Seattle For Real?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    They are good, but they still need to prove they can play well consistently away from home.  Also while they do have a top defense I have to believe they get a bit of a boost from the fact that the opposing offense can't function normally because of the crowd noise in that stadium.  They blew out the 9ers last year in Seattle in week 16 and didn't win make it out of the divisional round so while this was a good win for them it is a long season.

     



    They can`t win in the east cost.

     




    Care to explain why you think that?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PATSchampsSB. Show PATSchampsSB's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

     

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

     

    They are good, but they still need to prove they can play well consistently away from home.  Also while they do have a top defense I have to believe they get a bit of a boost from the fact that the opposing offense can't function normally because of the crowd noise in that stadium.  They blew out the 9ers last year in Seattle in week 16 and didn't win make it out of the divisional round so while this was a good win for them it is a long season.

     

     



    They can`t win in the east cost.

     

     

     




     

    Care to explain why you think that?

    The Seahawks' record of futility in games played on the East Coast and starting at the 1 p.m. ET time slot is well-known. Last season, the Seahawks went 1-4 in games that started at 1 p.m. ET, with their only victory coming in overtime against the Chicago Bears, who are based in the Central Time Zone (last year's win over the Panthers came in a game with a 4:05 p.m. ET kickoff time). Since 2010, the Seahawks are a dismal 4-9 (including playoff games) in 1 p.m. ET starts. Despite that abysmal showing in early games, the Seahawksmanaged to make the playoffs in 2012 (they countered a 3-5 road record with a dominant 8-0 mark at the friendly confines of CenturyLink Field -- which has developed quite a reputation as a raucously loud venue for both of Seattle's football teams).

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    Care to explain why you think that?




    49ers manhandled Patriots last year.  Don't see many reasons why Seattle can't do the same.  Certainly, if it's in really cold weather or in a storm/blizzard/inclement weather - that certainly can change the dynamics of the game for any visiting team.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to magicalhobo's comment:

     

    I think they are up there. Once Harvin comes back they will have another receiver threat, and Lynch is a beast. They have a 2001 Patriots kind of vibe to me. Everyone thinks they are still bad, but they keep fighting.

    Plus their home advantage is insane. If they could get that throught the playoffs that would be ridiculous.

    __________________________________________________

    Come on if you think you can take us on
    You and whose army?
    You and your cronies.




    Lynch gets a lot of help from his OL. Case in point was his TD run. Any average RB would have gotten that TD. Pats RBs seldom see that kind of running anes, and they definitely did not have it against the Jets.

     

    It's interesting also that his beast status gets validated by 3.5 ypc performance, yet the Pats RBs are seen as lacking on talent even when they turn in a 4.5 ypc performance like Ridley did against the Bills.

    This is not a commentary on you. It's more about posters here in general.

     



    I think those #'s will always need to be provided with context. I am not saying either one is wrong, but if Lynchs average is only 3.5 than that is misleading. I am taking Ridley over him if that where you are going. Benny enjoyed a higher ypc here than he is in Cincy. Why, who are the QB's he is behind? Playing here with Brady, a back will enjoy a higher ypc because the defense cant afford to key on them. Not since Dillon was here has any Defene put 8 in the box for a runner. What about AP? You dont think HE is working harder with 10 in the Box and Christain Ponder behind him?  So Im sorry, give me Lynch any Day! Sure his line opens up Holes. but He is all alone when He RUNS OVERS DEFENDERS. Nothing misleading about that.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    My flash power ratings after the Seattle game:

    1    den    15.2    (last wk.    2    )
    2    sea    15.1    (last wk.    1    )
    3    gb    13.0    (last wk.    5    )
    4    sf    12.1    (last wk.    3    )
    5    atl    10.9    (last wk.    7    )
    6    ne    10.5    (last wk.    4    )
    7    no    10.2    (last wk.    10    )
    8    mia    10.1    (last wk.    8    )
    9    hou    9.6    (last wk.    6    )
    10    min    9.4    (last wk.    15    )
    11    cin    9.2    (last wk.    9    )

    Seattle did have a huge home field advantage.  Otherwise they demolished a great team by the middle of the fourth quarter.

