Our chances of winning the remainder of our games

[minormillikin]

100% guarantee that we win the remainder of our games, including playoffs and Super Bowl! [emoji16]

This is excellent news.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

IMO,

Week 9: vs. Oakland - (80%)
Week 10: vs. N.Y. Giants - (70%)
Week 11: at Kansas City - (40%)
Week 12: vs. Arizona - (65%)
Week 13: at San Francisco - (45%)
Week 14: at Philadelphia - (50%)
Week 15: vs. San Francisco - (60%)
Week 16: at Arizona - (50%)
Week 17: vs. St. Louis - (70%)

Increase each game by 5% if we can get Wagner back.

Truly curious here, what method you use to come up with those hard percentages?

 

[mikeak]

There is a 50% chance to win every game. You either do, you or you don't.

This is not coin-flipping. The chance is not 50% for each game

 

[JesterHawk]

Win 'em all? I don't really see how they're going to win at Santa Clara on the short week. Isn't that why the schedule got made that way?

Based on my rudimentary understanding of the game the best way to win in that situation would be to score more points than the opposing team.

 

[therealjohncarlson]

There is a 50% chance to win every game. You either do, you or you don't.

Im guessing you didn't pass basic probabilities in math class in elementary school?

 

[AgentDib]

Obviously not everybody appreciates good statistics humor.

I would put it at 2% or so, which is probably much higher than if you estimated each of the games separately and then multiplied them together. Football outcomes are highly dependent on previous outcomes which significantly increases the odds of seemingly unlikely events. In other words, if we put together a string of wins now then everybody will feel much more confident about our divisional games later.

 

[NINEster]

Win 'em all? I don't really see how they're going to win at Santa Clara on the short week. Isn't that why the schedule got made that way?

Exactly.

The 2011 season opener they gave the Seahawks over 7 days to prepare and it still wasn't enough time. :roll:

All of this schedule complaining league wide by fans is too much. One Giants' fan is complaining that they are playing a home game on Monday Night following a bye and how that will affect them the next week at Seattle, lol.

When the 49ers had to play the Ravens in Baltimore on Thanksgiving, that was a bit of a scheduling snafu. Whatcha complaining about over a 2 hour flight in the same time zone to a division rival?

The 49ers last year after two straight losses back to back traveled up to St. Louis on a short week and kicked their a**.

With the way some times underperform following a bye, I'd imagine too much time could be worse than too little occasionally.

 

[NINEster]

IMO,

Week 9: vs. Oakland - (80%)
Week 10: vs. N.Y. Giants - (70%)
Week 11: at Kansas City - (40%)
Week 12: vs. Arizona - (65%)
Week 13: at San Francisco - (45%)
Week 14: at Philadelphia - (50%)
Week 15: vs. San Francisco - (60%)
Week 16: at Arizona - (50%)
Week 17: vs. St. Louis - (70%)

Increase each game by 5% if we can get Wagner back.

Truly curious here, what method you use to come up with those hard percentages?

Starting with week 10, these prediction percentages will change week to week based on the previous game's performance.

Killing the Raiders at home could raise the percentage for beating the Giants (i.e. confidence).

But there's always some element working in reverse. Wins inspire confidence but sometimes also complacency. And then you have to factor in results from other seasons -- the Giants have lost two straight to Seattle and last year was ugly. And if the Giants drop to Indy on MNF, it's possible they will be seen as chop liver like old times.

How did Dallas beat Seattle? I think a good part of it is that the last time they played, they were murdered. On some level Seattle probably took Dallas for granted or disrespected them. If the fanbase does, a good chance the team would too. The LINK adds a layer of protection when playing against any team, and a team viewed as bad? Forget about it.

Of course this also works in opposite ways -- lose to KC, and now play tougher against AZ. You saw what happened after the Patriots played KC.

The one thing going for Seattle (and SF) from here on out is how tight the division race is and that you can't rest easy.

Should probably stick to the time honored way of predicting football games: matchups and home field advantage.

 

[Seafan]

Injuries will dictate the outcome. A healthy Seahawks team can certainly win the rest of their games. That won't happen.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Although I voted on this poll....I must consider the real fact of the matter.....Our team is 0-0 going into Sunday.
Go Hawks.

 

[grizbob]

Don't do no polls but, just like the beginning of the season it's possible till it aint

 

[BraveHeartFan]

I put it with 60%.

