Before you use the '10 am starts is whining, get over it'. .

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • lets not forget that the NFL felt so bad for those poor east coast teams that they gave them a helping hand in 09. . .

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4009230

    Under the new plan, teams wouldn't have to visit two West Coast teams, just one, along with a team closer to the Midwest. Specifically, Oakland will be paired with Denver, and San Diego will be paired with Denver. In the NFC, Arizona and San Francisco will be paired as will St. Louis and Seattle.


    its why we had to, for example, go on the road twice in a row now to pissburg.

    So yeah while 10 am starts shouldn't be a problem for a good team, obviously the NFL thinks scheduling/travel are an unfair advantage in some cases. Just, ya know, not a disadvantage for us to have to play early games 5 times across the country.

    lets not forget that of SF's two 10 am starts, one is against a crappy Jaguars team not even at their home stadium but in london. A team they could destroy by playing only their backups.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2877
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • East coast bias will always be there. More fans.
    User avatar
    MrCarey
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1680
    Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:16 pm


  • you know, it doesn't matter who we play, what time we play, or where we play...we could play on the moon at midnight as far as i'm concerned...as long as we stay HEALTHY, teams better be concerned when on THEIR schedule it says vs/at seahawks...not the other way around...

    the schedule is what it is, times are what they are, and each team plays 16 reg season games so...whatever..

    like all teams, health is main component for how a team does, along with some other things but if you're healthy for the most part all year, your odds of winning go up and if you healthy and a damn good squad like my seahawks...well times, opponents, none of that shit matters

    stay healthy my friends...coach has spoken...out
    User avatar
    jack_patera
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 208
    Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:37 pm
    Location: ..Location..Location


  • Seems to me there quantifiable proveable scheduling bias shown with the schedule this year.

    Of course the eastern teams get a break with the travel time zone changes going west but for those Seahawks we'll give them 5 eastern timezone games beginning early so they can 'prove themselves'. Forget about fairness for them.

    Of course when the team overcomes this disadvantage built into the schedule, the league will say: "see it doesn't make any difference", when we all know it certainly is an obstacle to overcome.

    There is no western team that has a worst schedule as far as travel than the Seahawks.

    That said I agree the team just needs to stay healthy and win those games despite the built in advantage the league has given the east coast teams.
    Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to completely take the final step. That was done and the final step was taken. The OLine still needs work.

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions at last after 38 seasons. Awesome!!!
    jammerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1952
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


  • If this team can't win at 10am they don't deserve a trip to the Super Bowl. It sucks that they have to be scheduled that way yes, but it's up to them to overcome any challenge, including this one.
    Image

    “There’s no reason, with Mr. Allen and the fan base here and the stadium, that this can’t be a stable, long-term winning organization.” - John Schneider
    User avatar
    Bakergirl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3302
    Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:13 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • Bakergirl wrote:If this team can't win at 10am they don't deserve a trip to the Super Bowl. It sucks that they have to be scheduled that way yes, but it's up to them to overcome any challenge, including this one.



    Basically my point...it sucks but we will deal.

    I just remembered when they did what was described in the article, I was baffled and it made 0 sense why they would 'help out' the east coast teams but do nothing about our travel/early starts.

    I realize it's nothing to cry about. Hawks are going all the way. It's just BS and we obviously get screwed. we will deal. But the bias is offensively blatant.

    just got my season tickets locked in today, after being a 5-game holder last year that bought single game seats to every other home game, so i'm "pumped" and "jacked" either way.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2877
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • I really hope that they blow out the thinking that 1000 starts are so horrible. This is a new team, we all know that and are starting to actually let that soak in to the way we think. While there has been some whining about 1000 starts, it's not as bad as in the past where that's all we'd hear about. Exciting times ladies and gentlemen, exciting times. Go Hawks!
    Zebulon Dak wrote:If any Twitter employees get assassinated I'll vote Republican from here on out.
    User avatar
    OkieHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2734
    Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City


  • Chargers also have five 10am kicks..
    _____________________

    Where can I find Seahawks98.com???
    User avatar
    Barthawk
    *Bacon Eating Crusader*
    *Bacon Eating Crusader*
     
    Posts: 2631
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:17 am
    Location: San Antonio, TX by way of Kalispell, MT


  • John Clayton figures it will make it tougher to win. Las Vegas is figuring the 10am starts in to the odds, so yes, it does mean something. But we have a young team who will be less effected by the time difference.
    Clayton also said it is a result of the Seahawks being a popular team. Networks want our team in their primetime slots, which is ten in the morning.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8896
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • I have taken your request under consideration.

