The SuperBowl Losers' Curse

[darin]

Why aren't we talking about how the Seahawks are the only team in nearly a decade to have broken the curse last year? Why do people doubt their ability to beat the Packers or the 'Boys? The Hawks ARE a strong team.

[Immanuel]

Why aren't we talking about how the Seahawks are the only team in nearly a decade to have broken the curse last year? Why do people doubt their ability to beat the Packers or the 'Boys? The Hawks ARE a strong team.

Oh, I hope they do beat both, but then I'm not going to put any cold, hard cash down on the hope that they do. I agree they are a strong team, but I just don't think they have what it takes to drop the Cowboys or the Pack. But, I can dream about it.

Immie

[darin]

Why not, though? I've seen both teams get 'pushed' by underdogs. The seahawks are playing as good or better than they've ever played. If it weren't for their record (early-season miscues), they too would be an 11 or 12 win team. :)

[jimnyc]

Why aren't we talking about how the Seahawks are the only team in nearly a decade to have broken the curse last year? Why do people doubt their ability to beat the Packers or the 'Boys? The Hawks ARE a strong team.

I have no doubt that Seattle has the ability to beat either team, just not willing to bet on it just yet! I think Seattle, Cowboys, Packers & Giants all have a legit shot in the NFC. I give experience to Seattle, but I think home field advantage will play a big role in the playoffs this year.

Unfortunately for me, I don't think any team has a chance in the AFC against New England. The playoffs are almost here though and it'll be fun anyway!

[jimnyc]

Why not, though? I've seen both teams get 'pushed' by underdogs. The seahawks are playing as good or better than they've ever played. If it weren't for their record (early-season miscues), they too would be an 11 or 12 win team. :)

Same as my shitty Steelers, who lost 3 very close games, and could very well be 12-1 at this stage. Wouldn't matter though as they still would have been pulverized by NE, and likely again in the playoffs if they're lucky enough to see them again. Damn Cardinals, Jets and Broncos! :fu:

[Immanuel]

Why not, though? I've seen both teams get 'pushed' by underdogs. The seahawks are playing as good or better than they've ever played. If it weren't for their record (early-season miscues), they too would be an 11 or 12 win team. :)

Yeah, and without the miscues, the 49ers could be in first place too or maybe even the Raiders could be 13-0! Now, back to reality... I just don't think the 'hawks have what it takes this year to bring down either one of those teams. Both teams are very tough this year and bringing them down is going to take a lot of luck.

I'm going to go out on a limb so early in the season and predict New England vs. either the Cowboys or the Pack in the Super Bowl. Most likely the Cowboys. Wow! I'm really stepping out on that limb, aren't I? :D

Hey, but at least it won't be Pittsburgh! :clap: Hehe

Immie

[darin]

not even CLOSE.

Let's look at seattle's four losses.

First loss - v. Carolina. Matt made a bad audible call when they were 10 yards from field goal range. Shaun fumbled and the Cards picked it up.

2nd Loss - Steelers. Seahawks got their asses beat. No excuses.

3rd Loss - Saints. Long-Snap on a punt for a TD. That set the tone for the game. Take that way and it's a 4-point saints lead. MUCH different ballgame. HORRENDOUS Holding on the part of the Saints O-line, rarely? Never? Called.

4th Loss - 2nd half collapse.


Now - Do that with the raiders losses and you'll know why your statement is ridiculous. :)

Out on a LIMB with your prediction? that's not being out on a limb, that's taking the SAFE choices. :)

You forget how 'untouchable' Indy was in 2005 entering the playoffs. They seemed too-strong for any other AFC team to have a chance, ESPECIALLY playing at-Indy.

There are three season every year. Pre-Season. Regular-Season. Play-off Season.

[theHawk]

No ones talking about them because the Seachickens SUCK!!! :laugh2:


GO COWBOYS!!!!! :thewave:

[darin]

No ones talking about them because the Seachickens SUCK!!! :laugh2:


GO COWBOYS!!!!! :thewave:

http://www.sph33r.net/upload/files/16/banned03.gif

[Immanuel]

not even CLOSE.

