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

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

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.

[WARNING SNIPE COMING]

Wow

[SNIPE COMPLETE]

 

[Solar7]

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.

Disagreed here. If you go through the effort of writing out the questions, you're at least postulating it might be on the minds of the players/owners/personnel mentioned, unless you say it's exclusively a "what if" scenario (it doesn't have to be those words, but you get the point).

If I come into a thread and say "one may think Michael Bidwill was hotly pursuing a deal to acquire Tom Brady and Bill Belichick," that pretty much says I think MB was looking to make a huge franchise changing move. "One may think Steve Keim was out drinking Korean Soju with John DeFilippo in Scottsdale the day Wilks was hired" implies I'm pretty much saying Keim was doing just that.

The thing is, there's no disclaimer to the posts I had issue with... they read less like speculation and more like "this is what's happening."

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

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.

Amen. In all roles of my life (son, brother, friend, boss, parent) I consider myself and likely others consider me to be a relative sensitive individual. But my god have people become thin-skinned on here. If someone reads something you post and thinks it’s ridiculous it’s not an attack to state it’s ridiculous. That word is descriptive. Are people calling for a ban of the word “ridiculous????” That’s ridiculous!

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

.

. 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.

"
..

Uh oh . . . that’s “vulgar” language! The Triad is gonna get you!

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

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, cmon buddy, when you choose to post something on a public forum where you KNOW people have been critical you have to expect to take some heat, particularly when what you postulate is based on a lot of conjecture. I applaud your courage in posting a great deal that tends to be counter to generally held beliefs and perceptions but you have to understand that in doing so you are going to draw an inordinate amount of critical attention to your ideas. I’m not telling you to not post as a result. Your posts are thought-provoking. If they weren’t you’d have no responses. But you just have to accept that people are going to disagree with and at times think your thoughts are laughable. It happens to everyone. If it happens to you more often that’s likely due to:

1. You start your own threads a LOT; and

2. Your thoughts are usually not widely held beliefs and based in large part on conjecture.

 

[GimmedaBall]

Jebus... we REALLY need FA to start.

Do you think the dog fights are going to be less intense?

 

[Mitch]

Mitch, cmon buddy, when you choose to post something on a public forum where you KNOW people have been critical you have to expect to take some heat, particularly when what you postulate is based on a lot of conjecture. I applaud your courage in posting a great deal that tends to be counter to generally held beliefs and perceptions but you have to understand that in doing so you are going to draw an inordinate amount of critical attention to your ideas. I’m not telling you to not post as a result. Your posts are thought-provoking. If they weren’t you’d have no responses. But you just have to accept that people are going to disagree with and at times think your thoughts are laughable. It happens to everyone. If it happens to you more often that’s likely due to:

1. You start your own threads a LOT; and

2. Your thoughts are usually not widely held beliefs and based in large part on conjecture.

I appreciate your input, Ouchie. After 20 years of writing on this board, I know how it works, but there are times when I feel like I have to stand up for myself and for others who receive similar treatment. I appreciate that you have the kindness to see that it does take courage to think outside the box and write something one knows is going to rock the mainstream (but you should know i don't do it to rock the mainstream, i do it because I honestly trust in my instincts and thought process, for right or for wrong)---and yes, you are 100% correct, while that may tend to draw added attention and criticism, as you know, there is a difference between criticism and mockery.

I have made my feelings known---hopefully everyone can understand and move on. Anyone who responds to my or another's post with respect, I will respond to and keep the discussions going with.

I would just like a clean slate with everyone. Let argue the hell out of every point, but let's lift each other up in the process. There so much mystery and change surrounding the Cardinals right now---let's relish in it as Birdgangers---which is what we all are at heart.

 

[cardncubfan]

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)

No, I just come here looking for updates on Steve Wilks search for a QB. (Like the title of the thread) Not whether Keim made goo goo eyes at Wilks or not. Thread is completely derailed.

 

[SeattleCard]

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

@MrYeahbut.... how can you not like this avatar??????

 

[GimmedaBall]

No, I just come here looking for updates on Steve Wilks search for a QB. (Like the title of the thread) Not whether Keim made goo goo eyes at Wilks or not. Thread is completely derailed.

