Schedule Now Becomes Home Friendly

[NJSeahawk]

Stanton for AZ should make it an easy win. Sadly, we haven't always been as successful against him as we should.

But looking at the next few games, only the Eagles in Dec. really worry me. And at least we have them in Seattle. :2thumbs:

Wasn't it Stanton who was doing that b!&$@ made dance on the sidelines at our place when Arizona broke open a win against us a couple years ago?

Yeah. Make sure everyone in Seattle( I'm not) finds a way to remind the LOB of that before that game.

Time to pay the piper Drew.

Not for nothing,this was pretty funny.Just the dance part, though.

Stanton's going down.Someone is gonna sack him and do the same dance he did. Especially with the relaxed celebration rules.


KaKawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

 

[adeltaY]

Do you think it's fair to say that facing the Houston DL with Clowney is about as difficult a matchup as facing NY with JPP and Snacks Harrison on the road? I'm more scared of their secondary tbh. Andre Hal is a really underrated player, JJo has been a monster this year, KJo is a great athlete at the position with very fluid hips, and generally they're very well-coached and talented. Seeing Baldwin get open against Jackrabbit and DRC was inspiring though, I think he can win his share of matchups against their secondary.

Of course, as many have pointed out, it's the NFL and we could look like crap against them. Texans O has been the highest scoring in the league since Watson started btw.... Fuller has been particularly dangerous with 7 catches for 5 freaking TDs! What about Nuk and him vs. our corners. Makes me nervous tbh because Watson isn't afraid to let the ball fly.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Stanton for AZ should make it an easy win. Sadly, we haven't always been as successful against him as we should.

But looking at the next few games, only the Eagles in Dec. really worry me. And at least we have them in Seattle. :2thumbs:

The Texans don't worry you? That's a top-5 defense.

I'd say the Texans defense is bipolar this year. We don't know which version we're going to get.

 

[MD5eahawks]

The way this year has unfolded throughout the league I don't think any team outside of Cleveland shoud be considered an easier win than any other team.

 

[chris98251]

We have problems on offense and if we can't give the defense a chance to rest, I don't look at any team lightly, we should have blown the Colts and the 49ers out, we didn't, games should have been over in the first half and they were not. That has been our history under the philosophy we use at this time. Without a run game that resembles what Lynch did I have no qualms about saying every week is a new challenge for us. If we take a team lightly we will get bit.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

This team won't take other teams lightly, I don't worry about that.

I love the fact that they are 4-2, and have already played 4 road games. Huge.

 

[ballard1951]

Thank God we will not meet Case Keenum, our krypyonite, this regular season.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

This team won't take other teams lightly, I don't worry about that.

I love the fact that they are 4-2, and have already played 4 road games. Huge.

That's it in a nutshell.

The key to winning divisions and hopefully HFA is to win your home games, and steal 3-4 road games. We've already won two road games, so all we gotta do is hold serve at home and snag another couple road games, and voila, 12-4.

 

[kidhawk]

This team won't take other teams lightly, I don't worry about that.

I love the fact that they are 4-2, and have already played 4 road games. Huge.

That's it in a nutshell.

The key to winning divisions and hopefully HFA is to win your home games, and steal 3-4 road games. We've already won two road games, so all we gotta do is hold serve at home and snag another couple road games, and voila, 12-4.

That's always been my line of thought as well. Win 7-8 home games and 4-5 road games and you have a shot at a 1st round bye in the playoffs.

 

[FlyingGreg]

We have problems on offense and if we can't give the defense a chance to rest, I don't look at any team lightly, we should have blown the Colts and the 49ers out, we didn't, games should have been over in the first half and they were not. That has been our history under the philosophy we use at this time. Without a run game that resembles what Lynch did I have no qualms about saying every week is a new challenge for us. If we take a team lightly we will get bit.

Unrealistic. NFL games are rarely over in the first half.

We beat the Colts 46-18. I think that counts as a blowout.

Nobody until Dallas last Sunday has blown out the Niners. They have been in every game.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

We have problems on offense and if we can't give the defense a chance to rest, I don't look at any team lightly, we should have blown the Colts and the 49ers out, we didn't, games should have been over in the first half and they were not. That has been our history under the philosophy we use at this time. Without a run game that resembles what Lynch did I have no qualms about saying every week is a new challenge for us. If we take a team lightly we will get bit.

Unrealistic. NFL games are rarely over in the first half.

We beat the Colts 46-18. I think that counts as a blowout.

Nobody until Dallas last Sunday has blown out the Niners. They have been in every game.

The 49ers defense has been seriously underrated all season. So was the Packers'. The Rams are good. The fact that we're sitting here 4-2 means something.

I don't think the Houston game will be a blowout, but I expect Watson will have some level of Goff-esque regression against the Legion.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't think the Houston game will be a blowout, but I expect Watson will have some level of Goff-esque regression against the Legion.

In general, running QB's don't fare well against our defense. Too much speed and sound scheme discipline.

Not that Watson won't make plays, he's very Russell Wilson-esque in his escapability and playmaking ability.

IMO this is another game where the closeness of the score will depend on how many quarters it takes our offense to get their poop together.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

We have problems on offense and if we can't give the defense a chance to rest, I don't look at any team lightly

I don't see this at all. Seattle has insane depth on the front. Regardless of how the offense has fared in holding possession -- the defense has been stout. Thus far, the Titans game has been the outlier for the season. Can it tire? Yeah. I don't see another 95 snap outing this year like we saw in Arizona. This defense really hasn't been stressed stamina wise this year.

we should have blown the Colts and the 49ers out, we didn't, games should have been over in the first half and they were not. That has been our history under the philosophy we use at this time.

This hasn't been true. Seattle doesn't blow teams out regularly. We are a team that thrives in the 19-13 type contests. That's been our blueprint. It's still how we generally win. And we are constantly close at the half:

GB: 3-0
SF: 6-6
Tenn: 7-9
Ind: 10-15
LA: 10-10
NY: 3-7

Going back last year:

Mia: 6-3
@LAR: 3-6
SF: 24-3
@NYJ: 14-10
ATL: 17-3
@ARI: 0-3
@NO: 14-13
BUF: 28-17
@NE: 19-14
PHI: 16-7
@TB: 5-14
CAR: 23-7
@GB: 3-21
LAR: 10-3
ARI: 3-14
@SF: 19-14

SF and Carolina at home would be early blowouts. Atlanta and Buffalo were skewed on turnovers/blocked punts in their own red zones. Other than that, these games were all pretty close at the half.

I think confirmation bias is skewing your perspective of the SF/Carolina games of last year, and the Titans game of this year and applying how those games evolved inaccurately to all of our other games. You're making a case that clearly doesn't exist except in outlier form.

This team plays teams tight. In the majority of games. We don't blow teams out and coast to the end. That's never been a staple of our success. There is a definite camp of .net that thinks there is something wrong because we're not blowing teams out like we did in Buffalo and against Arizona in back to back weeks in 2012. That's never been how this team is constructed. Or how it's built to win. This has always been a team where the first to 16 should win. The defense is protected by the offense to put it in a position to achieve that. We don't accept or take risks that compromise the defense. We take sacks and punt, not throw 50/50 balls in hopes to get a first down and score.

 

[AgentDib]

FO has them at 6, the Rams at 9.

You keep quoting FO for some reason, which is a stat based efficiency ranking that just aggregates the six games they have played. Even putting aside the issue of a small sample size, the Texans lost two of their key players in Week 5 vs. the Chiefs and then played Week 6 against a very suspect Browns offense. The fact that they held the Bengals to nine points in week 2 really doesn't say that much about the team that will show up at CenturyLink on Sunday.

A better indicator looking forwards is the spread and O/U from Vegas, which translate to an expected outcome of 26-20 in favor of the Hawks. Vegas is expecting the Hawks offense to be able to take advantage of the missing Texan players but for the Texans offense to keep things close due largely to Watson.

 

[hawk45]

You keep quoting FO for some reason, which is a stat based efficiency ranking that just aggregates the six games they have played. Even putting aside the issue of a small sample size, the Texans lost two of their key players in Week 5 vs. the Chiefs and then played Week 6 against a very suspect Browns offense. The fact that they held the Bengals to nine points in week 2 really doesn't say that much about the team that will show up at CenturyLink on Sunday.

A better indicator looking forwards is the spread and O/U from Vegas, which translate to an expected outcome of 26-20 in favor of the Hawks. Vegas is expecting the Hawks offense to be able to take advantage of the missing Texan players but for the Texans offense to keep things close due largely to Watson.

Every other stats-based ranking is going to suffer from the same problems (small sample-size, don't reflect things like loss of key players) but the alternative is what? Subjective rankings? Apparently that's what you choose, hence the reference to Vegas - which is a good selection if you're going subjective - but that doesn't make it leaps and bounds better than the stats-based rankings. It has its own flaws.