                                                                                                                                       
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

     

     

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

     

     

    They are good, but they still need to prove they can play well consistently away from home.  Also while they do have a top defense I have to believe they get a bit of a boost from the fact that the opposing offense can't function normally because of the crowd noise in that stadium.  They blew out the 9ers last year in Seattle in week 16 and didn't win make it out of the divisional round so while this was a good win for them it is a long season.

     

     

     



    They can`t win in the east cost.

     

     

     

     

     




     

     

    Care to explain why you think that?

     

     

    The Seahawks' record of futility in games played on the East Coast and starting at the 1 p.m. ET time slot is well-known. Last season, the Seahawks went 1-4 in games that started at 1 p.m. ET, with their only victory coming in overtime against the Chicago Bears, who are based in the Central Time Zone (last year's win over the Panthers came in a game with a 4:05 p.m. ET kickoff time). Since 2010, the Seahawks are a dismal 4-9 (including playoff games) in 1 p.m. ET starts. Despite that abysmal showing in early games, the Seahawksmanaged to make the playoffs in 2012 (they countered a 3-5 road record with a dominant 8-0 mark at the friendly confines of CenturyLink Field -- which has developed quite a reputation as a raucously loud venue for both of Seattle's football teams).

     




    Last year, they too were a young team, still elarning how to play together consistently. I don't think their past record will have any bearing on how they perform on the road this year. They will be above 500 on the road.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to anonymis' comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    Care to explain why you think that?

     




    49ers manhandled Patriots last year.  Don't see many reasons why Seattle can't do the same.  Certainly, if it's in really cold weather or in a storm/blizzard/inclement weather - that certainly can change the dynamics of the game for any visiting team.

     




    THat's what I am saying. Seattle is probably a better team now than their road record last year would indicate. They play in bad weather too. They don't see snow as much, but 10 degree temp in damp conditions feels a lot colder - it penetrates to the bone for some reason.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

    The one thing that stood out to me was the overall speed of their Defense. That defense right now is an elite D. It will be inetresting to see how teams attack them going forward.




    Carroll always liked having a lot of speed on his defense. It's been talked about in Seattle sports radio, back when he started witht eh team. He'll have size if he can get it, but in addition to speed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

    The one thing that stood out to me was the overall speed of their Defense. That defense right now is an elite D. It will be inetresting to see how teams attack them going forward.

     




    Carroll always liked having a lot of speed on his defense. It's been talked about in Seattle sports radio, back when he started witht eh team. He'll have size if he can get it, but in addition to speed.

     




    Conceptually, it kinda makes sense given where offenses are going.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to magicalhobo's comment:

    I think they are up there. Once Harvin comes back they will have another receiver threat, and Lynch is a beast. They have a 2001 Patriots kind of vibe to me. Everyone thinks they are still bad, but they keep fighting.

    Plus their home advantage is insane. If they could get that throught the playoffs that would be ridiculous.

    __________________________________________________

    Come on if you think you can take us on
    You and whose army?
    You and your cronies.



    What are you talking about?  They have been considered 1 or 2 on the power rankings before the season started, and they'll stay there as the season continues.  No one is surprised.  They return the same players basically everywhere from their strong season last year, and added an elite pass rusher and dynamic player on offense.  No brainer really.  Carroll built a good team up there.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

    The one thing that stood out to me was the overall speed of their Defense. That defense right now is an elite D. It will be inetresting to see how teams attack them going forward.

     

     




    Carroll always liked having a lot of speed on his defense. It's been talked about in Seattle sports radio, back when he started witht eh team. He'll have size if he can get it, but in addition to speed.

     

     




     

    Conceptually, it kinda makes sense given where offenses are going.



    The lateral movement by the entire D was exceptional. They were fast to the boundaries and closed gaps as fast as i have ever seen. I don't know if it was just last night but if the D palys at that level and intensity throughout the year they have to be considered the favorites in the NFC.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    I have Seattle beating Jacksonville by an astounding 31.2 points next week.  I've never seen anything like this.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    No question the Seahawks appear legit at this point.  Defense clearly gets it done and the O seems to be getting there as well.  

