HawkShack.com

Interesting article about Harvin's side of the story as to why things didn't work out in Seattle, takes a few shots at his former teammates.

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-fo ... h-seahawks

I don't believe a single word that comes out of that man's mouth.

Next to T.O., I can't think of a better description of a locker room cancer.

Head case that's undermined his own career. What a waste.

I think he honestly believes the nonsense that comes out of his own mouth. I agree he is most likely going to end up another TO without the stats. lots of potential lots of attitude problems to go with it

Glad to hear Baldwin took the high road after Harvin's comments.

So his excuse with the Jets was? I really don't want to dog pile on Harvin and maybe the Seahawks receivers weren't accepting but I mean seriously, he had physical fights with Baldwin and Tate...

There is a common denominator here. And even if the locker room didn't trip over themselves to be his best friend, I feel the same way about this that I feel about a guy who tears down his ex-girlfriend once they break up. She may have been the biggest b**** in the world but you chose that for yourself and it's just weak sauce to complain about it publically. Not a good look for a grown man.

There is a common denominator here.

Exactly. You can play the Blame Everyone Else game until a pattern starts emerging, and sorry, Percy, but you've got a solid pattern going.

He was here to take them (the receiving core) to the "next" level. WHAT A JOKE!!! They got to the next level with out him. He is still buying that ESPN malarkey that he "sealed" or even "won" the Super Bowl for our Seahawks. The guy is the epitome of a cancer, I am sure he studied TO and IMHO has out did Owens, because actually made most of the teams he played with better. We got to the SB w/o Pussy Harvin, the Eagles NEVER would have been in the SM w/o T.O.

T.O will be in the HoF some day, Harvin NEVER WILL.

Okay let's not get out of hand. The Hawks probably win the Super Bowl anyway but Harvin played a big role and that kickoff return to start the second half completely broke their back. You could see in their faces that's when they completely gave up. He may be a douche but let's give credit where credit is due.

kalibane wrote:Okay let's not get out of hand. The Hawks probably win the Super Bowl anyway but Harvin played a big role and that kickoff return to start the second half completely broke their back. You could see in their faces that's when they completely gave up. He may be a douche but let's give credit where credit is due.

At 22-0, Harvin's kickoff return took what was about a 95% chance of victory and turned it into a 99% chance.

That game was so one sided that the loss of any one single player or coach would not have changed the outcome. We would have won that game without Russell Wilson, without Cam Chancellor, without Pete Carroll, and undoubtedly without Percy Harvin. And of course, Harvin did absolutely nothing, Zippo, nada to help us get there.

Like I said the Hawks win anyway but that return crushed their spirit and that means something. It hurt especially because they tried to kick the ball away from him. He also set the tone early with that fly sweep and forced them to account for him on every down which made life really tough on their defense precisely because they had no film on him and didn't know how he was going to be used.

Everyone was saying the trade was worth it just because of the Super Bowl at the time. Let's not be dishonest about how Seahawk Nation felt about him after the Super Bowl.

I don't buy into any of that win probability garbage. I like stats but that is where I draw the line. It doesn't take into account the actual players you are playing against. The Broncos were fully capable of scoring 21 points in five minutes of clock time. It's a lot different for them to be down by 22 vs the Bengals. And win probability doesn't factor that in.

When that return happened in real time I told my wife "I don't care that he didn't do anything for us all year and I don't care what he cost, he was worth it!!"

I'm not gonna start calling myself a liar now.

It's a matter of opinion re Harvin's worth. I'll be the first to admit that there is the possibility that my POV could be influenced by a want or need to have my personal opinion vindicated.

Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that even CBob said at the time that we would have won that game with TJack as the quarterback (to which I wholeheartedly agree), and if we could have won it without Russell, we certainly would have won it without Harvin. His contributions to our success in 2013-2014, when taken as a whole (from trade to trade) were very, very small and are far outweighed by a number of other factors that we're still dealing with.

I completely disagree with winning that game with TJack. It was awesome how our defense set the tone early and we did match up with them very well, but a big part of the reason why that game was so lopsided is because there was such a big lead that it makes the Bronco's one dimensional and things just snowball.

You can see the same principal with the Greatest Show on Turf Rams. They would jump out on teams so early that the defense never had to worry about the run and it made their defense look better than it really was and the games even more lopsided.

