wildcat2334 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 No, you're missing the point... again. There's no such thing as a back having a "nose for the endzone." um, ok whatever you say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 No, you're missing the point... again. There's no such thing as a back having a "nose for the endzone." um, ok whatever you say. 1291851[/snapback] I have "eyes for supermodels" and an "affinity for money," but I'm not rich, nor am I sleeping with Cindy Crawford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 The Steelers defense has been off-the-hook good against some pretty good offenses. Not only are they solid against the run, but their pass rush has been incredible in the playoffs. Seattle will score points, but I'd be surprised if they get into the endzone more than twice. 1285371[/snapback] What exactly is this based on?? Cin would have racked up huge numbers had Palmer not gone down. Indy shat the bed- excellent performance by The Steelers, no doubt. Seattle has the most balanced, highest scoring offense in the league. They just shredded a very good Carolina team. 2 td's?? . What in the world are you watching?? This is getting pretty funny. SEA scores on everyone, and they will on Pitt as well- You can count on 28+. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 (edited) SEA scores on everyone, and they will on Pitt as well- You can count on 28+. 1291874[/snapback] The Colts scored on almost everyone as well... until they played the Steelers. Seattle's offense is very good. No doubt about that. I think that they have a really good shot at winning as well. But only a ridiculous homer would say, "you can count on 28+." Edited January 27, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 (edited) The Colts scored on almost everyone as well... until they played the Steelers. 1291882[/snapback] The Colts put up 17 points against the Chargers in Week 14 and clearly never regained their offensive potency from earlier in the regular seaon. Edited January 27, 2006 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 The Colts put up 17 points against the Chargers in Week 14 and clearly never regained their offensive potency from earlier in the regular seaon. 1292021[/snapback] That's because the Chargers defense played a great game. The Colts have also struggled mightily against 3-4 defenses (SD, PIT, NE) over the past couple of years. The Steelers defense has allowed an average of only 12 ppg over the past 7 weeks. They're hot right now. I don't see how even a strong offense like Seattle's could be a lock for 28 points. I'd be surprised if they scored more than 23 or 24. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 That's because the Chargers defense played a great game. The Colts have also struggled mightily against 3-4 defenses (SD, PIT, NE) over the past couple of years. The Steelers defense has allowed an average of only 12 ppg over the past 7 weeks. They're hot right now. I don't see how even a strong offense like Seattle's could be a lock for 28 points. I'd be surprised if they scored more than 23 or 24. 1292204[/snapback] Well done- 23, 24 sounds a heck of a lot better than 2td's in a previous post- sounds like your coming around. Just real quickly, how is being suprised if they score more than 24, much different than 28?? Iam listed in my rec bball league at 5'8, but the truth is I am much closer to 5'7. Obviously I was joking some by saying put em down for 28+- Pitt has a great D no question I just think Seattle has shown they will consistantly score points- against anyone. Well, on second thought- put em down for 31 Sea 31 Pitt 20. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheezhed Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 SA is a fantasy god at this particular time in his career, BUT.........take away Mack Strong and SA's "nose for the endzone" may be broken!!! JM(unknowledgable)O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Well done- 23, 24 sounds a heck of a lot better than 2td's in a previous post- sounds like your coming around. 1292305[/snapback] 2 TDs + 2 EPs + 3 FGs = 23 points Just real quickly, how is being suprised if they score more than 24, much different than 28?? You said that they'd score 28 easily. I predicted that they'd struggle to score 24. Big difference. Iam listed in my rec bball league at 5'8, but the truth is I am much closer to 5'7. Which means you're about 13, as I suspected. Don't worry, puberty will hit soon and you'll be 5'8" in no time. I just think Seattle has shown they will consistantly score points- against anyone. Given that they haven't beanten any of the top teams from the AFC yet (the game against Indy's second-stringers doesn't count), I'm not sure about that. We'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 (edited) Given that they haven't beanten any of the top teams from the AFC yet (the game against Indy's second-stringers doesn't count), 1292329[/snapback] If Indy doesn't count, how many "top" AFC teams did Seattle play after Week 1 of the regular season? That statement doesn't mean much. Edited January 27, 2006 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 If Indy doesn't count, how many "top" AFC teams did Seattle play after Week 1 of the regular season? That statement doesn't mean much. 1292350[/snapback] It means everything. The AFC was obviously the tougher conference this year. The Steelers had to play New England, Indy, San Diego, Jacksonville, and Cincy (twice). Seattle's schedule, through no fault of their own, was a joke in comparison. The teams they beat in the playoffs (Carolina, Washington) weren't as good as Indy, Cincy, or Denver. Therefore, the notion that "Seattle has shown they will consistantly score points- against anyone" is a misinformed one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 It means everything. 1292368[/snapback] No, it means the AFC is a tougher conference. To say the Hawks may not score against Pittsburgh based on ONE matchup from Week 1 is a reach at best and a long way from meaning everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 (edited) No, it means the AFC is a tougher conference. 1292402[/snapback] Combine that with the fact that Seattle only played one AFC playoff team at full strength (and lost), and there's absolutely no basis for saying that, "Seattle has shown they will consistantly score points- against anyone." Thanks for proving my point. Edited January 27, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 It means everything. The AFC was obviously the tougher conference this year. The Steelers had to play New England, Indy, San Diego, Jacksonville, and Cincy (twice). Seattle's schedule, through no fault of their own, was a joke in comparison. The teams they beat in the playoffs (Carolina, Washington) weren't as good as Indy, Cincy, or Denver. Therefore, the notion that "Seattle has shown they will consistantly score points- against anyone" is a misinformed one. 1292368[/snapback] Sweski, Swerski, Swerski- hmmm- One thing you fail to realize is those teams you listed- only Indy & Jax have solid Defenses- Cincy, NE, and later SD all had porr D's. Even in the playoffs- Wash, Car are both TOP 10 D's. How is a team that averages 28/game, and just DESTROYED the NFL's #3 Defense- not get any credit?? It is a given the AFC was stronger- fine- but at the same time the NFC had 7 OF THE TOP 10 D'S IN THE NFL. Granted not 100% accurate because of scheduling- but still needs to be noted. UNREAL- they have been the best offense all year with their #1 WR out most of the year. I mean, I am being a homer that they will score 28+, but am I really?? I mean what is so hard to believe that they won't?? tell me. please. Please do not reference the Cin game either b/c if Palmer doesn go out on that freak roll by Kimo- Cin scores 30+ and rolls up 450 yds of offense. They resemble Seattle in that they are balanced nicely in run/pass- only thing is - they aren't as good. So, combine that with indoors/field turf and an o/u that has CLIMBED to 47.5- am guessing I am not the only that sees Seattle putting some points up......... You documented your 23 call very nicely- I happend to agree +1 TD= 30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 (edited) Sweski, Swerski, Swerski- hmmm- One thing you fail to realize is those teams you listed- only Indy & Jax have solid Defenses- Cincy, NE, and later SD all had porr D's. 1292413[/snapback] New England's defense got much better as the season went on and they held Jacksonville to 3 points in the playoffs. Going into the playoffs, I'd say that they had a "good-but-not-great" defense. San Diego's defense was average overall, but could be dominant at times. Cincy's D was bad, but their offense was great and they managed 11 wins, despite having to play Indy, Jacksonville, Chicago, and the Steelers twice. Even in the playoffs- Wash, Car are both TOP 10 D's. Washington's offense was awful and I'm surprised that they even won a playoff game. Carolina's D was good but not great, given the level of competition that they played (Top 10 defenses also don't give up 21 to the Bears in the playoffs). Carolina's offense was without both Davis and Foster, which really hurt them in the Seattle game. Not to mention the fact that nobody outside of Steve Smith can separate from DBs and catch the ball. They would've been a Wild Card team in the AFC. It is a given the AFC was stronger- fine- but at the same time the NFC had 7 OF THE TOP 10 D'S IN THE NFL. The NFC also had some of the worst offenses in the NFL. It wouldn't be difficult for a good-but-not-great team like CAR to hold the Bears, the 49ers, the Bucs, the Cardinals, the Lions, the Packers, or the Saints to less than 14 ponts. Conversely, the AFC was very strong offensively (IND, CIN, NE, SD, KC, DEN, etc.). I mean, I am being a homer that they will score 28+, but am I really?? I mean what is so hard to believe that they won't?? tell me. please. They're playing a very strong defense that allowed just over 17 ppg in the playoffs on the road. Said team also has a strong running game and controls the clock very well. I'm not saying that Seattle CAN'T score 28 against the Steelers, but it's ridiculous to ASSUME that they will just because they were able to do so against inferior teams like Washington and Carolina. The NFC this year was a lot like the NFC last year. There was one really good team that deserve to go to the SB and maybe two others that belonged in the playoffs. And the rest were crap. There were about 8 teams in the AFC that were playoff-worthy and maybe four that were good enough to go to the SB. While I put Seattle up there in the same "tier" as the elite AFC teams, the level of competition that the Seahawks and Steelers faced over the course of the season was still vastly different. There's no getting around that. Edited January 27, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeler Posted January 27, 2006 Author Share Posted January 27, 2006 [wildcat2334] But, but, but... like Seattle WILL score 28 points! [/wildcat2334] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeler Posted January 27, 2006 Author Share Posted January 27, 2006 Seattle's record away from home this year: at Jacksonville L 26-14 at Washington L 20-17 at St Louis W 37-31 at Arizona W 33-19 at San Francisco W 27-25 at Philadelphia W 42-0 at Tennessee W 28-24 at Green Bay L 23-17 Not very impressive IMO. Plus, they only scored 13 points against Dallas (the only other 3-4 defense they faced all year). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 (edited) 1. Ok, now we're gettin carried away here. The Seahawks are a witches whisker from being 6-1 on the road (I refuse to count Green Bay). Shoulda won that Redskins game, and if we would've played Jacksonville even in week 2 instead of week one, we woulda killed em. The bottom line to me there is most people would think of them a lot differently if they were 6-1 on the road, even though they would have been playing nearly the exact same football they are playing when thought of as crap at 5-3. 2. Unless your name is Namath it would be absolutely ludacris to guarantee ANYTHING in a super bowl. I love this Hawk offense but to guarantee big points?? How would you have any idea? C. I think the argument about Shaun's "nose for the endzone" was taken a bit off track. Its simple. Watch the games. Shaun runs drastically harder and more physical inside the 10. Hawk fans have actually gone as far as calling it the "Shaun Zone", cause thats when he wakes up and takes over. I mean, forget about it. You can go get your beverage when we get inside the 10, the rest is just a formality. It was glaring obvious throughout his career until these last two years, until he started running hard on every down because he's playing for money. He still breaks way more tackles and drives his feet harder in the red zone, you'll see it. Edited January 27, 2006 by Seahawks21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 This thread is off- track, who cares- that is how it goes. I love how road wins in the NFL are all of a sudden "not impressve" oh really- since when?? 5-3, shoulda been better, still will take it. AFC - stronger this year- fine, but the AFC still had NYJ,Hou,BUff,Cle, last I checked. Swerski Carolina had an strong D- that didn't change any by winning an NFL playoff game on the road and giving up 21pts- gimme a break. You like to bring up single games as examples- All I know is Seattle consistantly scored TD's this year at a high rate. Pitt has an excellent D- I agree. I think both teams are playing at a high level, and I just happen to think this Sea offense is rolling so nicely that they will continue to score. I like ludacris by the way!- Seahawks21- fans don't guarantee anything, we can't- what you talkin bout? I just think they will put up 28 - darn- my boys are in the SB- and i am makin a prediction they will win, and I think they will need to score 28+ to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Not very impressive IMO. Plus, they only scored 13 points against Dallas (the only other 3-4 defense they faced all year). 1292483[/snapback] Well, there was one other 3-4 defense the Hawks scored 42 points on and the Seachickens were without their #1 and #2 recievers against the Cowboys (a game they still won). The Cowboys effectively stacked the box against a depleted receving core and against a passing offense nowhere near as explosive as it is now. As a Steeler fan with this line of thought (Seahawks less than impressive), it would obvioulsy diminish everything accomplished this season if the Steelers lost to such a mediocre team, eh? This is the same broken record train of thought from Redskin and Panther fan. I like the pattern. One could only hope that this is permeating from Steeler fan to the Steeler player.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 If I remember correctly the Texans and 49ers both play 3-4 defenses as well. The Hawks struggled their first two times against it (Cowboys, 49ers), yet adjusted well for their next two, albeit against the Texans and 49ers again. While these defenses aren't in any way similar to Pittsburghs, the thought that the Seahawks haven't seen much of or had success against the 3-4 are a bit overblown. The game won't come down to the base matchups, it will as always, come down to the individual players on the field. It comes down to Hampton and Porter and Polamalu against Walt and Hasselbeck and Shaun. Whoever makes more mistakes will lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeler Posted January 28, 2006 Author Share Posted January 28, 2006 (edited) I love how road wins in the NFL are all of a sudden "not impressve" oh really- since when??1292607[/snapback] Throwing out the GB game, the Hawks road wins came against teams with a combined record of 25-55. Their losses came against teams with a combined record of 32-10. They are obviously a different team away from home so this is a very interesting stat to me. Edited January 28, 2006 by steeler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeler Posted January 28, 2006 Author Share Posted January 28, 2006 This is the same broken record train of thought from Redskin and Panther fan. I like the pattern. The Steelers are way better than both Washington and Carolina... plus the Seabags will be playing away from home where they are medicore at best. And the Steelers just beat the three best teams in the AFC on the road One could only hope that this is permeating from Steeler fan to the Steeler player.... 1292648[/snapback] That would be the Seahawks best chance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 (edited) This thread is off- track, who cares- that is how it goes. I love how road wins in the NFL are all of a sudden "not impressve" oh really- since when?? 5-3, shoulda been better, still will take it. 1292607[/snapback] Kind of like how the Steelers kicked the crap out of three of the best AFC teams on the road in the playoffs? AFC - stronger this year- fine, but the AFC still had NYJ,Hou,BUff,Cle, last I checked. Yes, and last I checked, the NFC had more crappy teams: NO, DET, GB, PHI, STL, ARI, SF. The Seahawks got to play NINE games against these teams during the regular season. They're an elite team for sure and definitely earned their trip to the SB, but they had a VERY easy path. Swerski Carolina had an strong D- that didn't change any by winning an NFL playoff game on the road and giving up 21pts- gimme a break. You like to bring up single games as examples- OK, here are some multiple-game examples: They gave up a ton of points to bad offenses during the regular season as well (23 to NO, 27 to MIA, 29 to GB, 20 to ARI, 20 to DET, 20 to TB). The Panthers defense played well at times, but were overrated in general. All I know is Seattle consistantly scored TD's this year at a high rate. Pitt has an excellent D- I agree. I think both teams are playing at a high level, and I just happen to think this Sea offense is rolling so nicely that they will continue to score. I like ludacris by the way!- Seahawks21- fans don't guarantee anything, we can't- what you talkin bout? I just think they will put up 28 - darn- my boys are in the SB- and i am makin a prediction they will win, and I think they will need to score 28+ to do so. The "Greatest Show on Turf" only scored 23 points in SB 34. And that was with their strength on offense (passing) matching up very well against TEN's mediocre secondary (ranked 26th in passing yds and 27th in passing TDs). The '05 Steelers defense is a hell of a lot better than the '99 Titans' (ranked 3rd in points allowed vs. 15th for TEN). And the '99 Rams offense was arguably more prolific than Seattle's this year (55 TDs and 6639 total yds vs. Seattle's 54 TDs and 6089 total yds). Edited January 28, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 After reading this whole thread for about the 3rd time... I am still confused. Is this thread about Alexander or Seattle vs Pittsburgh? So far I have gleaned from this thread: Alexander does NOT, nor does any RB ever in history, have a 'nose for the end zone'. Seattle cannot score more than 1, maybe a longshot 2, TD's against arguably the best team to come down the pike in many a year. No successful RB in history was worth spit. It is only the FB and O-line that is worth spit. Alexander becomes a different RB when inside the ten yard line. Alexander has what is now known as the mythical 'nose for the end zone' syndrome. Seattle played such an easy sked that not only is Alexander just lucky but Seattle shouldn't even show up since for the SB since they obviously cannot keep up with not only Pitt but the super dominate AFC. Seattle is mediocre at best. The NFC sucks and has no team worth noting. The AFC is so far superior to the NFC they shouldn't even have to show up to win the SB. Calling someone great while running them down seems like a backhanded compliment to me. Lot of interesting arguments on both sides. I will continue to monitor just so I can see if it is finally laid to rest whether the 'nose' exists or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.