namelesstavern.net

All im saying is that seattle wasnt particularly impressive in several of its wins, and im predicting come playoff time, they will get beaten. Homefield advantage all the way through be damned, they just aren't that good of a team.

The Giants aren't a terribly good barometer for a teams ability considering they lost to the Vikings.

I think the Seahawks have a very good chance of representing the NFC in the Super Bowl, but a very poor chance of winning it. Dallas may get the spot, but they're the only viable challenger I think at this point.

The thing is though spliffs, every year teams are not particullary impressive in a large majority of their wins. I remember last year the patriots and the Steelers not being particularly impressive in alot of their victories, however they still won. And winning is the name of the game.

All last year alot of people did not give credit to the patriots, wondering when they were going to slip up, and didnt.

Now im not saying the Seahawks were necessarily better than the patriots last year, but they are not a bad team at all. They have all the tools to be a succesful championship team. The number 1 ranked offense in the NFL, that has to say something. A defense rated around number 12 (they give up alot of passing yards because they are leading the majority of their games). Untill last week they had not allowed a 100 yard rusher, and Tiki needed over time to accomplish that on their defense.

If you are not on the west coast, and dont see them play every week, your not going to give them the credit they deserve.

If Seattle wins on the road at Philly, I'll give them props. Even without Mcnabb, Philly is a well coached team with a good D.

It's easy to be 9-2 when you play in far and away the weakest division in the NFL. I have a bit more respect for Denver, which has beaten the AFC West teams and worked a bit more for that 9-2.

Seattle is 9-2, but I see any of the top AFC teams rolling them in the Super Bowl.

I dont buy that the NFC is a much weaker division at all. While i do give props to Denver, i dont think they are a better team than the Seahawks. Who have they beaten this year for that 9-2 record? Lets consult the crystal ball......

They beat the chargers at Home (big props their, the chargers are the best team aside from indy in the AFC imho) But second game of the year, the chargers werent playing well then.

Beat KC at home. Sorry no different than beating the Rams imho. KC is alittle better, but really they are mirror images of eachother. KC doesnt make the playoffs this year.

NE at home.......well we know the story there. Not all that impressive.

Washington at home.........we are finding out the Redskins are not a playoff team at all.

Philly at home this was their most impressive win. Still had TO, still had Mcnabb. They handled the eagles pretty easily.

At Oakland, again not impressive. Not a playoff team.

Jets at home.........no comment.

At Dallas.....impressive win here. Dallas is a solid team.


In conclusion Denver has not played a higher tier of opponents at all. They beat alot of non Playoff teams.....just like the Seahawks. 3-1 (including KC) against potential playoff teams.....Seahawks are 3-1 against potential playoff teams.

Again.....i dont buy that the AFC is better, and i dont buy that the Broncos have beat more "quality" opponents.

C'mon Xaiv.

Seattle is in a division with San Fran(2-9), Arizona(3-8), & St Louis(5-6).

Do you really want to compare that with Denver who is in a division with San Diego(7-4), KC(7-4), & Oakland? Or even the NFC East?

Seattle has played two quality teams on the road. And Lost to both of them. They have had a frickin cakewalk schedule, and played their few tough NFC foes all at home.

Amassing a nice record beating San Fran twice, Arizona Twice, Houston, and others makes them seem better than they are, but Seattle is not a dominating team.

They should be thanking the schedule makers they don't have any real teams in their division to actually have a challenge, and that they were fortunate enough to play Dallas and NY at home.

Do you think Seattle would be anywhere NEAR 9-2 if they played in the NFC East or AFC West, or really any of the other good divisions? No frickin way.

You can't take the wins away, but lets see how they do @Philly. Given they lost both their other tough road games, we'll see how they do in this one, against a depleted Philly team.

They dont do any worse in the AFC west. Player for player they are not worse than Denver. KC is not a real team, they have a good running game and no defense. Gonzalez has not been himself this year, Green has been ok but they are not a better team than the Rams. Oakland....please they are worse than mediocre.

Again im not taking anything away from Denver, or any other team but the Seahawks are no worse than any team in the AFC (exception Colts for obvious reasons). I just am not buying that Denver or any AFC team is better. /shrug.

