3Girls'HawkDad
New member
Wow! That is an easy home schedule. 14-2
kearly":30s46crn said:And while it's fair to read all this and think "homer!", the fact is, Seattle will never have a better collection of talent than they will in 2013. After next year, salary cap realities will begin to set in and we'll gradually start losing players. Soon we'll have to pay Okung and Thomas and they won't be cheap. Then we'll have to sign Sherman to megabucks. Then it's probably Joe Flacco money for Wilson. We'll probably have something like 70% of our 2013 talent level in 2016, most likely. And around that same time, you'll probably see Lynch's career winding down. If there is a year to make a run at "23-0", 2013 is the year to do it.
Exactly. The Jags and Bills wouldn't have gotten deals like those.themunn":1dqmv7q5 said:I think team strength is a major reason we got Avril and Bennett on such great deals
A London Hawk":73ijtrop said:What's the unbeaten at home for X games record?
Wikipedia":73ijtrop said:Most Consecutive Home Games Won, 30
New England Patriots 2008–2011
Most Consecutive Home Games Won (including playoffs), 31
Miami Dolphins 1971–1974
bestfightstory":1lyi8071 said:Keep in mind that the undefeated Russell Wilson streak I mentioned included the 2 preseason games he started last year.
Obviously, they don't "count" but the significance is that he has NEVER walked off the field in Seattle as a loser in the entirety of his professional career.
themunn":2p7em003 said:bestfightstory":2p7em003 said:Keep in mind that the undefeated Russell Wilson streak I mentioned included the 2 preseason games he started last year.
Obviously, they don't "count" but the significance is that he has NEVER walked off the field in Seattle as a loser in the entirety of his professional career.
I thought I replied earlier to this but apparently not... agreed he has never walked off of the the field in Seattle as a loser... but he didn't start the game against Tennessee
bellingerga":35im8e6u said:All Teams lose games but somehow seahawks fans don't seem to realize that sometimes. Can't wait for the epic meltdown of doom on this board when that happens.
FreshlySnipes":3smfbi2d said:no I would be ok with a superbowl.
jewhawk":2b3e6xaw said:The people saying 8-0 at home should be expected are drastically underestimating the variance of NFL games. If we are 90% to win each home game, we would be less than 50% to go 8-0 in those games. And 90% is a ridiculous over-estimation for how likely we are to win each game. A 90% favorite to win translates to a 17 point favorite in Vegas which is incredibly rare. From 2000 to 2011, there were a total of 13 NFL games where one team was favored by 17 or more. If you say we are 75% to win (translates to 8.5 point favorites) the 49ers and Saints games and 90% to win the others, we would be less than 30% to go 8-0 at home. If you say we are on average 80% to win each home game (translates to 10.5 point favorites), we would be less than 17% to go 8-0 at home.
http://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/bestfightstory":d5y82cz0 said:jewhawk":d5y82cz0 said:The people saying 8-0 at home should be expected are drastically underestimating the variance of NFL games. If we are 90% to win each home game, we would be less than 50% to go 8-0 in those games. And 90% is a ridiculous over-estimation for how likely we are to win each game. A 90% favorite to win translates to a 17 point favorite in Vegas which is incredibly rare. From 2000 to 2011, there were a total of 13 NFL games where one team was favored by 17 or more. If you say we are 75% to win (translates to 8.5 point favorites) the 49ers and Saints games and 90% to win the others, we would be less than 30% to go 8-0 at home. If you say we are on average 80% to win each home game (translates to 10.5 point favorites), we would be less than 17% to go 8-0 at home.
Interesting take. I am curious where you get these percentages. I have never seen vegas lines equated that way.