The reason why many on this board are upset

[seabowl]

Yes we are 7-1. Yes we are off to the best start in our history. Yes we are at the top of the NFC. So why are people so upset still?

Because in many of our victories we have looked like an average team. Think about it, we have faced mostly crappy to average QB's and or teams.

TEAM Carolina- ave-good, QB Cam Newton- average
Whiners- good to very good, Kap- good to very good
Jags-terrible, Henne- bad
Texans- average, Schuab- bad-/ave
Colts- very good, Luck- very good
Titans- ave, Fitzpatrick- bad
Cardinals- bad-aver, Palmer- bad/average
Rams- average, Clemmens- terrible/bad

The bar and expectations this year from fans perspectives have been raised. When playing bad-average teams many of us including me expect to win and win going away. We have had way too many close calls against teams we should dominate. This is why many on this board are still upset even in victory. A good QB playing for the Rams and Texans probably swings these games to a loss. The team as it stands now is not as good as the one ending last year even with the injured OL back. Only if we start winning games the way we are supposed to win them will get me and probably others in a more comfortable state. Thoughts?

 

[sc85sis]

I guess that depends on your definition of "the way we are supposed to win them." If you mean be dominating and blow teams out, that just isn't realistic. Would I prefer things be a little less panic-inducing during games? Yep. But a win is a win. Most teams could not win without their two starting tackles (and their C for a couple of those games). The fact the Hawks have shows that they aren't just an average team. They will not give up. They find ways to win.

 

[Reaneypark]

This is the only win that really pissed me off because it seemed like the Hawks were outcoached and outplayed on offense. We usually had spots where we looked like crap, but we still would eventually control the game on offense. This was the first game that it looked like we had no clue and just hit a couple of lucky plays. I hope that's an abberration and we see better play next week.

 

[Happy]

Style points count now?

Like Bill Parcells says, you are what your record says you are. And thus far the record says this year's team is on par with the '84 team and the '05 team. The window of contention is open and it's a great time to be fan.

I think expectations need to come back down to earth if people want to actually enjoy themselves instead of making themselves miserable by being unrealistic. As for me, I'm having a blast. These are the best of times, too bad more people can't see that.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Also possible that the Titans beat Seattle at home if Locker plays.

 

[CortezKennedyfan]

Your 2013 Superbowl Champion Baltimore Ravens:



1 Cincinnati Bengals** W 44–13 1–0
2 at Philadelphia Eagles L 23–24 1–1
3 New England Patriots W 31–30 2–1
4 Cleveland Browns W 23–16 3–1
5 at Kansas City Chiefs W 9–6 4–1
6 Dallas Cowboys W 31–29 5–1
7 at Houston Texans L 13–43 5–2
8 Bye
9 at Cleveland Browns W 25–15 6–2
10 Oakland Raiders** W 55–20 7–2
11 at Pittsburgh Steelers W 13–10 8–2
12 at San Diego Chargers W 16–13 (OT) 9–2
13 Pittsburgh Steelers L 20–23 9–3
14 at Washington Redskins L 28–31 (OT)
15 Denver Broncos L 17–34 9–5
16 New York Giants** W 33–14 10–5
17 at Cincinnati Bengals L 17–23 10–6



They won 3 games by more than 10 points all season. All 3 were at home...one was the season opener and the other one shouldn't count because it was against the Oakland Raiderettes.

Two went to OT and they lost one and easily may have lost to the freaking CHARGERS in OT. And they barely beat the Eagles, Chiefs, Browns and Chargers...non-playoff teams. And they lost to inferior teams as well.

But why let facts get in the way, right?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I could think of worse problems to have than being 7-1 and still not even playing close to our potential.

But yes, without high expectations most of us wouldn't be so critical of performance. It's like having a super smart kid that's getting C's on his/her report card. You expect better.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Like Bill Parcells says, you are what your record says you are.

Yet, we know that's not true with at least one or two teams every single year. Going to try and say Denver wasn't a paper tiger last year? 13-3, they hit the playoffs and look like a 9-7 squad. Hell, they'll probably do the same thing this year DESPITE being on a record-setting offensive scoring trend, because defense actually matters and theirs sucks. Plus an easy schedule.

Not all wins are created equally, nor are all losses, IMO.

