support and vindication. The added fact that the utmost item of Steve Wilks' priority list is "player development" and "understanding what makes today's players tick" completes the syllogism that Keim did his part but the previous coaching staff dropped the ball.

 

[oaken1]

Thanks for the clarification.

I'm not married, and while I understand the analogy, I have a tendency to look at this more from a business perspective... because while your wife may want the Voyager instead of the Mustang so you can efficiently move the kids around, both in business and the NFL, you're looking to make money and put out a product. If my boss drastically overruled me to hire a counterpart at my position that I felt was not equipped for the role, and was going to affect my job, I wouldn't take an extension. I'd politely explain that I'd like to see how this relationship goes and reapproach at the end of my deal.

But I kind of jumped to conclusions from your post because I've inferred from your previous posting that you're not exactly head of the Steve Keim Fan Club.

LOL... dude... I love stevie Keim... he is by far the best GM we have ever had around here. But he aint flawless and I would like to see him grow in his job and fix some of his warts.
He is the GM.. he gets praise when the world is sparkly and he gets the poo thrown on him when things go bad... right now we are screwed and whomever or however the decisions were made...he is ultimately the guy who will take the brunt of the criticism for that.
Sometimes a person hits success and they start believing their own hype... I think this has happened with SK... but dude needs to forget he ever won the GM of the year award and get back to work like he is still hungry... because the fans are hungry and if his level of hungry doesnt match the fans level of hungry then he is gonna be a problem.

You like to look at things from a business perspective...so... Steve Keims job is to put together a team that will win a super bowl... its all about championships...playoffs, division banners...all losers...
But somehow we find ourselves suddenly with nearly no oline, no WR, and most importantly no field general to lead our team.... basically we have DJHump, David Johnson, and Larry on offense.
That is a colossal failure and that falls directly on SK.

"well, this happened" and "that happened"...all excuses. It is his job to make sure situations like this just do not happen, regardless.

I think he can fix it. Just concerned he will be too conservative in his methods because his history so far shows that he holds back and is more prone towards standing pat instead of snatching the bull by the horns...

 

[Mitch]

This is a conversation between you and daves, so I'm not going to cut in and reply to the whole post, but this is where the speculation bothers me. In what organization do you get a contract extension from a boss that doesn't like you? Especially when you have remaining time on your deal, and the "rift" can be settled with the expiration of the contract? Or what employee was overruled by his boss and then accepts a contract extension in the middle of a rift, especially when said boss is going nowhere anytime soon?

A contract extension or raise 99% of the time implies that you're happy with the direction of the organization under that person's leadership.

Lastly, I believe in the "where there's smoke, there's fire" adage, and none of the media whose job it is to report on this and be on the pulse of the team, have reported any kind of rift or dissension in this process. With the exception of you, Gimmedaball, as I don't know your location, all of the writers are closer to the organization than any of the "evil triad," and I don't think anyone is going to bury the lead on a juicy story involving front office drama.

As to everyone's overall points here, man, there's a lot of drama here. This is one of the softest, easiest places to post on the internet in my experience, outside of maybe the occasional example a couple times a year. I can't believe anyone would feel "attacked" enough that they're afraid to share their opinions, even if others disagree vehemently.

Let me get this straight---you and daves come onto this thread and make a mockery of my and oaken's theories---and now "there's a lot of drama" here. You are danged right there is a lot of drama---drama that you and daves created in the first place.

If you think this is one of the "softest, easiest places to post," why don't you try spending an hour or two writing your own thread---and then see what it feels like to have some snarky poster come right in and call you and your thread absurd, preposterous, utter nonsense, pure fantasy from the nether world (like you know where). See how that feels.

if you think, "well i can just shrug it off as this is what happens on MBs---no big deal", keep writing the threads, keep spending several hours a week researching and writing them, keep spending hours responded to other poster's comments---keep posting your threads---and then see how long it takes before the mockery gets to you. You can't be human and not feel the mean-spiritedness on a human level. It's impossible.

 

[Solar7]

LOL... dude... I love stevie Keim... he is by far the best GM we have ever had around here. But he aint flawless and I would like to see him grow in his job and fix some of his warts.
He is the GM.. he gets praise when the world is sparkly and he gets the **** thrown on him when things go bad... right now we are screwed and whomever or however the decisions were made...he is ultimately the guy who will take the brunt of the criticism for that.
Sometimes a person hits success and they start believing their own hype... I think this has happened with SK... but dude needs to forget he ever won the GM of the year award and get back to work like he is still hungry... because the fans are hungry and if his level of hungry doesnt match the fans level of hungry then he is gonna be a problem.

