http://www.thescore.com/home/article...kips-media-day

He participated in Media Day today.

I'd imagine a high GPA and mediocre SAT scores (990 SAT/1060 retake) and a good, but not great Wonderlic score just means he's a decently smart guy who works really hard in the classroom (which is admirable).

Cowheard said sherm got a 1400 sat score

Juuuuuuust barely. About the only way you can get Lynch talking is asking him about Japanese candy.

I mean, it's possible, but that means he took the SATs three times and suddenly made a huge improvement for the 3rd test (after making a small improvement with the first retake).

http://georgia.scout.com/a.z?s=135&p=8&c=1&nid=1850663

That's a pretty nice way to say he makes stuff up.

Meh. Regurgitating bad info isn't the same as making it up (it's super annoying and possibly dishonest though).

Cowherd, like Simmons, is a monkey put there for our amusement. There's some good comedy to be had with both, but they aren't to be taken seriously either as analysts or as sources of information.

I wonder if the scout.com report only has the sum of his reading + math scores, while 1400 includes his writing section. 990 and 1060 would be really low for a total of all three sections.

Weekend warriors money will come in on Friday. Public will be betting against the "villainous" Sherman. And put there money on that nice young man that sells them Buicks and cardboard pizza. But as stated before there is already heavy Denver action. Wether that is sharp or square money, I couldn't tell you. If you are waiting for a line move to pounce on Seattle you might get + 3.5 but I wouldn't be fretting about the line dipping to entice more Denver money.

Assuming this is out of 1600, not 2400, which would make his scores ~average. He graduated in 2005 (the last year before the new format).

good point asdf, he's a "thug"

Just a stupid, stupid, post.

Yeah, when I made that post all I was going off of was seeing soundbites from him go up on Twitter. Didn't really realize that he cut it so far short. But at least that interview he did with Deion was hilarious.

yeah whereas arguing about his SAT scores is brilliant

I wonder what the demographic profile is of the Superbowl bettor. The rooting public might see the game as "villain vs nice young man" but not the guy who slaps down 100 with his local bookie. Not sure though just my perception.

I haven't been arguing about his SAT scores. But even if I was, your post was still really stupid.

Goddammit we're talking about SAT scores here. Let's liven this baby up a little. I want SEA +1. Willing to book up to $1k action. I reserve the right to refuse anybody action for no reason whatsoever.

I'd take $100 of that if someone will escrow for us.

lol escrowing

NEXT

By the way, here is a pretty good unbiased look at each team's tactics on offense and defense and how they might plan to exploit the other. Much better than most tired analysis I've read so far.

Yeah, that was a great article.

Ya I'm sure this is why the opening line moved quickly from -1 SEA to -2 DEN.

One thing I've been wondering about is Needle's article:

http://zonereads.wordpress.com/2013/...s-cover-3hawk/

In this, he breaks down a few plays in which the Seahawks show a safety blitz but then drop him into zone, show cover 2 and then drop into robber, and show cover 2 and run a zone blitz. Neat stuff, and I certainly couldn't read coverages like this before seeing this article. However, I also wouldn't say I'm as good at reading coverages as Matt Hasselbeck:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2014/1/27/...ahawks-defense

Watching the Seahawks this year, I've looked for those disguised coverages as we go, but it's hard to do on the TV, and I'm not necessarily all that good at it anyway. I didn't get the impression from Needle's work what whether the disguises were a common element of the defense or an occasional wrinkle. So, were those 3 disguised coverages against the Cards 3 wrinkles brought out just for that game that Needle happened to talk about? Was Hass being a little understated about the degree to which Seattle disguises their coverages? Do the Seahawks typically do a handful of disguised coverages per game that Needle chose to break down rather than focusing on the breat-and-butter? Something else?