 

[hawk45]

I'm upset because we can go 15-1 and if Russell is injured or shell-shocked by the time we get the playoffs then the rest of it is for nothing. He's taking a beating every game.

 

[Sarlacc83]

The best analysis is one done based off the OP's biases and opinions rather than facts. Go home Bayless. You're drunk.

 

[Happy]

Like Bill Parcells says, you are what your record says you are.

Yet, we know that's not true with at least one or two teams every single year. Going to try and say Denver wasn't a paper tiger last year? 13-3, they hit the playoffs and look like a 9-7 squad. Hell, they'll probably do the same thing this year DESPITE being on a record-setting offensive scoring trend, because defense actually matters and theirs sucks. Plus an easy schedule.

Not all wins are created equally, nor are all losses, IMO.

Regarding the Denver example, that was a classic Peyton manning kind of season. In that case the record is an accurate reflection IMO.

I would say a more challenging example would be the 2011 giants who won the superbowl going into the tournament with a 9-7 record.

 

[Cartire]

Hmm, what team with 2 losses or less hasn't played a bad game or against sub par teams? I'll wait for your response. Are we suppose to only play power houses and destroy them? What game are you watching? These expectations have ruined this game for so many people here.

 

[volsunghawk]

Yes we are 7-1. Yes we are off to the best start in our history. Yes we are at the top of the NFC. So why are people so upset still?

Because in many of our victories we have looked like an average team. Think about it, we have faced mostly crappy to average QB's and or teams.

TEAM Carolina- ave-good, QB Cam Newton- average
Whiners- good to very good, Kap- good to very good
Jags-terrible, Henne- bad
Texans- average, Schuab- bad-/ave
Colts- very good, Luck- very good
Titans- ave, Fitzpatrick- bad
Cardinals- bad-aver, Palmer- bad/average
Rams- average, Clemmens- terrible/bad

The bar and expectations this year from fans perspectives have been raised. When playing bad-average teams many of us including me expect to win and win going away. We have had way too many close calls against teams we should dominate. This is why many on this board are still upset even in victory. A good QB playing for the Rams and Texans probably swings these games to a loss. The team as it stands now is not as good as the one ending last year even with the injured OL back. Only if we start winning games the way we are supposed to win them will get me and probably others in a more comfortable state. Thoughts?

Well, there's your problem. People like to look at the opposing QB and then base the perceived quality of the opponent on that QB. Why don't you list the qualities of the defenses of our past opponents? Because THAT is where our team has been struggling for the most part. It hasn't been our D being unable to get a stop except in a handful of situations. It's been the offense going up against those opposing defenses that's been the reason we're not dominant, and merely 7-1.

So, how good are those Ds?

According to Football Outsiders (up through last week):

CAR: 3rd ranked D
SF: 12th ranked D
JAX: 31st ranked D
HOU: 13th ranked D
IND: 11th ranked D
TEN: 15th ranked D
ARI: 5th ranked D
STL: 27th ranked D

What's that? You don't like FO's methodology?

Okay, then how about yardage rankings? We've faced - and beaten - 2 of the top 3 defenses by yardage. Oh, points matter more? We've faced 4 of the top 10 defenses in points allowed.

Our offensive issues are no real mystery. We've got an incomplete O-line and we've been facing some good to elite defenses for the most part this season. Watch what happens when we start getting to face teams like Atlanta, Minnesota, and Tampa.

 

[JonRud]

while last night was brutal to watch, I am not upset at all with the big picture. we are 7-1 for the first time in franchise history with a much more favorable 2nd half schedule and 5 home games. we have avoided any major season ending type injuries, and we are still waiting to get back both of our starting tackles & Harvin.

What matters for this team is to be the #1 seed in the playoffs where we will be extremely difficult to beat in January. I think this team will play a lot better in the second half of the season.

You cannot dominate consistently every week in the NFL now - the other teams have good players and are trying to win too. What matters is piling up the wins so we hold off SF for the division and then beat NO on Dec. 2nd to get HFA.

 

[Chapow]

Your 2013 Superbowl Champion Baltimore Ravens:



1 Cincinnati Bengals** W 44–13 1–0
2 at Philadelphia Eagles L 23–24 1–1
3 New England Patriots W 31–30 2–1
4 Cleveland Browns W 23–16 3–1
5 at Kansas City Chiefs W 9–6 4–1
6 Dallas Cowboys W 31–29 5–1
7 at Houston Texans L 13–43 5–2
8 Bye
9 at Cleveland Browns W 25–15 6–2
10 Oakland Raiders** W 55–20 7–2
11 at Pittsburgh Steelers W 13–10 8–2
12 at San Diego Chargers W 16–13 (OT) 9–2
13 Pittsburgh Steelers L 20–23 9–3
14 at Washington Redskins L 28–31 (OT)
15 Denver Broncos L 17–34 9–5
16 New York Giants** W 33–14 10–5
17 at Cincinnati Bengals L 17–23 10–6



They won 3 games by more than 10 points all season. All 3 were at home...one was the season opener and the other one shouldn't count because it was against the Oakland Raiderettes.

Two went to OT and they lost one and easily may have lost to the freaking CHARGERS in OT. And they barely beat the Eagles, Chiefs, Browns and Chargers...non-playoff teams. And they lost to inferior teams as well.

And they barely beat the worst team in the league (the 2-14 KC Chiefs) by a score of 9-6 which clearly shows that they were not championship material and could not possibly win a playoff game.

 

[capncrunch]

We finished off last year like a steamroller putting up 50 points left and right. I think we all got kind of use to that sort of excessive dominance. Hopefully we can get it back.

 

[Polaris]

The Seahawks yesterday played a putrid game. There is no sugarcoating it. The only good thing about it is that in the end we WON. I don't remember (and I've been following Seattle since Ground Chuck) another Seahawk team that would or could have won a game like this.

What I am about to say in no ways to diminish the legit problems the 'hawks really have esp on Offense and O-Line in particular. Now look who we've played:

Carolina: I hear SF fans like to laugh at us for "barely beating" Carolina (they haven't played them yet), but this was a 10am game (a venue where the 'hawks normally lose) and in case everyone hasn't paid attention, Carolina has been playing some DAMN GOOD football (and football outsiders rates them very well). Carolina is a borderline playoff team.

San Fran: Enough said. We dominated them. It was at home, true, but we dominated them.

Jacksonville: The game was over by halftime like it was supposed to be. Most of what Jax did was in garbage time.

Houston: Houston when we faced them was an AFC contender and was playing like it. They had just gotten their first lost the week before. This was before Houston imploded....and don't tell me that Watt isn't a true talend on the D-Line.

Indy: We actually played very well for the most part, and this was a loss that we honestly should have won. Regardless, by anyone's standards Indy is a damn good team (which also beat Denver and SFran) so we're in good company there.

Tenn: We dominated Tenn. Don't let the score fool you. There was a 10 point swing in favor of Tenn that was entirely due to a fluke play that doesn't happen at least 999 times out of 1000.

Arizona: Again if you wached the same game we did, we dominated the cards, as a road time on a Thursday (which is hard). San Fran played them just before us at their place, and San Fran looked much worse against Arizona than we did.

Rams: Well we snatched victory from the jaws of inglorious defeat. I will note that the Rams play the NFC West and particularly SF and Sea particularly tough. I note in 2012, that the Rams were 4-1-1 in Division play while only going 7-8-1 overall, so we perhaps should have expected a tough game, esp when everyone was disrespecting the Rams.

I say the Hawks should learn from this, grow from this, but look at it for what it is: An ugly win that we somehow got on the road.....and one that will help us stay home in the playoffs.

 

[CortezKennedyfan]

In the Salary cap/concussion and injury protocol era, there is too much parity in the NFL. No one blows out its opponents week in/week out.

 

[chawx]

This is how Seattle is built to win games...sometimes, it's going to be ugly, but they still win.

The best part is that we know our offense is capable of some pretty damn amazing stuff, especially if our guys can execute and block up front for our dynamic QB. We may have lost some of our National "Sex appeal" when it comes to power rankings and opinion based BS, but don't you worry your pretty little head sweet heart, if you want to see big fancy points and lots of TDs, watch that orange team with the guy with the huge forehead...

...but if you want old school, smashmouth, ground and pound, defense first, bruising football that MEN play, this is your team baby!

 

[Polaris]

I also note that the San Fran love is starting up again, but here's the thing about the Niners. While the Seahawks have just survived (barely survived in yesterday's case) the most brutal part of their schedule, San Fran has yet to face it's most brutal stretch.