This isn't to say that our defense wasn't dominant but once we were up 22 and especially up 29, it made things so ridiculously easy on the defense. They didn't even have to think about the run at that point. And even though the defense was a great matchup for their offense it doesn't guarantee that they'll dominate. That same team went right down the field on us in Week 3 last year don't forget.

Where TJack factors in is he isn't scoring. That leaves the defense is on the field longer. Russell Wilson made plays and throws that TJack can't make and is unwilling to make. None of those deep middle throws would have happened because TJack is so risk averse (plus he lacks the accuracy). With TJack in the game those completions all become check downs, the offense doesn't score as much so the Bronco's don't get desperate and the game doesn't snowball out of control. If TJack plays that game instead of Wilson I think what happens is the Defense keeps us in it, we probably even lead for the majority of the game but by the fourth quarter they are worn down a little. The pressure isn't as fierce and Peyton wins it in the fourth quarter.

Yet another way the trade for Harvin nearly wrecked our team is the fact that after giving an obscene amount of money to P.H. the team couldn't afford Golden Tate. Not to mention that they supposedly were both the same type of receiver, which I myself never bought in to. The most worst thing about acquiring P.H. is that Schneider tore up his contract even though he still was under contract for 3 seasons and wrote him a new one with so much money that we couldn't resign Tate and it ate up CAP money better spent else where.

BTW; it was THAT contract that started the trend of players whining that they wanted to renegotiate a contract they had just signed months earlier. With Lynch, it was just shifting money around, but no NEW money. With Bennett and now Kam they both want "new" money that just is NOT available unless they gut the roster.

Could they have won with T-Jack? Sure, if Wilson had got hurt in the first half and T-Jack had had to come in AFTER half time and played the second half. But not starting the game, no.

Sure Bob, we ALL said that. But, that does not change the FACT that we made it to the SB with out Harvin and that we would have won the game with out Harvin. Now we know how much of a CANCER Harvin was, especially AFTER the SB no one but a blind fool would say that in hind sight he was worth it. Since PC knew the B.S. Harvin was pulling behind the scenes, B.S. that we in Seahawk nation knew nothing about I am sure he had decided that if Harvin kept it up he would be gone.

Think about some of the stuff that was said to reporters by an "anonymous" source. Players in the locker room supposedly saying Wilson wasn't "black enough". Oh, it was Golden Tate who "shagged" Wilson's wife and that is why the Hawks didn't try very hard to resign him. There is no proof, but I am willing to bet that Pussy Harvin was behind that non sense. You notice that stuff all stopped AFTER Harvin was jettisoned.

Did the Harvin trade work out? Absolutely not. Is it or will it destroy the Seahawks? Absolutely not. The extremes expressed by some are downright stupid. Seattle built a team , one which is not dependant on one move or one player, which affords them the ability to gamble, Harvin was a whiff, Lynch was a homerun, would rather have a team with the ability to gamble, lose, and STILL vie for Chanpionships, then one playing it safe, and sticking with picks like Curry, Mirer, or signing and sticking with guys like Flynn, or Houshyourdaddy.

HumanCockroach wrote:Did the Harvin trade work out? Absolutely not. Is it or will it destroy the Seahawks? Absolutely not. The extremes expressed by some are downright stupid. Seattle built a team , one which is not dependant on one move or one player, which affords them the ability to gamble, Harvin was a whiff, Lynch was a homerun, would rather have a team with the ability to gamble, lose, and STILL vie for Chanpionships, then one playing it safe, and sticking with picks like Curry, Mirer, or signing and sticking with guys like Flynn, or Houshyourdaddy.

Agreed, which is why I said that in SB48, the loss of any single player would not have affected the ultimate outcome.

I also agree that we are so well put together that a high profile trade, or to take that a step further, one or two top draft picks that don't blossom as planned, doesn't devastate us like it could have to so many teams.

More sour grapes:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutd ... 42290.html

RiverDog wrote:More sour grapes:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutd ... 42290.html

Yeah, the guy who's on his 4th team in 3 years was blameless, but the guys we either kept or wished to keep were problem children.

Grow up, Percy.

LOL! I posted his history suggests he is a T.O when Hawks aquired him. if I took the lumps on Tate, you guys have to admit you were wrong in this guy. He has a long history of issues dating back ti highschool.

