Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

[pw_1016]

I hope Tyrann Mathieu and PP can shut down Seattle's receivers. I love seeing the Seahawks go down, especially as a niner fan. I am surprised that Chris Johnson has been having some success this season. Thought he was washed up.

[thaima1shu]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

Last time Carson Palmer was against the Seahawks was the game where the Cardinals came up and won in Century Link. This is gonna be a tough one, but the Seahawks need this one badly.

Always love going to primetime home games. Gonna be fun.

[Kanobi]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

This is the time of year when the Seahawks decide they wanna win 8 straight games and ride that wave deep into the postseason. Could be a really rough outing for the Cardinals but for some reason I see them coming out on top.

[cima]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

This is a good test for the Cards, they need this win so they can actually say they've beaten a good team this year, because they haven't yet. Though if they do win, you'll still get those idiots that say "the Seahawks aren't good, they're 4-5".

[55]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

I hope Tyrann Mathieu and PP can shut down Seattle's receivers.

What Seattle receivers?

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

This is a good test for the Cards, they need this win so they can actually say they've beaten a good team this year, because they haven't yet. Though if they do win, you'll still get those idiots that say "the Seahawks aren't good, they're 4-5".

So what are the Seahawks as they currently stand at 4-4 then?

[cima]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

So what are the Seahawks as they currently stand at 4-4 then?

They are good. 4-2 with Chancellor. I think the Cards are better this year but the Seahawks are not a bad team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pw_1016]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

What Seattle receivers?

Lmbo!!! All those mid to late round draft picks they have on the roster. They are overhyped, IMO.

[thaima1shu]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

Lmbo!!! All those mid to late round draft picks they have on the roster. They are overhyped, IMO.

Uhhhh...what? Who in their right mind hypes them up? Even Seahawks fans think it's a bottom 5 receiving group. I'm confused where this thinking is coming from.

[Bengals1Fan]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

Settle's recievers have just enough gusto to show up when they need to.
All be it a terrible group, they make the plays they need to.

As for the game, I think Arizona needs this one. They've had a rough past 4 weeks, but Seattle needs it more.

Seattle wins a close one at home 17-13

[cima]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

I'm starting to think the 'Hawks take this one as well. Based off the 8 game sample of AZ this year, they struggle against good defenses and their 2 losses were against good defensive teams. In fact when you look at the teams they've defeated and where they rank in scoring defense:

Saints - 31st
Bears - 27th
49ers - 18th
Lions - 32nd
Ravens - 25th
Browns - 26th

And the teams that beat them:
Rams - 6th
Steelers - 8th

Seahawks are tied for 2nd.

Add on top of that the game is in Seattle...I unfortunately see the Hawks taking this one.

[Jr.]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

This should be a fun one to watch.

[neifro]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

Both teams haven't beat anybody worth a damn this year. Should be close. Hopefully Cards pull it out just to shut Seattle fans up.

[ddtrane]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

Why is that not a safety?

[ddtrane]

Re: Week 10 SNF: Arizona Cardinals(6-2) @ Seattle Seahawks(4-4)

Ok Cris good explanation.