Russell Wilson will play last season of his deal w/ insurance policy in case he gets a boo boo.

[Scooby-Doo]

follow the bouncing ball...had nothing to do with winning the game.

No idea what you are talking about.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Really. How did he manage that???

Cute. IF your retort is pointing out a type-o, I have nothing to add.

 

[jarntt]

Cute. IF your retort is pointing out a type-o, I have nothing to add.

I read what you wrote. You had nothing before I pointed it out...

 

[PDay8810]

Palmer missed the entire game also, so it was a wash. Plus it was in Dallas. Not that I like to give rock any fuel, but that is not a good argument.

Palmer threw 3 TD passes that day...
and
the topic was stats that Romo lacked from not playing

did you move from St Louis too?

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Palmer threw 3 TD passes that day...
and
the topic was stats that Romo lacked from not playing

did you move from St Louis too?

Your're right, he did come back that game, my bad. I believe he got injured the next week.

Maybe i'm slow because I am sick and on cold medicine today, but I am not picking up on your insults?

 

[PDay8810]

Your're right, he did come back that game, my bad. I believe he got injured the next week.

yes sir...look at the stats
Cowboys held their own. The difference was clearly the QB play that day, even with Palmer not being a world beater that afternoon

 

[Scooby-Doo]

I read what you wrote. You had nothing before I pointed it out...

You said Palmer sucked, I pointed out his stats said otherwise (at least recently, with a type-0) you pointed out the type-0.

 

[Southieinnc]

One has played in a piece of shit division, one has played in the toughest division.

Welcome to SportsHoopla. POS division? You'll fit right in.
You still live in Yakima?

 

[Wolvie]

1 win followed by a loss...is a dynasty now?

nope, but its being in the midst of one

 

[HaroldSeattle]

1 win followed by a loss...is a dynasty now?

What say you if they win the SB next year?

 

[HaroldSeattle]

the nfc west was a joke for a long time. SF or LA (or STL) or NO (rarely all 3) and everyone else. i'm talking post montana.
the afc east has been more competitive than at least 2 other divisons over the last 3-4 years.

Why say the NFC West has been a tough division? Well let's see 2 playoff teams all of the last 3 years with one of them reaching the Super Bowl every single one of those years and with one season where the NFC Championship game was an all NFC West Championship. So yeah I would say they have been highly competitive. That doesn't even take into account the Cardinals missing the playoffs even though they had double digit wins in one of those seasons.

Yup.

Because most fans understand that winning the most games or the SB doesn't in and of itself mean you were the best team. The teams in the NFC West other than Sea won 25 games. The teams in the AFC East other than NE won 21. Sea had a stronger strength of schedule. NE played 5 2014 playoff teams, Sea played 9 (if my quick count is accurate). The best team doesn't always win in sports. Dallas won in Seattle last year, but they weren't a better team. Dallas also won as many games as GB, but they aren't yet as good a team as GB. I think most people that watch the games and can objectively look at it would say that over the last couple of years Sea has been the best team. I don't like the Seahawks, but I can still admit that they have been/are the best team.

Kudo's good sir.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Added a poll.

 

[Rock Strongo]

nope, but its being in the midst of one

no, its isnt. dynastys you kinda need to...not lose?

 

[Rock Strongo]

What say you if they win the SB next year?

well, they wont...but i'll play along.

they would have gone to 3 straight superbowls and won 2. losing in the middle kills the "dynasty". i know dynastys, you dream of them.

3 in 4 years.

 

[chf]

Uh, let's assume that Seattle wins the Superbowl this upcoming season.

Logically what would be the difference between 2 in 3 years and 3 in 4 years if losing in the middle torpedoes the 'dynasty?'

 

[Rock Strongo]

Uh, let's assume that Seattle wins the Superbowl this upcoming season.

Logically what would be the difference between 2 in 3 years and 3 in 4 years if losing in the middle torpedoes the 'dynasty?'

a superbowl loss, logically.

same thing that killed the pats dynasty in 07.

you are confusing "losing a superbowl" with not making it to one.

 

[Rex Racer]

3, maybe 4 titles in pretty quick fashion makes a dynasty. 1 title does not.

Maybe they will win a couple more in the next few years and we can call them that, but it's too soon right now.

 

[Rock Strongo]

3, maybe 4 titles in pretty quick fashion makes a dynasty. 1 title does not.

Maybe they will win a couple more in the next few years and we can call them that, but it's too soon right now.

"but but but the seahawks went to back to back and lost the second one, so its still a dynasty."

like lebrons in the middle of a personal dynatsy lol

 

[Rex Racer]

3, maybe 4 titles in pretty quick fashion makes a dynasty. 1 title does not.

Maybe they will win a couple more in the next few years and we can call them that, but it's too soon right now.

I should have left out the "maybe". 4 titles in quick fashion (6 years?) is certainly a dynasty.

 

[chf]

3, maybe 4 titles in pretty quick fashion makes a dynasty. 1 title does not.

Maybe they will win a couple more in the next few years and we can call them that, but it's too soon right now.

I don't disagree. It IS too early to call them a dynasty.

Just trying to follow along with Rock's tortured logic.