Power Rankings

AROS

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
18,957
Reaction score
7,668
Location
Sultan, WA
So NFL.com's Elliot Harrison has the Seahawks bumped up to 21 after 4 weeks. They started out, what, 30th? ESPN has us at 22. CBS Sports also 22.

Look, you can continue to tell the world that Power Rankings don't matter, you could "honestly care less" about them but we all know it's a lie. Just like the actor who reads their reviews. Other people's opinions shouldn't matter, but they do. We're human. So in that light, humor me. Is 22 a fair spot for this team right now?

Where would you rank the Seahawks in YOUR power rankings here in week 4? Don't be a homer. Be honest, good, bad or indifferent.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
I think that's about right, mid 20's somewhere.

Remember the good ol' days when we were mad cause we weren't #1, or we got bumped to #2 or #3? Good times, good times.
 

AubHawk71

Active member
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
417
Reaction score
94
How about 16? They are 2-2, so there you go.

It almost feels as though the fact that the LOB imploded gave certain media, let's call them East Coast, the reason they've been wanting to write off the South Alaska Seahawks. Peter King described it as a "Powderkeg" yesterday. Hard to say from the outside, but it seems ETII was the last of the rabble rousers...and even last year he was begging Garrett to trade for him, so that's not exactly new news.

The only thing that would make me rank them lower would be the coaching/general direction of the club. Let's face it, you don't get into the NFL without talent. We need a steady hand on the rudder.
 
OP
OP
AROS

AROS

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
18,957
Reaction score
7,668
Location
Sultan, WA
Sgt. Largent":2mf7nklv said:
I think that's about right, mid 20's somewhere.

Remember the good ol' days when we were mad cause we weren't #1, or we got bumped to #2 or #3? Good times, good times.

Ah yes. Sigh.

Personally I would put them around 16-18. Honest.
 

Uncle Si

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
20,596
Reaction score
3
Sgt. Largent":3mqnri19 said:
I think that's about right, mid 20's somewhere.

Remember the good ol' days when we were mad cause we weren't #1, or we got bumped to #2 or #3? Good times, good times.

The good ol' days were being in the 20s...

hell, the good ol' days were when someone outside of the city of Seattle mentioned the franchise on national TV
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
Uncle Si":2scppxyn said:
Sgt. Largent":2scppxyn said:
I think that's about right, mid 20's somewhere.

Remember the good ol' days when we were mad cause we weren't #1, or we got bumped to #2 or #3? Good times, good times.

The good ol' days were being in the 20s...

hell, the good ol' days were when someone outside of the city of Seattle mentioned the franchise on national TV

Fair point.

If you would have told a young ruggedly handsome Sgt Largent in 1992 that this era of Hawk football existed off in the distant future full of SB's and playoff runs I would have laughed you out of my house.
 

Hawk-Lock

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
5,301
Reaction score
556
I think 21 is about fair. The NFL has a lot of mediocre teams like us this year. Very few awful teams. Even the Browns aren't the Browns anymore. The only really bad teams in the NFL right now IMO are the Bills, Jets and Niners. I think it has to do with a lot more talented QB's in the league.
 
OP
OP
AROS

AROS

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
18,957
Reaction score
7,668
Location
Sultan, WA
Hawk-Lock":2m249umx said:
I think 21 is about fair. The NFL has a lot of mediocre teams like us this year. Very few awful teams. Even the Browns aren't the Browns anymore. The only really bad teams in the NFL right now IMO are the Bills, Jets and Niners. I think it has to do with a lot more talented QB's in the league.

That's fair. The homer in me wants to rank them 12-14, but in truth that's not accurate at this stage. Late teens, early twenties feels right.
 

Bigpumpkin

Active member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
8,030
Reaction score
3
Location
Puyallup, WA USA
Aros":1mvz3y9b said:
That's fair. The homer in me wants to rank them 12-14, but in truth that's not accurate at this stage. Late teens, early twenties feels right.

Hey....we beat the Rams next Sunday.......we will take a giant leap!!!
 

James in PA

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
4,827
Reaction score
4,482
Taking the homer glasses off, 21 sound about right. If the young D can keep this up and Russ and our receivers can ever get it figured out, we could make a nice jump. For now though, hard to argue against the teams currently ranked ahead of us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Attyla the Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
2,559
Reaction score
47
Late teens, early twenties.

But this is a team that still has room to decline. Early part of the schedule was the easy teams.

This team still feels strongly like it isn't at rock bottom yet. Fully expect a couple of bad seasons result wise coming.
 

rcaido

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
488
I would say 17 w/ the injuries. Just waiting on Wilson to get his groove back.
 

Hawk-Lock

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
5,301
Reaction score
556
Aros":2phfn5i0 said:
Hawk-Lock":2phfn5i0 said:
I think 21 is about fair. The NFL has a lot of mediocre teams like us this year. Very few awful teams. Even the Browns aren't the Browns anymore. The only really bad teams in the NFL right now IMO are the Bills, Jets and Niners. I think it has to do with a lot more talented QB's in the league.

