HawkShack.com

by **trents** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:57 am

No dominant teams this year it seems in the NFL. Teams that started strong and looked invincible have sputtered down the stretch and teams that started weak have gotten it together of late. Some, like Dallas, seem to have gotten it to gether of late but then have an inexplicable no show game. New England is no longer a shoe in. Chicago seems to have an invincible defense but not much offense. Saints are weak on the road but invincible at home and have home field advantage throughout the playoffs so I might put my money on NO.

What do you guys think? Who will we see in the SB?

by **RiverDog** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:07 am

Call me crazy, but I think that the Ravens could make some noise. Over in the NFC, I'd like to pick us as I think that we're just as good as any of the other playoff participants, but it's damn tough to beat the Saints on their home field.

So I'm going with Ravens-Saints.

by **trents** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:22 am

I concur with you. I think Seattle is playing about as good as anyone right now but they are so dinged up and there will be no off weeks because of being low seed. That's my biggest concern there, as well as not having home field.

by **NorthHawk** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:31 am

The other dark horse candidate is the Vikings.
They seem to have put it together lately and if they have come together it's at just the right time.

by **trents** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:16 am

NorthHawk wrote:The other dark horse candidate is the Vikings.
They seem to have put it together lately and if they have come together it's at just the right time.

Hmm. We beat them two weeks ago didn't we?

Too bad Nick Foles wasn't quarterbacking the Eagles from the start of the season. He's a money player. Eagles have the slimmest of chances to get in the playoffs but I can't see it really happening. Depends on too many things not in their control.

by **NorthHawk** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:21 am

The Vikes fired their OC and have gone back towards how they played last year with more running.
We got them at a good time when DeFillipo (sp) was still calling pass plays instead of going back to
their identity of last year and like us, running first.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 12:12 pm

NorthHawk wrote:The other dark horse candidate is the Vikings.
They seem to have put it together lately and if they have come together it's at just the right time.

trents wrote:Hmm. We beat them two weeks ago didn't we?

Too bad Nick Foles wasn't quarterbacking the Eagles from the start of the season. He's a money player. Eagles have the slimmest of chances to get in the playoffs but I can't see it really happening. Depends on too many things not in their control.

We weren't all that convincing in our win over the Vikings. Besides, look at how drastically things changed in just two weeks with our 2 games against the 49'ers.

Agreed about the Eagles. They're the best team in the league not to have made the playoffs.

by **Hawktawk** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:13 pm

I started a thread called its wide open. Nobody responded, probably way too long winded but I couldn't agree more with the assessment that its really anyone's tournament to win or lose. Everyone has a flaw and the Rams and Saints have come back to earth. KC has had 4 "big " games and is 0-4 in them. Bears looked formidable the last few weeks but yesterday the 9ers had them on the ropes for quite a bit of the game. I really don't see the Vikes beating them though with "Mr September" cousins and his fat checkbook in a must win situation so that makes the Eagles the likely 6. Foles is capable of being as good as any QB who ever stepped on the field sometimes.

The Steelers collapse has been stunning but the way Mayfield is performing I'm not buying playoff tickets yet if I'm a Ravens fan. The Texans lost a squeaker obviously but have been very good. Hottest team in the AFC might be the Colts right now.

Im not able to pick a SB from either conference right now. Baltimore has the best D in the league but they better stay that way because Jacksons game isn't built to come from behind. The Pats are running on fumes and Tom terrific has been very mediocre and pedestrian.I have no clue who emerges. Maybe Rivers finally gets there, I wouldnt mind that.

In the NFC the money has to be on the Saints most likely but Seattle might be the hottest team in the conference, very dangerrus.

by **trents** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:00 pm

Yeah, the Colts have come on strong. I'm glad to see it. Good organization and Andrew Luck is not only a great talent when finally healthy but a quality individual. I like to see those kind succeed. I don't think anyone wants to play them now.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:57 pm

Good point about the Colts. I'd sort of forgotten about them.

It's funny how the situation can change. At the start of the season, everyone was on the Rams bandwagon, then the Chiefs, the Saints and Drew Brees, even the Cowpukes. This could be the season that we end up with two wild cards making it to the Super Bowl.

by **idhawkman** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 6:35 am

Us (because I'm such a homer I never think we will lose) and the Chargers.

