NFL dynasties disappeared; could Seahawks be one?

[ZagHawk]

The Hawks do have the youth factor on their side of this discussion. But IMO that's only a small part of what goes into a dynasty.

IMO the most important factor is hunger and desire, which is a HUGE part of football. Do we still have the hunger and desire to win another SB? The players certainly think they do, but isn't that what EVERY SB team says the next year?

The fact is it's human nature for athletes to get comfortable after they just accomplished their lifelong dream. Are we different? We'll see.

I know it's early in the season (heck it hasn't even started), but I'm not seeing/feeling it. Training Camp lacked "energy". and PC's "always compete" mantra obviously no longer applied in preseason this year. The reason we were 8-0 in preseason was because he was "always competing". This year suddenly it's "glorified practice".

 

[McG]

You should be pissed! Todd is stealing your work! 8)

That's a negative, Ghost Rider. He is joining in the holy crusade of correcting poor grammar; a noble and valiant cause.

Hey I didn't even realize I wrote that much. Usually I don't post that often, but I was having that exact discussion with my 11 year-old earlier that day. I'm usually a complete grammar nazi so thanks for putting me in my place. LOL

 

[Largent80]

Breaking news.

Dynasties crumble.

Staying competitive in a changing world is a winning process.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

Isn't it strange how Denver was never mentioned as a dynasty after winning back to back SuperB Owls? Just have been because Elway retired.

I distinctly remember that. The sentiment was pretty strongly, "welp, they got their Super Bowls so Elway could retire. Mission accomplished." Basically, they did what they wanted to do and that was the end of it.

As far as Seattle being a potential dynasty, sure. If any are to occur over the next decade or so, we're right up there in the conversation. The thing is, so is San Francisco. They've been almost as successful as we have been the past few years. Arguably longer, more consistent success; they just didn't win their Super Bowl. Pretty damned hard to have two teams in the same division vying for that elusive "dynasty" label. I'd say almost impossible for either one, let alone both.

So what happens when both Seattle and San Francisco win half of the next few Super Bowls? Has there ever been a pair of teams from the same division both a dynasty at the same time? That'd be pretty wild to see.

There were lots of dynasties in the same conference: Oakland/Pitt, Niners/Cowboys...

 

[olyfan63]

I know it's early in the season (heck it hasn't even started), but I'm not seeing/feeling it. Training Camp lacked "energy". and PC's "always compete" mantra obviously no longer applied in preseason this year. The reason we were 8-0 in preseason was because he was "always competing". This year suddenly it's "glorified practice".

Are you kidding? One play goes the wrong way by a matter of inches (Pryor pick instead of TD) in a road game against a championship finalist team from last year, and you're ready to flush the whole thing down the toilet?

Then there's the other excellent chance to win the game, where Pryor's bad ball placement & pace resulted in a dropped sure TD pass.

So because one player, Terrelle Pryor is still learning how to throw receivers open with proper placement and touch, the whole training camp and preseason lack urgency and Pete's whole "always compete" program is suddenly in the toilet and the whole team lacks urgency? If they hadn't taken a flyer on Pryor (I'm a poet and didn't know it) and TJ or BJ had led Seattle's 3rd and 4th stringers to a win over Denver's 2nd stringers, would that suddenly validate Pete's entire program this year?

As other posters pointed out, one of Pete's goals in preseason is to put players in situations that show if and how they step up to a challenge, and where players need to grow. Winning meaningless preseason games is secondary.

Now Pryor has *two* potential game-deciding plays that didn't happen, and a loss, because of one area he needs to work on, ball placement/touch and throwing receivers open. Do you think this issue got his attention and he learned something he needs to focus on improving? Do you think the coaching staff will arrange some extra-extra opportunities for him to work on this specific skill? I sure do; it will get *massive* attention now, including from Pryor himself. And I bet we will see growth in Pryor's game there.

Pryor has been humbled as a man and an athlete for probably the first time in his life. Now he has to look inside and stop over-relying on athleticism and evolve as a thinking, skilled quarterback. Personally, I'm betting on Pryor doing the work and growing and being on the team this year. In future years, he could even wind up being our potential dynasty's Steve Young.

(Poster reaches out and grabs baby from bathwater before dirty water gets tossed out the 2nd story window.)

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

The Seahawks were so competitive that they played the first preseason game with as many backups as they could against the AFC champs' mostly starters, and still almost pulled it off.

Also, those dynasties were in the same conference, not the same division like the Seahawks and the 49ers.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

The Seahawks were so competitive that they played the first preseason game with as many backups as they could against the AFC champs' mostly starters, and still almost pulled it off.

I expect the very same Friday against San Diego. It's stupid that we played 3 of our regular season opponents in the preseason. Everybody knows you are as vanilla as possible in the preseason but having to play the same opponent for real 4 weeks later? That's why starters aren't even playing at all and the secondary is showing nothing so not to give them any ideas about a particular scheme or a weakness to exploit.

 

[HansGruber]

Isn't it strange how Denver was never mentioned as a dynasty after winning back to back SuperB Owls? Just have been because Elway retired.

No. It was because they cheated the cap and the NFL was pissed enough to pull draft picks. Once they complied with the cap, they went to crap. That's not a dynasty.

 

[HansGruber]

Isn't it strange how Denver was never mentioned as a dynasty after winning back to back SuperB Owls? Just have been because Elway retired.

I distinctly remember that. The sentiment was pretty strongly, "welp, they got their Super Bowls so Elway could retire. Mission accomplished." Basically, they did what they wanted to do and that was the end of it.

As far as Seattle being a potential dynasty, sure. If any are to occur over the next decade or so, we're right up there in the conversation. The thing is, so is San Francisco. They've been almost as successful as we have been the past few years. Arguably longer, more consistent success; they just didn't win their Super Bowl. Pretty damned hard to have two teams in the same division vying for that elusive "dynasty" label. I'd say almost impossible for either one, let alone both.

So what happens when both Seattle and San Francisco win half of the next few Super Bowls? Has there ever been a pair of teams from the same division both a dynasty at the same time? That'd be pretty wild to see.

Dallas, New York Giants and Washington all had good runs in the late 80's early 90's.

Funny Dallas is considered a Dynasty by many yet the Giants with Parcells and LT are not nor the Skins, Giants have their legendary players but are never in the Dynasty conversation.

Interesting point. I've always thought it was because they didn't have glamor at quarterback

 

[HansGruber]

I don't see a lot of teams in the dynasty discussions having only won twice. The Raiders aren't in that discussion either having titles in '80/'83.

The Raiders definitely WERE a dynasty. And they won it 3 times from 76-83, as well as being consistent contenders. The younger crowd doesn't talk much about the Raiders because steelers and Vikings are what most people remember about the 70s. But Raiders were most definitely a dynasty, one of the greatest in NFL history

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I know it's early in the season (heck it hasn't even started), but I'm not seeing/feeling it. Training Camp lacked "energy". and PC's "always compete" mantra obviously no longer applied in preseason this year. The reason we were 8-0 in preseason was because he was "always competing". This year suddenly it's "glorified practice".

I know it's been touched on elsewhere in other threads. I was somewhat surprised that our depth didn't extend our lead heading into the second half. It's entirely possible that some other teams' depth is elevating to our level or that our having to elevate depth players to departed UFAs is now sacrificing some of that advantage (likely a bit of both).

I'd caution strongly about generalizing about lack of energy and hunger. Seattle played a championship caliber opponent on the road. Did so with many 2nd teamers against 1st teamers. And we were ahead at the half.

I don't see it as a particularly bad result. I felt like we were highly competitive throughout the game against an elite opponent. And it really looks like all teams, not just us, are still feeling out the 'new emphasis' rules. So the end results are not entirely accurate.

I will grant, that when you're the champs, as fans we're all kind of looking for evidence of the hangover effect. It's something all fans of all SB winners have done for a long time now. Ultimately, I think it's easy to look at the first loss in 2 years in the preseason as something more than it is. It's pure confirmation bias. Other than our depth not being considerably better than other teams' depth, I was pleased with the result.

And it's hard to even say how good/bad our depth was considering the cascading effect of having to elevate guys across the board. It bears watching but there are certainly reasons why our 2nd/3rd teams weren't as dominant as we've come to expect.