That'll teach you to not always believe what you read.

When has a thread ever stayed on topic?

 

[oaken1]

That'll teach you to not always believe what you read.

When has a thread ever stayed on topic?

Costco.

It was legendary

 

[Cheesebeef]

Do you think the dog fights are going to be less intense?

No, but at least they'll be more entertaining.

 

[GimmedaBall]

No, but at least they'll be more entertaining.

I can't imagine what a pack of pit bulls would do to Jar Jar Binks (well, wait a minute, of course I can).

 

[WisconsinCard]

Costco.

It was legendary

I got me some Kirkland socks....

 

[THESMEL]

smelogy is less boring then mitchology.
That's BS! not as BS as your BS - My BS is bigger than your BS! just look at it-

Going down town, gonna see my gal, gonna sing her a lil song, gonna show her my ding --You can't say that on TV! what's this ding dong?
I think he is going to show you JR! ZIP, FOLDING -Oh my damn look at the size of that thing!!! ( Cheech and Chong is recording

Shel Silverstein said: everybody got one, everybody got one -but Stacy Brown got Two!

Andy Griffin said this is football! biggest fight he ever seen- them to groups spent all day - seeing who could get that pigskin across that cow pasture- without stepping in any thing.

Watch out for Russian trolls - they root for bears and their breath smells like sheep. just saying.

We are blessed to have a team in Arizona - with a real fan base! I really like our FLAWS!

getting Foles is aggressive- Getting Bridgewater, Bradford or Keenum is Aggressive - Keeping Gabbert is aggressive. moving up in the draft is aggressive.

I think Cousin is overpriced, moving up in the draft is overpriced and don't see the risk/reward worth it.
Bridgewater, Bradford, Gabbert are all first round draft pick QB's that are gettable. I hope for one of them.
Bradford backed up by Gabbert competing with a rookie would be my best case scenario.

My aggressive line in the Army was - Lead follow or get the hell out of my way.
Rock on Mitch and all.

Buddy Ryan said if you aint lead dog- the view never changes!

 

[daves]

Daves,

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

Well I did so because you asked for "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". But i'm beginning to regret it as it is contributing to sidetracking the topic of this thread.

Sigh... i was trying to keep this post shorter and not respond point-by-point. I responded in detail before because you seemed like the voice of reason among the Evil Triad, but now you seem to be doubling down on some of the nonsense spouted above. So, here goes... even though as i said in my original post, there's no point debating conspiracy theories with true believers, i'll give it this one last shot.

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.

Yep, and i specifically 'Like'd Mitch's post #4, and enjoyed your posts #11 and #14, where you noted that there are a lot of unknowns behind the scenes, and specifically cautioned people not to read too much into what Wilks et al. have said. (Wow, what happened to that cautious stance?!)

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.

You're stretching things a bit - this forum is a place for all kinds of DISCUSSION about the Cardinals. Much of that is reactions to news, proposals for roster moves, debating merits of coaching moves, etc. PART of that is speculation, and a SMALL part of THAT is FANTASY. But yes, i would agree that fantasies and fantastic speculation are appropriate subjects to discuss on this board, and never said or implied otherwise. (Some people who tend to READ INTO things what they are actually PROJECTING from their own personalities may disagree.)

But starting with this post, some of the flights of fantasy started to be represented as facts (emphasis added):

I am fairly certain Mike B over ruled Keim and hired Wilks against SK's wishes...
it is the only thing that explains how uncomfortable SK looked at the press conference and why Mike B spent so much time praising his GM when he was there to introduce his coach.

All i can say to that is, "Wow."

Then Oaken1 speculated about what happened to DiFilippo as an OC candidate:

I am thinking maybe SK gave him high hopes and then Mike over ruled him and hired Wilks, thus...pissing JDF off and he refused to come here and be OC...so they hired McCoy.

Purely speculation on my part obviously.

... clearly labeled as speculation, then he continues:

But SK was not happy in the coach introduction presser, that was obvious...
good chance all that is directly why Mike followed up by extending SK's contract... to try and smooth the waters and instill a sense of faith and confidence in Keim

OK, now we're seeing this idea that Keim was uncomfortable labeled as "obvious", and a repeat of the assertion that Keim's contract extension was an underhanded gesture not based on merit but only intended to smooth ruffled feathers and instill confidence. Again, wow.