"IF" the chargers can get past the Ravens in the Wild Card round, I expect them to make it to the end.

Philly can get in with a Vikings loss and a Philly win. Not too hard to imagine since Minny is playing Chicago in Minny and Philly has the Skins. Philly may make some noise in N.O. and we could be hosting the NFCCG in Seattle.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 6:48 am

idhawkman wrote:Us (because I'm such a homer I never think we will lose) and the Chargers.

"IF" the chargers can get past the Ravens in the Wild Card round, I expect them to make it to the end.

Philly can get in with a Vikings loss and a Philly win. Not too hard to imagine since Minny is playing Chicago in Minny and Philly has the Skins. Philly may make some noise in N.O. and we could be hosting the NFCCG in Seattle.

Da Bears don't have much to play for and IMO will be doing a lot of scoreboard watching, keeping an eye on the Rams-Niners contest. If the Rams start to blow out the Niners, they could start pulling some of their starters.

by **idhawkman** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 6:53 am

RiverDog wrote:Da Bears don't have much to play for and IMO will be doing a lot of scoreboard watching, keeping an eye on the Rams-Niners contest. If the Rams start to blow out the Niners, they could start pulling some of their starters.

Yep, and as I looked a little closer, Philly could still get in with a Vikings loss so they have much more to play for in the game against Chicago this week.

by **Hawktawk** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:07 am

I don’t see the bears letting off the pedal at home vs their hated divisional opponent. I see eagles most likely as the 6 and that might be trouble for everyone. Does Foles ever get another chance to be “the” guy?

by **RiverDog** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:21 am

Hawktawk wrote:I don’t see the bears letting off the pedal at home vs their hated divisional opponent. I see eagles most likely as the 6 and that might be trouble for everyone. Does Foles ever get another chance to be “the” guy?

The Bears aren't at home. They play in Minneapolis. And as I stated, the game doesn't mean as much to them as it does the Vikings, who will be playing for their playoff lives.

I agree about the Eagles, if they get in, they can do some damage, and you're right, Nick Foles has to be the most disrespected QB in the league, especially when you contrast him with grossly overpaid QB's like Cousins and Carr. I just think they'll end up being a day late and a dollar short.

by **trents** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:50 am

Saying goodby to Kareem Hunt has really hurt the Chiefs and a badly dinged up Todd Gurley has shifted more responsibility to Jared Goff to keep the sticks moving for the Rams. Goff doesn't have the athleticism to succeed in that role.

by **politicalfootball** » Wed Dec 26, 2018 3:48 am

Agreed so obviously the 2 or 3 top teams are struggling (KC Rams) my money is on the Seahawks (literally) the smart bet though IMHO is the Chicago Bears.

by **RiverDog** » Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:22 am

trents wrote:Saying goodby to Kareem Hunt has really hurt the Chiefs and a badly dinged up Todd Gurley has shifted more responsibility to Jared Goff to keep the sticks moving for the Rams. Goff doesn't have the athleticism to succeed in that role.

Perhaps it's just a coincidence, but all 3 of the league's 30+ ppg offenses have hit a bit of a swoon at the same time:

The Chiefs have scored below their 35 ppg average in the past 3 games.

The Saints have scored below their 33 ppg average in the past 5 games.

The Rams have scored below their 32 ppg average in the past 4 games.

Are the defenses catching up?

by **politicalfootball** » Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:36 am

Ok I lied I don't have any money bet on Seattle winning the SB at the beginning of the year. It's not too late to do that BTW. Any team going to be in the playoffs can become a SB champ.

What we need to address is just who those teams are struggling with their greatness or barely made it in lol all of them have a chance.

by **trents** » Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:21 am

"Perhaps it's just a coincidence, but all 3 of the league's 30+ ppg offenses have hit a bit of a swoon at the same time:

The Chiefs have scored below their 35 ppg average in the past 3 games.

The Saints have scored below their 33 ppg average in the past 5 games.

The Rams have scored below their 32 ppg average in the past 4 games.

Are the defenses catching up?"

