By Shannon Drayer

Baseball legend Pete Rose joined "Wyman, Mike and Moore" Wednesday afternoon for a no holds barred interview in which he addressed topics ranging the Seahawks winning the Super Bowl to his ban from the baseball and ineligibility for the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Rose accepts responsibility for the violation that has kept him out of the Hall of Fame but asks whether it's fair when other serious transgressions receive comparatively tame punishments.

"What I did was absolutely wrong," he said, "but when does the time come when a guy gets a second chance?"

He added: "These guys doing the drugs are getting 50 games, 100 games. I'm going on 24 years I have been suspended. When is enough?"

Rose said the fact that he didn't bet on baseball when he was playing is an important distinction to make.

"I understand the integrity of the game. Who played the game in a better way as far as integrity of the game than I did? I made the mistake when I was a manager, not when I was a player," he said. "I did no gambling on baseball when I was a player. It happened when I was a manager because there was something that was missing. All of a sudden you don't get the at-bats. You don't get the collisions at second or at home, and I needed something extra and the extra was betting on my team to win. That's what I did. And I was wrong. I was absolutely wrong. I think most people would say I played the price."

While saying that he has had good meetings with commissioner Bud Selig that allowed him to be on the field for World Series celebrations honoring the All Century Team and memorable moments, he suggested that the fact that these events made baseball money had more to do with his inclusion than good will. He is not sure if a new commissioner will help him get any closer to reinstatement.

More from Rose – including his thoughts on whether or not those associated with performance-enhancing drugs should be allowed in the Hall of Fame and whether he believes Edgar Martinez's numbers were good enough to get – can be heard here.

By Brent Stecker

It's one thing to win a world championship in the NFL. It's another thing to keep that title-winning team together.

With a world championship comes the expectation of increased salaries for the players, and that combined with the salary cap makes it increasingly hard for franchises to hold onto players entering free agency after the Super Bowl.

bennett practice
Michael Bennett will be one of the top defensive linemen on the free-agent market due to his versatility, which allows him to play several positions on the line. (AP)

It's something the Seattle Seahawks now face, as 19 members of their championship squad are hitting free agency this offseason. It will be a tough task to retain a majority of those players, but as Seahawks reporter Terry Blount told 710 ESPN Seattle's "Wyman, Mike and Moore," it should be clear-cut for Seattle which two it needs to put the most resources into bringing back – defensive end Michael Bennett and wide receiver Golden Tate.

Bennett, 28, joined the Seahawks as a free agent from Tampa Bay on a one-year contract before the 2013 season, and he turned into a star with his play on the field (8.5 sacks) and a fan favorite thanks to his humor off of it.

"I know they could look back now and wish they had signed him to a two- or three-year deal instead of a one-year deal. He's their best defensive lineman," Blount said of Bennett. "I think they really, really want to keep him, but it won't be easy. He made $4.8 million against the cap this year, (and) somebody's gonna offer him $7 million or more.

"He's a huge cog on that defensive line because he can play anywhere. He can play inside, he can play outside. He just has such a relentless motor. He's such a relentless player."

Tate, 25, has been with Seattle since it took him in the second round of the 2010 draft out of Notre Dame, and he broke out in 2013 to lead the team with 898 receiving yards on 64 catches.

"He made $880,000 this year, a real bargain for a guy that caught as many passes and played as well as he did," Blount said of Tate. "Somebody's gonna offer him a lot – at least $4-5 million a year, if not more, (so he) won't be easy to keep when they start thinking about what are they gonna do there."

Coming off the Super Bowl win, the Seahawks have made it clear that they have the team they want to move forward with, even with the challenge keeping everything together presents.

"Pete Carroll made it perfectly clear after the (victory) parade on Wednesday that he wants to keep this team like it is. They don't feel like they need to go out and do a bunch of stuff in free agency. They really wanna just keep what they have, but it's tough," Blount said.

The Seahawks' youth is an advantage most other championship teams don't have heading into their first post-title offseason.

"They're in way better shape than most Super Bowl-winning teams," Blount said. "For example, last year, Baltimore, oh my goodness, that team was just ripped apart after the Super Bowl and weren't the same. This team is in so much better shape because they're so much younger, they have so many of their best players still under contract, and a day of reckoning is coming with guys like Richard Sherman and especially Russell Wilson, but it's not next year, so they're in pretty good shape."

By Evan Seguirant
Special to

Now that the Seahawks have secured the first Super Bowl championship in franchise history and are the second-youngest team to ever win the big game, experts are discussing whether the Seahawks can emerge as the next NFL dynasty.

