I thought this was about the most complete game

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • Tech Worlds wrote:Good teams win this game.


    You mean a road game against a team you're "supposed" to beat?

    I guess San Francisco is no longer a "good team" since they blew one to the Vikings earlier this season. :roll:

    If you want to make the argument that we're not a good team because our defense has severe issues with 3rd downs, then I'd agree.

    If you want to make the argument that we're not a good team because we still seem to have issues with the chemistry between the QB and receivers, sure.

    If you want to make the argument that we're not good because our coordinators seem to have issues adjusting to the opponent, and are good for several bonehead calls per game, absolutely.

    Hell, if you just want to say we're not good because we have a 4-4 record, that's a valid argument.

    But I can't get on board with these ridiculous platitudes about not being good because we failed to meet some arbitrary standard.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7978
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • RW is looking good, you can see the improvement every week, rookie or no rookie he's going to make mistakes, errant throws, late throws, inaccurate throws, hell manning had some bad throws last night, but in my opinion he had a great game against the saints... i'm starting to feel much more confident in this offense, because yet again, our 3rd round rookie QB led us on yet another 4th quarter comeback drive for the win, which the defense pissed away, like they we're playing the greatest show on turf rams or something... if anybody doesn't see weakness and major concerns in our defense then you are just kidding yourself... our weakness has been discoverd and these weaknesses have been put on display for the last 2 weeks now, really actually 3 because new england started dinking and dunking us, we were just able to get a few key stops in that game. linebackers better learn how to cover that short stuff,and the TE's or at least make the tackle at the spot of the catch, or your going to see this over and over again... last time i checked RW doesn't play both ways, this loss is on the D big time.

    i'm a realist, i love my hawks, but i'm not thinking SB or playoffs, i just want to see improvement.. we're 1, maybe 2 years away from being a force, providing we can keep the core of players together that long... Just My Opinion
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3921
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • The Radish wrote:we've played all season.
    Did you all think we were going to the SB this year?


    No, but I did think we had a shot at the playoffs. I also thought we had a shot at challenging SF for the NFC West.

    I guess my expectations for this team is higher than yours.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2951
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    The Radish wrote:we've played all season.
    Did you all think we were going to the SB this year?


    No, but I did think we had a shot at the playoffs. I also thought we had a shot at challenging SF for the NFC West.

    I guess my expectations for this team is higher than yours.


    Neither of those things is out of the realm of possibility at this point in the season.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7978
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    The Radish wrote:we've played all season.
    Did you all think we were going to the SB this year?


    No, but I did think we had a shot at the playoffs. I also thought we had a shot at challenging SF for the NFC West.

    I guess my expectations for this team is higher than yours.


    Neither of those things is out of the realm of possibility at this point in the season.


    Of course it's possible. But is it likely? No.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2951
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Not sure what defense you were watching. The D was horrendous yesterday.
    ShaunPope
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
    Location: Everett, WA


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:No, but I did think we had a shot at the playoffs. I also thought we had a shot at challenging SF for the NFC West.

    I guess my expectations for this team is higher than yours.


    Neither of those things is out of the realm of possibility at this point in the season.


    Of course it's possible. But is it likely? No.


    I would argue that Seattle has a very good shot at a playoff berth, given the 2nd half schedule. You've got the 4 NFC division leaders, and then a massive clump of teams sitting close to .500. With 5 games at home and winnable road games coming up, I think Seattle has a pretty decent shot - especially with HTH tiebreakers over Green Bay and Dallas.

    Our shot at a division crown will be better if Arizona beats SF, but the odds will be significantly longer if SF wins. The flipside of that, of course, is that our odds for a wildcard playoff berth increase if SF wins.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7978
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:Good teams win this game.


    You mean a road game against a team you're "supposed" to beat?

    I guess San Francisco is no longer a "good team" since they blew one to the Vikings earlier this season. :roll:

    If you want to make the argument that we're not a good team because our defense has severe issues with 3rd downs, then I'd agree.

    If you want to make the argument that we're not a good team because we still seem to have issues with the chemistry between the QB and receivers, sure.

