Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Are the Seahawks the worst team to make the playoffs? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LHUCKS
- Start date
The Jacket
Footballguy
Easily. They're the worst playoff team ever.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Running game: awful
QB play: awful
Defense: Awful
Record: below average
They are not a very good team, and should not be in the playoffs. Easily one of if not the worst playoff teams ever.
QB play: awful
Defense: Awful
Record: below average
They are not a very good team, and should not be in the playoffs. Easily one of if not the worst playoff teams ever.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Would it matter how the game goes this week? If they win would that change anyone's opinion? How about if they played a close game and barely lost? Would it have to be a blowout? Or would the game itself have no bearing on anything?
Gopher State
Footballguy
Banger
Footballguy
16 games is a better indicator than 1. They are bad...can they get lucky, possibly, but they are a bad team.
DoubleG
Footballguy
No, the 2008 Cardinals were the worst to that point in time. The Peahawks are worser.
Sweet Love
IBL Representative
Sure it would...a poster came up with the Cardinals of 2008, but considering they made it to the Super Bowl, it is hard to say they were the worst ever. In fact, over time, we will forget they ever squeezed in and just remember them as a Cinderella team that was one "tip toe" catch away from winning the whole thing.I see that the 'Hawks are not good on record or on paper, but unless they get tossed this weekend, I don't really think you can call them the "worst". What is the Raiders made it and only beat three teams outside of their division (for a 9-7 record), would they automatically be the worst because they beat up their own division? I don't think so. I think that in determining this, you need to consider how the Hawks do in the playoffs (not that I am expecting much).
Shlon
Footballguy
Even the blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then, I would still consider them bad.
SWC
Bromigo
if it were up to me the seahawks should not be allowed to play in the nfl playoffs this year i think if you dont have a .500 record and somehow win your division it means your division stunk up the joint and you were only the least smelly of the stinky crap in the division crock pot and you should be at home while a more deservnig team with a winning record gets to stand in maybe have the the next best record that was not a division winner fill that spot
and yes the hawks are the worst playoff team ever in a nonstrike shortened year
and yes the hawks are the worst playoff team ever in a nonstrike shortened year
CalBear
Footballguy
The 2008 Cardinals had a Hall of Fame QB, and one of the top offenses in the league (#4 yardage, #3 scoring). They also had a winning record. Even their defense wasn't terrible, #19 in yardage allowed.The Seahawks are ranked #28 on offense and #27 on defense. (#23 and #25 in scoring). It's hard to imagine a worse team than that making the playoffs.This is the correct answer
by_the_sea_wannabe
:sj:
The 2008 Cardinals had a Hall of Fame QB, and one of the top offenses in the league (#4 yardage, #3 scoring). They also had a winning record. Even their defense wasn't terrible, #19 in yardage allowed.The Seahawks are ranked #28 on offense and #27 on defense. (#23 and #25 in scoring). It's hard to imagine a worse team than that making the playoffs.
the cards didn't look great but they at least had some things going for them, not sure what seattle has other than being home the first game.
SWC
Bromigo
the best thing seattle has going for them is a good crowd ill give them that and also the coffee in seattle is pretty good and they have nice views of the harbor and the fish market is nice but that is things related to the city and not the football teams because the team is a total stink bomb
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Everything is going to get messed up when they switch to an 18 game schedule anyway. Has anyone heard the plan for that? Where are the extra two games going to come from in terms of opponents?
Maybe they would make it 6 divisional games, 4 games against another division in conference, 4 games against another division in conference, and 4 games against a division out of conference. That would be the easiest. (Basically, dumping the two games in conference against foes that finished in the same place as you.)
Maybe they would make it 6 divisional games, 4 games against another division in conference, 4 games against another division in conference, and 4 games against a division out of conference. That would be the easiest. (Basically, dumping the two games in conference against foes that finished in the same place as you.)
CompetitiveEdgeFootball
Footballguy
"That 12th man in Seattle is very real...but it's the first 11 I question..." -Billick
DoubleG
Footballguy
Hipple Long Ware & Peete
Footballguy
yes. maybe. maybe.but odds are more likely that this weeks game will reinforce what the Times wrote.
Hipple Long Ware & Peete
Footballguy
even playing in one of the worst divisions (if not THE worst) EVER, they still obly mustered 7 wins.
that's really bad.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Nah. The Eagles and Chargers teams that made the playoffs that same year were worse.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I read today that since the current playoff system was implemented in 2002, all three teams that made the playoffs at 8-8 won their first playoff game that season.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I think all of them would have played that game at home.
Max Fischer
Footballguy
Are they the worst playoff team in the last 30 years? Relatively, maybe. In real terms, no way.
Thirty years ago, the Vikings won the NFC Central with a record of 9 & 7. This year's Seattle team would smoke these guys by 50. Below is the 1980 Vikings offensive line:
LT - Steven Riley, Height: 6-5 Weight: 258 lbs.
LG - James Hough, Height: 6-2 Weight: 267 lbs.
C - Dennis Swilley, Height: 6-3 Weight: 253 lbs.
RG - Wesley Hamilton, Height: 6-3 Weight: 261 lbs.
RT - Anthony Ronald Yary Height: 6-5 Weight: 255 lbs.
All I'm saying is that these historical comparisons are all relative. These teams from generations past would probably struggle in The Big East.
Thirty years ago, the Vikings won the NFC Central with a record of 9 & 7. This year's Seattle team would smoke these guys by 50. Below is the 1980 Vikings offensive line:
LT - Steven Riley, Height: 6-5 Weight: 258 lbs.
LG - James Hough, Height: 6-2 Weight: 267 lbs.
C - Dennis Swilley, Height: 6-3 Weight: 253 lbs.
RG - Wesley Hamilton, Height: 6-3 Weight: 261 lbs.
RT - Anthony Ronald Yary Height: 6-5 Weight: 255 lbs.
All I'm saying is that these historical comparisons are all relative. These teams from generations past would probably struggle in The Big East.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Runningman
Footballguy
No it is not because they at least had a very good pass offense.This is the correct answer
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
I think it absolutely has bearing on it. If they won this week, how can you say they're the worst team ever in the playoffs? This is yet to be determined. If they get blown out, then they'd probably get my vote. I don't think New Oreans is playing all that well either. This isn't going to be some 30 point win by New Oreans. It'll be somewhere between 10 and 19 and although that's a healthy win, there's certainly been larger blowouts than that.
FunkyPlutos
Footballguy
Not the Vikings.
PlasmaDogPlasma
Footballguy
Not the Rams either. Both NFC wild cards were 8-8 that year.
Last edited by a moderator:
mad sweeney
Footballguy
And the Rams beat Seattle at Qwest for their third victory over Seattle that year! Of course it took the Rams 11 more tries before they could beat them again.
captain_amazing
Footballguy
Seahawks Odds to win Superbowl before season were 50|1bodog has them at 100-1 to win the superbowl
i think they had better odds before the season started
CalBear
Footballguy
100-1 is probably a good bet on the Seahawks, actually. They only need to have a better than 33% chance of winning each game to have better odds than that.bodog has them at 100-1 to win the superbowli think they had better odds before the season started
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
The NFC West is the worst division in the history of football. So, uh, yeah. To be bad in a horrible division is really saying something. They won the worst division of all time on a tiebreaker, what more do you need to know?
Hipple Long Ware & Peete
Footballguy
Nice Hipple in that linkcaptain_amazing said:Seahawks Odds to win Superbowl before season were 50|1flc735 said:bodog has them at 100-1 to win the superbowl
i think they had better odds before the season started
Kevin Ashcraft
Footballguy
I would not put the 1986 Chiefs above the 2010 Seahawks, but anytime you are dead last in yards on offense and make the postseason, you should be in the discussion.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/kan/1986.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/kan/1986.htm
Hooper31
Footballguy
I remember that team. They were playing both Blackledge and Kenney at QB a lot. They would even play Blackledge on first and second down, and then switch to Kenney on passing downs. I remember a Seahawk game against the Cheifs were they did this repeatedly through the game. I've never seen anything like it since.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
and they lost to the Jets (who had lost 6 straight games to back into the playoffs at 10-6) in the first round of the playoffs that year. The Jets also benched Ken O'Brien and started Pat Ryan in the playoffs. Can you imagine a worse QB matchup than Pat Ryan against Todd Blackledge in a playoff game?
Brunell4MVP
Footballguy
Seems like that team had a pretty good D though?
Kevin Ashcraft
Footballguy
I have that WC game on DVD -- it is rough to watch! Yeah that is about the worst QB matchup I can remember.
Kevin Ashcraft
Footballguy
They had a good, not great, defense as it pertains to points and yards. Where they were dominant is turnovers. They led the NFL in that dept. in '86. They won 2-3 games solely on blocked kicks, punts, pick 6's, etc.Like I said, not the worst, but they are in the conversation.
BlueDredSo
Footballguy
You're comparing apples to oranges. Obviously, the OP meant relative to the other teams in the leage that same year. Come on.
purplejesus28
Footballguy
From Footballoutsiders final DVOA rankings:
Are the 2010 Seattle Seahawks the worst playoff team in NFL history? At least as far as DVOA is concerned, the answer turns out to be a surprising "no." The Seahawks were so good in their final win -- their third-highest DVOA of the year, 46% -- that they climb to -23.6% overall. That puts them ahead of the 2004 Rams, who had -26.5% DVOA. The Seahawks do pass the 1998 Cardinals as the second-worst playoff team in DVOA history. What's scary here is that the 2004 Rams and 1998 Cardinals each won their first playoff game.
Are the 2010 Seattle Seahawks the worst playoff team in NFL history? At least as far as DVOA is concerned, the answer turns out to be a surprising "no." The Seahawks were so good in their final win -- their third-highest DVOA of the year, 46% -- that they climb to -23.6% overall. That puts them ahead of the 2004 Rams, who had -26.5% DVOA. The Seahawks do pass the 1998 Cardinals as the second-worst playoff team in DVOA history. What's scary here is that the 2004 Rams and 1998 Cardinals each won their first playoff game.
The "no pressure" factor here when everyone says you "don't belong" must play into these wins.
captain_amazing
Footballguy
Yea I had to do a couple takes before I finally scrolled down. It was a convenient distraction.Nice Hipple in that linkSeahawks Odds to win Superbowl before season were 50|1bodog has them at 100-1 to win the superbowl
i think they had better odds before the season started
Not to mention the fact that each of their 9 losses were by at least 15 points.
