What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

why is everyone so smitten with the seahags? (1 Viewer)

hey buddy seattle hasn't beat any even slightly ok team by more than 4 points. i'm betting the farm on the skins and i hope you bet easy on seattle -9 or you will be a very poor man. skins +9 is easy money. you think that santana moss can't break a few against the 25th ranked pass defense in the league? don't forget about cooley too. gibbs wins playoff games period. he finds a way.
I would like to see the Skins (minus Santana Moss and Cooley) play the Rams w/ Bulger and all their starting WRs intact and see them win by more than 6 pts...because that's what the Hawks did without Engram and Darrell Jackson.Since this playoff scheme was adopted in 1990, no 6th seed has ever made it to the conference championship. And when they lose, it's by an average margin of 17 points. That's a big hurdle to get over- and with injuries to Brunell, Portis, Wynn, Springs, Thrash, and Rogers, I don't see them breaking the trend.

 
during their current 6 game win streak how much did the skins lose by?

ok i'm tired of tearing you guys and your arguments apart just refer all future posts to this:

SKINS WIN HAWKS DON'T

 
Last edited by a moderator:
as long as no one has anything useful to add to the debate. why do you guys even post? i offer analysis and you say sig info blah blah,intelligence blah blah. you refute nothing. what's the point of posting?
Maybe if you posted in a little less attacking manner, people would respond.
Perhaps.Not sure where "everyone is so smitten" is coming from. I think most people would take the Skins with the points.

His tone seems to indicate that he's just looking for a fight. :shrug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents.  Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating.  So hilarious.
come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.
Cards/SF/Rams all with backup starting QBs (Bears w/ Orton's first NFL reg season AND preseason start). vs. Philly was first week w/o TO.
The Redskins played all year with their backup QB, so that argument holds no milk
 
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents.  Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating.  So hilarious.
come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.

also you're from canada and don't matter. thanks for stopping by canuck :bye: , get back to your snow and ugly women.
Lets see....Seahawks lost 3 games all year and two of those were close losses to playoff teams in first four weeks of season. The third loss was last game of season to GB where Seattle rested its players.Washington lost a total of 6 games this season and three of those were to non playoff teams. They even lost to a 4-12 oakland mid season. You can point out the win against the giants but what about the 36-0 loss to the giants in mid season. I love how people only point out the facts that help their side and don't show the negative ones.

This should be a very good game this week and I am 50/50 as to who will win but I have to think that the bye week for Seattle as well as home field advantage as well as the physical game Washington had against TB gives Seattle the advantage.
then surely you must love Wash+9, no?
 
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents.  Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating.  So hilarious.
Hey come on now, he can't compute valid arguments.come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.

beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.
Cards/SF/Rams all with backup starting QBs (Bears w/ Orton's first NFL reg season AND preseason start). vs. Philly was first week w/o TO.
Hey come on now, he can't compute valid arguments. thebird is about as big of a troll as they come.....No common sense and refutes all arguments in a grade 2 style.
no one likes you canadian. go back home and talk aboot ice fishing or other nonsense you know about. way to use all the words i used in my posts against me, very creative, did you pass grade 2? or in canada do they just have 1 year of school and then just send you out to trap in the wilderness?
in before the ban.
 
during their current 6 game win streak how much did the skins lose by?

ok i'm tired of tearing you guys and your arguments apart just refer all future posts to this:

SKINS WIN HAWKS DON'T
What teams did the Redksins beat during that winning streak that hve much worth?
 
no one likes you canadian. go back home and talk aboot ice fishing or other nonsense you know about. way to use all the words i used in my posts against me, very creative, did you pass grade 2? or in canada do they just have 1 year of school and then just send you out to trap in the wilderness?
And you just proved to me exactly why I should not have even opened this thread and read your idiotic drivel.
 
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents.  Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating.  So hilarious.
come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.

also you're from canada and don't matter. thanks for stopping by canuck :bye: , get back to your snow and ugly women.
Lets see....Seahawks lost 3 games all year and two of those were close losses to playoff teams in first four weeks of season. The third loss was last game of season to GB where Seattle rested its players.Washington lost a total of 6 games this season and three of those were to non playoff teams. They even lost to a 4-12 oakland mid season. You can point out the win against the giants but what about the 36-0 loss to the giants in mid season. I love how people only point out the facts that help their side and don't show the negative ones.

This should be a very good game this week and I am 50/50 as to who will win but I have to think that the bye week for Seattle as well as home field advantage as well as the physical game Washington had against TB gives Seattle the advantage.
then surely you must love Wash+9, no?
I think that Washington +9 is a good bet but that isn't what the original argument (post) was about. I think that if you look at how both teams have played against the playoff teams the games have been fairly close and this game should be the same.
 