    However, 10 am or 1 am doesn't matter. Doesn't matter who or where. The Hawks are gonna be pumping teams all over the place. No excuses, no whining.
    kobebryant
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1235
    Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 1:45 pm


  • ivotuk wrote:John Clayton figures it will make it tougher to win. Las Vegas is figuring the 10am starts in to the odds, so yes, it does mean something. But we have a young team who will be less effected by the time difference.
    Clayton also said it is a result of the Seahawks being a popular team. Networks want our team in their primetime slots, which is ten in the morning.

    They are not stupid it seems. I have no worries, last year the 10am thing was becoming irrelevant and this year it will be a non-factor because Russell Wilson will make it so.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8003
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


  • KCHawkGirl wrote:I have no worries, last year the 10am thing was becoming irrelevant and this year it will be a non-factor because Russell Wilson will make it so.


    I think it was still a factor. Including playoffs, the Seahawks were 1-4 in 10:00 AM games last year. 12-2 in all other games and 3-2 in later road games. Seattle's only 10:00 a.m. win was a come from behind victory that required two game winning drives in Chicago. Very easily could have gone 0-5 in those games.

    I think the Seahawks can definitely overcome it, but it's another obstacle. This issue needs to be addressed by the league, but they're obviously more concerned about their TV contracts than fair competition. I don't expect them to think twice about it.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4059
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • If you think it's not a factor at all, you're simply wrong. There is empirical evidence to support this all over the place based on 'science'. It's not "crying" to be armed with facts.

    However

    If you think it's not a factor because the Seahawks are good enough to overcome the issues a 10 AM start poses, you are most likely right.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2877
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • Hawknballs wrote:If you think it's not a factor at all, you're simply wrong. There is empirical evidence to support this all over the place based on 'science'. It's not "crying" to be armed with facts.

    However

    If you think it's not a factor because the Seahawks are good enough to overcome the issues a 10 AM start poses, you are most likely right.

    Lets just say I am in the second camp. The Seahawks like any team of elite level (New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore when it counts or recent San Francisco teams make it a non-factor through sheer talent and will. The evidence is undeniable that West Coast teams are at a distinct disadvantage with 10am games but elite teams overcome it. If you don't then you don't deservie to be a Superbowl champion or a team regarded as elite or have any respect/hate outside your own direct fanbase. Just derision even worse just being ignored as nonexsistent.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8003
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


  • Barthawk wrote:Chargers also have five 10am kicks..

    And didn't the Whiners last year? It's bullshit and biased, pure and simple.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    ImageImage

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12656
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • KCHawkGirl wrote:
    Hawknballs wrote:If you think it's not a factor at all, you're simply wrong. There is empirical evidence to support this all over the place based on 'science'. It's not "crying" to be armed with facts.

    However

    If you think it's not a factor because the Seahawks are good enough to overcome the issues a 10 AM start poses, you are most likely right.

    Lets just say I am in the second camp. The Seahawks like any team of elite level (New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore when it counts or recent San Francisco teams make it a non-factor through sheer talent and will. The evidence is undeniable that West Coast teams are at a distinct disadvantage with 10am games but elite teams overcome it. If you don't then you don't deservie to be a Superbowl champion or a team regarded as elite or have any respect/hate outside your own direct fanbase. Just derision even worse just being ignored as nonexsistent.


    Sadly, even this isn't really true. Many, many teams have gotten their Super Bowls by having an average or easy schedule. In fact, there's no correlation to schedule difficulty and winning a Super Bowl and the public doesn't really factor in how hard your schedule was when they and the media brand teams "elite".

    If I were on the team, I would definitely take the second perspective because sports science has demonstrated that it's the mindset of "winners". But as a fan, my mindset is irrelevant, and this schedule is a punch to the gut.