Then Mitch reinforces Oaken1's comments, stating that they're "feasible", then adds, with an air of certainty:

But, SK's sour mood goes back to BA's retirement press conference, which was very curious in a few ways---first that BA elected not to take any questions (very unlike him)---yes, of course he was choked up, but he was very chummy with the media for 5 years and it seemed like BA did not want to risk hinting at the real reason why he retired.

if anyone believes it was for family reasons, there is some swamp land in Louisiana for sale at $5 an acre.

So now Keim's sour mood is not just speculation, but an obvious fact, and there's a conspiracy afoot - Arians did NOT retire for family reasons, that was a bunch of lies to help cover for Bidwill, who actually forced Arians to retire on the promise of a "severance package". And if we don't believe it, we must be the kind of IDIOTS who would buy swampland in Louisiana offered at $5 per acre! (How condescending!)

Now deeper into the details of Mitch's theory, he uses caveats like "One might imagine". But he also provides supporting "evidence" here and there, such as "if you noticed---at Wilks' press conference---BA was not mentioned, not even once."

At this point i'm thinking that relying on subtle cues like body language and omissions from press conferences is all well and good, but did anyone actually compare Keim's body language at Arians' press conference, or notice that Whisenhunt wasn't mentioned at all then? There has been a disconnect from reality here.

Mitch continued, "Bidwill clearly wants a more diligent day to day approach and preparation, a staff of coaches who will "relate" to the players and not denigrate or belittle them (so as to improve player development), a higher level of player and coach accountability."

Even though Mitch says that Bidwill "clearly" wants this, no evidence is given to that effect, and this sentiment actually just happens to be something that Mitch himself has said that HE wants to see - hence my PERCEPTION (which is FAIR GAME for others to criticize or speculate about or rebut!), is that this is a PROJECTION of Mitch's own personality.

Then you gave your "impressions" based on body language reading, with which you have expertise based on your experience in management consulting, HR, and cross-cultural training. I've already responded to some of your speculations point-by point, but without rehashing the whole thing, while conceding the expertise of your observations, i dispute the some of the far-fetched inferences you made based on those observations.

At that point i saw a thread that was being derailed, where wild speculation was being reinforced, labeled as obvious, and not questioned, and i felt like the only sane person in a room of flat-earthers. I posted to call out what had devolved into projections and "Wild fantasies pulled from the nether regions"(TM).

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.

Really? One is based on reading body language, and in the case of the Evil Triad, imagining behind-the-scenes dynamics that cannot be known, willfully ignoring statements made on the record (or considering them to be disingenuous or outright lies), and imputing implausible ulterior motives to events that have actually happened, such as Keim's contract extension. The other is based on objective information like the salary cap, contract details, injury history, and available free agents and players in the draft, and subjective but measurable information like past performance, trends, etc.

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.

Sure, no one is stopping you or even discouraging anyone from posting fantasies - but when they're labeled as "obvious" or there being a "good chance" that they're accurate, or described as the "only thing that explains" observed behaviors, or it's stated that if you don't believe the conjecture then you're a RUBE who would buy cheap swampland in Louisiana - then it is my right as a participant in the board, and my DUTY as a rational human being, to label them as nonsense. You can rebut and debate all you like, and i welcome that!

Here’s your post #37 [...] 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.’

Yes, Gimmedaball, "pulled from the nether regions" is actually, i think, a NICE and NON-VULGAR way to say, pulled out of your butt. Which is a VERY COMMON EXPRESSION in the English language meaning, "having no basis in reality" If you think that's an insult and a "vulgar reference", i don't even know how to respond except to say that, as i believe YOU have pointed out, different people have different ways of expressing themselves. Or, are you being overly dramatic here to exaggerate my "insult"?

You also demean the whole science of Non-verbal communications and body language by referring to simple observations as projecting and creative interpretation.