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents. Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating. So hilarious.
come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.
Cards/SF/Rams all with backup starting QBs (Bears w/ Orton's first NFL reg season AND preseason start). vs. Philly was first week w/o TO.
The Redskins played all year with their backup QB, so that argument holds no milk
So you're saying Brunell belongs grouped with Orton, McCown, Alex Smith, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. :popcorn:

 
If this game were the Superbowl, and both teams had the same amount of rest and the game was played in a neutral site, I think the Redskins would win. Unfortunately, the Redskins fought an all out war last week with TB and travel to SEA to play a WELL rested team.

 
Another thing....The Seahawks were up 14-2 in the one quarter that was played against the Indy starters. Thats not too shabby....Also, the Seattle Defense is very 'Bend-Don't-Break'. they seem to tighten up within about the 35 yd line. With Trufant on Moss (doubling with Babineaux) and Lofa covering Cooley, how are the Redskins going to move the ball?

 
Reasons I like the Seahawks:

They were #1 in the NFL in points scored and #7 in points allowed.

They have HFA in what appears to be a very loud and hostile stadium.

The QB doesn't make many mistakes, as evidenced by 9 INTs on the season. Hasselback ended the year throwing 10 TDs to 1 INT.
Mike Holmgren has shown that, when he fields a team as strong as this one, he can go to the super bowl and win it. I believe there are some coaches who can make the playoffs a lot but also don't have the ability to get his team to win it all.
so are you saying joe gibbs, who has won superbowls, doesn't have what it takes to get to the superbowl? seattle fans will turn on them as soon as they're behind just like the cinci fans did. seahawks haven't won a playoff game for 20 years so what's to feel good about. same thing as cinci not have a playoff game since 1990 they see the writing on the wall and are ready to turn on the home team. they were number 1 in points playing the worst defenses and number 7 in points playing the worst offenses. when you play bad teams all year you get good stats even if you're a mediocre team which they are.
I don't see any reason to believe Joe Gibbs no longer has what it takes to get to a super bowl. He's won three of them. I do think Gibbs needs a stronger club than the one he has in 2005. I think he can build that club down the road but that's for later. For now, the Redskins have accomplished a lot and should feel very good about the future, win or loss this weekend.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to weigh in here as a Redskins fan.I think Seattle has to be given the edge here. As weak as their schedule was, 13-3 still illustrates that they have what it takes to win games. Combined with the extra rest and homefield, I definitely think they have the edge in this game.However, this game is in no way a forgone conclusion. I fully expect it be be a very close game, and an odd bounce of the ball might swing it one way or another.Ultimately, I'd say the Redskins have an 45% chance of winning, but they have a 80% chance of beating a 9 point spread.

 
Weighing in as well. This team is not a pushover at all. They are going to run the ball down your throat. If anyone out there thinks this OL is a pushover they have not been paying attention and they need to go study Broke Back Mountain. The defense? +10 TO diff. Going into the playoffs and they are playing a team that was just pathetic offensively. This team is going to host the NFC championship if the Redskins bring this type of offense because they will turn it over and take a red house whipping from SA all day...

 
You can say all you want about the easy schedule and try to claim that all 7 probowlers (5 starters) and alternates and all-pros (specifically Jones 49 votes, Hutch 42) and homefield record (22-3)are a product of that but that's shortsighted. Fact is that all but 2 of this year's probowlers (one a rookie and one onsidered one of the best finally getting his recognition) and allpros are on those lists each of the last 2 years as well, some even longer, so this year's cake schedule (that Washignton shared 8 teams of) is moot. It's tough to argue they haven't beaten anyone good at home since their 22-3 record covers the last 3 years. Sure they had some breakdowns against the Rams and Cowboys, but they came back and conquered those problems this year. Not so bad as dropping a home loss to the lowly 4-12 Raiders, THIS year. They haven't won a meaning ful game in over a month? If their schedule is so cake then they havent played a meaningful game all year so this should be no different. After this weekend I'll probably agree with you on one thing. We STILL won't have played a good team all year.

 
If this game were the Superbowl, and both teams had the same amount of rest and the game was played in a neutral site, I think the Redskins would win. Unfortunately, the Redskins fought an all out war last week with TB and travel to SEA to play a WELL rested team.
:goodposting:
 
as long as no one has anything useful to add to the debate. why do you guys even post? i offer analysis and you say sig info blah blah,intelligence blah blah. you refute nothing. what's the point of posting?
Maybe if you posted in a little less attacking manner, people would respond.
Perhaps.Not sure where "everyone is so smitten" is coming from. I think most people would take the Skins with the points.