    Not only does Seattle have 5 10 am starts, we have the biggest differential between home team winning record and road team winning record. The teams we play on the road won almost 60 percent of their games last year, while our home opponents only won a little over 40 percent. That's a really big gap. These two things together...smh. I find it extremely hard to believe it was an accident that the team with the best home field advantage has their scheduled constructed this way, although someone can probably tell me how it was.

    Fact is, as fans, with this schedule, we now need to be prepared for the possibility of an underwhelming regular season. If there's much bad luck, like injuries or refs, there's a chance we only win 10 games. Or even 9? The margin for error has been taken away by the league. If Seattle wins the division with this schedule, we're talking about an all-time team.
    formido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 484
    Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:41 pm
    Location: Ventura, CA


  • Sadly, even this isn't really true. Many, many teams have gotten their Super Bowls by having an average or easy schedule. In fact, there's no correlation to schedule difficulty and winning a Super Bowl and the public doesn't really factor in how hard your schedule was when they and the media brand teams "elite".

    This is very true. Also the season can do exactly like Denver last year a supposed hard schedule turning to pitiful because you actually have to play the games and things change the instant the season starts.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8003
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


  • The funny thing is, most good teams don't succumb to the early AM start phenomenon.

    Back in '08, '09 and '10 we struggled on the east coast. But that was due to general suckness. We got destroyed by the Giants in NY, but we didn't fare much better with Charlie clipboard at Qwest the following year. We were awful everywhere on the road. Early starts on the road just meant getting a good jump on your yardwork before lunch.

    We're a good team. This means nothing.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 733
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


  • formido wrote:Many, many teams have gotten their Super Bowls by having an average or easy schedule. In fact, there's no correlation to schedule difficulty and winning a Super Bowl and the public doesn't really factor in how hard your schedule was when they and the media brand teams "elite".

    If I were on the team, I would definitely take the second perspective because sports science has demonstrated that it's the mindset of "winners". But as a fan, my mindset is irrelevant, and this schedule is a punch to the gut.

    Not only does Seattle have 5 10 am starts, we have the biggest differential between home team winning record and road team winning record. The teams we play on the road won almost 60 percent of their games last year, while our home opponents only won a little over 40 percent. That's a really big gap. These two things together...smh. I find it extremely hard to believe it was an accident that the team with the best home field advantage has their scheduled constructed this way, although someone can probably tell me how it was.

    Fact is, as fans, with this schedule, we now need to be prepared for the possibility of an underwhelming regular season. If there's much bad luck, like injuries or refs, there's a chance we only win 10 games. Or even 9? The margin for error has been taken away by the league. If Seattle wins the division with this schedule, we're talking about an all-time team.

    I like your take on this. Players need to believe it doesn't matter for psychological reasons, similar to how Wilson says his height is a non-issue. As fans we can look at it more objectively and identify advantages and disadvantages, similar to how coaching staff factors Wilson's height in when they are designing and calling plays.
    "Check out my 2012 NFL Draft Grades. I just gave the worst grade ever to Seattle." - WalterFootball.com
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2303
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • formido wrote:
    If Seattle wins the division with this schedule, we're talking about an all-time team.


    If we win the division? Not very confident are we in this team eh? The division is ours until Wilson retires. Go Hawks!
    Zebulon Dak wrote:If any Twitter employees get assassinated I'll vote Republican from here on out.
    User avatar
    OkieHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2734
    Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City


  • Also, I think for many of us who have tested our physical strength during many different parts of the day, it should be obvious why west coast teams have trouble with east coast starts. Any particular person might be different, but the general profile is inarguable: We warm to our peak body temperature and greatest strength by mid to late afternoon and hold close to that peak through the evening. This is the way we are built, physiologically. I was a little annoyed reading Sando earlier today because he seemed to suggest that east coast teams would have just as much trouble going west, which means he doesn't understand the physiological underpinnings for the problem. East coast body clocks will always be at least even, depending on where the game is played. Here's a summary of research I found on elitefitness.com:

    American Council on Exercise - 2007

    Warm is better
    It is the influence of circadian rhythms on body temperature that seems to yield the most control over the quality of a workout. When body temperature is at its highest, your workouts will likely be more productive; when your temperature is low, chances are your exercise session may be less than optimal.
    Body temperature is at its lowest about one to three hours before most of us wake up in the morning, in contrast to late afternoon when body temperature reaches its peak. If you are an early bird or a night owl your temperature peaks within an hour or two of the norm (4pm – 6pm).
    Studies have consistently shown that exercise during these late-in-the-day hours produces better Performance and more power. Muscles are warm and more flexible, perceived exertion is low, reaction time is quicker, strength is at its peak, and resting heart rate and blood pressure are low.

