Seahawks SUCK !!!!

[LA RAM FAN]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

PLUS nearly blowing a three touchdown lead at home no less when you are expected to win hardly qualifiys as a statement game.


the Cowboys game yeah he is right,that WAS a statement game for the cowboys but the seahawks just barely winning at home by a field goal when they are expected to win is a statement game?

comedy gold.

 

[HUGGY]

the NFC is a wacky and unpredictable conference this year.Teams you figured to be competitive-the panthers and cardinals are not,and the teams you never figured to be superbowl contenders this year are those being the vikings-"after Bridgewater went down,you figured so did their season",Cowboys,and Falcons.The NFC is wide open this year. Any of these teams -seahawks,cowboys,vikings,or falcons could go to the superbowl this year.

I was surprised Dallas beat GB in Lambeau. And they did it convincingly. Both Seattle and the Cowgirls had "statement" games this weekend and they both made that statement. It is probably too early to make these kind of predictions but right now it really looks like it will come down to Dallas and Seattle.

What was the statement in the Seattle game? The Seahawks can win when they get a terrible non-call as their opponent is driving to try and win at the end of the game?

There were non calls all through out that game. That was just one of them. The refs didn't take a touchdown away from Atlanta. What was Atlanta's excuse in the first half? It could have been a much better refereed football game. You are obviously one of those people who ignores what goes on for 55 minutes and thinks the last five minutes are the only minutes that mean anything. For all you know the Seahawks could have been ahead 35 to nothing if the refs had called the game the same for both teams and all situations competently.

What you failed to see was that with the exception of two rare long passes against the Seahawks the Hawks were obviously the better team yesterday. THAT was the statement. Sure...Atlanta COULD have won. If they had won they could have thanked THEIR lucky stars that on only two plays Seattle's Corners got the call wrong. Kelsey McCray was substituting for Cam Chancellor who normally calls the DB coverage's.

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

They were certainly dominant in the first half. They had a couple of hiccups in the third qtr. Nothing they cannot fix. I agree that the non call was bogus.

 

[HUGGY]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

 

[Montrovant]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

 

[antiquity]

Sorry, you interjected into a conversation about whether or not it was a statement game.

No I didn't....I expressed my opinion why Seattle won. You do know this is a Seattle Seahawk thread didn't you?

 

[Papageorgio]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

So did the non-call cost Atlanta the game? By your statements you are saying it didn't, yet in another thread you inferred it did. At least be consistent hugsluts.

 

[Montrovant]

Sorry, you interjected into a conversation about whether or not it was a statement game.

No I didn't....I expressed my opinion why Seattle won. You do know this is a Seattle Seahawk thread didn't you?

Yes, you did. You quoted and responded to a post of mine in which I was discussing with Huggy whether or not this was a statement game. In the post of mine you quoted, I said

Sorry, you interjected into a conversation about whether or not it was a statement game.

No I didn't....I expressed my opinion why Seattle won. You do know this is a Seattle Seahawk thread didn't you?

Yes, you did. What you were trying to say does not change that Huggy and I were having a discussion about whether or not this was a statement game. The post of mine you quoted talked about whether it was a statement game. I used the word statement 3 times in the 3 sentences of the post!

You may not have wanted to talk about whether it was a statement game, but the conversation you entered into was clearly about that.

 

[Papageorgio]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

It was a statement game, the Hawks should have romped after a big lead and then had to rally to win. The statement game is that they were lucky.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Niner's suck.

Q. Should season ticket holders have the right to fire ownership?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Niner's suck.

Q. Should season ticket holders have the right to fire ownership?

they should have the right to fire anybody who was a jerk enough to move the team out of the city into a suburb of SF. They should as well have the right to put the guy behind bars along with several other owners in the past who have given fans the middle finger and taken their teams from them.

sportscasters are saying that the reason the seats are empty at santa clara is because of the niners poor play.please give me a break. In the early 2000's when they were horrible as you remember at candlestick they STILL packed them in every year regardless of their record.

It wont make a single bit of difference when they become good in the future.it will be the same result since most the fans that go there are suites who leave at halftime then dont come back till the middle of the fourth quarter being they are not real fans.

it will be the same with them even when they are good as it was with the raiders when they were in LA. Despite winning the superbowl out there in LA,the next year for their home opener and most their other games the whole year,they had half empty stadiums cause nobody in LA cared about the Raiders and never wanted them there in the first place.

same will hold true with SF even if they win a superbowl.No niner fans will show up in that dump stadium in that dump city santa clara.

the stick was five times nicer than that dump they play in at SF despite what the propaganda media tries to tell us.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

Indeed,you took the words right out of my mouth.I was about to say just the exact same thing that had the Seahawks blown the falcons out then yeah THAT would be a statement game since they are a superbowl contender but nearly blowing the game at HOME no less against them is a statement game? maybe a statement game for the FALCONS.

seahawk fans kill me with their logic constantly.

