pittpnthrs":anpwz1wc said:
Maelstrom787":anpwz1wc said:
Realists don't make blanket statements and definitive judgments on events that have yet to transpire and clearly have no certain result.
Realists take the evidence thats given to them and draw opinions from it. The evidence gathered from the past 6 years is that Russ is good enough to give the team 10-12 wins a season which usually nets a Wild Card position in the post season and once there, they get promptly beaten within the first or second round because the competition is better and Russ cant overcome Carrolls ineptitude at that point. With that body of evidence, why would anybody think it would or will be any different?
The realist view would simultaneously acknowledge that Seattle has deeply concerning facets of their organization, from roster down to coaching, but also that the team tends to overperform regardless and doesn't really get blown out very often at all.
The realist view considers both the pessimist take and the optimist take.
Optimist: Seattle, with largely the same team makeup, has continued to win 10-plus yearly, and this year is simply an aberration on that proven track record, therefore the team is likely to trend upward in the second half of the year. The defense is improving in a similar way to last year and Russ is coming back. Any game is winnable.
Pessimist: Seattle has had deepening issues with roster construction and gameplanning for an extended period of time. Years of subpar drafting and dubious acquisitions have hampered the teams upward mobility, and therefore, this year is simply a reflection of where the team always deserved to be results-wise. They will miss the playoffs.
Realist: A person that can simultaneously acknowledge the valid points of both parties above, and someone who can acknowledge that any result is far from determined, including that of the Packers game and the wild card race.