49ers vs Seahawks schedules compared

[Mindsink]

The 49ers are last year's NFC champs, and yet no matter how I analyze their 2013 schedule, it looks easier. How on Earth do they have an easier schedule than us? I just don't get it.

Allow me to break it down:

We both play AFC South. Our two road games are vs the top two teams - Houston and Indy (and both playoff teams from last year). Their two road games are against the Titans and Jags. Both of our road games vs the AFC South are 10:00am PST games. Only one of their road games vs the AFC South is a 10:00am PST game.

Speaking of 10:00am PST starts... We have five 10:00am road games. The 49ers have two - one at London vs Jacksonville!

Further, We play the Falcons (another playoff team) on the road. They play them at home.

Am I missing something here?

Looking ahead...

Set aside our head-to-head matchup in week 14. I don't see the 49ers losing another game on their schedule, except at the Saints. That leaves them at 12-3.

This means that if we lose one more game, then we must beat the 49ers at the stick, otherwise, we end up tied for the division lead, and we leave it in the hands of tiebreakers. I don't like that scenario, at all.

I know it's only week 5, and a lot can change, but that's how I see things playing out based on what I've seen through week 5.

 

[QuickLightning]

The schedule is the same outside of the 49ers playing the division winners and the Seahawks playing the second place teams.

 

[NINEster]

You can cherry pick things to make it seem conspiratorial and what not, but the bottom line is that these games against conference and out of conference teams are by rotation. And with the two teams here in particular, you cannot have both teams playing common opponents in the same venue.

So next year, each NFC east team will play sea and sf but only one west coast trip, except for AZ.

Last time SF played tenn and Jax was at home. And I'm pretty positive Seattle traveled for those games.

Last time sf played texans was in Houston and colts in Indy.

To complain about this is crazy.

As for 10 am starts, there might be some favoritism with putting certain teams in prime time. In 2011, sf played quite a few 10 am games. And won all of them.

Also, the sf/Oakland scheduling conflict forces those games to never be on at once unless they are obviously playing each other. Look it up on wiki, each team will always get at least one Monday night appearance each season regardless of how good or bad they are to deal with the complexity of nfl scheduling.

What fails to be mentioned here is SF will travel the most this year, and if they don't stay in Ohio or east coast after titans game, that's one hell of a trip to London

Finally I think saints in new Orleans is tougher than falcons at Atlanta judging by the first few games.

 

[volsunghawk]

You can cherry pick things to make it seem conspiratorial and what not, but the bottom line is that these games against conference and out of conference teams are by rotation. And with the two teams here in particular, you cannot have both teams playing common opponents in the same venue.

So next year, each NFC east team will play sea and sf but only one west coast trip, except for AZ.

Last time SF played tenn and Jax was at home. And I'm pretty positive Seattle traveled for those games.

Last time sf played texans was in Houston and colts in Indy.

To complain about this is crazy.

As for 10 am starts, there might be some favoritism with putting certain teams in prime time. In 2011, sf played quite a few 10 am games. And won all of them.

Also, the sf/Oakland scheduling conflict forces those games to never be on at once unless they are obviously playing each other. Look it up on wiki, each team will always get at least one Monday night appearance each season regardless of how good or bad they are to deal with the complexity of nfl scheduling.

What fails to be mentioned here is SF will travel the most this year, and if they don't stay in Ohio or east coast after titans game, that's one hell of a trip to London

Finally I think saints in new Orleans is tougher than falcons at Atlanta judging by the first few games.

Actually, the last time we played the AFC South, the Seahawks road/travel split was exactly the same. Jax and Tenn in Seattle, Hou and Indy on the road. It's a particularly annoying quirk of the scheduling.

But you're right that the complaints are kind of ridiculous. I don't hear a single Seahawk fan complaining about the fact that we have to face the Saints - who honestly look like our toughest remaining test - in Seattle while SF has to deal with them on the road. I also don't hear any Hawks fans complaining about the fact that we got to deal with the entire AFC South - where the games have absolutely no tiebreaker implications - early in the season while we had (and still have) some key players lost to injury or suspension.

 

[AF_Hawk]

Rotation my ass, I specifically remember the Seahawks traveling to Shitsburg the last three or four times we've played.