Nope, i am calling BS on your INTERPRETATION of your observations. And i called on you, as a body language expert, to actually perform some baseline observations, by referring you to Arians' introductory press conference. I've mentioned it three times now and even pointed out specific parts of it, and you have made no attempt to compare and contrast Keim's body language in that instance (looks pretty darned similar to me, but then i'm not an expert). There are countless other videos and it would've been really interesting to see whether Keim was wearing dress shoes or sneakers (which you call "clown sneakers", perhaps trying to enhance your take with some of your own preconceptions?), whether he checked his phone, etc.

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.

Nope, just using colorful language to illustrate the absurdity of your conclusions from your body language observations. You gave no baseline observations for comparison. Bidwill is typically cheerful. Keim almost always looks nonplussed, at best. My proposed layman's interpretations for Bidwill and Keim's body language, absent any baseline or any other supporting evidence, are as valid as your expert interpretations.

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.

Um, what? I didn't defend or make any value judgment on Arians' vulgarity. It's been a known quantity since before he was hired and has been cited as a key moment in the hiring process. Arians has consistently been described as a having a "fun uncle" personality. Never has Bidwill given any overt indication that he had a problem with Arians' personality or mode of expression. These suggestions have, however, repeatedly come from Mitch and some others on this message board who personally dislike this aspect of Arians' personality.

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.

Nope, i'm basing my assessment on YEARS of CONSISTENT, on the record journalist stories, quotes, and videos where Bidwill and Keim (and formerly Arians) have talked about how much mutual respect they have for one another, how well they work together, and how they come to "Cardinal decisions". You're basing yours on body language and colorful sneakers. I refuse to put my "conjecture" on equal footing with that of 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 . . .”

In my "fantasy", a/k/a/ the real world, when businessmen voluntarily and prematurely extend the contracts of those they employ, it's overwhelmingly because they are pleased with the work of the employee, and enjoy a productive working relationship with the employee. Again, this is also consistent with YEARS of words and actions by Bidwill and Keim.

The "Evil Triad" idea that the extension was an appeasement for ruffled feathers, to assuage and instill confidence in Keim (aside: has Keim's body language ever given the impression that he lacks confidence in his ability to do his job well?), whose power may be under threat by the brand new HC hire, after Arians was "refired" again and lied about wanting to spend time with his family... it's all possible, sure. About as plausible as a flat earth, 9/11 was an inside job, and vaccines cause autism... but sure, it's possible

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.

Just as if i drop my computer, i ASSUME it will hit the floor. I fantasize that gravity will pull it toward the center of the earth, but hey, gravity is just a THEORY.

Gotta skip forward a bit.. this is already way too long, and i'm sure most of the people on this thread have lost interest.

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.

Really? Have you never been in a locker room? Have you never been in a room full of 20-30 year old men?

Have you not read the quotes and watched the videos of even the most religious guys on the team, like Palmer, who clearly had a close bond with Arians? As a body language expert, can you point to a time when any player, ever, exhibited overt or covert discomfort with how Arians expressed himself?

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.

Oh gimme a break man. I demean the players? YOU demean the players by infantilizing them as grown men who have played team sports most of their lives, but who would be offended and hurt by Arians dropping F-bombs.

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.

Oh, look who's being condescending! I make no claims of being brave - frankly, it's tiresome to treat this as a debate among equally likely possibilities.

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.

I did not even respond to Mitch's post, nor did i mention any of Mitch's theories! I was responding to the entire tone that the thread had taken on, where wild conjecture was labeled as "obvious", the "only possible explanation", and reinforced by the members of the Triad agreeing with one another on many point, without any skepticism that i saw when i posted. Mitch chose to take it as a personal attack and that's his problem. No apology will be forthcoming. And i don't appreciate your trying to silence my opinion and denigrate my take by saying that i should apologize for expressing it. But i'm not going to get butt-hurt over it.

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.’

Nope, i called out the notion of a highly dysfunctional, deceptive front office with power struggles and hidden agendas going on behind the scenes, as preposterous. It is a theory WITHOUT the same merit as the prima facie notion that years of words and actions (and even body language!) mean exactly what they appear to mean. When you come up with a wild theory that flies in the face of the obvious, the burden is on YOU to support it. As you yourself have pointed out, you should expect sharp criticism and challenges.