"This is the only place I see a real possible dynasty," NFL Network analyst Michael Irvin said of the Seahawks on 710 ESPN Seattle's "Wyman, Mike and Moore" Wednesday.

tate NFC title
The Seahawks are attempting to build a dynasty after their first Super Bowl win, but wide receiver Golden Tate, their leading receiver in 2013, will test free agency this offseason. (AP)

ESPN's John Clayton also discussed the possibility of a Seattle Seahawks dynasty when he joined 710 ESPN Seattle's "Brock and Danny." Clayton defines a dynasty as winning three championships within six seasons, and explains that doing so is nearly impossible in the salary-cap era, which began in 1994. In fact, only the New England Patriots have met Clayton's criteria during the salary-cap era, winning the Super Bowl in 2001 and then back-to-back championships in 2003 and 2004.

However, Clayton said the Seahawks have constructed the ideal roster to make a run at multiple championships. Having a young, improving quarterback in Russell Wilson on an affordable contract offers two benefits: the contract enables additional spending at luxury positions and Wilson's progress on the field can offset the loss of some talent in free agency.

The Seahawks are poised to be serious championship contenders for the next few years, but challenges persist. Only two true dynasties have emerged over the last 20 years -- Irvin's Dallas Cowboys of the 1990s and the aforementioned 2000s Patriots. Seattle also resides in the NFL's toughest division; the NFC West went 30-10 against the rest of the league last year.

Overcoming these challenges will involve making tough choices. The Patriots cut several well-liked players during their run, and Seattle will likely do the same in order to keep their key pieces together.

One of those pieces could be receiver Golden Tate, who said that he would be willing to take a hometown discount to stay with the team. That sentiment reminded Irvin of the Cowboys dynasty that won three Super Bowls between 1992 and 1995.

"When guys say 'I'll take a little less money,' because the truth of the matter is, 'I want to be a part of history,' " Irvin said.

By Jim Moore

This is the post you've been waiting for, the one where you're hoping I'll pick Denver to blow out the Seahawks in Super Bowl XLVIII.

Everyone thinks I'm wrong with my picks even though I'm actually 9-8-1 against the spread in Seahawks games this year. And 15-3 last year. I keep bringing up last year because I actually sort-of knew what I was doing back then. But when you pick the Saints to beat the Seahawks on "Monday Night Football" and San Francisco to beat Seattle in the NFC Championship Game, you get a reputation for being a hater or a fool or both.

In the Super Bowl, you can make a case, albeit flimsy, for Denver to crush or at least beat the Seahawks.

You start with Peyton Manning and his four marquee targets. As good as the Legion of Boom is, they've never faced a quartet like Demaryius Thomas, Julius Thomas, Wes Welker and Eric Decker.

Denver's defense isn't as strong as those Russell Wilson and the Seahawks faced over their last four games. (AP)
As a quick aside, if you're bored and trying to kill time before kickoff, Google image Decker's wife, Jessie James. You can thank me later.

How can you possibly stop all of those guys? You also have to be concerned about running backs Knowshon Moreno and Montee Ball. They both averaged more yards per carry than Marshawn Lynch. Moreno rushed for 1,038 yards, and if he'd carried it 301 times like Lynch did, he would've rushed for 1,296 yards, more than Beast Mode's 1,257. He's also a threat coming out of the backfield with 60 receptions and a 9.1-yard average per catch.

Denver's defense was average in the regular season but has stiffened against the run in the playoffs. In its wins over San Diego and New England, the Broncos have allowed only three points in the first three quarters of both games. But is Denver's defense tougher than New Orleans' or San Francisco's, the two that Seattle faced in the playoffs? Or Arizona's or St. Louis' in the last two regular-season games? I would think not.

I'm hoping that Russell Wilson's struggles are more a result of the defenses he faced than his own issues as a quarterback. I know he missed on some throws, but this should be a spot for him to get back on track again. Denver was 27th against the pass in the regular season, and it's missing one of its best corners, Chris Harris, who's out with a torn ACL.

Wilson should throw for at least 250 yards, and I'm guessing he's got a shot at 100 yards on the ground, too. Could be wrong about that, but I'm thinking we'll see Wilson completely unleashed in this one. His mobility is one of his strengths, why not use it more often? That's what I'm thinking if I'm offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell, who needs to call more read-options in the Super Bowl.

