Seahawks Schedule Announcement Thread

NO PRIMETIME GAME!

The Seahawks got shut out of the Primetime schedule. Looks like the NFL doesnt think that the Hawks will be that good this year …

The Peepshow

by peepshowmopguy on Apr 14, 2009 4:02 PM PDT reply actions

Well that and the Seahawks don't make for good ratings at all

Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.

by SSreporters on Apr 14, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions

You're only as good as your last season to NFL schedulers

unless you’re the Lions.

--Shrug
Field Gulls - The SBN Seattle Seahawks Blog

by Shrug on Apr 14, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions

Not if you're the Dallas Cowboys.

They get a ridiculous amount of prime time games, even following a disappointing season. They didn’t make the playoffs last year, but they still get 6 prime time slots? F’ing bullshit!

Weez the juice!!

by Carl Shinyama on Apr 15, 2009 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions

All the better to embarass you on national TV, my dear.

I <3 Dallas just for their drama. Who will they blame when they miss the playoffs again now that T.O. is in Siberia?

…Oh wait, they’ll still blame him.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions

From Seahawk Addicts

1 Sep 13 STL @ SEA Qwest Field 4:15 PM Tickets FOX

2 Sep 20 SEA @ SF Candlestick Park 4:05 PM Tickets FOX

3 Sep 27 CHI @ SEA Qwest Field 4:05 PM Tickets FOX

4 Oct 04 SEA @ IND Lucas Oil Stadium 1:00 PM Tickets FOX

5 Oct 11 JAC @ SEA Qwest Field 4:15 PM Tickets CBS

6 Oct 18 ARI @ SEA Qwest Field 4:05 PM Tickets FOX

7 Bye

8 Nov 01 SEA @ DAL Dallas Cowboys New Stadium 1:00 PM Tickets FOX

9 Nov 08 DET @ SEA Qwest Field 4:05 PM Tickets FOX

10 Nov 15 SEA @ ARI University of Phoenix Stadium 4:15 PM Tickets FOX

11 Nov 22 SEA @ MIN Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome 1:00 PM Tickets FOX

12 Nov 29 SEA @ STL Edward Jones Dome 1:00 PM Tickets FOX

13 Dec 06 SF @ SEA Qwest Field 4:15 PM Tickets FOX

14 Dec 13 SEA @ HOU Reliant Stadium 1:00 PM Tickets FOX

15 Dec 20 TB @ SEA Qwest Field 4:15 PM Tickets FOX

16 Dec 27 SEA @ GB Lambeau Field 1:00 PM Tickets FOX

17 Jan 03 TEN @ SEA Qwest Field

Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.

by SSreporters on Apr 14, 2009 4:06 PM PDT reply actions

So basically our only game in the EST is week 4

And how we do against our first set of divisional games will be huge since they’re all before the bye week. There you go.

Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.

by SSreporters on Apr 14, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions

How does the divisional contests being before the bye affect their importance?

by John Morgan on Apr 14, 2009 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm trying to figure that out too.

Maybe we don’t want to have a shitty record going into the bye week and affecting morale (?). I’m not really sure what that has to do with divisional contests, except for the fact that they may be easier than the other three games before the bye. Personally, I’d rather the bye week interrupt a losing streak than a winning streak.

by SeaTownBlueDevil on Apr 14, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Actually, I think we're fairly lucky.

No coast-to-coast trips this year. The farthest east we go is Indianapolis? I’ll take that.

Not sure what bearing that’ll have on the schedule but at least we won’t be hearing about 3500-mile jaunts to Florida.

--Shrug
Field Gulls - The SBN Seattle Seahawks Blog

by Shrug on Apr 14, 2009 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Especially since the Miami game was basically one of the closest ones we lost the entire season.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 14, 2009 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions

3 game road stretch

which includes two playoff games and two 10 am games, don’t forget the 6 10 am games, while the cardinals only have four

by laubster on Apr 14, 2009 4:07 PM PDT reply actions

10 AM game

There’s only one EST game (Indy) so there can only be one 10 AM PST game. Week 4 will be a 10am PST game though, you’re right about that.

Blazers fan in beantown.

by cmcdougall on Apr 14, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions

All the CST games are 10 am

So throw in Dallas, Green Bay, Houston, St. Louis, and Minnesota – the times are listed in EST, time zone doesn’t matter

by laubster on Apr 14, 2009 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions

THIS IS A CRIME

Why does the NFL insist on making PST teams play at 10 am? I can hardly get dressed that early. Mora addressed this circadian problem. In his first press conference he said they would bring in Olympic trainers. While Holmgren dismissed this and called it a non-factor. The crime is that there is no need to play the Central time zone games this early.

I say Seahawk fans unite. Do any of you guys drink tea???

Cogito Ergo Sum

by censor1979 on Apr 16, 2009 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions

The selfish part of me actually likes waking up to some football.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 16, 2009 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions

Same here. When I lived in the east coast and in the midwest

I hate having to wait until noon or 1pm for football to start. I like waking up, doing some type of exercise, making breakfast, then sitting down and watching the 10 am game. But I guess I’m weird, since I’ve never slept in past 9:30 am (time zone changes excluded).

by LantermanC on Apr 16, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions

I agree.

I’ve always enjoyed the opportunity to watch an entire football game without feeling like I’ve wasted an entire day.

by abender20 on Apr 16, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions

I'd say it's a 10 win season if ...

We didn’t have so many early games :(

by Nick Andron on Apr 14, 2009 4:08 PM PDT reply actions

That's bunk.

There’s no proof that early game adversely affect PST teams.

by John Morgan on Apr 14, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes there is.

I’ll try to locate it.

by weebs on Apr 14, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions

I think it's all about West Coast teams (so Denver does not count) being mediocre

Outside of the 2005 Seahawks and the 2006-2007 Chargers, teams along the West Coast have been less than average. The Raiders just stink. The 49ers can be good but from the Erickson era to the last game of Mike Nolan they’ve been a joke. The Chargers got in thanks to the profound collapse of the Broncos. The 2005 Chargers went from AFC West champions to missing the playoffs altogether. When the 49ers and Raiders were in their heyday this West Coast/East Coast thing did not matter at all.

John’s last comment just strengthens the argument that there is no proof of West Coast teams struggling when they travel East for a 1:00 early kickoff.

Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.

by SSreporters on Apr 14, 2009 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Football Outsiders did a study on this in one of its PFP

The conclusion is there’s no effect.

This was brought up October 13 of last year. At that time…

All Road Games: 49-76 (.392)

East Coast: 15-21 (.416)

Seattle was better playing on the East Coast than overall.

by John Morgan on Apr 14, 2009 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Bunk

Cogito Ergo Sum

by censor1979 on Apr 16, 2009 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions

We sucked last year on the road on the east coast.

by Nick Andron on Apr 15, 2009 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions

And before last season as well.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions

Use some common sense man.

Cogito Ergo Sum

by censor1979 on Apr 16, 2009 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions

By common sense I assume you mean junk science.

by John Morgan on Apr 16, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions

Alright I'll drink the hemlock, the earth is not flat.

Cogito Ergo Sum

by censor1979 on Apr 16, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions

9-7

as I see it.

by LantermanC on Apr 14, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions

You're all very optimistic here.

I’m seeing 6-10. I only see us sweeping SF and STL, and beating the Lions and Texans.

by SeaTownBlueDevil on Apr 14, 2009 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Too early for pessimism.

I’ll be pessimistic when we get our butts kicked @Buffalo to begin the season.

by LantermanC on Apr 14, 2009 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions

Nah, I think the Bucs are very vulnerable on the road.

And I’m not sure what to think of the ’09 Titans yet.

--Shrug
Field Gulls - The SBN Seattle Seahawks Blog

by Shrug on Apr 14, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions

Although I'm forgetting one very important aspect of all this speculation:

IT’S FREAKING APRIL

--Shrug
Field Gulls - The SBN Seattle Seahawks Blog

by Shrug on Apr 14, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions

I would say a sweep of Arizona isn't out of the question.

Considering how super bowl losers’ seasons typically go.

by Tyopiod on Apr 15, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions

While that little trend may hold true (and even the one about the team that beats the Eagles in the playoffs going 7-9)...

