throwback week



Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: Anti-Seahawk

  1. #16
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by DanS761
    Whos getting full of themselves? Is it against rules on being excited aboput a 13-2 team?
    Seahawkfanforlife is pretty full of himself thinking that the Hawks beat a full strength Colt team. I'm not saying all Hawks fans are full of themselves, but the ones who think they actually acomplished something vs the Colts besides homefield advantage and beating a 2nd string team seem to be a little overconfident. Be proud of your 13-2, I'm not bashing the Hawks at all, they have had a good season. I'm pointing out to certain Hawks fans who think they beat the real Colts, that they didn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  2. #17
    DanS761 Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    i think what he's excited about is the fact that the colts had thier backups in and so did the hawks, and the hawks won. Thats something to be excited about besides the 13-2 record. Both teams had backups in and we beat the former best team in the league with both teams playing backups. I was a little unimpressed with the colts effort especially after the week they had. You would have thought the players would be playing harder for thier coach.

  3. #18
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    I wouldn't get that excited since the Hawks starters were still in there during the 3rd quarter vs the 2nd stringers of the Colts.

    If you lit them up like you did to Philly and had your starters on the bench at halftime that would be impressive. But to try and make it seem like the most of the hawks starters weren't in there is kind of silly.

    Bottom line is the Hawks brought everything they had available to that game, the Colts didn't. So you can't read too much into the win vs the Colts.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  4. #19
    DanS761 Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    I'm sorry thats your opinion. I respect that. When i say starters i mean in the defense. Hawks offense was playing ball control and were very conservative with thier play calling because they had a comfortable lead most of the game. While the hawks DID have some starters on offense sit small part of the game that isnt an excuse.

  5. #20
    Milan Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by DanS761
    just dont understand your logic when you say the hawks were "as real as they get" THEY HAD 5 STARTERS OUT! you cannot discount that. There will be 2 DIFFERENT teams if these 2 teams face eachother in the superbowl. Whos getting full of themselves? Is it against rules on being excited aboput a 13-2 team?
    What about all of your players on Offense?

    The Colts had 7 out the whole game, then they took out most of their starters later on.

  6. #21
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    So it's convenient for you to only refer only to the "starters" as defense. But reality says your starting offense & defense played most of the game, where neither the Colts offense or defense starters played much at all.

    If Hawks fans can't see that they didn't play the full strength Colts, then if the Hawks make it to the Superbowl vs the Colts they will see a much different team, and have a much tougher time winning.

    I'm just being realistic, I don't like the Colts or Hawks. If you beat them full strength then of course brag, but you didn't so some of the overconfident Hawks fans might want to take it one game at a time, and not think they beat the best that the Colts have to offer.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  7. #22
    Seahawk_For_Life Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    This doesn't surprise me. As a Seahawk fan we've dealth with this attitude the entire year. But yet we keep winning, then listening to the excuses after....

    The Falcons cried and cried, I thought the Dallas fans were the worst, then the Giants, the Eagles, now the Colts. Whatever.

    This game was no different. We knew(fans on Seahawk boards) that "if" we won the Colts games, the excuses would fly, and boy are they flying now.

    The fact is, both teams are banged up. Starters were out for both teams, the Seahawks defense primarily. But yet the fans didn't complain, the team didn't offer excuses. They went out and won.

    Before the Colts pulled Peyton, the score was 14-3 with both teams at full "available" strength. We had starter quality players out, they did as well. But we held Peyton out of the endzone, and scored twice on them. I think that speaks volumes. Our backups have stepped up all year, and we keep rollin'.

    But hey, make more excuses. Rationalize all your want. Quite frankly, we've become very indifferent to all the naysayers. Winning does that.:tongue:

  8. #23
    DanS761 Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    NO NO NO NO, I DID NOT SAY THE SEAHAWKS HAD STARTERS OUT ON OFFENSE. i was saying that the seahawks TOO had injuries. Most notably on thier defense. The media has said several times about the colts having players out, seahawks had a lot on defense.

    Point is you wont see the real 2 teams if they were to play in the superbowl

  9. #24
    Seahawk_For_Life Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    That's not the point, Seahawk Fan For Life said it was 14-3 with all the Colts starters in. That isnt true.
    Sure it is, the players they started the game with. You read something into my comment.

    Face it the Hawks are fairly healthy right now
    Umm, right...

    Cornerbacks Andre Dyson and Kelly Herndon, and safety John Howell led the inactive list for the Seahawks. Followed by Wayne Hunter, Ray Willis, Itula Mili and Chuck Darby. Seahawks cornerback Marcus Trufant suffered a lower-back contusion in the first quarter and did not return. That left only Michael Boulware from the starting secondary at the start of the season, with the loss of Ken Hamlin, Andre Dyson and Kelly Herndon. Defensive end Joe Tafoya strained his hamstring in the second half and did not return...Linebacker Isaiah Kacyvenski suffered a concussion in the second half and didnít return...
    Hamlin, starter
    Sharper, starter
    Dyson, starter
    Herndon, starter(Dyson and Herndon have traded off starter duties this year)
    Howell, backup safety
    Hunter, backup tackle
    Willis, backup tackle
    Mili, used to be the starter
    Darby, starter
    Trufant, starter(played one series)
    Tafoya, backup defensive end
    Kacyvenski, backup LB, special teams standout

    Did I just count 6 starters out for our defense? But yet they kept Peyton out of the endzone, not to bad.

