Well, so much for the 16-0!

[had2bhawk]

http://forums.colts.com/public/style_em ... action.gif
Well, so much for the 16-0! I really couldn't imagine the Hawks going undefeated. It would seem too drastic a change from one year to the next. It's too early in the year and the NFL is too competitive to realistically think this young team could do that.
I do believe the Hawks can go 14-2 with the remaining schedule and hope their 2nd loss isn't to our beloved niners. Seems to be tough to get our first units, D&O on the playing field together. Hopefully everything will fall together by seasons end.

 

[TwistedHusky]

16-0 was a ridiculous expectation.

It is also needless pressure. Remember that team that was undefeated in the regular season and then ended up failing in the postseason? Remember the scrutiny they were under? No thank you.

Some of the greatest teams I have seen, including the Greatest Show on Turf, did not go 16-0. That great Ravens defense didn't. Neither did Green Bay with Brett Favre and Reggie White, and guys like Chmura.

In fact, the only team that did was a 1972 team. And as the next year shows, it wasn't because they were dominant, they were very good but they were also lucky. Because football isn't just about who is better, it is about matchups and who is the better matchup. They got good matchups all the way to the end.

Anyone that expects 16-0 is crazy, from any team. MAYBE Denver this year has a shot, and they almost lost to Dallas yesterday.

Seahawks were going to lose a game. Might as well have been with 1/2 their OL out, on the road with sketchy officiating. Even then they almost pulled it off.

 

[CallMeADawg]

Glad we lost and got that out of the way. Glad they are tasting it now, and will have it to use as motivation moving forward. Better now than in the playoffs!

 

[bestfightstory]

Glad we lost and got that out of the way.

:177692:

 

[seanoob]

I still can't watch that loss to the falcons. No more playoff losses please

 

[had2bhawk]

Glad we lost and got that out of the way. Glad they are tasting it now, and will have it to use as motivation moving forward. Better now than in the playoffs!

Yeah, I believe there is really something to that! It's alright to have a swag but, overconfident will kill ya.

 

[themunn]

In fact, the only team that did was a 1972 team. And as the next year shows, it wasn't because they were dominant, they were very good but they were also lucky.

They lost the 71 superbowl, went unbeaten in 72, then in 73 they lost 2 games total and won the Superbowl again.

I would say that making three successive Superbowls and winning it twice counts as dominant, unless you can be lucky for three years?

 

[400WattHPSHawk]

In fact, the only team that did was a 1972 team. And as the next year shows, it wasn't because they were dominant, they were very good but they were also lucky.

They lost the 71 superbowl, went unbeaten in 72, then in 73 they lost 2 games total and won the Superbowl again.

I would say that making three successive Superbowls and winning it twice counts as dominant, unless you can be lucky for three years?

You are sooo gonna get it in 3..2..1 :mrgreen:

 

[TwistedHusky]

The Bills went to 3 successive SuperBowls too.

What I am saying is that being undefeated isn't a measure of being the best team. It is getting good matchups.

Which is clear by the fact they lost one SB and lost games the year after.

So does being undefeated correlate with being the best? Yes. Perfectly? No. Would you consider the 72 Dolphins the best team ever? I wouldn't.

I never said it didn't mean that they were not good or even great. But I certainly believe that other championship teams were just as good and some were better. Those Cowboy teams that destroyed some damned good Bills teams for instance.

So yeah, you have to be both good and lucky to be undefeated. And planning on luck isn't wise - which is why expecting a 16-0 season for Seahawks made no sense.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

The Bills went to 3 successive SuperBowls too.

What I am saying is that being undefeated isn't a measure of being the best team. It is getting good matchups.

Which is clear by the fact they lost one SB and lost games the year after.

So does being undefeated correlate with being the best? Yes. Perfectly? No. Would you consider the 72 Dolphins the best team ever? I wouldn't.

I never said it didn't mean that they were not good or even great. But I certainly believe that other championship teams were just as good and some were better. Those Cowboy teams that destroyed some damned good Bills teams for instance.

So yeah, you have to be both good and lucky to be undefeated. And planning on luck isn't wise - which is why expecting a 16-0 season for Seahawks made no sense.

Cuz you were too young to have seen them? Had not the WFL stolen away their best players, the Dolphins would have continued to dominate and we'd be talking about all those epic Dolphins-Steelers showdowns of the 70's. Czonka, Kickk (sp?) and Warfield, Griese, all those guys were pretty damned good.

 

[HawkWow]

The Bills went to 3 successive SuperBowls too.

