Jets v. Seahawks and common opponents

[Jazzhawk]

Common opponents

Jets v. Bills - 17-27
Jets v. 49ers - 13-31
Jets v. Cards - 10-30
Jets v. Phins - 0-24
Jets v. Bills - 10-18
Jets v. Patriots - 27-30
Jets v. Phins - 3-20
and
Jets v. Seahawks - 3-40

Sure, they are much to look at, but we beat them better than most of the other teams we've shared the season with versus the Jets. Just some food for thought.

 

[ludakrishna]

Common opponents

Jets v. Bills - 17-27
Jets v. 49ers - 13-31
Jets v. Cards - 10-30
Jets v. Phins - 0-24
Jets v. Bills - 10-18
Jets v. Patriots - 27-30
Jets v. Phins - 3-20
and
Jets v. Seahawks - 3-40

Sure, they are much to look at, but we beat them better than most of the other teams we've shared the season with versus the Jets. Just some food for thought.

Good data but division opponents should not count. Rams have owned us since the beginning of time, but the 49ers have owned the Rams. The two results from that list which stand out are the Niners and Cards and I agree, we did perform better against them than those two.

 

[BChawkfan]

Common opponents

Jets v. Bills - 17-27
Jets v. 49ers - 13-31
Jets v. Cards - 10-30
Jets v. Phins - 0-24
Jets v. Bills - 10-18
Jets v. Patriots - 27-30
Jets v. Phins - 3-20
and
Jets v. Seahawks - 3-40

Sure, they are much to look at, but we beat them better than most of the other teams we've shared the season with versus the Jets. Just some food for thought.

Good data but division opponents should not count. Rams have owned us since the beginning of time, but the 49ers have owned the Rams. The two results from that list which stand out are the Niners and Cards and I agree, we did perform better against them than those two.

Or is it because their kicker did his job?
Just sayin

 

[Fudwamper]

Watching the game the other day I noted it never really felt like the hawks throttled the Jets. I more felt like the jets had a ton of unforced errors that resulted in the throttling, especially on the offense side.

 

[balakoth]

Common opponents

Jets v. Bills - 17-27
Jets v. 49ers - 13-31
Jets v. Cards - 10-30
Jets v. Phins - 0-24
Jets v. Bills - 10-18
Jets v. Patriots - 27-30
Jets v. Phins - 3-20
and
Jets v. Seahawks - 3-40

Sure, they are much to look at, but we beat them better than most of the other teams we've shared the season with versus the Jets. Just some food for thought.

Good data but division opponents should not count. Rams have owned us since the beginning of time, but the 49ers have owned the Rams. The two results from that list which stand out are the Niners and Cards and I agree, we did perform better against them than those two.

Or is it because their kicker did his job?
Just sayin

Basic math says we still beat them by more than those other teams.. even if he did kick those field goals..

Just sayin

 

[jammerhawk]

Watching the game the other day I noted it never really felt like the hawks throttled the Jets. I more felt like the jets had a ton of unforced errors that resulted in the throttling, especially on the offense side.

So you are saying it wouldn't have been as convincing if the Jets had got another 9 points? 40-12? Really???

Sounds like another "Great win, BUT" post to me. Our D missed three easy INTs , at least 2 of which would have been pick 6 type INTs.

The Hawks soundly beat the Jets in every phase of the game and it was never close despite their unforced errors.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Jets v Cards - 10-30
Jets v Seahawks - 3-40
Giants v Cards - 7-26
Giants v Seahawks - 17-12
Cards v Seahawks - 21-28
Seahawks v Cards - ?

 

[Fudwamper]

Watching the game the other day I noted it never really felt like the hawks throttled the Jets. I more felt like the jets had a ton of unforced errors that resulted in the throttling, especially on the offense side.

So you are saying it wouldn't have been as convincing if the Jets had got another 9 points? 40-12? Really???

Sounds like another "Great win, BUT" post to me. Our D missed three easy INTs , at least 2 of which would have been pick 6 type INTs.

The Hawks soundly beat the Jets in every phase of the game and it was never close despite their unforced errors.

Kind of a great game but post. More just an observation of why it never felt like a throttling the whole 1st half.

I felt like while I was watching the game if the Jets would not have stepped all over themselves on offense only the missed field goals all should have been TD's. I didn't seem like or feel like the D forced a situation, just that the Jets are really inept. I kept thinking to myself if the hawks were playing a halfway competent team they would probably be losing. That's how I felt through the 1st half.

 

[sc85sis]

Watching the game the other day I noted it never really felt like the hawks throttled the Jets. I more felt like the jets had a ton of unforced errors that resulted in the throttling, especially on the offense side.

So you are saying it wouldn't have been as convincing if the Jets had got another 9 points? 40-12? Really???

Sounds like another "Great win, BUT" post to me. Our D missed three easy INTs , at least 2 of which would have been pick 6 type INTs.

The Hawks soundly beat the Jets in every phase of the game and it was never close despite their unforced errors.

Kind of a great game but post. More just an observation of why it never felt like a throttling the whole 1st half.

I felt like while I was watching the game if the Jets would not have stepped all over themselves on offense only the missed field goals all should have been TD's. I didn't seem like or feel like the D forced a situation, just that the Jets are really inept. I kept thinking to myself if the hawks were playing a halfway competent team they would probably be losing. That's how I felt through the 1st half.

You also could say that we would have had another TD without the Jets D making an interception in the end zone. Or we might have scored more had our D not dropped two potential interceptions.

Ultimately, what-ifs don't matter.

 

[QuickLightning]

This is silly. Are you going to write one up for common opponents against the Giants as well now?

 

[sutz]

This is silly. Are you going to write one up for common opponents against the Giants as well now?

Yeah, I'm not sure what this discussion accomplishes. Common opponents works for tiebreakers, not much else. And even then, when a team plays another often means more than just the fact you played them.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

They won by 37, rested starters the entire 4th quarter and dropped a couple pick 6's.
good enough...…..

 

[3-2-16-4-6]

They won by 37, rested starters the entire 4th quarter and dropped a couple pick 6's.
good enough...…..

:irishdrinkers: