HawkShack.com

On paper the Hawks should have a win over the cards but that seems to be the type of game they lose. (Ghost of Ariens) But Rosen could but should not have some spectacular day. Just seems to go that way with Hawks. I am hoping Hawks 27, Cards 13.

On the flipside all stars point to the Rams easily winning here! That is another setup where the Hawks may surprise and have just the right game plan for this point in the season. Especially if thy lose in ARZ.

Hawks 24, Rams 23

Uppercut wrote:On paper the Hawks should have a win over the cards but that seems to be the type of game they lose. (Ghost of Ariens) But Rosen could but should not have some spectacular day. Just seems to go that way with Hawks. I am hoping Hawks 27, Cards 13.

On the flipside all stars point to the Rams easily winning here! That is another setup where the Hawks may surprise and have just the right game plan for this point in the season. Especially if thy lose in ARZ.

Hawks 24, Rams 23

The past few years we've played well in Arizona, and having gone to 3 of the past 4 games down there myself, I can vouche for the fact that it's a virtual home game for the Hawks. So yea, I think your Hawks 27 Cards 13 call is reasonable.

But the Rams are an entirely different story. They are as hot as a firecracker right now, the consensus best team in the conference, solid on both sides of the ball. I want to see how they play against a quality Vikings team this weekend before I commit myself, but at this point in time, they look to be the best team on our schedule and a prohibitive favorite even on the road in our house.

It's still a tad bit early to be handicapping schedules, but at this point, I see us going 3-3 into our bye week. Too bad we couldn't capitalize on two very winnable games in Denver and Chicago. We have a number of games down the road that if they were on our schedule this weekend, we'd be 7+ point dogs.

I get irritated when PC says "Its not how you start, its how you finish"

The last time I checked a win in September counts the same as a win in December as far as making the playoffs.

Uppercut wrote:I get irritated when PC says "Its not how you start, its how you finish"

The last time I checked a win in September counts the same as a win in December as far as making the playoffs.

Just another buzz word phrase like so many that PC has in his arsenal. "Always compete" is another one that can draw a person's ire. It's meant to sell books and add flavor to the interviews and lecture circuits.

There is no way the Seahawks will beat the Rams this year or for many.

Dreaming to even have the thought buddy-boys

U R right that Rosen will have a career day against you

ARZ 28, SEA 9

Week After

RAMS 55, SEA 0

Someone had to say it now go have milk and cookies and go back to bed

We're in Wolf Grey's this weekend. Should be a good time...

Talking about the Rams is putting the cart before the horse a bit, but they will have an extra few days rest heading into that game, which should help them. At the same time they could be without their 2 starting corners... At the end of the day it is going to be tough for the Hawks to beat the Rams who are probably the best team in the league right now. Their only real weakness is at QB, other than that they are solid at every position... offense and defensively.

mykc14 wrote:Talking about the Rams is putting the cart before the horse a bit, but they will have an extra few days rest heading into that game, which should help them. At the same time they could be without their 2 starting corners... At the end of the day it is going to be tough for the Hawks to beat the Rams who are probably the best team in the league right now. Their only real weakness is at QB, other than that they are solid at every position... offense and defensively.

Unlike us, they are a balanced team and if one side of the ball is having problems, the other can pick them up and maybe get a win.
With us we only really had Defense and a marginal Offense even with Lynch.
I guess their HC is more secure than Pete in that he lets the DC determine how that Defense plays unlike Pete who demands the Offense play a certain way regardless of personnel or situation.
It was and remains our Achilles heel.

We "should" win. IF we win the next 3 out of 6 games we will be doing well.

It's still a tad bit early to start handicapping our schedule, but after the Cards game this weekend, we'll be heading into a tough part of our schedule. Obviously the Rams are going to be a huge challenge, but many of our remaining opponents, teams like the Chargers, Packers, Panthers, and Lions have experienced Pro Bowl quality QB's that can slice and dice our young secondary, which by that time, could be Earl-less. Russell and the offense are going to have to repeat the efficiency with which they played last Sunday, ie strong running game and no turnovers, if we are to make a run at the playoffs.

At this point, I see no reason to back off my original 7-9 forecast.

We should be starting to round into mid-year form for the team now. I'm a firm believer that if our schedule allows us to make the playoffs then we deserve to be there and anything can happen in the playoffs. So let the games begin and root, root, root for the Seahawks.

