Your thoughts on the NFL putting Green bay and Detroit into the late slot?

[blstoker]

We do have some big problems on defense, we’re getting run over, so picking 13th or 19th can make a difference talent level potentially, of course you need to nail the draft pick … Example, we had a 6th and a 14th the year we got Okung at 6th and Earl Thomas at 14th… If we had a 19th that year we miss out on Earl who definitely was gone probably the next pick… So draft position can be HUGE …

Coming in a little late (actually I thought I had posted this, but when I came here this morning it was still in the dialog box).

Seattle had no control over the 14th pick that year. They didn't lose on purpose to get that pick. Denver gave us that pick. Getting that pick at all was a bonus based on a team desperate to draft a player the year before.

They went to the playoffs that year in a similar situation as what we're in now. What happens if they miss the playoffs that year? Yeah, they coulda had JJ Watt or Robert Quinn, they may have even turned into what they turned into - but does that mean no Cliff Avril or Michael Bennett (or both)? More importantly, does a team with no QB but a top 10 pick (coulda been as high as 6) take a Jake Locker, a Christian Ponder or a Blaine Gabbert instead of signing Tarvaris Jackson? That means no Russell Wilson - and do they even make the Super Bowl with Jake Locker instead of Russell Wilson?

Hell, does a staff going 6-10 and 7-9 in 2 years have the leeway to be given a third year the same way 7-9 and 7-9 with a playoff win were given?

In 2011, because they went to the playoffs, they got a 10 year starter in the NFL instead of possibly a 4 year injury report blocking them from drafting a 9 time pro bowler the next year.

There's no way of knowing how the NifL would've really played out, but even at 20 different draft slots between picks, I see winning that week 17 game against the Rams led directly to the Seahawks winning the Super Bowl 3 years later. There's no guarantee that picking a few places higher will provide the same value as giving Woolen, Walker, Bryant, Cross, Lucas and others a taste of the playoffs and winning.

 

[flyerhawk]

Coming in a little late (actually I thought I had posted this, but when I came here this morning it was still in the dialog box).

Seattle had no control over the 14th pick that year. They didn't lose on purpose to get that pick. Denver gave us that pick. Getting that pick at all was a bonus based on a team desperate to draft a player the year before.

They went to the playoffs that year in a similar situation as what we're in now. What happens if they miss the playoffs that year? Yeah, they coulda had JJ Watt or Robert Quinn, they may have even turned into what they turned into - but does that mean no Cliff Avril or Michael Bennett (or both)? More importantly, does a team with no QB but a top 10 pick (coulda been as high as 6) take a Jake Locker, a Christian Ponder or a Blaine Gabbert instead of signing Tarvaris Jackson? That means no Russell Wilson - and do they even make the Super Bowl with Jake Locker instead of Russell Wilson?

Hell, does a staff going 6-10 and 7-9 in 2 years have the leeway to be given a third year the same way 7-9 and 7-9 with a playoff win were given?

In 2011, because they went to the playoffs, they got a 10 year starter in the NFL instead of possibly a 4 year injury report blocking them from drafting a 9 time pro bowler the next year.

There's no way of knowing how the NifL would've really played out, but even at 20 different draft slots between picks, I see winning that week 17 game against the Rams led directly to the Seahawks winning the Super Bowl 3 years later. There's no guarantee that picking a few places higher will provide the same value as giving Woolen, Walker, Bryant, Cross, Lucas and others a taste of the playoffs and winning.

In the aggregate the odds of hitting on a draft pick directly correlate to the draft position. So you may have a 25% of getting a pro bowl caliber, but not all-pro, player at 13. And at 19 it may be 23%

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Coming in a little late (actually I thought I had posted this, but when I came here this morning it was still in the dialog box).

Seattle had no control over the 14th pick that year. They didn't lose on purpose to get that pick. Denver gave us that pick. Getting that pick at all was a bonus based on a team desperate to draft a player the year before.

They went to the playoffs that year in a similar situation as what we're in now. What happens if they miss the playoffs that year? Yeah, they coulda had JJ Watt or Robert Quinn, they may have even turned into what they turned into - but does that mean no Cliff Avril or Michael Bennett (or both)? More importantly, does a team with no QB but a top 10 pick (coulda been as high as 6) take a Jake Locker, a Christian Ponder or a Blaine Gabbert instead of signing Tarvaris Jackson? That means no Russell Wilson - and do they even make the Super Bowl with Jake Locker instead of Russell Wilson?

Hell, does a staff going 6-10 and 7-9 in 2 years have the leeway to be given a third year the same way 7-9 and 7-9 with a playoff win were given?

In 2011, because they went to the playoffs, they got a 10 year starter in the NFL instead of possibly a 4 year injury report blocking them from drafting a 9 time pro bowler the next year.

There's no way of knowing how the NifL would've really played out, but even at 20 different draft slots between picks, I see winning that week 17 game against the Rams led directly to the Seahawks winning the Super Bowl 3 years later. There's no guarantee that picking a few places higher will provide the same value as giving Woolen, Walker, Bryant, Cross, Lucas and others a taste of the playoffs and winning.

