Halford & Brough in the Morning - Seahawks Great Richard Sherman

Episode Date: February 6, 2025

In hour three, Mike & Jason talk the latest Canucks news ahead of tonight's matchup in San Jose with Canucks Talk host & The Athletic Vancouver's Thomas Drance (1:44), plus the boys are joined by Seahawks legend and Super Bowl champion Richard Sherman (23:58) ahead of the big game on Sunday. This podcast is produced by Andy Cole and Greg Balloch. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

What we just have to call Thomas Drance Erotica. Thomas Drance Erotica. Corsi. Thomas Drance Erotica. Expected goals. Thomas Drance Erotica Toth model Thomas Drance Erotica

regression Thomas Drance Erotica PDO Thomas Drance Erotica 803 on a Thursday Oh, Thomas Drance, Veronica. 803 on a Thursday, Halford Brough, Sportsnet 650. Halford Brough of the morning is brought to you by Vancouver Honda, Vancouver's premier destination for Honda customers. They have a friendly, knowledgeable staff that can help with anything you're looking for,

be it sales, financing, service or parts. We are an hour three of the program. Thomas Drantz from the Athletic Vancouver and Canucks talk right here on Sportsnet 650. He's going to join us in just a second here to kick off hour three. Hour three is brought to you by Campbell and Pound, real estate appraisers. Trust the expertise of Campbell and Pound. Visit them on the internet at Campbell-Pound.com today. We are coming to you live from the Kintec studio. Kintec, footwear, and orthotics working together with you in step.

Our next guest is a presentation of Freeway Mazda. Is it Mazda or Mazda? What do you guys say? Mazda or Mazda? I say Mazda. Mazda. Mazda. Mazda.

It's like how my dad says, tacos. We're having tacos for dinner tonight. What? I like some of them. Tacos. He's from England. Yeah. Tacos. Joining us now, Thomas Drantz, Halford, Bruff, Sportsnet 650. What up I'd like some of them tacos. He's from England. Yeah. Tacos. Joining us now, Thomas Drantz.

Halford, Bruff, Sportsnet 650. What up, Drantz? However you say Mazda, you know I say it Mazda. Mazda. You know, like I'm definitely a Mazda seer, right? So you should probably go with that before my hit. I might start calling you Thomas Drantz, actually. God.

Drantz, what do you think of all these moves the Canucks have made? Yeah, I don't love the value on the second JT Miller trade, but I like the players they got back. So, look, I think it's consistent with something I've been critical of this organization for across six years and of this management group across three or four, where, you know, my concern is a lot of these trades sometimes raise their floor, right? This is a team with a pretty high floor with a pretty solid defensive group, which man, been a long time since we said that, especially once you throw, I mean, we haven't even seen it with Quinn Hughes thrown into the banks. So I like that. But I do worry that that, you know, they dealt the highest upside asset. And for me, it was the first they got back from the Rangers.

To me, that's just, I just worry a little bit that ultimately you could get stuck in the middle with this approach. That's always been my fear with Vancouver going after players, sort of not prioritizing, accumulating talent and building out your sort of hall of futures and trying to do at least a few things through the draft. Although, you know, my understanding is the Canucks are very reluctant to trade their own firsts. So at least there's that. I don't think their first is valuable as the Rangers. Like I think they're more likely to make the playoffs this year and just as likely to make the playoffs next year, given the state of the West. Yup.

Um, so that, to me, I just didn't love the entire maneuver, but I liked, like I liked Marcus Pedersen a lot. I think Drew O'Connor is a really good player. It sounds like there was quite a bit of competition for Drew O'Connor too. Elliot Freeman reporting that Vegas and Edmonton among others were in the mix for him.

So maybe, you know, maybe that's the price, right? Yeah, it was a significant price. They're good players, you know? So anyway, I think you come out of it with a Canucks team where the build's a little flipped. We've been talking for so long about Vancouver having really forwards and some top endy, but not enough depth on defense. And suddenly, Vancouver's top target over the next 12 to 18 months is going to be a top two line center.

