"Seahawks are not a good road team"

[Birdfinger]

The Colts weren't going through 2 time zones to the east against the ninnirs, they were coming west, a lot easier on the phyckie.

:les:

Hey... watch the language, phycker!

 

[v1rotv2]

I wouldn't say we're a bad road team anymore, but we probably have the largest drop-off of any team going from home to road.

Yeah, from winning by 3 scores to winning by one.

:mrgreen:

I think that has to do more with the front 7 of the defenses we've faced while being banged up on the Oline part of the time. An average strength road schedule and a healthier Oline would show a different outcome.

 

[formido]

Indy went into SF missing 2 starters on their o-line. They played well in both halves which cannot be said for us in either of our two games on the road this year. I don't think he's being lazy so much as agreeing with commonly held opinion outside of SEA fans.

We found a way to win but we didn't look like Indy did in either of our road wins. There is a HUGE difference in how their performance differs from ours (when considering perception).

And anybody who wants to contradict me, go read the game day thread or a transcript from live chat at the end of the first half when we were @Houston.

What the mediots fail to realize is that the niners just aren't a very good team. They'll be the last to figure it out.

Yet they were only down by two points going into the 4th quarter here in SEA, correct? That said, we struggled for three quarters on offense and finally put the game to bed in the 4th quarter (with some help from the same defense that's bailed us out on the road).

Surely some of you think we can be good fans while acknowledging that our offense has been far from "good" on the road or at home against stout defenses like Carolina, San Fran and Houston.

When Seattle is singled out as being not good on the road, the implication is "compared to other teams" or "compared to other elite teams". That implication is false.

Being good on the road doesn't mean dominating exactly the way you do at home, at least it's not used that way with every other team in the NFL. Being within a score at worst and winning half or more of them seems like a good standard. Seattle is doing that and then some. If Seattle starts dominating teams on the road, then there's a very good chance Seattle will set records which imply that it is in the conversation for best team in NFL history. "Best team in NFL history" seems like an unusually high standard just to be considered good on the road.

As some people have noted, it's really just the disparity in performance home and away and there's nothing we'll ever be able to do about it no matter how good we are on the road in absolute terms. If we won by 100 at home and "only" 50 on the road, analysts will say we're vulnerable at home because it's comparatively true, analysts are prone to exaggeration, and the story line "Seattle will cruise to victory again" doesn't provide much conflict or suspense.

 

[mikeak]

Redskins - Seattle - first quarter 14-0
Falcons - Seattle - First half 20-0
Panthers - Seattle - First half 7-3
Houston - Seattle - First half 20-3

We may be winning on the road right now as opposed to before but we are clearly behind after the first half. To ignore that early starts, travelling and lack of homecrowd support somehow hurts this team is ignoring facts.

Sure we normally come back and win it but guess who has more comeback wins than Seattle and RW during the past two years? Yep that is right it is Luck and Indy. You can say what you want about weak schedules etc but it is reasonable to believe that Indy will take an early lead and we will claw our way back and it can go either way in the end. If we played them at home I believe we are smoking them....

 

[Laloosh]

Indy went into SF missing 2 starters on their o-line. They played well in both halves which cannot be said for us in either of our two games on the road this year. I don't think he's being lazy so much as agreeing with commonly held opinion outside of SEA fans.

We found a way to win but we didn't look like Indy did in either of our road wins. There is a HUGE difference in how their performance differs from ours (when considering perception).

And anybody who wants to contradict me, go read the game day thread or a transcript from live chat at the end of the first half when we were @Houston.

What the mediots fail to realize is that the niners just aren't a very good team. They'll be the last to figure it out.

Yet they were only down by two points going into the 4th quarter here in SEA, correct? That said, we struggled for three quarters on offense and finally put the game to bed in the 4th quarter (with some help from the same defense that's bailed us out on the road).

Surely some of you think we can be good fans while acknowledging that our offense has been far from "good" on the road or at home against stout defenses like Carolina, San Fran and Houston.

When Seattle is singled out as being not good on the road, the implication is "compared to other teams" or "compared to other elite teams". That implication is false.

Being good on the road doesn't mean dominating exactly the way you do at home, at least it's not used that way with every other team in the NFL. Being within a score at worst and winning half or more of them seems like a good standard. Seattle is doing that and then some. If Seattle starts dominating teams on the road, then there's a very good chance Seattle will set records which imply that it is in the conversation for best team in NFL history. "Best team in NFL history" seems like an unusually high standard just to be considered good on the road.

