Postmortem: Seattle vs. Lambs Second String

[D-train]

The catching the ball inside the 10 thing and jumping offsides before the ball is snapped will always blow my mind. You could literally train a dog not to do those things in about an hour.

Its like when they were handing out brains and athleticism they were given $100 and said spend it however you like. And after consider $99 on athleticism and $1 on brains they that nah let's go with $99.99 on athleticism and 1 cent on brains.

[auroraave]

The catching the ball inside the 10 thing and jumping offsides before the ball is snapped will always blow my mind. You could literally train a dog not to do those things in about an hour.

Its like when they were handing out brains and athleticism they were given $100 and said spend it however you like. And after consider $99 on athleticism and $1 on brains they that nah let's go with $99.99 on athleticism and 1 cent on brains.

And you actually have the dogs to train!

I can understand the defense jumping off sides, I can understand an olineman jumping if you have Lawrence Taylor looming, even Aaron Donald, but against the second string? Really? Then the batted pass and the failure to down the punt - good god what a series of sheer stupidity.

That's a great analogy. The physical tools are there - but the mentality just isn't. It seems league wide these days. I think the way the college game has been bastardized has made a huge difference in motivation, and I think the rise of social media has too - these players just think differently. We saw it firsthand when Wilson went into the brandmeister and product shilling mode and forgot he was supposed to be a football player. Gettin' paid in college and getting those insta followers is what it's about.

[DavidGee24]

This is what average looks and feels like.

To be average and win 10 games - the most of any non playoff team - is still baffling. Did they over perform? Underperform? Ten wins in the NFL is no joke, so are they really average? Inconsistent for sure. What does this say about the coaching staff to take an average team to ten wins? I have no answers. It sure feels average, but man oh man it looked a lot worse at times.

Being a game of momentum, our 10-7 looks so-so. The Steelers finished at 10-7 on a four-game losing streak which will likely become five next week in Baltimore. Meanwhile, the Bengals finished at 9-8 and are out despite winning their last five games. They should switch those two teams.

That happened to the Hawks in 1986 when they stomped their last five opponents to finish 10-6 but didn't make the playoffs. That 10-6 team looked like a legit Super Bowl contender. This 10-7 team looks like it should be setting up tee times.

[Donn Beach]

So you are valuing the last five games more than the first five games, shouldn't every game be valued equally?

[auroraave]

So you are valuing the last five games more than the first five games, shouldn't every game be valued equally?

NO, because it's how you are playing NOW - no contender 'peaks' the top of the season - they hit their peak late in the season - a lot factors into that like injuries, players getting used to each other etc, but performance-wise, you always want to be hitting stride the last 1/3 (ish) of the season giving you confidence and momentum heading into the post season. Just like David Gee pointed out - all about momentum. Seattle won their first three game - and then absolutely embarrassed themselves against the moribund Bears. Which team were they? They also took Minnesota's best - and if not for a Geno int - who knows? Minnesota is the better team - on paper - but Seattle stayed with 'em for the most part - that's the same team that fell asleep vs the Bears. Jeckyl and Hyde.

[Captain 97]

This is what average looks and feels like.

To be average and win 10 games - the most of any non playoff team - is still baffling. Did they over perform? Underperform? Ten wins in the NFL is no joke, so are they really average? Inconsistent for sure. What does this say about the coaching staff to take an average team to ten wins? I have no answers. It sure feels average, but man oh man it looked a lot worse at times.

Its not that baffling. They played a weak schedule. Their opponents were 137-152 for a .474 winning percentage which was tied for the 21st most difficult schedule in the League. Give an average team a below average schedule and they will have a slightly above average record. Even with that, If they catch Denver and The Rams in any other weeks other than week 1 and week 18 and they are probably an 8 win team.

[Sibelius Hindemith]

The Seahawks and Mariners have got that slightly better than mediocre thing down. It's hard to get better players whrn you're always drafting in the 17-22 range.

[Donn Beach]

So you are valuing the last five games more than the first five games, shouldn't every game be valued equally?

NO, because it's how you are playing NOW - no contender 'peaks' the top of the season - they hit their peak late in the season - a lot factors into that like injuries, players getting used to each other etc, but performance-wise, you always want to be hitting stride the last 1/3 (ish) of the season giving you confidence and momentum heading into the post season. Just like David Gee pointed out - all about momentum. Seattle won their first three game - and then absolutely embarrassed themselves against the moribund Bears. Which team were they? They also took Minnesota's best - and if not for a Geno int - who knows? Minnesota is the better team - on paper - but Seattle stayed with 'em for the most part - that's the same team that fell asleep vs the Bears. Jeckyl and Hyde.

David said as I understand it they should switch the Bengals for the Steelers because of how they were playing at the end of the season, isn't that valuing later games over earlier games?

[Donn Beach]

The Seahawks and Mariners have got that slightly better than mediocre thing down. It's hard to get better players whrn you're always drafting in the 17-22 range.

So they should suck for awhile?

[auroraave]

So you are valuing the last five games more than the first five games, shouldn't every game be valued equally?

NO, because it's how you are playing NOW - no contender 'peaks' the top of the season - they hit their peak late in the season - a lot factors into that like injuries, players getting used to each other etc, but performance-wise, you always want to be hitting stride the last 1/3 (ish) of the season giving you confidence and momentum heading into the post season. Just like David Gee pointed out - all about momentum. Seattle won their first three game - and then absolutely embarrassed themselves against the moribund Bears. Which team were they? They also took Minnesota's best - and if not for a Geno int - who knows? Minnesota is the better team - on paper - but Seattle stayed with 'em for the most part - that's the same team that fell asleep vs the Bears. Jeckyl and Hyde.

David said as I understand it they should switch the Bengals for the Steelers because of how they were playing at the end of the season, isn't that valuing later games over earlier games?

No, he's saying the Bengals were the hottest team in the league down the stretch, while the Steelers faded during the same stretch. The Bengals would likely provide a more competitive match up in the playoffs as they are trending up - while Pitt is trending down.