View from the Other Side: Seattle Seahawks (Merged 2X)

[Large_Ant]

"Now, fortunately for Seattle, the Redskins are a team always willing to break out a six turnover game with 15 penalties to keep you guys in it, but, as a general statement, there's nothing you have as a team that's overly concerning to the Redskins on either side of the ball."

...

"This is how you'll win if you do. If, however, we decide not to be quite as harmful to our chances the Seahawks are not a team we'll find all that concerning in terms of beating us without our assistance."

Not for nothing but this sounds like prepping an excuse.

"Even if we lose, it's not because we got beat, it's because we beat ourselves." I suppose in those six turnover games the balls just fall out of the RBs hands or interceptions are thrown to DBs that are standing there with their hands in their pockets. In no way is fumbling or poor passing a reflection of the Redskins being an inconsistent team, just the other team getting lucky. Yeah, whatever. The excuses are setting up nicely.

[Art]

Again with the last year stuff? You don't think teams got that stuff on tape from last year and the first two games this year? You don't think that teams are going to take advantage of that? Chicago and Dallas don't have the weapons to exploit your weaknesses on defense. You say it yourself that your defense won't rate as high because you play more good offenses - the Seahawks are one of those good offenses.

Alexander runs behind two Pro-Bowlers on the left side and one of the best blocking Full Backs in the league. The Redskins are going to have to commit a whole lot to stoping Alexander if that is what they choose to do. When they do that then we'll start hitting you with play action and the short passing game until you come up to stop that and then we'll burn you deep with the double move and pump fake. You haven't played an offense like this in awhile.

You want to talk about last year? How did you fair against the Eagles last year? I think that is the closest comparison to the Seahawks as you will find. Same basic offense and philosophy. Wish we had their defense, but I think our defense is good enough to stop your offense at this point.

Maybe you have a point. I mean, Gregg Williams has never been known to produce a top defense until last year, so, it is probably a fluke. Wait, that's not right. In fact, it's pretty normal for Gregg Williams to produce a top defense. That's what he does. Obviously we know teams have things on tape from last year. We're counting on it because they will prepare for things we'll appear to do that will be entirely different.

Remember against the Bears when they spoke about seeing things they'd never seen before on tape? We have that stuff too. We don't have Ray Rhodes as a coordinator. We have Gregg Williams. He actually CHANGES things a lot. And, we have great talent. We are among the top run stopping teams in football because that's what we do.

But, even when we DIDN'T do that, it wasn't like Alexander was tearing Washington up or anything. Right?

We enter this game with respect for your offense as it is a good, balanced attack. Sadly, you don't quite understand you need to fear our defense because it is a top unit, again, coached by the best staff with the most experience in football on that side of the ball.

Your offense has been good and faced good defenses before. Last year, for example, you played Tampa. The Bucs defense wan't as good as ours, but, you managed 10 points, 182 yards and a long drive of 29 yards. Something to fret, to be certain.

You played Buffalo, another good defense and one that looks a LOT like our defense as it was put together by Williams and is coached by a guy who gave Williams lots of new tricks. You managed 230 yards and all of 9 points. So, good defenses can stop the awesome offense you have. Obviously you know this.

So, knowing this, what you've had to do is create the fictional impression a defense that is better than those that throttled you will get pounded by you. Perhaps so, but, really, it would be a shock if it were to happen. Philly's offense is NOTHING like yours. You have a better running attack. They have a more dangerous QB who can make plays with his legs and a top receiver who breaks games open.

In our first game against them we were down 14-6 when our offense did what it does by self destructing and our defense caved a little and quit. Players acknowledged that was the game they knew they were out of contention with. But, we played them again with fewer players because of injury, and we beat them around like stepchildren causing them to flinch.

