Call your shot -- playoffs or nah?

What Toffee said. What better way to flip it right back to the drama queens than to get in the playoffs and do some damage??

I am hoping, I want another shot at the Rams, the league may fix the game but I want that shot, knocking them out would be great, also they want anyone to get in but us, we are the last team they want to see.

Absolutely, would LOVE too see the Rams again. They stood toe to toe with them, both games. They also were not intimidated one bit. I'm loving this rivalry, and it's going to get a lot bigger the next couple of years. That would be one hell of a playoff game if we could face them down there, and I'm sure Hawks fans would represent well as always.

chris98251":3v0ci704 said:

I am hoping, I want another shot at the Rams, the league may fix the game but I want that shot, knocking them out would be great, also they want anyone to get in but us, we are the last team they want to see.

Click to expand...

Suh and Donald don't deserve Super Bowl rings.

pittpnthrs":1nc79m40 said:

knownone":1nc79m40 said:

After watching KC tonight I'm not at all afraid of them. Seattle would have controlled the time of possession and those Mahomes turnovers would have absolutely killed KC. Seriously, the Hawks win that game by 10+ if they were in the Rams shoes.

Click to expand...

The 51 points that they hung on the team that beat us twice wasnt enough to concern you? Granted, teams with winning records are only averaging 29 points a game against us (thats a lot), but come on man. We should probably beat at least one team with a winning record before proclaiming a win over a team like KC.

I still see us at 8-8 and at the best, maybe a 1st round win if we're lucky and sneak into the playoffs. Nothing more than that. If Carolina beats us, that will pretty much cement the 'can beat the bottom feeders, but cant beat the upper tier' stigma for the Hawks.

Click to expand...

The Chiefs concern me less because they have a horrible defense that can't stop the run. I'm not saying we're a better team or anything, the matchup just looks a lot easier on paper than I initially expected.

All that nonsense about giving up 29 ppg and how we haven't beat a team with a winning record is entirely dependent on a limited sample size that is relative to this point in the season. For instance, if the Seahawks win and the Packers and Cowboys win, Seattle will have 3 wins over teams with a winning record. Which would put their points allowed against winning teams at 25. We can then factor in defensive TDs and bring that total down to 21 points allowed/game against teams with winning records.

What does all that mean? Absolutely nothing... but remember while you are doubting the Seahawks legitimacy as a contender, 1TD is all that separates the Seahawks and Rams for the division lead. You can pretend the gap between Seattle and the Rams is bigger than it is but that's the reality of the situation. Why? Because parallelism is a transitive property, so if you hold the Rams in high esteem, then you must hold the Seahawks equidistant to the Rams.

(this is all in good fun btw, I don't know why I come off so grumpy in text)

I was going to write about how a loss against Carolina does a lot of damage to our playoff hopes, but I wrote my way out of it once I started doing my research. Now I'm more 50/50.

Carolina does has a relatively favorable remaining schedule - their remaining road games are against TB, CLE, and NO, and they get home games against the Saints and Falcons. That's probably nine wins for them outside of Seattle, so if we do lose to them, I don't see the #5 seed for us.

Minnesota is good. They have the Packers and Patriots before us - three games that are probably more manageable for them than you'd think, at least right now. Then the Bears in Week 17.

Dallas will be moving to take the NFC East any time now, but they have the Saints and Colts, as well as two respectable division games.

Packers are probably done - just too beat up - but their remaining schedule after this week is cake except for the Bears.

Eagles are a weird team this year but have the talent to come back.

knownone":2d5su59f said:

The Chiefs concern me less because they have a horrible defense that can't stop the run. I'm not saying we're a better team or anything, the matchup just looks a lot easier on paper than I initially expected.

Click to expand...

The Rams have a crappy defense too, but like the chiefs, their offense wins by putting more points on the board. Yes, we played them very well, but they outscored us,,,,just like how I feel the chiefs would.

All that nonsense about giving up 29 ppg and how we haven't beat a team with a winning record is entirely dependent on a limited sample size that is relative to this point in the season.

Click to expand...

We are better than half way through the season and the facts are we have played 4 teams that currently have a winning record (Rams twice) and we have lost them all. I don't believe that's just a big coincidence.

For instance, if the Seahawks win and the Packers and Cowboys win, Seattle will have 3 wins over teams with a winning record. Which would put their points allowed against winning teams at 25. We can then factor in defensive TDs and bring that total down to 21 points allowed/game against teams with winning records.

Click to expand...

Your talking about what might happen going forward. I'm talking about whats actually happening now.