As some people have noted, it's really just the disparity in performance home and away and there's nothing we'll ever be able to do about it no matter how good we are on the road in absolute terms. If we won by 100 at home and "only" 50 on the road, analysts will say we're vulnerable at home because it's comparatively true, analysts are prone to exaggeration, and the story line "Seattle will cruise to victory again" doesn't provide much conflict or suspense.

No, they wouldn't. That's simply not a realistic thing to say.

The discussions about how good we are on the road or at home have generally been in direct reference to either 1) the team we face(d) during the week in question or 2) the Denver Broncos who, while playing some fairly craptastic teams, look amazing thus far.

The fact that we're still in the top 2 in virtually all power rankings validates what we all think, which is that we're a really good team. What it doesn't validate however, is whether or not we can continue to win given our offense's performance from week to week (except when we're playing the worst team in the league).

 

[OffensivelyPC]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

 

[mikeak]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

We are one or two first downs away from losing at Houston. We are a fumble away from having to execute a GW drive against the Panthers. Yes we were the better team in the second half, yes we won so we are the better team but I personally don't think you can just look at 2-0 and say oh the Seahawks - fantastic road them - unbeaten. Just like I would say you can't say crappy road team if we had been 1-1.

When we can go on the road and play consistent throughout a game (something I thought we did more against the Panthers than Houston) then we can figure out if we are a good or bad road team......

with that said if we are 3-0 on the road after Indy then nothing else matters

 

[bigtrain21]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

Then how can people use the narrative that the Seahawks are a bad road team. We are 2-0 on the road this year. You can't have it both ways. It makes no sense. Not as dominant as at home I can understand but that applies to every team in the NFL.

 

[ivotuk]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

Then how can people use the narrative that the Seahawks are a bad road team. We are 2-0 on the road this year. You can't have it both ways. It makes no sense. Not as dominant as at home I can understand but that applies to every team in the NFL.

Nailed it!

 

[HawkMeat]

That's our reputation. Reputations are hard things to shake. Schlereth is using lazy analysis but most NFL teams are weaker away from home and as strong as we are at home our dropoff is (historically) more significant.

This.

You don't shake reputation with a a couple road wins this year, and a few last year. Most teams are not great road teams too. This will be said until the hawks win consistently this season on the way to the superb owl. No reason to look deep into it. History is changing. Plus it is far tastier to see these analysts proven wrong with road wins stacking up.

Go HAWKS

 

[had2bhawk]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

Agree, we all witnessed a huge change in just a half a ball game!

 

[brettb3]

Indy went into SF missing 2 starters on their o-line. They played well in both halves which cannot be said for us in either of our two games on the road this year. I don't think he's being lazy so much as agreeing with commonly held opinion outside of SEA fans.

We found a way to win but we didn't look like Indy did in either of our road wins. There is a HUGE difference in how their performance differs from ours (when considering perception).

And anybody who wants to contradict me, go read the game day thread or a transcript from live chat at the end of the first half when we were @Houston.

Okay, I'll bite. SF isn't that good of a team. They have some serious weaknesses as we proved when they came to the clink. The 49ers beat a bad Rams team, so what?

I doubt Indy could go to Carolina or Houston and beat them by 20. In fact I think they would lose to the Texans and maybe squeak by the Panthers, but that's a maybe.

I agree with the poster who stated "Seattle is a good road team, not a great one, but good." They haven't been a bad road team for a while now.

In what way have you contradicted anything that I said? We went on the road and played questionable ball on offense for at least an entire half in BOTH of our road games. Indy was consistently good in both halves against a team that we had to play tight for 3 quarters at home. Again, we're talking about perception here.

If you're an Indy fan looking at these Seahawks, why wouldn't you question how beatable they were given their slow starts on the road? Our own members were freaking the hell out over the course of the first half last week.

I don't see why anyone would question the "perception" that we struggle on the road? Even if we won, we struggled to get going. Most of America thinks we were lucky to come out with one or both wins because our defense basically had to bail us out.

This doesn't mean we're a lesser team, just means we've struggled on the road... we have struggled, on the road... we have... struggled... on the road. Have we not?

Wouldn't it be just as valid to discuss how Indy has looked at home so far? They lost to an okay but probably not good Miami team (yes, they actually lost, something the Seahawks have yet to do on the road), and needed a fourth quarter comeback to squeak by a woeful Raiders team. So if pundits are going to predict a Seahawks loss because they are a "bad" road team, then one can just as easily conclude that the Seahawks will win because the Colts are a poor home team. But I haven't heard anyone say that.