After the officials delivered them a touchdown on the opening series, the Eagles made a couple of plays in the game, but, with things on the line, here's what happened in the fourth quarter:

14:35 0:59 PHI 46 3 4 Interception

12:04 1:51 PHI 21 3 6 Punt

08:52 1:00 PHI 24 3 4 Punt

04:59 1:01 PHI 20 3 7 Punt

01:46 1:03 PHI 20 3 4 Punt

You can't say they weren't trying because they only ran twice in the first 10 plays of the quarter. We entered lock down. They were cringing from our physical play. The Eagles present matchup issues with us by having a top receiver and a very fast runner who catches passes well and a mobile QB. We've played the Eagles a lot. We've also played you some over the years.

Trust me, there's nothing about your offense that is all that worrisome in comparison. Alexander is great. But, we've stopped him with lesser talent and a lesser scheme. He might break a couple. That kind of thing can happen when a defense plays as aggressively as ours. But, for that to happen it would be quite rare and only your most fevered dreams allow it to be plausible.

It's your hope.

Your hope the Redskins defense isn't as good as those that typically stop you easily. Unfortunately, we're better than those defenses. Likely you will find things surprising when you get nothing going. But, if you're very lucky, we'll help you with turnovers and penalties. That is the most likely way you will win because you lack the ability to do much else.

But, I ONLY say this because of how easy you guys have been beaten by our team when we weren't as sound as we are now. Still, we're prone to the big mistake, so, you have a shot since we give everyone a shot .

[Art]

What matchups favor the Redskins? I don't see a single unit on either side of the ball where the personnel is better than the Seahawks.

I hope your dog is well trained as I'd hate you to be hit by traffic crossing the street. The Redskins outclass your defense in ways typically measured in tons . Talent, depth, versatility and scheme all favor the Redskins wildly on the defensive side. Offense is where things are more to your favor given superior play at QB, a very strong runner and a good offensive line.

The Redskins actually have more pure ability up front on the line than you have, and very good coaching, but, need to get the cohesion we lack for having made changes. Our ability to move you guys off the ball is where the matchup really goes our way. Your line will not be able to blow back our defensive line because that simply doesn't happen to our line, which is the BEST in football against the run. Your line is generally a little undersized and though mobile enough to make big plays, will have situations where you will wear down.

Portis is a dangerous back who still hasn't completely found his rhythm in our system, but, you can see where that will come given his effort and ability to generate positive yards out of plays you see little gain possible. Brunell is our wild card. We will be able to run for about 130 yards on you. If Brunell can be consistent and continue drives, the game will be over quickly. Alexander will be taken out of the contest and you lack the threat at receiver to dominate.

Alexander is successful because Seattle's offensive line is one of the best in the entire league. He's successful because defenses have difficulty stopping him while also defending the pass. He will be consistent because you don't have the strength up front to stop Jones and Hutchinson from creating huge holes for Strong to come through and clean out whichever LB or DB is stupid enough to try and fill that gap. As good as your defense is, you haven't faced anything like this yet.

Alexander is successful for all the reasons you mention. But, you haven't seen a defense as good as ours against the run. Suggesting we don't have the strength up front to stop the run shows a terrible ignorance. That's EXACTLY what our defensive line does. It's about ALL it does well . We have good size up front and we're well schooled in a great system. No line in football controls the running game better than ours. It's not really close.

I don't care what defense it is, getting put back on the field after repeated three and outs by their offense wears on them mentally and physically. Particularly when the opposition is consistently and relentlessly driving down the field to score time after time.

Sure, when the opposition is consistenty and relentlessly driving down the field for scores time and again, a defense will give up some. Fortunately there's no chance of you getting that to happen. If we give you short fields, maybe you'll score some. But, we surrendered the fewest points as a defense in the league last year. We're in the SECOND year of the system THIS year, with more talent. Unless we GIVE you something, you won't likely TAKE anything.

Last year you lost to Green Bay 14-28 at home coming off a bye. In 2003 you lost to Dallas in Dallas 14-21 coming off your bye. I don't think you really want to count on the bye as being a good thing for you.

Actually, we beat Green Bay 21-20 coming off our bye last year. Unfortunately the officials took a touchdown from us on a bogus call then didn't call pass interference on a hold the next play. Green Bay was able to score late. You might want to know the details of play before making such statements. Green Bay did JUMP ALL over us early in that game though. We adjusted and held them after that nice early start.

