Is there any scenario?

[Polaris]

To be fair (admittedly with difficulty), it's easy to see why this narrative is engraved in stone in non-Seattle NFL circles despite Seattle's success on the road for the past three years (including this one). Prior to 2013 even Pete Carrol's Seahawks struggled mightily on the road esp on 10am starts even in Wilson's first year here (as was already noted).

 

[AZ_fan]

Seattle was 3-5 on the road that year, with no loss greater than 7 points. How is that awful with a rookie QB?

2013 - Seattle was 6-2 on the road
2014 - Seattle was 5-3 on the road
2015 - Seattle is 4-3 on the road with one game remaining.

That's 3 straight years of .500 or better play on the road.

Again.. keep living off the narratives from the Holmgren days when they were unbeatable at home and softer than Charmin on the road. :lol:

Heheh.. I'm not. I'll give the rookie benefit of the doubt and .500+ is respectable. I don' t know if that translates into 3 straight playoff road wins but we'll find out soon enough.

To be fair (admittedly with difficulty), it's easy to see why this narrative is engraved in stone in non-Seattle NFL circles despite Seattle's success on the road for the past three years (including this one). Prior to 2013 even Pete Carrol's Seahawks struggled mightily on the road esp on 10am starts even in Wilson's first year here (as was already noted).

Thanks... that's all I was trying to say.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Heheh.. I'm not. I'll give the rookie benefit of the doubt and .500+ is respectable. I don' t know if that translates into 3 straight playoff road wins but we'll find out soon enough.

Even if they lost in the NFC Divisional Round or Championship, that doesn't mean Seattle is a bad road team.. just that this year they weren't the best in the conference. It happens. Even Tom Brady has lost in the AFC playoffs.

Had Seattle lost to hapless Baltimore on the road .. then you'd have something here. Losses to St. Louis (with a new OL and no Kam Chancellor), Green Bay and Cincinnati - all games they lead going into the 4th quarter .. doesn't mean they're a bad road team.

 

[RiverDog]

Oh please. Now you're embarrassing yourself. I remember it was not too long ago that the Arizona fans here couldn't help but throw their NFL leading DVOA in our faces as to how good they were and how rotten we were (although Seattle was never bad in DVOA even at our worst). From then to now Seattle has improved by more than +20% in overall DVOA and that IS light-years.

You want to use the standard that favors you the most. I seem to recall that DVOA was Arizona's favorite measurement not two months ago. Hmmmmm.......

Great... so DVOA has Seattle "light-years" ahead of where they were at the beginning of the season. I said they were better... I don't need overanalyzed statistics to see that.

So all the Cards fans were here flashing their DVOA a while back eh? None of them were me though. Not sure why I should be embarrassed.

"You are what your record says you are" ~ Bill Parcells

I'm sure you feel differently and that's fine... that's why we have the playoffs... gotta love the finality of it. Win or GTFO.

Yea, the light years ahead remark was a bit homerish and over the top. There's no need for such a dramatic superlative. I'd object to the use of that term if I were an opposing fan, too.

But the point these guys are making is valid. The Seahawks are a lot different team than we were 2-3 months ago, much more so than the relative differences of the Cards and Panthers over the same period of time. The Hawks are peaking by making big splashes, cannon balls off the high dive, while Carolina and Arizona, while winning, are basically treading water, so to speak.

At least that's how I see it. It could turn into fool's gold and we get our arses whipped in the playoffs by the time we get there, but it's undeniable that there has been a significant shift in the power structure of the NFC between now and the first part of November.

 

[Polaris]

In DVOA Light-Years was accurate. It wasn't homerish or over the top in the slightest. Seattle went from having a DVOA in the low positives at our lowest point (around 5% IIRC) to 35%. That IS Light-Years as DVOA is measured.

 

[AZ_fan]

Even if they lost in the NFC Divisional Round or Championship, that doesn't mean Seattle is a bad road team.. just that this year they weren't the best in the conference. It happens. Even Tom Brady has lost in the AFC playoffs.

