I'm telling you, heat was a factor.

[RolandDeschain]

Go ahead, keep saying it wasn't hot, even though it's been pointed out by not only us fans but even Earl Thomas.

I haven't said it wasn't hot even once. I'm saying it was nowhere near as hot as that BS thermometer in direct sunshine was saying, and that is indisputable fact.

If the real temperature inside the stadium had been say, 100 degrees, that thermometer pic would have looked like this:

 

[Largent80]

It wasn't hot. Honestly, to me anyway, I live here. For the Hawks, it was like hell.

 

[Hawks46]

I keep reading all these threads.

Doom and gloom
Bevell blaming
Overlooking

Yada yada yada

Honestly, the biggest factor was heat. I was there. I felt it. I almost died in it.

I understand that SD played in the same heat. And it was unusually high for even SD standards. But it was the biggest factor.

-Our guys were not acclimated to it. It was noticeable from the beginning.

Jesus. It's not an excuse for anything, and how much it affects you is more mental/psychosomatic than anything else. Ever wonder how people in cold winter climates can wear t-shirts and shorts and barbecue outside in spring when it's 50 degrees out, but native southern Californians wear parkas, mittens, and scarfs in that temperature? You don't think they actually develop some magical skin covering or enzyme that makes the weather affect them less, do you? It affected some guys way more than others, and most of the ones affected by it most negatively, it didn't have to. The actual temperature also never got even close to 115 degrees.

-Signed, someone who has lived in Phoenix, Miami, Wisconsin, and Seattle.

It definately makes a difference. The temp on the field can be a ton different from up in the stands. You lived in Phoenix. You ever work outside there in the summer ?

It will say 110 degrees, but work outside in the direct sunlight and the heat index is higher. Then play on either a heat reflective surface, or a heat absorbent surface (like asphalt) and it will kill you.

I worked as a carpenter in Las Vegas. I've worked in 116 degress (the highest I've worked in there) and it was hot, but survivable if you got into the shade often and drank a ton of water and electrolytes. I worked in 105 degrees, and the bottom of my boots melted and I got sunburned on the bottom of my chin....because I was working on black plywood with a glass like finish and both absorbed and reflected the heat. So, surface temp matters.

 

[Sarlacc83]

The reason this discussion matters is not because it provides an excuse, but because if the heat affected the team, that is a mistake that Carroll must correct.

 

[Hawks46]

It's also something that won't effect later in the season.

It's not an excuse, but it's a contributing factor. I think it was the heat, combined with the Hawks not being able to sustain drives, coupled with scoring quickly, and the defense crapping the beds on 3rd down.

Everything seemed to keep the defense on the field, and any team is going to wilt under that heat, for that long.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Good Article by Terry Blount that sums up the loss. I get some of you don't want to use that as an excuse but it was a factor whether you think it is or not. It was a HFA for the Chargers (in all white) and they used it to their advantage with our team playing a little sluggish and uncoordinated at times. I can easily run 10-12 miles at night, yet when I try to do that same run in 80+ I get exhausted at the 3 mile mark. The one time I tried running in 90+ heat, (stupidly in a black tank top) I collapsed from heat exhaustion and invested in a camelpak.

As others have said: HEAT was not THE factor, but it was A factor.

SAN DIEGO -- The usual paradise-like weather conditions of San Diego were more like a day in the Sahara Desert on Sunday, and the Seattle Seahawks' defense wilted away in the sweltering heat.

The defending Super Bowl champs got pushed around and outmuscled most of the day by the San Diego Chargers, who came away with a 30-21 victory at blisteringly hot Qualcomm Stadium.

The air temperature was 95 degrees at kickoff, but down on the field temperatures reached 118 degrees. The Chargers wisely wore all white and the Seahawks had to wear their dark blue jerseys.

That didn’t mean much, but what did was the fact that the Chargers had possession for more than 42 minutes. And the Seahawks' defense got worn down and worn out.

San Diego ran 75 plays to only 40 for the Seahawks, now 1-1. Seattle had only 13 running plays, a disaster for a team that prides itself on its power running game.

“It was a lot warmer than we're used to and the defense was out there for some really long drives,” Seattle tight end Zach Miller said. “You can’t help but get tired.”

Heat or no heat, the Legion of Boom was getting beat. Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers completed 28 of 37 passes for 284 yards and three touchdowns, all to tight end Antonio Gates.

Gates moves to 11th all-time in NFL touchdown receptions with 90.

“He did some great things, but we didn’t tackle well,” Seahawks defensive end Michael Bennett said. “It still was a close-fought game and a battle to the final minute. Everybody in the NFL wants to see us lose, but people wish they were us and we’ll keep playing.”

The Seahawks normally are able to get to the quarterback without blitzing, but that wasn’t effective Sunday.

ESPN Stats & Information showed Rivers was 22-of-25 for 211 yards against four or fewer pass-rushers Sunday. It was only the second time since 2011 that the Seahawks gave up three passing touchdowns when sending standard pressure.

Since the start of the 2013 season, Seattle is first in the league in passing TDs allowed while rushing four or fewer pass-rushers. Those numbers were much different Sunday -- an 88 percent completion percentage for Rivers compared to 59.7 entering the game for the Seahawks over the previous 17 regular-season games.

What caused it? Was it too many defensive snaps in the heat? Or just too much Rivers-to-Gates, a combo that has 63 TDs together?

Seattle free safety Earl Thomas left the game in the third quarter and went to the locker room for IV fluids because of cramps in his legs from the heat, but he returned one series later.