I guess this is just one of those things that we'll just have to wait to see. The Seahawks have been bringing pretty good pressure against some pretty good and big offensive lines. Rhoades has been dialing up some good blitz packages that are using the best of the talent we have available. Even when we don't get sacks, we have people in the QB's face and at their feet which makes real hard to step in to deliver the ball. If you fall behind early and are forced to pass, look out because they will come after Brunell.

I actually like Rhodes a lot. I respected him when he was here. Having seen him coach a defense and seen Williams, however, the choice is clear. You guys have done a nice job generating sacks this year. The downside for you in this game is the longer this group plays together the fewer mental breakdowns will be witnessed. Physically your players aren't likely to beat ours in individual matchups. Mentally is where you might get something going. Rhodes may be doing more scheme stuff now than he usually does, but, he's generally not a guy who outsmarts the opposition.

Now, I'm not sure which offensive line you guys have played that you view as good. You've played three very, very, very poor pass blocking offensive lines. You should look good against them.

We may not be big, but we are fast and agressive. Also, they managed to shut down Atlanta's running game, and I don't think the Redskins are any better than they are at running the ball.

Atlanta's running game is Vick based. It always has been. Most team's don't have QBs capable of 900 yards rushing. Put a QB with around 100 yards, like most teams, and suddenly Atlanta's running game drops drastically. In any case, I think the Falcons did run for 115 yards and a 4.1 yard average against you. If you shut us down the exact same way we'll beat you by 10 points.

It would be great if your team was so dismissive of the Seahawks. I think they know better. I think they know that a quality team is coming to town and if they don't bring their A game, they will get whipped and good. Even with their A game, there is a good chance the Seahawks could beat them.

I know we know we have a quality team coming to town. We recognize a solid offense and frisky defense is coming. No one is dismissing that at all. You, on the other hand, have entirely dismissed the reality of our defense and even the improved nature -- through some added explosiveness -- of our offense. In any case, if we don't kill ourselves you won't win. If there's an outcome where we play well and cleanly and you do I'll congratulate you for it. It's just not likely.

[Art]

Not for nothing but this sounds like prepping an excuse.

"Even if we lose, it's not because we got beat, it's because we beat ourselves." I suppose in those six turnover games the balls just fall out of the RBs hands or interceptions are thrown to DBs that are standing there with their hands in their pockets. In no way is fumbling or poor passing a reflection of the Redskins being an inconsistent team, just the other team getting lucky. Yeah, whatever. The excuses are setting up nicely.

Most of the mistakes the Redskins make are unforced in nature. I have long worried and openly stated that our team is defined more by these dumb mistakes than anything else -- including good defense. I'm not setting up an excuse in the slightest. If we beat ourselves because of dumb plays that we give you but you don't really have a hand in, then, you'll win because we're a dumb team, not because you have better players.

One day we may not be a dumb team. It won't be lucky for you to have us play in this way. It's generally how we play in such games as this. More than anything this is the area we have to overcome. It is similar to the dropped passes thing you guys experience. If we have a really close game that we win but you guys drop eight passes you should have caught and didn't but we didn't have anything to do with stopping, you can say, "Hey, Art, we beat ourselves." You'll be right.

Your team has those characteristics too. No doubt about it. Those are defining characteristics of teams. You hope you're overcoming them on your end. We haven't seen any real improvement here on ours. So, I'm prepared for us to just do so many dumb things as to cost us the game because that's what we do.

If you take the ball away from us by big hits or great individual plays, I'll certainly know the difference. That would be a sign of a superior team taking it to us. Again, I just don't see that as likely.

[akseahawkfan]

Maybe you have a point. I mean, Gregg Williams has never been known to produce a top defense until last year, so, it is probably a fluke. Wait, that's not right...

Where did I even insinuate that the Redskins coaching staff was anything less than top notch? I have nothing but respect for them as individuals and collectively. The ONLY thing I have said is that coaches coach and players play. No matter how good the coaching and schemes may be the players still have to go out and execute.

