Can Seattle go 14-2?

[Sharkonabicycle]

NFC West is too tough, which means likely injuries.... the same thing that did them in last year when basically half their offense went down against Arizona. I dunno what it is with Arizona but Seattle has always struggled in the Carroll regime. Can't remember what season but I remember another year when like half the fuckin' team went down against Arizona (and Arizona had a ton of injuries too - it was ridiculous).

I think Seattle goes 11-5/12-4. If they can resign Clowney to a 1 year deal (where he'll try just like he did last year), Dunbar actually plays, and with the Adams signing I'd elevate that to 13-3. 14-2 is ridiculous enough and it treads on that fine line of 'rest the starters' given other teams in the conference aren't going to snatch homefield.

 

[Southieinnc]

NFC West is too tough, which means likely injuries.... the same thing that did them in last year when basically half their offense went down against Arizona. I dunno what it is with Arizona but Seattle has always struggled in the Carroll regime. Can't remember what season but I remember another year when like half the fuckin' team went down against Arizona (and Arizona had a ton of injuries too - it was ridiculous).

I think Seattle goes 11-5/12-4. If they can resign Clowney to a 1 year deal (where he'll try just like he did last year), Dunbar actually plays, and with the Adams signing I'd elevate that to 13-3. 14-2 is ridiculous enough and it treads on that fine line of 'rest the starters' given other teams in the conference aren't going to snatch homefield.

Now that you have the #14 safety you should be good to go!

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Now that you have the #14 safety you should be good to go!

Ah yes... let me clarify for everyone....

The #14 safety is based on a site calling Earl Thomas the #4 upcoming safety and Denzel fuckin' Ward as #5....

https://athlonsports.com/nfl/nfl-defensive-back-rankings

And then gave me a PFF link to an unfiltered list and said he was #16 (with individuals graded in the 50s ahead of him).

Your comment Southie is roughly the equivalent of someone saying Andy Dalton was a better QB than Tom Brady ever was. That or you've pulled off the greatest trolling of this month... in which case *nods and raises drink to you*

 

[Southieinnc]

Ah yes... let me clarify for everyone....

The #14 safety is based on a site calling Earl Thomas the #4 upcoming safety and Denzel fuckin' Ward as #5....

https://athlonsports.com/nfl/nfl-defensive-back-rankings

And then gave me a PFF link to an unfiltered list and said he was #16 (with individuals graded in the 50s ahead of him).

Your comment Southie is roughly the equivalent of someone saying Andy Dalton was a better QB than Tom Brady ever was. That or you've pulled off the greatest trolling of this month... in which case *nods and raises drink to you*

I'll take that drink.....

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Hear me out...

They play the two weakest divisions in the league. Against the NFC East, they're going 3-1 or 4-0. Against the AFC East, they're going 3-1 or 4-0.

The only losses against those two divisions I see are back to back home games, and they are not losing to both NE and Dallas.

They are going to better than NYG and Washington, and they have pretty much fleeced the Eagles. Not only that, they are better than the Dolphins and Jets. Bills are not a home advantage team. They will be coming off a home game against NE. Back to back home games are not ideal when the second team is superior.

So 7-1 at worst against those two divisions. Now the other stuff....

This is the best opportunity they have to kick the Rams while they're down. They need to sweep LA, and it's possible if they get the first matchup, they will. They do not have to go to SF until week 17, and week 7 SF will be coming off a road game AT NE, Garoppolo's former team. So if Seattle goes 4-1 in their division before week 17. If Seattle needs to sweep SF, and SF is already locked in the wild card, they won't be denied.

So now you have perhaps 12-2.

The Vikings have lost a lot this offseason and I don't think their defense will be as good, which is even more trouble trying to beat a team who hasn't lost in the last five tries.

