I'm taking Seattle in the Super Bowl.

[nickgutierrez]

:hide:

[WilliamPitt]

1. Hey, it's your money

[joeybee12]

2. And he's gonna have more once the game is over!

[nickgutierrez]

3. Heh

There's just too much talk about "destiny" and "foregone conclusions" here for me to feel comfortable going with the consensus. No such thing as a sure-fire win in professional sports, as you know.

(Here = the sports community, not just at DU. ESPN ran a headline a while ago that went something like "How can Seattle beat Pittsburgh?", which is the kind of thing that makes me wonder which team was the 1-seed in their conference, and which was the 6-seed.)

[WilliamPitt]

4. A sixth seed in the AFC v. a first seed in the NFC

= pretty much an equal game. Or do you delude yourself that the talent in both leagues is equal?

The first, second and third seeds in the AFC could beat any team in the NFC. The Steelers beat all three top AFC seeds to get this far. They will eat Seattle's lunch.

[nickgutierrez]

5. I'd say that's a fair assessment

AFC's #6 = NFC's #1.

Which is why all the talk ensuring a Steelers' victory is making me think this is going to be one of those games where the "underdog", in this case the Seahawks, pulls out a "how the hell did we not see this coming?" performance.

24-13 Hawks, I'll say.

[kick-ass-bob]

6. That is just plain silly to compare. Duke beat Texas and G'town

beat Duke. So G'town should beat Texas in the National Championship.








Right?


Why not compare the 2 teams and what they have rather than their schedules?

[WilliamPitt]

7. You're making comparisons between college basketball and the NFL?

Um...no.

[kick-ass-bob]

8. And yet you compare team's schedules?

Um...no.


I could have done the same thing for any major sport, but this one was most easily accessible to my brain at the time. Why don't you look for the point that is being made instead of nitpicking the details?

Schedule comparison is the biggest cop-out in a sports fan's repertoire.

"Well, we beat them and you didn't. Neener, neener!"


So what if Seattle had a weaker schedule? Can you say they wouldn't have won against a stronger schedule? Hell no, you can't, because they didn't play a different schedule, they played the one they were GIVEN. You criticize a team for rolling through a schedule that they had no say in building (which is MUCH different than college)? Asinine.

You can guess about what they have done, but since you probably have seen them all of 2 times this year, your guess is not a very educated one.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Which league is stronger?

AFC or NFC?

And, FYI, I've been keeping an eye on Seattle for the last eight weeks.

And FYI again, comparing anything about college hoops with anything about the NFL is just flat dumb.

So, AFC or NFC?

[kick-ass-bob]

10. Who cares about which league? They are 2 teams. The leagues aren't playing

And again - I really don't want to go find a (NFL A) beat (NFL B) who beat (NFL C) who beat (NFL A) comparison - and you know I would find one to prove the same point that the other did just fine with. Talk about dumb.

It is Seattle who lost to Jax and Washington (and GB - without their starters), but beat everyone they were supposed and needed to beat when they needed to
versus
Pittsburgh who lost to NE, Jax, Blt, Indy, and Cincy, but beat everyone they were supposed to (except Blt) and needed to beat when they needed to.


You WAAAAY overrate the importance of the league a team is in.

[WilliamPitt]

11. Yeah

The caliber of the teams faced, and the offensive/defensive spreads they see, play no role whatsoever.

Or something.

Seattle has seen exactly one 3-4 defensive sceme all year, from Dallas. Dallas made them look dumb until they gave the game away.

Pittsburgh plays the best 3-4 in the AFC, against a caliber of opponents that consistently ate the NFCs lunch all year.

But none of that matters. It's all tea leaves and comparisons to NCAA basketball.

Or something.

[kick-ass-bob]

12. Congratulations on avoiding the entire point.

Good fucking god, I thought you were smarter than that. Guess I was wrong.

:eyes:

See ya around.

[WilliamPitt]

15. "The leagues aren't playing" you said. Yes they are.

The best of the AFC v. the best of the NFC. To say the teams they've played mean nothing, and the respective strengths of the leagues mean nothing, is gibberish.

[timber84]

18. Will he's still pissed about the panthers give him some time

[WilliamPitt]

19. Is that it?

OK. Understandable. If it helps, I had Carolina picked to win that game, and expected them to maybe even beat the Steelers in the Bowl. I was shocked when they spit the bit last Sunday. But as the Patriots showed last week, even very good teams can lay an egg at the worst of times.

[timber84]

20. If Pitt had lost to Denver I'd being giving kudos to Denver in the

Bowl. It makes you feel better when the team that beats you wins the SB, at least you can say you got beat by the champs. That's my logic.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

24. Actually two such defenses.

If the the Texans rate as a footballl team. Okay, 1 1/2.

Make no mistake Pitt, the Seahawks are a very good, very disciplined football team.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

25. Why are you spreading lies?

The seahawks saw more than 3-4 defensive scheme all year. I think it's pretty low of you to purposefully lie in order to put down the Seahawks.

http://www.seattlest.com/archives/2006/01/25/national_media_perpetuating_fallacy_about_seahawks.php

National Media Perpetuating Fallacy About Seahawks
It's a telling fact--during 2005, the Seahawks only once faced the 3-4 defense (the one the Steelers use)--against the Cowboys, who stifled the Hawks. We've read it in the Boston Globe, on NFL.com, in the Detroit Free Press. But it's wrong.

The Hawks also faced the 3-4 against the Texans (who they demolished) and against the Niners (who they beat twice).

[WilliamPitt]

27. Purposefully lie?

I read it in the Boston Globe, even posted the link in its own thread here in this forum.

But you're right. It's all part of my grand scheme. Or something.

(seahawk fans are kinda weird)

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

28. Because the Globe knows football.

[Ravenseye]

17. It's all context

Seattle beat two teams with winning records during the regular season, the Giants and the Cowboys. Both games were given up by the other team, more than they were won by Seattle. Seattle's record is a mirage. 6 wins against the NFC West powerhouses of San Francisco, Atlanta and St. Louis. Wins against Houston and Tennesee.

Could they be good? Sure, but they lost to every team with a winning record except the two that threw the games. It's hard to say. I don't count the loss to GB among the record, nor do I count the win against Indy. Both weren't square matches.

Pittsburgh fairly lost to NE, before NE was wracked with total injuries, and maybe because of a bit of nerves. The loss to Jacksonville was because Pittsburgh's third string quarterback was playing and threw multiple interceptions to keep them in the game. Same with Baltimore. Indy was a loss when they rushed Ben back to play for it after his big knee injury, he wasn't mobile, and they hadn't prepared for the crowd noise. The Cincinnati loss was pretty square but it was against a divisional rival. Even the best teams can lose to a good divisional rival.

Which league a team is in doesn't really matter, but looking at how the teams have performed, at least for the past 4-6 weeks is a key indicator of how they're going to play in thecoming games. Pittsburgh has faced far more difficult competition and settings and dominated, than Seattle.

Could Seattle be good enough to beat Pittsburgh? Sure. I just haven't seen any evidence of that.

[opiate69]

23. Seahwks - Giants context

Of course, nobody mentions the fact that the Giants were given their only touchdowns by the officiating crews.. or the fact that at the beginning of the season all the so-called 'experts' considered st louis one of the league's elites, and Arizona serious contenders.. what happened to them? they ran onto the brick wall called the Seahawks. Whatever.. I predicted that carolina would get pimp-slapped in the conference finals, and I predict the Seahawks will shut all these Steeler band-wagoners up.

[JVS]

21. Comparing strength of schedule is how college football ranks

IIRC in the mid-90's Penn State went undefeated but wasn't national Champion because there was a team that had lost one game but had played many tougher opponents.

[friesianrider]

13. LOL...what you said.

[Bluzmann57]

14. Not too sure

Pittsburgh may well be "the team of destiny" this year. They seem to get the idea of football. Put pressure on the QB while on defense, and have a strong running game, as well as a strong armed mobile QB on offense. In other words, it still all comes down to blocking and tackling. It always has, and it always will. Plus, as a Packer fan, I'm still not overly happy with the way Holmgren left Green Bay. It wasn't the most pleasant of situations. Steelers 31-21. Bettis will close out his career in his hometown and will be the MVP of the game, whether he desreves it or not. If anyone bets, uh, matchsticks or candy bars on this game, please do not take my prediction to the bank. I thought the Bears were going to be awful too.

[northzax]

16. well, I can make the same arguement the other way

After all, the Seahawks lead the league in sacks, have perhaps the best offensive line in football and a running back to follow them and outthrew the Steelers.

[Robeson]

22. I'm pulling for Seattle, but I have no idea who is going to win.....

...I hope it's Seattle, though. Besides, the Steelers bandwagon is getting so big around here, that if one more person jumps on it, it would snap the axle in half.

[eridani]

26. True that AFC is the stronger conference--

--but I'd say it's a toss-up.