You like to look at things from a business perspective...so... Steve Keims job is to put together a team that will win a super bowl... its all about championships...playoffs, division banners...all losers...
But somehow we find ourselves suddenly with nearly no oline, no WR, and most importantly no field general to lead our team.... basically we have DJHump, David Johnson, and Larry on offense.
That is a colossal failure and that falls directly on SK.

"well, this happened" and "that happened"...all excuses. It is his job to make sure situations like this just do not happen, regardless.

I think he can fix it. Just concerned he will be too conservative in his methods because his history so far shows that he holds back and is more prone towards standing pat instead of snatching the bull by the horns...

All good, we’re on the same page then. Last year I was clamoring for a QB, and panicked about the WR situation. We at least took a shot at a WR, and time will tell if he’ll develop with a new staff. I’m not as concerned at OL as some are.

However, I just don’t feel Keim is all that conservative, just principled. He went all in to get Chandler Jones, which is more aggressive than this team has ever been in my life.

But I’m happy you and I don’t think that wildly differently about him, we just talk about it differently.

 

[Solar7]

Let me get this straight---you and daves come onto this thread and make a mockery of my and oaken's theories---and now "there's a lot of drama" here. You are danged right there is a lot of drama---drama that you and daves created in the first place.

If you think this is one of the "softest, easiest places to post," why don't you try spending an hour or two writing your own thread---and then see what it feels like to have some snarky poster come right in and call you and your thread absurd, preposterous, utter nonsense, pure fantasy from the nether world (like you know where). See how that feels.

if you think, "well i can just shrug it off as this is what happens on MBs---no big deal", keep writing the threads, keep spending several hours a week researching and writing them, keep spending hours responded to other poster's comments---keep posting your threads---and then see how long it takes before the mockery gets to you. You can't be human and not feel the mean-spiritedness on a human level. It's impossible.

Mitch, I’ve been pretty effusive in my praise of you over the years when I’ve been posting. I admire the work you put into your opinions and posts. I like you, daves seems to like you from what I’ve seen, and it’s not like we follow you from thread to thread to belittle your opinions. So I’ll say, I get no pleasure from making you unhappy. Were I trolling, I’d be intentionally posting to elicit a reaction.

I do a lot of writing outside of this board. On other forums, in other shared communities, wherever it may be. I’ve learned that no matter what I write, people are going to disagree, criticize, and be as grating as they possibly can, and you need to roll with the punches.

But let’s call a spade a spade here - daves and I didn’t maraud into a thread you created and spent hours researching to belittle you, we called shenanigans on a couple of replies in a thread that was overwhelmingly turning into a criticism of a coach and GM who haven’t even made a personnel decision yet, and then skewed into a tangent that implies that something sinister lurks behind the curtain on this team.

But I will say, if you can’t handle people challenging your opinion in sometimes grandiose ways, you’re going to stand to get hurt more often than not.

I enjoy your posts and would hope I don’t get put on ignore, but if that’s going to make you more comfortable, I respect your decision, just know I hold no ill will towards you.

 

[GimmedaBall]

Geez, can we close this thread already? It's still much ado about nothing. smh

Is there somebody there twisting your neck until you open the thread? You have the power to close the thread by not opening it. (Post a reply and keep it open)

 

[GimmedaBall]

No, but you did question if MB went out and recruited other GMs, and that SK might have been extended because "no one else was willing to take the job." That's essentially the implication of your post.

Solar7---Don't gimmedaball, gimmeabreak. We are in different time zones and galaxies far, far away. I posed a whole series of possibilities that we don't know about. There were no implications meant that any of them happened.

 

[GimmedaBall]

Check the drama, hostility, and anger here and then imagine what is happening in a billion dollar business operation.

Anyone who has worked in a group (be it male or female) is fully aware of the infighting and power plays that go on among coworkers. People will get into life-and-death struggles over who gets the top shelf on the coffee cup rack, the desk near the exit door, the parking spot nearest the shade tree, the new office computer, etc.

We just had a major upheaval in the Cards Front Office. There is major reshuffling of roles and authority within the organization from Owner-GM-HC to the guy wondering if the Cards are still going to keep him on to trim the grass.

Anyone who has undergone major changes at work know that is true.

How that resolves itself has as much to do with the Cards success going forward. It is not 'much ado about nothing.'