    Medical Review Board - September 2007

    • For most people, body temperature and hormone levels peak at 6 p.m. Exercising 3 hours before or after the peak will give your your best workout for both endurance and building muscle.
    • Research shows lung function is best at 4 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    • Muscles are warm and flexible.
    • Perceived exertion is lowest -- how hard you feel yourself to be working at exercise. So you may be able to work out harder or faster by doing so in the afternoon.
    • Can help regulate the amount of food you feel like eating for dinner.
    • Stress relief after a day at work, school, or home.

    USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education) - April, 2005

    Exercise best in late afternoon
    Circadian rhythms, the body's biological processes that repeat in 24-hour cycles, may have a significant effect on a person's lung function and, ultimately, help determine the best time of day for exercise and the administration of medications and medical procedures. In a study by Boris I. Medarov, a physician at Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, N.Y., lung function was found to have a natural circadian rhythm, where it is at its peak during the late afternoon hours and at its lowest around midday.
    "Circadian rhythms regulate our biological cycles for sleep, activity level, metabolism, and many other processes through our body's exposure to sunlight and darkness," explains Medarov. "Our study finds that lung function has its own rhythm that may govern how much energy we exert throughout the day and the best times to engage in certain activities."
    The study investigated how lung function fluctuated throughout the working hours of 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Results were compared within nine time intervals, and showed that patients' overall airway resistance was at its most prominent around 12 p.m. but reached its minimum between 4-5 p.m.
    "We often associate the end of the workday with being tired and less motivated for physical exertion; however, lung function seems to be at its best during this time," notes Medarov. "As a result, exercising or engaging in other physical activities in the late afternoon may help us to achieve optimal Performance."

    CNN - January 2004

    "The best time to work out is in the late afternoon," Zee said. "The reason for that is your muscle strength is at its peak, its highest. You're going to be less likely to injure yourself. It's also a time when people are most awake and alert."
    The science behind Zee's assertion resides with delicate rhythms of the brain called circadian rhythms. According to Zee, circadian rhythms explain why working out later in the day might be more productive and beneficial.
    "One of the things that circadian rhythms does is that it determines when your best Performance time is," Zee said. "Your ability to perform changes throughout 24 hours."
    Circadian rhythms operate like an internal clock in the body. Neuron signals are fired out by the hypothalamus [a region of the brain], controlling sleep patterns, blood pressure, even our moods.
    "These are rhythms that are innate," Zee said. "They are in almost any organism, whether you are an animal or a plant, and they recur every 24 hours."
    Circadian rhythms also control body temperature, a key element of a more productive workout. According to Zee, by the afternoon, body temperature is between one and two degrees warmer than in the morning, making muscles in the body more supple and lowering the risk of injury.
    Another circadian expert agrees.
    "Maximum body temperature happens between 2 and 4 p.m.," said Dr. Michael Vitiello, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of Washington. "After that, [body temperature] starts to decline for most people.
    formido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 484
    Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:41 pm
    Location: Ventura, CA


  • This will make the end result all the sweeter. We have Russell Wilson now people...he never sleeps so the start time is irrelevant. I just don't care what they throw at us, if we are good enough to win the Superbowl, this isn't going to hold us back.

    Go Hawks!
    Image
    User avatar
    Rose City Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 926
    Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:51 am
    Location: Portland Oregon


  • DavidSeven wrote:
    KCHawkGirl wrote:I have no worries, last year the 10am thing was becoming irrelevant and this year it will be a non-factor because Russell Wilson will make it so.


    I think it was still a factor. Including playoffs, the Seahawks were 1-4 in 10:00 AM games last year. 12-2 in all other games and 3-2 in later road games. Seattle's only 10:00 a.m. win was a come from behind victory that required two game winning drives in Chicago. Very easily could have gone 0-5 in those games.

