Seahawks make history of most wins vs backup QB's ever

[Great Dayne]

No, instead we decided to blow a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter of the SB instead.

ouch, still not as bad as our choke job. Well good luck and beat AZ for us.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

I was hoping you would give Monte Ball a chance for him to join RW and run the same style offense as the Badgers do. It's terrible that Rawls dropped because he had a legit shot at ROY. I feel Lynch will do ok but he's just not the same and might retire at the end of year. I guess he will come back just in time for AZ.

I think even if Lynch hadn't got hurt he was done at the end of this year. He was talking retirement after our SB win a year ago so I doubt he'd of stayed for another year again.

Rawls was playing out of his mind but I don't think he was going to get ROY. Winston will get that. It's nice to know we have Rawls for next year though. And it's not that bad knowing that even though we lost Rawls this year his "replacement" will be a healthy Beast Mode just in time for the playoffs.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

ouch, still not as bad as our choke job. Well good luck and beat AZ for us.

Good luck to you too.

 

[France_Steve]

You make no sense here. You're saying because the Hawks couldn't win games in the end of games like they used to makes my stat mean nothing. I'm not sure you understand the thread. I was merely pointing out the fact that majority of your wins come against backup QB's. Sorry but you or the other bandwagon chicken fans can't argue this.

It is actually not a fact but an opinion. The basis of your opinion is that any qb who has been a backup for any reason all season counts as a backup. Furthermore, any qb that will eventually be a backup in your opinion also counts as a backup (bridgewater). This is not facttual, it is an opinion on what constitutes a backup.

A better definition (and univerally accepted) of backup is a quarterback who is not the team's first choice at the time of the game. It is asinine to count both qb's of the niners as backups when they were actually first choice qb's each time they played the hawks. Same thing goes for the rams, where you listed both qb's as backups.

The Hawks have actually played Bears, Ravens, Cowboys who did not have their first choice qb available. I haven't looked at it, but I am willing to bet 3 games against backups is about average.

What you are actually trying to say is that you don't think the hawks have any quality wins. That would be a clearly stated opinion and then your post is absolutely legitimate. As it is, your initial post is not factual because your definition of "backup QB" is not shared by anyone, and it is frankly the first time I have ever heard anyone define it in that way. You have looked at qb's that are bad and decided to make a definition of backup that allows you to call them backups.

You were probably trolling with your post but on the off chance you were not I thought I would give you a real reply.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

I can agree with this with exception to Car who hasn't been here before. It always takes at least one postseason before the a new up coming team pulls it off. See Packers before their SB win and the Hawks before theirs.

The panthers had a post season win last year

 

[DunceKaep]

France_Steve posts little, but his posts are spot on.

I like your contributions, keep it coming.

Now, let's continue the roll, and finish off this season tough.
Being the WC will require great play on the road, but I feel the Seahawks can do it. Bring it.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

You make no sense here. You're saying because the Hawks couldn't win games in the end of games like they used to makes my stat mean nothing. I'm not sure you understand the thread. I was merely pointing out the fact that majority of your wins come against backup QB's. Sorry but you or the other bandwagon chicken fans can't argue this.

OH so now I'm a bandwagon fan ? Because you know me right and you know my loyalty towards the Seahawks and my city... And my point to you was we could a and most likely should a won some of those games earlier in the year ... Our D blew some coverages and gave some games away ... But it's all irrelevant anyway, Seattle is playing better now and that's what counts... It's obvious you have some fear going on to make a post like this...

 

[Uhsplit]

I was just making a simple observation. Just like when the Packers fans were all excited about the 6-0 start but I infomed them it was vs all below .500 teams and sure enough we lost the next two. I just tell it like it is by laying out the facts and you're welcome to take it how you want to.

I did take it how I wanted to.
Wanna talk a little crap about any team in the league? It's easy. Pick a team, any team, and it won't take much time to say anything negative about them.

 

[Uhsplit]

wow...wish we could count the old days, but that's not allowed

Maybe a nostalgia thread?

 

[Uhsplit]

The 7-9 Seahawks team from like 4-5 years ago when you guys faced the Aints. I predicted the Hawks to win that game.

Damn, you're the smartest guy I know.

 

[Uhsplit]

I was just making a simple observation. Just like when the Packers fans were all excited about the 6-0 start but I infomed them it was vs all below .500 teams and sure enough we lost the next two. I just tell it like it is by laying out the facts and you're welcome to take it how you want to.

Damn, you're the smartest guy I know.

 

[Uhsplit]

More like Hawks win despite Wilson at least for that game. Four int's has to be the worst QB performance to ever win a postseason game. Wilson seems to struggle vs our D. I'm not sure if it's the 3-4 defense, the players, or both.

I get your vibe.
Yes, Russell had a lousy game. 2 ints bounced of Kearse's hands and became RW ints. When it mattered he rose to the occasion and slayed the Packers. I was in attendance. A spectacular one in a million moment.

 

[Uhsplit]

More like Hawks win despite Wilson at least for that game. Four int's has to be the worst QB performance to ever win a postseason game. Wilson seems to struggle vs our D. I'm not sure if it's the 3-4 defense, the players, or both.

How about he is a young QB that is growing into his own, but usually still beats the Pack.

 

[seafandoghawk]

Your words not mine, I was just posting Hawks record vs backup QB's and most Hawks fans got defensive for some reason.

The dreaded 'defensive' again-- those pesky Hawk fans!

 

[flyerhawk]

You make no sense here. You're saying because the Hawks couldn't win games in the end of games like they used to makes my stat mean nothing. I'm not sure you understand the thread. I was merely pointing out the fact that majority of your wins come against backup QB's. Sorry but you or the other bandwagon chicken fans can't argue this.

When you define every San Fran and St. Louia QB as a backup and Teddy Bridgewater a backup, then the legitimacy of your post is null.

 

[Great Dayne]

Damn, you're the smartest guy I know.

Thanks, we need more Hawks fans like you.

 

[Great Dayne]

When you define every San Fran and St. Louia QB as a backup and Teddy Bridgewater a backup, then the legitimacy of your post is null.

I never said Bridgewater is a backup and I said the SF and STL QB's you have faced were backups at one point.

 

[Great Dayne]

The dreaded 'defensive' again-- those pesky Hawk fans!

Exactly, it's like someone saying the sky is blue and then some kids whine and cry that it isn't. I'm glad you're coming along.

 

[Great Dayne]

How about he is a young QB that is growing into his own, but usually still beats the Pack.

I agree, he is the best QB under 30 in the game with the potential to be the best in a couple years.

 

[Great Dayne]

The panthers had a post season win last year

I'll fall for the trap I guess

Vs your backup QB.