Yeah. Right? And- How are they going to find that? That's the big question. Let's say that, let's say that Pedersen doesn't dramatically improve and let's be generous to Philip Heidel and say that he's got that, he's a 2C, that he plays up to a 2C. Even if you don't think he can, let's just say

it for the sake of argument. So they're in a situation where they've got Pedersen, he isn't improving, so they really need a one C. That is not an easy position to be in. No, and when we see those guys move, it's not, frankly, all that unlike the situation that, for example, landed the New York Rangers their new 1C last week. Right? These situations that boil over that tend to be relationship-based as opposed to hockey-based

where someone you don't expect to be available or to move suddenly ends up moving. Right? I mean, sometimes you can find it through a breakout candidate. Like, uh, like I, I mean, I wouldn't call him a one C, but like Sam Bennett to Florida, where he hadn't been the player that he has been for the Panthers. When the Calgary flames dealt him, they were able to get him for two seconds. So sometimes you can gamble on, you know, honestly, that's not different than, that's not too different anyway than what you're hoping

for from Phillip Heidel. Right. Right. Yeah. That's not too different from what the Calgary Flames are hoping for with Morgan Frost. Right. So, so that's one way to do it is the, is the

like lower end younger guy still has some juice and upside, maybe he can be more for us. So that's, that's the one way. And then the other way is the Jack I go JT Miller way, where something odd happens, one of those weird opportunities comes about. And honestly, this is not that theoretical, like we see a couple guys move like this, you know, I wouldn't say a couple guys a year, but we see, you know, three or four guys move like that every five years. But you need to be ready. You need to be ready. You need to have the assets to win the bidding. You need to be positioned and flexible and able to get

it done whenever the occasion presents itself. And you need to be willing to take on the risk to do it. You need to be willing to do what the Rangers did in acquiring Miller. You need to be willing to bet on a player with a basically unprecedented spinal surgery in their recent past in Jack Eichel. You need to take on some risk and swing hard for an elite player, but those tend to be the ways that really, really good centermen get acquired on the trade market. If you're the Canucks, how would you game plan the Pedersen situation, knowing a few things, knowing that he's got the no move clause that kicks in on July 1st, knowing that some people think that what he

needs is a really good off season of getting stronger and getting more burst into his game and knowing that if you bet on that, then he needs a good off season that the no move clause date might be eclipsed. So the, my focus on upside, just like my, my, my belief in it, my, my prioritization of it would lead me to be patient with Elias Pedersen. Now there's sort of a couple factors that play into that.

The first is the no move clause is obviously inconvenient and to some extent saps your ability to build a market and get 100% value. But if I'm dealing in any way, I'm not going to get back an asset with more upside than Pedersen regardless at this stage. So that's baked in. There's no world where I trade Pedersen and get another player who, you know, like over his previous 12 months stretch, we know what this last 12 months stretch has looked like. It's been 80 games and 57 points, right? Not great. The previous 12 months stretch was 112 points over 85 games, right? Ludicrous stuff from Elias Patterson.

And so I'm not going to get that much upside back if I trade him whether the no move clause exists or not. And so I'd look at it as, okay, no move clause kicks in, I'm still going to probably be able to move the guy. It's just going to be a little bit more complicated, a three-dimensional deal as opposed to one that I can make unilaterally. Right? And so I would look at it as a risk for sure, but at least if I'm gambling that Pedersen

can find this form or, or at least if I'm taking the organizational view, they're like, okay, everything we do here is going to be about finding a way to help this guy succeed and finding a way to get a skating burst back. Right? Like that's everything for us right now, in terms of forwards, we need to figure this out. Yeah. You know, like at least if I'm right, I get

something really, really good. You know, it's not like I'm gambling or the organization would be gambling on a 60 point guy even if that's what he is now. Right? You're gambling that you can get at this player who's been, you know, point per game through the ages of 19, but from the ages of 19 through 25, a guy who's, you know, hit a ceiling where he's had a hundred point season or hit a 12 month or an 85 game stretch where he's got

112 points and 45 goals. The level that he has been at is so high that I think you have to be super reluctant to get rid of it. And if it requires you taking on more risk than you're comfortable with, more risk than you actually have appetite for, Well, at least what you get is probably the single hardest thing to find in this league, which is a genuinely elite scoring one center who also has good two-way driving ability. Yeah.

It sucks. Whatever has happened is completely black box to me. I don't know. And this does not compute. No, and it doesn't look good, right? Like it doesn't look good right now. So do you have any theory? Like, do you have a, cause there are some people out there and you see it on social media, just the

certainty that they like, it's so obvious he's injured. I'm like, uh, I don't know. Like it might be a factor, but I think it goes beyond that. That's my theory. Do you have any theories or even actual Intel on how a player can, like his, his stride has never been pretty, but he's had jump, he's had burst. And right now he, you know, he looks like he looks like a flat tire. You know, like that's so, you know, so people are like,

shoot the puck, shoot the puck. Well, he's not opening up any shooting lanes because he's not moving and the coaches, you got to move your feet, you got to move your feet, but even when he does move his feet, you know, he's not moving them very well and it doesn't look efficient in it. And again, his stride has never looked super efficient, but it looks even less efficient now. So do you think the, do you have any ideas?

Do you think the Canucks know actually what's going on? I don't, uh, I don't, and, and I don't have any Intel and I don't have any theories. I think the. That's crazy, man. Like I'm not, I'm not criticizing you. I was just like, I'm, it's crazy that there's

no diagnosis of this yet, unless the Canucks are keeping something back from us. Yeah. I mean, and the fact is, is that it looks physical to me, right? I think when you really hone in and watch his first few steps, it doesn't look like he used to, right? Pedersen wasn't fast, fast, but he had quickness.

You know, like Pete Pedersen is quick, even if he's not fast. And that's not there and that's not there. That's not there at all. So I, you know, I struggle with the idea that it's like, it's what's between his ears. Although look, there probably is an element. I'm sure there's a combination of that.

I'm sure it's a combination, but, but there does look like there's something physical to me. And maybe that's had a bad off season and never caught up. Maybe that's, you know, the other thing is if you go look at that NHL edge data, right, which everyone's talking about because his skating speeds down so significantly, his shot speed is down so significantly, right? All of his season highs in terms of burst, in terms of shot volume, were from like the first two weeks of the season. So, you know, it's actually like gotten worse as we've gone along

through this year. I don't have an explanation. I don't have a theory, like not at least not a complete one. I just look at that and I watch him play and I watch the lack of burst and quickness and think there's got to be at least a physical component to this. Yeah. I agree with you, but is it the tendonitis or is it the, or is it the fact that you didn't show up to shake?

Lack of preparation. Fitness. But sometimes, you know, it's sometimes it's your energy levels too. Like, you know, that can contribute to that. So I don't know, all I know is that I hope to God that the Canucks have some idea, because if they don't, then they're guessing at this point about whether or not he can come back.

Yeah. Look, and it's an uncomfortable spot to be in. The other, it's a deeply uncomfortable spot to be in with an $11.6 million commitment that becomes a little bit more locked in come July 1. We have seen him have a 50 game stretch in that 2020-22 season, no, 2021-22 season, right? After the first 25 games with Travis Green, first 20 games with Bruce Boudreaux before he really clicked back in the year. And then, you know, we got 140 games of Pete Pettersson and then this last calendar year arrived. So we have seen this, I guess.

We've seen stretches where this has happened and he did get through it last time. I don't know if that gives you confidence or, or makes you more concerned that you've got a long-term commitment to a guy who's gone in and out and we've never really understood why. Um, but yeah, he, he does. You were watching him play right now and it feels like a dimming light or like, you know, one of those lights that doesn't have enough electricity. It's just kind of like, it's just, it's just not there in his game. And yeah, that unnerves me.

But again, this team's going like the logic of this team, the logic of this team now, they're sort of entering this new upside down build relative to where they've been, where you look at it and say, okay, especially with the uncertainty that they've got going on, best are like where, where's the goal is going to come from, you know, like 10 years ago, 10 years ago, you could win a cup with the best defensemen in the league, a really good defensive structure, a deep blue line and like, you know,

uh, two second line quality, forward lines and two third line quality forward lines. And you're just like the deepest team with great goal pending and you control play really well. And that that could that could win you a cup but you need a dude now like you absolutely need in this era of McDavid and honestly the Panthers are a perfect example where it's like they had Barkov and I'm this you know excellent team and they won the President's Trophy but they needed Matthew Kachak to make two consecutive finals you need a dude you

need elite talent to win with the way the game is trending and the way save percentage has dropped and the impact that star players are making on a night to night basis. And if that's not Pedersen, the Canucks do not have even like a bid in on a dude. So I just think this is, this is one of those risks that yes, it's significant. Yes, it's unnerving and uncomfortable to be in this spot. But if the Canucks aren't betting on the guy they already have, who are they betting on? We're speaking to Thomas Drance from the Athletic Vancouver and Canucks talk here on the Haliford

& Brough Show on Sportsnet 650. The Marcus Pedersen contract extension, have we covered all our bases there? Are we good? Is there any take you've cooked up in the lab you got on this one? You got anything for us here, Drance? No, I've, it's decent. I mean, it's, uh, it's good. It's good work. It's good value. He's a good player. Um, he's tough as nails, but just in a different way.

