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!
And this part, even according to the article, was tongue-in-cheek. Prior to that he gave props to the Seattle offense for the big day (particularly Doug Baldwin) and gave a ton of respect to Antonio Brown and the Steeler's O for putting up such a huge day. So in essence, it was nothing like you just insinuated.
Yeah --the title of the article was typical baiting -- I was inferring what Catbird said --but agree you'd have to hear the interview to get context.
Yeah, I don't blame either of you nor am I trying to be combative. It's more me just fed up with the media and how they do circular reporting to try to clickbait everyone.
Do you think this is really going to happen? It seems like you get baited by him every time he comes in. Why not just ignore him and accept that he's just a tool
He doesn't represent us. That guy was a Bronco fan that was severely butt hurt after Seattle destroyed Denver in the SuperBowl. Every time he shows up I'll point it out. Perhaps its just a part of team success? Are all teams worthy of having fake fans? Same with Sabertool posting in here I guess. Seattle put some emotionally tough losses on Green Bay so some of the Packer fans troll through Seahawk threads.Do you think this is really going to happen? It seems like you get baited by him every time he comes in. Why not just ignore him and accept that he's just a tool
You're better than that Hooper... You're making yourself look like the tool... come on. Just because Sabertooth isn't a seattle fan doesn't mean he can't come in here at all (why is that automatically seen as trolling? If they're pretending to be fans yeah that's one thing, or actually trolling). For me, I'm a football fan. GB fan yes but I find conversations with other fans about their teams to be constructive. Biabreakable also gets butt hurt over someone coming in and discussing at all; automatically assumes it's trolling. People need to R-E-L-A-X.
Conversation is one thing. Sabertool has no interest in conversation. His reputation is well earned.
You guys? Who is you? I suggest that you direct your commentary towards whoever "you" is. If that's Richard Sherman, I doubt he's reading this thread.
Saber is called out enough by his own kind in the Packer forums. His message wasn't directed at you at all. He was calling out a mutually disliked obnoxious poster. If anything I think you'd appreciate the poke in the eye Saber was giving Imthescientist
Seahawks fans in general. You were so matter of fact about your dominance. So #### sure about your dynasty. Maybe not you in particular but you have to admit that the 12s were a bit over confident.
What do the Aggies have to do with Seattle?????
couldn't help myself....
One season? They gave up the fewest points in the NFL for four consecutive seasons. This past year they gave up the 3rd fewest points. That defense is still intact. All 11 starters are still under contract for next season.Dr. Brew said:
All three of Sherman, Thomas, and Chancellor are under contract for next season. Further investigating, they have tons of cap space available next year too. They can easily keep all three as long as they think all are worthy of being kept.Dr. Brew said:
I do, actually, know many seattle fans. in real life. not a message board. but real cute of you to try and pretend you know me and who I know and talk to
I like Wilson as a person a lot. I think he's a good player. his stats this year and how they match up to his other seasons speaks for itself
you had one season where seattle was the #1 defense, yes
By what metric? Yards? I can't think of a situation where a team would rather give up more points as opposed to giving up yards.
Your opinion of Wilson has been noted time and again. There are many varying opinions of him as a player. I don't have a problem disagreeing with yours.
Sure, by the metric of points allowed. Again, what metric would you prefer that your team lead the league in? Would you rather your team gave up the fewest yards or fewest points? Neither statistic is wins and losses. They're just statistics. They only have whatever meaning we assign to them in the long run. When did anyone ever decide which statistic represents the #1 defense? And why is that suddenly valid?
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
At the time, sure it was tough to swallow. The next season, yeah I wanted to kick the crap out of Seattle. Now, no I couldn't care less about what happened years ago. It may have hit Sabertooth a little hard. He had frequently referenced that game as the beginning of the downfall of McCarthy earlier this season when GB looked destined for failure.proninja said:
I'm not a big fan of using points against exclusively. I don't think we should ignore it but at the same time I don't think it should be the "be all end all" of defensive statistics. There are a lot of scenarios where a defense is so bad but they give up fewer points in a game than they would have otherwise. If a team is down 21-0 in the 4th quarter and the opposing team kicks 3 FGs instead of going for 3 TDs. That game will result in fewer points allowed than a team that wins in a 38-37 shootout, but both are probably equally bad defenses. Or, a team like New England gets up by a lot early, forcing teams to chase them in points, which usually doesn't work out so well. And finally, points allowed is a bit skewed if you have a division that can't score points. That means that 6 games a year you're allowing low points. Not saying that is the only factor, but if the other three teams in your division have bad QBs playing, it's not as hard to hold them to fewer points. All you have to do is look at a team's schedule and see the games that they allowed very few points against and it's easy to see how they can get a lower average than an equally good defense in a better division.
Dr. Brew said:
I feel like it's pretty self explanatory. 2014 Seattle had the #1 defense in the league, aka the best defense. Since then they have been top 5 but not best. In fact, since then Seattle has dropped each season. However, I understand we can argue about 2015 if they were #1 or not depending what criteria one would use. As I said, if you aren't 1 then it's not really much to argue over.
so you're saying the NFL should take away draft picks?BusterTBronco said:
Yep. Possible HoF? I'm not really that versed in serious football history like I am in baseball, but he would seem to be a top candidate.