Xaiveir wrote:They dont do any worse in the AFC west. Player for player they are not worse than Denver. KC is not a real team, they have a good running game and no defense. Gonzalez has not been himself this year, Green has been ok but they are not a better team than the Rams. Oakland....please they are worse than mediocre.
.

ok... You are saying KC... a 7-4 team that blewout New England, beat the Redskins, ya know a team that beat Seattle... Is not as good as St Louis, a team that lost to Arizona and is in the bottom 1/3rd of the league?

I'd argue KC is as good a team as Seattle. Seattle plays at KC, they lose. KC plays at Seattle, they lose.

KC also has a tougher strength of schedule than Seattle. It's hard to compare a team that plays in a real competitive conference to one who plays against Arizona and San Fran.

Seattle is a team that is where they are due to their schedule. There is nothing wrong with that, and it's where the Bengals are too, my team.

They have talent, but as I said, let them beat a quality opponent on the road.

I said KC is not a better team than the rams, not they are worse than the Rams.

Both teams are very similiar in design. If Bulger is healthy (yes he has missed quite afew games this year) the rams dont lose to AZ. If they would have been running Stephen Jackson all year like the Cheifs do with Priest/johnson yeah the Ramscould be a 7-4 team.

I will deffinatly agree with you on one point though, the Seahawks need to learn to beat teams on the road. They are very lathargic on the road, it has been a curse of the Seahawks for years. Coaching, long travel, wrong type of players, not enough preparation.......whatever it is, they need to figure it out.

That is why it is so important to get homefield advantage for the playoffs. If they can do that, i would give them the nod for the favorites coming out of the NFC. If they do not have homefield playoff advantage i dont see them making the Superbowl.


This Game in Philly is going to be a good test for them. Eagles are playing alittle better now they are running the ball, and could be dangerous for playoff teams down the road. They could be a "trap" game on playoff contenders schedules.

Even though the Seahawks have the inside track on homefield advantage, i would label the Eagles game as a "must win" for them.

Ralf, a SoCal virgin just hasn't taken it up the ass yet. Everything else is fair game.

-Out

Seahawks are a good team. They will make the playoffs, maybe even win a playoff game, and it will have been a nice year for them. They still aren't going to do anything against serious competition in the NFC title game or the superbowl though!

Love ya Xaiv, but it's the truth!

Serious competition like......the Cowboys Spliffs?




<3 Spliffs

In my opionion, it will be the Bears against the Seahawks in the NFC championship game.

I agree Phlem. That will probably be the NFC championship. If its in Chicago the Bears win, if its in Seattle, Seattle definatly wins.

Xaiveir wrote:Serious competition like......the Cowboys Spliffs?




<3 Spliffs

Against anyone that will be in the playoffs. :p

Soooo um yeah, how about them hawks? 42 to zip.

Defense look ok to everyone? That is their weak point you know......

Well, if they play Mike Mcmahon and Koi Detmer every week, they'll do fine.

Philly looked like a lethargic team that's given up on their coach. What a change from last years team.

It'll be fun when Seattle plays Indy in two weeks.

Seattle is the best team in the NFC by far...it is in Seattle and it will be a close game.

I'm curious to see a bears/seahawks game

Seahawks will beat the Bears. In soldier Field...or at home. Bears do not put up enough points even with that defense. They have been playing inept offenses for afew weeks now.

It was nice to see the Seahawks finally win on the east coast. Seahawks i think showed that they are the best team in the NFC right now. Games against the Niners, Titans, Packers and Indy still to go, they should go 3-1 if not 4-0 in those games. The way the weather has been up here in the NW it may be snowing come playoff time, couple that with the noise its going to be a VERY tough place to play.

I'm not convinced that seattle will be a good bad weather team

Alexander while a good back doesn't seem like much of a mucker, and if seattle ends up having to travel to chicago (i think seattle will host the NFC title game tho) I don't think they'll win

I just read this today about Alexander.. you might change your line of thinking after you actually read what he has done and continues to do.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9059271

eh?

had nothing to do with him not being a good mucker

there's no doubt he's productive

don't gert me wrong, I don't think he sucks, he's definately a top 5 back