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.

Again, i have gone out of my way to praise a lot of what Mitch has written, have probably liked or praised hundreds of his posts. I even liked his first post in this threat! I didn't attack Mitch personally, and i didn't tell him to stop posting. The only reason i've taken so much time to write such a long response to your post is out of respect for you, Mitch, and Oaken1. I think your concerns are worthy of a response and explanation.

But just to be clear, i will reiterate that i think most of what the Evil Triad has posted in this thread is nothing more than wild fantasies, pulled from the nether regions. If i'm not allowed to express that opinion, then what's the point of this forum?

...dave

P.S. I welcome any response but this has become too long, time-consuming, and off-topic, so it will probably be my last words on this issue here.

 

[Jetstream Green]

smelogy is less boring then mitchology.
That's BS! not as BS as your BS - My BS is bigger than your BS! just look at it-

Going down town, gonna see my gal, gonna sing her a lil song, gonna show her my ding --You can't say that on TV! what's this ding dong?
I think he is going to show you JR! ZIP, FOLDING -Oh my damn look at the size of that thing!!! ( Cheech and Chong is recording

Shel Silverstein said: everybody got one, everybody got one -but Stacy Brown got Two!

Andy Griffin said this is football! biggest fight he ever seen- them to groups spent all day - seeing who could get that pigskin across that cow pasture- without stepping in any thing.

Watch out for Russian trolls - they root for bears and their breath smells like sheep. just saying.

We are blessed to have a team in Arizona - with a real fan base! I really like our FLAWS!

getting Foles is aggressive- Getting Bridgewater, Bradford or Keenum is Aggressive - Keeping Gabbert is aggressive. moving up in the draft is aggressive.

I think Cousin is overpriced, moving up in the draft is overpriced and don't see the risk/reward worth it.
Bridgewater, Bradford, Gabbert are all first round draft pick QB's that are gettable. I hope for one of them.
Bradford backed up by Gabbert competing with a rookie would be my best case scenario.

My aggressive line in the Army was - Lead follow or get the hell out of my way.
Rock on Mitch and all.

Buddy Ryan said if you aint lead dog- the view never changes!

"I was working part time in a five and dime, my boss was Mr. B. He told me several times that he did not like my kind, because I ran the ball too sparingly. Seems that I was busy doing something close to running, but different than the game before. That's when I saw him, ooo I saw him, DJ walked through the locker room door. He wore Cardinal red, like they wore in nineteen fifty four, he wore Cardinal red, and could also catch the ball unlike Frank Gore"

Being a dog lover, I approve of Buddy's analogy

 

[cardncubfan]

http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and...-Combine/09aea774-6ee5-42ed-980e-c9428aad15ae


“There are some differences from the staff we had previously, but at the same time, the way we communicate with our coaches, the relationship I had with Bruce is no different than the relationship I envision with coach Wilks.”

 

[Zeno]

"I was working part time in a five and dime, my boss was Mr. B. He told me several times that he did not like my kind, because I ran the ball too sparingly. Seems that I was busy doing something close to running, but different than the game before. That's when I saw him, ooo I saw him, DJ walked through the locker room door. He wore Cardinal red, like they wore in nineteen fifty four, he wore Cardinal red, and could also catch the ball unlike Frank Gore"

Being a dog lover, I approve of Buddy's analogy

Great now I have that song stuck in my head.

 

[GimmedaBall]

Th

Well I did so because you asked for "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". But i'm beginning to regret it as it is contributing to sidetracking the topic of this thread.

Sigh... i was trying to keep this post shorter and not respond point-by-point. I responded in detail before because you seemed like the voice of reason among the Evil Triad, but now you seem to be doubling down on some of the nonsense spouted above. So, here goes... even though as i said in my original post, there's no point debating conspiracy theories with true believers, i'll give it this one last shot.



Yep, and i specifically 'Like'd Mitch's post #4, and enjoyed your posts #11 and #14, where you noted that there are a lot of unknowns behind the scenes, and specifically cautioned people not to read too much into what Wilks et al. have said. (Wow, what happened to that cautious stance?!)