There is never a guarantee, but if I asked you would you prefer Seattle having an 13th pick or 19th pick, I’m sure you wouldn’t say 19th pick because there are no guarantees the 13th pick will be any better… That’s my point, higher draft pick is always a better position and it gives you more options…

 

[blstoker]

There is never a guarantee, but if I asked you would you prefer Seattle having an 13th pick or 19th pick, I’m sure you wouldn’t say 19th pick because there are not guarantees the 13th pick will be any better… That’s my point, higher draft pick is always a better position and it gives you more options…

You'd guess wrong. I value the experience of winning much more than the draft pick. I want the young players this year hungrier to get back. I want this team to see itself as a winning team - not a team that always looks to next year to get better.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

You'd guess wrong. I value the experience of winning much more than the draft pick. I want the young players this year hungrier to get back. I want this team to see itself as a winning team - not a team that always looks to next year to get better.

Oh you’re talking about Seattle making the playoffs so the young guys get some experience, I hear ya on that… I’m not against that if they can slip in.. But if they don’t I’m ok with it, I like the position we’re in draft wise, very happy about it …

 

[HaroldSeattle]

First down.

 

[YourFriendGannon]

I loved every minute of it.

 

[Screamin12th]

the fact it was a Rogers INT that helped seal this win makes it that much better. That shit that happened before Detroit scored the TD was just ugly ... wtf was those two Green bay players thinking? Both should have been ejected and the 2nd guy came in belly bumped him ( trainer ) and tried to intimidate a member of Detroit's staff. sure he catches a BIG fine and the NFL might kick him out for the first game of 2023 they have done just that before.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Packers and Broncos outlook gloomy, Seahawks outlook bright! I don't want to double down on Geno Smith but for this season he stepped up as much as he could.

 

[Coily1]

View attachment 318548


View attachment 318549

Packers and Broncos outlook gloomy, Seahawks outlook bright! I don't want to double down on Geno Smith but for this season he stepped up as much as he could.

Always best not to overpay for an over-the-hill QB. Rodgers at least made his young receiver corps better over the course of the season, but it was a mistake to give him that extension. Wilson's a complete bust, and Seattle looks to be genius letting him walk.

 

[MrS]

Word is geno got a cool million for making the playoffs

 

[Screamin12th]

I'm happy for Geno and if the Hawks can some how pull off the upset in the playoffs over the 49ers he might earn himself a cool 30+ Million.

 

[flyerhawk]

I'm happy for Geno and if the Hawks can some how pull off the upset in the playoffs over the 49ers he might earn himself a cool 30+ Million.

I'd say he's getting 30 million no matter what.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Detroit battled like warrior poets, I’m stunned we’re in the playoffs, unbelievable…

 

[seattlefan75]

I'm so happy for both the Lions and Jaguars this season. After over a decade of Aaron Rodgers terrorizing the NFC North the Vikings and Lions finally finished on top of the division. Also with everything that happened with Urban Meyer in Jacksonville I thought Lawrence would be on his way to a bust career thanks to bad management but they have really turned things around too and made the playoffs.

 

[Screamin12th]

After Lawrence's rookie season and when the Hawks traded Wilson I wanted them to go after him SO BAD! I thought the Hawks could snatch him for a 2nd and a player or two and the Jags would jump at it. He looked like a bust but I thought he looked like a stud with nothing in place around him causing him to struggle.

 

[JMR]

…only because it’s 3 teams vying for the single spot. There are simply more of those “exciting” scenarios for viewership, by making Seattle play first:

1. Seahawks lose to the Rams, then it’s a straight head-to-head for the Lions and Packers for the last spot.

2. Seahawks beat the Rams, then gets in only if Lions beat Packers.

3. Though if Seahawks beat Rams and Packers beat Lions, then Seahawks still get eliminated.

Contrast that with if the Lions-Packers had played first:

4. Lions beat Packers and then Seahawks lose, giving Lions the final playoff spot.

5. Lions beat Packers and then Seahawks win, and then Seahawks make the playoffs.

6. Packers beat Lions, and then Seahawks-Rams game is meaningless as Seahawks were eliminated before game even begins.

(excluding all the scenarios where there are ties)

There’s simply more nail-biting, watchable action for fans, if the NFL flexed the Packers game. For Seattle fans, scenarios 2-3 and 4-5 are about equally thrilling, but casual viewers lose if #6 happens. If Seahawks win early, then the Lions can still play a spoiler game to keep the Packers out.

Someone mentioned it, but I don't think anyone here was arguing that the Seattle game should have been flipped with Det/GB. Instead, we just said it would have been better to play them at the same time.

Moot point though. Suck it, Packers!!!

 

[Coily1]

Someone mentioned it, but I don't think anyone here was arguing that the Seattle game should have been flipped with Det/GB. Instead, we just said it would have been better to play them at the same time.

Moot point though. Suck it, Packers!!!

As it happened, it was one of the highest rated SNF games in history. The NFL marketers were right.

Enjoy watching your team 1 more week.

 

[JMR]

As it happened, it was one of the highest rated SNF games in history. The NFL marketers were right.

Good for you Packers fans. Heck of a consolation prize for choking at home against the mighty Lions!

Enjoy watching your team 1 more week.

I for sure will. It's always fun watching your team in the playoffs.

 

[Coily1]

Good for you Packers fans. Heck of a consolation prize for choking at home against the mighty Lions!

I for sure will. It's always fun watching your team in the playoffs.

LOL you’re talking trash and pumping up teams vying for the last wildcard spot. No one expected much from any of those 3 teams.

Teams must love to play against the “genius” of Pete Carroll, btw.