The bears game is pretty much meaningless

[CouchLogic]

Yall are nerds [lol], go for the head and play to win. Always.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

If you really want to be pragmatic about it, it is actually better if the Seahawks lose to the bears to improve their 2025 Draft Pick in case the Rams beat the Cards (or us).

The Bears and Seahawks should be competing this year in free agency and the draft for offensive linemen. It should be target as #1 need. This game could decide who gets ahead in the draft. They can't both lose the game! If Bears drop out of top-10, they may go for Edge and leave Seahawks more OL options. The two best are Campbell and Banks, and it drops off from there.

 

[Rat]

We're not communicating here, and I'm not sure why. Are we talking about two different things?

I'm not talking about what importance this game may or may not hold on January 6th, the end of the regular season. I'm talking about the importance this game holds on December 26th. In order to advance to the playoffs, all we need to break our way is for us to beat the Bears and the Cards to beat the Rams in Week 17. If that happens, then both us and the Rams would have identical 9-7 records and the Week 18 game in LA would be for the NFC West championship.

That means that our game with the Bears is critically important since as you noted, things get a lot more complex if we lose that game.

And again... if they're 9-7 and we're 8-8, it's STILL for the NFC West Championship. Things do NOT "get a lot more complex" if we lose to the Bears. It would still be literally the exact same situation: win and we take the division.

You have to be trolling at this point...

 

[Rat]

Yes it does, we’re a game back unless we win both and they lose both.

Yes, we would be a game back if both teams lose... and then we'd be playing them. What do you think happens if we beat them if we're a game back? Same record. And we'd have the tiebreaker.

 

[GetNjigbaWithIt]

Bears need to lose this game to get too-10 draft pick. It may also help get Poles fired. 2/3 of my Bears forum wants Poles fired for neglecting the offensive line. Um, where have I heard that before?

 

[Rat]

2nd tiebreaker is division record. That, too, would be tied at 3-2 for both teams, so it would go to the 3rd tiebreaker.

3rd tiebreaker, conference record. If the Rams lose to the Cards, our conference record would be 5-6, and if we beat the Bears, ours, too, would be 5-6, and would throw it to the 4th tiebreaker, strength of victory, which has yet to be determined.

It would not go to the third tiebreaker. If the Rams lose to the Cards, we're both 3-2 in the division. The winner of the Seahawks-Rams game would then be 4-2 while the loser would be 3-3. It ends there.

 

[RiverDog]

I'll try to keep it simple to avoid confusing myself.

If the 8-7 Hawks lose to the Bears, our record drops to 8-8, and if two days later the 9-6 Rams beat the Cards, their record goes to 10-6, a two game lead with one to play. They clinch the division.

If we beat the Bears and the Rams lose to the Cards, then the two teams would be tied at 9-7 going into Week 18.

Bears game matters.

 

[Rat]

I'll try to keep it simple to avoid confusing myself.

If the 8-7 Hawks lose to the Bears, our record drops to 8-8, and if two days later the 9-6 Rams beat the Cards, their record goes to 10-6, a two game lead with one to play. They clinch the division.

If we beat the Bears and the Rams lose to the Cards, then the two teams would be tied at 9-7 going into Week 18.

Bears game matters

OK, I'm sure it matters on some level. Getting into the playoffs isn't one of them though.

And you left out the scenario we're actually talking about. The one where we lose to the Bears and the Rams lose to the Cards.

If the Rams beat the Cards, they win the division regardless of whether we beat the Bears. If the Rams lose to the Cards, week 18 is winner-take-all for the division regardless of whether we beat the Bears. This isn't really that difficult.

It'd be a lot easier at this point to just admit you were mistaken about the tiebreakers instead of pretending you meant something else. It happens. I've done it many times on here. I think I've made about a dozen posts in the past few months where I talked about Woolen with the assumption he was a free agent after the season. I wish someone had corrected me after the first one before I made further uninformed posts.

 

[RiverDog]

OK, I'm sure it matters on some level. Getting into the playoffs isn't one of them though.

And you left out the scenario we're actually talking about. The one where we lose to the Bears and the Rams lose to the Cards.

If the Rams beat the Cards, they win the division regardless of whether we beat the Bears. If the Rams lose to the Cards, week 18 is winner-take-all for the division regardless of whether we beat the Bears. This isn't really that difficult.

It'd be a lot easier at this point to just admit you were mistaken about the tiebreakers instead of pretending you meant something else. It happens. I've done it many times on here. I think I've made about a dozen posts in the past few months where I talked about Woolen with the assumption he was a free agent after the season. I wish someone had corrected me after the first one before I made further uninformed posts.

I'm beginning to see your point, that there's not much difference in our playoff odds if we win or lose to the Bears, so I'll concede, and you have my sincere apology. There is a difference, but not much of one.

Nevertheless, I do not look at the game as meaningless. This team needs to get better if we're going anywhere this season, and if we can't beat the 4-11 Bears, then there's not much hope of us beating the Rams or anyone else if we were to make the playoffs. You don't get better by losing to a 4-11 team.