We enter this game with respect for your offense as it is a good, balanced attack. Sadly, you don't quite understand you need to fear our defense because it is a top unit, again, coached by the best staff with the most experience in football on that side of the ball.

All I have said is that I haven't seen it THIS YEAR. Considering that you played Chicago and Dallas I would think that your defense would have really shined. It didn't. It was ok. It was good enough to win. But, it wasn't impressive. It wasn't dominating. It wasn't something that strikes 'fear' in the heart of this Seahawks fan.

Your offense has been good and faced good defenses before. Last year, for example ... You played Buffalo ...good defenses can stop the awesome offense you have. Obviously you know this.

Sure I know this. I just don't know that the Redskins are THAT good - THIS year. Also, I need to point out that the problem with last year's offense was basically dropped balls by the receivers. That hasn't been a problem through the first three games this year. Holmgren also seems to be more willing to stay with run longer.

Trust me, there's nothing about your offense that is all that worrisome in comparison. Alexander is great. But, we've stopped him with lesser talent and a lesser scheme. He might break a couple. That kind of thing can happen when a defense plays as aggressively as ours. But, for that to happen it would be quite rare and only your most fevered dreams allow it to be plausible.

Like I said earlier. I can't believe the Redskins are as dismissive of the Seahawks as you are. This is an offense that is good enough to score at any time against any team. Will they do that Sunday against the Redskins, I think so. Will it be enough to beat them? Yeah, I think so. I think so because I don't think the Redskins have an offense capable of scoring more than the Seahawks. If the Redskins are good enough to hold the Seahawks to 7 points, the Seahawks will be good enough to hold the Redskins to 6. I don't think it will be that close or that low of scores, but the W will be in the visitors column.

Your hope the Redskins defense isn't as good as those that typically stop you easily. Unfortunately, we're better than those defenses. Likely you will find things surprising when you get nothing going. But, if you're very lucky, we'll help you with turnovers and penalties. That is the most likely way you will win because you lack the ability to do much else.

Let me make sure I have this correct. If the Redskins win it's because they are the better team. If the Redskins lose it's because they had a bad game. Ok. Got it. :laugh:

[akseahawkfan]

I think I have said everything I can say about the upcoming game on Sunday. I want to thank you all for being so hospitable and allowing me the opportunity to exchange views. Seriously a pleasure, and I don't want to wear out my welcome. The Redskins will be my favorite team every week they face a NFCW team. Give 'em hell.

I have one final thought to add before game day:

Most of the mistakes the Redskins make are unforced in nature. I have long worried and openly stated that our team is defined more by these dumb mistakes than anything else -- including good defense. I'm not setting up an excuse in the slightest. If we beat ourselves because of dumb plays that we give you but you don't really have a hand in, then, you'll win because we're a dumb team, not because you have better players.

Now Art, you have made a whole lot about how the Redskins coaching is so superior to the Seahawks. While I've given my respects to the Redskins coaching staff, I have to wonder why you don't hold coaching responsible for these "dumb mistakes". In my thinking dumb mistakes are the results of poor coaching and a lack of discipline. You can't give credit to the coaches for everything good and then not hold them accountable for everything bad. Well, I guess you can, but that doesn't make much sense does it?

I'll be here win or lose Sunday after the game. I'll be interested in the comments of those of you that see the game live. It's always a little different in person.

Ak

[BlueTalon]

So basically, what you're saying is that this game will either be a blowout by the Skins, a close game won by the Skins, a close game won by Seattle, or a blowout by Seattle?

Hard to argue with that.

I like covering all the bases!

The real point I was trying to make, though, is that I believe a Seahawks route of the Redskins is possible. That's something that hasn't been seen much on any of these threads. I'm not predicting it, and I think the game is going to be a bit of a slugfest, but if we get one or two breaks, that might trigger a fairly high scoring game.

[Large_Ant]

I like covering all the bases!

