Okay. Enough of the 'Fail Mary'

[darin]

heard a great convo about that play - two years ago.


"...going back to the fail mary play - and I still don't believe they got it wrong. One thought it was in INT, the other a TD, Ruling on the field was TD. They went to the booth; it was inconclusive - and BY RULE that means it's a touchdown...People were so upset because it was teh Seahawks and GreenBay. The national belief was there is no way the seahawks can beat green bay like that - they just don't deserve it. Look at silly Pete Carroll hopping up and down! Who the heck is Golden Tate!? Russell Wilson is Five-Foot-FIVE! There's no way THAT team can beat Green Bay on a horrible play like that and SO we must gather as a community to erase these refs from our business because they are screwing up the NFL if it means the Seahawks can beat the Packers. "

That game signaled - to the Nation - the shift in the ballance of power from East-coast teams to west-coast teams. The play was indicative of a transformation people didn't want to see. Since that play, the Seahawks are 27-8, 4 playoff games, INCLUDING a Superbowl. The Packers 19-13-1 with 1 playoff win.

The seahawks have become the blue-bloods of the NFL. Two consecutive good years; and likely a 3rd this season.

Do the Seahawks have the respect they deserve? The Difference? The Seahawks are Balanced. The Packers - and others - are one-trick ponies.

Great audio - starts about 12 minutes in;

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9976470&p=1007&n=Brock and Salk


GO HAWKS!

http://s3.amazonaws.com/br-cdn/temp_images/2014/01/12/2014-01-1116_29_18.gif

[Gunny]

heard a great convo about that play - two years ago.


"...going back to the fail mary play - and I still don't believe they got it wrong. One thought it was in INT, the other a TD, Ruling on the field was TD. They went to the booth; it was inconclusive - and BY RULE that means it's a touchdown...People were so upset because it was teh Seahawks and GreenBay. The national belief was there is no way the seahawks can beat green bay like that - they just don't deserve it. Look at silly Pete Carroll hopping up and down! Who the heck is Golden Tate!? Russell Wilson is Five-Foot-FIVE! There's no way THAT team can beat Green Bay on a horrible play like that and SO we must gather as a community to erase these refs from our business because they are screwing up the NFL if it means the Seahawks can beat the Packers. "

That game signaled - to the Nation - the shift in the ballance of power from East-coast teams to west-coast teams. The play was indicative of a transformation people didn't want to see. Since that play, the Seahawks are 27-8, 4 playoff games, INCLUDING a Superbowl. The Packers 19-13-1 with 1 playoff win.

The seahawks have become the blue-bloods of the NFL. Two consecutive good years; and likely a 3rd this season.

Do the Seahawks have the respect they deserve? The Difference? The Seahawks are Balanced. The Packers - and others - are one-trick ponies.

Great audio - starts about 12 minutes in;

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9976470&p=1007&n=Brock and Salk


GO HAWKS!

http://s3.amazonaws.com/br-cdn/temp_images/2014/01/12/2014-01-1116_29_18.gif

Nice of you to not pick the vid that was clearly and interception and a late call after the Seahawk receiver stole the ball on the ground. ;)

[darin]

Nice of you to not pick the vid that was clearly and interception and a late call after the Seahawk receiver stole the ball on the ground. ;)

Except the ball didn't touch the ground; It SEEMED Golden Tate wrestled the ball away while atop the defender :)

[Gunny]

Except the ball didn't touch the ground; It SEEMED Golden Tate wrestled the ball away while atop the defender :)

The defender had the ball. Just showed it yesterday. The ball doesn't have to touch the ground. Possession in the end zone. Not at the end of the wrestling match. Clearly a bad call.

[Baba Booey]

The Seahawks need to win consistently before they earn any credibility. One SB (#1 actually) isn't enough, if they go back to being painfully mediocre again consistently then they're claim to fame is "one and done" or "one hit wonder".

The Packers have without a doubt earned their credibility.

[Gunny]

The Seahawks need to win consistently before they earn any credibility. One SB (#1 actually) isn't enough, if they go back to being painfully mediocre again consistently then they're claim to fame is "one and done" or "one hit wonder".

The Packers have without a doubt earned their credibility.

You can argue that one out with D.

Not sure what credibility is these days. Once free agency started, it's about being wise with the money and getting lucky. Prior to that you had to actually build a team. Now, if the team you have are money grubbers and not athletes that want to play the game, they're gone in a year or two.

Each has its good and bad points, but free agency changed the NFL and I divide accolades in before and after. All the Seahawks have to happen to them is a couple of "star" players walk for more money. Same with any team.

[Baba Booey]

You can argue that one out with D.

Not sure what credibility is these days. Once free agency started, it's about being wise with the money and getting lucky. Prior to that you had to actually build a team. Now, if the team you have are money grubbers and not athletes that want to play the game, they're gone in a year or two.

Each has its good and bad points, but free agency changed the NFL and I divide accolades in before and after. All the Seahawks have to happen to them is a couple of "star" players walk for more money. Same with any team.

Teams with histories are successful for a reason and I believe it starts with ownership.

It's not a mistake that teams like the Packers, Steelers, Patriots are consistent winners, there is a formula and it works.