    I think the Seahawks can definitely overcome it, but it's another obstacle. This issue needs to be addressed by the league, but they're obviously more concerned about their TV contracts than fair competition. I don't expect them to think twice about it.

    This.

    The Seahawks last year could have won the Super Bowl. The average win % of west coast teams on the east coast at 10 am is 22%. This Super Bowl worthy team won exactly 20% of those games.

    The competition level of the NFL is too close for a team to overcome a signifcant disadvantage. Expect the Hawks, no matter how good they are, to go 1-4 again. A good result would be 2-3.

    To expect more than that is just unrealistic homerism and a refusal to accept empirical evidence.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4866
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • There's no doubt that it is a disadvantage to play early games. Those that say it won't matter may be right, but it was likely a factor in our losses to Miami and Detroit last year. There are lots of articles regarding Vegas odds and winning percentages being lower for west coast teams playing early games on the east coast. Obviously, some of it depends on how good the teams are. It was a joke that we had to play the first game on Saturday against Atlanta last year in the playoffs since it was the only game out of the 4 playoff games that was a 1:00 EST start time.
    User avatar
    vonstout
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 81
    Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:00 pm


  • jack_patera wrote:...we could play on the moon at midnight as far as i'm concerned...



    this is because you arent an nfl player
    Image
    User avatar
    KitsapHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 857
    Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:04 pm
    Location: Behind you


  • The team is from Seattle, therefore we will always play more 10 A.M. games.

    So what?.......Just win 1/2 of them and we are fine.
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25004
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Yes, that is a Bacon Wrapped Turkey


  • I do agree that we will be lucky to go 2-3 on those trips. Having traveled to the east coast a lot in my working years I laugh at people that say they notice no difference. Its just not true. Much harder mentally to get up the next day and complete at your very best. And football is a lot more mental than you think.

    But didn't the team leave a day early last year to help offset some of that? At least last year we seemed to be in all those games where in years past we truly sucked in 10am games.

    And remember the only NFL team with any success traveling across the country west to east was the ninnir teams of the 80s. True Zona went one year but they are a time zone further and you can't exactly call St. Louis a West Coast Team.

    I will worry but hope for the best. I know Wilson will be ready but he's one guy. Remember the team has to be ready to play every game at their peak or the "on any sunday" will rear up its ugly head.

    :les:
    Image
    On to week two. Week one was not a fluke!
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18655
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


  • i just think it's dumb that the NFL has a meeting to make up a bunch of rules to help out east coast teams and we get stuck with this. that's all. I wouldn't have posted or peeped about the 10 am starts if i didn't jarringly remember this absurd change from '09 to help out tom terrific.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2877
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • vonstout wrote:There's no doubt that it is a disadvantage to play early games. Those that say it won't matter may be right, but it was likely a factor in our losses to Miami and Detroit last year..............

    Not to mention the slow start in the playoff games.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    ImageImage

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12656
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • It doesn't matter how good this team is, or whether we should be able to overcome an obstacle like the schedule. The fact that the NFL will protect poor wittle pissburg from having to make two whole west coast trips in the same season in order to preserve the competitiveness of the division, and force any west coast team to make five 10:00 starts, is bleeping hypocritical and bleeping SUCKS. Seriously, I'd like to tag the schedule maker with a cattle prod right in the junk. (OK, maybe not so seriously. A dreamer can dream.)
    49ers webzone: Win or lose, i hope you injure Sherman. Like a serious career ending injury. I don't want him to get paid.
    49ers webzone: noise should not be the overwhelming reason a team is favored. they need to spray noise-damping foam onto the ceiling of that place.
    User avatar
    BlueTalon
    * NET Curmudgeon *
    * NET Curmudgeon *
     
    Posts: 7450
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:06 am
    Location: Eastern Washington


  • Ok. Let me get this straight.

    First of all, we are to beat every team.

    Secondly, We have to beat the schedule.

    Thirdly, we have to beat the league/officials.

    Just win games with superiority in coaching, players, and schemes.

    Then we can finally hoist a Lombardi.

    There are NO excuses.
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25004
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Yes, that is a Bacon Wrapped Turkey


  • formido wrote: If Seattle wins the division with this schedule, we're talking about an all-time team.


    Ya, Im sure they will be talking about the division winning Hawks right up there with the 1972 Dolphins. :th2thumbs:
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2611
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • Sorry bro's.....but whining about "start times", "road games", "refs"...etc...... all makes the fan base seem sorry. Ask Russell Wilson...every field is 100 yards.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2611
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • Bakergirl wrote:If this team can't win at 10am they don't deserve a trip to the Super Bowl. It sucks that they have to be scheduled that way yes, but it's up to them to overcome any challenge, including this one.


    Not bitching, I think we are up for the challenge but comments like this kind of get under my skin.

    Good teams overcome bad calls. So does that mean we didn't deserve to be in the Super Bowl in 05?

    We don't have one ten am game. If we did I would whole heartadly agree with you but we don't have one we have five. Last year one more win would have put us as the 2 seed with a Bi week and without the loss of Clemons and Haushka or injuring Lynch. So if we don't win all five do we not deserve to be in the super bowl? Keep in mind that was one caught pass against AZ, one bad call against Miami, Skelton staying healthy or Pete getting his time out in St Louis.

    This is a game of inches and to expect us to win every game by a mile and overcome any amount of diversity is a little on the other side of unrealistic.

    The odds of us winning all those games is lower with a 10am starts and it could be the difference between the 2 seed and the 5 seed just like last year.

    Hopefully we can find a way to not let it dictate the outcome of the season for us but if we manage to get to the super bowl in spite of this schedule, it will be a major accomplishment that most super bowl caliber teams in past history have failed to accomplish.

    I like our chances but I will never say that not accomplishing a task like this is proof we don't deserve to be there.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3027
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • "We don't have to lose anymore games guys....."
    Pete Carroll
    " There's levelz 2 these bezzles"
    User avatar
    HommyHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 158
    Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:41 pm


  • 49ers had five 10 AM starts, sure as hell didn't stop them

    The whole "NFL is biased against Seattle with all the early starts" is stupid. They are biased against all west coast teams. Goodell wants to protect his precious big market east coast teams.
    Vpk0718
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 308
    Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:42 pm


  • T-Sizzle wrote:Sorry bro's.....but whining about "start times", "road games", "refs"...etc...... all makes the fan base seem sorry. Ask Russell Wilson...every field is 100 yards.


    Yeah okay, every field is a hundred yards, so even a field laced with land mines wouldn't make a difference right? As long as it's a hundred yards?

    That sort of comment just ignores reality. I travel regularly to the east coast and I'm wacked out in the morning until a couple days in, and that experience is shared with the rest of my co-workers who do that travel.

    We do just fine, obviously, we have no choice, but we're not elite athletes trying to reach peak performance for four 15 minute quarters. Physical performance has a lot to do with peaking on a macro and a micro level.

    And our east-coast customers, when they travel west, confirm that coming west is cake compared to when they return back east.

    So it doesn't make anyone sound sorry except dishonest east-coasters. Honest east-coasters know damned well it makes a difference.
    hawk45
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 5466
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


  • Vpk0718 wrote:49ers had five 10 AM starts, sure as hell didn't stop them

    The whole "NFL is biased against Seattle with all the early starts" is stupid. They are biased against all west coast teams. Goodell wants to protect his precious big market east coast teams.

    Acknowledging that "THEY" are biased against ALL West coast teams, and then saying that "Goodell wants to protect his precious big market east coast teams" doesn't sound stupid? LOL
    Jet lag is for real, and having LIVED the going East, and through three hour time zone changes, while in the military back in the '60's', I can HONESTLY attest to how it taxes the mind and body.
    I call bullshit on folks that don't understand, or don't care about the ineptitude of scheduling FIVE games that gives an advantage to East coast Teams.
    Hell one or two early games is one thing, but FIVE?? :141847_bnono:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3758
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • RichNhansom wrote:
    Bakergirl wrote:If this team can't win at 10am they don't deserve a trip to the Super Bowl. It sucks that they have to be scheduled that way yes, but it's up to them to overcome any challenge, including this one.