And man, it's going to like, you know, that I like the idea that this team's going to have a variety, like at least three quality defensemen, like, you know, like, you know, like, you know to like, you know, that I like the idea that this team's going to have a variety, like at least three quality defensemen, right? At least three guys that I think you feel really comfortable with playing top pair minutes on any given night. That's what you need, right? Like I think that's, I think that's what this team has needed for an awfully long time. that's, I think that's what this team has needed for an awfully long time. And I think it's going to look so much different from so much of what we've seen, especially once we get to see it with Quinn Hughes.

Um, now the, they're still going to need some juice, but in terms of what the backend looks like, and in terms of the bids that they have coming to level it up further, uh, both because DPD looks so much, so far ahead of schedule on his development track record. And then Tom Blander at some point, probably later this year, um, gives them, you know, another guy with pedigree who could make a significant difference. I mean, the state of this blue line is the healthiest it's been in a decade. And I think fans are going to enjoy watching that.

I think I'm going to enjoy watching that. I think this team is going to be able to plug players into a far more, um, like healthy hockey environment as a result of what they've added with Pedersen and what they should still add in the months ahead. It's crazy how quickly we've all gone to like, we've all gone to like, okay, we like our centers, but the defense is a problem. And now I'm looking at the defense and you know, you got Hughes and like we've all gone and like, okay, we like our centres, but the defence is a problem. And now I'm looking at the defence and you know,

you got Hughes and Hronik and Marcus Pedersen, but also some young guys on the way too. I mean, who couldn't be excited about DP, DPD and Tom Willender. And we haven't even seen Victor Mancini yet. And there's Kudryasov and Sawyer Minio. Like, I don't know if those guys will amount to anything, but they're there.

And you know, you only have to find, the thing is that you only have to find four defencemen, right? Really, if you think about it. Um, because you can, you can hide a bottom pair. I mean, some teams have gotten away with three defencemen. That's Chicago Blackhawks want to, want to stand like up with three really good defencemen and three other guys, right? The forward group is, the forward group is more complicated, right?

Like I think even if Pedersen comes back and plays well and Besser resigns, I'm still not a hundred percent loving the top six. Yeah, no, I agree with you. I mean, even right now, like if you try to make lines and there's no one out hurt, I still think they're a top nine forward short. Yeah.

Right. Like right now, I think there's tonight against San Jose. I think they're top nine forward short. Um, you know, Josh, Joshua played really well on Tuesday, but it's kind of been in and out and understandably given all the time he missed. Right. Um, so I still think ideally if you, if you were able to find a way for him to play with like Bluger and Hoeglander on the fourth line for a little bit and the Canucks play their fourth line relatively generously, like I still think you're still top nine guys short now, like right now. So yeah, I mean, and that's already with a center mix of suitor and blueger in your bottom six that I don't

think is scaring anyone come playoff time. So I mean, I think upgrading, upgrade is at center, more depth and more talent, more elite talent on the wings. I mean, there's an element to which what you just described is an example of Whack-a-Mole where the Canucks had had, you know, the strength down the middle with those three guys. They traded it for some strength on the back end, but the problems have just cropped back up. There's an element to which I think it's fair to describe that. Uh, the Connex have been just sort of reallocating as opposed to aggregating overall talent in their lineup.

And, and, you know, that's a tough spot to be in, but I do think that you can make lesser players look better, right? If you have a plan and a structure that makes sense and, and a blue line that can actually hold up. You know, there's not a lot of good, like the truth is is that there's like 25 good NHL defenseman. It's just so many, there's so many teams that don't have enough of them and the connects might have

three of the 25. That's a, that's a good building block, a good starting point, but you still need to graph the elite talent onto this lineup. Transor thanks for this bud. We appreciate it. Enjoy the game tonight. Should be a good building block, a good starting point, but you still need to graph the elite talent onto this lineup. Drantzer, thanks for this bud. We appreciate it. Enjoy the game tonight. It should be a good one. Cheers guys. Bye.

Thomas Drantz from the Athletic Vancouver and Canucks talk right here on the Halford and Breff show on Sportsnet 650. Okay. Coming up on the other side of the break, hopefully, it is not going to be what we learned, brackets might be. Richard Sherman is supposed to join the program. We were supposed to have him on Tuesday. It didn't work out. We're going to try again we learn, brackets might be. Richard Sherman is supposed to join the program. We were supposed to have them on Tuesday. It didn't work out.