What I am saying is that being undefeated isn't a measure of being the best team. It is getting good matchups.

Which is clear by the fact they lost one SB and lost games the year after.

So does being undefeated correlate with being the best? Yes. Perfectly? No. Would you consider the 72 Dolphins the best team ever? I wouldn't.

I never said it didn't mean that they were not good or even great. But I certainly believe that other championship teams were just as good and some were better. Those Cowboy teams that destroyed some damned good Bills teams for instance.

So yeah, you have to be both good and lucky to be undefeated. And planning on luck isn't wise - which is why expecting a 16-0 season for Seahawks made no sense.

Cuz you were too young to have seen them? Had not the WFL stolen away their best players, the Dolphins would have continued to dominate and we'd be talking about all those epic Dolphins-Steelers showdowns of the 70's. Czonka, Kickk (sp?) and Warfield, Griese, all those guys were pretty damned good.

Great post...but don't forget my friend and neighbor Jake Scott!

Jake and I have had this talk too many times to count. He hates the record. Wants it broken, he's tired of talking and hearing about it.

On Warfield: Jake swears to God that Paul Warfield is the best receiver in the history of football. He downplays his own success (and is actually rather bitter re the NFL) but says any success he ever had was owed to practicing against Warfield as a Phin. Jake also thought highly of our own Steve Largent and called Rice a punk for un-retiring Largent's number.

 

[themunn]

The Bills went to 3 successive SuperBowls too.

And won how many?

What I am saying is that being undefeated isn't a measure of being the best team. It is getting good matchups.

Which is clear by the fact they lost one SB and lost games the year after.

But still won the superbowl? What you're saying is the 72 dolphins aren't the best because they were undefeated, but because they weren't undefeated two years in a row?

So does being undefeated correlate with being the best? Yes. Perfectly? No. Would you consider the 72 Dolphins the best team ever? I wouldn't.

Being undefeated isn't what makes a team the best, but being the best is what makes a team undefeated, 1st in points scored, 1st in points allowed, won every game. And went to Superbowls either side of that, winning one. How does a team have a more impressive season than that without it being called a fluke?

 

[SonicHawk]

http://forums.colts.com/public/style_emoticons/default/reaction.gif
Well, so much for the 16-0! I really couldn't imagine the Hawks going undefeated. It would seem too drastic a change from one year to the next. It's too early in the year and the NFL is too competitive to realistically think this young team could do that.
I do believe the Hawks can go 14-2 with the remaining schedule and hope their 2nd loss isn't to our beloved niners. Seems to be tough to get our first units, D&O on the playing field together. Hopefully everything will fall together by seasons end.

Is this a fake video?

Dude's got a Seahawk avatar, posting on a Seahawk forum and links to an emoticon from a Colts forum!

 

[Axx]

85 bears didnt go undefeated

 

[volsunghawk]

http://forums.colts.com/public/style_emoticons/default/reaction.gif
Well, so much for the 16-0! I really couldn't imagine the Hawks going undefeated. It would seem too drastic a change from one year to the next. It's too early in the year and the NFL is too competitive to realistically think this young team could do that.
I do believe the Hawks can go 14-2 with the remaining schedule and hope their 2nd loss isn't to our beloved niners. Seems to be tough to get our first units, D&O on the playing field together. Hopefully everything will fall together by seasons end.

Is this a fake video?

Dude's got a Seahawk avatar, posting on a Seahawk forum and links to an emoticon from a Colts forum!

Maybe because that's the emoticon he wanted to use, and it wasn't available here? :|

 

[had2bhawk]

http://forums.colts.com/public/style_emoticons/default/reaction.gif
Well, so much for the 16-0! I really couldn't imagine the Hawks going undefeated. It would seem too drastic a change from one year to the next. It's too early in the year and the NFL is too competitive to realistically think this young team could do that.
I do believe the Hawks can go 14-2 with the remaining schedule and hope their 2nd loss isn't to our beloved niners. Seems to be tough to get our first units, D&O on the playing field together. Hopefully everything will fall together by seasons end.

Is this a fake video?

Dude's got a Seahawk avatar, posting on a Seahawk forum and links to an emoticon from a Colts forum!

Maybe because that's the emoticon he wanted to use, and it wasn't available here? :|

Exactly Volsunghawk!

SonicHawk, lol, hes correct. I was on the colts board(trolling) reading the posts and got board. lookedat their smilies and didn't cancel out the page. noticed that while making this post and thought I try it. It worked but, didn't work. ya know what I mean? :dummy: anyway sorry DUDE!