Would anything less than an 8-0 home record be disappointing

3Girls'HawkDad · Mar 16, 2013

Wow! That is an easy home schedule. 14-2

themunn · Mar 16, 2013

kearly":30s46crn said:
And while it's fair to read all this and think "homer!", the fact is, Seattle will never have a better collection of talent than they will in 2013. After next year, salary cap realities will begin to set in and we'll gradually start losing players. Soon we'll have to pay Okung and Thomas and they won't be cheap. Then we'll have to sign Sherman to megabucks. Then it's probably Joe Flacco money for Wilson. We'll probably have something like 70% of our 2013 talent level in 2016, most likely. And around that same time, you'll probably see Lynch's career winding down. If there is a year to make a run at "23-0", 2013 is the year to do it.

How much do you expect Okung to get?
Given he signed a 6 year contract worth 48 million it shouldn't be terrifically more than that (and also, given it was a 6 year contract he probably won't get extended until halfway through year 5, ie mid-2014).
His contract will probably be dictated by what Jake Long gets (4x pro-bowler, 2x all-pro), who is looking for somewhere in the region of 5 years 55 million.
Considering Okung is a pretty down to earth guy I'd be surprised if he was "insulted" by a 5 year 50m deal (a little less to stay on a team of quality, rather than signing with the Dolphins or Rams), which isn't much more than we're paying already, so cap figure shouldn't change too much.

ET is a different story, his contract was only 5 years 21 million, so he should be getting extended sometime this season, in all likelihood that figure will be doubled to match the Goldson deal, though I'm sure our contract guys will try and negotiate ET down a bit with the proviso that they can use the money to extend other skill players.

Guys DO want to be the best paid, but they also want to win. If you go into negotiations offering players good money (I mean, 35 million over 5 years is hardly something scoff at), but with the understanding that the 7 million saved compared to Goldson means they'll be more likely to keep Sherman, for example, players will be more willing to listen.

Sherman mentioned it when asked if he wanted to be the highest paid corner on NFL am, he said something which translated along the lines of "it'd be nice, but I'm not going to jeopardise the future of the team by being greedy"

I think team strength is a major reason we got Avril and Bennett on such great deals, though the latter is clearly aware that if he puts in a decent season this year he'll be a free agent in a much more expensive market next year.

razgriz737 · Mar 16, 2013

themunn":1dqmv7q5 said:
I think team strength is a major reason we got Avril and Bennett on such great deals

Exactly. The Jags and Bills wouldn't have gotten deals like those.

kearly · Mar 16, 2013

True, Okung will probably get a continuation of his current pay. Which just proves how insane the old rookie pay scale was.

kearly · Mar 16, 2013

Things change year to year, but it's worth noting that just two teams on Seattle's 2013 home game docket finished with a winning record last year. Seattle actually played both of those teams in Seattle last season. Seattle won both games, and won by a combined score of 72-33.

A London Hawk · Mar 16, 2013

What's the unbeaten at home for X games record?

debevemos · Mar 16, 2013

A London Hawk":73ijtrop said:
What's the unbeaten at home for X games record?

I immediately thought of the same thing....

Wikipedia":73ijtrop said:
Most Consecutive Home Games Won, 30

New England Patriots 2008–2011

Most Consecutive Home Games Won (including playoffs), 31

Miami Dolphins 1971–1974

bestfightstory · Mar 16, 2013

Keep in mind that the undefeated Russell Wilson streak I mentioned included the 2 preseason games he started last year.

Obviously, they don't "count" but the significance is that he has NEVER walked off the field in Seattle as a loser in the entirety of his professional career.

8philngood · Mar 16, 2013

Keep in mind, we were extremely healthy last year - probably the most healthy that I can ever remember.

*I'll be mad if we lose a game, but it'd make more sense to me if we are missing a key piece (like Beast or RW)

JSeahawks · Mar 16, 2013

I'd rather go 8-0 on the road. And 7-1 at home.

SalishHawkFan · Mar 16, 2013

I won't be that disappointed, because the Rams are getting much better and that will be a tough battle. It's the road schedule that's brutal and will probably keep people saying we can't win on the road.

themunn · Mar 16, 2013

bestfightstory":1lyi8071 said:
Keep in mind that the undefeated Russell Wilson streak I mentioned included the 2 preseason games he started last year.

Obviously, they don't "count" but the significance is that he has NEVER walked off the field in Seattle as a loser in the entirety of his professional career.

I thought I replied earlier to this but apparently not... agreed he has never walked off of the the field in Seattle as a loser... but he didn't start the game against Tennessee

bestfightstory · Mar 16, 2013

themunn":2p7em003 said:
bestfightstory":2p7em003 said:

Keep in mind that the undefeated Russell Wilson streak I mentioned included the 2 preseason games he started last year.

Obviously, they don't "count" but the significance is that he has NEVER walked off the field in Seattle as a loser in the entirety of his professional career.

Click to expand...

I thought I replied earlier to this but apparently not... agreed he has never walked off of the the field in Seattle as a loser... but he didn't start the game against Tennessee

Aha-good catch. So RW is 9-0 as a starter in all games played in Seattle and the team is undefeated/10-0 at home since RW arrived.

SeAhAwKeR4life · Mar 16, 2013

bellingerga":35im8e6u said:
All Teams lose games but somehow seahawks fans don't seem to realize that sometimes. Can't wait for the epic meltdown of doom on this board when that happens.

WTF?!? The Seahawks are never going to lose another game, of that I'm certain. Russel Wilson will bring Seattle eternal perfection! I think you need to go adjust your attitude dude! :sarcasm_off:

FreshlySnipes · Mar 17, 2013

no I would be ok with 7-1, even 6-2 depending on the schedule and the teams we lost to. Obviously 8-0 is the benchmark but we cant get greedy here. If we expect to be a superbowl contender we need to win At Least 6 home games and be more than great on the road.

jewhawk · Mar 17, 2013

The people saying 8-0 at home should be expected are drastically underestimating the variance of NFL games. If we are 90% to win each home game, we would be less than 50% to go 8-0 in those games. And 90% is a ridiculous over-estimation for how likely we are to win each game. A 90% favorite to win translates to a 17 point favorite in Vegas which is incredibly rare. From 2000 to 2011, there were a total of 13 NFL games where one team was favored by 17 or more. If you say we are 75% to win (translates to 8.5 point favorites) the 49ers and Saints games and 90% to win the others, we would be less than 30% to go 8-0 at home. If you say we are on average 80% to win each home game (translates to 10.5 point favorites), we would be less than 17% to go 8-0 at home.

bestfightstory · Mar 17, 2013

FreshlySnipes":3smfbi2d said:
no I would be ok with a superbowl.

Hey, Snipes, did you finish your research project?

bestfightstory · Mar 17, 2013

jewhawk":2b3e6xaw said:
The people saying 8-0 at home should be expected are drastically underestimating the variance of NFL games. If we are 90% to win each home game, we would be less than 50% to go 8-0 in those games. And 90% is a ridiculous over-estimation for how likely we are to win each game. A 90% favorite to win translates to a 17 point favorite in Vegas which is incredibly rare. From 2000 to 2011, there were a total of 13 NFL games where one team was favored by 17 or more. If you say we are 75% to win (translates to 8.5 point favorites) the 49ers and Saints games and 90% to win the others, we would be less than 30% to go 8-0 at home. If you say we are on average 80% to win each home game (translates to 10.5 point favorites), we would be less than 17% to go 8-0 at home.

Interesting take. I am curious where you get these percentages. I have never seen vegas lines equated that way.

jewhawk · Mar 17, 2013

bestfightstory":d5y82cz0 said:
jewhawk":d5y82cz0 said:

The people saying 8-0 at home should be expected are drastically underestimating the variance of NFL games. If we are 90% to win each home game, we would be less than 50% to go 8-0 in those games. And 90% is a ridiculous over-estimation for how likely we are to win each game. A 90% favorite to win translates to a 17 point favorite in Vegas which is incredibly rare. From 2000 to 2011, there were a total of 13 NFL games where one team was favored by 17 or more. If you say we are 75% to win (translates to 8.5 point favorites) the 49ers and Saints games and 90% to win the others, we would be less than 30% to go 8-0 at home. If you say we are on average 80% to win each home game (translates to 10.5 point favorites), we would be less than 17% to go 8-0 at home.

Click to expand...

Interesting take. I am curious where you get these percentages. I have never seen vegas lines equated that way.

http://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/

bestfightstory · Mar 17, 2013

Thanks.

Would anything less than an 8-0 home record be disappointing

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Active member

Active member

New member

Active member

Similar threads