NFC Wild Card: Saints @ Seahawks

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

Just want to point out that there was a stat shown Sunday night that the SB winner hasn't won a playoff game the next year since 2005.

I'm fairly certain that no defending SB champ has faced a team with a losing record in the postseason.

People keep trying to come up with reasons to pick Seattle, but all of them require us to forget the fact that the Hawks aren't good. The only way the Saints lose this game is by beating themselves (i.e. by going -3 or more in turnover diff.).

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

I'm fairly certain that no defending SB champ has faced a team with a losing record in the postseason. People keep trying to come up with reasons to pick Seattle, but all of them require us to forget the fact that the Hawks aren't good. The only way the Saints lose this game is by beating themselves (i.e. by going -3 or more in turnover diff.).

Just like I mentioned to da throne, I'm not coming up with any reasons for anything. The post was a response to the comment that the Saints are SB champs and battle tested. The Saints are a better team and probably would've won their division if they didn't have so many injuries early. Hell I had them right next to the Packers as my preseason pick to make the SB. But them being the defending SB champs doesn't mean much when the last 5 didn't even win a playoff game.

[TheWatcher]

The Saints can win easily if they don't turn the ball over, but therein lies the issue. The Saints are still a good team, but too many turnovers at the worst times have been an issue this year. When you're outdoors in January in the playoffs, more than any other time of the year you can't afford to waste possessions. So with that in mind, and this being the pros, it can spell disaster on the road even against a team like Seattle.

I'll also add on to wwharton's stat cite, and say that when you see a statistical trend like that happening over a period of time, it's not an accident. What the reason is can be debated, but the outcome can't be discounted. I'll also add in my own and cite that the Saints have never won a road playoff game in franchise history and it'll contine to mean something until they do.

I don't know who I have yet.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

The Saints can win easily if they don't turn the ball over, but therein lies the issue. The Saints are still a good team, but too many turnovers at the worst times have been an issue this year. When you're outdoors in January in the playoffs, more than any other time of the year you can't afford to waste possessions. So with that in mind, and this being the pros, it can spell disaster on the road even against a team like Seattle.

Fair enough.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

I'll also add on to wwharton's stat cite, and say that when you see a statistical trend like that happening over a period of time, it's not an accident. What the reason is can be debated, but the outcome can't be discounted. I'll also add in my own and cite that the Saints have never won a road playoff game in franchise history and it'll contine to mean something until they do.

It's also "not an accident" that all nine of Seattle's defeats this season have been by 15 or more points. I get what you're saying, but surely the fact that the 2010 Seahawks are absolutely dreadful is more relevent to someone trying to predict a winner this weekend than any historical trends might be?

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

It's also "not an accident" that all nine of Seattle's defeats this season have been by 15 or more points. I get what you're saying, but surely the fact that the 2010 Seahawks are absolutely dreadful is more relevent to someone trying to predict a winner this weekend than any historical trends might be?

There is no doubt that the Seahawks are a weak football team. You'll notice that I leaned only towards history and the possibility of the Saints continuing to make mistakes, because matchup for matchup the Seahawks have nothing going for them on the field.

[goh]

Quote: Originally Posted by Chrisksaint

But the Saints beat the falcons by 3, and vice versa in OT and have proven to be almost equal atleast this season. Didn't know playing at home/road these days in the NFL made that huge of a difference, which I don't buy any good team can/will win anywhere.

You don't think the Seahawks having to fly across the country to play in a dome in Atlanta where Matt Ryan is something like 20-2 with the team coming off a bye and being in relativley good shape matters?

You don't think the Saints having to fly across the country to play in cold/rain/snow? instead of their dome while they're banged up against a team that essentially just played a playoff game doesn't matter?

If this game was in New Orleans,yah I wouldn't give the Seahawks a chance.
Though if you wanna go with your original post...the Saints only beat the 49ers by 2. Seattle beat them 31-6 in week 1! (Then lost 40-21 later.)

[thaima1shu]

Chris Ivory is apparently out for the game this Saturday. That's HUGE, because nobody could tackle Ivory when we played earlier in the year.

[Chrisksaint]

Can't say i'm surprised he just can't stay healthy which apparently has been a thing for him ever since 8th grade.

I expect Pierre to pretty much be a lock to play this week. I don't see NO relying just on Bush for the most part, although I think he'll have a big game