HawkShack.com

Just a thought but if Romo did not get injured in pre-season playing here, he may have still been starting all season throwing INT's all over and getting sacked. Cowboys would be 8-7 right now.

As if Saturday's game wasn't bad enough...

Yea, The Hawks of sort of inadvertently sh*tying in their own cereal bowl all year. Maybe they swirtch from Wheaties to Lucky Charms before the playoffs arrive. Never know, could meet the turds in the playoffs , take out Dak and return Romo to all his playoff glory.

Have faith!

pope out

Hawks aren't taking anybody out in the playoffs- the defense has gone soft, focused on everything but football this season, and the offense has no blocking, something necessary for running and passing.

I'm afraid this isn't our year. Maybe next year we assemble 5 NFL-caliber offensive linemen and the players concentrate on football. Neither is the case this year and it's only been getting worse as the year wore on.

I disagree. I think we can beat anyone in the NFL still. We also can lose to anyone. We shall see what happens.

I think we can beat anyone in the NFL still.

Maybe, but it looks to me like our offensive line is in disarray (nobody even knows who the fck is *starting* anymore) and the defense has quit.

Honestly- did anyone doubt the missed extra point wouldn't matter last week, that the Cards, a team reduced to playing 'spoiler' for weeks now, was going to get the ball in FG range?

A minute to drive on this defense has become an eternity. Nobody would love to see them have an epiphany more than me, but I'm not holding my breath anymore. I'm convinced their minds are elsewhere.

The missed extra point didn't matter. The missed FG mattered, and the fumble to start the game mattered. I get your point though.

I always felt we were bad at defending a close game late the last few years, we play too soft and rely too much on the prevent nickel. We need to bring heat in those situations and force the opposing qb to throw it to Sherman.

You might have a point about the distractions this year. They seem really dialed in at times and at other times not focused on the game at all. I wonder if the Lockett injury might've taken our focus off winning a little bit? Whatever it is I am gonna remain optimistic until the season is over (hopefully after we lift the trophy.)

I don't buy the statement that the missed XP didn't matter.
It meant everything. It changed this thing called "momentum".

Az had watched 59 minutes of winning football turn into a potential loss and then........
Seattle had clawed furiously back to seize the lead in a game they were buried and gone in and then.......

Anyone who discounts momentum misses the entire point, just like hauchka did.

The missed fg and missed scoring opportunities in the first half were hindsight things but in the moment hauchkas F up on another XP in that situation was a huge factor in the loss .

Much like our offense, this season hasn't had much in the way of rhythm.

I suppose you could throw in the defense and special teams too, along with coaching.
It's been an odd year.

Not much is lending itself to a deep run with this group. We can all hope for one anyway.

I completely agree Seattle should have performed better and win a must have game against Arizona, that said regardless of the Cardinals record, they are indeed a "quality" opponent, and one built to beat us ( just like any other conference opponent). They aren't some chaff like the Browns or something. You guys are discussing the #3 defense and #8 offense in the NFL, who before the season was a huge obstacle in Seattle's way.

Not to many top ten offenses and top three defensive teams sitting home for the playoffs.

HumanCockroach wrote:I completely agree Seattle should have performed better and win a must have game against Arizona, that said regardless of the Cardinals record, they are indeed a "quality" opponent, and one built to beat us ( just like any other conference opponent). They aren't some chaff like the Browns or something. You guys are discussing the #3 defense and #8 offense in the NFL, who before the season was a huge obstacle in Seattle's way.

Not to many top ten offenses and top three defensive teams sitting home for the playoffs.

This^^^^^^they are still an obstacle LOL.

Seattle isn't Seattle right now either, especially on defense. Having a dormant offense suddenly erupt often in the nick of time has been standard operating procedure for too long to remember.
But having our defense give up 20 points at home in the 4th quarter is kind of new.
If nothing else the comeback proves the will to win is still there.

Count out the Hawks at your peril.

EmeraldBullet wrote:I disagree. I think we can beat anyone in the NFL still. We also can lose to anyone. We shall see what happens.

This. We are perhaps the only team in the league capable of going into NE and beating the best team in the league on the road. We could also lose to the Browns at home when things are not in sync ... (which happens way too often)

Which is why it's important just to get to the dance. One and done or another Lombardi are both possibilities, give us the chance and lets just see where it takes us.

Unless we come away with the 2 seed, I'm pretty pessimistic about our chances of getting back to the SB. We haven't strung together the 3 straight A game performances, especially road performances, that will be necessary to make it to the SB if we end up with anything less than the 2 seed. But then again, I'm the type that likes to lower my expectations. The valleys of the emotional roller coaster are easier to deal with and the peaks are more enjoyable.

I might have argued with you a week or two ago, RD...on all counts. I am hopeful because PC and his teams are usually in every game - and are not likely to quit. And while anything is indeed possible, we just have not been able to get a string of good games together without a major effin clunker in the middle. Here's hoping that run starts now, eh?

Hawk Sista wrote:I might have argued with you a week or two ago, RD...on all counts. I am hopeful because PC and his teams are usually in every game - and are not likely to quit. And while anything is indeed possible, we just have not been able to get a string of good games together without a major effin clunker in the middle. Here's hoping that run starts now, eh?

