To the doomers and the optimists:

johnnyfever · Dec 12, 2017

adeltaY":sl2f77qu said:
But what's your answer to johnny's question?

Please answer sioux.

RolandDeschain · Dec 12, 2017

Siouxhawk":lhooiu11 said:
Sports Hernia":lhooiu11 said:

And Sioux/BFS/Leaf goes on to prove iRo’s point without realizing it, LOL. Go figure!

Click to expand...

Actually, if you look at track records for accuracy, he eats my dust. And so do you.

BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Good one. This is one of the most delusional things I've ever seen anybody post; and you truly believe it! Outstanding. It must be nice to just convince yourself of anything you want in life, facts and supporting evidence be damned.

MontanaHawk05":lhooiu11 said:
Everything in OP is an opinion.

You may as well say that facts don't exist and everyone's opinion matters equally.

jdemps":lhooiu11 said:
Your post starts with an ad hominem attack on all other posters on this forum,

Actually, my post starts off making an attack on posters that fit two particular groups. If you choose to believe that all posters in the forum fall into one of those two mindsets only, then that's your assumption; I never said, or even IMPLIED, it was all of the forum. Work on your reading comprehension a bit.

jdemps":lhooiu11 said:
states a list of opinions with "FACT" in front of them to try to add credence to your opinions, and finishes by saying that everyone who disagrees can take their opinion and "shove it where the sun don't shine." This kind of post is exactly what's wrong with discourse in this day and age. It's more about shouting down other peoples opinion and discrediting them because you're a better, smarter fan than they are. This is no longer a discussion, and, to be quite honest, this particular thread belongs in the shack so everyone can attack everyone else without the guise of calling it Seahawks related.

It actually is in the shack, and it started off there. It was suggested, by some in that thread, that I add it to the main forum; so I did. I've also got a LOT of supporting evidence backing the items which I stated are facts. If you want to pull a Siouxhawk and ignore them, by all means.

jdemps":lhooiu11 said:
I think it's time for me to deactivate my account. Even people who used to be solid posters have reverted to kindergarten mudslinging and I don't have the time and energy to deal with this from fans of my own team. Go Hawks.

Well, do whatever you feel is best. However, the very reasoning you gave for disliking my post applies SIGNIFICANTLY more to the two groups I'm targeting with it; the doom & gloom crowd, and the eternal optimists. They're far more ignoring of facts and reality than I am with this post. I can only surmise that you fall into one of the two groups I reference, considering your misplaced outrage at me because of this post.

Aros":lhooiu11 said:
Unless someone is reporting an actual FACT that can be confirmed by official team sources all ANYONE is doing in this forum is offering OPINION.

You know, like buttholes...We all got 'em and none smell any better or worse than the next.

Ah, another message from the "everyone's opinion is important and none are wrong" crowd...lol.

UK_Seahawk":lhooiu11 said:
People who represent opinions as facts are cockwombles. Didn't read anymore of this thread.

I heard a rumor that there's no such thing as a fact in this world, only opinions, and that they all carry a high degree of importance. #SeemsLegit

Y'all are sounding like that alcoholic family member many of us have encountered who is sure your "opinion" that he has a drinking problem is wrong. In fact, I'm seeing a lot of similarities between "I can stop drinking anytime I want" and "We're fully capable of winning the Super Bowl this year."

Also, Johnnyfever and adeltaY, give Sioux a bit; he's formulating his response to try and semi-answer your question while ignoring reality to the utmost of his ability, which is really quite impressive.

NINEster · Dec 12, 2017

Popeyejones":1dv0a8su said:
RolandDeschain":1dv0a8su said:

Fact: This team has been slowly trending downward overall since we lost the Super Bowl to the Patriots. This has been visible the whole time if you care to accurately evaluate the product you see on the field.

Click to expand...

Question about this "Fact": If they've been trending down since the SB loss, why isn't it showing up in their record?

Since then they've gone 10-6, 11-5-1, and are on pace to probably go 10-6 or 11-5 again.

They're below the highs of those SB years (which is true for practically EVERY Super Bowl team), but they seem to be holding much more steady than most, rather than trending down (as most teams do after SB runs).

The defense and running game has been trending down, which is having the bigger effect of the team's threat as a championship contender, despite Wilson getting better. He hasn't kept pace with that drop off, and not many QBs can.

Just think how crazy it is that during the Harbaugh era the 49er Super Bowl window was open more than any time during the post SB 29 Steve Young years (1 NFCC appearance vs 3 consecutive with Harbaugh).

BTW, Steve Young was the 49ers leading rusher for the 1990s.

Defense and a good RB were absolutely paramount to be a true contender.

It still is to an extent unless you have a Brady or a Rodgers.

Siouxhawk · Dec 12, 2017

johnnyfever":2ogsysv1 said:
adeltaY":2ogsysv1 said:

But what's your answer to johnny's question?

Click to expand...

Please answer sioux.

Your question is moot at this point. But I believe in our team and you obviously don't, so I can see where you'd be hung up on such matters that I consider frivolous.

TwistedHusky · Dec 12, 2017

I am going to point out the obvious Sioux.

If you honestly believed we 100% or even 80% were making the playoffs, you would point it out. Just like you honestly believe we have a competent staff.

So the fact you refuse to go on record speaks volumes, even you refusing to admit it makes it clear you are hedging.

Siouxhawk · Dec 12, 2017

TwistedHusky":26tkraa1 said:
I am going to point out the obvious Sioux.

If you honestly believed we 100% or even 80% were making the playoffs, you would point it out. Just like you honestly believe we have a competent staff.

So the fact you refuse to go on record speaks volumes, even you refusing to admit it makes it clear you are hedging.

Last I looked it wasn't the offseason. I'm more concerned about the here and now, which is focusing on a big game against the Rams this week. I sure am glad I'm not part of the complainers guild, of which you seem to be a full-fledged member, as I'd hate to miss out on the thrills this season has already presented and promises to continue to provide. When the offseason is here, then those questions become relevant.

Rocket · Dec 12, 2017

RoD right.
RoD Gawd.

AgentDib · Dec 13, 2017

johnnyfever":6abxqkvq said:
If they don't make the playoffs this year sioux, will you finally concede that maybe some coaching changes are needed...

This line of reasoning only makes sense to me if you are wildly optimistic about how talented our current team is.

Do you think we'll have the more talented line up on the field on Sunday? In my view the Rams will field around $160 million in value while the Seahawks will field at best $120 million. The Rams are much healthier and have like half of their key players still on underpaid rookie contracts.

OrangeGravy · Dec 13, 2017

A question to all optimists and doomers.

What do you think the odds are for even the most talented team winning the Superbowl going into a season? If you started with the most talented team on paper every year, how many times do you think you would win it all out of 10 seasons?

Not meant to be sarcastic at all. I think how someone answers these questions will help everyone understand where they're starting from.

Siouxhawk · Dec 13, 2017

OrangeGravy":1t4ace7r said:
A question to all optimists and doomers.

What do you think the odds are for even the most talented team winning the Superbowl going into a season? If you started with the most talented team on paper every year, how many times do you think you would win it all out of 10 seasons?

Not meant to be sarcastic at all. I think how someone answers these questions will help everyone understand where they're starting from.

I like what you are getting at here and your poll in another thread. Talent determination, though, is still highly subjective and you'd have to look at it on a game-to-game basis due to absences or limitations from injury. Just look at our offensive line before and after the addition of Brown and tell me where we'd rank in talent.

Popeyejones · Dec 13, 2017

bevellisthedevil":2gct3vat said:
2010 7-9
2011 7-9
2012 11-5
2013 13-3
2014 12-4
2015 10-6
2016 10-5-1
2017 8-5

Plot these numbers on a graph and tell me there is no downward trend.

It's not a downward trend. They're on pace to finish 11-5 or 10-6 again.

A downward trend is getting progressively worse each year.

Instead, they had two Super Bowl years followed by two years of slightly lower but essentially flat performance, which this year will likely be also.

AVL · Dec 13, 2017

Most teams would kill to have consecutive "almost " seasons. In our super bowl years we had a lot of luck, as all teams do, winning or almost winning, a single elimination tournament. We, nor any other good team, is as good as the hype.

But fanatics have to blow it all up.

Popeyejones · Dec 13, 2017

OrangeGravy":17zqa7fi said:
If you started with the most talented team on paper every year, how many times do you think you would win it all out of 10 seasons?

This is a great question.

If we're staying 1 standard deviation from the mean I'd say the most talented team would win about 1.5 Super Bowls in those ten years, with an unlucky version of that team winning 0 and a lucky version winning 3.

Another way to think about this is suppose I told you Team X was the most talented team across a decade, and an unnamed team won two Super Bowls in that decade.

Would you bet on that unnamed team being Team X or being one of the 31 teams that isn't Team X?

If someone doesn't bet the field on that they're nuts.

with 16 games a year, a one-and-done playoff structure, and a ridiculously high injury rate the NFL is about as close to randomness as you could get if you were developing a sport in a lab.

Seanhawk · Dec 13, 2017

Popeyejones":14cceh31 said:
OrangeGravy":14cceh31 said:

If you started with the most talented team on paper every year, how many times do you think you would win it all out of 10 seasons?

Click to expand...

This is a great question.

If we're staying 1 standard deviation from the mean I'd say the most talented team would win about 1.5 Super Bowls in those ten years, with an unlucky version of that team winning 0 and a lucky version winning 3.

Another way to think about this is suppose I told you Team X was the most talented team across a decade, and an unnamed team won two Super Bowls in that decade.

Would you bet on that unnamed team being Team X or being one of the 31 teams that isn't Team X?

If someone doesn't bet the field on that they're nuts.

with 16 games a year, a one-and-done playoff structure, and a ridiculously high injury rate the NFL is about as close to randomness as you could get if you were developing a sport in a lab.

The question I have is, if a team wins a half of a Super Bowl, what part of the trophy would they get? The football part, or the shaft part?

Hasselbeck · Dec 13, 2017

RolandDeschain":261sr0bp said:
Both groups, the doomers and the optimists, are equally naive.

Fact: This team has been slowly trending downward overall since we lost the Super Bowl to the Patriots. This has been visible the whole time if you care to accurately evaluate the product you see on the field.
Fact: We're not in blow-up-the-franchise mode.
Fact: We're also not "just fine" - if you make posts in the main forum saying you still have faith we can win the Super Bowl (and I'm talking about having done that at any time this whole season), then you are purposely sticking your head in the sand, and your mentality places being a fan higher than accepting the facts, which is not uncommon, but incredibly frustrating to witness.
Fact: I would like everyone to wake the hell up, take off the rose-colored glasses - and BOTH EXTREME SIDES OF THIS ARGUMENT ARE WEARING THEM - and start being realistic.
Fact: We should make some big changes this off-season, but we won't, because Pete is too loyal to his coaches.
Very strong likelihood: Unless we do make some big changes, we are resigned to another "almost" season next year, where we will make the playoffs and win one playoff game at most before being bounced out again, which is what will also happen this year.
Fact that applies to my state of mind, but probably some others around here as well: I had more fun watching the Seahawks in Pete Carroll's second season here where we still went 7-9 and missed the playoffs, but the overall improvement in the product on the field was palpable and exciting, and we just KNEW things were only getting better.

I'm not a bandwagon fan. I was around the prior iteration of this forum for years before my registration date here. Ah, the Scout days...Also, I've been a Seahawks fan as far back as I can remember, including the second half of my childhood which was spent in Wisconsin during the Favre glory years (screw the Packers and their toothless hunting-is-everything Miller-swilling fan base), and that was NOT an easy time to be a Seahawks fan in public schools in Packerland; I took a lot of crap for it from the natives, especially with Behring trying to move our team to L.A.

I will still watch every single game no matter what. I love this team and that will never change. However, I'm facing the music - if there aren't some big changes made by the start of next season, our downhill trend will continue, and that's really hard to watch because I love the Seahawks so much and I also know what Pete Carroll is capable of doing. Perhaps old age is making him more stubborn than he realizes; I don't know, but I hope to Christ he wakes up before it's too late.

To the extremists on both sides - those who preach eternal doom and gloom, and to those that are eternal optimists: take both of your points of view and shove 'em where the sun don't shine (grammatical error intentional), and take a really close look at what's ACTUALLY happening...and try to post more accordingly.

:salute:

Par for the course Roland post.

Seymour · Dec 13, 2017

I have no issue with any on the "facts". I think a strong case could be made on every one.

I do have one I'll add as a counter to it though.

Fact: If all of this board agreed to these facts and quit posting their extreme 1 sided opinions, we would become Stepford.net.

People that don't believe this are snatchwombles.

johnnyfever · Dec 13, 2017

Siouxhawk":1k6eh133 said:
johnnyfever":1k6eh133 said:

adeltaY":1k6eh133 said:

But what's your answer to johnny's question?

Click to expand...

Please answer sioux.

Click to expand...

Your question is moot at this point. But I believe in our team and you obviously don't, so I can see where you'd be hung up on such matters that I consider frivolous.

This is the same messed up mentality that is holding this team that I love back right now. They REFUSE to identify and take responsibility to blaringly apparent shorcomings and weaknesses we have. Sioux is in total denial mode. The reason he wont answer my question is so it gives him an out. At some point you will have to come to grips with the fact you are seeing this incorrectly, and that there are issues with some of our coaching staff. I dont think there needs to be a change at the top with JS and PC, but all others are fair game.

Next year his thing will be "how many other teams go over .500 every year", nothing to see here folks and no need to change, I'm totally fine with letting the team continue to regress as long as no negative is ever said and no improvements are made requiring coaching replacements.

Total weak sauce sioux, be a man and if you truly believe the garbage that rolls out of your facehole then stand behind it.

AgentDib · Dec 13, 2017

I'd take the under on 1.5 Superbowl wins out of 10 seasons but only just, maybe like 1.2. If you can also combine it with a consistent doormat division like the AFC East then I'd bump it up to 2-2.5.

It's also worth pointing out that randomness does not imply a lack of skill, but rather equivalent skill. Consider two equally matched chess Grandmasters who split their games 50-50. You could consider the result random but that doesn't mean skill isn't the dominant factor in chess outcomes. The Browns would consistently wreck a good college team.

johnnyfever":3tzw5gsn said:
Sioux is in total denial mode. The reason he wont answer my question is so it gives him an out.

You're only preaching to your fellow wild optimists who think we have more talent then everybody, injuries are just excuses, or it's just a matter of calling plays that result in success instead of failure. Your personal opinion may be that coaching is a major issue but to be persuasive you should substantiate that with reasons. Arguing that failing to meet performance standard X indicates poor coaching ignores that coaching is just one of a large number of factors that affect football outcomes.

johnnyfever · Dec 13, 2017

AgentDib":253a74c1 said:
I'd take the under on 1.5 Superbowl wins out of 10 seasons but only just, maybe like 1.2. If you can also combine it with a consistent doormat division like the AFC East then I'd bump it up to 2-2.5.

It's also worth pointing out that randomness does not imply a lack of skill, but rather equivalent skill. Consider two equally matched chess Grandmasters who split their games 50-50. You could consider the result random but that doesn't mean skill isn't the dominant factor in chess outcomes. The Browns would consistently wreck a good college team.

johnnyfever":253a74c1 said:

Sioux is in total denial mode. The reason he wont answer my question is so it gives him an out.

Click to expand...

You're only preaching to your fellow wild optimists who think we have more talent then everybody, injuries are just excuses, or it's just a matter of calling plays that result in success instead of failure. Your personal opinion may be that coaching is a major issue but to be persuasive you should substantiate that with reasons. Arguing that failing to meet performance standard X indicates poor coaching ignores that coaching is just one of a large number of factors that affect football outcomes.

You are confusing the term optimist with realist, and I have never said we have more talent than everybody. Injuries are a part of the NFL and happen to every team, every year. It is not my personal opinion, but the opinion of the majority on .net (several polls) as well as the industry analysts including but not limited to brock and salk, who are pretty respected when it comes to x's and O's. I have wasted my breath with HUGE posts pointing out the exact coaching shortfalls, the plays that demonstrate their shortfalls and the strategies needed to correct it. Any of the 2 or 3 that might disagree with those long specific posts though always come back with a vague "but we make the playoffs so nothing can be wrong" excuse. I stopped wasting my breath as those of us that pay attention realize the specifics involved in the creation of our opinion. i wasnt born disliking bev or cable, but rather after the last few years of seeing the ineptitude and lack of a cohesive gameplan utilizing our strengths while mitigating our weaknesses have been forced to develop that opinion.

As far as talent on the team, go look up the statistics on the rating of individual players based on gameplay stats and then ranking the teams by where those players reside. You cannot argue that pre season we had one of the top teams in the league as far as verifiable statistic based talent.

adeltaY · Dec 13, 2017

Popeyejones":2l8pvaum said:
bevellisthedevil":2l8pvaum said:

2010 7-9
2011 7-9
2012 11-5
2013 13-3
2014 12-4
2015 10-6
2016 10-5-1
2017 8-5

Plot these numbers on a graph and tell me there is no downward trend.

Click to expand...

It's not a downward trend. They're on pace to finish 11-5 or 10-6 again.

A downward trend is getting progressively worse each year.

Instead, they had two Super Bowl years followed by two years of slightly lower but essentially flat performance, which this year will likely be also.

Popeye, do you really believe the Hawks are winning 10 this year?

To the doomers and the optimists:

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

Member

Active member

New member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Similar threads