Had Seattle lost to hapless Baltimore on the road .. then you'd have something here. Losses to St. Louis (with a new OL and no Kam Chancellor), Green Bay and Cincinnati - all games they lead going into the 4th quarter .. doesn't mean they're a bad road team.

You're absolutely right... they aren't a bad road team.

When it comes down to 3 road trips in 3 weeks with at least 2 of them going to the east coast and knocking off 3 of 4 (Redskins, Panthers, Cardinals, Packers) as a neutral fan I just couldn't put my money on Seattle...

... or Arizona either.

There's a reason that the VAST majority of SB winners are the 1 or 2 seed...

Good luck pulling it off.

 

[Hawkpower]

Even if they lost in the NFC Divisional Round or Championship, that doesn't mean Seattle is a bad road team.. just that this year they weren't the best in the conference. It happens. Even Tom Brady has lost in the AFC playoffs.

Had Seattle lost to hapless Baltimore on the road .. then you'd have something here. Losses to St. Louis (with a new OL and no Kam Chancellor), Green Bay and Cincinnati - all games they lead going into the 4th quarter .. doesn't mean they're a bad road team.

You're absolutely right... they aren't a bad road team.

When it comes down to 3 road trips in 3 weeks with at least 2 of them going to the east coast and knocking off 3 of 4 (Redskins, Panthers, Cardinals, Packers) as a neutral fan I just couldn't put my money on Seattle...

... or Arizona either.

There's a reason that the VAST majority of SB winners are the 1 or 2 seed...

Good luck pulling it off.

Is there a reason you keep telling us how hard you think it's going to be for Seattle?

Hoping if you say it enough, you will get your wish?

 

[chris98251]

Last game of the season Arizona will rest their starters, I just want to win that game and not give them motivation to step things up, as much as I want to crush them.

They may think they want us, but I really think they would rather have a bad case of syphilis .

 

[Hasselbeck]

You're absolutely right... they aren't a bad road team.

When it comes down to 3 road trips in 3 weeks with at least 2 of them going to the east coast and knocking off 3 of 4 (Redskins, Panthers, Cardinals, Packers) as a neutral fan I just couldn't put my money on Seattle...

... or Arizona either.

There's a reason that the VAST majority of SB winners are the 1 or 2 seed...

Good luck pulling it off.

This may come as a surprise to you, but.. playoff runs typically are difficult. Even with HFA.

The Saints pulled within a TD and 2 point conversion and recovered an onside kick in 2014.

The 49ers were driving to win the game in 2014.

The Packers had a big lead that teams will close out 99% of the time just 11 months ago.

Ultimately those games weren't won because the end zones had Seahawks text in them.

Of course adding an extra round in the playoffs to get to your eventual goal is difficult. But again.. you're simply banking on a point that hasn't held any water for quite some time in that the moment the Seahawks leave the state of Washington they're suddenly a bad football team. That may have rang true with the Mike Holmgren team, but not this one. If they lose in the playoffs it'll be because they just weren't the better team on the field that day. It will have nothing to do with location.

And again - as you're drumming up this concept of HFA... the Panthers, while being an outstanding team, don't really have a huge HFA. The Cardinals absolutely do not, as illustrated by this weeks game. The Packers are probably the one team with the opportunity to host a playoff game that would have an actual advantage given the weather and how the Packers usually fare there.

Also.. the vast majority of SB winners are a top 2 seed because for a vast majority of football, there wasn't the balance of talent in the league that there has been over the last 10-15 years. You're comparing eras where the salary cap and free agency weren't what they are today.

I'm sorry - a team thats been to the Super Bowl 2 straight years and has overcome some enormous obstacles in the process.. that is a dangerous, dangerous team. Thinking otherwise is foolish.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Yes.

We beat Washington in Wildcard Round, then beat Arizona in Divisional..................and Minnesota beats GB in Wildcard and Carolina in Divisional.

Hello NFC Championship Game.

Not as far fetched as it may seem at first glance.

I would laugh really hard if Minn runs though both GB and Carolina. That would make my day!