Are the Seahawks one of the 3 best teams in the NFC?

[knownone]

Am I crazy for assuming that we're not only a top 3 team but that we haven't even hit on all cylinders yet?.

I do think we're just starting to hit our stride............so if we played the Bears again on a neutral field? I think we win.

But that's the thing about the NFL, unless it's the SB or Phoenix in December when half the crowd is the opposing team's fans.........there is no neutral field.

We lost to the Bears, they have a better record, so IMO we're squarely in the 4-6 range.

1. Saints
2. Rams
3. Bears
4. Panthers, Hawks and Vikings (choose your order).

The thing is the Bears have played the second easiest schedule in the NFL, the Vikings have played the 9th easiest schedule, Carolina the 13th easiest. Seattle's played the 3rd toughest.

Sure the Bears beat the Vikings and us before we had found our identity but are they a better team than Seattle is right now? Remember, in week two we randomly decided to stop running the ball despite having success with Carson, we didn't have KJ, Baldwin, Fluker, or Sweezy and our O-line couldn't block anyone. If we played them in Chicago next week I think we beat them by 7.

 

[knownone]

Rams, Saints, Chicago, Minny and Carolina are better "on paper" than us. We are more in the Dallas/Wash/GB/Philly range talent wise. But we have wilson and wagner. And that sometimes is the difference.

We are cobbling together a solid season but I don't think we are firmly entrenched near the top. We can play with anyone, but even the 2011 Seahawks could do that. We need to finish the season strong and show some growth on defense to really move higher up the chain.

How exactly do you judge talent on paper though? It's seemingly arbitrary. I don't look at the Vikings or Carolina and see a more talented team. Statistically speaking, despite playing a tougher schedule Seattle ranks ahead of both Carolina and the Vikings in both offensive and defensive efficiency. The only advantage the Bears have is in defensive efficiency but they've only played 2 top 10 offense (#7,#5) and those offenses averaged 31 points against their defense. Seattle's played 6 top 10 offenses (#2,#2,#3,#5,#8,#9) who averaged 28.5 against our defense. If the Rams put up 30+ on the Bears, I honestly don't think they have a better defense than us, they've just benefited from playing 6 games against bottom 10 offenses and a cupcake schedule.

 

[Steve2222]

How are the Panthers better than us on paper exactly? Chicago might be better than us on paper, but our QB compared to theirs levels the playing field tenfold.

 

[zetes]

Rams and Saints are way above the Hawks so as one poster mentioned the gap between those 2 and the rest is quite big. I think the Bears right now are CLEARLY the #3 team right now. The Bears are playing really well and dominating even with a back up qb on the road. Their defense is probably the best in NFC too. I think Hawks, Vikings and Panthers are after those top 3. The Hawks beat the Panthers but just barely you could argue. The Vikings game will be tough although Vikings aren't clicking like they did last year with what you could argue is even better talent. It should be a fun December.
Z.

 

[johnnyfever]

Rams D is a joke, other than the D Line.

That joke beat us twice, so then what does that say about us?

 

[Palmegranite]

Shoot, it's just fun being in the mix this year. And certainly not expected.

I can tell you for certain that this isn't the mindset of RW and can't be the sentiment of the rest of the team.

He knows they are now playing tough and at the highest level. I'm having a hard time coming up with a team the Seahawks couldn't beat right now. A playoff birth is step 1. We'll see where they land re 3rd, 2nd or best in the NFC.

 

[DomeHawk]

We are good enough to play every team close BUT we can't blow anyone out, AND that concerns me. If we are relying on 4th qtr nail-biters to win it can go either way.

We need to get up early in some games or we are going to be in trouble.

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

Rams D is a joke, other than the D Line.

That joke beat us twice, so then what does that say about us?

It says I hope we get a grudge match playoff game. :evil: :evil: :evil:

 

[Fade]

Trubisky has to take a step forward and there is a lot of unknown with him in terms of how he will perform in the post-season. If he lays an egg in the Wild Card round then the Seahawks will be the undisputed 3rd best team in the NFC. If he plays well, then the Bears are the undisputed 3rd best team in the NFC.

Trubisky is the wild card in this discussion.

3rd/4th: Bears & Seahawks.

5th best team The Vikings: I don't trust Cousins, or there aging defense, and they have a bad O-Line.
6th best team The Panthers: Old as hell defense, Ron Rivera is John Fox in disguise.
The NFC least is just that.


