Would the Hawks been better off if.

[theseahawkguy]

They lost the first game? In recent memory the season of 2005 where the Hawks would have won the super bowl if it were not for the striped shirts, they lost the first game on the road to Jacksonville. Then last year losing at Arizona the first game of the year translated to an 11-5 season. Not sure how the 1984 Seattle Seahawks did on their first game but they did finish 12-4.

Or perhaps we can finally win the first four games and that proves to be the difference maker in winning it all?

Hoping this is the year we do it, go hawks!

 

[HawksFTW]

Anyone that thinks losing is EVER the answer needs to get their head on straight. Leave no doubt, 24/7.

 

[Barthawk]

84 they blew out Cleveland 34-0 I believe but also lost Warner for the year

 

[HawkFan72]

I have had this same thought, but ultimately I don't think it matters all that much.

In 2005, we lost in very similar conditions to this past Sunday: Very hot, humid, and the offense started out very slow.

Last year in Arizona, we were in position to win but lost because of a conservative offense.

In both of those years, it wasn't exactly a "wake-up call" or anything like that. Last year the offense still played very conservative for a few more weeks. It didn't change anything. In 2005, it was just bad conditions that slowed the team down. They were still the same team.

There were a few years under Holmgren where we started out 2-0 or 3-0 and went just as far in the playoffs as we did last year.

I just don't think a win or loss in week 1 makes that much of a difference.

I'm just glad that the worst we could be after Sunday is 1-1. That's the worst case scenario for our record, and I can live with that.

 

[FlyingGreg]

 

[bestfightstory]

Imagine how great it would have been if we lost last week AND lost to the Niners AND even the Jags, but people made fun of us then we got all pissed off and won ALL the rest of our games AND the Super Bowl!!!

I think that might have been the best thing.

 

[ensett]

If we need to lose to wake up, then we aren't going anywhere this year anywhere.

 

[lukerguy]

No, but I feel like it's almost better for SF to have won their game vs GB. They couldn't start 0-2, so this gives them some compromise when they go 1-1

 

[Blitzhawk]

I guess you could say last week was best case scenario in a way if you believe we needed a wake up call and some struggles against a tough team to get adjusted better while still pulling out a win on the road.

But I am not really a big believer in all that. I really don't think this team needs a wake up call and we would identify/make adjustments regardless of type of win (close or blowout) or loss.

 

[Barthawk]

I think we should just lose the rest of the games and draft Clowney since our pass rush sucks.

 

[mikeak]

We lost the first game last year and it had a huge impact on the season........

So no

 

[therealjohncarlson]

oh god.... what a defeatist attitude....

we finally win our first road game of the season and people are upset we won...?

 

[Atradees]

i think that home feild advantage for the Hawks is pretty huge.

The win at Carolina guarantees us a minimum nine win season.

Nine win usually gets a wild card spot.

We will win all the home games.

From those statements I guess you could infer that I guarantee a win versus the Niners.

 

[SeahawksRawk]

I think we should just lose the rest of the games and draft Clowney since our pass rush sucks.

Took the words right out of my mouth!! :mrgreen:

 

[bestfightstory]

I think we should just lose the rest of the games and draft Clowney since our pass rush sucks.

Took the words right out of my mouth!! :mrgreen:

If things fall right, we still have a chance!!

 

[SeaTown81]

i think that home feild advantage for the Hawks is pretty huge.

:13:

The difference to me between the Hawks having HFA and having to play a couple road playoff games is beyond huge.

If you were to tell me that the Hawks will have HFA come playoff time, I'd be currently looking into booking plane tickets to NY. Anything less and it's the exact same as last year with me feeling every playoff game is a toss up.

Go Hawks.

 

[Popeyejones]

Would the Hawks been better off if they lost the first game?

The NFL, like many sports leagues, uses a somewhat abstract organizational structure, in which teams are split into groups (called "conferences"), and then those groups are subdivided into smaller groups (called "divisions"). If a team makes the playoffs or not is based on 1) winning the most games in their division, and 2) if they do not win the most games in their division, winning the most games among teams in their conference who did not win the most games in their division.

Because of this extraordinarily high level of emphasis placed on the number of games a team has won in allocating playoff spots, teams are better off winning games than losing them, and should really go out of their way to try to win games whenever possible.

It can admittedly seem complicated at first, but over time the way the system is set up begins to feel more intuitive.

Hope this helps.

 

[bestfightstory]

i think that home feild advantage for the Hawks is pretty huge.

:13:

The difference to me between the Hawks having HFA and having to play a couple road playoff games is beyond huge.

If you were to tell me that the Hawks will have HFA come playoff time, I'd be currently looking into booking plane tickets to NY. Anything less and it's the exact same as last year with me feeling every playoff game is a toss up.

Go Hawks.

THIS CANNOT BE OVERSTATED.

Nobody can come into Seahawks Stadium, in the postseason, and feel confident. It is a slaughterhouse.

We deserve to have that experience again.

There is no greater rush in sports, IMO. It's downright transcendental.

I want the number one seed. Which is why I go berserk after every single regular season loss. They ALL matter.

 

[bestfightstory]

Would the Hawks been better off if they lost the first game?

The NFL, like many sports leagues, uses a somewhat abstract organizational structure, in which teams are split into groups (called "conferences"), and then those groups are subdivided into smaller groups (called "divisions"). If a team makes the playoffs or not is based on 1) winning the most games in their division, and 2) if they do not win the most games in their division, winning the most games among teams in their conference who did not win the most games in their division.

Because of this extraordinarily high level of emphasis placed on the number of games a team has won in allocating playoff spots, teams are better off winning games than losing them, and should really go out of their way to try to win games whenever possible.

It can admittedly seem complicated at first, but over time the way the system is set up begins to feel more intuitive.

Hope this helps.

That was too good for words. Where did you come from? Stick around, please.

 

[chawx]

Huh? Would we be better off if we lost on Sunday? ...ummm