Let's look at seattle's four losses.

First loss - v. Carolina. Matt made a bad audible call when they were 10 yards from field goal range. Shaun fumbled and the Cards picked it up.

2nd Loss - Steelers. Seahawks got their asses beat. No excuses.

3rd Loss - Saints. Long-Snap on a punt for a TD. That set the tone for the game. Take that way and it's a 4-point saints lead. MUCH different ballgame. HORRENDOUS Holding on the part of the Saints O-line, rarely? Never? Called.

4th Loss - 2nd half collapse.


Now - Do that with the raiders losses and you'll know why your statement is ridiculous. :)

My point was that we can all say... "IF ONLY", even us Raider fans. :D


Out on a LIMB with your prediction? that's not being out on a limb, that's taking the SAFE choices. :)

Yeah? Well, you got my point on that one. ;)


You forget how 'untouchable' Indy was in 2005 entering the playoffs. They seemed too-strong for any other AFC team to have a chance, ESPECIALLY playing at-Indy.

No, I didn't forget anything. I didn't say I would bet against the 'hawks either, but I am not putting hard earned money up on them winning that is for sure. Who knows, maybe Favre or Romo will have a bad game someday? If Only!


There are three season every year. Pre-Season. Regular-Season. Play-off Season.

True, and there is plenty of room for the wanna be's at the bottom of the bracket in the playoffs. However, those wanna be's are usually just there to make the cream of the crop look good before the real games begin. :D

Immie

[Immanuel]

Wait.. wait... wait... let me do it for you dmp.

Immie... http://www.sph33r.net/upload/files/16/banned03.gif

[manu1959]

they don't call it the nfc worst for nuffin.........:poke:

[darin]

My point was that we can all say... "IF ONLY", even us Raider fans. :D


But I didn't say 'If Only' - I illustrated a few miscues does not make a team less-good. The Raiders are NOT GOOD, apart from a few good plays.



No, I didn't forget anything. I didn't say I would bet against the 'hawks either, but I am not putting hard earned money up on them winning that is for sure. Who knows, maybe Favre or Romo will have a bad game someday? If Only!

You 'talk' like you base your assessment of a team solely upon their record.




True, and there is plenty of room for the wanna be's at the bottom of the bracket in the playoffs. However, those wanna be's are usually just there to make the cream of the crop look good before the real games begin. :D

Immie


Any team starting Ken Hamlin has glaring weakness in the secondary. :)

[Immanuel]

But I didn't say 'If Only' - I illustrated a few miscues does not make a team less-good. The Raiders are NOT GOOD, apart from a few good plays.

Whether you used the words, "If Only" or not, that is basically what you are saying. As for the Raiders being "Not Good", you give them too much credit. They stink and that is probably too much credit too.

Oh, and I have been saying that if only the referees had eyes the Raiders would have won the "Immaculate Reception" game since the moment it happened. That doesn't change a darned thing!



You 'talk' like you base your assessment of a team solely upon their record.

Maybe so, but looking at the teams and the games they have played this year, I think you have been bitten by the "My Team is the Greatest" bug. Look at your team critically and you will see the fallacy in your viewpoint. They just don't have what it takes this year and believe me when I say, better the Seahawks than either the Cowboys or the Packers! Unfortunately, I just don't think they have what it takes this year around. Alexander's been hurt for a good part of the year and I don't think that even if he were 100% healthy going into the playoffs that they have the power to take down Romo/TO or Favre and the gang.

Who knows, maybe your 'hawks will get lucky this year. It's happened before but I would not count on seeing the Seahawks face off against New England come Super Bowl Sunday.

Immie

[darin]

I think you have been bitten by the "My Team is the Greatest" bug.


