Would you rather - Superbowl XL or 49 edition.

[CalgaryFan05]

Okay - now it's officially a slow day.

If you had a time machine, and you could go back and pick ONE of XL or SB49 - and make the hawks win it - just ONE. Which would it be?

I'm torn. XL would have validated Hass and Holmgren. BUT, if we don't lose 49, does the locker room still implode? Do we go for 3 or 4? Does the LOB stay together for longer?

I 'think' my answer is 49.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Okay - now it's officially a slow day.

If you had a time machine, and you could go back and pick ONE of XL or SB49 - and make the hawks win it - just ONE. Which would it be?

I'm torn. XL would have validated Hass and Holmgren. BUT, if we don't lose 49, does the locker room still implode? Do we go for 3 or 4? Does the LOB stay together for longer?

I 'think' my answer is 49.

Losing XL hurt but let’s be real, Seattle, never really loss XL, but more so, the NFL gave it to Pittsburgh.

SB49, that was probably the single most heartbreaking sports game in Seattle sports history. Losing SB49 in the manner of how Seattle did and now knowing the aftershock of that night reverberated over years and years later, it doesn’t make it any easier but only leaves us with “what could have been?” Like a Marvel separate timeline, if Seattle, had won SB49, who knows would could have been years and years later.

I would choose to win SB49 and cement a dynasty and see what could have happen years later, rather than win XL.

I think had Seattle won XL, Holmgren would have soon retired and that Seattle core would have all just retired anyways.

I’ll take winning SB49, 10 out of 10 times, and 10 more times, over winning XL.

 

[Jerhawk]

If they win 49, I'm confident they'd win another one and form a true dynasty.

XL hurt, but it served a purpose. The NFL is rigged and the whole world saw it played out

 

[SoulfishHawk]

They should be 3-0 in the SB. Nothing will ever change my mind on that.

 

[jammerhawk]

I'd prefer to answer, BOTH.

However, for me 49 if forced to choose.

The refereeing calamity that was XL reminded us all that it is easy enough to fix the outcome of games or at the least steer them in a preferred direction.

The galactically stupid playcall of that pass to Lockette with a timeout to give and the toughest RB in the NFL with the ball on the Patriots' 1 yard line never fails to cause me to shake my head in sad disbelief.

 

[kidhawk]

I would have to say XL, and the main reason is it would have been our first Lombardi and although it was sweet when we finally one won, winning the first one would have been that much sweeter.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I'd prefer to answer, BOTH.

However, for me 49 if forced to choose.

The refereeing calamity that was XL reminded us all that it is easy enough to fix the outcome of games or at the least steer them in a preferred direction.

The galactically stupid playcall of that pass to Lockette with a timeout to give and the toughest RB in the NFL with the ball on the Patriots' 1 yard line never fails to cause me to shake my head in sad disbelief.

Yep. I was at the game. Happened right in front of me. I'm still pissed about it to this day. Defense crapped away a 10 point lead, but I'm not sure I've ever been that angry in my life at a sporting event. Pathetic play call, pathetic execution by all involved.

 

[jammerhawk]

XL was the classic all time steering job and some of the calls were certainly inexplicable, and certainly ridiculous and biased.

 

[Hawk4life]

I would have to say XL, and the main reason is it would have been our first Lombardi and although it was sweet when we finally one won, winning the first one would have been that much sweeter.

Yep, that is why it was bitter sweet.

Definitely XL because they were a high character, wholesome team that put in the work and deserved to win that season. They were far and away the best team in the NFL that year. The Stealers weren't better in any category.

I never have supported PC's "cheat, just don't get caught" ideology but it apparently is necessary to win the Super bowl. I'd rather have Holmgren any day over PC but good guys don't win in the NFL these days.

 

[AROS]

Man that is a fantastic question, OP. I am torn because I see the value in both. I am going to say 49 ONLY because I truly believe had we won back-to-back SB's we would have become a dynasty and likely would have won even more since there would not have been any real fracture in the locker room and the pieces were still in place to win 3 or 4.

XL would have been so sweet for that great 05 team and I would love for those men to have rings to this day. However it was such a filthy city with 90% Steelers fans, the celebration would have had to been delayed until they got home, and who knows the physical abuse Seahawks fans could have taken after the game? I was there so yes it is something I definitely think could have happened.

 

[pmedic920]

Took a bit of thought but I’m going to win 49.

We all know that we should have won both but…..

40 was out of our hands AND not our fault.

“Our” = The Seahawks

 

[schkoot]

XL by a long shot for me. 49 sucked and it is embarrassing, but at least we lost fair and square.

XL still burns.