Wow...Harvins comments are not shocking, he hasn't got an ounce e of class or team spirit to him. Hes a complete head shaker, body by God, temper by Satan, brain by K mart.

What a loser. Seattle helped him get a ring which he will never sniff again. He cant carry TO's jock strap.

That being said he had a huge impact on the SB. The Jet sweeps early were devastating and put the Denver defense on their heels. I think they had assumed stopping Lynch and containing Wilson would stop the threat of a run game. Harvin was our leading rusher with 2 or 3 total carries. And the KO return was the clincher IMO. Manning had a slew of 20+ point comebacks in his career including coming back from 21 down in the 4th quarter vs Tampa Bay and 20+ vs NE the year Indy won the SB. He came roaring back vs the Colts and nearly eclipsed a huge deficit earlier in the 2013 season. We will really never know what Seattle had as an offensive game plan or Denver as a defensive plan after the half. If Seattle turns it over or punts and Denver scores its a whole different ball game. I will give Percy credit for being instrumental in the most perfect of a moment.

As for Seattle winning that game with TJ someone is completely delusional. Ive said for over a year RW should have been MVP. Seattle didn't punt until late in the 3rd quarter. Yeah the defense was awesome but they got lots of rest as Russ engineered drive after drive despite Lynch being held in check and the offensive line playing a brutal game overall. Pot Roast abused Unger. Still Wilson never took a sack and never came close to turning it over.

IMO it was only the anti Wilson pro Manning Bias that cost Russ the MVP award. A couple of years earlier the Giants defense stuffed Brady and Eli got the award, twice actually. Russ is a huge part of the equation as JS proved he understands by writing the check.....Someday even the pundits who hate saying they were wrong will have to respect his greatness.

Futureite wrote:LOL! I posted his history suggests he is a T.O when Hawks aquired him. if I took the lumps on Tate, you guys have to admit you were wrong in this guy. He has a long history of issues dating back ti highschool.

Whoa, there, guy! I'm as big of a Seahawk fan as there is and I hated this trade from the get go, so there's no admission of guilt on my part.

And as far as any of the other posters in this forum goes, most if not all the regulars here admitted that they were wrong about Harvin. The only debate was about how much of an impact he had in our SB 48 victory.

I thought it was a gamble worth making at the time of the trade, but it's not a coincidence that the team started winning when Harvin was traded.

What still concerns me is Bevell and his influence (or not) in the decision to get Harvin. Wouldn't he have known about how Harvin was and some of the issues with the Vikings?
If he did have problems with the acquisition of Harvin, was he ignored - or did he not foresee how Harvin would have affected the Offense?
Either event is worrisome from an evaluation of a player fit point of view as Harvin's history is and was well known.

IMO it was only the anti Wilson pro Manning Bias that cost Russ the MVP award.

RW would have been a worthy choice, but when the highest scoring offense in NFL history gets absolutely *shut down*, it was pretty likely the MVP would come from the D.

burrrton wrote:IMO it was only the anti Wilson pro Manning Bias that cost Russ the MVP award.

RW would have been a worthy choice, but when the highest scoring offense in NFL history gets absolutely *shut down*, it was pretty likely the MVP would come from the D.

Agreed, and there was a precedent. I can't remember which SB, but they awarded co MVP's to two defensive players, Randy White and (I believe) Ed Too Tall Jones as a means of acknowledging their defense.

RiverDog wrote:
RW would have been a worthy choice, but when the highest scoring offense in NFL history gets absolutely *shut down*, it was pretty likely the MVP would come from the D.

Agreed, and there was a precedent. I can't remember which SB, but they awarded co MVP's to two defensive players, Randy White and (I believe) Ed Too Tall Jones as a means of acknowledging their defense.[/quote]

Ok so back in the mid 70's there was a precedent? More recently NE came into the SB 18-0 with at that time a record setting offense. The Giants defense shut them down. Manning made a miracle throw and Tyree made an even more amazing catch and Manning got the MVP even though it was a nail biter of a game where he didnt do much overall. Actually both his SB victories/MVPs followed the exact same script with the same opponent. Our defense was magnificent in SB 48 but really there was about 3 guys on that side of the ball you could have given it too. My defensive MVP was Cam Bam. He set the tone early and there were lots of alligator arms from then on. Smith had a great game but he capitalized on a play made by Avril and a play made by Maxwell.
Wilson managed the offensive game beautifully.
Based on RECENT precedent he got screwed.