That's fair. The homer in me wants to rank them 12-14, but in truth that's not accurate at this stage. Late teens, early twenties feels right.

Throw record out, sample size is too small. Through four games we've played the worst team in the NFL and another bottom 10 team at home. How do you think we'd fair on the road against any of the top 20 teams, we probably lose. As the season goes on and the schedule gets more difficult, I think we will be comfortably in the 20's. We are a really average team right now.
 
OP
OP
AROS

AROS

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
18,957
Reaction score
7,668
Location
Sultan, WA
Attyla the Hawk":1ssodln7 said:
Late teens, early twenties.

But this is a team that still has room to decline. Early part of the schedule was the easy teams.

This team still feels strongly like it isn't at rock bottom yet. Fully expect a couple of bad seasons result wise coming.

I see it completely opposite. I think this team is on the rise. Sure we will lose our fair share of games this season and likely fall short of the playoffs for the second straight year but there's a lot of good to great young players on this team.

This team may be 18-21 now ranking, but they are not that far from top ten. Just got to get Russ going.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Bothell
Power Rankings usually mean "how likely is each team to win this year" and NFL Future Odds are arguably the best source of that data. However, I don't think the AFC likelihoods should matter much to Seahawks fans (and vice versa). What we care about is playoff outcomes through the NFC.

NFC futures after week 4
#1 Rams
#2 Saints
#3 Packers
#4 Bears
#5 Vikings
#6 Eagles
#7 Falcons
#8 Panthers
#9 Seahawks
#10 Cowboys
#11 Redskins
#12 Giants
#13 Lions
#14 Buccaneers
#15 49ers
#16 Cardinals

The good news is the 49ers and Cardinals are both bringing up the rear and the bad news is the Rams are sprinting out in front.
 

sutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
29,163
Reaction score
5,185
Location
Kent, WA
Yeah, meaningless, but reading the responses can be fun. :snack:

We started way low, largely because of heavy turnover of well known athletes. We might have been bumped another couple of spots if ET hadn't got hurt. 20 +/- a couple of spots seems fair at this time of the season. 'Hawks still have a lot to prove, some of which we'll see about this Sunday. How we match up with an arguably top 3/5 team will say a lot.
 

mistaowen

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,334
Reaction score
606
If this offense can figure out a rhythm to the run vs pass game, introduce some creativity and wrinkles, and start to hit on the deep passes Russ is so good at, they should remain competitive with most teams. The teams played so far aren't a good measuring stick for the quality of the roster IMO and losing Earl on a defense still learning is big. McDougald will have to keep his level of play up big time.

I think how they look this week against a high powered offense like the Rams will be a good judge. It's almost inevitable they'll hit a couple huge quick strike plays and at some point they will suddenly be up by 2 TD's. How will the offense respond? 3 and out? Shoot themselves in the foot with penalties? Can they take the ball back and go down and score? Can't settle for field goals or punting it from their 40 because McVay will be going for it on those situations every time. More than anything I just want to see them hang with a SB contender this week.
 

jammerhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
10,154
Reaction score
1,764
Power Rankings are fairly meaningless as they represent a subjective view of the respective teams progress and their player who you like or don't like. To me all that matters are the W's and L's. What will the Hawks ranking be if they were upset the Rams this weekend? Do they still suck?

It's hard for the rankings writers to overcome the losses of Sherman, Chancellor, 2 Richardsons, Bennett, Avril, Graham, and now Thomas. Meanwhile the preconceptions of how weak the OLine is, and the general lack of Offence persist along with the suspicion the team has a too many unproven young players so the view is they should be scored lower on the power rankings. watching the D play to now should cause a few to revisit their negativity as to that phase of the game. It appears the team can move the ball on the ground again which is a marked improvement form the two prior seasons. Now to see some explosive creativity that has been moribund this season, along with faster play from them.

My view is they rank about mid-level. However, a crucial W or two will quickly cause a sharp revision of their ranking upwards. The team isn't in the final quartile or in the top half but they are closer to being in the top half than the final quartile.
 

hawknation2018

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
3,082
Reaction score
0
The only teams who look very good at this point are the Rams and Chiefs. And both of those teams struggled their way to close victories on the road this last week.

Everyone else is a muddle.

Seahawks defense has looked good through 4 weeks. They’re ranked in the Top 10 in most defensive categories. The new Defensive DVOA isn’t out yet, but they should be in the Top 5. No one knows how the defense will hold up without Earl Thomas, a generational talent who is virtually irreplaceable in our defensive scheme.

The running game has gotten going. But what is on paper our greatest strength (I.e. Russell Wilson’s play making) has not shown up on the field so far this season. If that happens, the offense could look much better.

So who knows? If everything clicks, maybe they can be a 9-7 Wild Card team that makes a run. But with all the injuries and issues with Russell Wilson, that seems unlikely. Hope they get it together.
 

QuahHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
5,641
Reaction score
108
Location
Issaquah, WA
#18

I think we are as good or better than a number of teams ahead of us. We are on the same level as Chicago and Denver even though we lost i think we'd have beat both on our field and in a rematch later in the years we'd beat them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Top