 

[projectorfreak]

Great fricken question as I normally ain't a fan of some of these types of posts but this one is 49 for sure as 48 heals a wound to the heart 49 possibly would have kept us on a BPA trajectory that could have paid benefits without all the earl thomas birds when someone got hurt , it may never have happened and we might never become a dynasty but sure could've beeni

 

[hgwellz12]

Beating Belicheat and Tawmy in 49. I'm never coming back to this painful ass thread, btw.

 

[BlueTalon]

Man that is a fantastic question, OP. I am torn because I see the value in both. I am going to say 49 ONLY because I truly believe had we won back-to-back SB's we would have become a dynasty and likely would have won even more since there would not have been any real fracture in the locker room and the pieces were still in place to win 3 or 4.

I think you could make a similar argument for XL. If we'd have won that one, maybe Hutch stays a Seahawk.

For the purpose of this thread, my vote is for XL. We legitimately lost 49, whereas we were prevented from winning XL, which is why 49 will never bother me as much as XL.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

XL was the classic all time steering job and some of the calls were certainly inexplicable, and certainly ridiculous and biased.

My friends who went that game said that there were Steelers fans coming up to them saying that the Hawks got shafted by the refs. No joke.
That game was pre-determined imo. And I don't do the conspiracy crap. But some things are just obvious. No way in hell they were going to let Pitt. lose that game.

 

[pittpnthrs]

XL for sure. Beating the Steelers is much more satisfying than beating the Patriots. They both hurt though.

 

[FattyKnuckle]

Man that is a fantastic question, OP. I am torn because I see the value in both. I am going to say 49 ONLY because I truly believe had we won back-to-back SB's we would have become a dynasty and likely would have won even more since there would not have been any real fracture in the locker room and the pieces were still in place to win 3 or 4.

XL would have been so sweet for that great 05 team and I would love for those men to have rings to this day. However it was such a filthy city with 90% Steelers fans, the celebration would have had to been delayed until they got home, and who knows the physical abuse Seahawks fans could have taken after the game? I was there so yes it is something I definitely think could have happened.

It depends probably on how we won. It would've been interesting to watch since ME3's ambition wouldn't have changed. If he bootlegs it after PA to Lynch (which 100% should've been the call if they were going to pass) and runs it in or threads a crazy pass, thus becoming the hero, then the diva may have come out and been disruptive to the team sooner than it did in this timeline. If Lynch punches it in, gets the MVP, then ME3 is butthurt and gets malicious earlier.

There are three time travel scenarios, basically, in how going to the past will affect the future. The change can either result in a separate new timeline where the original timeline keeps going, aka the multiverse theory. Or you can make a change akin to throwing a rock in the time stream which diverts the single river in a new direction. The third is you throw a rock in the middle and it just goes around the rock in the same direction it was going before. A few things change but the results are the same. I think the team would've gone the 3rd route, regardless of the method of winning XLIX. Mr Unlimited would still demand diva accommodations, the D would still be at odds with him. Maybe some of the departures would be delayed but the team would still break up in acrimony due to competing egos. Maybe we add another Lombardi before it happens or maybe the same kind of crushing blow would come in that time and leave us in the same spot we were in 2 years ago. Having a trophy for XLIX would obviously be great for the team's legacy and thrilling for us and maybe that makes the team breakup harder for us to swallow, but we'd still have a dynasty under our belt. I would definitely take XLIX over XL. I'd rather be one of the few teams to go back to back and we wouldnt be known as the "dynasty that wasn't".

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Calling someone "butthurt" when you clearly are still "butthurt" over 15 months later. Classic

 

[Jegpeg]

The galactically stupid playcall of that pass to Lockette with a timeout to give and the toughest RB in the NFL with the ball on the Patriots' 1 yard line never fails to cause me to shake my head in sad disbelief.

I hate the disrespect people show to Pete about that play call. PC has made numerous play call that were unexpected with a very high success rate. If he didn't call for the fake field goal where Ryan passed it to Gilliam in the Championship game we probably wouldn't have been in SB49.

Against the Pats we had time for 2 attempts run the ball but could also try a throw as long as a failure led to an incompletion. The commentator I was listening to before 1st down did raise the posibility of a throw on 2nd down. Giving the ball to Lynch is not the guaranteed TD that most people who decry the playcall suggest, the SB49 commentator said Lynch was "borderline unstoppable in this part of the field" and everyone believes that reaility is that year he was 1 from 5 on the one yard line and 7 from 16 in the previous 3 years, worse than the NFL average of about 57%. In the 2012 playoffs against Washington Lynch fumbled on a rush from the 1. A pass attempt on 1st down was less expected than one on 2nd down and therefore more likely to succeed.

The disaster of an interception was due to execution not the play-call, Wilson should have spotted Butler and thown the ball away.