Yep Future was right on Percy. Although I'm not sure any of us were blind to his having some issues. He wouldn't have even been available in trade otherwise. But he was a transcendent talent didn't work out.

As far as Bevell he probably thought he'd be worth the headaches. Percy hadn't fully developed a reputation yet in 2010 which was the last year he was there. Personally my bigger concern with Bevell is his inability to find more ways to get him involved without disrupting the offense other than the fly sweep.

kalibane wrote:Yep Future was right on Percy. Although I'm not sure any of us were blind to his having some issues. He wouldn't have even been available in trade otherwise. But he was a transcendent talent didn't work out.

As far as Bevell he probably thought he'd be worth the headaches. Percy hadn't fully developed a reputation yet in 2010 which was the last year he was there. Personally my bigger concern with Bevell is his inability to find more ways to get him involved without disrupting the offense other than the fly sweep.

There were incidents at Florida and with the Vikings.
After at least a year with him, I would have hoped that Bevell would have been able to see how he might not fit in with the Offense - of which he knows better than anyone else.
Maybe he thought that throwing a lighted match onto the pile of gunpowder would work miracles for the entire unit, but who knows what the thought process was.

I agree that not having Harvin more involved in different aspects of the Offense was disappointing, but I read recently that the Bills are teaching him how to run routes as he has never done that before. It could be that he wasn't able to be fully integrated into the Offense because other than Jet Sweeps and Bubble Screens, he couldn't fully contribute as a WR.

Hawktawk wrote:Ok so back in the mid 70's there was a precedent? More recently NE came into the SB 18-0 with at that time a record setting offense. The Giants defense shut them down. Manning made a miracle throw and Tyree made an even more amazing catch and Manning got the MVP even though it was a nail biter of a game where he didnt do much overall. Actually both his SB victories/MVPs followed the exact same script with the same opponent. Our defense was magnificent in SB 48 but really there was about 3 guys on that side of the ball you could have given it too. My defensive MVP was Cam Bam. He set the tone early and there were lots of alligator arms from then on. Smith had a great game but he capitalized on a play made by Avril and a play made by Maxwell.
Wilson managed the offensive game beautifully.
Based on RECENT precedent he got screwed.

His stats weren't MVP worthy. He barely broke 200 yards passing and had just 26 yards on 3 carries. No quarterback RECENTLY, without going back to the mid 70's as you chastised me for doing, has won the SB MVP award with numbers as low as Russell's were.

I don't want to diminish Russell's role as he played a solid game and did everything he was asked, but the defense was clearly the star of the show. As burrton noted, we essentially shut out the highest scoring offense in history and their first ballot HOF quarterback, with their only scoring coming well after the game was decided. It was IMO the most impressive defensive performance in SB history.

Percy Harvin is a child. Whether any of what he says is true or not (and I'd bet parts of it are), he is indeed the common denominator to a whole lot of trouble. He simply continues to ignore the role he plays in the trouble (and the consequences) that keeps on finding him...over and over and over again.

Percy was a factor in the SB victory and it is just plain silly to argue otherwise. All at once, it can be true that you didn't like the trade, that you saw the Harvin-Seahawk relationship ending badly and that you realize that PH was a legit contributor to that game. I would even go so far as to say I'm sure his name was one of the several considered for MVP of that game. I agree that it should have been a defender (If it were up to me, I would have chosen Cliff first and Kam second...) but when the score is 43 - 8, there are clearly a lot of people on both sides of the ball who could have been the MVP.

And just a favor to ask - life is a lot more pleasant when certain blocked troll's posts never pass by my eye-lids - If you could refrain from quoting him, It'd be great. Thanks

Hawk Sista wrote:Percy Harvin is a child. Whether any of what he says is true or not (and I'd bet parts of it are), he is indeed the common denominator to a whole lot of trouble. He simply continues to ignore the role he plays in the trouble (and the consequences) that keeps on finding him...over and over and over again.

Percy was a factor in the SB victory and it is just plain silly to argue otherwise. All at once, it can be true that you didn't like the trade, that you saw the Harvin-Seahawk relationship ending badly and that you realize that PH was a legit contributor to that game. I would even go so far as to say I'm sure his name was one of the several considered for MVP of that game. I agree that it should have been a defender (If it were up to me, I would have chosen Cliff first and Kam second...) but when the score is 43 - 8, there are clearly a lot of people on both sides of the ball who could have been the MVP.