Yep. These past two seasons have had a totally different feel to them than the 2012-2014 squads, of which I was supremely confident that we were the best team in the NFC if not the entire league. Today, it's more like "I think we can win" instead of "I know that we will win". I guess the Beast retiring took away a little of my swagger, too.

But we'll see. This is the NFL, and on any given Sunday...

RiverDog wrote:Unless we come away with the 2 seed, I'm pretty pessimistic about our chances of getting back to the SB. We haven't strung together the 3 straight A game performances, especially road performances, that will be necessary to make it to the SB if we end up with anything less than the 2 seed. But then again, I'm the type that likes to lower my expectations. The valleys of the emotional roller coaster are easier to deal with and the peaks are more enjoyable.

To be fair, there's no guarantee of three road games if they are the three or four seed. The three and four seed could very easily get the same amount of home games as the two. Hell even the one should that team lose its first game. The playoffs aren't some sort of lock, Seattle is guaranteed no more than two road games during the playoffs ( unless I suppose you're including the neutral SB site as a road game) as they automatically have a game at home if they don't get the bye in the first round.

Either way, at least they're in the dance, which means each week they play is a chance to advance. I wouldn't be shocked to see Seattle host the NFC championship game whichever of the three seeds they end up with. Won't be holding my breath or anything, but a WC team certainly could knock off Dallas, which would leave Seattle as the three or four seed having to trump a single opponent on the road once. ( Of course that's all a what if proposition. What if the Giants or Pack/ skins/Detroit beats Detroit/GB and then upsets Dallas? Seattle wins game 1 and then beats Atlanta? Means an NFC Championship game at home).

It's all moot at this point ultimately, anything can happen in the postseason, should be interesting.

I heard today that the Cowboys de-activated Tony Romo. Mark Sanchez will be the starter this Sunday, and I'm sure that guys like Whitten, Bryant, Sean Lee, etc, will see very limited action. At least they didn't mail in the Lions game.

They don't wanna risk tony's trade value.

c_hawkbob wrote:They don't wanna risk tony's trade value.

That's the argument for not playing him. The argument for playing him is that he needs the work. If something happens to Dak, they will need Romo. The goal here is to win the Super Bowl, not to increase or maintain the trade value of certain players.

http://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahaw ... f-matchups

Though he has NY at number two ( which I completely disagree with) the easiest certainly is one of those matchups that looked good on paper. Probably move GB to third, and NT to fourth.

That's the argument for not playing him. The argument for playing him is that he needs the work. If something happens to Dak, they will need Romo. The goal here is to win the Super Bowl, not to increase or maintain the trade value of certain players.

So what's the trade value for an old, brittle Quarterback?
My guess is a lower draft pick, as they might have some Cap problems next year, so playing him wouldn't really affect his trade value.
Then again, it's Jerruh's world where flights of fancy are abundant.

NorthHawk wrote:So what's the trade value for an old, brittle Quarterback?
My guess is a lower draft pick, as they might have some Cap problems next year, so playing him wouldn't really affect his trade value.
Then again, it's Jerruh's world where flights of fancy are abundant.

Don't underestimate the demand for quarterbacks in this league. I wouldn't be at all surprised if a team like Cleveland or Jacksonville took a chance on Romo.

Point is that having an insurance policy at quarterback in a season where a Lombardi is within your grasp outweighs almost anything in terms of trade value.

Why stop there? Denver, Houston, Arizona could all use a veteran QB, Denver's window is closing, Osweiler has been a disaster, and Arizona may feel they have squeezed out whatever is left of Palmer, looking for another "big" arm in his twilight years. How about Minnesota? Are they sold on Bridgewater? Bradford? The Jets? I think there will be far more demand for a "bridge" QB than you're thinking North.

HumanCockroach wrote:Why stop there? Denver, Houston, Arizona could all use a veteran QB, Denver's window is closing, Osweiler has been a disaster, and Arizona may feel they have squeezed out whatever is left of Palmer, looking for another "big" arm in his twilight years. How about Minnesota? Are they sold on Bridgewater? Bradford? The Jets? I think there will be far more demand for a "bridge" QB than you're thinking North.

Chicago could be in the market, too. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the guaranteed portion of Cutler's contract runs out in 2016.

Point being is that the market always has been and always will be extremely over priced for quarterbacks.

Absolutely they could be in the market. Though I'm guessing a location that is either already a QB ready team, or close to a playoff contender ( something I'm not sure Chicago is as opposed to a team like Denver, Houston or Minnesota... )Ultimately I think Romo is going to be able to "pick" his destination with his relationship with good ol' Jerrah...

Not so sure.
If they trade for him his contract is 24+ million.
That limits the teams that want to or can take on a big contract.
Even if he restructured his contract, I doubt it would be for much less over the length of the contract leaving the new team with a lot in dead cap for a few years after he's gone.

Add in he might rather retire than go to a bad team, the possible locations become limited.
This puts the team negotiating for him in the drivers seat.

Here's a dark horse.... One with lots of money, a good ish line and a young team.... San Fransisco.

SF might be one of the few that needs a QB and could afford one. Spotrac estimates their Cap space as about 87 million.
They certainly wouldn't give up the #2 or 34th picks, so what might they gamble?
My guess is a maximum 6th considering his age and health.