01 Saints
02 Rams
03 Bears
04 Seahawks
05 Vikings
06 Panthers
07 Cowboys
08 Falcons
09 Packers
10 Eagles
11 Redskins (Healthy Alex Smith = 7th Best)( If Colt McCoy plays well down the stretch I will move them up.)
12 Lions
13 Buccaneers
14 Giants
15 Cardinals
16 49ers

 

[themunn]

We are good enough to play every team close BUT we can't blow anyone out, AND that concerns me. If we are relying on 4th qtr nail-biters to win it can go either way.

We need to get up early in some games or we are going to be in trouble.

That's the case with most teams though. We blew out the Raiders, and were 24-6 up and 28-7 up against the Cowboys and Lions in the 4th quarter, both of which we won by a comfortable margin. The other 3 wins have been a tough game we pulled through against a divisional opponent, and the Packers & Panthers, who are both good teams that are rarely blown out.
We have games against the Niners and Cardinals again coming up which should give us an opportunity to demonstrate winning comfortably- albeit there is no such thing as a comfortable win against a divisional opponent (2012 excluded!)

 

[Mad Dog]

Rams, Saints, Chicago, Minny and Carolina are better "on paper" than us. We are more in the Dallas/Wash/GB/Philly range talent wise. But we have wilson and wagner. And that sometimes is the difference.

We are cobbling together a solid season but I don't think we are firmly entrenched near the top. We can play with anyone, but even the 2011 Seahawks could do that. We need to finish the season strong and show some growth on defense to really move higher up the chain.

How exactly do you judge talent on paper though? It's seemingly arbitrary. I don't look at the Vikings or Carolina and see a more talented team. Statistically speaking, despite playing a tougher schedule Seattle ranks ahead of both Carolina and the Vikings in both offensive and defensive efficiency. The only advantage the Bears have is in defensive efficiency but they've only played 2 top 10 offense (#7,#5) and those offenses averaged 31 points against their defense. Seattle's played 6 top 10 offenses (#2,#2,#3,#5,#8,#9) who averaged 28.5 against our defense. If the Rams put up 30+ on the Bears, I honestly don't think they have a better defense than us, they've just benefited from playing 6 games against bottom 10 offenses and a cupcake schedule.

You just look at the players on each team. More pro bowlers and players with history of being top players. Our guys still have to prove that (other than a handful of guys like Wilson, wagner, Clark, Baldwin and Lockett).

I think our coaching has been fabulous compared to Vikings and Panthers. I think that accounts for our statistical edge. Having Wilson and Wagner might also be huge difference makers that other teams can't compare to.

 

[Chapow]

Rams D is a joke, other than the D Line.

That joke beat us twice, so then what does that say about us?

He said that D, not that team.

That D gave up 31 points to us, twice. I don't think their D is the reason why they won those games.

The Rams have a very, very good offense and a surprisingly poor defense. I wouldn't call it a joke, but their D is no where near as good as pretty much everyone thought they would be coming into this season.

If their offense falters at all, they are going to be in trouble.

 

[RCATES]

If we beat Minnesota then possibly yes. At the end of the day we still lost to the Bears.

 

[Bandwagon76]

How did the Hawks look when Kendrick’s was playing?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Trubisky has to take a step forward and there is a lot of unknown with him in terms of how he will perform in the post-season. If he lays an egg in the Wild Card round then the Seahawks will be the undisputed 3rd best team in the NFC. If he plays well, then the Bears are the undisputed 3rd best team in the NFC.

I'd love a rematch with the Bears in the playoffs, even in Chicago.

- Fluker in the lineup and the run game in full effect
- Cold weather
- Trubisky's first or 2nd playoff game

I'd like our chances in that game.

 

[Seymour]

How did the Hawks look when Kendrick’s was playing?

Better!! :2thumbs:

 

[Bigpumpkin]

Our performance in these final five games will show the rest of the league what kind of team we really are. If we beat the Niners and Cards by at least ten points and the Vikings by seven points......people will take notice. If we play tough with KC. If Russ and the rest of the team can stay uninjured........no one will want to face us!!! :rumble:

 

[Hasselbeck]

Not with this defense. I would give the Bears the edge over us because of that.

They're dangerous though, and as tired of a cliche as it is in the sports world - the Seahawks really are a team I doubt many teams want to see from here on out.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

4th is about right.

Can't say you're better than the Saints, Rams, and Bears right now.

You can make case for being better than all of the NFC east teams, the Panthers and the Vikings (although still need to prove it).

 

[bighawk]

They could be if the defense can stop the run more consistently. The offense is fine. They should play Jones Reed Ford in a rotation with Stephens.