Would the Hawks have won the bowl without the 12th Man?

This one is a close call IMO

come on now lets not get too high on ourselves here. this is a prime example of what i don't like about the 12th man sometimes, its about the team not us.

Can the fanbase please stop blowing itself? We get it. We're awesome.

Seahawks1983":15n2f5qp said:

Can the fanbase please stop blowing itself? We get it. We're awesome.

Click to expand...

exactly, its getting to be too much. we are SEAHAWKS fans not 12th man fans. i talked about this earlier in the year, i found it really strange how before the Super Bowl everywhere you looked around the city you saw 12 banners, signs etc and barely any seahawks logos.

Tough call. There is a reason why we went to the big game in 2005 and 2014 -- home field advantage throughout the playoffs. I think the 12's help them accumulate wins at home to be in a position to win at home in the playoffs and go to the SB. Would we have beat SF in San Fran last year?

Well...
How many yards did the 12th man get?
How many passes did the 12th man catch?
How many tackles did the 12th man get?
How many interception did the 12th man get?

Won the SB, yes. Won the NFCCG. Maybe not.

:roll:

They went 6-2 on the road. 7-1 at home. Teams are generally better at home, so how much better or worse could things have really been anywhere else? A major home field advantage helps middling teams like our 2010 squad. This team won everywhere, including 10am games.

No, you are not the reason they beat San Francisco. Seattle is a better team than San Francisco and was one illegal hold away from beating SF in THEIR HOUSE just weeks earlier. If anything, certain of you guys actually cost them that game by flying that freakin' banner above their stadium. I'm with chimp. Take credit for being a loud group, but this isn't all about you.

Big difference between a quiet home game and a road game, something some of us here are conflating. Arguably there were a number of home games during the regular season with plays where the Twelves directly affected the game, and possibly the outcome. Switching those games from wins to losses would then affect our seeding in the playoffs, and put us on the road at least a game. The difference between playing a road game and a home game is a very quantifiable measurable, with a distinct advantage going to the home game.

So while we unnecessarily hype our impact as Twelves on the game, we do have at least some impact throughout the season. Look back to individual plays that were affected by the noise of the crowd and you'll be able to get at least a rough estimate of games that were affected by us.

But to truly answer the question posed in this poll, you'd then have to do comparisons with every other team out there and find out whose fan base affects more plays than others'. Once you have a breakdown of where each fan base stands, then you can make at least an educated guess on whether we affected the outcome of this season or not.

My take? I'd lean toward yes, if for no other reason than even one game dropped would have put us on the road again for the playoffs, and that road would probably have led through San Francisco, and probably after playing at Carolina. Winable? Sure. Hardly a gimme, though.

Picking one over the other diminishes both.

Seahawks1983":1wfag9ei said:

Can the fanbase please stop blowing itself? We get it. We're awesome.

Click to expand...

This

w/o even doing much thinking I voted NO.

Won the SB, Yes.

Got to the SB, No.

We BARELY squeaked one out over SF in the NFCC. If that game is in SF, I don't think we would have won. Macklemore and the fans pick the whole team up and made it hard for Kaep to hear in the 2nd half.

I truly believe a LARGE % of the team (including. staff/coaches/Paul) would wholeheartedly agree that w/o the 12s history making season, the outcome of the season would have been different.

hgwellz12":2i885c5q said:

w/o even doing much thinking I voted NO.

Click to expand...

We barely beat SF at home in the NFCCG. With that said not sure how you came to your answer.

I don't think this kind of question is possible to answer with a yes or no, black or white answer.

If Seattle had lost 1 more game, they would have been a wildcard team. Think about the epic comebacks, or the hard fought wins that came down to the last play. Seattle's margin for error was basically zero last season, we were very fortunate to have HFA in the postseason.

Was the 12th man the difference in getting home field? Since it was so razor-close, I think it probably was, but if you simulated a thousand 2013 seasons you'd have some years where Seattle could have won enough even without the crowd advantage, and some years where they could have won it all as a wildcard.

In terms of the 2013 season that actually happened, I do think the 12s were a determining factor, but it was such a close call winning the division that you could point to a lot of things that paved the way to a championship that year. Like Kellen Clemens throwing a terrible pass on the final play of the Rams game, among many other things.

seabowl":2s6ycjzn said:

hgwellz12":2s6ycjzn said:

w/o even doing much thinking I voted NO.

Click to expand...

We barely beat SF at home in the NFCCG. With that said not sure how you came to your answer.

Click to expand...

And they barely beat us in SF a few weeks earlier. On a neutral field, Vegas would probably call it even-money, and if there was a slight edge, it might go to Seattle. On a quieter "home" field, Seattle would still get the same 3 points that any other home team gets. Not sure why anyone would presume that game is an automatic loss.

This is a vague question.

Do you mean just the SB itself not having the 12th man?
Or the whole season?
Or ever?

There is something to be said psychologically of having a fan base with an identity. They feed off each other.

Without being called the 12th man, there'd still be a fan base.

It's nice that the organization credits the fans for helping them get to the promise land, but it detracts from their achievements to think it is solely passionate fans that allowed them to win it all. If the 12th man was booing the team all year, would it have prevented them from rising up? I don't know. I think this question cannot be answered and never should have been asked.

The team has to have talent and able to get some breaks along the way to win it all. Fans didn't intercept Schuab and take it to the house. Or win a slugfest in Carolina. The 12th man couldn't will the team to victory against the Cardinals so it isn't like they are some mystical creature of unlimited power.

I just take comfort in pulling for a team that has the moxie and will to slug it out with the best and come out on top. The 12th man's impact cannot be measured to determine wins or losses. The 12th man didn't lead the comeback against the Bucs nor prevent the team from falling into a deep hole in the first place.

DavidSeven":3iy5hbp2 said:

seabowl":3iy5hbp2 said:

hgwellz12":3iy5hbp2 said:

w/o even doing much thinking I voted NO.

Click to expand...

We barely beat SF at home in the NFCCG. With that said not sure how you came to your answer.

Click to expand...

And they barely beat us in SF a few weeks earlier. On a neutral field, Vegas would probably call it even-money, and if there was a slight edge, it might go to Seattle. On a quieter "home" field, Seattle would still get the same 3 points that any other home team gets. Not sure why anyone would presume that game is an automatic loss.

Click to expand...

Same can be said as to why anyone would presume an automatic win as it was stated "w/o even doing much thinking I voted NO".