Week 1...at Atlanta. I stressed this already. This is Seattle's make-or-break game for a dominant year. They run the risk of tying TB at 13-3, and the Seahawks only have a shot at one scenario.
Beating Dallas instead of NE, gives them a even conference record with the Bucs. The Bucs have to lose one to the Falcons.
Common Tie-breaker
Rams: Seahawks 2-1
Falcons: 2-2
Giants: 3-3
Vikings: 4-4

Next tie-breaker will be strength of victory. Seattle's best wins will amount to SF, Arizona, Dallas/NE, and Buffalo with lots of bad wins. TB's best wins will amount to NO, Chicago/GB, and not as many bad wins. I have not done the math officially on these teams so I cannot say who comes out on top. But as you can tell, an Atlanta win or sweeping the AFC and NFC East is a must.

They may not be the best team in the NFC on paper but the schedule could give them the biggest advantage they could ask for. They just need to take care of business the first three weeks and win week 10.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Hear me out...

They play the two weakest divisions in the league. Against the NFC East, they're going 3-1 or 4-0. Against the AFC East, they're going 3-1 or 4-0.

The only losses against those two divisions I see are back to back home games, and they are not losing to both NE and Dallas.

They are going to better than NYG and Washington, and they have pretty much fleeced the Eagles. Not only that, they are better than the Dolphins and Jets. Bills are not a home advantage team. They will be coming off a home game against NE. Back to back home games are not ideal when the second team is superior.

So 7-1 at worst against those two divisions. Now the other stuff....

This is the best opportunity they have to kick the Rams while they're down. They need to sweep LA, and it's possible if they get the first matchup, they will. They do not have to go to SF until week 17, and week 7 SF will be coming off a road game AT NE, Garoppolo's former team. So if Seattle goes 4-1 in their division before week 17. If Seattle needs to sweep SF, and SF is already locked in the wild card, they won't be denied.

So now you have perhaps 12-2.

The Vikings have lost a lot this offseason and I don't think their defense will be as good, which is even more trouble trying to beat a team who hasn't lost in the last five tries.

Week 1...at Atlanta. I stressed this already. This is Seattle's make-or-break game for a dominant year. They run the risk of tying TB at 13-3, and the Seahawks only have a shot at one scenario.
Beating Dallas instead of NE, gives them a even conference record with the Bucs. The Bucs have to lose one to the Falcons.
Common Tie-breaker
Rams: Seahawks 2-1
Falcons: 2-2
Giants: 3-3
Vikings: 4-4

Next tie-breaker will be strength of victory. Seattle's best wins will amount to SF, Arizona, Dallas/NE, and Buffalo with lots of bad wins. TB's best wins will amount to NO, Chicago/GB, and not as many bad wins. I have not done the math officially on these teams so I cannot say who comes out on top. But as you can tell, an Atlanta win or sweeping the AFC and NFC East is a must.

They may not be the best team in the NFC on paper but the schedule could give them the biggest advantage they could ask for. They just need to take care of business the first three weeks and win week 10.

Seahawks won a lot of really close games last year and to be frank got quite lucky.

They won 11 games last year but played more like a 9 win team to put it politely.

As much as I hope you're right, I have to disagree that they will come even close to that mark. The Rams and 49ers are both playoff contenders and the Seahawks have to battle with a rising Arizona team.

The offensive line is a mess as always, and the defensive line was unable to generate any pressure last year and I don't really see the bandaids the team added this offseason as a solution.

Best case scenario is that a full season of Quandre Diggs at FS, Jamal Adams at SS, and hopefully Dunbar on the outside compensates for a lack of pass rush.

 

[The Oldtimer]

Now that you have the #14 safety you should be good to go!

#5 safety.

 

[Brees#1]

It's two LATE 1st round picks in all likelihood (pending injury) and with COVID who the hell knows what draft picks will mean in terms of value if NCAAF is delayed (or doesn't even start), etc. Seattle always finds a way into the playoffs with Wilson and with Adams it's probably a lock (again pending injuries). If HALF their offense didn't get injured in the Arizona game they probably would've beat San Fran the final week, claimed the division and bye, and probably represented the Super Bowl.

As for Mack vs. Adams, agreed there... but the Bears were never a lock to win their division let alone make the playoffs with the team Mack was going to. In addition, Adams is probably the best safety in the league (Mack arguably best LBer at the time) and is a fantastic blitzer... so I'd expect Seattle to use him in packages where he's blitzing often. Adams is probably easily the best tackler/blitzer safety in the league, so it's decent value here... Seattle also runs very unorthodox packages so would not be surprised for 3-3-5 packages which is Adams acting in a 3-4 capacity for blitzing.

The one thing I did NOT like about the trade (that I later found out) was giving away McDougald who has been very serviceable for Seattle but I'm assuming he doesn't fit the scheme Carroll is now looking for and they needed cap room.

You would be the number 3 seed if you lost to Arizona.

Seahawks won a lot of really close games last year and to be frank got quite lucky.

They won 11 games last year but played more like a 9 win team to put it politely.

As much as I hope you're right, I have to disagree that they will come even close to that mark. The Rams and 49ers are both playoff contenders and the Seahawks have to battle with a rising Arizona team.

The offensive line is a mess as always, and the defensive line was unable to generate any pressure last year and I don't really see the bandaids the team added this offseason as a solution.

Best case scenario is that a full season of Quandre Diggs at FS, Jamal Adams at SS, and hopefully Dunbar on the outside compensates for a lack of pass rush.

The Rams are gonna regress. That team lost talent.

 

[Southieinnc]

#5 safety.

LOL

 

[tabascojet]

12-4....

 

[SJ76]

#5 safety.

Are you alive maaaaan? Anyone seen this dude? I kinda his retarded persistent outbursts

 

[gohusk]

nope. they won't next year either because Pete can't get it through his head that he doesn't have an all time great defense and banking on Wilson to pull off miracles every week isn't a winning strategy. I honestly think the game has passed him by. Norton sucks at his job for how long but he's safe, but Schottenheimer has a bad stretch and he's instantly axed? What kind of dysfunctional org does that?

 

[Clayton]

Only if they play the Rams 16 times.

Best post in the whole topic

 

[Manster7588]

Are you alive maaaaan? Anyone seen this dude? I kinda his retarded persistent outbursts

Per his profile, or lack of a profile.


"This user's profile is not available."



I guess he got perma banned.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

The final answer to the OP's is.........NO

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Well they won 12 which was a decent season... But this team never found consistent all year.. My feeling was they’d lose in the divisional round vs the Pack or Saints... I thought they’d beat the Rams in a close one though, Rams D was really good, better than expected ..

 

[Jikkle]

I can't see them ever going 14-2 under Carroll and with Wilson at the helm.

Carroll's philosophy simply leads to very tight and razor thin margins of victory. We've seen it year in and year out that the Seahawks can be just as easily 13-3 as they can be 9-7. And judging from the fact he sent the OC packing because he wants to run the ball more it seems the direction the team will be going is even tighter margins of victory.

The issue with Carroll in my view isn't that he wants to run the ball more because a lot of teams like the 9ers, Rams, Ravens, and etc run the ball a lot but the difference is Carroll wants to run the ball to protect small leads and win 13-6 whereas the other teams I mentioned want to run the ball and still score 30+ points.

It's just not a recipe for long term success in today's NFL. It's just simply harder to maintain an excellent defense long term compared to having elite QB play. With an elite QB you're set for 10+ years but with defense you need multiple parts on multiple levels of the defense and you can maintain that for around 4 years. That's the popular head coaching candidates are the young creative offensive minds because you can pair them with an elite QB and you're going to be in great shape for years to come.

As far as Wilson it's just apparent he just has a few bad games a season in him. He plays at a high level for the majority of the season but he inexplicitly has some games where he just plays badly for whatever reason and it just leads to a handful of losses a year for the Seahawks.