What does all that mean? Absolutely nothing... but remember while you are doubting the Seahawks legitimacy as a contender, 1TD is all that separates the Seahawks and Rams for the division lead. You can pretend the gap between Seattle and the Rams is bigger than it is but that's the reality of the situation. Why? Because parallelism is a transitive property, so if you hold the Rams in high esteem, then you must hold the Seahawks equidistant to the Rams.

Click to expand...

Its true, I don't see the Seahawks as a legitimate contender. Why would I, they are .500 and again, haven't beaten a good team yet. The only people on this earth that feel the Seahawks might be a contender are a few of their own fans and that's it.

(this is all in good fun btw, I don't know why I come off so grumpy in text)

Click to expand...

Agreed. Just having fun. Happy Thanksgiving and peace.

If we win this week and don’t blow one verse San Fran or Arizona we are in. But we have to win his week. I think we could still lose to Minnesota and KC and still get in.

I was toying around with the playoff machine trying to see how low the Hawks can go and still make the playoffs. Thinking the KC & Carolina games were okay to lose as long as they won against Minnesota, and the Niners, Cards.

Nope.

This Carolina game is big, they need it. If they lose they have to win out for all intents in purposes.

To stay ahead of MIN/GB.

pittpnthrs":2uile38p said:

Its true, I don't see the Seahawks as a legitimate contender. Why would I, they are .500 and again, haven't beaten a good team yet.

Click to expand...

A lot of good teams are .500 or thereabouts right now. That's the NFC this year.

Seattle beat a good quarterback just last Thursday. Are you going to respond by telling us how terrible Rodgers has become?

We’ll make playoffs at least that much I think. I see us facing the Rams for the 3rd time this season, in LA, and I have to believe in the magic of the 12th man, that always seems to find its way into the mix when everyone else has all but given up and thrown the towel in on us.

My prediction is that “the 3rd times a charm”, and we bust the Rams bubble and move on to our next run at a Super Bowl title. Pete Carroll has whatever it is, that knows how to make the playoff run, and this year we’re not depending g on the Blair Walsh kicking fiasco to keep us in the hunt.

We got Sea Bass who just keeps getting better with age, and Michael Dickson and his fantastic foot that can drop the ball anywhere you tell him to. I know I sound like a homer and I’m guilty as charged, but dammit I really like what I’m seeing this season.

We have a team and a game plan and we have a collection of top flight players that bring the perfect formula they need to take us all the way. That is if they just settle down and focus. It’s tgere for the taking, all we need to is believe. When I see Russell Wilson running up and down the sidelines pleading with his teammates to keep believing and never doubt, I can’t help but believe that crazy mofo is going to do it again.

The Seattle Seahawks are going all the way this season, the Emerald City Miracle part doh awaits us!

Go Seahawks!

MontanaHawk05":1wuwkdf6 said:

pittpnthrs":1wuwkdf6 said:

Its true, I don't see the Seahawks as a legitimate contender. Why would I, they are .500 and again, haven't beaten a good team yet.

Click to expand...

A lot of good teams are .500 or thereabouts right now. That's the NFC this year.

Seattle beat a good quarterback just last Thursday. Are you going to respond by telling us how terrible Rodgers has become?

Click to expand...

Good lord. So beating a good QB that's surrounded by a crappy supporting cast is the same thing as beating a good team? Green Bay sucks this year.

By the way, who are all of these good teams that are .500 right now and what are you basing their goodness off of?

pacific101":kc9ijma8 said:

The Seattle Seahawks are going all the way this season, the Emerald City Miracle part doh awaits us!

Click to expand...

And people get bent out of shape about negativity around here.

SoulfishHawk":20w75j99 said:

Whatever man. Why are you taking this personal? I say plenty. I get that you don't like me, but you know nothing about me. But, I'll gladly bow out if I'm such a horrible poster. Montana been an ass to me for a long while now, for no good reason. Whatever makes you feel better. Guess I thought I was welcomed here, clearly not. Have a great holiday.
Go Hawks

Click to expand...

Soulfish is awesome. Keep posting, brother.

YES . Things break there way and there in at 9-7 if not well we get a better draft pick.

SoulfishHawk":i9dd7wyo said:

Absolutely, would LOVE too see the Rams again. They stood toe to toe with them, both games. They also were not intimidated one bit. I'm loving this rivalry, and it's going to get a lot bigger the next couple of years. That would be one hell of a playoff game if we could face them down there, and I'm sure Hawks fans would represent well as always.

Click to expand...

Britt vs Donald Round 3 would be worth the price of admission.

pittpnthrs":j7kc2uys said:

MontanaHawk05":j7kc2uys said:

pittpnthrs":j7kc2uys said:

Its true, I don't see the Seahawks as a legitimate contender. Why would I, they are .500 and again, haven't beaten a good team yet.

Click to expand...

A lot of good teams are .500 or thereabouts right now. That's the NFC this year.

Seattle beat a good quarterback just last Thursday. Are you going to respond by telling us how terrible Rodgers has become?

Click to expand...

Good lord. So beating a good QB that's surrounded by a crappy supporting cast is the same thing as beating a good team? Green Bay sucks this year.

By the way, who are all of these good teams that are .500 right now and what are you basing their goodness off of?

Click to expand...

Dallas, Philly, Carolina, Minnesota, GB, Atlanta, Seattle. All somewhere between 4-6 and 6-4.

Goodness is based on roster talent and recent years successes. All those teams have had a top NFC seed in the last 4 years.

Mad Dog":30fpov5g said:

pittpnthrs":30fpov5g said:

MontanaHawk05":30fpov5g said:

pittpnthrs":30fpov5g said:

Its true, I don't see the Seahawks as a legitimate contender. Why would I, they are .500 and again, haven't beaten a good team yet.

Click to expand...

A lot of good teams are .500 or thereabouts right now. That's the NFC this year.

Seattle beat a good quarterback just last Thursday. Are you going to respond by telling us how terrible Rodgers has become?

Click to expand...

Good lord. So beating a good QB that's surrounded by a crappy supporting cast is the same thing as beating a good team? Green Bay sucks this year.

By the way, who are all of these good teams that are .500 right now and what are you basing their goodness off of?

Click to expand...

Dallas, Philly, Carolina, Minnesota, GB, Atlanta, Seattle. All somewhere between 4-6 and 6-4.

Goodness is based on roster talent and recent years successes. All those teams have had a top NFC seed in the last 4 years.

Click to expand...

Your basing your opinion on what some of those teams used to be. Dallas, GB, Atlanta, and Seattle arent good teams. They are average teams. Only on fan forums can a team be .500 without beating another team with a winning record and be considered good.

pittpnthrs":14f0qn78 said:

Mad Dog":14f0qn78 said:

pittpnthrs":14f0qn78 said:

MontanaHawk05":14f0qn78 said:

A lot of good teams are .500 or thereabouts right now. That's the NFC this year.

Seattle beat a good quarterback just last Thursday. Are you going to respond by telling us how terrible Rodgers has become?

Click to expand...

Good lord. So beating a good QB that's surrounded by a crappy supporting cast is the same thing as beating a good team? Green Bay sucks this year.

By the way, who are all of these good teams that are .500 right now and what are you basing their goodness off of?

Click to expand...

Dallas, Philly, Carolina, Minnesota, GB, Atlanta, Seattle. All somewhere between 4-6 and 6-4.

Goodness is based on roster talent and recent years successes. All those teams have had a top NFC seed in the last 4 years.

Click to expand...

Your basing your opinion on what some of those teams used to be. Dallas, GB, Atlanta, and Seattle arent good teams. They are average teams. Only on fan forums can a team be .500 without beating another team with a winning record and be considered good.

Click to expand...

Hypothetical question: If every team in the league won and lost close to the same number of games, are they all "average" or all "bad" or all "good"?

Parity can make even great teams look mediocre at times. The difference between average and good, or good and great, may be one game or two with a win/loss point difference of 4 or 5 points.

Ad Hawk":12li66p2 said:

pittpnthrs":12li66p2 said:

Mad Dog":12li66p2 said:

pittpnthrs":12li66p2 said:

Good lord. So beating a good QB that's surrounded by a crappy supporting cast is the same thing as beating a good team? Green Bay sucks this year.

By the way, who are all of these good teams that are .500 right now and what are you basing their goodness off of?

Click to expand...

Dallas, Philly, Carolina, Minnesota, GB, Atlanta, Seattle. All somewhere between 4-6 and 6-4.

Goodness is based on roster talent and recent years successes. All those teams have had a top NFC seed in the last 4 years.

Click to expand...

Your basing your opinion on what some of those teams used to be. Dallas, GB, Atlanta, and Seattle arent good teams. They are average teams. Only on fan forums can a team be .500 without beating another team with a winning record and be considered good.

Click to expand...

Hypothetical question: If every team in the league won and lost close to the same number of games, are they all "average" or all "bad" or all "good"?

Parity can make even great teams look mediocre at times. The difference between average and good, or good and great, may be one game or two with a win/loss point difference of 4 or 5 points.

Click to expand...

If every team was .500 or around there, I would venture to say that there were no dominant teams and they were all pretty much equal or average. I agree with your parity comment, but I don't feel Seattle falls into the good team category currently. The sample size is large enough for me to see that they cant beat a good team yet. Maybe we can beat Carolina, who I think is better than we are and get started.