I'd like the chances of the Seahawks' offense getting untracked without Percy Harvin, but they'll have him, too. Think about the problems he presents for Denver's defense. Fly sweeps, bubble screens, quick lateral passes, maybe even a vertical threat the Seahawks have been lacking. At the very least, as a decoy, he'll help other receivers get open.

Plus he'll give the Seahawks a threat to score on kickoff returns or shorten their drives - he averaged 35 yards on kickoff returns with the Vikings last year and had a 58-yarder in his only kickoff return against the Vikings this year.

So much talk has been about Denver's No. 1 offense against Seattle's No. 1 defense, but I think the game will be decided by Seattle's offense against Denver's defense. In that matchup, I like the Seahawks a lot.

I'm hoping they'll have a two-score lead to avoid Manning magic in the final 2 minutes. The Seahawks' defense still concerns me late in games – they failed to hold a 17-16 lead in San Francisco and a 10-9 lead against Arizona.

The line will likely move by kickoff, but as I'm writing this on Saturday morning, Denver is favored by 2.5 points. Like the Groz, who picked the Seahawks to win 31-14, I think they could win by two touchdowns or more. But in respect for the guys in Vegas who anticipate a close game, I'm predicting this will be the first Super Bowl to go overtime. With a 50-yard field goal, Steven Hauschka's going to win it, and Harvin will be the MVP.

See you at the parade.

Prediction: Seahawks 27, Broncos 24 (OT)
Season record against the spread: 9-8-1

The Go 2 Guy also writes for his website,, and You can reach Jim at and follow him on Twitter @cougsgo.

By Jim Moore

Seattle is the capital of sports disappointment. As a native, I know this because I've been here for many of the most-recent heart-breaking defeats.

When you reach the age of 56, as I have, you're somewhat of a historian – at least compared to all of the youngsters running around at the station.

seahawks fan super bowl
The last time a Seattle sports franchise reached a pro sports title game, fans were left disillusioned by a Super Bowl loss to the Steelers that featured numerous questionable calls. (AP)

They weren't alive the last time a Seattle team won a championship, when the Sonics beat Washington in the 1979 NBA Finals.

That was so long ago that Washington was called the Bullets then; they're the Wizards now.

I watched the Game 5-clinching series win in Ketchikan, Alaska, with Bob Norton in his apartment on Fairy Chasm Road. He was my landlord and best friend in Ketchikan.

Bob grew up on Mercer Island and was a huge Seattle sports fan. We celebrated into the night after the Sonics won the NBA championship.

I will be thinking of Bob on Sunday when the Seahawks end Seattle's 35-year championship drought by defeating the Broncos in the Super Bowl.

Bob died of ALS a few years ago, and I know how excited he would be to see his Seahawks in the big game.

Between 1979 and now, think of everything that's happened and how close the Sonics, Mariners and Seahawks have come to winning championships from time to time.

Sonics: They had their best run in the '90s, reaching the NBA Finals in 1996 after beating Utah in the Western Conference Finals.

Going into the Finals against the Bulls, who went 72-10 in the regular season, they were underdogs who lost the first three games of the series.

But after they won the next two games, you started to feel like maybe they could win Game 6 and 7 and become one of the greatest NBA teams of all-time.

I still wonder if it could have happened if Nate McMillan were healthy in that series. As you know, Michael Jordan's team won Game 6 and took the series.

The Sonics also set the tone for Seattle sports disappointment in 1994 when they went 63-19 and became the first No. 1 seed to lose to a No. 8 seed in the playoffs.

When the Seahawks beat the Broncos on Sunday, it will be payback 20 years later for what the Nuggets did to the Sonics.

And now to think we don't even have the Sonics anymore.

Mariners: The miraculous late-season run in 1995 might be the most memorable sports stretch in Seattle history. They rallied to tie the Angels for first place in the AL West and won the one-game playoff in the Kingdome.

They then beat the Yankees on Edgar Martinez' 11th-inning double in Game 5 of the AL Division Series but lost to Cleveland in the ALCS.

And in 2001, they were 116-46 and huge favorites to at least go to the World Series if not win it all. But they lost to the Yankees in the ALCS in another "well, it figures" moment in Mariners' history.

Seahawks: In 1983, Chuck Knox's team shocked Dan Marino and the Dolphins in Miami and moved one step from the Super Bowl but lost to the Raiders in Los Angeles in the AFC Championship Game.

