|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: seahawkseahawk Date: Dec 17, 2006 02:37
Here's something you long time followers of the Seahawks probably knew in
the back of your mind
I was thinking about why this franchise has taken so long to get to where we
are now where we expect to win the division from the first day of the year
and are really disappointed that we probably aren't going to make the Super
Bowl and take the playoffs for granted (at least until last Thrusday we
did).
I was reflecting that at least it's not as bad as in years past when I was
rooting for all the Seahawks opponents to win by this time of the year so
we'd get a better draft pick. I hated that we'd always finish just out of
the playoff's but not have a bad enough record to get into the top 12 draft
picks or so. It seemed like we couldn't get any impact players and remained
just good enough to almost get into the playoffs but not bad enough to get
the players we needed to get better. I got to thinking about whether that
was indeed the case or just my perception of the franchise's history. I
checked the facts and here's the breakdown:
In 30 seasons our record has been:
|
| Show full article (4.46Kb) |
|
| | 14 Comments |
|
|
Author: akremakrem Date: Dec 17, 2006 07:35
> Here's something you long time followers of the Seahawks probably knew in
> the back of your mind
>
> I was thinking about why this franchise has taken so long to get to where
> we are now where we expect to win the division from the first day of the
> year and are really disappointed that we probably aren't going to make the
> Super Bowl and take the playoffs for granted (at least until last Thrusday
> we did).
>
The 80's gave us hope. 1999 started it over again. I'm happy on how far our
team has come. It just needs fine tuning. :)
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Santolina chamaecyparissusSantolina chamaecyparissus Date: Dec 17, 2006 09:35
seahawk wrote:
>
> In 30 seasons our record has been:
>
> 13 - 3 Once- made playoffs
> 12 - 4 Once - made playoffs
> 10 - 6 Twice - made playoff 1 year
This is all that needs to be said when the groups devolves into another
pissing match about how loyal Seahawk fans are. Only two truly
outstanding regular seasons in 30 years, only two times getting as far
as the conference championship in the playoffs, yet the fan base has
remained strong except for the darkest days of the Behring years.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MelvinMelvin Date: Dec 17, 2006 10:09
On Dec 17, 4:37 am, "seahawk" bullshit.net> wrote:> We used to say you needed around 3 impact players on each side of the ball
> to have a really good squad. On defense, if you had an impact defensive
> lineman, an impact linebacker, and an impact defensive back, you usually had
> a decent defense. On the Seahawks, I see only an impact LB and we're lacking
> impact players on the line and in the backfield. On offense, an impact
> offensive lineman and a couple of impact skilled players (QB, WR, RB,
> TE)will get you there. Definately Jones, Hass, Alexander and a healthy
> Jackson qualify here and really form the basis for our offensive strength.
> Those missing impact players on defense though will keep us out of elite
> status. Here's where we'll see how good Ruskell really is. Without...
|
| Show full article (1.92Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: James in PAJames in PA Date: Dec 17, 2006 10:46
seahawk wrote:
> Here's something you long time followers of the Seahawks probably knew in
> the back of your mind
>
> I was thinking about why this franchise has taken so long to get to where we
> are now where we expect to win the division from the first day of the year
> and are really disappointed that we probably aren't going to make the Super
> Bowl and take the playoffs for granted (at least until last Thrusday we
> did).
>
> I was reflecting that at least it's not as bad as in years past when I was
> rooting for all the Seahawks opponents to win by this time of the year so
> we'd get a better draft pick. I hated that we'd always finish just out of
> the playoff's but not have a bad enough record to get into the top 12 draft
> picks or so. It seemed like we couldn't get any impact players and remained
> just good enough to almost get into the playoffs but not bad enough to get
> the players we needed to get better. I got to thinking about whether that
> was indeed the case or just my perception of the franchise's history. I
> checked the facts and here's the breakdown:
> ...
|
| Show full article (5.30Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: James in PAJames in PA Date: Dec 17, 2006 11:23
Dino Scoppettone wrote:
>>
>> I used to write about this all the time in this NG. I referred to it
>> as the "Mediocrity Cycle From Hell." Obviously, you *can* get high
>> impact players towards the middle or end of every round. You just
>> decrease you chances of doing so the lower you pick. So, without a 1st
>> rounder and having mid to low-mid round picks from the 2nd round on,
>> the Hawks are really going to have to do their homework in next year's
>> draft. I think Ruskell and Holmgren can get this team back competing
>> for a Super Bowl in the near future. This team has the core people in
>> place, they just need to get better on the D-Line and in the secondary.
>> The secondary issue might be a coaching problem. I'm seeing the same
>> mistakes year after year. By the way, what was the other year they
>> finished 10-6? I know 1986 was one of them.
>
> 2003, the "we want the ball and we're gonna score" year.
>
> Here are the sum total of all Seahawks playoff seasons: ...
|
| Show full article (1.90Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MelvinMelvin Date: Dec 17, 2006 15:11
On Dec 17, 1:23 pm, "James in PA" aol.com> wrote:>. As
> far as the 9-7 records and winning the division, that could very well
> happen a 4th time this year!
I sure hope it's not 8-8 and winning the division, though that would be
better than 8-8 and losing the division.
Melvin
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MelvinMelvin Date: Dec 18, 2006 12:34
Tim Douglass wrote:
>
> Sort of amazing that half our playoff appearances have come under
> Holmgren. Sort of puts some perspective on things of late.
Yeah, and there was a 10-year playoff drought from '89 to '98 and
20-year playoff WIN drought from '85 to '04 that made us appreciate
what it's like to be a Cardinals or Saints fan.
Cards: Four playoff appearances since 1948, one playoff win in '99 (and
the only other one in '47).
Saints: Six playoff appearances since team was founded in '67, one
playoff win.
Melvin
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MelvinMelvin Date: Dec 21, 2006 11:52
Curt Nelson wrote:
> If I've done my math correctly, a 21-year playoff win drought. Last win was
> the '84 AFC Wildcard and we didn't actually win a playoff game until last
> year.
I stand corrected. In one year (2005), Seattle went from being
considered one of the worst teams in league history to a team that has
at least made it to the Super Bowl, unlike Cleveland, New Orleans,
Detroit, Jacksonville and Arizona.
Melvin
|
| |
| 3 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: M. Zaiem BegM. Zaiem Beg Date: Dec 21, 2006 13:08
On 21 Dec 2006, Melvin wrote:
:
:Curt Nelson wrote:
:> If I've done my math correctly, a 21-year playoff win drought. Last win was
:> the '84 AFC Wildcard and we didn't actually win a playoff game until last
:> year.
:
:I stand corrected. In one year (2005), Seattle went from being
:considered one of the worst teams in league history to a team that has
:at least made it to the Super Bowl, unlike Cleveland, New Orleans,
:Detroit, Jacksonville and Arizona.
Considered one of the most mediocre teams in league history, maybe.
Seattle was never, ever considered to be the worst by a longshot.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
