Originally posted by Rascal:
OK, I disagree.
In my opinion, as much as I hate to admit, the Seahawks will go to the Super Bowl. The 9ers is not a bad team per se, but is just not good enough to compete for the top spot. If I am not wrong, the Seahawks have not lost a single regular season game ever since they beat the Bears on the road last year, that is 12 games in a row. That means something. And if you are talking about head-to-head match-up, that's even worse, they didn't just beat us, they beat us down, not just once but twice, there is just no other way to say it. I feel Kap is intimidated when he plays them. If we lose the December game at home, there will be no more excuse from us, but to crown the Seahawks as the new King Of NFC West.
Once again, I would be esctatic if I am wrong, but if I have to be totally honest with you and be truthful of how I look at the current situation, that is just how I feel.
Seattle are a very good team and have a very good chance of doing damage in the playoffs, athough it's way too early to talk SB for anyone - all teams are one injury away from disaster. I find all this Seattle-related angst in this forum bizarre to say the least. Let's get our act sorted out first and get to the playoffs, and quit worrying about Seattle. Anyway, even if they do win it all, I would bet good money it's not going to be because they tend to sign our castoffs.
I mean, jeez, I liked Daniels as well, but this Nate Davis-like moaning and gnashing of teeth is hard to comprehend. It's all very simple: like about every other NFL team out there, we have a problem with backup QB. If the starter misses time, teams hope to get around .500 out of the backups starts. More often (recent history: Chicago, Houston, even the Raiders) the season is a writeoff because the backup doesn't cut it. Don't judge by Kaep last year, he was brought in exactly to be the QB of the future and he just got his chance earlier than planned.
So, the team have been trying all sorts of moves to address the back QB issue as much as it can be addressed: we traded (cheaply) for McCoy who had made actual NFL starts. He doesn't seem to be the answer. We tried Wallace for the same reason - and cut him for the same reason. Now we're bringing Skelton in. It's clear that management puts a whole lot of importance on having a veteran backup, and one that has actually started actual NFL games at that. A developmental QB is a luxury for their purposes. The PS is the place for such a player, and I'm sure they meant to put Daniels there if he cleared waivers. He didn't. Time to move on.
Cam: when season started everyone commented how stacked we were at OLB compared to last year, particularly if you count Tank coming back shortly. The Aldon debacle left a big unexpected hole there, but (1) it's not as if anyone expected his troubles to flare up so spectacularly; (2) Cam would still
not have been the answer.
Hawkins: I was disappointed at him being cut, and I do think that of all the cuts he would have been the most help if he had stayed on. Kyle Williams (whom I usually support) has been a big disappointment both at WR and PR, although at least he holds on to the ball. Perhaps Hawkins would have been a better alternative, but that's all hindsight.
Our management sometimes gets unjustified credit for stacking the team with talent, when a lot of our stars were brought in during the previous, much-maligned regimes (both draft and FA - Justin anyone?). Similarly, they get lots of unjustified flak for not being able to sign every FA out there and not keeping every project in the world, as if there was no cap to fit under and no 45-man active squad to fit everyone in.