    Not bitching, I think we are up for the challenge but comments like this kind of get under my skin.

    Good teams overcome bad calls. So does that mean we didn't deserve to be in the Super Bowl in 05?

    We don't have one ten am game. If we did I would whole heartadly agree with you but we don't have one we have five. Last year one more win would have put us as the 2 seed with a Bi week and without the loss of Clemons and Haushka or injuring Lynch. So if we don't win all five do we not deserve to be in the super bowl? Keep in mind that was one caught pass against AZ, one bad call against Miami, Skelton staying healthy or Pete getting his time out in St Louis.

    This is a game of inches and to expect us to win every game by a mile and overcome any amount of diversity is a little on the other side of unrealistic.

    The odds of us winning all those games is lower with a 10am starts and it could be the difference between the 2 seed and the 5 seed just like last year.

    Hopefully we can find a way to not let it dictate the outcome of the season for us but if we manage to get to the super bowl in spite of this schedule, it will be a major accomplishment that most super bowl caliber teams in past history have failed to accomplish.

    I like our chances but I will never say that not accomplishing a task like this is proof we don't deserve to be there.


    Maybe my wording was a little off there. My point is..if this team is hungry enough they will find a way to win in spite of odds, in spite of start times and schedules. On a side note...I wish Mr. Allen would pony up the dough to establish a practice area on the east side alla 49ers style. Somehow it feels like they get to cheat when it comes to their 10am east coast games by leaving early and staying there for a few days. It's irritating that they can do that and we cannot.
    Image

    “There’s no reason, with Mr. Allen and the fan base here and the stadium, that this can’t be a stable, long-term winning organization.” - John Schneider
    User avatar
    Bakergirl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3302
    Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:13 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • The whole thing is insane. It really is. But so is the idea and belief of "parity in the NFL."

    It's a big deal that should get fixed immediately, but it won't. Luckily for us, John Schneider, Pete Carroll and company have built a team so strong that this can't and won't hold them down. I'm so glad those two took EVERYTHING into account and made bringing a Super Bowl to Seattle priority #1 in their lives. It shows.
    Talkin Seahawks All Day, All Night @ my blog Seafense! http://seafense.blogspot.com/
    User avatar
    NYCoug
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1440
    Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:45 pm


  • Seattle was given a biased schedule the last two or three years now. It's not an excuse though as long as they make sure to get enough rest and be ready we should be fine.
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


  • Football is football... The good teams win no matter what. If they are what I think they are, what we all think they are then the start time should be the last of our worries. Staying focused, staying healthy those are the things that matter to the great teams, not the start time of a road game against a team that they are better than. This isn't 2007 or 1995 or something. This is a team led by a great head coach, a great young QB and a great defense. It's time they prove it to everyone by putting a Lombardi Trophy in the offices in the at the VMAC.
    User avatar
    McG
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 844
    Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:30 am
    Location: Van Buren, AR from Kent-Covington, WA


  • Every road game outside of the division is a 10 am PST start. I don't study every other team's schedule, but that seems like a pretty big anomaly to me.
    User avatar
    Joshoeuh
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:53 pm
    Location: Pikeville, KY


  • McG wrote:Football is football... The good teams win no matter what. .

    False. If that were true, west coast teams playing 10am games on the east coast would have a better winning percentage than 22%.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4866
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • It's hard not to be critical of the scheduling when you look at all the games outside of the NFC west:

    Home: Jax, Minn, NO, Tenn, TB
    Away: Atl, Car, Hou, Indy, NYG

    Home: Jax and TB (EST) all others (CST)
    Away: Atl, Car, Indy, NYG (EST) Hous (CST)

    Not only did they sent Seattle East for 4 of those 6 EST, but they are probably the 4 toughest teams. Jax obviously is the weakest. TB and Jax are the longest flights on top of it all.