It took another 22 years before they returned to their next conference championship game against Carolina. As you know, the Seahawks beat the Panthers and went on to the Super Bowl, where the officials and Steelers took the Lombardi Trophy away from them.

So here we are, on the verge of finally ending all of this talk about the past.

I'm looking forward to seeing Pete Carroll hoisting the Lombardi Trophy with a smile that stretches all the way to Seattle.

Then the championship parade through downtown with the 12th man lining the sidewalks, people and confetti everywhere.

Then discussion about the future for a change: Can they win another Super Bowl next year? Can they build a dynasty? Can this be happening here? After all that we've been through? Really?

Can all of this feel-good stuff extend to the Mariners? And a return of the Sonics?

The vibe of "nothing's possible" is about to change to "all things possible" thanks to the Seahawks.

The Go 2 Guy also writes for his website and You can reach Jim at and follow him on Twitter @cougsgo.

By Brent Stecker

In the 48-year history of the Super Bowl, the game has been played in a cold weather city just five times.

The Seattle Seahawks' first Super Bowl trip was in one of those cities -- Detroit -- in 2005. Their second, set for next Sunday against the Denver Broncos, will be cold weather Super Bowl No. 6, but the first to actually be played outdoors in that snow

Temperatures are expected to be below freezing, and snow may be on the ground for the first time in Super Bowl history at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, N.J. on Feb. 2.

Some people may like the idea of the game providing a different visual for the millions watching at home, as well as a completely new (and freezing) experience for the patrons in the stands, but Hall of Famer and Seahawks legend Steve Largent isn't a fan, as he made it clear on 710 ESPN Seattle's "Wyman, Mike and Moore" on Friday.

"My personal opinion is they need to examine someone's head, whoever picked this place to play a Super Bowl," Largent said. "I think it's dumb. I think it sorta defeats the purpose of the Super Bowl being held in an attractive city that would attract fans and not detract fans, and I think that's exactly what they've done."

Largent said he'd much rather see the game played in the myriad of cities with warm climates that have hosted Super Bowls in the past.

"(I'd rather they play the game at) any warm weather site that they could have -- in L.A. and San Diego and Phoenix and New Orleans and Miami and Jacksonville," he said. "There's a lot of different alternatives that they could have to play this game, but to have it in New York City in an outdoor stadium in February, I think it's dumb."

The irony of the sites of the Seahawks' two Super Bowl appearances is not lost on Largent.

"The Seahawks have played in my opinion in two of the worst places in the last 50 years that they've had a Super Bowl -- in Detroit and then New York City," he said. "But that's the bad news. The good news is they're playing in the game, and I hope they're going to win."

And when it comes to that, he acknowledges that the weather will at least give Seattle and running back Marshawn Lynch an advantage.

"I think it actually favors the Seahawks because they're the stronger running team, and I think it's detrimental more so to a passing team, so I think it actually works for the Seahawks in their favor," Largent said. "But still I would rather see the game played in a warm climate."

Richard Sherman's postgame interviews have received more attention than his play that sealed Seattle's win. (AP)

By Jim Moore

We're three days removed from Richard Sherman's rant with Erin Andrews after the NFC Championship Game. The last three days should have been filled with talk about the best play in Seahawks history, the one that Sherman made with his deflection in the end zone to teammate Malcolm Smith.

Instead, ESPN and every other media outlet is consumed with reaction to Sherman's rant. Listeners told us Tuesday on "Wyman, Mike and Moore" to move on. They're sick of the Sherman controversy.

But look at the interest. A Seattle Times poll on Sherman drew more than 9,000 votes. Thirty-six percent said they're disappointed in Sherman but forgive him. Thirty-five percent said they're fine with it: He won and he can say what he wants. The trailer in the poll is the one I would've voted for: 29 percent said they hated it because it was classless and offensive.

The poll results are slanted because we're in Seattle and everyone loves Sherman and the Seahawks, particularly now that the gifted and outspoken cornerback made the play that sent them to the Super Bowl.

If you held the same poll in San Francisco, I'm guessing 90 percent would've said they hated Sherman's rant. I'm also guessing if Sherman played for the 49ers, 90 percent of voters here would've said they hated it, too.

I'm surprised at the number of people who support Sherman and those who make excuses for him. I thought it was inexcusable, but then I went to Sherman's news conference at the team's headquarters Wednesday and came away with a slightly different opinion.

Sherman said he could have "worded things better," and been "more mature" with his handling of the interview with Andrews. He regretted taking the spotlight away from his teammates. He said he doesn't think he's a villain and feels like people are wrongly "judging the book by the cover." He spent 20 minutes being the likable Richard Sherman we've come to know in Seattle.

