Comments

1
Why OH why did we not run the ball more when we had possession? I get not running it 4th quarter, but part of our defense's success last year was our ability to keep the other team's defense ON the field so our's could get a breather.
2
This just in: football players are violent thugs. Go team!
3
This was really long so I only skimmed, but I did look for mention of the fact that the NFL confirmed that Harvin's TD should have been called back because he stepped out of bounds, and did not see that.

Anyway, if you think any regular season loss "doesn't matter," especially one that should have been by 16 points instead of nine (last year Seattle lost only three games by a combined 15 points), you're deluding yourself. Early losses of games that should have been won have a way of looming large down the stretch.
4
If there's such thing as a "good loss", I think this was one. It provides a wake-up call to the Hawks' defense that they're not invincible.

I think the weather played a big part. The Chargers ran a hurry-up, which didn't allow the Hawks to sub on defense. In cooler weather this might not have mattered as much. A nearly 3-to-1 time of possession differential is ridiculous.

The 11-point loss was really an 8-point loss, with the Hawks having to go for it on 4th down at their own 15. They didn't play well and weren't blown out. As Spike points out: if a fumble or two had bounced our way, we would've won.

Watching Kaepernick choke at home in the night game lessened the blow. If I was the Niners, I'd be worried. As a Hawks fan, I am not.
5
The Sounders won 3-2 against Real Salt Lake and were the first to lock in their spot in the MLS championships. Why no love?
6
I was so pissed at Hawks losing I went to bed to read and turned off all my media, skipping Sunday Night Football because it would just be Kapernick gloating in our faces.

Now you tell me they lost!?!?

I wish I had seen that!!

And thanks SLOG...you made my day!
7

As far as Mariners, we no longer control our own destiny.

http://www.playoffstatus.com/mlb/america…

Now we have to hope that the Royals lose...and lose...
8
@2: Even though when we look at facts instead of selected biases, NFL players are arrested for violent crimes at lower rates than the general public?

https://stat.duke.edu/~dalene/chance/cha…

@4: In your calculations, you forgot the free seven points gifted to the Hawks when Harvin ran out of bounds and the refs decided that despite NFL rules, they did not have to review the play.

Fumbles do not always equal pure luck. More people near a play equates to more recoveries, so teams that are big on never giving up on plays recover more fumbles. It is about effort and coaching. Also, you forgot that causing fumbles and holding on to the ball are not luck at all.

Seattle's defense could not get off the field because their offense could not sustain drives. Mock the "dink and dunk" style the Chargers put forward if you must, but the methodical drives made the defense tired and unable to stay in the game.

Sherman was targeted five times, and the recievers were 5/5 for about sixty some yards. After this, Sherman ran from a post game interview, choosing instead to pout on Twitter about it. I don't have much respect for guys who talk mountains of trash when they are on top, and flee when they lose.

9
@3: Stepping out of bounds does not turn the ball over to the other team.
10
No, @9, but it DOES keep seven points off the board. And there's no assuming that they would have gotten the touchdown if the call was reviewed (like all scoring plays are supposed to be) and called back.
11
@10: For the moment. You can't play that game of "the score shoulda been..."
You have no idea how the game might have gone from that point on. For all we know, calling that play back "coulda been" the best thing to happen for the Seahawks. We will never know.
12
@ 11, you're giving @4 a free pass to play it...
13
Don't sleep on the Arizona Cardinals. They're 2-0, and they won in Seattle last year.
14
@12--Nah, just didn't see the comments when I initially replied. 4 & 8 are included.

Let's discuss the multiverse, Monday morning QBs!
15
BORRRRRING.
16
Sunday's game was a solid game played by both sides--sad to see Seattle lose but I'm reasonably satisfied otherwise. I don't know how much can be taken from it given the unusual heat--I think the weather was a boon to the offense similar to how cold weather games generally help the defense.

Given that San Diego controlled the ball as much as they did, I think it says something that the Seahawks were in the game and could have won with a late fourth quarter touchdown. I don't think it helped their game that the offense's scoring drives were all very efficient--the defense really could have used a break!