I'm not married to the idea that the Texan D is currently right smack where FO puts them but they don't have to be for my larger point to be perfectly valid. To wit: the way our offense struggles against even middle-of-the-pack defenses means that we shouldn't overlook any team capable of a good defensive performance. Go ahead, deny that the Texans fit this description.

I repeat: it's ludicrous that the Texans don't even warrant a mention on the list of upcoming teams that may give us a tussle. That was my original objection. I didn't predict a certain Seahawk loss, I wasn't wailing and gnashing my teeth, I simply said hey wait so only the Eagles are worth mentioning? That's nuts.

And it is.

Edit: Where my original objection falls down is putting the ceiling of our offense at 13 pts. That's 10 or more points low. It's *possible* the Texan D puts together that kind of performance, but nowhere near as likely as I made it out to be.

 

[chris98251]

We have problems on offense and if we can't give the defense a chance to rest, I don't look at any team lightly

I don't see this at all. Seattle has insane depth on the front. Regardless of how the offense has fared in holding possession -- the defense has been stout. Thus far, the Titans game has been the outlier for the season. Can it tire? Yeah. I don't see another 95 snap outing this year like we saw in Arizona. This defense really hasn't been stressed stamina wise this year.

we should have blown the Colts and the 49ers out, we didn't, games should have been over in the first half and they were not. That has been our history under the philosophy we use at this time.

This hasn't been true. Seattle doesn't blow teams out regularly. We are a team that thrives in the 19-13 type contests. That's been our blueprint. It's still how we generally win. And we are constantly close at the half:

GB: 3-0
SF: 6-6
Tenn: 7-9
Ind: 10-15
LA: 10-10
NY: 3-7

Going back last year:

Mia: 6-3
@LAR: 3-6
SF: 24-3
@NYJ: 14-10
ATL: 17-3
@ARI: 0-3
@NO: 14-13
BUF: 28-17
@NE: 19-14
PHI: 16-7
@TB: 5-14
CAR: 23-7
@GB: 3-21
LAR: 10-3
ARI: 3-14
@SF: 19-14

SF and Carolina at home would be early blowouts. Atlanta and Buffalo were skewed on turnovers/blocked punts in their own red zones. Other than that, these games were all pretty close at the half.

I think confirmation bias is skewing your perspective of the SF/Carolina games of last year, and the Titans game of this year and applying how those games evolved inaccurately to all of our other games. You're making a case that clearly doesn't exist except in outlier form.

This team plays teams tight. In the majority of games. We don't blow teams out and coast to the end. That's never been a staple of our success. There is a definite camp of .net that thinks there is something wrong because we're not blowing teams out like we did in Buffalo and against Arizona in back to back weeks in 2012. That's never been how this team is constructed. Or how it's built to win. This has always been a team where the first to 16 should win. The defense is protected by the offense to put it in a position to achieve that. We don't accept or take risks that compromise the defense. We take sacks and punt, not throw 50/50 balls in hopes to get a first down and score.

That's the whole damn problem, we don't have running game to eat time in the second half, we should be opening up and letting the defense feast on the oppositions desperation not acting as the desperate.

 

[AgentDib]

It's ludicrous that the Texans don't even warrant a mention on the list of upcoming teams that may give us a tussle.

I suspect most agree with that regardless of the team we face, but fan confidence is a slippery concept.

We're now favored by 5.5 over the Texans which gives us a 69% chance to win historically. That's good but it's also a far cry from 100%. Should fans be confident or not?

My take is that we are a pretty good team and a win probability of 69% will probably be around the median for our remaining games. Falcons, Eagles, @Jags, Rams, @Cowboys will probably be lower and the other four will be higher. I don't think it's unreasonable to be somewhat confident about this game.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I don't think the Houston game will be a blowout, but I expect Watson will have some level of Goff-esque regression against the Legion.

In general, running QB's don't fare well against our defense. Too much speed and sound scheme discipline.

Not that Watson won't make plays, he's very Russell Wilson-esque in his escapability and playmaking ability.

IMO this is another game where the closeness of the score will depend on how many quarters it takes our offense to get their poop together.

We-hell. I think we underestimated our boy Watson, eh?

...

But in looking at the schedule, I feel better about winning the division. The Rams get the Giants next, then face Houston, New Orleans, Philly, Minnesota, Tennessee, and us again in a seven-week stretch. The last three are road games. We don't have it that bad. Take care of business and we should be good.