Richard Sherman’s interactions with media don’t matter, but his interactions with Seahawks do

So Richard Sherman didn’t have much to say in Seattle’s locker room on Wednesday, huh?

Good. Because I wasn’t all that interested in what he had to say. At least not if it was going to be more of what we’ve heard from him over the past two weeks.

This is not the most journalistically sound approach. Then again neither is bringing a player lunch, and I’ve done that before. A few times, in fact.

So forget whether Sherman is boycotting the local media. I’m boycotting his interviews. I’m not interested in what he has to say. At least not as long as he’s reasserting his belief he was right to criticize the offensive play selection and then getting mad when people question his lack of contrition.

Because that’s just ridiculous.

Sherman was in the wrong. Not so much for reacting on the sidelines. That was a spur-of-the-moment emotion. Except then he sat calmly in front of his locker after the game and said it was because he didn’t want the team passing from the 1-yard line. Then – after his coach made it sound like Sherman would be apologizing – Sherman said pretty much the same thing all over again.

What he did amounted to a repeated challenge to the very structure of the team.

But he also did that in a press conference while talking with reporters as opposed to in a meeting room with teammates and/or coaches.

What he says to reporters doesn’t matter. Not in comparison to his interactions with the team, and my understanding is that Sherman did tell Darrell Bevell his emotions got away from him on the sideline.

Besides, this all happened two weeks ago. The reason it’s still an issue is because of the continued interaction of Sherman and local reporters covering the team. He said it was a privilege for him to answer questions in a press conference though he was smiling when he said and may have been joking. He said he’d be missed when he is gone.

He is playing the martyr athlete besieged by the media that is hounding him and ticking him off, to use his words.

Which is weird because all reporters have asked him to do is discuss a very public act of insubordination, and the question that aggravated him was when he was asked plainly to reconcile what he had said about throwing a pass from the 1-yard line.

“What I don’t understand is, Darrell Bevell is calling plays that he thinks are going to work. So do you think you have a better handle on what should be called in that situation?”

Now let’s get this straight: Sherman doesn’t have to be sorry. He doesn’t have to tell reporters – and by extension the public – even if he is sorry. But I also have every right to say that’s incredibly disappointing, especially since it was done by a player and person I’ve admired very much in six years covering him. I mean, I get a couple of e-mails from him every day because I bought two of his T-shirts earlier this year. One for me, one for my wife.

But, at this point, there’s not a whole lot more questions that I have for Sherman.

Wait. That’s not at all right. There’s not a whole lot more questions that I have for Sherman that would result in a productive interview.

There’s only so many times you can ask a guy if he’s sorry or if he regrets something before you realize that no one is going to satisfied by the ensuing conversation. Sherman has made his decision. He dug in his heels, and he’s not going to express any remorse or contrition for what has happened.

Fine. I’ll stop asking him to.

And while I wonder if all of this is affecting how the team inside the locker room – where it truly matters – I don’t believe that any answers Sherman provides to Ed Werder, the team’s website or anywhere else is actually providing any information on what’s really going on inside the locker room.

Follow @dannyoneil