The one thing that disappointed me was punting the ball away on fourth and two on the second to last drive. Normally I'd have less an issue with putting the game in the hands of the defense, but I feel like giving the ball back to the Chargers with so little time left and a lopsided time of possession was the wrong call.
17
@14: The Seahawks score an average of 2.08 points per drive, higher than usual, the average is closer to zero. So on a drive where something like this happens, one is safer assuming points would not have been scored, rater than assume a touchdown.

On the play specifically, Seattle's total red zone TD efficiency last year was around 50%, so assuming the ref calls the play correctly, three points would be more appropriate assumption as a field goal is a more likely outcome. I did not feel the need to be as detailed in my original statement.
18
I'm not caring because I'm so disgusted with spectator sports. It's all about the money, big money, so sociopathic and dangerous behavior is tolerated and swept under the rug. Since Penn State broke, I've no respect or love for any players or teams. The rot clearly sets in at the college programs (which are just vocational training for the professional leagues) and carries through to those leagues. I know not all professional athletes are bad apples, but far too many of them have shown themselves to be wormy for me not to suspect there's a lot more disgusting sleaze being deliberately hidden from us. In my heart, I can't find anything to cheer for.
19
@17: The normal average points per drive is close to zero? That's the dumbest thing I've read all day. You are apparently confusing football with futbol.
20
Who gives a shit?
21
Awesome coverage Spike. Keep this going please.
22
Let's see San Diego up here in Safeco Field in the rain!

GO, SEAHAWKS!!!!
23
Guys, dwelling on the Harvin decision? Really? 1st and 10 on the 21 is a pretty good place to be; that down/field position with no clock pressure has a point expectancy of around 5. Also, the defense would have benefitted from the offense staying on the field longer. So if you want to wipe two points off the board... whatever, fine... but don't act like that's a seven point swing.
24
@19: You realize that points are not scored on every drive, right?

There are these things calls punts, and these things called turnovers. Also, it is possible to miss field goals.

They keep stats for these kinds of things you know, which you could have just looked up instead of making yourself look like a moron. I know most Seahawks fans are very new to fotball, but they should know what Google is.
25
@24: I don't need Google to tell me that the normal average points per drive is close to zero, 35 years of observation and a basic understanding of math tell me that you're wrong.

But if you want Google to help out, here's a link to the 2013 NFL Points Per Drive stats. Denver had the highest PPD at 3.0. The Jaguars were the worst at 1.27. I'm not going to do the tabulation, but I'm guessing the average points per drive in 2013 was around 2.0.

And that's ALL drives last year. As @23 astutely points out, the odds of the Hawks scoring from their opponent's 21 is much, much greater--the Hawks scored a touchdown 53% of the time they were in the red zone last year (Google told me so!). And considering Hauschka is nearly automatic inside 50 yards, I think 5 points is the likely average for the Hawks to score at 1st and 10 from their opponent's 21.
26
@25: Net points per drive is the accepted stat. If you have no rules for where the data comes from or how it is compiled you can get anything you want, basically. You are looking at raw numbers. Even then it is barely different than what I already stated.

One also can not simply declare that a 53% TD red zone efficiency means that 53% of the time the ball is at the 20 it will end up in the end zone. The ball on the twenty is the worst case scenario, meaning it will be heavily weighted more towards a field goal rather than a TD. Typically you see the majority of that 53% number as a result of red zone drives starting closer to the ten yard line than the twenty.
27
Give it up, man.
28
People are forgetting that the Seahawks scored a touchdown on their drive before the half leaving 16 seconds left on the clock... I'd argue that if the free touchdown the Seahawks were given was taken back and ball placed on the 21 yard line more time has to be ran off the clock even if they scored a td after that it leaves them with less time if any for that before the half touchdown. Which is in fact a at least a 4 point swing but more then likely a 7 point swing. Just my opinion
29
People are forgetting that the Seahawks scored a touchdown on their drive before the half leaving 16 seconds left on the clock... I'd argue that if the free touchdown the Seahawks were given was taken back and ball placed on the 21 yard line more time has to be ran off the clock even if they scored a td after that it leaves them with less time if any for that before the half touchdown. Which is in fact a at least a 4 point swing but more then likely a 7 point swing. Just my opinion

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.