“It was hot and there was a lot of cramping up when [the defense] was out there long time," Thomas said. “I exert a lot of energy out there, and in this heat it was kind of hard for me at times. But it wasn’t anything we didn’t prepare for. We just didn’t execute when it really mattered. When somebody beats us it's just luck to me. It’s not about them.”

Seattle linebacker K.J. Wright saw it differently.

“It was hot, but we can’t let external factors bother us," Wright said. “They told us it would be hot. We should have prepared for it. They kicked our ass and beat us at our own game.”

 

[RolandDeschain]

Of course the heat was A factor, my problem is that it's A factor that affected both teams equally and that it's not an excuse for anything. Weather conditions affect every single non-dome game to varying extents, that's nothing new.

...Also, as a generalization, I'm sure plenty of players would rather imply that the weather caused them to lose rather than admit they played like crap. Just food for thought.

 

[cesame]

On the list of reasons why the Seahawks lost the game yesterday, heat being a factor is at the bottom.

 

[cesame]

“It was hot and there was a lot of cramping up when [the defense] was out there long time," Thomas said. “I exert a lot of energy out there, and in this heat it was kind of hard for me at times. But it wasn’t anything we didn’t prepare for. We just didn’t execute when it really mattered. When somebody beats us it's just luck to me. It’s not about them.”

There you go.

 

[raisethe3]

I agree with Catire. If this game was played a lot cooler, I think we'd win.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I agree with Catire. If this game was played a lot cooler, I think we'd win.

I agree with myself, that this is a bogus excuse for people that can't handle losing.

 

[Anonymous]

Having worked here in the heat for many years, and have managed employees working in direct sunlight and heat, I can tell you, without a doubt, that operating in direct sunlight is the difference between being productive or not.

I don't care who you are, the rays of the sun beaming down on dark-colored fabrics heat you up. It is extremely difficult to concentrate when streams of stinging, salty perspiration get in your eyes. You feel like you are swimming in your clothing, and you beg for any kind of breeze and shade.

Add running around and breathing heavy and your energy is tapped at a much greater rate. Your body is trying to regulate it's temperature without your consent and when you ask for more power your internal "Scotty" says, "we're given 'er all she's got cap'n, the engines can't handle t much longer".

It was a factor yesterday, I know it in my heart.

 

[cesame]

I agree with Catire. If this game was played a lot cooler, I think we'd win.

Does that mean you think the Saints would beat the Seahawks if the conditions weren't cold and rainy?

Can't have it both ways.

 

[SeaChase]

Well the TRUE factor was my wife, she jinxed the team because I was being an #ss to her. So I going to have Ray Rice her...

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

On the list of reasons why the Seahawks lost the game yesterday, heat being a factor is at the bottom.

Pretty much. Execute or not and they did not end of story. And weather be damned because it affects everybody and can be prepared for and taken into account just like anything else. You expect it, prepare for it and then execute regardless. San Diego did and the Seahawks did not.

 

[Largent80]

Once again, people sitting in their living rooms and drinking, and or eating are experts in being in 100+ heat and playing football......OK, yeah, got it.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Once again, people sitting in their living rooms and drinking, and or eating are experts in being in 100+ heat and playing football......OK, yeah, got it.

I was outside drinking beer thank you very much. :lol:

 

[nsport]

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/sep/14/seattle-seahawks-san-diego-chargers/

Thanks for the proof. See how that thermometer is sitting in direct sunshine?

NOW READ THIS: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/weather/ ... ture_x.htm

And the players were playing in the shade the entire game?

Wait wait wait... Roland gets credit for the actual air temperature. That is correct it probably was not triple digits.

However, the field was in the sun all day, which adds the radiant heat - I bet if you took the temperature on their dark uniforms or skin it would be a hell of a lot hotter than 90+ that the air temperature probably was.

Simply too hot. That being said, some people may equate it to the loss - but I would say we didn't lose because of the heat, but it sure made it more difficult to play sound football. At the end of the game, we still had a chance to win - and that's all you can ask. I mentioned before that the big problem in this game probably wasn't SD's long drives, but as a byproduct of our short drives, our defense never really got the time it needed to rejuvenate between series. I'm certain the TOP would have been more like 37/23 or even 35/25 had we had long drives rather than quick-strike drives. It just exacerbated the issue of heat more than anything.

 

[volsunghawk]

Of course the heat was A factor, my problem is that it's A factor that affected both teams equally and that it's not an excuse for anything. Weather conditions affect every single non-dome game to varying extents, that's nothing new.

...Also, as a generalization, I'm sure plenty of players would rather imply that the weather caused them to lose rather than admit they played like crap. Just food for thought.

How many Chargers had to leave the game for IVs? Just curious.

I agree that both teams have to play in the weather, regardless of what the venue is. I disagree with the "affected both teams equally" part. If you're acclimatized to that kind of weather, it's not going to have as big an impact on you. Maybe that's partially mental, but people adapt to their surroundings.

With that said, people are neglecting a big part of the argument, and that is that the Seahawks were playing against a team that made the divisional round last season, a team with a top 5 offense. Road games against strong opponents are never a cakewalk, and the Chargers played a damn good game. The gameplan and execution were much bigger factors in the loss than anything else. But to suggest that the heat played zero factor is ludicrous. It makes a nice theoretical argument, but it ignores reality.

 

[PlinytheCenter]

How about this...the Hawks D will not have a performance like this the rest of the year. IMO the D was effected immediately by the heat. It showed right away and it just got worse. Excuses be damned. They got gassed. I don't know what game you guys were watching but I saw slow reactions, lack of a vital closing step and general confusion out there yesterday which I attribute directly to the temperature on the field. The worst performance since the Lions/Phins games from 2012.

Onward...