Seahawks defensive tackle Leonard Williams focused on field, not a new contract ⁠1%

By Gregg Bell⁠1% Tacoma News Tribune⁠0%

7/31/2026, 6:02:07 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Pessimism Bias, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 30% saturation with 21 hits. Analysis detected 69 faulty-reasoning hits from 70 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠1% (30,480 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 99.70% of the article peer group.

Leonard Williams and the Seattle Seahawks have had “conversations” about a new contract. 
But it sounds like those talks can, and will, wait. 
“There’s been a few conversations,” Williams, the 31-year-old Pro Bowl veteran defensive lineman said Tuesday in his 12th NFL training camp. 
“But nothing set in stone.” 
Williams and his wife Hailey married in April 2025. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.5%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.9%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.6%Availability Heuristic12.9%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.1%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 7.0%Framing Effect17.1%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 14.3%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.2%Pessimism Bias14.3%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 9.0%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 4.5%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.1%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.1%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.5%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 30.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.4%Unattributed Quote30.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 17.1%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 6.5%Biased Writer Voice17.1%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Gregg Bell: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

70 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker37%attributed speech44writer words
Selected voice

Leonard Williams

100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words100% of attributed speech70% writer coverage
0%42.5%85.0%Unattributed Quote+80.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Leonard Williams: 80.8%80.8%Biased Writer Voice-27.3 ptsWriter: 27.3%Leonard Williams: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.