If we finish 15-1...

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
If we finish 15-1...
Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:26 pm
  • Russell will be one victory away from having the best winning percentage of all time.

    He currently sits at 3rd all time with a record of 21-6 behind. Wouldn't that be awesome if Russell had the best winning percentage of all time, and of course he owns the best home winning pecentage of all time.
    User avatar
    skater18000
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 500
    Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:14 pm


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:29 pm
  • He has already won the award for stealing my heart.

    *swoon*
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24819
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:35 pm
  • Be damn hard to top Otto Graham and the other guy...68-16 or something more ridiculous.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6770
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:48 pm
  • KCHawkGirl wrote:Be damn hard to top Otto Graham and the other guy...68-16 or something more ridiculous.


    Russell's 6 games away from taking the lead though
    User avatar
    skater18000
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 500
    Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:14 pm


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 12:20 am
  • That's a record that is worthless before you retire though, since it's one you can lose again.


    I thought this thread was going to be the question I was going to ask - if the Seahawks finish 15-1 AND win the Superbowl... based on how they've played so far, how would they rank in the pantheon of great teams? Only three other teams have won 18 games in a season, only two of them won the Superbowl. The 84 49ers, the 85 Bears and the 07 Patriots.

    Are we that level? Obviously, if we win, yes IMO. But will others see it like that?
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2373
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:16 am
  • KCHawkGirl wrote:Be damn hard to top Otto Graham and the other guy...68-16 or something more ridiculous.

    Not too much impressed with the records in days of old.
    At least not after listening to Steve Largent, and hearing him go on about how much Bigger, and Faster the players are nowadays, as compared to the times that he was tearing it up, ALTHOUGH he did say that he thought that he would stillhave been able to compete with the huge and athletic monster Corners that are now playing the games, but he said that he had his doubts that he could have been as effective, and made the same kind of impact if he had to face the same kind of players back in his hay-day.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3511
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:52 am
  • skater18000 wrote:Russell will be one victory away from having the best winning percentage of all time.

    He currently sits at 3rd all time with a record of 21-6 behind. Wouldn't that be awesome if Russell had the best winning percentage of all time, and of course he owns the best home winning pecentage of all time.


    I could care less about individual stats and honors. Just give me a Lombardi. That's all I want.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 562
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:59 am
  • themunn wrote:That's a record that is worthless before you retire though, since it's one you can lose again.


    I thought this thread was going to be the question I was going to ask - if the Seahawks finish 15-1 AND win the Superbowl... based on how they've played so far, how would they rank in the pantheon of great teams? Only three other teams have won 18 games in a season, only two of them won the Superbowl. The 84 49ers, the 85 Bears and the 07 Patriots.

    Are we that level? Obviously, if we win, yes IMO. But will others see it like that?


    At 18-1? They'd better.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10679
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 7:26 am
  • scutterhawk wrote:Not too much impressed with the records in days of old.
    At least not after listening to Steve Largent, and hearing him go on about how much Bigger, and Faster the players are nowadays, as compared to the times that he was tearing it up


    Theory of Relativity??
    Image

    "Everyone hath a plan... until they get punthed in the fathe." -- Mike Tython on the 2014 Theattle Theahawkth.
    User avatar
    LawlessHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1064
    Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Tonasket, WA to Temecula, CA


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 11:15 am
  • LawlessHawk wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:Not too much impressed with the records in days of old.
    At least not after listening to Steve Largent, and hearing him go on about how much Bigger, and Faster the players are nowadays, as compared to the times that he was tearing it up


    Theory of Relativity??



    I'm just the opposite, seeing these older records and looking at what they had to work with in those days. Some really bug me like the most yards by a running back. they gave the record to a guy that barely broke it in 16 games while OJ made his yards in a 14 game season. I think they should show that difference.

    I think records like that they should list as yards gained in 14 & 16 game seasons.

    :les:
    Image
    So close to the real thing.
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18538
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 11:30 am
  • The Radish wrote:
    LawlessHawk wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:Not too much impressed with the records in days of old.
    At least not after listening to Steve Largent, and hearing him go on about how much Bigger, and Faster the players are nowadays, as compared to the times that he was tearing it up


    Theory of Relativity??



    I'm just the opposite, seeing these older records and looking at what they had to work with in those days. Some really bug me like the most yards by a running back. they gave the record to a guy that barely broke it in 16 games while OJ made his yards in a 14 game season. I think they should show that difference.

