adeltaY
New member
sdog1981":2r9awucv said:Pete Carroll got a team of nobodies to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as QB and an offense that lost 6-3 to the Browns. 9 wins the floor of the Russell Wilson Seahawks.
So far...
sdog1981":2r9awucv said:Pete Carroll got a team of nobodies to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as QB and an offense that lost 6-3 to the Browns. 9 wins the floor of the Russell Wilson Seahawks.
scutterhawk":3hzjuctl said:4 & 12 ugly ? BWAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAA.Sgt. Largent":3hzjuctl said:Well, like I said in another thread if the combo of Solari, Schottenheimer and our RB's, O-line don't work out.........it could get 4-12 ugly.
Our D-line has major holes, other than Clark there are no proven stars. Same with the defensive backfield, especially if Earl holds out.
If the offense rebounds in the run game and we can play some smash mouth ball control play action offense that can score 24-30 pts a game? Yeah, we have a shot at competing.
But if the offense does what it did last year, stink in the run game and Russell has to account for 90% of the offensive output running for his life trying to make plays? 4-12 could happen my friend.
You're souring all the hell on Wilson,,,4 & 12?...C'mon Sargie-Large, get serious man. ukeface:
Worst case scenario I see -> MAYBE <-another 9 - 7 Season if the Run Game don't pan out & that's not being homer, I'm just more confident that Russell Wilson is WAY BETTER than you're giving him credit. SMH.
Sgt. Largent":rxoslc3y said:ImTheScientist":rxoslc3y said:Trrrroy":rxoslc3y said:When was the last time a team with a healthy top 5 qb went 4-12?
2015 San Diego Chargers went 4-12.
- Brees played on three straight 7-9 teams
- Eli Manning was 6-10, 6-10 and 3-13 three of the past four years
- Favre went 4-12 in 2005
- Matt Ryan went 4-12 and 6-10 in 2012 and 2013
- Cam Newton went 2-14 in 2010
Is it likely we go 4-12 with a healthy Russell? No, but to say "hey he's too good for us to stink" is not an accurate opinion.
lukerguy":16vkuyu0 said:Sgt. Largent":16vkuyu0 said:ImTheScientist":16vkuyu0 said:Trrrroy":16vkuyu0 said:When was the last time a team with a healthy top 5 qb went 4-12?
2015 San Diego Chargers went 4-12.
- Brees played on three straight 7-9 teams
- Eli Manning was 6-10, 6-10 and 3-13 three of the past four years
- Favre went 4-12 in 2005
- Matt Ryan went 4-12 and 6-10 in 2012 and 2013
- Cam Newton went 2-14 in 2010
Is it likely we go 4-12 with a healthy Russell? No, but to say "hey he's too good for us to stink" is not an accurate opinion.
Brees and Ryan are the only top 5 QBs on this list at the time. Newton was close.
Besides that point, I think you almost make the other side of this argument.
Russ and the Hawks went 9-7 last year with the WORST oline, I've seen fielded by an NFL club in a long time. With a decent FG kicker they would have gone what 11-5? When Ryan went 4-12 and 6-10 he had a terrible OLINE as well. They couldn't protect him or run the ball.
If the Falcons go 4-12 when they have no oline, what does that mean for the Seahawks if they can fix this? If they can't fix it then I would assume 8-8 - 11-5 would be their likely outcome range.
Sgt. Largent":2frz7yig said:lukerguy":2frz7yig said:Sgt. Largent":2frz7yig said:ImTheScientist":2frz7yig said:2015 San Diego Chargers went 4-12.
- Brees played on three straight 7-9 teams
- Eli Manning was 6-10, 6-10 and 3-13 three of the past four years
- Favre went 4-12 in 2005
- Matt Ryan went 4-12 and 6-10 in 2012 and 2013
- Cam Newton went 2-14 in 2010
Is it likely we go 4-12 with a healthy Russell? No, but to say "hey he's too good for us to stink" is not an accurate opinion.
Brees and Ryan are the only top 5 QBs on this list at the time. Newton was close.
Besides that point, I think you almost make the other side of this argument.
Russ and the Hawks went 9-7 last year with the WORST oline, I've seen fielded by an NFL club in a long time. With a decent FG kicker they would have gone what 11-5? When Ryan went 4-12 and 6-10 he had a terrible OLINE as well. They couldn't protect him or run the ball.
If the Falcons go 4-12 when they have no oline, what does that mean for the Seahawks if they can fix this? If they can't fix it then I would assume 8-8 - 11-5 would be their likely outcome range.
The Hawks went 9-7 with Russell AND an above average defense for most of the season, especially early on before guys like Kam, Richardson, Wagner and Bennett got hurt.
So you guys keep leaving out the defense in your analysis of why we can't stink in 2018. IF this defense full of young players and depth issues doesn't pull together and play well..............then sorry, there is a scenario with continued poor O-line play and no RB taking charge that this team doesn't stink.
adeltaY":3l7epg0g said:I don't think the D will be as good, but it's PC so there's a chance. People keep neglecting they were 25th in points allowed after losing Kam and Sherm. They were 6th or so up until that point. Ended up 13th in scoring D at the end of the season.
Sgt. Largent":3e5w9ts6 said:Well, like I said in another thread if the combo of Solari, Schottenheimer and our RB's, O-line don't work out.........it could get 4-12 ugly.
Our D-line has major holes, other than Clark there are no proven stars. Same with the defensive backfield, especially if Earl holds out.
If the offense rebounds in the run game and we can play some smash mouth ball control play action offense that can score 24-30 pts a game? Yeah, we have a shot at competing.
But if the offense does what it did last year, stink in the run game and Russell has to account for 90% of the offensive output running for his life trying to make plays? 4-12 could happen my friend.
hawkfan68":3hym9x92 said:adeltaY":3hym9x92 said:I don't think the D will be as good, but it's PC so there's a chance. People keep neglecting they were 25th in points allowed after losing Kam and Sherm. They were 6th or so up until that point. Ended up 13th in scoring D at the end of the season.
People also are forgetting that it was PC who built the defense to its greatness to begin with. He did it once and so why not again?
MontanaHawk05":311lgqdq said:hawkfan68":311lgqdq said:adeltaY":311lgqdq said:I don't think the D will be as good, but it's PC so there's a chance. People keep neglecting they were 25th in points allowed after losing Kam and Sherm. They were 6th or so up until that point. Ended up 13th in scoring D at the end of the season.
People also are forgetting that it was PC who built the defense to its greatness to begin with. He did it once and so why not again?
Because the talent that PC used to built id, isn't going for cheap throwaway late-round picks that you can amass by trades. They're going for first-round picks now.
Popeyejones":e38impw0 said:After the 9ers’ coach and roster purge of 2014 they still went 5-11 in 2015.
The Seahawks have shed a ton of talent, but not as much as the 9ers did, and the talent they’ve retained is also much more talented than the retained talent from those 9ers teams.
I think we could chart out a highly unlikely path in which the Seahawks totally bottom out at 3-13/4-12 in 2020, but a season ending injury to Wilson early in this year is the only way that happens this season.
On the low end I think 6-10 is possible. On the high end I think 10-6 is possible, with a normal distribution between those points.
Coug_Hawk08":1camdr86 said:Are we forgetting Pete went 7-9 with 200000 transactions of nobodies? He has never had a team win less than 6.
chet380":2x5g39dy said:1 - 5 vs NFC West
4 - 5 in remaining non-NFC West home games
2 - 5 in remaining non-NFC West road games
Looks ugly, but let's take our lumps w decent draft picks and rebuild a championship team again.