You're stretching things a bit - this forum is a place for all kinds of DISCUSSION about the Cardinals. Much of that is reactions to news, proposals for roster moves, debating merits of coaching moves, etc. PART of that is speculation, and a SMALL part of THAT is FANTASY. But yes, i would agree that fantasies and fantastic speculation are appropriate subjects to discuss on this board, and never said or implied otherwise. (Some people who tend to READ INTO things what they are actually PROJECTING from their own personalities may disagree.)

But starting with this post, some of the flights of fantasy started to be represented as facts (emphasis added):


All i can say to that is, "Wow."

Then Oaken1 speculated about what happened to DiFilippo as an OC candidate:



... clearly labeled as speculation, then he continues:



OK, now we're seeing this idea that Keim was uncomfortable labeled as "obvious", and a repeat of the assertion that Keim's contract extension was an underhanded gesture not based on merit but only intended to smooth ruffled feathers and instill confidence. Again, wow.

Then Mitch reinforces Oaken1's comments, stating that they're "feasible", then adds, with an air of certainty:



So now Keim's sour mood is not just speculation, but an obvious fact, and there's a conspiracy afoot - Arians did NOT retire for family reasons, that was a bunch of lies to help cover for Bidwill, who actually forced Arians to retire on the promise of a "severance package". And if we don't believe it, we must be the kind of IDIOTS who would buy swampland in Louisiana offered at $5 per acre! (How condescending!)

Now deeper into the details of Mitch's theory, he uses caveats like "One might imagine". But he also provides supporting "evidence" here and there, such as "if you noticed---at Wilks' press conference---BA was not mentioned, not even once."

At this point i'm thinking that relying on subtle cues like body language and omissions from press conferences is all well and good, but did anyone actually compare Keim's body language at Arians' press conference, or notice that Whisenhunt wasn't mentioned at all then? There has been a disconnect from reality here.

Mitch continued, "Bidwill clearly wants a more diligent day to day approach and preparation, a staff of coaches who will "relate" to the players and not denigrate or belittle them (so as to improve player development), a higher level of player and coach accountability."

Even though Mitch says that Bidwill "clearly" wants this, no evidence is given to that effect, and this sentiment actually just happens to be something that Mitch himself has said that HE wants to see - hence my PERCEPTION (which is FAIR GAME for others to criticize or speculate about or rebut!), is that this is a PROJECTION of Mitch's own personality.

Then you gave your "impressions" based on body language reading, with which you have expertise based on your experience in management consulting, HR, and cross-cultural training. I've already responded to some of your speculations point-by point, but without rehashing the whole thing, while conceding the expertise of your observations, i dispute the some of the far-fetched inferences you made based on those observations.

At that point i saw a thread that was being derailed, where wild speculation was being reinforced, labeled as obvious, and not questioned, and i felt like the only sane person in a room of flat-earthers. I posted to call out what had devolved into projections and "Wild fantasies pulled from the nether regions"(TM).



Really? One is based on reading body language, and in the case of the Evil Triad, imagining behind-the-scenes dynamics that cannot be known, willfully ignoring statements made on the record (or considering them to be disingenuous or outright lies), and imputing implausible ulterior motives to events that have actually happened, such as Keim's contract extension. The other is based on objective information like the salary cap, contract details, injury history, and available free agents and players in the draft, and subjective but measurable information like past performance, trends, etc.



Sure, no one is stopping you or even discouraging anyone from posting fantasies - but when they're labeled as "obvious" or there being a "good chance" that they're accurate, or described as the "only thing that explains" observed behaviors, or it's stated that if you don't believe the conjecture then you're a RUBE who would buy cheap swampland in Louisiana - then it is my right as a participant in the board, and my DUTY as a rational human being, to label them as nonsense. You can rebut and debate all you like, and i welcome that!



Yes, Gimmedaball, "pulled from the nether regions" is actually, i think, a NICE and NON-VULGAR way to say, pulled out of your butt. Which is a VERY COMMON EXPRESSION in the English language meaning, "having no basis in reality" If you think that's an insult and a "vulgar reference", i don't even know how to respond except to say that, as i believe YOU have pointed out, different people have different ways of expressing themselves. Or, are you being overly dramatic here to exaggerate my "insult"?