We're going to try again on the other side. The keynote speaker at this year's RBC JCC Sports Dinner, five time Pro Bowler, five time All-Pro Super Bowl champion. One of the greatest Seahawks of all time, Richard Sherman. Hopefully coming up next on the Halford and Brough show on Sportsnet 650. It's Canucks Central with Dan Riccio and Satya Arshaw, your destination for everything Canucks. Exclusive interviews, inside info, and even the post game show.

Listen 4 to 6 p.m. weekdays and on demand through your favorite podcast app. 8.32 on a Thursday. Happy Thursday everybody. Halford and Brough, Sportsnet 650. Halford and Brough of the morning is brought to you by Vancouver Honda, Vancouver's premier destination for Honda customers. They have a friendly, knowledgeable staff that can help with anything you're looking for, sales, financing, service or parts.

We are in hour three of the program. Hour three is brought to you by Campbell & Pound real estate appraisers. Trust the expertise of Campbell & Pound. Visit them on the internet at Campbell-pound.com today. We are very excited to talk to our next guest. He is a five-time Pro Bowler. He is a five-time All-Pro. He is a Super Bowl champion. He is one of the greatest Seattle Seahawks of all time. He's the guest speaker at this year's RBC JCC Sports Dinner,

which will be next week, February 12th, the Hyatt Regency in Vancouver. Without any further ado, very excited to bring Richard Sherman onto the program on the Halford and Brough Show on Sportsnet 650. Morning Richard, how are you? Good morning. I'm doing pretty good on yourself. We are well as well. Thanks for taking the time to do this. We really appreciate it. We're both very big Seahawks fans We're both very excited to get to speak with you before we get into all the cool football stuff

I do want to ask a very important question about not just this dinner But the JCC and your involvement with them the JCC does help communities Through sport they offer a number of sports related programs for the community for all types of individuals including those with like learning disabilities and mental health challenges. Why was it important for you to be involved with this type of initiative? Well it's always important to give back and you know we've given back to a number of causes over my time as a professional and even before, but my mom also, you know, worked with mentally and physically disabled kids for 30 years

growing up. So, um, obviously I was, I was introduced to that at an early age and, and really, uh, it had a positive impact on me just being able to interact with them, help treatment, um, therapy and things like that throughout my time as a kid. And so, you know, just a and things like that throughout my time as a kid. And so, you know, just a lot of things aligned in the right way for this to work out. What was your childhood like and how did it shape you as a person and as an athlete? Well, I mean, you know, every childhood is unique, but, you know, I think mine was pretty, pretty interesting, you know, rough neighborhood and good parents.

Sports allows you an avenue and a space to get away from that. Obviously sports has been a bridge for me to put myself and my family in a better place. To make a long story short, that's the breath of it. How are you enjoying the TV role with Amazon? Did speaking on TV come naturally to you? Yeah, I'm enjoying it a ton, man. It's a great crew. It's a fun show to do.

It's fun to talk about sports, as you guys know. And it came pretty easily. I felt like I'm built to talk about sports and, you know, debate the facts and stats and everything we love and hate about sports. So I've enjoyed it since the moment I got on the set. We're speaking to Richard Sherman here on the Haliford and Bref Show on Sportsnet 650.

Richard, of course, is the keynote speaker at this year's RBC JCC Sports Dinner, February the 12th at the Hyatt Regency, Vancouver. Now that you're in your role as a media guy and working the Thursday Night Footballs for Amazon and everything, who do you pay more attention to? The Seattle Seahawks or the San Francisco 49ers? You got to pay attention to everybody these days. I mean, you never know what's going to happen in these games.

But I watch both. I keep a pulse on both teams. Also keep a pulse on Tampa and Kansas City and all the rest of these teams because you never know who's gonna come out of nowhere and be relevant. The Detroit Lions, for example, came out of nowhere, built a really great team, great culture and now are perennially in the playoffs and contending and have the number one seed before getting upset by the commanders. What do you think about where the Seahawks are right now? What's going to be the biggest challenge to make them a Super Bowl contender again? to make them a Super Bowl contender again?