    I think records like that they should list as yards gained in 14 & 16 game seasons.

    :les:

    Most definitely it's just like baseball with the 154/162 game seasons. Didn't the NFL start out with 12 game seasons?
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6770
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 11:34 am
  • The Radish wrote:
    LawlessHawk wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:Not too much impressed with the records in days of old.
    At least not after listening to Steve Largent, and hearing him go on about how much Bigger, and Faster the players are nowadays, as compared to the times that he was tearing it up


    Theory of Relativity??



    I'm just the opposite, seeing these older records and looking at what they had to work with in those days. Some really bug me like the most yards by a running back. they gave the record to a guy that barely broke it in 16 games while OJ made his yards in a 14 game season. I think they should show that difference.

    I think records like that they should list as yards gained in 14 & 16 game seasons.

    :les:


    One thing I always point out when somebody downgrades stats and performances of players of the old days is that if that player had been born in today's evolution of mankind and with all the equipment, training, technology and all-around know-how to tune an athlete, they would be even better.
    "Authority should derive from the consent of the governed, not from the threat of force."

    - Barbie from Toy Story 3
    User avatar
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2117
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:47 pm


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 11:50 am
  • Go watch some film of NFL games in the 80s, or worse, the 70s.

    DBs were practically allowed to impale someone on a pickaxe in an attempt to stop people from catching the ball.

    Largent would have flourished in a system where you can barely impede the progress of a WR vs an older era where you could literally closeline receivers to keep them from being able to catch the ball.

    Players are certainly bigger and faster, but the rules of the game are so slanted in favor of the offense that the records don't matter anymore. Offensive players get more possessions because current rules give them more opportunities for first downs and for the TDs that follow. Remember when Kurt Warner was putting up 300+ yd passing games routinely and it was this amazing accomplishment? Now QBs routinely rip past the 300 yd mark and nobody bats an eyelash.

    I truly believe that offensive production is inflated by the changes in rules and officiating practices (as well as # of games).

    Largent would have done just fine.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 686
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 12:57 pm
  • TwistedHusky wrote:Go watch some film of NFL games in the 80s, or worse, the 70s.

    DBs were practically allowed to impale someone on a pickaxe in an attempt to stop people from catching the ball.

    Largent would have flourished in a system where you can barely impede the progress of a WR vs an older era where you could literally closeline receivers to keep them from being able to catch the ball.

    Players are certainly bigger and faster, but the rules of the game are so slanted in favor of the offense that the records don't matter anymore. Offensive players get more possessions because current rules give them more opportunities for first downs and for the TDs that follow. Remember when Kurt Warner was putting up 300+ yd passing games routinely and it was this amazing accomplishment? Now QBs routinely rip past the 300 yd mark and nobody bats an eyelash.

    I truly believe that offensive production is inflated by the changes in rules and officiating practices (as well as # of games).

    Largent would have done just fine.


    Great post, but in addition, all things be equal, Largent himself playing in this age would also be stronger and more 'fit' if you like, in line with current team strength and conditioning practices. It's interesting to imagine him stronger and yes, a bit faster...and man-handled less.
    User avatar
    Lieutenant Dan
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 385
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:52 am
    Location: Memphis (Displaced Seattleite)


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 1:07 pm
  • themunn wrote:That's a record that is worthless before you retire though, since it's one you can lose again.


    I thought this thread was going to be the question I was going to ask - if the Seahawks finish 15-1 AND win the Superbowl... based on how they've played so far, how would they rank in the pantheon of great teams? Only three other teams have won 18 games in a season, only two of them won the Superbowl. The 84 49ers, the 85 Bears and the 07 Patriots.

    Are we that level? Obviously, if we win, yes IMO. But will others see it like that?

    Yep and nobody talks about the 1998 Vikings, the 2004 Steelers, or the 2011 Packers...gota have the Lombardi!
    Image
    "Make good teams look bad and make bad teams look terrible!" -Michael Robinson
    User avatar
    BlueTalons
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1120
    Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 11:36 am
    Location: Spanaway, WA


Re: If we finish 15-1...
Thu Nov 21, 2013 1:33 pm
  • BlueTalons wrote:Yep and nobody talks about the 1998 Vikings, the 2004 Steelers, or the 2011 Packers...gota have the Lombardi!



    :13:
    User avatar
    The_Z_Man
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 555
    Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:57 pm




It is currently Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:38 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information