I don't see the Seahawks being consistent to be honest with you. When they lost that big name guard and gave that wide receiver that nobody ever heard of - Nate Burleson I think his name was like $50m then just went on drunken spending spree in free agency year after year there was no way they were ever going to develop a successful strategy.

It's the same strategy that Danny Snyder uses - buy the best (hasbeen) players, pay them tons of cash, underperform, break your skull hitting the cap, firesale, watch the playoffs from the comfort of your living room.

SBXL was a fluke for them, they just were the least suck team in a completely suck AFC, they fell backwards into it by default.

For Seattle I think the stars just aligned the right way this time around and they definitely deserved this win, no doubt about it, but time will tell how good they really are in the long run.

[Gunny]

Teams with histories are successful for a reason and I believe it starts with ownership.

It's not a mistake that teams like the Packers, Steelers, Patriots are consistent winners, there is a formula and it works.

I don't see the Seahawks being consistent to be honest with you. When they lost that big name guard and gave that wide receiver that nobody ever heard of - Nate Burleson I think his name was like $50m then just went on drunken spending spree in free agency year after year there was no way they were ever going to develop a successful strategy.

It's the same strategy that Danny Snyder uses - buy the best (hasbeen) players, pay them tons of cash, underperform, break your skull hitting the cap, firesale, watch the playoffs from the comfort of your living room.

SBXL was a fluke for them, they just were the least suck team in a completely suck AFC, they fell backwards into it by default.

For Seattle I think the stars just aligned the right way this time around and they definitely deserved this win, no doubt about it, but time will tell how good they really are in the long run.

Dude, the Steelers were the losingest team in NFL history until 1972. :laugh:

And the Dallas Cowboys the winningest team for a long time.

History is just that ... history.

[darin]

The defender had the ball. Just showed it yesterday. The ball doesn't have to touch the ground. Possession in the end zone. Not at the end of the wrestling match. Clearly a bad call.

Okay - I thought you said Golden wrestled the ball away on the ground as in - the ball was on the ground.

Look again, NO video is CONCLUSIVE. The call was within the rules.


The Seahawks need to win consistently before they earn any credibility. One SB (#1 actually) isn't enough, if they go back to being painfully mediocre again consistently then they're claim to fame is "one and done" or "one hit wonder".

The Packers have without a doubt earned their credibility.

Maybe look into the Seahawks before you talk about them? Win consistently? Define consistency.

Is five years consistent enough? Any more than about 5 means NOTHING to the current state of an NFL team because few players stay more than 5 years at a franchise. Whatever the Steelers did in 1975? WhogivesaShit. People watching today's league understand history is only history. I doubt a serious Football person - one who can turn off their 'homer' glasses can think GreenBay is a BETTER team - regardless of what happens tonight.

The leauge is now arranged so 'consistent' winning can only happen from one MAYBE two seasons - to have more than two or three solid, GOOD seasons is rare.


Last five years:

Packers: 55-24-1 .696
1 Conf, 1 SB
Seahawks: 43-37 .551
1 Conf, 1 SB

Doesn't account for strength of schedule.


Last Three years:
Packers: 31-13-1 Strenth of Schedule average: -.8
2013, Point dif: -11 & Lost WC
2012, Point dif: 97 & Lost Div
2011, Point dif: 201 & Lost Div

Seahawks: 33-17 Strenth of Schedule average: 1.2
2013, Point dif: 186 & Won SB
2012, Point dif: 167 & Lost Div
2011, Point dif: 6 & no Playoffs.


If The Packers have been 'consistently good' - the Seahawks have been Conistently Pretty Darn Good.

[darin]

Oh...by the way.


KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMM!


http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/229/files/2014/01/003.gif

[Gunny]

Oh...by the way.


KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMM!


http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/229/files/2014/01/003.gif

That IS a nice shot. And I'll give him props because from the one angle he's at least trying to wrap up.

[Jeff]

Personally I think the Seahawks are here to stay for a while, admittedly I know very little about them but they seem to play together well and when ya have a team like that they are going places

[Baba Booey]

Dude, the Steelers were the losingest team in NFL history until 1972. :laugh:

And the Dallas Cowboys the winningest team for a long time.

History is just that ... history.

And the Browns have the most pre-NFL championships and are now the laughing stock of the league, so what's your point?

Edit: I meant NFC in my previous post, me=derp.

[Gunny]

Personally I think the Seahawks are here to stay for a while, admittedly I know very little about them but they seem to play together well and when ya have a team like that they are going places

Like I previously posted, depends a lot on the players. Most put a ring and the team AFTER their bank accounts. From certain POV, I can see that. Each and every play could be their last. What usually happens is some no-name with a medium contract becomes a star and wants more money for himself without regard to the affect it has on paying everyone else. And the owner has a salary cap. I've watched this play out in the NBA for years. I want all this money, and oh yeah, build a team around me. You can't have your cake and eat it too. :)

The Seahawks will be good this year and they ARE the team to beat. The teams to beat them, depending on how they play, will be the Ravens or Steelers. Seattle's defense is too good. Someone's got to out-defense them. Those are the two teams that traditionally have had shut-down defenses.