Top Seeds are 2 out of 12 this Century

I'll maintain that #1 is not particularly important, but homefield advantage is, a bye and only playing a maximum of 1 game on the road is a far easier road than playing two road games or even 3.

Of the 26 teams that have made it to the big game since 2000, 17 of them have had a first round bye followed by a home game.

Once you get to that game, history has shown us that nothing you've done until then matters.
But you can't win it til you're in it

It's all about the easiest path. First round bye and 2 home games is the easiest path. Other teams at home don't have near the advantage we have.

Hasn't there been 24 #1 seeds since '00? 2 from each, 12 postseasons, 24 #1 seeds.

ChrisB Bacon":21f73qzv said:

Hasn't there been 24 #1 seeds since '00? 2 from each, 12 postseasons, 24 #1 seeds.

Click to expand...

Yeah-I went through the same thought process and was about to type that response when it occurred to me that, although there have been 24 #1 seeds, there have only been 12 Super Bowl Champions. The 2 of 12 is a reflection of that. That's what the OP is getting at.

I almost wish the number was zero. I enjoy that we do things never done before...

Oh well, better lose a few games then.

While those stats are interesting I keep going back to this same question: How does anything that happened before this season matter for this season? I say very little.

One thing that concerns me was that if the Falcons were to upset the Saints this Thursday, we win our next two games vs. Saints and Niners, and the Panthers lose one of their next three (which includes a game vs. the Saints), we could mathematically cinch HFA with 3 games to play. That would make it a full month between meaningful games. I'm not sure I'd want that to happen.

We have only made it to that game as a 1 seed, so I'll take meh chances again

ChrisB Bacon":9xclh4l3 said:

Hasn't there been 24 #1 seeds since '00? 2 from each, 12 postseasons, 24 #1 seeds.

Click to expand...

2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

13?

And that's NFL seasons, since the superbowls have obviously been played in the following years of 2001-2013

Id guess top seed overall in the NFL. Weren't we the top seed in 2005?

Traditionally the problem with getting the first round bye has been rust, especially since most of the time, teams that have the first round bye have generally locked up a playoff spot for several weeks prior and were coasting. Indy was notorious for this, but even our own 2005 Seahawks had symptoms of this when they played Washington in Jan 2006.

In too many cases a hot wildcard team could and did play better and knock out the team that coming off an extended vacation played lethargically until it was too late.

I don't think that will be a problem with this year's Seahawks given our players and coaches.

I don't see that as predictive.

Too many teams have captured lightning in a bottle and seen mediocre teams land the #1 seed. We've seen the genesis for our kind of record going back to last season. This isn't a team predicated on luck and an easy schedule/division. This 10-1 record has been well earned. Seattle isn't a 9-7 team talent wise where fortune has gifted us 4 wins. It's a dominant team, comfortable with adversity and not prone to beating itself when games get tight.

I'd also say this is a team that preaches the right things, in terms of finishing and toughness. Teams that won as wild card entries were generally teams that either got healthy late (as we are now) or teams with exceptional fortitude, mental toughness (which we are now), and a good touch of desperation. We handle adversity as well or better than every other team in this league.

You can't say that about many of the #1 overall seeds in the 2000s. Seattle is not a flawed team with a glaring Achilles heel. It's a team sublimely balanced and comfortable winning in any fashion and playing whatever game a team wants to try to dictate. I don't think there is another team in the NFL that can really claim that. While it's true, some team could just be ridiculously hot heading into the playoffs (Carolina may be that team) -- the fact is, we're extremely well built to counter that kind of team.

Its just about not getting complacent and getting/being hot at the right time. I trust the leaders of the team, especially/specifically wilson, to prevent any complacency issues we could encounter.

The couple wild card Super Bowl winners merely serve to give hope to those teams that couldn't get it done to win their division. Look at how many wild cards have won it throughout history.

My feeling is that teams that make #1 often are able to do it because of baby schedules. Just look at the Falcons last year. No way anyone thought they were far and away the best team in the league the way their record made it look.

A truly dominant, dynastic team wins the top speed and powers through the Super Bowl. Lucking our way to a Super Bowl win isn't my dream, anyway. I think Carroll might be smart and innovative enough to produce a dynasty amid the fog of parity.

I tend to think that #1 seeds result from cake schedules, while the lower seeds are more battle-tested and therefore, counterintuitively, more ready for playoff showdowns. Seattle, however, is both.

HFA doesn't extend through the superbowl. I'd much rather see stats on how #1 seeds have done through their respective conference playoffs. The reason we want the HFA is not because it will help us WIN the superbowl, it's because it gives us the edge to GET TO the superbowl. Don't mistake getting there with winning it. Odds of their being a Jets/Giants team in the superbowl are fairly low, so there is no true HFA in the superbowl. The idea is to get the best route for your team to be successful in the playoffs. Nobody holds a better HFA than the Seahawks. This is why we need HFA, not to win the superbowl, but to make our odds of getting there increase. Once you get there, then everything is gone, W/L records don't matter, nothing matters except what happens on that day.

Possibly a more recent factor has been that there are now two wildcard teams and four divisions. Many times, the wildcard in the #5 slot is a much better team than the division winner in the #4 slot. They take out the division winner and advance to play the #1 team. Meanwhile, the #3 team advances to play the #2 team. That #3 team may not be as good as that #5 wildcard team, meaning the #1 has a tougher matchup than the #2.

This year, we're most likely to face Carolina, which would be the #5 team. That's the toughest matchup we could face IMO. That's why so many wildcard teams have slipped in and so many #1's have fallen. Last year, we were the #5 team and nobody wanted to face us. We knocked off the #4 and nearly knocked off the #1 seed.

In the days of three divisions, the Wildcards played each other first. They literally were playing the 5th best team in the playoffs, not the 8-8 winner of the NFCLeast. And the #2 and #3 got byes. meaning the #1 had the unique advantage of being the only team with two weeks rest facing an opponent who did not have two weeks rest. In those days, wildcards beating #1's was rare.