I heard Danny O'Neil talking yesterday about us wanting our athletes to act a certain way and when they don't, we get upset about it. I guess Danny's right. I like it when athletes have class. I like it when people have class. I also like sportsmanship.

I don't mind taunting and trash talking. In fact I actually enjoy it. But Sherman took whatever his issues are with 49ers receiver Michael Crabtree too far.

In my own mind, I'm trying to figure out why I love Charles Barkley and couldn't stand what Sherman said Sunday night. Barkley says outrageous stuff all the time, and I get a kick out of him.

Back in the day, I thought Muhammad Ali was funny and creative with his trash talking, but I admit that I always wanted Smokin' Joe Frazier to shut his mouth in the ring.

But Sherman wasn't funny or creative with Andrews. Yet I know we should give him a break because the interview came in the heat of the moment, and what do you expect when someone throws a microphone in front of his face? He's a warrior who still had his game face on.

But what about his postgame news conference, a full half-hour after he had time to shower and dress? He still launched into Crabtree with his "mediocre" tirade, unleashing yet another rant that rivaled last year's when he told Skip Bayless that he was better at life than the ESPN personality.

So he doubled down with his ridiculous outbursts, and we haven't even mentioned the choke sign that he gave to 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick. It's just not OK to do that. I can't even believe I felt the need to write that sentence; it should be understood. But I guess it's not. Asked if he regretted giving the choke sign, Sherman said: "Nah, man, it's Reggie Miller," referencing the former All-Star guard who famously did it in an NBA game.

Sherman, like Barkley, probably doesn't want to be a role model. But kids are watching him and looking up to him. Many want to be like him.

The hell of it is, Sherman has a great story. Tough childhood in Compton, Calif., going to Stanford, converting from wide receiver to cornerback, a fifth-round draft choice, a third-stringer here, and now he's the best cornerback in the NFL. But he obscured all of that with his latest outburst.

If you've got issues with Crabtree, take them up with him. I don't care if Crabtree disrespected you at some Arizona charity softball game. I don't care if he didn't shake your hand. I don't care about any of it. Your team just won a huge game. Why not celebrate the fact that you're going to the Super Bowl, thanks in large part to a terrific play that you just made?

Because I'm a Seahawks fan, I don't want Peyton Manning to burn Sherman in the Super Bowl. But there's a big part of me who will look forward to the day that football humbles him, and younger receivers beat an aging cornerback who isn't as good as he used to be.

It will be interesting to see how he handles all of the media next week in New York. If I'm his dad, I'm telling him to be a toned-down version of himself. Plus, I'm telling him to show a little humility.

And I'm reminding myself of something else. I was talking to a former teammate of mine at the Post-Intelligencer, Art Thiel. He asked me to think of the times I've had my own outbursts without cameras and microphones around. I immediately thought of a time when I completely crushed a laptop out of frustration. Literally threw it and stomped it to smithereens. If you'd seen that 15-second tirade, you would've thought I was a crazy person. Maybe you do already, I don't know, but that was a less than flattering portrayal of who I am most of the time.

At any rate, let's see what happens from here. I didn't think I'd be saying this, but I'm ready to cut Sherman some slack.

The Go 2 Guy also writes for his website,, and You can reach Jim at and follow him on Twitter @cougsgo.

Doug Baldwin's 51-yard reception was one of several big plays made by Seattle's oft-criticized receivers. (AP)

By Jim Moore

They will be overlooked again in the Super Bowl, and that's fine with Doug Baldwin, the Seahawk with a self-proclaimed boulder on his shoulder.

Forget the chip. He's upset with the ongoing perception that the Seahawks have an average receiving corps.

It started with a USA Today story several weeks ago and continued last week when NFL Network analyst Michael Irvin called the Seahawks' receivers the weakest link on the team. Then Baldwin heard comments from ESPN's Keyshawn Johnson and Cris Carter, who said Seattle's receivers were appetizers for the main course of Marshawn Lynch.

"They were talking about how Russell Wilson was struggling, and the reason he was struggling is because the receiving corps, they're appetizers," Baldwin said. "I'll take that. I'll be an appetizer. But that's a good-ass appetizer if you ask me."

Baldwin had his best game of the season as the Seahawks won the NFC title with a 23-17 victory over the 49ers at CenturyLink Field. In seven targets, he had six catches for 106 yards, including a 51-yarder that led to the Seahawks' first three points.