    If you want to make the argument that we're not good because our coordinators seem to have issues adjusting to the opponent, and are good for several bonehead calls per game, absolutely.

    Hell, if you just want to say we're not good because we have a 4-4 record, that's a valid argument.

    But I can't get on board with these ridiculous platitudes about not being good because we failed to meet some arbitrary standard.


    Arbitrary standards are the best because you can always change them in order to find the downside of every situation.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 14749
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • We over-covered Meg... ergo, the others had room.

    Wilson had a great game, the dropped passes were mostly gone.

    The pass rusher needed to do more.

    Not sure about some offensive coaching decisions.

    Lil' Rus had a come behind game winner for chrisakes, we just left enough time for 'Lil Matt to do one too.

    Can't wait to play the imploding Vikings. Go Vick.
    User avatar
    Rocket
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1214
    Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:12 pm
    Location: The Rain Forest


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    I would argue that Seattle has a very good shot at a playoff berth, given the 2nd half schedule. You've got the 4 NFC division leaders, and then a massive clump of teams sitting close to .500. With 5 games at home and winnable road games coming up, I think Seattle has a pretty decent shot - especially with HTH tiebreakers over Green Bay and Dallas.

    Our shot at a division crown will be better if Arizona beats SF, but the odds will be significantly longer if SF wins. The flipside of that, of course, is that our odds for a wildcard playoff berth increase if SF wins.


    I'd agree with you if I had faith that the Hawks can get it rolling in all facets for the 2nd half of the season. But you know the old saying "prior history dictates future outcomes."

    The first 8 games tell me that the Hawks are going to continue to play close games regardless of opponent. Which means we'll win some, and lose some. That spells 8-8.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2951
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    I would argue that Seattle has a very good shot at a playoff berth, given the 2nd half schedule. You've got the 4 NFC division leaders, and then a massive clump of teams sitting close to .500. With 5 games at home and winnable road games coming up, I think Seattle has a pretty decent shot - especially with HTH tiebreakers over Green Bay and Dallas.

    Our shot at a division crown will be better if Arizona beats SF, but the odds will be significantly longer if SF wins. The flipside of that, of course, is that our odds for a wildcard playoff berth increase if SF wins.


    I'd agree with you if I had faith that the Hawks can get it rolling in all facets for the 2nd half of the season. But you know the old saying "prior history dictates future outcomes."

    The first 8 games tell me that the Hawks are going to continue to play close games regardless of opponent. Which means we'll win some, and lose some. That spells 8-8.


    Yes, prior history does tend to dictate future outcomes. Last season, the team managed to get rolling later in the season, and I don't see any reason to think that this year's team can't do the same. We saw signs of life from the offense on the road, and why can't that continue?

    Additionally, our defense seems to play better at home, and 5 of our final 8 are played in friendly confines (not to mention that we aren't facing a bunch of outstanding offenses in the 2nd half of the season like we did in the 1st half). Why can't the defense find itself again with the crowd roaring and lesser QBs across the line?
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7978
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • "I guess San Francisco is no longer a "good team" since they blew one to the Vikings earlier this season"

    San Fran is 5-2, we're 4-4. They've found a way to win a couple more than we have, thus they are a better team. You are what your record says you are.
    Hawks46
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3465
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm


  • The Radish wrote: BALANCED
    :les:


    Ballanced??, how the hell is allowing a 75% of the opponents to make those 3rd down conversions, BALLANCE, especially when your OFFENSE isn't coming close to mirroring those percentages in ANY game this Season?
    I saw a pretty good outing for Russell Wilson, but our Defense did NOT hold up their end for the ballance you claim we had.
    To answer your question about our going to the Super Bowl this Year?, no, "Defenses win Championships".
    My dad was a Seahawks fan right up until the day he died (1985), and even then, he was hopeing to see them make it to the big dance.
    I'll be a Seahawks fan right up till the day I cash in, but I see other teams making 2nd, and 3rd returns for the chances to winning it all AGAIN.
    Why is it silly to expect the Seahawks to get that shot this Season?, if not this Season, maybe next?, or the next?
    No, there's something missing in this BALLANCE thing you're touting, because if the much improved Seahawks Defense can't force more 3 & outs to the #17th Offense, we have taken a step backwards.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3518
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    Additionally, our defense seems to play better at home, and 5 of our final 8 are played in friendly confines (not to mention that we aren't facing a bunch of outstanding offenses in the 2nd half of the season like we did in the 1st half). Why can't the defense find itself again with the crowd roaring and lesser QBs across the line?