That right there tells me you're being thick-headed. I'm saying BASED ON THE FACTS of how Seattle has been playing, there's little reason to think they'd be anything less than competitive against the pack or the boys. The WORST possible circumstance is for Alexander to get healthy, and the hawks start wasting plays called to him.

[Immanuel]

That right there tells me you're being thick-headed. I'm saying BASED ON THE FACTS of how Seattle has been playing, there's little reason to think they'd be anything less than competitive against the pack or the boys. The WORST possible circumstance is for Alexander to get healthy, and the hawks start wasting plays called to him.

Based on facts?

I don't think so. The "facts" don't stand up. Both the Cowboys and the Packers are having phenomenal years while the 'hawks barely look better than the average team, yet you think that the 'hawks can compete against either one of them? Sorry, I don't see it happening. The 'hawks are NOT a super team this year. Both Romo and Favre will pick your defense apart, chew them up and spit them out.

The Seahawks just don't have what is needed this time around.

But, I DO wish your team success against both the Cowboys and Packers. I'd like nothing more than come the end of the NFC championship game to post here saying that you were right.

I despise the Cowboys and have ever since Jerry Jones bought them and I don't like Brett Favre. He's a great QB but wiping that darned smile off his face is a dream game come true.

{edit}

Oh and one more thing, as a long time Raider fan, I know what it is like to believe my team is the greatest. It took me years to finally wake up and realize that they are nothing but has beens and that it is time to kick Al Davis' butt into retirement.

Immie

[darin]

Based on facts?

I don't think so. The "facts" don't stand up. Both the Cowboys and the Packers are having phenomenal years while the 'hawks barely look better than the average team, yet you think that the 'hawks can compete against either one of them? Sorry, I don't see it happening. The 'hawks are NOT a super team this year. Both Romo and Favre will pick your defense apart, chew them up and spit them out.

The Seahawks just don't have what is needed this time around.

Immie


You clearly don't watch Football games or follow the sport when you can't watch games. That's fine. This might help.


the Seahawks could be dangerous because their quarterback is hot and their defense can pressure the passer, force turnovers and cover on the back end. Any team that beats Dallas (13-1) or Green Bay (12-2) in a road playoff game figures to require those traits. A running game also might help, but the Cowboys in particular appear vulnerable to spread passing teams.

Matt Hasselbeck has flourished since Seattle stopped trying to run the ball on its own terms. The Seahawks are a pass-first team with the personnel to make it work. It starts with the quarterback.

Hasselbeck, 32, is on pace for to reach 4,000 yards and 30 touchdowns for the first time in his nine-year NFL career. On Sunday, Hasselbeck became the first quarterback since 2003 to toss four touchdown passes against Arizona. He's heating up at the right time and his receiving options should improve.

Starting flanker Deion Branch might not regain top form until a foot injury has time to heal during the offseason, but he's back on the field and contributing. Starting split end D.J. Hackett, a difficult matchup for smaller corners, is close to returning from ankle problems.

Nate Burleson leads Seattle in receiving touchdowns with six, but 34-year-old Bobby Engram is the receiver Hasselbeck trusts the most. Engram, having overcome thyroid issues that threatened his career last season, improbably has two more receptions (76) than Dallas' Terrell Owens.

Lofa Tatupu (51) and Patrick Kerney (right) have been making big plays for the Seahawks' defense. Tatupu recently had a three-interception game; Kerney has a trio of three-sack outings.
As for those Cowboys: No NFC team has defeated them since the Seahawks eliminated Dallas from the playoffs last season.

The Cowboys are much better now, as are the Seahawks, particularly on defense. Seattle's secondary, since revamped, featured former loan officer Pete Hunter in a prominent role when the teams played in January.

Seattle also won in its most recent game against second-seeded Green Bay. Hasselbeck tossed three touchdown passes to beat the Packers last season, joining Tom Brady and Tony Romo as the only quarterbacks to throw three or more against Green Bay in the Packers' last 31 games.

