2010 Super Bowl team - half gone

[hoosier]

The point is the trend of the Seahawks since Pete Carroll and TT's protege took over. Not judging it on 1/2 season or an early game

The Seahawks are trending up with a complete team unlike the Packers.

R U calling the Seahwks drafting, acquiring of free agents and coaching a fluke?

Since Carroll took over Seattle is 25-23. They've finished below .500 twice in three years. The only "trend" I see there is that they tend to finish 7-9 most years.

[rbaloha1]

Since Carroll took over Seattle is 25-23. They've finished below .500 twice in three years. The only "trend" I see there is that they tend to finish 7-9 most years.

I am talking about this season and the arrival of Schneider. Don't the hawks have a playoff victory against the saints 2 seasons ago and a playoff victory this season? That is the trend I am talking about not the beginning. If you want to use the front end to discredit the current hawks situation then go ahead.

The hawks currently have a better roster and coaching staff than the packers. You want to use the old hawks to support your claim is just like saying bo derek is still a 10.

The packers current roster is only good enough to win the north and not beat the 49ers/Giants type teams. The normal turnover is not working at a level to go to the super bowl.

[mraynrand]

The hawks currently have a better roster and coaching staff than the packers.

I am talking about this season and the arrival of Schneider. Don't the hawks have a playoff victory against the saints 2 seasons ago and a playoff victory this season?

you either have to take the whole package or just recent history; you can't mix and match just to favor your argument.

[rbaloha1]

you either have to take the whole package or just recent history; you can't mix and match just to favor your argument.

Should we compare the 1921 packers against the current era?

The issue is the bold recent chages made by a TT protege that has resulted in a better roster than the Packers.

The hawks 3 years ago has no bearing in the argument since there almost all gone just like over 50 per cent of the packers are gone.

Its about now and if TT does not acquring free agents that do not screw the cap the Packers are in trouble of not winning the NFC.

[hoosier]

I am talking about this season and the arrival of Schneider. Don't the hawks have a playoff victory against the saints 2 seasons ago and a playoff victory this season? That is the trend I am talking about not the beginning.

Sorry, but one year doesn't make for a trend.

I get that you are impressed with the way the Seahawks renewed their roster and improved after the debacle of Holmgren's last year. They certainly exceeded everyone's expectations this year. And they were one of the hottest teams in the league in the second half of the season. I am not "discrediting" anything. I am pointing out that what has gotten you so excited is, historically speaking, often something that turns out to be short lived. Guiness pointed out Detroit as one example. Let's see what Seattle does next year. In the meantime, your assertion that their coaching staff and roster are superior to GB's is probably not one that most knowledgeable observers would share.

[rbaloha1]

Sorry, but one year doesn't make for a trend.

I get that you are impressed with the way the Seahawks renewed their roster and improved after the debacle of Holmgren's last year. They certainly exceeded everyone's expectations this year. And they were one of the hottest teams in the league in the second half of the season. I am not "discrediting" anything. I am pointing out that what has gotten you so excited is, historically speaking, often something that turns out to be short lived. Guiness pointed out Detroit as one example. Let's see what Seattle does next year. In the meantime, your assertion that their coaching staff and roster are superior to GB's is probably not one that most knowledgeable observers would share.

It is case by case situation. I never said the Lions had any staying power.

The hawks are the MODERN example of how to construct a team with huge changes and be competitive instantly. The old cliches about taking 3 -5 years to build no longer fit just like rookie qbs can not start in the NFL and the option could never work in the NFL are done. Your interpretation to claim its only half a season is trying to dismiss the hawks as short lived and a fluke is wrong.

Hopefully Kelly has success with using no huddle periodically throughout the game which sparks MM to use it the no huddle more.

[ThunderDan]

I am talking about this season and the arrival of Schneider. Don't the hawks have a playoff victory against the saints 2 seasons ago and a playoff victory this season? That is the trend I am talking about not the beginning. If you want to use the front end to discredit the current hawks situation then go ahead.

The hawks currently have a better roster and coaching staff than the packers. You want to use the old hawks to support your claim is just like saying bo derek is still a 10.

The packers current roster is only good enough to win the north and not beat the 49ers/Giants type teams. The normal turnover is not working at a level to go to the super bowl.

So SEA is 2-2 in the playoffs over the last 3 years.
The Pack is 5-2 with a Super Bowl.

[rbaloha1]

So SEA is 2-2 in the playoffs over the last 3 years.
The Pack is 5-2 with a Super Bowl.

The hawks with Schneider started the major overhaul over the last 2 years. Packers 0-2 in the playoffs

While you at it go back to 1921. Back to the future.

[Guiness]

I am talking about this season and the arrival of Schneider. Don't the hawks have a playoff victory against the saints 2 seasons ago and a playoff victory this season? That is the trend I am talking about not the beginning. If you want to use the front end to discredit the current hawks situation then go ahead.

The hawks currently have a better roster and coaching staff than the packers. You want to use the old hawks to support your claim is just like saying bo derek is still a 10.

The packers current roster is only good enough to win the north and not beat the 49ers/Giants type teams. The normal turnover is not working at a level to go to the super bowl.

I don't think looking at the last three years is ancient history! Their win over the Saints was when they got into the playoffs as a 7-9 team. I don't want the Pack to be a 7-9 team that needs a freakshow broken play 79 yard running TD to win a playoff game!

I'm not saying they're not trending upwards, just that I think the Pack patterning themselves after them smacks of bandwagon jumping!

[Guiness]

The hawks with Schneider started the major overhaul over the last 2 years. Packers 0-2 in the playoffs

While you at it go back to 1921. Back to the future.

The Pack is 1-2. They did beat Minnesota 2 weeks ago.

[rbaloha1]

I don't think looking at the last three years is ancient history! Their win over the Saints was when they got into the playoffs as a 7-9 team. I don't want the Pack to be a 7-9 team that needs a freakshow broken play 79 yard running TD to win a playoff game!

I'm not saying they're not trending upwards, just that I think the Pack patterning themselves after them smacks of bandwagon jumping!

Again the point is big roster changes does not mean rebuilding for the next season as the hawks are demonstrarting.

You guys keep pointing the Packers past success -- guess what -- over 1/2 the roster is gone from the super bowl and the replacements have not won a PLAYOFF GAME SINCE.

On the other hand, the hawks have significantly changed their roster during the same period and won 2 playoff games and were closer to the NFL championship game this season than the Packers.

[rbaloha1]

The Pack is 1-2. They did beat Minnesota 2 weeks ago.

Right. Big deal.

[Guiness]

Right. Big deal.

lol, ok! I would damn well have been a big deal if they'd lost!

[denverYooper]

If you judge a team on how it finishes the year, then 4 times out of 5 you are going to be disappointed. If you decide to blow the team up every time it finishes on a bad note, you will just be adding lack of continuity to its list of problems. Look at how the Packers have done over the past five years since AR has been the QB. And then compare to Seattle. Chances are, next year Seattle will be reverting to their usual 8-8. Teams will figure out ways to stop Wilson, they will get their share of injuries, they won't get any gifts from replacement refs, and so on. Comparing Green Bay to Seattle based on one half a season is not very illuminating.

Seattle's DC, Gus Bradley, also left to be HC of the Jax Jags. That's a big change for the real heart and soul of that team.

[hoosier]

The hawks are the MODERN example of how to construct a team with huge changes and be competitive instantly. The old cliches about taking 3 -5 years to build no longer fit just like rookie qbs can not start in the NFL and the option could never work in the NFL are done. Your interpretation to claim its only half a season is trying to dismiss the hawks as short lived and a fluke is wrong.

Can you offer something other than just your own persistent assertion about why we should see the Seahawks as here to stay? Their record this year does not by itself make for good evidence. Your claims about their superior coaching and roster talent do not strike me as very credible. I guess I am having a hard time seeing where you are coming from, unless it is just the enthusiasm of the bandwagon.