It’s hard to imagine a rational explanation why. It’s not like the Cardinals have gotten any worse. One can argue they’ve even improved.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe they've improved.

But they were what, 9-7 last year? In THIS division? They pretty much rode the “fling it up to Fitz” (FIUTF) strategy all the way through the playoffs last year, I don’t think they’re actually that good of a team.

by djafrot on Apr 15, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions

FIUTF, I like that...

While I don’t think they’re that great either and are a Kurt Warner hand injury away from 4-12, as it stands they’ve only lost minor depth and bad players, and signed some decent ones (Bryant McFadden).

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions

The big difference between their streak in the playoffs

And their regular season, was that their pass rush woke up in the playoffs.

Weez the juice!!

by Carl Shinyama on Apr 15, 2009 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions

To me coming from you fan is a 4 letter word.

Cogito Ergo Sum

by censor1979 on Apr 16, 2009 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions

Typo in the list, John.

You’ve got Week 16 repeated, and no Week 17.

by sev79 on Apr 14, 2009 4:17 PM PDT reply actions

Thanks

You can really tell the stuff that I don’t have my heart into.

by John Morgan on Apr 14, 2009 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions

My favorite part of the day the schedule is released

is going back and looking at last years predictions when the schedules were released.

by Nate Dogg on Apr 14, 2009 4:22 PM PDT reply actions

5-1 through

week 6 is possible and would give us a lot of confidence. Plus the first 2 games should both be W’s so maybe the ease of the early schedule can help out the latter more difficult part.

by gohawks89 on Apr 14, 2009 4:30 PM PDT reply actions

Jesus Murphy.

That schedule looks tough, just based on the teams involved.

AT the Packers, Vikings, Cowboys and Colts? Ouch.

by djafrot on Apr 14, 2009 4:30 PM PDT reply actions

The Packers and Cowboys don't scare me this year.

--Shrug
Field Gulls - The SBN Seattle Seahawks Blog

by Shrug on Apr 14, 2009 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions

Any game at either the Packers or Cowboys

scares me because there are refs at the game.

by LantermanC on Apr 14, 2009 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions

And we'll get more than our fill of East Coast

ignorance and misunderstanding. I wonder if they’ll even mention that we’re also playing in the game in between stories of various mainstream popularity. THE GAME! TALK ABOUT THE GAME AND THE TEAMS PLAYING IN IT. WHAT THE F@#$%^ is happeing ON THE FIELD – IN THE GAME??!!!

/rant

by Misfit74 on Apr 16, 2009 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions

I think we can start 2-0

Then it goes downhill

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 14, 2009 4:36 PM PDT reply actions

I'm refraining from making comments about our record based on this schedule

I think many of us penciled in the Miami game as a win and were eagerly looking forward to Brady getting ripped up by Seattle’s defense while Hasselbeck was flipping passes to Nate Burleson. Anything can change within the next several months.

I’m just pumped we’re beginning and ending the season at home.

Seattle: Where the sun coming out or snow falling takes up 20 minutes of a 1 hour local news broadcast.

by SSreporters on Apr 14, 2009 4:38 PM PDT reply actions

4 of the first 6 games are at home

and 3 of the last 5. That seems pretty ideal.

by Nate Dogg on Apr 14, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions

I like St. Louis at home to start

without Pace and Holt, and in general the first half of the year is relatively easy so we should be off to a good start. Sucks for the pro-bowl caliber players that there are no prime-time games though.

by diehard82 on Apr 14, 2009 6:21 PM PDT reply actions

Christ

I hope we don’t lose to the Rams… John, dissuade my fear of a crushing victory over Seattle being Spag’s welcoming to head coaching in the NFL.

by Anticitizen_One on Apr 14, 2009 6:44 PM PDT reply actions

We're going to crush them

There roster isn’t any better than last year’s. And they still have a shitty QB.

by Nick Andron on Apr 15, 2009 7:23 AM PDT up reply actions

Bulger is (was?) great.

As in, a top 10 QB. But now he seems destined to remain in his David Carr state because of how ridiculously bad the Rams’ offensive line is. If they don’t pick Jason Smith/Eugene Monroe #2, I’m going to chuckle.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions

If we get through the bye at at least .500

I think we’ll be in decent shape. But with new coaches and it being the NFL, anything is possible.

by Trepidation on Apr 14, 2009 7:31 PM PDT reply actions

So....16-0? Maybe 15-1 if some people get hurt.

by MFAN on Apr 15, 2009 12:42 AM PDT reply actions

That's absurd...

19-0 is the only possible outcome.

by gobo on Apr 15, 2009 8:28 AM PDT up reply actions

I find our schedule to be incredibly uninteresting.

of course, that could be more of a reflection of my minimal optimism. I see 5-11, 6-10.

by SpokaneSHAWK on Apr 15, 2009 8:31 AM PDT reply actions

Too early to be pessimistic/realistic. Off the top of my head projections.

Rams, 95% chance of win
@ 49ers, 70% chance of win (Singeltary factor)
Bears 55% chance of win
@ Colts 5% chance of win
Jags 60% chance of win
Cardinals 55% chance of win
BYE 0% chance of loss
@ Cowboys 15% chance of win
Lions 99% chance of win
@ Cardinals 25% chance of win
@ Vikings 25% chance of win
@ Rams 75% chance of win
49ers 85% chance of win
@ Texans, 45% chance of win
Bucs 65% chance of win
@ Packers 25% chance of win
Titans 45% chance of win

Expected wins 8.44

by LantermanC on Apr 15, 2009 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions

Was is this 'Singletary' factor?

The fact that he’s so far acted like a giant douchebag and hired one of the NFL’s worst ever offensive coordinators?

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions

Woah woah woah.

I clearly stated it as ‘Singeltary’ not ‘Singletary’, don’t quote me if you’re not going to quote my misspellings ;) .

by LantermanC on Apr 15, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions

"Woah woah woah" - Lanterman

Done and done.

by abender20 on Apr 15, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions

I may be out of the loop...

But did the NFL abandon the whole “flex scheduling” experiment? I haven’t heard anything about it this year or seen any of the little notes about how the night game is subject to change.

by busplunger on Apr 15, 2009 9:01 AM PDT reply actions

As far as we know it's still on. I don't think it's an experiment anymore.

--Shrug
Field Gulls - The SBN Seattle Seahawks Blog

by Shrug on Apr 15, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions

OK, thanks

All the papers are running headlines like “Seahawks shut out of prime time” but I guess there’s still a chance that we could get a nationally televised game if the team is playing well and one of the matchups looks compelling to NBC later in the year.

by busplunger on Apr 15, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions

A thing about the Cardinals...

Because of their division title from last year, they have to play the other division winners in the NFC: New York Giants and the Carolina Panthers.

by PattyB on Apr 15, 2009 9:44 AM PDT reply actions

Dallas and Tampa

isn’t that much easier.

by LantermanC on Apr 15, 2009 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions

Dallas: I don't think Romo will do well at all next season without T.O., because Roy Williams is not good.

Tampa is destined for a rebuilding season, it seems. Though I suppose they could be somewhat decent.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 15, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions

As much as I absolutely

hate Dallas, they have much ammunition on both sides of the ball. I think Roy Williams will be much better than people are expecting. Hopefully, Romo will continue his December swoons and gaffes at key times. Unfortunately, not matter what they do, we’ll all have to hear about it. Over and over and over again. That schedule is built on TV dollars. 6 primetime games for Dallas = $.

by Misfit74 on Apr 16, 2009 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions

On the contrary, I think Roy Williams is going to be one of the worst trade-busts in recent memory.

He certainly isn’t going to routinely attract double coverage and open things up for Witten and…Crayton? In addition, everyone loves to see DeMarcus Ware and his flashy stats, but while he’s a phenomenal player, their 3-4 defense is still not great.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 16, 2009 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions

I don't think he'll necessarily live up

to the fortune they paid for him, but Roy can be a very good player. I do agree they overpaid, at least on the surface. The move also allowed them to release TO, which would have been tough to justify w/out Williams’ acquisition. The bottom line is that I think Roy can be a top-10 WR stud. Time will tell.

by Misfit74 on Apr 16, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions