SoulfishHawk wrote:Or maybe the refs call the obvious PI in the end zone and the Hawks win the division.
Or maybe KJ doesn't drop an easy game ending pick in that same game where the Niners somehow only lost because of a missed FG.
But hey, eventually idiots like this will be "right" if they keep predicting doom and gloom every year.
This isn't the BCS, you either win or you don't. This team gets it done, dwelling on how it looks doesn't and/or saying they barely won etc. doesn't change it.
"Idiots like this"?
"Doom and gloom"?
Lets look at the actual headline of the article...
"Why the Packers, Seahawks, Saints COULD lose more games.."
Then he states later ...
" The goal isn't to put anyone down or ruin anybody's excitement over the season but rather to try to see whether there are reliable indicators of future success or failure."
Such doom and gloom!
He simply states that according to a formula based on math Seattle is a LIKELY candidate to win ONE less game than last year. Has this "hack" had any success in the past using this formula called the Pythagorean expectation? From the article...
"Over the past three years, I've identified 16 teams who I expected to decline in their upcoming campaign.
Fourteen of those 16 teams did decline, while two maintained their prior record. Not a single one improved."
That's a statistically sound assumption. Now, I love your optimism and I share it. As a matter of fact, I think Seattle will win more games than last year because I think they have made substantial personnel upgrades. But to call Barnwell a "Anti Seahawk Hack" or a "doom and gloomer" is preposterous and intellectually dishonest.