If anyone has a shot at upsetting Dallas or Green Bay in the conference playoffs, it's probably the team with the NFC's best record since 2003. Only New England (63) and Indianapolis (61) own more regular-season victories than the Seahawks (50) over the last five seasons. Seattle also has ample playoff experience.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3151529&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab6pos1

Of course, I'm sure you are more football smart than Sando and Tuna. :)

[Immanuel]

the Seahawks could be dangerous because their quarterback is hot and their defense can pressure the passer, force turnovers and cover on the back end. Any team that beats Dallas (13-1) or Green Bay (12-2) in a road playoff game figures to require those traits. A running game also might help, but the Cowboys in particular appear vulnerable to spread passing teams.

Matt Hasselbeck has flourished since Seattle stopped trying to run the ball on its own terms. The Seahawks are a pass-first team with the personnel to make it work. It starts with the quarterback.

Hasselbeck, 32, is on pace for to reach 4,000 yards and 30 touchdowns for the first time in his nine-year NFL career. On Sunday, Hasselbeck became the first quarterback since 2003 to toss four touchdown passes against Arizona. He's heating up at the right time and his receiving options should improve.

Starting flanker Deion Branch might not regain top form until a foot injury has time to heal during the offseason, but he's back on the field and contributing. Starting split end D.J. Hackett, a difficult matchup for smaller corners, is close to returning from ankle problems.

Nate Burleson leads Seattle in receiving touchdowns with six, but 34-year-old Bobby Engram is the receiver Hasselbeck trusts the most. Engram, having overcome thyroid issues that threatened his career last season, improbably has two more receptions (76) than Dallas' Terrell Owens.

Lofa Tatupu (51) and Patrick Kerney (right) have been making big plays for the Seahawks' defense. Tatupu recently had a three-interception game; Kerney has a trio of three-sack outings.
As for those Cowboys: No NFC team has defeated them since the Seahawks eliminated Dallas from the playoffs last season. Note: Paybacks are a Bitch!!

The Cowboys are much better now, as are the Seahawks Really?, particularly on defense. Seattle's secondary, since revamped, featured former loan officer Pete Hunter in a prominent role when the teams played in January.

Seattle also won in its most recent game against second-seeded Green Bay. Hasselbeck tossed three touchdown passes to beat the Packers last season, joining Tom Brady and Tony Romo as the only quarterbacks to throw three or more against Green Bay in the Packers' last 31 games. Last season, Favre was ready to retire... this season, Favre is playing like he is 25 again.

If anyone has a shot at upsetting Dallas or Green Bay in the conference playoffs, it's probably the team with the NFC's best record since 2003. Only New England (63) and Indianapolis (61) own more regular-season victories than the Seahawks (50) over the last five seasons. Seattle also has ample playoff experience.

There are a lot of variables in there... a lot of if's. Especially that last one. "If Anyone has a shot"... not "The Seahawks have a shot" or "The Seahawks can beat..." well, of course they can win but that will take a lot of things falling into place in order to happen.

Immie

PS Hopefully my standing up for the Cowboys (Wow! If my dad read this, he'd croak!) and the Packers will bring them bad luck!

[5stringJeff]

Are the Seahawks competitive? Yeah. However, they do play in the NFC West, in which Appalachian State could finish second, were they given the chance. So that makes them look a little better in comparison. The Hawks could probably win if they were in the NFC South. No way would they win the NFC East or North. That's why I don't think they'll be able to get to the Super Bowl this year.

[Trigg]

COLTS


Again in 08


:thewave:

[darin]

There are a lot of variables in there... a lot of if's. Especially that last one. "If Anyone has a shot"... not "The Seahawks have a shot" or "The Seahawks can beat..." well, of course they can win but that will take a lot of things falling into place in order to happen.

Immie


There are IFs for EVERY NFL GAME.

IF Romo doesn't have an aneurysm. IF Farve doesn't throw 10 pics.

What you're really saying is "The IFs only Apply to teams you don't follow" ;)