    But hey, I guess if we lost, we could be like the Colts fans and use it as an excuse.LOL

  10. #25
    DanS761 Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    We're On A Freakin 11 Game Winning Streak For God Sakes!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  11. #26
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Wow Seahawk For Life you are dellusional. I'm not making any excuses, just the facts. Who was out for the Hawks on offense?????? No one.

    Your "available" full strength is much better than what the Colts "available" full strength was, theres no comparison. Let's compare

    Colts : June, Diem, Harrison, Freeney (for most of the game), Manning (for some of the game) Wayne (for some of the game) Bob Sanders, Reagor, Simon, Mathis all sat out due to the game not meaning much to the Colts.

    Hawks (According to Dan) : Herndon, Dyson, Darby, and Trufant for 3 quarters. Hass and Alexander in the 4th and if the game were closer Hass and Alexander wouldn't have where as Manning, Wayne, Harrison etc would have sat no matter what.

    So reality says the Colts were really undermanned, and the Hawks were injury free on offense, and had 3 out on D.

    Of course you will defend the Hawks, but just be realistic, that wasn't the full strength Colts that you would see in the Superbowl. If you play like you did yesterday you would have a hard time beating the full strength Colts with your full strength Hawks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life
    Give it up? It was 14-3 with all the starters in.
    My whole part in this discussion started when I read the above quote, and posted that it just isn't true.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  12. #27
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life
    Sure it is, the players they started the game with. You read something into my comment.
    That's a lame attempt at trying to justify your statement.

    This just proves that even you know deep down you didn't play the real Colts.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  13. #28
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life
    Sure it is, the players they started the game with. You read something into my comment.



    Umm, right...



    Hamlin, starter
    Sharper, starter
    Dyson, starter
    Herndon, starter(Dyson and Herndon have traded off starter duties this year)
    Howell, backup safety
    Hunter, backup tackle
    Willis, backup tackle
    Mili, used to be the starter
    Darby, starter
    Trufant, starter(played one series)
    Tafoya, backup defensive end
    Kacyvenski, backup LB, special teams standout

    Did I just count 6 starters out for our defense? But yet they kept Peyton out of the endzone, not to bad.

    But hey, I guess if we lost, we could be like the Colts fans and use it as an excuse.LOL
    It's funny how you bring up Hamilin and Sharper who haven't played in forever and meant nothing in this game and nothing in this discussion. Milli LOL you are grasping at straws just quit while you are behind.

    I'm not a Colts fan so I don't need to look into all the backup players they have injured like you did to try and prove a point, which you didn't prove
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  14. #29
    DanS761 Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    It's funny how you bring up Hamilin and Sharper who haven't played in forever and meant nothing in this game and nothing in this discussion. Milli LOL you are grasping at straws just quit while you are behind.

    I'm not a Colts fan so I don't need to look into all the backup players they have injured like you did to try and prove a point, which you didn't prove
    Meant nothing? How do you know since they didnt play? How do you know if all of Indy's starters were playing? You dont know because they didnt play. You can assume all you want, but assuming things doesnt prove facts.

    Seahawks are on a 11 game winning streak, we should be 14-1 if JB made the field goal(no excuses though) and you rams fans are so bitter about being 3rd in the NFC west, that you have to downplay or manipulate something against the seahawks. A year ago you guys were on top of the world, and the hawks down in the dumps. you CANT STAND the fact that the hawks are so rediculously good, and you are 5-10. it KILLS YOU! bottom line..........















    13-2

  15. #30
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by DanS761
    Meant nothing? How do you know since they didnt play? How do you know if all of Indy's starters were playing? You dont know because they didnt play. You can assume all you want, but assuming things doesnt prove facts.

    Seahawks are on a 11 game winning streak, we should be 14-1 if JB made the field goal(no excuses though) and you rams fans are so bitter about being 3rd in the NFC west, that you have to downplay or manipulate something against the seahawks. A year ago you guys were on top of the world, and the hawks down in the dumps. you CANT STAND the fact that the hawks are so rediculously good, and you are 5-10. it KILLS YOU! bottom line..........
    13-2
    Wow you need to read everything I post and not just pick and choose. It doesn't kill me that the Hawks are good. I already said above that the Hawks are having a good season. I'm not bitter about anything, the Rams are horrible this year. I also said earlier that if the Colts and Hawks play again, anyone can win but it will be much tougher for the Hawks to beat a full strength Colt team.

    Exactly my point, no one knows what Sharper or Hamlin would mean, they could mean a couple losses or bigger wins who knows, but as for this discussion they mean nothing because they haven't played in forever. Hamilin has been out half the season and Sharper almost the whole season. So they don't mean anything either way to that Colt game, this discussion, or any future Hawks games this season. The Colts who sat out and could have played mean a lot because they would have played if the game meant something. I didn't see any Hawks sit who could have played therefore the Hawks were a lot closer to full strength then the Colts were.

    So again I reiterate, the Hawks have had a good season, I respect any Hawks fan who realizes that yesterdays win vs the Colts wasn't a true test of what the Colts are. IF you make it to the Superbowl and play the Colts with all the starters and win, congrats but it will be a lot tougher than yesterday is what I'm saying.

    It's cool to be proud of 13 wins but when you haven't won a playoff game yet, it's a little early for some Hawks fans to start bragging don't you think.

    Bottom line is this, if I had to pick the Colts or the Hawks both at full strength, I would say the Colts are a much better team. The majority of fans would agree so prove us wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •