Erebus
Active member
There are two games of primary interest (besides ours), and one of secondary interest. Those are the 49ers at Rams, Bears at Vikings, and Eagles at Redskins. A lot is on the line here, but the implications for the Seahawks are not clear.
If the 49ers beat the Rams (it's possible; Gurley is out, Mullens has been surprisingly good lately) and the Bears beat the Vikings, then the Bears get the #2 seed. And if the Eagles win in that situation, they sneak into the playoffs at the #6 seed. However, if the Vikings win, nothing changes from the current playoff seedings. Rams would get #2, Bears #3, Vikings #6.
Our first priority is (probably) an easier path to the Super Bowl. That means having a team in the #6 seed that is most likely to win a road playoff game, which would save us from having to go to New Orleans, and also potentially give us a home game in the NFC Championship. If the Bears and 49ers win (making Bears #2, Rams #3), who is better suited to beat the Rams in the wild card round? Vikings or Eagles? And then who would we rather face in the divisional round, Bears or Rams? I think I'd rather play the Rams in warm weather; we were so close to beating them twice. It's hard to beat a team three times in one year. So, perhaps we should be rooting for the Rams to beat the 49ers and secure the #2 seed?
However, that may just be short-sighted thinking. That's one game, and the future of the 49ers success may depend on losing this game. Kyler Murray has a pretty good shot at going #1 overall in the draft, thus letting Nick Bosa slip to the 49ers. If the 49ers win, they move themselves out of position to select him, and making our next decade of football a little easier.
What do you all think? Is there that much of a difference between playing the Bears or Rams that we would much rather play the Rams and let the 49ers get Bosa? Or is the difference negligible and we can beat either one, and thus hope the 49ers beat the Rams?
If the 49ers beat the Rams (it's possible; Gurley is out, Mullens has been surprisingly good lately) and the Bears beat the Vikings, then the Bears get the #2 seed. And if the Eagles win in that situation, they sneak into the playoffs at the #6 seed. However, if the Vikings win, nothing changes from the current playoff seedings. Rams would get #2, Bears #3, Vikings #6.
Our first priority is (probably) an easier path to the Super Bowl. That means having a team in the #6 seed that is most likely to win a road playoff game, which would save us from having to go to New Orleans, and also potentially give us a home game in the NFC Championship. If the Bears and 49ers win (making Bears #2, Rams #3), who is better suited to beat the Rams in the wild card round? Vikings or Eagles? And then who would we rather face in the divisional round, Bears or Rams? I think I'd rather play the Rams in warm weather; we were so close to beating them twice. It's hard to beat a team three times in one year. So, perhaps we should be rooting for the Rams to beat the 49ers and secure the #2 seed?
However, that may just be short-sighted thinking. That's one game, and the future of the 49ers success may depend on losing this game. Kyler Murray has a pretty good shot at going #1 overall in the draft, thus letting Nick Bosa slip to the 49ers. If the 49ers win, they move themselves out of position to select him, and making our next decade of football a little easier.
What do you all think? Is there that much of a difference between playing the Bears or Rams that we would much rather play the Rams and let the 49ers get Bosa? Or is the difference negligible and we can beat either one, and thus hope the 49ers beat the Rams?