 

[12thManNorth]

Every year San Fran seems to lose games they shouldn't, so I really don't know about pencilling them in to win every single remaining game except the Saints game. Last year I didn't forsee them losing @Minny, vs NYG, @STL, and tying STL, and they did. They're also a lot more beat up injury wise than last year

 

[Axx]

last season our schedule was far more "favorable" but they still managed to win the Division and go to the superbowl.

I don't want any excuses

 

[kidhawk]

Actually, the last time we played the AFC South, the Seahawks road/travel split was exactly the same. Jax and Tenn in Seattle, Hou and Indy on the road. It's a particularly annoying quirk of the scheduling.

But you're right that the complaints are kind of ridiculous. I don't hear a single Seahawk fan complaining about the fact that we have to face the Saints - who honestly look like our toughest remaining test - in Seattle while SF has to deal with them on the road. I also don't hear any Hawks fans complaining about the fact that we got to deal with the entire AFC South - where the games have absolutely no tiebreaker implications - early in the season while we had (and still have) some key players lost to injury or suspension.

It's not really a "quirk" in the schedule, as much as it was an adjustment in the schedule to insure that in future rotations, east coast teams wouldn't have to travel to both of the furthest west teams (In the NFC that's Seattle and San Francisco) in the same year. They started that 2 years ago(I believe) so we should be all back to a normal 3/6 year cycle of where we play opponents. One thing is for sure though, count on us and the Niners always having opposite home/away schedules from this point forward. Sometimes it will favor us and sometimes it will favor them. That part just comes down to who is good in any particular year.

 

[volsunghawk]

Actually, the last time we played the AFC South, the Seahawks road/travel split was exactly the same. Jax and Tenn in Seattle, Hou and Indy on the road. It's a particularly annoying quirk of the scheduling.

But you're right that the complaints are kind of ridiculous. I don't hear a single Seahawk fan complaining about the fact that we have to face the Saints - who honestly look like our toughest remaining test - in Seattle while SF has to deal with them on the road. I also don't hear any Hawks fans complaining about the fact that we got to deal with the entire AFC South - where the games have absolutely no tiebreaker implications - early in the season while we had (and still have) some key players lost to injury or suspension.

It's not really a "quirk" in the schedule, as much as it was an adjustment in the schedule to insure that in future rotations, east coast teams wouldn't have to travel to both of the furthest west teams (In the NFC that's Seattle and San Francisco) in the same year. They started that 2 years ago(I believe) so we should be all back to a normal 3/6 year cycle of where we play opponents. One thing is for sure though, count on us and the Niners always having opposite home/away schedules from this point forward. Sometimes it will favor us and sometimes it will favor them. That part just comes down to who is good in any particular year.

It's a quirk in that when the NFL made the adjustment, it would have been reasonable to ensure that the home/away matchups weren't replicating for teams. And for some teams, the home/away splits actually don't repeat themselves. But for the Seahawks, our home/away splits against AFC opponents have been repeating each season since that adjustment. I don't believe for a second that the schedulers couldn't have said, "Okay, now that we've made this adjustment, let's apply it going forward while still trying to make sure that teams aren't seeing the exact same home/away opponents for the same divisions as they were before the adjustment."

 

[Hawknballs]

the schedule rotation changed in 2009, when the NFL decided it was 'unfair' for East Coast teams to travel back west too many times in one season.

Even though they didn't even consider doing the same service for West coast teams.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4009230

but that is why we've had similar opponents on the road like for example the Steelers twice in a row.

NFL modifies West Coast formula

Updated: March 23, 2009, 10:27 PM ET

NFL owners voted Monday to modify the schedule to ease the burden of cross-country road trips.

Last year, the Patriots and the Jets had to make West Coast trips to play AFC West opponents and NFC West teams. The Patriots chose to remain on the West Coast twice last season -- for back-to-back games against San Francisco and San Diego in October and Seattle and Oakland in December -- to minimize the wear-and-tear the schedule presented.

The Jets, meanwhile, played at San Diego and then had to travel to Oakland three weeks later. In December, New York visited San Francisco, returned home to play Buffalo, then went back to the coast to play Seattle. The Jets were upset by the Raiders as part of a late-season swoon that prevented them from making the playoffs.