And just a favor to ask - life is a lot more pleasant when certain blocked troll's posts never pass by my eye-lids - If you could refrain from quoting him, It'd be great. Thanks

I'm not sure if you're directing your remarks at me, but if you are, I've never said that Harvin wasn't a factor. What I said was that the game was so one sided that we could have won it without the contributions of any single player or coach, which includes Harvin. It's undeniable that he was a major factor in the win.

I am certain that some of what Harvin says is true. I can imagine other teammates teasing him while he was on IR as not needing him, after all, we were something like 10-1 before he even got into a game. But given his past history at Minnesota and Florida and given that he's the one that refused to play when told, I have a hard time believing that the context is how he depicts it as being. I've never heard of Tate, Baldwin, Kearse, Lockette, or any of our other receivers having locker room issues, only Percy. It seems that he's on a mission to re-invent his image, and he's doing it by throwing his former teammates under the bus. If it wasn't for them, he wouldn't have gotten a ring. Talk about an ungrateful S.O.B.! He's despicable.

Futureite doesn't bother me half as much as he does you and some of the others, but as a friend, I'll try to accede to your request.

And just a favor to ask - life is a lot more pleasant when certain blocked troll's posts never pass by my eye-lids - If you could refrain from quoting him, It'd be great. Thanks

You heard her, guys- stop quoting Kalibane...

burrrton wrote:And just a favor to ask - life is a lot more pleasant when certain blocked troll's posts never pass by my eye-lids - If you could refrain from quoting him, It'd be great. Thanks

You heard her, guys- stop quoting Kalibane...

Yea, that Kal is a frigging troll! ROFL!

His stats weren't MVP worthy. He barely broke 200 yards passing and had just 26 yards on 3 carries. No quarterback RECENTLY, without going back to the mid 70's as you chastised me for doing, has won the SB MVP award with numbers as low as Russell's were.

Actuly RD, Wilson is the ONLY QB with a line like his without winning the award ( over 200 yards passing, 2TDs, QBR OVER 120, NO turnovers) I'm surprised you didn't know that, it was brought up at the end of the game, after the game, and on this board when discussing the MVP award. Only 4 QBs have had a line so efficient, and three won the MVP.

Not saying he should have won, but you most definitely do not have to go back to the 70's as it hasn't happened, well, ever.

His stats weren't MVP worthy. He barely broke 200 yards passing and had just 26 yards on 3 carries. No quarterback RECENTLY, without going back to the mid 70's as you chastised me for doing, has won the SB MVP award with numbers as low as Russell's were.

I don't want to diminish Russell's role as he played a solid game and did everything he was asked, but the defense was clearly the star of the show. As burrton noted, we essentially shut out the highest scoring offense in history and their first ballot HOF quarterback, with their only scoring coming well after the game was decided. It was IMO the most impressive defensive performance in SB history.[/quote]

For the record Wilson threw for 225 yds, 2 TDs, and did you really say he ONLY ran for 26 yards on 3 carries. Do the Math RD thats a tick under NINE FRIGGING YARDS PER CARRY! you think that might matter in a SB game when a guy can rip you like that on a broken play?
Then there are the plays that dont show up on the stat sheet like the completely DOA Lynch throwback call by Bevell on 502 legal. Wilson gets the duck with 3 guys in his face, escapes left and chest passes the ball close enough to Zach Miller to avoid a grounding penalty. The next play he drops a perfect 40 yard dime to Baldwin at the Denver 5 eliciting a call from Joe Buck of "what a throw,what a catch!"

RD buddy you didn't see the game I saw. That was one of the best QB performances in recent years in a Superbowl,sorry.

Mike Rob confirmed that the locker room issues did exist. Wouldn't tell much more, but we now know that both Tate and Baldwin had their run-inns with Mr. Harvin.... and we still won the Super Bowl.

Looks like we lost Tate because of Percy, not necessarily over $$$. IHMO.

HumanCockroach wrote:Actuly RD, Wilson is the ONLY QB with a line like his without winning the award ( over 200 yards passing, 2TDs, QBR OVER 120, NO turnovers) I'm surprised you didn't know that, it was brought up at the end of the game, after the game, and on this board when discussing the MVP award. Only 4 QBs have had a line so efficient, and three won the MVP.

Not saying he should have won, but you most definitely do not have to go back to the 70's as it hasn't happened, well, ever.

It depends on what metric you use. Russell's total passing yards was the lowest of any MVP QB (assuming he would have won it) than Roger Staubach in SB VI, or so I originally thought. I wasn't trying to cherry pick, just that the site I used showed passing yards and TD passes as the only constant metric.

But I'll have to stand corrected. I just saw an error, on both parts, a SB MVP QB with less than 200 yards (Brady with 145 yards in XXXVI, Montana with 157 in XVI) and a defensive player winning it in recent years..it's actually happened quite often, 4 times since the 70's and at least once in each decade: Richard Dent, Larry Brown, Ray Lewis, and Dexter Jackson. Throw in the 3 guys from the 70's (Chuck Howley, Jake Scott, and Martin/White) and it's happened 7 times in 49 SB's, so it's more than an anomaly, happens about 15% of the time. Pretty sloppy research on my part.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/superbowl/history/mvps

So I'll stand semi corrected. You could make a an MVP argument for Russell as they've obviously given it to the quarterback of the winning team when no other performance, including the defense, stood out (Brady, P. Manning, Rypien etc), but not when the defense shuts down an opponent in the manner in which we shut down Denver. Giving it to Russell would not have reflected the true character of the game. He did not get screwed by some haters, as Hawktalk would have us believe.

Hawktalk, where on Earth did you come up with 225 passing yards? I'm not trying to make you into a liar over 19 yards, but let's be accurate. Here's Russell's SB 48 passing stats:

R. Wilson 18/25 206 8.2 2 0 0-0 88.1 123.1

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=340202007

And as far as his rushing totals, my point was that they weren't very impressive. 26 yards rushing isn't a whole lot for a scrambling, read option quarterback like Russell. His career average is 39.1 rushing yards/game, which includes last year's 53.1 YPG.

Oh, and sorry buddy, but Russell's performance wasn't the most impressive in "recent years" unless your memory is extremely short. Joe Flacco's performance the year before, 22-33 for 287 yards 3 TD's zero INT's was at least as impressive as Russell's. Plus that doesn't take into account Flacco's post season run of 11 TD passes and 0 INT's, a truly impressive feat.

Tate chimed in on the topic, and said what I hoped he would....pretty much took the high road, while taking some backhanded shots in what he said. I miss Golden, I think most agree he was a keeper but became a casualty of the cap.

If ADB89 does in fact respond, I hope it is similar to this style.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25273336/golden-tate-says-he-was-never-jealous-of-percy-harvin-in-seattle

Oh, and sorry buddy, but Russell's performance wasn't the most impressive in "recent years" unless your memory is extremely short. Joe Flacco's performance the year before, 22-33 for 287 yards 3 TD's zero INT's was at least as impressive as Russell's. Plus that doesn't take into account Flacco's post season run of 11 TD passes and 0 INT's, a truly impressive feat.[/quote]

# 1 RD I said ONE OF THE MOST IMPRESSIVE PERFORMANCES. Reading comprehension bro. Flacco was awesome and got the deserved MVP.He was throwing to Jacoby Jones, Torrey Smith, and Anquan Boldin. He was well protected throughout the postseason allowing him to do what he does from the pocket. He had a filthy defense as well in that SB which actually was what preserved the win, not some last second heroics from Flacco..

Wilson got the shaft despite directing the offense to 32 of its 48 points with no real running game, a shitty line, and throwing to the likes of Doug Baldwin etc. It is HUGE that Seattle didn't punt for almost 3 full quarters of the game. There were 3 or 4 outstanding defenders on that team. There was one outstanding offensive player. The guy who handled the ball every snap. He got screwed. If it was to be the defense it should have been the entire unit which I would agree. Absent that no way was Malcolm Smith more valuable to the team that Russell Wilson or more valuable than any other number of players on the defense for that matter.

I know you wont agree RD and it isn't surprising. You're one of the guys who just cant quite bring yourself to give Wilson his due....

I thought this thread was about how much of a douche bag Pussy Harvin is. How did this devolve into whether RW deserved the MVP???