The NFL is weird, regardless, of how good or a bad a team is. If your team only had 1 loss right now I'd still put it at about 60% to win out because that's just how tough the NFL can be.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Do they have a chance? Sure

Will it happen? No.

 

[fenderbender123]

There is a 50% chance to win every game. You either do, you or you don't.

This is not coin-flipping. The chance is not 50% for each game

There is a 50% chance I was being sarcastic. I either was, or I wasn't.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Less than 10%.

Nothing I've seen since we pounded the Packers in week one gives me any indication that this team is good enough to win out.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Its really hard to refrain from calling some of you hopeless pessimists.

I'll go with history and history tells me Pete Carroll's teams have always finished and flourished in the 2nd Half of the Season. I say the Seahawks will win vs Oakland, and close the season out at:

5-3 (90%)
6-2 (60%)
7-1 (30%)
8-0 (10%)

Even our dominant 2013 that many of you cite that the 2014 is just not good enough comparably had a much better 2nd Half than 1st Half.

Discounting the Superbowl to make it an even 18 games with a 9 game split, Seahawks went:

8-1 in 1st Half in the Season
7-2 in their 2nd Half of the Season (counting 2 play-off games)

However, of those 8 first half wins.

5 other games were within a TD reach of losing:

Panthers by 5
Texans by 3
Titans by 7
Rams by 5
Buccaneers by 3

A big play or two difference in the Seahawks going 8-1 or 2-6 really.

In the 2nd half of the season, Seahawks did have those 2 losses by 2 points and TD.

But in their 7 other games, only 1 win came within a TD.

49ers in the NFC by Six.

So honestly, I'm not worried about 4-3, just get to 5-3 and keep trucking along. The reason why we finished some of those games last year with close wins was because the Seahawks had an easier schedule and faced much easier QBs for the most part.

This team has enough to get to 11-5, 12-4. 13-3 would be extremely difficult but not impossible.

Seahawks will eventually get healthier, they'll eventually get on schedule and stay on schedule, and all that young, inexperienced depth will be seasoned in the 2nd half of the season.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Less than 10%. Hell, I don't think our chances of making the playoffs is even at 50/50 right now, more like 40/60. REALLY want to be wrong about that.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Its really hard to refrain from calling some of you hopeless pessimists.

I'll go with history and history tells me Pete Carroll's teams have always finished and flourished in the 2nd Half of the Season.:.

wat

2010: Lost 7 of last 10 games, including 3 of last 4.
2011: Lost 6 of last 11, including 2 of last 3.

There's a difference between pessimism and realism. I love my Hawks, but I'm a realist, I know what I'm seeing on the field right now, and it's certainly not a team that can run the table. Now can they make the playoffs? Sure, but run the table?

 

[volsunghawk]

Its really hard to refrain from calling some of you hopeless pessimists.

I'll go with history and history tells me Pete Carroll's teams have always finished and flourished in the 2nd Half of the Season.:.

wat

2010: Lost 7 of last 10 games, including 3 of last 4.
2011: Lost 6 of last 11, including 2 of last 3.

There's a difference between pessimism and realism. I love my Hawks, but I'm a realist, I know what I'm seeing on the field right now, and it's certainly not a team that can run the table. Now can they make the playoffs? Sure, but run the table?

While PH's statement was a pretty broad declaration that clearly wasn't ALWAYS the case (as he stated), your post is kinda cherrypicking, isn't it?

What if we look at seasons where we have the HC/QB combo of Carroll and Wilson? After all, it seems that two key elements for a team to be a contender year in and year out are strength at the HC and QB spots.

2012: 7-1 over last 8 games.
2013: 9-2 over last 11 (though there were the divisional stumbles near the end)

I'm looking to 2012, personally, as a model for what I hope to see from the rest of the season. We know what this team is capable of, and we've seen them come together and click more and more later in the season. I'm hoping we see the team start to work out their issues and find their rhythm over the next couple of games - and then translate that into a strong push to the playoffs.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

While PH's statement was a pretty broad declaration that clearly wasn't ALWAYS the case (as he stated), your post is kinda cherrypicking, isn't it?

I wasn't cherry picking, I was pointing out the two seasons where the word "always" doesn't apply...........therefore an incorrect statement by the OP.