Injuries will dictate the toughness of our schedule. Both on us, and our opponents.

I see the Hawks winning by double digits against the Cards and losing by double digits to the Rams. Like RD, 7-9 seems the best prediction, but let's see what happens with injuries.

Man. Ol Gurley is like great

That is how u move the ball boys

Man ol Donald can flatten the QB

This is like the no defense game.

Going into TNF, I felt that the Rams were the best team in the NFC, and I still feel that they are as they clearly have the best offense in the league, at least to this point. But I was surprised at how well the Vikings were able to move the ball on them. For awhile, it looked like I was watching arena football, over 1,000 yards offense between the two teams. Wade Phillips had better get his chit together if they expect to compete for the SB.

Losing Aqib Talib to IR is big for the Rams but they still look like the class of the NFC. Glad we get them at home first. To be optimistic The rund D since about halftime of week 2 has been OK but Goff has been on a tear. I anticipate a win vs AZ but the Rams are going to be tough.

Just hear on NFL network that Jarred Goff is the first QB ever to pass for 350+yds and 75+% completions in his first 4 games of the season IN HISTORY. This Sean McVay is something. Scary

Seems like Petes style of football maybe has passed us by.

Uppercut wrote:Seems like Petes style of football maybe has passed us by.

We will find out. I'm a bit optimistic that a 1-1-1 Vikes team held it to one score in the Rams house despite all the offensive fireworks by the Rams. Stopping Gurley is a key then obviously pressure on Goff but their offensive concepts with multiple options all over the field every play is revolutionary.

I fear for Wilson with Aaron donald and Suh in the middle of a very able defense. Donald always had Russ's number and Suh crippled him for the season in the opener a couple of years ago. Carson and the run game has to be a key. lets see if Baldwin can get back and produce. we play them twice in the next fiew weeks so the answer will come soon enough

Uppercut wrote:Seems like Petes style of football maybe has passed us by.

Big offenses have been in the NFL for years. We all remember The Greatest Show on Turf, Air Coryell, the Packers winning the SB with (I think) the 32nd ranked defense in football, Peyton Manning leading the Broncos to the SB with 50 TD passes, Drew Brees and the Saints. Lots of great offenses. If anything, Pete's style was/is an anomally, although still a very effective style if he gets the right players like he had prior to these past few years.

Pete's Offensive style cripples the team. The NFL has passed him by.
An unbalanced team with one side far superior to the other isn't going to cut it in today's NFL.
Just look back the last 5 years and you will see teams all over the league who are good on only 1 side not quite getting there.
The only time it does work is if you get a generational player on Offense (in Pete's scheme RB), but that can't be expected to be continual.
The way out for him is to abandon his Offensive philosophy and hire an OC and let that OC do what he does best.
Basically, get out of the way of the Offense.
It's not going to happen, so...

NorthHawk wrote:Pete's Offensive style cripples the team. The NFL has passed him by.
An unbalanced team with one side far superior to the other isn't going to cut it in today's NFL.
Just look back the last 5 years and you will see teams all over the league who are good on only 1 side not quite getting there.
The only time it does work is if you get a generational player on Offense (in Pete's scheme RB), but that can't be expected to be continual.
The way out for him is to abandon his Offensive philosophy and hire an OC and let that OC do what he does best.
Basically, get out of the way of the Offense.
It's not going to happen, so...

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Imbalanced team often win the Super Bowl if by imbalance we're talking about top 5 in one area and middle of the pack in the other. Winners are balanced. They're usually very good at one thing, then middle of the road to adequate at the other save for perhaps a handful of dynastic superteams from long ago. If anything balanced power was from a time when you could build and retain super teams. The imbalance is more a modern method to win due to salary cap parity.

Here I was thinking Seattle being perennially in to top 10 in offense, and number 1 in defense seemed to work ( as well as Denver, Philly, Carolina, etc) the last several years....

I'm thinking that statement might not be real accurate.

Typically, a team is exceptional on one side of the ball, and top 1/3 in the league in the other ( not to mention typically top 1/3 in special teams) can't recall a single "average" team on both sides winning the SB in the last couple decades, the might be one or even two, but I can't recall one.

Maybe the Giants or Ravens one year??

Uppercut wrote:On paper the Hawks should have a win over the cards but that seems to be the type of game they lose. (Ghost of Ariens) But Rosen could but should not have some spectacular day. Just seems to go that way with Hawks. I am hoping Hawks 27, Cards 13.