Um, just big time players. Um, that's what makes a bowl teams. I think, you know, it's a pretty good coaching staff. Um, I think Mike has a good scheme defensively. Uh, obviously they want to make a change offensively and got rid of Grove. Um, and got Kubiak, but, so I expect them to run the football you know inside and outside zone seems to be what the Kubiak tree does but it's gonna come down to big-time players you know players are gonna have to develop into superstars on the field and at the end of the day that's how you get Super Bowls you have

Super Bowl caliber players that execute. I think they have those kind of players on defense, but it's going to have to manifest itself in a bigger way. Obviously, Leonard Williams had a huge year this year. They got big expectations for Byron Murphy, Boye Mafay to develop into something with a spoon and to wreak obviously And then Ernest Jones coming in, you know around midseason after the bye and made a really good impact

So hopefully they bring him back and then offensively you got to find an offensive line You know find an offensive line to get back up right? Richard Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you came up at least once to a Canucks hockey game in Vancouver, didn't you? Yeah, I did. Okay. So, very recently the Canucks had an issue on their team where two of their top forwards

were not getting along and they tried and they tried and they came together. They had lots of meetings and they just didn't get along. And it eventually led to one of them being traded away. Now we all know that there's been lots of talk about the Seattle Seahawks when you were there and did everyone get along? Was there a clash of egos? Was there a preferential treatment by the coach? So I guess my question to you is what's it like trying to get along with everyone on a professional sports team?

Well, that's a complicated answer, I guess, but I don't know what their issues were. You know, it could be a number of things, but usually, you know, if everybody's intentions are winning and winning is the most important thing for everybody, then usually you can find a common ground, um, uh, along most of these issues. You know, I think, you know, the problem lies in, you know, like you said, we had issues with preferential treatment and things like that, that kind of, uh, eats away at the, the accountability and credibility of the coaching staff. And then you leave, you start to question everything once the culture doesn't

apply uniform uniformly, uh, down the line. And so, uh, I think you gotta, you know, you gotta keep the main thing, the main thing, and if wings, the main thing, then a lot of times that, that can calm a lot of the frustration down and at least get it to a point where people can move per fresh professionally within building. Is it okay for a coach to treat players differently? If the coach knows that one player, for example, responds well to being challenged or doubted and

he's got a, you know, like I'll show you coach attitude while the other responds well to positive reinforcement, you know, there are some athletes, uh, and maybe more and more athletes, younger athletes now that kind of shut down when they're overly criticized. So how does it co, how is a coach supposed to balance that and, and, and not have this, um,

appearance of preferential treatment? That's, that's the tough space to navigate you know I mean I believe this generation has been softer so and I don't mean that in the kindest way you know I mean I just mean that generally it's soft and so you know I mean if you can't be coached and you need positive reinforcement every stretch of imagination every way and you haven't you know I mean and the rest of the team is getting coached in a certain way. It's not going to come off well. It's not never going to go well. You got to either,

you know, if your culture is one way and that's the way you coach, you know, 10 out of 11 guys and the 11th guy gets coached differently, you're going to create an issue. So, you know, it's unfortunate, but as the head coach, you have to keep the standard, the standard. If you were to tell a young athlete it's important to be coachable and I've actually tried to do this before and failed because I have a hard time exactly describing what being coachable is. What would you say or what were some examples that you point to about this is how you be coachable? Being able to accept and criticism and correction and make a difference in real time,

being able to not take things personally, being able to be told something such as a weakness, a flaw in your game and not take that offensively and go into a shell, a flaw in your game, and not take that offensively and go into a shell, but to take that as motivation to work on your craft and to improve that facet of your game or your sport or whatever the case may be, your life, your writing, your math.

I think that's the most important part of being coachable, being accountable when things aren't going great. And not again, taking it personally. You know, I think everybody gets into their emotions and feelings about things when it's, it's business, you know, like, Hey, am I doing the job? What can I do to do my job better? And then go out there and work on the things

that you can do better and then execute it at the end of the day. When did you learn that? Did you learn that as a, as a very young athlete? Was that always the way you were or did you actually have to like come to the conclusion that I need to be like this? I had really tough coaches when I was young,

so I didn't really have a ton of choices. It was like, do what the program, or don't play the sport. Did you have a particular favorite coach, either college, high school, the pros? Was there one guy that either stood out in a good way, of course, like that was someone that I really look up to as being the sort of like pinnacle or epitome of what I wanted out of a coach? Yeah, I mean, not in the moment. I didn't see him that way in the moment. I've seen him a, you know,

a much different way in the moment. But my football coach at high school, Keith Donerson and my track coach, Darrell Smith, and both of them ran the dog working to death. And in the moment, I'm thinking, man, this sucks. They are treating me preferentially in the worst way. They're singling me out and working me like a dog. And I don't see anybody else out here on this field. There's only like three of us and the word, the three can work like a dog, but then you can look in the championship games and the championship meets and all that. And those are the three that are there. You know, those are the three that

are making the biggest plays and going to college and getting scholarship offers and all that. But, uh, in the moment you're a kid, you're like, man, this sucks. Why can't I just get to chill and hang out on the side or go home early or do anything? But like I tell my son, nothing comes without hard work and everybody is conditioned to take the easy route. Those who don't usually make it to the top. So this is a question that we asked KJ Wright when we had him on a year or two ago and he was like, oh, that's a good question.

So this has KJ's approval as a question. So I'm going to ask you, are egos a good thing or a bad thing when it comes to team sports? Because egos can drive you to be better as an individual, but they can also be problematic in a team setting. Yeah, egos, egos the enemy. But I think some people confuse confidence

with ego sometimes. You know, ego is self, self, self, self. You know, everything is self improving. You know, everything is about me, me, me, self. You know, everything is self improving, you know, everything is about me, me, me, me. That's ego. I don't think ego ever wins. I don't think ego on a lot of championship teams really works. And I think people confuse that

because they use the word so loosely, like ego, ego, man, they have a lot of egos on that team. No, personalities may be true and confidence, no question about it. But egos wouldn't work because egos would always think me before week. And so when you when you have guys that think we before me, then they're not equal to school, at least in my opinion. You know, I could be wrong. But this is the way I thought sports and the reason why our team worked is because no matter what, the weed came

before the meat. So there's a certain teammate of yours, former teammate of yours that comes to mind and I used to be a big fan of this guy. And then he started talking about his legacy all the time. And you know, there was reports that he really wanted to win an MVP and it kind of lost me.

Um, I'm sure you can think of the guy that I'm probably thinking of, but was I on the right track there? Um, I, that, that, that's something that I think will go down in history as one of the, the most head scratching, um, questions of all time, because, um, outwardly it doesn't seem that way, but on the surface, at least from what we saw and decisions made, you

know, to throw a football that should have been run, there, there will always be that question. I don't think he's a bad guy or a bad person in any way, but, um, you know, I think, I think when you make decisions or decisions bad person in any way but you know I think I think when you make decisions or decisions are made in a situation that seems pretty clear-cut and obvious and different decisions are made that lead to losses then you know questions will be asked for a long time. Did he change as a person and a teammate or was was he always the same guy? Well, I don't know if he changed. I think he just became more outwardly what he was going to become.

I don't think anybody changed him as a person. I think he's a pretty straightforward guy, does things right, works hard you know, as circumstances change human beings start to become more of what they they want to be telling them what they want to be. And I think that's what happened. You know, I think, you know, you you think you're you're a guy and you're a big time guy and you see other big time guys getting treated a certain way and you say, Hey, I deserve to be treated that same way and I deserve to be looked at in that same way. And I think that's what he wanted. And we're of course talking about KJ Wright, right? No question. Yeah.

No question. We are. Can't be wrong. Very selfish. We are speaking to Richard Sherman here on the Alfred and Bruv Show on Sportsnet 650. Richard, your former head coach, Pete Carroll is back coaching in the NFL with the Las Vegas Raiders. I was listening to something you had with K Adams

on Up and Adams a little while ago, where you talked about Pete being a culture builder. And the quote was, I think everyone has gotten into this cutesy mindset of offensive genius or defensive genius, and they forgot about building the culture of a team. What makes Pete so good at building a culture of a team and how does he do it?

And he keeps the pulse on it. He's consistent almost to the point it's born. You know what I mean? It's robotic consistency. It's monotonous. You know, if you're there long enough, you'll hear the same stories over and over. You'll hear the same coaching points. You know, the same routines.

And you know, sometimes routines are bad and they're like, Hey, you know, I mean change something, but routines that are good and grounded in psychology and grounded in success can work. You know what I mean? They've been building cars the same way for a long time because it works. They build buildings the same way for a long time because it works. And I think that's the thing that has allowed him to have success at so many places because he knows how to build something that works.

And again, for our success, the reason it breaks is when you building something and then you're like, oh my God, we got a new part. We're not gonna build this part the same as we've been building every other part. We're gonna build this one different. And then when you do that, the machine breaks and then you have an issue.

Richard, this was great, man. We're right up against it for time time but we wanted to thank you for taking the time to do this today. We really appreciate it. Like we said, we're huge Seahawks fans. Huge fans of yours from the Legion of Booms day and it's very cool that you're going to be coming up here on February the 12th as the guest speaker of the RBC JCC Sports Dinner. Enjoy your trip to Vancouver and once again, thanks for doing this today. We really appreciate it. Thank you guys for having me. It was a pleasure. Thanks, Richard. Richard Sherman here on the Hell for the Bruff Show on Sports Night 650. Good detail breakdown on KJ Wright.