The real point I was trying to make, though, is that I believe a Seahawks route of the Redskins is possible. That's something that hasn't been seen much on any of these threads. I'm not predicting it, and I think the game is going to be a bit of a slugfest, but if we get one or two breaks, that might trigger a fairly high scoring game.

Art, your logic is extremely poor. If a team is not as mentally tough as another, then by definition, they are not as good of a team. I could go on and on about how we were really better than the Rams last year but we just dropped too many balls. Guess what? If we're dropping balls and they're not, that means they're better.

Losing because you dropped passes and the other team didn't means you lost because the other team was better. If you turn the ball over without being forced and the other team doesn't, that means they're better.

Saying "We didn't lose, we beat ourselves" is the biggest cop out in the world for having your backside handed to you.

At the end of the day, the team with the most points wins. And whatever mistake that you can come up with that the other team didn't commit only goes to prove the obvious. That they're better. Simple logic sans the excuses.

[Art]

Now Art, you have made a whole lot about how the Redskins coaching is so superior to the Seahawks. While I've given my respects to the Redskins coaching staff, I have to wonder why you don't hold coaching responsible for these "dumb mistakes". In my thinking dumb mistakes are the results of poor coaching and a lack of discipline. You can't give credit to the coaches for everything good and then not hold them accountable for everything bad. Well, I guess you can, but that doesn't make much sense does it?

I'll be here win or lose Sunday after the game. I'll be interested in the comments of those of you that see the game live. It's always a little different in person.

Ak

I do hold the coaching responsible for the dumb mistakes we make. Which is why it was so refreshing to see Gibbs pull Ramsey from the equation given he's a one-man wrecking crew in terms of mistakes. We may have to do MORE of this. Gibbs spent a year getting to know his players and the league. Now he's going to have to start pulling more talented players who can't get over a propensity for a little mental slip. Dockery, as an example, might have to come out of the lineup.

I believe Gibbs has failed to do what he must in this area, but, he's done a number of other things so that you can see changes in this area pending. He's instilled a character and toughness in this team we've lacked. He's instilled a unity both by being good with his player communication and by removing those guys identified as "I" types.

He's brought a work ethic we haven't had in 12 years. He saw an offense incapable of explosion and he's bringing more of that. He's got to find a way to generate consistency on offense -- the ability to sustain drives. Part of that is getting rid of the numerous mental mistakes that continue to set us back. Brunell making the wrong read against Dallas leading to an interception is an acceptable, normal error to see. Making the RIGHT read but making the wrong pass leading to an error is the type of thing Ramsey would do.

Now, if the Cowboys game was a rare one you'll see from teams a couple of times a year -- even the best, most disciplined teams -- that's fine. We won't know if this aspect has changed until about half way through.

[Art]

Art, your logic is extremely poor. If a team is not as mentally tough as another, then by definition, they are not as good of a team. I could go on and on about how we were really better than the Rams last year but we just dropped too many balls. Guess what? If we're dropping balls and they're not, that means they're better.

Losing because you dropped passes and the other team didn't means you lost because the other team was better. If you turn the ball over without being forced and the other team doesn't, that means they're better.

Saying "We didn't lose, we beat ourselves" is the biggest cop out in the world for having your backside handed to you.

At the end of the day, the team with the most points wins. And whatever mistake that you can come up with that the other team didn't commit only goes to prove the obvious. That they're better. Simple logic sans the excuses.

While I understand what you are saying I think it is simple enough to understand what I'm saying. Mistakes are either correctable or they are not. Mistakes that are unable to be corrected are a sign of a weaker player. In the case of Seattle, for some time you're receivers have had a bad case of the dropsies.

This is either a correctable issue or it is not. Many here have stated it is correctable who follow the Seahawks because it's not been as obviously a problem this year. If you lose a game while obviously being better than another team but areas of correctable errors the staff has focused on rears up to bring about a loss, you can view the context of the game itself and know whether your butts were handed to you, or whether you handed your butts to them.

More, though, games such as this for Washington tend to see a team very hyped up pressing way too hard and making remarkable numbers of mistakes. Why? Because this game against the Seahawks is the exact one the Redskins have failed to overcome on the path to improving. This is the first game of this sort with Gibbs. Under Spurrier and Marty and Norv we had games like this where we failed and we failed in ways that signaled we were not ready, as a team, to take the next step in level and competition.

So, it would not surprise me to see an effort far more clearly self-defeating that being beaten. It also wouldn't be a great surprise to see something of a coming together in a well played game as well. Gibbs identified a number of players making the type of mental errors that kill us and he got rid of them. Rasby, early last year, for a series of improperly run plays. Coles for routinely poor route running decisions. Gardner for the same and drops. Raymer simply for some physical limitations leading to mental mistakes in a full-time starting role. Brown, age and an unfamilar (not having been played for years) position leading to some communication errors.

These players have rotated out by guys generally capable of better mentally sound play. Ramsey was just pulled so the full offense could at least be called without constant fret of the boneheaded mistake. Gibbs is finding the guys he can rely on. He may not have that team yet. What we do generally know already, however, is the type of team he does have is one a team like yours will have a hard time with -- more physical in strength and nature -- unless we make it easy for you.

[bubba9497]

I like covering all the bases!

The real point I was trying to make, though, is that I believe a Seahawks route of the Redskins is possible. That's something that hasn't been seen much on any of these threads. I'm not predicting it, and I think the game is going to be a bit of a slugfest, but if we get one or two breaks, that might trigger a fairly high scoring game.

well considering the Skins defense gave up the fewest points (against the defense only) in the league last season, and so far this season are avg.'ng only 10 Pt's per game against two teams that scored 69 points combined in their next game after playing the Skins, .... that is highly improbable.

For that matter, the Skins offense might explode and route the seahawks.....

[BlueTalon]

well considering the Skins defense gave up the fewest points (against the defense only) in the league last season, and so far this season are avg.'ng only 10 Pt's per game against two teams that scored 69 points combined in their next game after playing the Skins, .... that is highly improbable.

For that matter, the Skins offense might explode and route the seahawks.....

Oh, I agree it's highly improbable. I also agree a route could go the other way. I merely was saying that I think it's possible, whereas most people posting do not.

I fully expect to see a close, tough game. I will be surprised, but not shocked, to see a blowout.

[trimee]

:seahawksu

IMO, the Portis vs. Alexander talk is... amusing to put it gently.

When you have a running back that actually wants to STAY in town....come talking to us then

[trimee]

Again with the last year stuff? You want to talk about last year? How did you fair against the Eagles last year?

Again troll, this can work both ways. How did you do against St. Louis last year? :seahawksu

[Arsenic]

Again with the last year stuff? You don't think teams got that stuff on tape from last year and the first two games this year? You don't think that teams are going to take advantage of that? Chicago and Dallas don't have the weapons to exploit your weaknesses on defense. You say it yourself that your defense won't rate as high because you play more good offenses - the Seahawks are one of those good offenses.

Alexander runs behind two Pro-Bowlers on the left side and one of the best blocking Full Backs in the league. The Redskins are going to have to commit a whole lot to stoping Alexander if that is what they choose to do. When they do that then we'll start hitting you with play action and the short passing game until you come up to stop that and then we'll burn you deep with the double move and pump fake. You haven't played an offense like this in awhile.

You want to talk about last year? How did you fair against the Eagles last year? I think that is the closest comparison to the Seahawks as you will find. Same basic offense and philosophy. Wish we had their defense, but I think our defense is good enough to stop your offense at this point.

Now that we beat the Cowboys, everyone is off the "most improved team of the century" bandwagon Now, all of a sudden, they don't have an offense worth bragging about shuttingdown. It's funny how that works.

Who exactly did the Seahawks beat? The New England Patriots?

Now you're comparing your team to the Eagles, man, you guys aren't that good. and we almost beat the Eagles last year—if that's the answer you were looking for. The Arizona Cardinals use some of the same schemes as some of the best teams in NFL history, but that doesn't mean they are going to play like them.

[Streater101]

If I didn't know this thread was about the Seahawks, I would have assumed we were facing Randal, Moss, Carter, and rest of the 98 Minnesota Vikings tommorow.

Seattle is nowhere in the same league as Philly (as much as it pains me to pay the Birds a compliment) so its laughable to compare our performance vs. them as some barometer for the game Sunday

I'm not going to start playing the Kevin Bacon game; "well, we played this team, and this team is good, and we won, therefore, we'll win etc..." We beat NE the year they won the Superbowl, so I guess that makes us better than the other 16 teams they beat en route to the Championship. :doh:

I'll just say I like our chances because I'm supremely confident about our front seven vs. Alexander, and see no bad matches in the secondary to make us play him honest.

[bubba9497]

IMO, the Portis vs. Alexander talk is... amusing to put it gently.

yes it is, because Portis puts up big yards even against good teams, and doesn't have the cream puff nfc west to get easy yards against.

not to mention our #2 guy coul start on most teams... exactly who is you backup rb?

:laugh: geez, smack talk from a seahawk fan is laughable

[skinsfan12]

a ream puff...ouch

.

EDIT: nevermind..

.

[AJ_Skins]

It's not complicated. The Seahawks don't match up with us well at all. We should win this game. It's all on Brunell.

[bubba9497]

speaking of that vaulted Seahawk defense

in game one AGAINST THE OFFENSIVE JUGGERNAUT JAGS (#16 OFFENSIVELY) they gave up 26 points.... then the High flying Jags, mustered up 3 against the Colts. Gave up 362 total yards, 119 rushing.

In game two, with a commanding 21 point lead at home, the Stonewall defense of Seattle's, gave up 18 unanswered points to The Falcons (#22 Offensively) in the second half, and was close to losing the game.

Then they faced their toughest challenge The Arizona Cardinals (#18), and there second string QB, holding them to a staggering 12 pts, and 266 total yards :thud:

How do they do these tremendous feats????

The offense put up a hard fought 37 against the powerful Cards defense (#22), and 21 early points against the awesome Falcon defense (#16).... and put up a tremendous 14 against the #2 Jags defense.

easy to see where all the bravado is coming from :rotflmao:

[Nighthawk]

History only seems to matter when it favors the Seahawks according to the statements that their fans make.

You can't make a statement that the Seahawks have had a better record than the 'skins since the last time they made the playoffs in '99, therefore they've been the better team but then dismiss that during that time, the Seahawks haven't beaten the 'skins. Which is it? Does past history matter or not.

If it does, then regardless of our record, we've been better than the Seahawks every time we've met them. PERIOD.

Tomorrow will be the same.

[BlueTalon]

History is history. I've been trying to make the point all along that this year is a new year, these teams are new teams, even if they have many of the same players. (Yes, there's continuity, but there's also new chemistry, new schemes, new players...) So I am with you on this -- people should not get wrapped up in previous years' records when trying to figure out what's going to happen in upcoming games.

However, having said that...

For what it's worth, Washington has an 8-4 lead in the series between the two teams. That means, Nighthawk, that for four games, the Seahawks were a better team than the Redskins. I'd recommend shying away from absolute, categorical statements.

[Larry]

Re: History:

I remember a scene from The Mary Tyler Moore Show

Ted says something stupid on the air. Lou announces his intention to go in there and kill him. Mary says "Lou, you know violence never settles anything."

Lou gives her a withering look, and says: "Mary, violence has settled every war in history, every Super Bowl ever played, and a lot of marriages I know."

Yes, historicly, the Skins have been the better team.

(However, Talon's right. That won't mean a whole lot, tomorrow.)

Like the disclaimer says on the commercials "Past results do not guarantee future earnings". Just ask the folks in Dallas.

[dreamingwolf]

blue talon is my adversary this week, and you my ally quote mary tyler moore. what have we become

[BlueTalon]

blue talon is my adversary this week, and you my ally quote mary tyler moore. what have we become

Mushy?