HedleyLamarr Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I know I'm probably highEdited for accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 NFL teams will figure out the read-option and I think the Seahawks will be something of a disappointment as a result. With an entire offseason to gameplan and consult with college coaches for how to stop the read option, NFL defenses will learn how to slow or stop it. The disparity in talent, in my opinion, isn't great enough for it succeed at the NFL level as it has in college. A team that plays fundamentally sound football and tackles well will stop the Seahawks offense.Hell, just watch game film from the St. Louis Rams last season. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckymack Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Seahawks aren't even the favorites in their own division, let alone the Super Bowl. Wilson and Lynch are slightly overrated, the receiving corps is subpar, and their front seven aren't scaring anybody. Seattle's got several glaring weaknesses at this juncture. Their secondary, however, may be the best in the league. Sigs are for sissies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jigga Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I know I'm probably highEdited for accuracy.I was gonna post a thread, but then I got high (oooooh oooh ooooh)The smartest thing I've ever said, but then I got high (laaaaa daa da da da da)Instead I look like I'm in phone, and I know why...Why, man? (yay hey)Because I got high! Because I got high! Because I got hi-igh!Sorry...anywho,no one who doesn't call himself "The 12th Man" (whatever the that's supposed to mean) can sit here with more than 80% certainty one way or the other. From my vantage point, the SeaHags' season was never going to depend on Harvin's tender hip (or his migraine headaches or whatever other nagging injuries he will have) anyway. This is the NFL, man. Anything can happen. They could go 5-11, 8-8 or 11-5; all are in the realm of possibility. Lots of other people are going to get hurt, a bunch of people we've never heard of are going to ball their asses off, and quite a few dudes who are "names" are going to be absolute dogs. There is no birthright for any team, especially in that division this year. They might be the favorites (though SF should get that nod, because theoretically the Harvin and Crabtree injuries cancel each other out), but they don't get 9 wins just for stepping on the field. On January 16, 2013 at 3:49 PM, NJTank said: Btw this is old hat for Notre Dame. Knits Rockne made up George Tip's death bed speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Ok, I'll give 5 reasons why Seattle could miss the playoffs:1. Seattle went 3-5 (or 4-6 including the playoffs) on the road, including losses to St. Louis, Arizona, Detroit, and Miami.5. Seattle has a tougher schedule.It is less the road losses, but more a product that the Seahawks are terrible when they have to play the early game.Since 2007, they are 9-18 when they travel to either the Eastern or Central time zone to play a 1PM Eastern/10AM Pacific kickoff.Unless flexed out, SEA must do that five times this season: @CAR; @HOU; @IND; @ATL; @NYG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kramerica Industries Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Yeah, and 2007 was a long time ago with a roster that may have experienced 100% turnover by this point, and between 2008-2010, the Seahawks were a miserable team.Stats like that, which range that far back, mean almost nothing to me. You know what, they've played four 1:00 ET (12:00 CT) games in Chicago in the past three years, and gone 3-1 in that stretch. Now what? There are infinite numbers of ways you can break down or dismiss a stat like that. What would I care about, if I were a Seahawks fan? They won three of their last four road games in 2012, and were a break or two away from that being five road wins in a row (the OT loss in Miami and the last second loss in Atlanta). The Seahawks were a team that quite clearly improved as the season went along last season, which should not be surprising given that they are a young team. What happened after November 1 has a lot more weight than what happened prior to November 1, as far as I'm concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.