    I tell you what, if we can beat the Vikings this weekend I'll jump on board with your theory.......but even then that's assuming we can beat SF at home, which is a HUGE question mark..........AND win another road game to get to 10-6, which this team seems to have a really hard time doing (win on the road), regardless of opponent.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2951
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Hawks46 wrote:"I guess San Francisco is no longer a "good team" since they blew one to the Vikings earlier this season"

    San Fran is 5-2, we're 4-4. They've found a way to win a couple more than we have, thus they are a better team. You are what your record says you are.


    Exactly. Which if you read the rest of my post, was precisely what I was pointing out. San Fran isn't a bad team because they lost a road game to a middling team. Trotting out these arbitrary standards as to what makes a "good team" is kinda ridiculous.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7978
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    I would argue that Seattle has a very good shot at a playoff berth, given the 2nd half schedule. You've got the 4 NFC division leaders, and then a massive clump of teams sitting close to .500. With 5 games at home and winnable road games coming up, I think Seattle has a pretty decent shot - especially with HTH tiebreakers over Green Bay and Dallas.

    Our shot at a division crown will be better if Arizona beats SF, but the odds will be significantly longer if SF wins. The flipside of that, of course, is that our odds for a wildcard playoff berth increase if SF wins.


    I'd agree with you if I had faith that the Hawks can get it rolling in all facets for the 2nd half of the season. But you know the old saying "prior history dictates future outcomes."

    The first 8 games tell me that the Hawks are going to continue to play close games regardless of opponent. Which means we'll win some, and lose some. That spells 8-8.


    Yes, prior history does tend to dictate future outcomes. Last season, the team managed to get rolling later in the season, and I don't see any reason to think that this year's team can't do the same. We saw signs of life from the offense on the road, and why can't that continue?

    Additionally, our defense seems to play better at home, and 5 of our final 8 are played in friendly confines (not to mention that we aren't facing a bunch of outstanding offenses in the 2nd half of the season like we did in the 1st half). Why can't the defense find itself again with the crowd roaring and lesser QBs across the line?


    Sure we will win some more games at home as the season rolls on. That is what a mediocre team does. Win or mostly win at home, rarely win on the road.

    Sound familiar?

    8 and 8, 9 and 7 at best.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9302
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Tech Worlds wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    I'd agree with you if I had faith that the Hawks can get it rolling in all facets for the 2nd half of the season. But you know the old saying "prior history dictates future outcomes."

    The first 8 games tell me that the Hawks are going to continue to play close games regardless of opponent. Which means we'll win some, and lose some. That spells 8-8.


    Yes, prior history does tend to dictate future outcomes. Last season, the team managed to get rolling later in the season, and I don't see any reason to think that this year's team can't do the same. We saw signs of life from the offense on the road, and why can't that continue?

    Additionally, our defense seems to play better at home, and 5 of our final 8 are played in friendly confines (not to mention that we aren't facing a bunch of outstanding offenses in the 2nd half of the season like we did in the 1st half). Why can't the defense find itself again with the crowd roaring and lesser QBs across the line?


    Sure we will win some more games at home as the season rolls on. That is what a mediocre team does. Win or mostly win at home, rarely win on the road.

    Sound familiar?

    8 and 8, 9 and 7 at best.


    Actually, I think we have a very good shot at winning all of our remaining home games, and I think we win at least 1 more on the road. I still think this is a 10-6 team that just came through the toughest part of its schedule with some surprising results and sitting at .500.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7978
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:Actually, I think we have a very good shot at winning all of our remaining home games, and I think we win at least 1 more on the road. I still think this is a 10-6 team that just came through the toughest part of its schedule with some surprising results and sitting at .500.


    With a rookie QB and relatively few passing weapons.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11247
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am




It is currently Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:36 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information