 

[Rat]

I'm beginning to see your point, that there's not much difference in our playoff odds if we win or lose to the Bears, so I'll concede, and you have my sincere apology. There is a difference, but not much of one.

And I'll concede that it's not 100% meaningless, and we can move on from all that stuff. Probably says something about me that I can't just let some of these things go.

Nevertheless, I do not look at the game as meaningless. This team needs to get better if we're going anywhere this season, and if we can't beat the 4-11 Bears, then there's not much hope of us beating the Rams or anyone else if we were to make the playoffs. You don't get better by losing to a 4-11 team.

I agree with that, but I don't know that we need the reinforcement. This team doesn't blow out anyone, and is beating a reeling Bears team by like 3-10 points going to improve the team mindset THAT much going into a potential winner-take-all Rams game? If they struggle, I'm not sure it helps at all. If they lose a key player to injury, that doesn't help the mindset. I think there's a good argument that resting starters maximizes their chances against the Rams, and even if the backups lose to the Bears, the team should still be feeling good that they took the 12-2 Vikings down to the wire in their most recent game with the starters they'll have out there.

I see a good argument for both sides. I believe it's a worthy discussion that I hope our coaches are having. I just don't like all "you play to win the game" cliches and all that. There's nuance to this stuff.

 

[RiverDog]

I agree with that, but I don't know that we need the reinforcement. This team doesn't blow out anyone, and is beating a reeling Bears team by like 3-10 points going to improve the team mindset THAT much going into a potential winner-take-all Rams game? If they struggle, I'm not sure it helps at all. If they lose a key player to injury, that doesn't help the mindset. I think there's a good argument that resting starters maximizes their chances against the Rams, and even if the backups lose to the Bears, the team should still be feeling good that they took the 12-2 Vikings down to the wire in their most recent game with the starters they'll have out there.

I see a good argument for both sides. I believe it's a worthy discussion that I hope our coaches are having. I just don't like all "you play to win the game" cliches and all that. There's nuance to this stuff.

It's a mechanical thing as well as psychological reinforcement, particularly with our offensive line. Those guys need more snaps. But I do maintain that you always play to win, that to do otherwise sends the wrong signal to the team.

We also have a mini bye next week, having played on a Thursday this week and not having to play again until next Saturday or Sunday. There shouldn't be as much of an excuse for resting starters.

And even though that there's only a 2% difference between our odds of making the playoffs if we win vs. lose in Week 17, just suppose for a minute that the improbable happens. How would you think the fans would react if he had mailed it in vs. the Bears and couldn't take advantage of the nearly impossible ending in Week 18?

 

[djb28]

Maybe one day the Rams will stop owning us and we can start calling the shots. I hate being their bitch. I guess the team doesn't mind so much.

 

[Rat]

It's a mechanical thing as well as psychological reinforcement, particularly with our offensive line. Those guys need more snaps. But I do maintain that you always play to win, that to do otherwise sends the wrong signal to the team.

We also have a mini bye next week, having played on a Thursday this week and not having to play again until next Saturday or Sunday. There shouldn't be as much of an excuse for resting starters.

And even though that there's only a 2% difference between our odds of making the playoffs if we win vs. lose in Week 17, just suppose for a minute that the improbable happens. How would you think the fans would react if he had mailed it in vs. the Bears and couldn't take advantage of the nearly impossible ending in Week 18?

I'd say that's far less than 2%.

 

[Appyhawk]

Regardless of playoff implications we NEED to finish this regular season with two wins in a row.

 

[RiverDog]

Regardless of playoff implications we NEED to finish this regular season with two wins in a row.

Agreed.

Macdonald is the youngest head coach in the league, and he and his staff need to build up their credibility with the players, present and future. As the Tuna used to say, you are who your record says you are. A 10-7 record sounds a helluva lot better than 8-9. We certainly don't want to end the season on a 0-4 losing streak.

 

[SonicHawk]

It's weird calling a game meaningless when if we go 2-0 and Rams go 0-2 (and we play them one game) we get into the playoffs.

 

[toffee]

I checked with both the football God, and that fat chick that I ain't done being mad with. Both guaranteed that they will not help teams that give up on their season.

 

[Ramfan128]

You guys have a HC trying to establish a culture and a QB that stays between bridge and franchise QB...

I get that because of some quirks this game doesn't technically affect your playoff chances. But after losing two games in a row, and playing a bad team - this is arguably the most important game of the Seahawks season to date.

 

[bigskydoc]

It's weird calling a game meaningless when if we go 2-0 and Rams go 0-2 (and we play them one game) we get into the playoffs.

Sigh. Why is this so difficult to understand?

If the Rams go 0-2, we make the playoffs.

It doesn’t matter whether we go 1-1 or 2-0, we still make the playoffs if the Rams go 0-2.

 

[SonicHawk]

Sigh. Why is this so difficult to understand?

If the Rams go 0-2, we make the playoffs.

It doesn’t matter whether we go 1-1 or 2-0, we still make the playoffs if the Rams go 0-2.

Sigh.

We can make the playoffs if the Rams go 1-1, if we go 2-0 amongst other things.