True, but not necessarily for the same reasons in each case. I think one thing they all have had in common during this down trend is that they were playing teams who needed the win much more than they did.

by **RiverDog** » Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:03 am

RiverDog wrote:"Perhaps it's just a coincidence, but all 3 of the league's 30+ ppg offenses have hit a bit of a swoon at the same time:

The Chiefs have scored below their 35 ppg average in the past 3 games.

The Saints have scored below their 33 ppg average in the past 5 games.

The Rams have scored below their 32 ppg average in the past 4 games.

Are the defenses catching up?"

trents wrote:True, but not necessarily for the same reasons in each case. I think one thing they all have had in common during this down trend is that they were playing teams who needed the win much more than they did.

I agree that the trend may not, and perhaps likely not, be due to a common reason, but I do not agree that the teams they played needed the win more than they did. We're talking about trends that began as early as Week 12, when very little if anything had been decided. The Chiefs and the Rams both still have a whole heck of a lot on the line this weekend.

by **NorthHawk** » Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:15 am

These teams all started out with their Offenses way ahead of most of the Defenses in the NFL.
Now that they have been tested, defenders have found the weaknesses and some of the teams lost good players to injury or other.

by **c_hawkbob** » Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:32 am

NorthHawk wrote:These teams all started out with their Offenses way ahead of most of the Defenses in the NFL.
Now that they have been tested, defenders have found the weaknesses and some of the teams lost good players to injury or other.

This.

It's pretty normal for defenses to catch up with offenses late in the season and into the playoffs as there in so much more tape on them by that time. Whatever new innovations were allowing for offenses to be very successful early in the season are more of a known quantity by now. That's part of the reason they say Defenses and a strong running game are the formula for success in the post season. With our offense we were never fooling anyone in the first place so there is little they can adjust to to make a significant difference.

by **Uppercut** » Thu Dec 27, 2018 4:23 pm

What would be cool is for the Hawks to play the Pats again and Sea win it with a 50 yd drop kick field goal in the final second.

by **obiken** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 7:07 am

River, Cbob, others, I think that unlike most years, there is no odds on favorite. IF I was laying my own 1000 bucks, I would say the Saints. However, there are dangerous teams flying below the radar you don't want to play right now; they are Us, Dallas, and the Chargers. I only "fear" 2 teams, the Saints and Cowboys. The rest of them are all beatable, beat up, or smoke and mirrors, like the Bears. But that's just me.

by **idhawkman** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:49 am

I'm not too scared of Dallas because our defensive weakness is with dink and dunk teams. Having KJ back helps a lot with this but we need McDougald and Bobby to be 100% to really shore up that part of our D. Dallas' secondary is their weakness and I think we'll exploit that to a large degree.

The key to beating us is dink and dunk, screens, and checkdowns. Work your way down the field and out score us.

by **RiverDog** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:23 pm

I agree with Obi regarding the fact that there isn't a hands down, odds on favorite. Because of their venue and the fact that they have HFA, the Saints have to be the team to beat, but I wouldn't want to put a pile of money on them.

The challenge for the Cowboys is going to be stopping our running game, something they failed to do in our meeting with them 3 months ago. Unless they can accomplish that task, I think we'd win this game by at least two scores.

by **obiken** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:38 pm

RiverDog wrote:I agree with Obi regarding the fact that there isn't a hands down, odds on favorite. Because of their venue and the fact that they have HFA, the Saints have to be the team to beat, but I wouldn't want to put a pile of money on them.

The challenge for the Cowboys is going to be stopping our running game, something they failed to do in our meeting with them 3 months ago. Unless they can accomplish that task, I think we'd win this game by at least two scores.

Wow that's good to hear.

by **idhawkman** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:48 pm

RiverDog wrote:I agree with Obi regarding the fact that there isn't a hands down, odds on favorite. Because of their venue and the fact that they have HFA, the Saints have to be the team to beat, but I wouldn't want to put a pile of money on them.

The challenge for the Cowboys is going to be stopping our running game, something they failed to do in our meeting with them 3 months ago. Unless they can accomplish that task, I think we'd win this game by at least two scores.