That was very well done. Yeah. I got a laugh out of him at least. It was good. I was a little bit nervous for that interview, I have to admit. You are rarely nervous when- I don't get nervous.

I don't get nervous for interviews, but I was a little bit nervous for him because he's such a big personality. He's a smart guy. Right. Like, and he- Something tells me he still thinks about that moment a little bit. Do you think so?

Yeah. Who's to say? Who's to say? It's like, oh. Couldn't glean that from the interview. Yeah. I thought Adog was like, what player are you talking about? Yeah, could you please be specific? Which Super Bowl was that?

Yeah. That was pretty funny when I said, we're talking about KJ, right? Right? That was funny. Yeah. You are a funny person. Yeah. Uh, I thought. You should host the JCC sports dinner. No. Okay.

I thought. It's not inspiring. It was very interesting and you've coached youth sports. Yes. And I've coached youth sports and there is a fine line that you walk in delivering criticism to young players. And there is a fine line that you walk in delivering criticism to young players. Um, and that frankly, that range is from like four

years old to like 23 years old, right? If you criticize too much, the player can take it personally. Cause as Richard Sherman said, it's a soft generation. Well, I mean, I think it's like that. I mean, I know I'm not going to comment on that, but, but I, I do think that, um, as coaches, maybe we need to do a better job of preparing the kids for the fact that they will be criticized.

Okay. You know what? I have a lot of thoughts. Maybe, maybe laying it out at the beginning of the season and going, and I'm not talking about like when they're like seven or eight years old. It's like, we're going to rip you guys this year. Like I'm talking about when they reach the age,

when they can be coached and you just say like, listen, prepare yourselves. You're going to be criticized and you may not like it, but we are doing this for you. Like we're trying to help you here. We're not trying to be mean just for the sake of being mean. What are your thoughts on this? So one of the most salient points was that there needs to be an ability on the athlete to not take criticisms personally. That criticisms or instruction or feedback that isn't positive on the field of play solely relates

to what you did as an athlete in that moment on a field. It's not a personal attack. It's not a personal attack. that isn't positive on the field of play solely relates to what you did as an athlete in that moment on a field. It's not a personal attack, it's not something that you should carry outside the lines of play. It is something that is a dynamic between a coach that has a job to do and a game plan to lay out and a plan that needs to be executed and then the individual pieces and players that are supposed to execute that plan. If you're not doing something within the framework of the team, it's not an indictment on you. It's telling you that if you don't do the things the way we need you to do them, then the rest of this team can't succeed. So everyone else is relying on you

to do your job. And if you can't do it, we'll find another person that can do it. And it's that, that's the, that's where that, um, criticism needs to exist. Is it like. You know where it comes up all the time in hockey coaching? F1 on the four check. If you don't do your job in chasing the puck

carrier or the puck, like we're not expecting you to get to the puck, but you have to chase enough that the D man's going to make, uh, to make a tough decision or be forced into making a decision. And I think that's like, you know, like, it's hard to explain sometimes because you're like, we want you to chase the puck, but then the player will be like, yeah, but I can't get to that puck. I was like, yeah, that's not the whole idea though. Because if you don't, if you don't, if you don't chase, like talk, if he's listening

right now, he's like, cause man go. Right? Like it all breaks down if the first guy doesn't do it. And frankly, it all breaks down if the second guy doesn't do it. If he doesn't go to the spot where the guy's trying to chase the puck to. But in the moment, the player or the athlete will

often say, the coach is coming down on me. And where the divide is, is the coach is saying, no, I'm talking about the breakdown in the system. You just happen to be that break down. It could be somebody else and they will get the criticism as well. This is not meant to be a reflection of you as a person. It's what you're doing within

how we're trying to achieve things as a team. Anyway, we're up against it for time now. Thank you all for listening today. It was a lot of fun. It was a great interview with Richard Sherman. Download our three of the podcasts. It's like an adog if you don't get the podcast up. It all breaks down.

The system fails. It's true. You're off the team. I'm a younger generation, so you gotta call me a little bit. I need positive motivation. You ain't that young. Yeah.

Oh god. Okay, we gotta get out of here today, but we will be back tomorrow. Enjoy the game tonight, everyone. We'll be back to talk about it tomorrow morning. Signing off for now, I have been Mike Halford, he's been Jason Brough, he's been Adog, and he's been Laddy. This has been the Halford and Brough Show on Sportsnet at 6.50.