Nope, i am calling BS on your INTERPRETATION of your observations. And i called on you, as a body language expert, to actually perform some baseline observations, by referring you to Arians' introductory press conference. I've mentioned it three times now and even pointed out specific parts of it, and you have made no attempt to compare and contrast Keim's body language in that instance (looks pretty darned similar to me, but then i'm not an expert). There are countless other videos and it would've been really interesting to see whether Keim was wearing dress shoes or sneakers (which you call "clown sneakers", perhaps trying to enhance your take with some of your own preconceptions?), whether he checked his phone, etc.



Nope, just using colorful language to illustrate the absurdity of your conclusions from your body language observations. You gave no baseline observations for comparison. Bidwill is typically cheerful. Keim almost always looks nonplussed, at best. My proposed layman's interpretations for Bidwill and Keim's body language, absent any baseline or any other supporting evidence, are as valid as your expert interpretations.



Um, what? I didn't defend or make any value judgment on Arians' vulgarity. It's been a known quantity since before he was hired and has been cited as a key moment in the hiring process. Arians has consistently been described as a having a "fun uncle" personality. Never has Bidwill given any overt indication that he had a problem with Arians' personality or mode of expression. These suggestions have, however, repeatedly come from Mitch and some others on this message board who personally dislike this aspect of Arians' personality.



Nope, i'm basing my assessment on YEARS of CONSISTENT, on the record journalist stories, quotes, and videos where Bidwill and Keim (and formerly Arians) have talked about how much mutual respect they have for one another, how well they work together, and how they come to "Cardinal decisions". You're basing yours on body language and colorful sneakers. I refuse to put my "conjecture" on equal footing with that of the Evil Triad.



In my "fantasy", a/k/a/ the real world, when businessmen voluntarily and prematurely extend the contracts of those they employ, it's overwhelmingly because they are pleased with the work of the employee, and enjoy a productive working relationship with the employee. Again, this is also consistent with YEARS of words and actions by Bidwill and Keim.

The "Evil Triad" idea that the extension was an appeasement for ruffled feathers, to assuage and instill confidence in Keim (aside: has Keim's body language ever given the impression that he lacks confidence in his ability to do his job well?), whose power may be under threat by the brand new HC hire, after Arians was "refired" again and lied about wanting to spend time with his family... it's all possible, sure. About as plausible as a flat earth, 9/11 was an inside job, and vaccines cause autism... but sure, it's possible



Just as if i drop my computer, i ASSUME it will hit the floor. I fantasize that gravity will pull it toward the center of the earth, but hey, gravity is just a THEORY.

Gotta skip forward a bit.. this is already way too long, and i'm sure most of the people on this thread have lost interest.



Really? Have you never been in a locker room? Have you never been in a room full of 20-30 year old men?

Have you not read the quotes and watched the videos of even the most religious guys on the team, like Palmer, who clearly had a close bond with Arians? As a body language expert, can you point to a time when any player, ever, exhibited overt or covert discomfort with how Arians expressed himself?



Oh gimme a break man. I demean the players? YOU demean the players by infantilizing them as grown men who have played team sports most of their lives, but who would be offended and hurt by Arians dropping F-bombs.



Oh, look who's being condescending! I make no claims of being brave - frankly, it's tiresome to treat this as a debate among equally likely possibilities.



I did not even respond to Mitch's post, nor did i mention any of Mitch's theories! I was responding to the entire tone that the thread had taken on, where wild conjecture was labeled as "obvious", the "only possible explanation", and reinforced by the members of the Triad agreeing with one another on many point, without any skepticism that i saw when i posted. Mitch chose to take it as a personal attack and that's his problem. No apology will be forthcoming. And i don't appreciate your trying to silence my opinion and denigrate my take by saying that i should apologize for expressing it. But i'm not going to get butt-hurt over it.



Nope, i called out the notion of a highly dysfunctional, deceptive front office with power struggles and hidden agendas going on behind the scenes, as preposterous. It is a theory WITHOUT the same merit as the prima facie notion that years of words and actions (and even body language!) mean exactly what they appear to mean. When you come up with a wild theory that flies in the face of the obvious, the burden is on YOU to support it. As you yourself have pointed out, you should expect sharp criticism and challenges.