On the flipside all stars point to the Rams easily winning here! That is another setup where the Hawks may surprise and have just the right game plan for this point in the season. Especially if thy lose in ARZ.

Hawks 24, Rams 23

I hope your right but your not. Cards 20 Hawks 17. Rams 35 Hawks 20.

Hawks 24, Rams 23[/quote]

I hope your right but your not. Cards 20 Hawks 17. Rams 35 Hawks 20.[/quote]

Hey, I was right on the score but not on the winner! Yippee, yappy! and yahooeeeey!

After watching the spectacle today I revise my Rams prediction to:

Rams > 42

Seahawks < 13

We'll be lucky to score against the Rams with this clown show offense.

I'm feeling actually a low scoring blowout if that's a thing.... like Rams 27 Seattle 10 ( but not as close as the score indicates) think 7 garbage points with 24 seconds left or something....

Uppercut wrote:After watching the spectacle today I revise my Rams prediction to:

Rams > 42

Seahawks < 13

Yeah no way we beat the Rams. However, most on this site wrote both Ram games off. The issue is how we do with everyone else, that will decide whether we end up 6-10 or 10-6.

I just hope we can hang with them, keep the spread at two touchdowns or less. The last thing I want to do is travel to London with my tail between my legs following some 45-13 arse kicking like we suffered last year.

There's a few things I'm happy about in the Rams game.

1. No Robert Quinn. He's been a sack machine against Wilson
2. Fluker may be big enough to get in McDonald's way
3. Sweezy should be able to do better if McDonald lines up over him.
4. Home game with lots of noise.

On my wish list though is RBs who cutback. Lynch was great about cutting back when the whole line is flowing one way. I see multiple runs by our RBs trying to force a hole where there isn't one instead of cutting back off the Tackle's collapsing block which would yeild huge runs.

In the ARZ. game the announcers said that RW doesn't keep on the read option unless he thinks he can get 12 or more yards. I think many times just getting 5 or 6 yards would keep the defense honest and open up some more of those cut back runs.

Rambo2014 wrote:Rubbing My Hands!

Your Day of Reckoning has Arrived!!!!!!

Reckoning? Lmao... there's no reckoning coming, only a football game.

What you gonna do if you lose? Seattle shouldn't win the game, but as with those abysmal Rams teams for the last decade, even a team that shouldn't, can.... Seattle fans always had something to fall back on ( you know playoff victories, multiple division titles, SBs... or, maybe you don't, at least this decade) you gonna fall back on? Well crap, there's nothing TO fall back on... better pray there's no upset...

[quote="HumanCockroach"][quote="Rambo2014"][b]Rubbing My Hands!

Your Day of Reckoning has Arrived!!!!!!


Don’t mind Rambo, what he really meant to say was Rubbing One Out! Doesn’t take much to amuse that boy.

Rub a dub dub Rambo does it in the tub. Ha ha ha Hey Rambo were going to have you rubbed out ha ha

Seriously though I see us winning against a long time rival it's a home game and I see Wilson behind an improved OL completing pass after pass maybe getting 400+ yards. Carson picking up lots of 1st downs. One of our best units is the DL and I think we get some sacks and stuff Gurley too.

I see this as a high shooting grudge match 37 us 27 them

RiverDog wrote:I just hope we can hang with them, keep the spread at two touchdowns or less. The last thing I want to do is travel to London with my tail between my legs following some 45-13 arse kicking like we suffered last year.

This game is gone River, I just hope our QB doesn't end up in Virginia Mason.

River, Cob, I wish Yoder could ban Dumbo, probably not much we can do as long as he doesn't insult anyone personally huh? He is starting to get to me as much as Tailgaitor on the old PI forum, because their is an element of truth to what he says now!

We always seem to play to our opponents level. If we hold the Lambs under 27points, there’s a good chance we can win.

obiken wrote:River, Cob, I wish Yoder could ban Dumbo, probably not much we can do as long as he doesn't insult anyone personally huh? He is starting to get to me as much as Tailgaitor on the old PI forum, because their is an element of truth to what he says now!

Just put him on ignore, Obi. Unlike some of the trolls from the PI forum, he never, ever makes any substansial contributions. You won't miss anything.

The guy is nothing more than a bad clown act. But even so, he has his entertainment value. I especially like how others can put him down.