When we played them Vander Esch wasn't playing yet. I think it will be harder for us to run than before but not impossible. I'm just saying, don't underestimate the addition of Layton on that D and if we can suck them closer to the line then the secondary will be vulnerable. Side Note: They did stop Kamara and INgram from the Saints with that D front 7 and so it isn't impossible for them to stop ours, too.

by **trents** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:16 pm

Everybody keeps touting the Chargers but I'm just not that impressed with them. They strike me as one of those teams that looks good when nothing is on the line but folds in the big games.

by **idhawkman** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:04 am

trents wrote:Everybody keeps touting the Chargers but I'm just not that impressed with them. They strike me as one of those teams that looks good when nothing is on the line but folds in the big games.

You may be right but remember, they handed OUR team the single biggest point loss total this year.

by **RiverDog** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:42 am

RiverDog wrote:The challenge for the Cowboys is going to be stopping our running game, something they failed to do in our meeting with them 3 months ago. Unless they can accomplish that task, I think we'd win this game by at least two scores.

idhawkman wrote:When we played them Vander Esch wasn't playing yet. I think it will be harder for us to run than before but not impossible. I'm just saying, don't underestimate the addition of Layton on that D and if we can suck them closer to the line then the secondary will be vulnerable. Side Note: They did stop Kamara and INgram from the Saints with that D front 7 and so it isn't impossible for them to stop ours, too.

I didn't say that the Cowboys couldn't stop our running game, just that if they don't, we'll win handily. I don't see a seceniro happening with the Cowboys like we had with the Vikings where we ran the ball for 200+ yards but barely pull out the win. IMO they don't stop our running attack and keep us under 150 yards rushing, the game will turn out more like our first game with the Niners.

I'm feeling pretty good about this team's chances, and had it not been for the fact that we're a wild card team and likely having to play all our playoff games in the road, I'd be predicting a Lombardi. I like this team way, way better than our 2015-2017 editions, for more reasons than one.

by **Hawktawk** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:22 pm

Im hearing the Cowboys have problems in the secondary? If that's the case and we have the ability to run somewhat and keep russ right side up were going to the divisional. Last Sunday Russ burned really good tight coverage on a lot of throws. If he bottles that why not a lombardi? This team is better than the 9-7 Giants team that won in 2011 isnt it?.

by **politicalfootball** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:38 pm

There's a lot of similarity between this team and the one that brought home the Lombardi. We certainly have the fire and enthusiasm for team chemistry between the players and fans.

Go Hawks !!!!!!

by **RiverDog** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:08 pm

Hawktawk wrote:Im hearing the Cowboys have problems in the secondary? If that's the case and we have the ability to run somewhat and keep russ right side up were going to the divisional. Last Sunday Russ burned really good tight coverage on a lot of throws. If he bottles that why not a lombardi? This team is better than the 9-7 Giants team that won in 2011 isnt it?.

My major concern is all the road games. We need to win 3 consecutive road games to make it to the SB, and we're not that great of a road team. We're bound to stumble somewhere.

by **Hawktawk** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:38 pm

History doesn’t play a down . Hawks have won on the road in the playoffs with Wilson under center a couple of times . They were competitive and won a few on the road this season such as hammering Detroit and obliterating the raiders back to back. They haven’t lost more than a one score game all year. It’s so wide open this year , more so than I can ever remember in my 45 years watching the game . As Russ so famously said in 2013”why not us”. Indeed, dare to dream . I guarantee you nobody is excited to see the hawks coming to town.

by **mykc14** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:52 pm

RiverDog wrote:
My major concern is all the road games. We need to win 3 consecutive road games to make it to the SB, and we're not that great of a road team. We're bound to stumble somewhere.

Although that is the most likely scenario if we make it to the SB there is still a chance that we host the NFCCG. With how wide open the NFC has been this could be the year a 5 seed hosts a 6 seed (fingers crossed).

by **RiverDog** » Sun Dec 30, 2018 9:35 am

RiverDog wrote:My major concern is all the road games. We need to win 3 consecutive road games to make it to the SB, and we're not that great of a road team. We're bound to stumble somewhere.

mykc14 wrote:Although that is the most likely scenario if we make it to the SB there is still a chance that we host the NFCCG. With how wide open the NFC has been this could be the year a 5 seed hosts a 6 seed (fingers crossed).

You're going to wind up with carpel tunnel by crossing your fingers that hard. Ever since they established wild card entrants into the playoff system over 40 years ago, no two wild card teams have ever faced each other in the playoffs or in the Super Bowl.

HawkShack.com

Who is online