SalishHawkFan wrote:According to FO, the 2005 Hawks was vastly superior on offense to the 2012 Hawks. It's not even close. That team was the #1 offense. The 2012 Hawks defense was vastly superior to the 2005 Hawks. 2012 Hawks had the leagues best defense.
The 2005 team won the Super Bowl. The 2012 team didn't make the Super Bowl.
Until the 2013 team proves they're better than the 2012 squad, the 2005 team is still the best.
FO has it right. The 2005 team didn't lose one of their most critically important players to an ACL and then have to play on the road to a rested 13-3 team at 10am. Postseason results are a poor way of evaluating a team. TONS of luck involved.
Keep in mind too- the Hasselbeck/Holmgren era Seahawks never
won a playoff road game. Wilson won his very first, and should have won his second despite a pair of major handicaps.
Leroy Hill played for both teams and said the 2012 version would win by at least a touchdown.
So what you're saying is the best way to judge a team isn't by their postseason results, but by their regular season results?
What's the point in even having the postseason if it's all just luck?
The 2005 Hawks went 13-3 and went to the superbowl.
And whilst yes, we lost Clemons, if you think that one player is the reason we lost the game then maybe we should really be saying Marquand Manuel cost us the Superbowl?
He might not be as good at his position as Clemons, but the drop off from his to Eric Pruitt is far greater than Clemons to Irvin.
You're playing a game of what-ifs again, even if we didn't lose Clemons and beat Atlanta, we still have to go to San Francisco and beat them. Sure we beat them at the CLink, but the playoffs are a different beast, and it's still not gimme that we would have beaten them - especially considering they managed what we couldn't and travelled to Atlanta and won.
I *think* the 2012 Seahawks would beat the 2005 Seahawks in a one-off one-on-one match up. But until another team matches their achievement, the 2005 Hawks are still the benchmark that everyone in the team should be striving for, not the 2012 Hawks.