His tone seems to indicate that he's just looking for a fight. :shrug:
I'll be his huckleberry.
 
hey buddy seattle hasn't beat any even slightly ok team by more than 4 points. i'm betting the farm on the skins and i hope you bet easy on seattle -9 or you will be a very poor man. skins +9 is easy money. you think that santana moss can't break a few against the 25th ranked pass defense in the league? don't forget about cooley too. gibbs wins playoff games period. he finds a way.
:own3d:
 
And to learn to use the shift key, and a grasp of the english language would help too.
you start a sentence with the word "and" and think i should grasp the english language. what a #######. also your sentence is a run-on sentence. go back to elementary school sally.bullitt don't be mad because my logic overwhelms your idiocy.
Post of the year here: :own3d:
 
While it is true Seattle had the lowest opponent winning percentage [.430] in the league, clearly their offense is potent and the home field has historically meant something.
wouldn't you agree that having a weak schedule leads to a good home record? i'll add up the wins and losses of the teams that played in seattle if you want and i'm sure it'll be ridiculously bad.
:own3d:
 
Reasons I like the Seahawks:

  They were #1 in the NFL in points scored and #7 in points allowed.

  They have HFA in what appears to be a very loud and hostile stadium.
  The QB doesn't make many mistakes, as evidenced by 9 INTs on the season.  Hasselback ended the year throwing 10 TDs to 1 INT.
  Mike Holmgren has shown that, when he fields a team as strong as this one, he can go to the super bowl and win it.  I believe there are some coaches who can make the playoffs a lot but also don't have the ability to get his team to win it all.
so are you saying joe gibbs, who has won superbowls, doesn't have what it takes to get to the superbowl? seattle fans will turn on them as soon as they're behind just like the cinci fans did. seahawks haven't won a playoff game for 20 years so what's to feel good about. same thing as cinci not have a playoff game since 1990 they see the writing on the wall and are ready to turn on the home team. they were number 1 in points playing the worst defenses and number 7 in points playing the worst offenses. when you play bad teams all year you get good stats even if you're a mediocre team which they are.
In all honesty, you are the mental midget of all mental midgets in the Shark Pool.Once again you are : :own3d:

 
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents.  Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating.  So hilarious.
come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.

also you're from canada and don't matter. thanks for stopping by canuck :bye: , get back to your snow and ugly women.
Again proving what we all knew the minute you ever posted in the Shark Pool: :own3d:
 
I love your dumb argument about scheduling when the Redskins never beat any of their good opponents.

The Redskins beat the same teams that the Hawks did.

How can you say the Hawks are overrated due to beating weak opponents, when the Redskins beat the EXACT same opponents.  Quite the double standard if you ask me.

Dallas

Philly

San Fran

Arizona

St. Louis

NY Giants

8 of the Redskins' wins came againts the exact same opponents you are knocking the Hawks for beating.  So hilarious.
Hey come on now, he can't compute valid arguments.come on man you're killing me barely squeaking by against teams is different than dominating like the skins have done lately.

beat dallas by 28 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat giants by 15 as opposed to hawks winning by 3

beat rams by 15 as opposed to hawks only winning by 6 once and matching winning by 15

beat san fran by 35 as opposed to hawks by 2!!! and then by 38

beat cards by 4 only one that favors hawks --> arizona hawks by 25 and then 14

beat philly with mcnabb by 7 as opposed to hawks by 42 against a completely different shell of a team thrown out

so against your common opponents its skins 4 hawks 1 with philly being thrown out. your point has no validity.
Cards/SF/Rams all with backup starting QBs (Bears w/ Orton's first NFL reg season AND preseason start). vs. Philly was first week w/o TO.
Hey come on now, he can't compute valid arguments. thebird is about as big of a troll as they come.....No common sense and refutes all arguments in a grade 2 style.
no one likes you canadian. go back home and talk aboot ice fishing or other nonsense you know about. way to use all the words i used in my posts against me, very creative, did you pass grade 2? or in canada do they just have 1 year of school and then just send you out to trap in the wilderness?
this post shows intellegence? :own3d:
 
Now I know why the MODS didn't ban you. Because they can spot a weak poster with a weak game. Let me say for all the Shark Pool that you are not liked nor needed here. You have nothing interesting to impart and you are always going to be :own3d: MODS: Do not take this down. After the stuff he has contributed, I went easy.

 
hey buddy seattle hasn't beat any even slightly ok team by more than 4 points. i'm betting the farm on the skins and i hope you bet easy on seattle -9 or you will be a very poor man. skins +9 is easy money. you think that santana moss can't break a few against the 25th ranked pass defense in the league? don't forget about cooley too. gibbs wins playoff games period. he finds a way.
You are right Sir! They haven't beaten even a slightly ok team by more than 4pts. Hopefully in the NFC Championship game they will be able to beat such a team!!! :own3d:

edited to add:

Hopefully that wasn't a turkey farm you bet, they're likely to take you away with them! :bye:

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top