Golden Tate also had four catches for 31 yards, and Jermaine Kearse was on the receiving end of a 35-yard pass from Wilson that gave the Seahawks a 20-17 lead early in the fourth quarter.

"It irritates the hell out of me when you have guys that constantly want to talk about our receiving corps," Baldwin said. "Talking about how we're average, how we're pedestrian. Well, we're going to walk our ass to the Super Bowl.

More coverage of the Seahawks' win over the 49ers in the NFC Championship Game.
Recap | Stats | Photos | Interviews | Pete Carroll Show
O'Neil: What we learned from the Seahawks' win
O'Neil: Seahawks' win validates Carroll's approach
Henderson: Carroll revels in Super Bowl berth
Henderson: Sherman pops off after game-saving play
Henderson: Chancellor makes his presence felt
Stecker: No redemption for Kaepernick | Notebook

"The thing that inspired me the most is that we know in this offense, we're not going to get as many opportunities as we would if we were in a huge passing offense. But we also know that when we get our opportunities in the passing game, we have to make the best of them. You saw that tonight, and you've seen that all season long."

Take Kearse for example. Wilson talked about the former Husky in training camp after they worked out together in Los Angeles.

"I said at the beginning of the year that Jermaine Kearse is one of those guys I knew was going to have an outstanding year," Wilson said. "He's worked so hard. He's tremendous on special teams. He's tremendous catching the football. He's got great hands, and he's got that desire. That showed up tonight."

On the second play of the fourth quarter, the Seahawks faced a fourth-and-6 at the 49ers' 35-yard line, trailing 17-13. Coach Pete Carroll thought a 52-yard attempt by Steven Hauschka might be pushing it. But he didn't want to punt, and instead opted to go for it.

Wilson went with a hard count, hoping to draw the 49ers offsides – and it worked. As soon as Wilson and the receivers saw the flags, that caused a play change with Tate, Baldwin and Kearse running vertical routes toward the end zone.

"We practice that stuff all the time," Wilson said. "That was one of the biggest plays of the game. I tried to look off the safety as long as possible and give him a one-on-one shot, and he came down with an unbelievable catch."

Kearse had a similar take, saying: "When we drew the offside, we got the flag so we got the free play and took a shot."

For the most part the Seahawks relied on Lynch, who rushed for 109 yards, including a 40-yard touchdown run that tied the game at 10-10 in the third quarter.

That will be the focal point again in the Super Bowl. "Beast Mode" will churn out four-word quotes and four-yard runs. Baldwin, Tate and Kearse will be negatively compared to the Broncos' star-studded receiving crew of Wes Welker, Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas.

That's what they hope will happen. Overlook them. Ignore them. Fuel their fire, as Baldwin says. Then watch out. Explosive plays from the Seahawks' maligned receivers could be the difference in the Super Bowl.

The Go 2 Guy also writes for his website,, and You can reach Jim at and follow him on Twitter @cougsgo.

« Previous
Next »

Dave Wyman

In addition to co-hosting "Wyman, Mike and Moore", Dave Wyman co-hosts the Seahawks pre- and post-game shows on 710 ESPN Seattle. Dave was an All-American and All-Pac-10 linebacker at Stanford -- where he received a degree in communications and is a member of the university's Athletic Hall of Fame -- before entering the NFL as second-round pick in 1987 and spending nine seasons with the Seahawks and Broncos. Dave lives in Sammamish with his wife and two kids.

Michael Grey

Michael, the new co-host of "Wyman, Mike and Moore", comes to 710 ESPN Seattle from 590 ESPN in Omaha, Neb. and previously worked at WBBL in Grand Rapids, Mich. Michael started in radio in 1997 in the rock music world at Grand Rapids stations WGRD and WKLQ.

Jim Moore

Jim Moore has co-hosted the show since its inception in 2009. He also co-hosts "The Northwest Golf Show" with Shon Crewe and writes weekly columns for Jim spent 26 years as a reporter and columnist at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, where he developed his nickname, "The Go 2 Guy."

Jessamyn McIntyre

Jessamyn McIntyre has produced the show since its inception in 2009 and is the executive producer of 710 ESPN Seattle. Jessamyn previously spent four years at ESPN headquarters in Bristol, Conn. She freelances as a producer for ESPN Radio and TV and is the sideline reporter for WSU football games on 710 ESPN Seattle.
Copyright © 2014 Bonneville International. All rights reserved.