Again, i have gone out of my way to praise a lot of what Mitch has written, have probably liked or praised hundreds of his posts. I even liked his first post in this threat! I didn't attack Mitch personally, and i didn't tell him to stop posting. The only reason i've taken so much time to write such a long response to your post is out of respect for you, Mitch, and Oaken1. I think your concerns are worthy of a response and explanation.

But just to be clear, i will reiterate that i think most of what the Evil Triad has posted in this thread is nothing more than wild fantasies, pulled from the nether regions. If i'm not allowed to express that opinion, then what's the point of this forum?

...dave

P.S. I welcome any response but this has become too long, time-consuming, and off-topic, so it will probably be my last words on this issue here.

Daves, Thanks for all the time you spent in your very detailed rebuttal.

Of course we are at the point of debating "What the meaning of IS, is." That, or going to war over which end of the egg to crack---the narrow end or the rounded end. Also, I don't think anyone really is interested in being witness to the two of us pizzing in the wind and just getting ourselves wet. There is no victory (or consultant fee) here for either of us. Besides, Mitch has withdrawn from the field leaving me an attorney without a client.

I will take to heart your comments. I consider criticisms as a means to improve my communication skills. Even someone who writes my comments off with a snipe "WOW" or ridicules non-verbal communication as talking about 'goo-goo' eyes is someone for me to listen to. The hostility is telling me I am not clear enough in delivering my message.

I will take a look respond regarding the BA-SK press conference you referenced and see if there are any major tells. The contrast is what is needed to make the point regarding the strength behind reading non-verbals.

Over and out.

 

[oaken1]

Th

Daves, Thanks for all the time you spent in your very detailed rebuttal.

Of course we are at the point of debating "What the meaning of IS, is." That, or going to war over which end of the egg to crack---the narrow end or the rounded end. Also, I don't think anyone really is interested in being witness to the two of us pizzing in the wind and just getting ourselves wet. There is no victory (or consultant fee) here for either of us. Besides, Mitch has withdrawn from the field leaving me an attorney without a client.

I will take to heart your comments. I consider criticisms as a means to improve my communication skills. Even someone who writes my comments off with a snipe "WOW" or ridicules non-verbal communication as talking about 'goo-goo' eyes is someone for me to listen to. The hostility is telling me I am not clear enough in delivering my message.

I will take a look respond regarding the BA-SK press conference you referenced and see if there are any major tells. The contrast is what is needed to make the point regarding the strength behind reading non-verbals.

Over and out.

I tried to watch that press conference...cant get it to work for me... issue is most likely on my end as I have problems with lots of videos

 

[daves]

Th

Daves, Thanks for all the time you spent in your very detailed rebuttal.

Of course we are at the point of debating "What the meaning of IS, is." That, or going to war over which end of the egg to crack---the narrow end or the rounded end. Also, I don't think anyone really is interested in being witness to the two of us pizzing in the wind and just getting ourselves wet. There is no victory (or consultant fee) here for either of us. Besides, Mitch has withdrawn from the field leaving me an attorney without a client.

I will take to heart your comments. I consider criticisms as a means to improve my communication skills. Even someone who writes my comments off with a snipe "WOW" or ridicules non-verbal communication as talking about 'goo-goo' eyes is someone for me to listen to. The hostility is telling me I am not clear enough in delivering my message.

I will take a look respond regarding the BA-SK press conference you referenced and see if there are any major tells. The contrast is what is needed to make the point regarding the strength behind reading non-verbals.

Over and out.

All good, Gimme! I really AM interested in expert body language observations, and whether there's a significant distinction between the Wilks press conference and the Arians introduction, or many other recent events that could serve as a baseline. I'll still be skeptical of conclusions drawn - e.g. if this is the only time Keim ever wore sneakers to a press conference, it may very well have nothing to do with disrespect for Wilks - it could be because he has developed a bunyon and his dress shoes were killing him that day. Or he's gained weight (i do believe he has) and feels really uncomfortable in his suit and shoes.

...dave