    Like TFB12, I don't care for Sherman's mouthiness but there is no doubt the guy is as good a corner as there is out there.

    Interesting - Pete Carroll - after 2 poor prior showings in the NFL - Jets and Pats.  We'll see how it all shakes out come January.



    that's true. It's a long season. Injuries happen. Other teams start coming at you a lil harder.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from PATSchampsSB. Show PATSchampsSB's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    Comic

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from PATSchampsSB. Show PATSchampsSB's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

     

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

     

     

     

     

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    They are good, but they still need to prove they can play well consistently away from home.  Also while they do have a top defense I have to believe they get a bit of a boost from the fact that the opposing offense can't function normally because of the crowd noise in that stadium.  They blew out the 9ers last year in Seattle in week 16 and didn't win make it out of the divisional round so while this was a good win for them it is a long season.

     

     

     

     



    They can`t win in the east cost.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




     

     

     

    Care to explain why you think that?

     

     

     

     

    The Seahawks' record of futility in games played on the East Coast and starting at the 1 p.m. ET time slot is well-known. Last season, the Seahawks went 1-4 in games that started at 1 p.m. ET, with their only victory coming in overtime against the Chicago Bears, who are based in the Central Time Zone (last year's win over the Panthers came in a game with a 4:05 p.m. ET kickoff time). Since 2010, the Seahawks are a dismal 4-9 (including playoff games) in 1 p.m. ET starts. Despite that abysmal showing in early games, the Seahawksmanaged to make the playoffs in 2012 (they countered a 3-5 road record with a dominant 8-0 mark at the friendly confines of CenturyLink Field -- which has developed quite a reputation as a raucously loud venue for both of Seattle's football teams).

     

     




    Last year, they too were a young team, still elarning how to play together consistently. I don't think their past record will have any bearing on how they perform on the road this year. They will be above 500 on the road.

     



    Yes, I agree with u they have everything to play better in the road this year.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to Paul_K's comment:

    I have Seattle beating Jacksonville by an astounding 31.2 points next week.  I've never seen anything like this.

     




    how are you doing with your picks this season?

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    I'm 2-0, but I really didn't expect to do well in weeks 1 and 2.  I'm best in weeks 3-16 when I have fresh numbers reflecting the actual teams on the field. 

    Interesting -- Vegas is getting "only" 19 1/2 points on the Seattle game. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    After beating the 49ers....are the Seahawks for real?  They ought to be favorites to reach the SB at this point.

     



         I thought that this question was answered in the positive last year.

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to Paul_K's comment:

    My flash power ratings after the Seattle game:

    1    den    15.2    (last wk.    2    )
    2    sea    15.1    (last wk.    1    )
    3    gb    13.0    (last wk.    5    )
    4    sf    12.1    (last wk.    3    )
    5    atl    10.9    (last wk.    7    )
    6    ne    10.5    (last wk.    4    )
    7    no    10.2    (last wk.    10    )
    8    mia    10.1    (last wk.    8    )
    9    hou    9.6    (last wk.    6    )
    10    min    9.4    (last wk.    15    )
    11    cin    9.2    (last wk.    9    )

    Seattle did have a huge home field advantage.  Otherwise they demolished a great team by the middle of the fourth quarter.

                                                                                                                                       




    Seattle,SF,Denver,Chicago , KC  - in that order for me right now

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Seattle For Real?

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

     

     

    Care to explain why you think that?

     

     




    49ers manhandled Patriots last year.  Don't see many reasons why Seattle can't do the same.  Certainly, if it's in really cold weather or in a storm/blizzard/inclement weather - that certainly can change the dynamics of the game for any visiting team.

     

     

     



    Umm, what? We turned it over 4 times in our own zone in the first half and then we destroyed them in the second half.

    Do you even watch these games, troll?  



    I do not understand why when the Patriots turn the ball over it is a "mistake" by the offense, but when the other team turns the ball over the Patriots defense "forced" a turnover.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share