 

[HUGGY]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

Seattle totally dominated the Falcons for three qtrs and with the exception of two freak plays allowed by a breakdown in the defense backfield positioning in the third qtr it was IMHO a statement that the Hawks Defense and Offense make up one of the strongest teams in the NFL.

 

[HUGGY]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

So did the non-call cost Atlanta the game? By your statements you are saying it didn't, yet in another thread you inferred it did. At least be consistent hugsluts.

You have been saying that the refs don't influence the game significantly for years. I agree and believe good teams overcome bad calls and win anyway.
\
I think you missed the context I used the statement about the "non call play". I was faking and feigning agreement with someone about the "play" on a thread or two.

It was obvious pass interference in my view. Usually Sherman gets called for much less if not non existent PI.

 

[HUGGY]

You miss the point. Winning by two, after giving up a substantial lead when you are supposed to have one of the best defenses in the league, and then having the game end on a blatant penalty that isn't called, is not much of a statement. I'm not saying Atlanta should have won, I'm saying the Seahawks did not have a statement game, unless the statement is that the Seahawks are not the dominant team they've been in the past few years.

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

It was a statement game, the Hawks should have romped after a big lead and then had to rally to win. The statement game is that they were lucky.

The "statement" is that they refuse to lose.

 

[antiquity]

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

It was a statement game, the Hawks should have romped after a big lead and then had to rally to win. The statement game is that they were lucky.

The "statement" is that they refuse to lose.

Good teams overcome bad calls...obviously the Falcons aren't too that point yet.

 

[HUGGY]

Really, supposed to?....Atlanta got only 52 yards rushing, no statement there, right? Remember Seattle out scored the Falcons in three of the four quarters. They shut down, shut out the Falcons in the decisive fourth quarter. Seattle also forced two turnovers to none both resulting in points.
I venture to say Seattle dominated Atlanta on the ground and less two broken coverage plays in the air. Seattle stopped the Falcons all day even when Chancellor and Clark didn't suit up and a cheap hit by Atlanta's OT on Bennett Seattle still sacked Ryan four, count them four times. If Seattle hadn't missed an extra point and that chip shot FG on a bad snap the game would not have been that close.

*sigh*

You, too, are missing the point.

Seattle won. It just wasn't a statement game. A statement game is one in which a team emphatically shows they are playing strong. Seattle did not do that. They played well enough to win, but they did not dominate. Yes, there were a couple of blown coverages, but that accounts for 80 yards of passing, Atlanta had 335. Yes, Atlanta had only 52 rushing yards. Seattle had only 72. Yes, Seattle got 4 sacks. That wasn't enough to stop Atlanta from coming back from a 17-3 deficit to take a lead in the game.

Seattle won, they deserved to win, they were the better team......barely. Squeaking by is only a 'statement game' if the team squeaking by isn't expected to win at all.

Nobody was predicting a blowout by either team. Atlanta was by far the most explosive offense in the NFL so far this season. Either team winning would have been a "statement". The best Offense against the best Defense was the question that needed answered. Seattle answered that question.

You have a strange idea of what constitutes a statement game. Hint : winning a game you are supposed to win, or winning a game you should have a decent chance to win, does not a statement game make.

If the Seahawks had dominated the Falcons, that would have been a statement game. Again I will ask, what is the statement from the Falcons game?

By your metric every game is a statement game.

It was a statement game, the Hawks should have romped after a big lead and then had to rally to win. The statement game is that they were lucky.

The "statement" is that they refuse to lose.

What ^^^^^ He ^^^^ said!

 

[antiquity]

Obviously the Falcons have a long road ahead of them after losing the lead again against the Chargers on their home turf.
I wonder if Falcons fans are whining about bad calls in that game also. They should be more concerned about a bad defense.

 

[HUGGY]

Just how tough IS Russell Wilson?

Just found out he has ANOTHER serious injury and he still plans on suiting up for our game with NO.

Yup..he injured his pec.. Which one I don't know. Either one should destroy any normal human being's ability to throw a football.

Now the question isn't whether he is a robot but.. Is he human?

 

[antiquity]

Just how tough IS Russell Wilson?

Just found out he has ANOTHER serious injury and he still plans on suiting up for our game with NO.

Yup..he injured his pec.. Which one I don't know. Either one should destroy any normal human being's ability to throw a football.

Now the question isn't whether he is a robot but.. Is he human?

I believe after he injured his ankle it was predicted he would have to sit down for three weeks....Russell Wilson is one tough dude.

 

[HUGGY]

GAAWWWDDDD!!!! That game in NO was painful to watch. We deserved to lose. The Hawks always get bad calls against them playing in the South so it should have been no surprise that NO would run pick plays all day with no trouble from the refs. Carroll and the defense co ordinator should have known better and prepared for it. Screw em.