So Wait A Minute, A Win Sunday Doesn't Guarantee Playoffs?

[Seymour]

But I don't believe tanking in the NFL exists, as we saw last weekend in Santa Clara.

Disagree.
I saw SeaBass tank it in the first half on Sunday.
He checked out like he had a hot date with a triple cheeseburger. :snack:

Is apathy and tanking the same thing?

I don't think so. Tanking is losing on purpose, I just think Janikowski doesn't care..........which makes for a great kicker to be able to miss and move on without caring, but for giving it your 100% on a KO return? Err, not so much.

Which is the root cause / emotion when a team tanks it.
Obviously this is not a widespread team attitude, just pointing out that going back to last year we've seen several players on the Seahawks tapping out.

 

[Steve2222]

If they win Sunday, doesn’t their chances bump up to like 99.5% or something stupid like that?

 

[Polaris]

If they win Sunday, doesn’t their chances bump up to like 99.5% or something stupid like that?

That's assuming nothing else goes right for Seattle this weekend. If either Washington or Minnesota loses (both games played before Seattle kicks off this weekend), then Seattle clinches with any win (either KC or AZ).

 

[Seahawkfan80]

8 win Washington is in over 8 win Seahawks due to win percentage in common games. I don't think I've seen that one before.

If it came down to the 8-8 scenario, the Seahawks and Redskins would tie on conference record. They would also tie on common games. So, the next tie break would be strength of victory, which would be a bit of a crap shoot.

As far as common games, each team would have 4-1 records. The common games include AZ, GB, Carolina and Dallas. You have 5 games each since Seattle plays AZ twice and Washington plays Dallas twice.

Ok...this is a little muddy for me. I do understand that Washington plays Dallas 2 times, we play them one time. I understand that we play Az 2x and Washington played them one time. So How do we get to the common games that they use both dallas games and we use both Az games? I would think that we would use a win as a barometer as it is based on wins. If they end up 1-1 in the division, the win takes precedence. If they go 0-2 or 2-0, then wins dont really matter with exception of the amount of wins. One game is common opponents, is it not? We did not play Dallas 2 times, only one? UW only played Az one time, not twice. I looked at the site and it did not specify. I also looked for how they would determine this more by scores and there was a distinct method.

https://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures

Please advise.

Yes - you just tally up the total wins and losses (and ties) related to the common opponents and calculate the win percentage. This (using the win percentage) is because one team may have played more games against common opponents due to a common opponent being in the same division as one of the teams. For example, as you note, AZ is a common opponent but we played them twice. We count them twice, Washington counts them once. They count Dallas twice, we count Dallas once.

For the site you mention, scroll down to the “Other Tie-Breaking Procedures” section. Item 2 says: “In comparing records against common opponents among tied teams, the best won-lost-tied percentage is the deciding factor, since teams may have played an unequal number of games”.

I read that part but it did not seem to coincide with wisdom. Then I just now thought if they were on our conference rotation, the Percentage would be in more effect rather than actual games. 6 played vs 5 played. I see their situation now. Example...we and them played Dallas (them 2x), detroit, Vikings, and Camsteam...we have 4 games and they have 5 which is where the percentage would need to be considered. I see it now.

 

[Steve2222]

If they win Sunday, doesn’t their chances bump up to like 99.5% or something stupid like that?

That's assuming nothing else goes right for Seattle this weekend. If either Washington or Minnesota loses (both games played before Seattle kicks off this weekend), then Seattle clinches with any win (either KC or AZ).

No. Nothing else matters if Seattle beats AZ. Washington, Philly, Minnesota could all win out. It doesn’t matter with a Seahawks win Week 17. Seattle controls their own playoff destiny.

What I was saying is a win Week 16 is basically a playoff clinch. There’s a .5% chance they don’t make the playoffs if the Seahawks beat KC and loses to AZ.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Well, all I know is that not only am I loving the fact that we have the Night game (so we will know much more what we need to clinch) but this Zona game being a HOME is huge.

 

[Polaris]

If they win Sunday, doesn’t their chances bump up to like 99.5% or something stupid like that?

That's assuming nothing else goes right for Seattle this weekend. If either Washington or Minnesota loses (both games played before Seattle kicks off this weekend), then Seattle clinches with any win (either KC or AZ).

No. Nothing else matters if Seattle beats AZ. Washington, Philly, Minnesota could all win out. It doesn’t matter with a Seahawks win Week 17. Seattle controls their own playoff destiny.

What I was saying is a win Week 16 is basically a playoff clinch. There’s a .5% chance they don’t make the playoffs if the Seahawks beat KC and loses to AZ.

Yes I know, but I wasn't considering AZ until week 17. The question at hand was if Seattle could make the playoffs this week with a win, and my point was this: By the time kickoff happens, we probably will be able to get into the playoffs with a win (assuming that either Washington or Minnesota lose this week both of which happen before Seattle plays).

To be clear, a win against AZ clinches the playoffs for Seattle no matter what, but we can clinch this week fairly easily with a win (Minnesota could lose to Detroit thought that seems unlikely, but Washington without an NFL caliber QB is likely to lose).

 

[Steve2222]

I wouldn’t put it past Minnesota to lose at Detroit.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

You never know with Detroit. Sometimes they actually play well :lol:

But, I suspect the Vikes offense is just way too much for Detroit. Hope to be very wrong on that.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

If we don’t make it how does it affect our draft? Is missing the playoffs more helpful in the long run than squeaking in and losing first round?

Scenario 1: miss out on the playoffs with an 8-8 record, start entrenching that culture of mediocrity in the locker room, and start playing like 3/4ths the league does year in and year out. Not Browns-bad, but not consistently good.

Scenario 2: squeak into the playoffs with an 8-8 record, give the team something to play for in the post season. Even if you lose the first playoff game, you were in the playoffs, you were a contender, and you build on that next year.

The difference between the lower tier playoff teams and the higher tier losers is a few draft positions. I wouldn't think for a second there would be enough evidence to suggest just missing out on the playoffs puts you in a better position as a team than being ousted in the first round of the playoffs, or even winning and then bowing out.

My hunch is that it's far better for a team's record in the long run to instill the mental attitude in the locker room, the winning mindset, the determination to win no matter what, than it is about gaining a couple of draft positions in the process of a losing season. I'd love to see some data on that too. I'd guess the data would favor my hunch over the other way around.

 

[bigskydoc]

Do people forget that Russ played college ball in Wisconsin??? .

They do forget that the coldest game he ever played in, while at Wisconsin, was against Ohio State on 10/29/11. It was 43 degrees, and calm, at kickoff. The only game in which he encountered precipitation was against Penn State on 11/26/11, a day that saw 0.31" of rain for the 24 hour period.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Luckily a running game works in any weather, I like our chances just fine, rain, snow whatever.......

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Luckily a running game works in any weather, I like our chances just fine, rain, snow whatever.......

Hmmm....whatever also means Redskin field and Santa Clara field?????? Axing for a friend. :mrgreen:

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Well, Carson had 119 at Santa Clara, and the team has 168 rushing yards. Pretty solid for playing on a crap field in Santa Clara.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Well, Carson had 119 at Santa Clara, and the team has 168 rushing yards. Pretty solid for playing on a crap field in Santa Clara.

:2thumbs:

Ya know I was just yanking ya chain. It is all good.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Absolutely, in all seriousness, weather is a factor for many QB's. Russ is no different, but I'm just a straw man argument/homer so :lol:

 

[zchurch74]

This game really means nothing. We need to play but rest our starters. We need to be as close to 100% healthy for AZ and the playoffs. Who cares if we lose bad at home. Everyone will know we’re resting starters and getting our bench some reps. People who know football know how good and dangerous we can be in the playoffs. Who cares if we lose to the chiefs Sunday. Lose Sunday and win 4 in a row and beat them when it counts.

 

[chris98251]

This game really means nothing. We need to play but rest our starters. We need to be as close to 100% healthy for AZ and the playoffs. Who cares if we lose bad at home. Everyone will know we’re resting starters and getting our bench some reps. People who know football know how good and dangerous we can be in the playoffs. Who cares if we lose to the chiefs Sunday. Lose Sunday and win 4 in a row and beat them when it counts.

This is the new mentality of our generation, everything is disposable, if you think you may lose just throw the game away, have a tough schedule one year tank it for a high draft pick to hope to get a easy schedule and some blue chippers next year (Colts) WORKED well for them, they have a whole bunch of Championships since getting Luck.

I'll take the loss if it comes, would rather lose to them now and know we were not good enough then to slip into the playoffs and not win because our players didn't get a chance to see these guys up close because they were sitting on a bench.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Couldn't disagree more, this game means plenty. If you want to be ready for the playoffs, you need to knock off a top tier team. Sure it would still be cool to get the birth against Arizona, but resting a bunch of guys is not the way this team rolls. Assuming a loss? No thx. This team has won so many games over the years under Pete when people thought they were going to lose. It happens once or twice every year.

 

[Tusc2000]

Would rather a game in warm Dallas than one in cold ass Chicago. Wilson is a fair weather QB and we actually would have a chance to beat Dallas.

Agree that it would be better to play in Dallas, but because we match up better with the Cowboys than the Bears.

Regarding Russ being a fair weather QB, I guess you haven't been to Seattle in December the past 6 years...