Under the new plan, teams wouldn't have to visit two West Coast teams, just one, along with a team closer to the Midwest. Specifically, Oakland will be paired with Denver, and San Diego will be paired with Denver. In the NFC, Arizona and San Francisco will be paired as will St. Louis and Seattle.

Since 2002 when the league expanded to eight four-team divisions, the NFL has used a rotating formula in which a team plays four opponents within its conference once every three years and four teams in the other conference every four years.

Teams that have road games against Denver and Oakland will get home games against Kansas City and San Diego. The opposite scenario will also be true. The same format of home-and-away games with the paired cities holds true for the NFC as well.

The proposal was submitted by the broadcast committee for the purpose of creating a better balance for travel to the West Coast. Currently, the AFC South and the NFC West are scheduled to play the AFC West in 2010, which is when the new plan would be starting.

 

[pehawk]

Hawknballs, THAT'S a classic example of why Goodell is hated. At least IMO.

Also, the 49ers will lose in Tennessee.

 

[drdiags]

Welcome OP. Too bad you didn't get involved with the schedule debate back when they first came out this year. I would say that you have to forget about comparing to other folks schedule. The team has a certain disadvantage because they are located in this region. That will not change and the NFL has done about all the adjustments they are going to do with scheduling as far as the East vs West thing is laid out.

Who knows which schedule is tougher? The team just has to play who they have on the docket and win/lose, move on to the next guy. I hear your complaint but for this year, nothing changes. There are 2 remaining 10:00 a.m games remaining. Hopefully the team can handle them but if not, sucks to be us.

 

[Hawknballs]

I like how the line is "NFL owners voted Monday to modify the schedule to ease the burden of cross-country road trips."

They should have added ". . .but only for East Coast teams."

 

[pehawk]

Well, yeah and Roger's defenders will say he did what the owners wanted. But, sorry, he should've said "umm, what about the inverse guys? While we're here and discussing it?". He has a responsibility to look for each owner and franchise in matters of fairness.

 

[C-Dub]

49ers lose in Tennessee? That's funny. Tennessee is a joke, and everyone will see this Sunday. All you Locker fans have a bad case of putting the p_____ on the pedestal.

 

[pehawk]

49ers lose in Tennessee? That's funny. Tennessee is a joke, and everyone will see this Sunday. All you Locker fans have a bad case of putting the p_____ on the pedestal.

Actually, it's more Gregg Williams and that physical defense. As much as they act like a bully, SF cant take a punch. I'm a douchebag, but a douchebag that kind of knows the NFL. Give me a little more credit, Sugarpants.

Or its what you said, I guess?

 

[birdman5]

Seems like the only solution to this is to sell the team to an east coast owner and move it there....

No thanks, I'll keep the team here and live with the disadvantages of being one of a minority of teams on the west coast.

 

[SoHo9erFan]

Hawknballs, THAT'S a classic example of why Goodell is hated. At least IMO.

Also, the 49ers will lose in Tennessee.

Titans will be without Locker. Seems like a penciled in win to me. I think this week against the Cards will be the toughest challenge for the 49ers the next 4 weeks. If they win, they can easily rip off wins against Titans, Jags, and Carolina at home. That's 7-2 with a huge tripe to New Orleans.

The Panthers game could be a trap game. The 49ers have a bye week before hand but I wouldn't be surprised if they dedicated the bye preparing for the Saints the following week instead of the Panthers...

Regardless, if the 9ers are 7-2 by week 10 (which seems very likely) the 49ers fan base should and will be ecstatic.

I'm predicting 12-4. I think Seattle goes 13-3.. Biggest game of the year will be the Hawks at the Stick

 

[DericLee]

Tougher schedule breeds a tougher team.

It will only make us better, if we can't pull out the wins then we didn't deserve them in the first place.

I WANT HARD GAMES.

I want a championship team to be born and tempered by them.

 

[HawkFan72]

I like how the line is "NFL owners voted Monday to modify the schedule to ease the burden of cross-country road trips."

They should have added ". . .but only for East Coast teams."

Or teams that are not media darlings.

The Jags had to travel out to Oakland and then fly out to Seattle the very next weekend.

The whole thing is pathetic. It was Goodell hand-picking his favorite teams to benefit.