    Someone commented about the fact that they wanted to put Seattle in the better time slots for TV. That's the truth. It's all about TV money. But I find it funny that none of our late starts are against east coast teams. Our night games are against NO, Ariz, and Stl. Why wouldn't they want to put the Atl or NYG game in prime time at night and eliminate the time zone issue? At the very least, they should have at least two of the road games be late starts.
    Last edited by vonstout on Sat Apr 20, 2013 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    vonstout
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 81
    Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:00 pm


  • jack_patera wrote:you know, it doesn't matter who we play, what time we play, or where we play...we could play on the moon at midnight as far as i'm concerned...as long as we stay HEALTHY, teams better be concerned when on THEIR schedule it says vs/at seahawks...not the other way around...

    the schedule is what it is, times are what they are, and each team plays 16 reg season games so...whatever..

    like all teams, health is main component for how a team does, along with some other things but if you're healthy for the most part all year, your odds of winning go up and if you healthy and a damn good squad like my seahawks...well times, opponents, none of that shit matters

    stay healthy my friends...coach has spoken...out

    couldnt agree more well stated!!!!!!

    Even though the east coast bias is crap.
    TLD0550
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 345
    Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 3:50 pm


  • Before you proclaim everyone as whiners consider why the NFL changed the rules for east coast teams traveling west. Without people voicing their frustration that change never happens. Do you think Pittsburgh would have dominated us in Seattle the way they did in Pittsburgh? They were the much better team that year but no so much better that we weren't even a challenge.

    Keep your hands in your pockets and nothing will ever change. It's even worse when you support their belief that it doesn't matter. If you think there is any disadvantage at all, you should be supporting the argument to get it fixed. Not telling the voice of reason to quit whining.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3027
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • This season, the Hawks will smack that 10AM road record crap out of history. They played SO much better on the road last year. Each year has been a forward step of improvement, with that comes the road wins. The 2005 team was 5-3 on the road, simply because of solid defense and QB play, they pulled the starters in the last game, which would have been a win too.

    RW and the additions to defense will make a team that was on the edge of dominance last year, over that hump. Not because they focused on the road, but simply because they will be a more experienced, higher caliber team.

    Teams of the past would have lost that game in Carolina, certainly the one in Chicago and obviously the one in DC.

    In the past, I would have been concerned about the schedule, but this team is different. They know how to win and they have the resources to do so.
    "The life you lose may be your own" - Drunk dude at the bar
    User avatar
    loafoftatupu
    I'M JIMMY!
     
    Posts: 5899
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Auburn, WA


  • formido wrote:I was a little annoyed reading Sando earlier today because he seemed to suggest that east coast teams would have just as much trouble going west, which means he doesn't understand the physiological underpinnings for the problem.


    I did the research on this back in 2010 (these numbers are only through 2009), simply because I was tired of this coming up every other season or so, but I found that Sando's suggestion is accurate:

    Image

    I do have the two images that I can post here if you are actually interested how it breaks down by year, and obviously I haven't updated the numbers since then. The disparity of teams that finished .500 or better of 21 games under .500 for east coast teams traveling to the west as their west coast counterparts is very telling. It is also worth mentioning how the 21 game difference could be largely attributed to night games where the east coast teams visiting the west are only 16-42.
    FIRE CABLE!
    Image
    User avatar
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1556
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:07 pm


  • We all know that good teams find ways to win games. I really don't see anyone whining here.

    The question is, how far can the league (any sports league, for that matter) push an unfair advantage before it's too far? How many fans does it take to believe the evidence, and how loud do they have to be about it before it's fixed? When does "whining" become "legitimate concern for fairness"?

    I think the concern is already legitimate. It happens to be up against billions of dollars and a LOT of east coast fans and media who just don't give a crap, so it's a foregone conclusion that nothing will change.

    Imagine it reversed, though. If the Giants, Steelers, Ravens, Redskins, etc. had to travel as much and start games at off-times. What if the Patriots wound up with 5 west coast starts at 6pm. New England would go NUTS and everyone would be screaming, "Nearly one-third of our games are ending at midnight our time! That's ridiculous!" Would their fans be "whining" when they took to the blogs and comment sections with their entitled vehemence? 'Cause you know they would. And you know they would get their way right quick.

    No whining. No excuses. You play to win the games. The question is, do the human beings who create the game setups include a tilt that knowingly affects one team more than the other? And if so, why is that okay?
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkAroundTheClock
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1589
    Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:30 pm
    Location: Olympia


Next


It is currently Sat Nov 22, 2014 8:00 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information