Hawk Talk
Comments
-
Hi there. They didn't have to win either of those must win games. They still control the #1 seed.topdawgnc said:Facts hurt.
The New Orleans game was not pressure packed.
The big SNF game ... at the start of the year ... yes ... huge ...
When they HAD to win in SF ... they lost.
When they HAD to win today ... they lost.
Next week tells the tale ... St. Louis gave them all they could handle earlier in the year ... Let's see if Neil Lomax still has some of that St. Louis magic left in him.
Get the fuck out of here. -
but hey @topdawgnc nice logic, as always.
-
When did Auburndoog hack topdoognc's account?
-
If Seattle is coasting ...He_Needs_More_Time said:
I stopped listening after that. If the Hawks lose that game that puts the Saints in the drivers seat to win the #1 seed.topdawgnc said:Facts hurt.
The New Orleans game was not pressure packed.
The big SNF game ... at the start of the year ... yes ... huge ...
When they HAD to win in SF ... they lost.
When they HAD to win today ... they lost.
Next week tells the tale ... St. Louis gave them all they could handle earlier in the year ... Let's see if Neil Lomax still has some of that St. Louis magic left in him.
After that Seattle could just coast for the #1 seed which they are doing.
If anything the Rams game is the first big game far as importance on winning since the Saints game.
How is the 49ers game so big if they lost and didn't change their place in the standings or what they needed to do?
Will they rest the starters next week?
If coasting ... have they wrapped it up or could Carolina or NO still snag it.
Wash the sand out of your vag ... the Seahawks have choked twice in two of the past three games ... no reason to lose to AZ with it all on the line.
Shades of Texas in the Rose Bowl. -
They didn't have to win this week. It's a costly loss, but they clinch home field with a win against the Rams next week. A fired up team at home playing against Kellen Clemens. I like Seattle in that one. If we lose next week, these doom and gloom posts will be spot on, but right now, it's an overreaction over a loss to a team that is 7-1 in its past 8 games. Next week is the must win game. Seahawks played like shit on offense, Turbin fumbled without being touched, didn't make plays when it counted, and lost a game they should have won.
-
TopDawgNC is MikeLeachClockManagementFS in this thread
-
Them choking and them not winning big games is two different things.topdawgnc said:
If Seattle is coasting ...He_Needs_More_Time said:
I stopped listening after that. If the Hawks lose that game that puts the Saints in the drivers seat to win the #1 seed.topdawgnc said:Facts hurt.
The New Orleans game was not pressure packed.
The big SNF game ... at the start of the year ... yes ... huge ...
When they HAD to win in SF ... they lost.
When they HAD to win today ... they lost.
Next week tells the tale ... St. Louis gave them all they could handle earlier in the year ... Let's see if Neil Lomax still has some of that St. Louis magic left in him.
After that Seattle could just coast for the #1 seed which they are doing.
If anything the Rams game is the first big game far as importance on winning since the Saints game.
How is the 49ers game so big if they lost and didn't change their place in the standings or what they needed to do?
Will they rest the starters next week?
If coasting ... have they wrapped it up or could Carolina or NO still snag it.
Wash the sand out of your vag ... the Seahawks have choked twice in two of the past three games ... no reason to lose to AZ with it all on the line.
Shades of Texas in the Rose Bowl.
I'm not happy they lost but to say this proves they can't win must win games is fucking stupid. -
We shall see.He_Needs_More_Time said:
Them choking and them not winning big games is two different things.topdawgnc said:
If Seattle is coasting ...He_Needs_More_Time said:
I stopped listening after that. If the Hawks lose that game that puts the Saints in the drivers seat to win the #1 seed.topdawgnc said:Facts hurt.
The New Orleans game was not pressure packed.
The big SNF game ... at the start of the year ... yes ... huge ...
When they HAD to win in SF ... they lost.
When they HAD to win today ... they lost.
Next week tells the tale ... St. Louis gave them all they could handle earlier in the year ... Let's see if Neil Lomax still has some of that St. Louis magic left in him.
After that Seattle could just coast for the #1 seed which they are doing.
If anything the Rams game is the first big game far as importance on winning since the Saints game.
How is the 49ers game so big if they lost and didn't change their place in the standings or what they needed to do?
Will they rest the starters next week?
If coasting ... have they wrapped it up or could Carolina or NO still snag it.
Wash the sand out of your vag ... the Seahawks have choked twice in two of the past three games ... no reason to lose to AZ with it all on the line.
Shades of Texas in the Rose Bowl.
I'm not happy they lost but to say this proves they can't win must win games is fucking stupid. -
yeah they really had to win those games. They lost both and they are still in the drivers seat. Not comprehending your logic here.topdawgnc said:Facts hurt.
The New Orleans game was not pressure packed.
The big SNF game ... at the start of the year ... yes ... huge ...
When they HAD to win in SF ... they lost.
When they HAD to win today ... they lost.
Next week tells the tale ... St. Louis gave them all they could handle earlier in the year ... Let's see if Neil Lomax still has some of that St. Louis magic left in him. -
The Rams game is the first "must-win" game IMO since the Saints game.
It's not a "must-win" if you lose and nothing impacts you. Seattle is still in the drivers seat while had they lost the Saints game they wouldn't have been.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
