HeatEquation":b0wfncot said:
Sports Hernia":b0wfncot said:
Scoreboard and stats say you are wrong, but then again I'm sure being WRONG is something you are quite used to.
Best teams don't always win the game. You're likely very young and don't have much experience watching football. But that's fact. Today was one of those cases.
This is sometimes true the better team doesn't always win. But this is not one of those cases.
How do you define better?
Because they had the lead most of the game? That certainly doesn't define better. We've seen that many times. The reason the Packers had the lead was they had great field position for several drives due to TO's yet couldn't convert that into TD's. That tells me right there they weren't the better team. By the sheer nature of where the TO's happened they were already automatic FG's. The fact that the Packers couldn't make them more says volumes about Seattle's D.
Because of turnover ratio? Not an indication of better. We've seen teams win the TO battle only to lose the game many times. 2 of those 4 picks should have been caught the other 2 were on RW as bad throwing decisions. Much like the 2 bad decisions AR made.
TOP? Pretty much even. GB 32:15 Sea 31:04.
Passing? Seahawks had 33 more yards.
Rushing? Seahawks had 59 more yards.
3rd down efficiency? GB 3-14 Sea 8-16.
Yards per rush? GB 4.5 Sea 5.5.
1st downs? GB 19 Sea 20.
Other than leading in scoring for most of the game due to 3 additional bad bounces of the ball I don't see how they were better.