 

[Laloosh]

I think you're over emphasizing the Indy part of my post. They were simply an example of a team who actually performed quite well (and it showed throughout), on the road. Substitute Indy with the Patriots in Atlanta for example. See where I'm going with this?

 

[Jay-Dog]

I think we are "good" road team today, we have been before at times in years past, but memory fades with each season. A chance to start a new year and define a team and win each and every game. Define, "good"? Does it have to be "great" in the eyes of those pundits who want to criticize this team because of past mistakes or our history of being a lowsy team on the road. I say to that, who cares...how awesome are we at home? All teams stuggle on the road, difficult as they know, we know as well. Recognition and limelight amoung media seems to be equated to a shut down week in and week out in order to prove the media elite and the highlight reel that follows.

A loss is a loss, a win a win; it's all about trying and fighting and clawing your way to the top. It's how you look at each game to get better and prepare for the next. We know who we are, or team is in to win. This team we have now is very, very special.

We all want to win, and winning on the road only seperates us from the pack, ugly or not. Our reputation may never change, no one wants us to win, but we keep winning and that's all that counts. My feathers are flapping all the way home.

 

[ZagHawk]

I wouldn't say we're a bad road team anymore, but we probably have the largest drop-off of any team going from home to road.

Yes. And yet we have won 5 of our last 6.

THIS year, our offense hasn't looked that good on the road. The Colts took it to the house against the Niners, and we're travelling. Can we pull off the win? of course, but I can't blame anyone for picking against us. We ESCAPED Houston, it's not like we demolished them.

 

[Jay-Dog]

Did anyone watch Lynch run through the Houston De-fense in slow motion? I saw nothing but Off-ense. I think we are doing just fine. :snack:

 

[kearly]

The Seahawks are a very different team on the road, especially at 10am. The reason we have won most of our recent road games is for three reasons:

-Hot streak to end 2012.

-Seattle has the best roster in the NFL, so we should expect to win every game, even on the road.

-Seattle got a couple of insanely clutch wins during that stretch. They could very easily be anywhere from 3-3 to 6-0 during that stretch.

(Also, 6 games is a small sample size).

You compare Seattle to Denver or the Saints and we are not as good on the road as they are, especially in early games. So I take no offense to Schlereth. Playing at 10am feels like a 14 point handicap compared to playing at home.

Schlereth is, and has always been, a Seahawks hater.

Actually, he's from Alaska and has fessed up to being a Seahawks fan.

 

[brettb3]

I think you're over emphasizing the Indy part of my post. They were simply an example of a team who actually performed quite well (and it showed throughout), on the road. Substitute Indy with the Patriots in Atlanta for example. See where I'm going with this?

Yes, but my point was more to illustrate how useless Schlerehh's reasoning is.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

Then how can people use the narrative that the Seahawks are a bad road team. We are 2-0 on the road this year. You can't have it both ways. It makes no sense. Not as dominant as at home I can understand but that applies to every team in the NFL.

I wasn't using it, I was criticizing it. And no one is as dominant on the road as they are at home. I'm with you, 2-0 on the road this year. All that matters.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

Never understood the road argument. And that goes both ways. Yeah you're 5-1 in the last 6 road games, but 4 of those road games were last year...irrelevant. This year, you're 2-0 on the road and that's all that matters. 5-1 in the last 6 road games don't matter. So don't use it. Detractors who use the 2012 road game record argument year, don't use it. If you do, you come across as someone who just doesn't understand how much can change in one offseason.

We are one or two first downs away from losing at Houston. We are a fumble away from having to execute a GW drive against the Panthers. Yes we were the better team in the second half, yes we won so we are the better team but I personally don't think you can just look at 2-0 and say oh the Seahawks - fantastic road them - unbeaten. Just like I would say you can't say crappy road team if we had been 1-1.

When we can go on the road and play consistent throughout a game (something I thought we did more against the Panthers than Houston) then we can figure out if we are a good or bad road team......

with that said if we are 3-0 on the road after Indy then nothing else matters

I wouldn't say fantastic, no. Everyone struggles more on the road than home. But every game has its ebbs and flows (minus blowouts of course). So while "fantastic road team" isn't the right words, "successful road team" would be.

Oh, and we aren't losing again at home! Good luck this Sunday. It'll be a bloodbath! :242735: :rocket: