Home-y Don't Play Dat: Seahawks with best home record against the spread since 2008

We are well aware of the fact that the Seahawks have had some bad seasons. As an expansion team in 1976, they were outscored by 200 points. That's so many points that it once took Russell Wilson three quarters to score 200 points last season.

However, perhaps no stretch in team history has ever been as bad as the Holmgren-Mora-Carroll stretch from 2008 to 2010.

Seattle was outscored by 98 in Holmgren's final season and went 4-12. They were outscored by 110 points in Mora's first and only season and went 5-11. Then finally, went 7-9 in the first year of Carroll, but were outscored by 97 points, half of which were given back to the Seahawks after Beastquake in order to satisfy the Gods. (Wilson)

So during that time, Seattle was really sucky sucky even at home right? Not exactly. According to an article today on the National Football Post, the Seahawks went 23-17 at home between 2008 and 2012 (which would mean they went 9-29 on the road, yeesh) and 26-13-1 against the spread. Seattle was on average 4.2 points above the spread at home, and that was the third-highest total in the NFL during that time, behind only the 2012 champion Ravens (+5.2) and 2010 champion Green Bay Packers (+5.1.)

All signs are obviously pointing to 2013 champion Seattle Seahawks.

Interestingly, the 23-17 record at home was only tied for 16th-best over that time period. The 26-13-1 against the spread record was tied for first with the New Orleans Saints. For their efforts, a person that bet on Seattle for $110 a game over that period would have earned $1,170 -- not bad! Five years later (and not sweating bullets because they were +4.2 to beat the spread on average) you could buy like... a PS4?

Obviously the most interesting part is just how bad Seattle has been since 2008, up until last year. They've shown marked improvement in three years under Carroll, but there were so many games we'd rather forget. Just.. not at home.

With only four wins in 2008, Seattle went 2-6 at home. But they beat the Rams 37-13, beat the Jets 13-3, lost by three in OT to the 49ers, and lost 24-21 to the Patriots.

With only five wins in 2009, Seattle went 4-4 at home. They beat the Rams 28-0 (thanks, Rams!), beat the Jaguars 41-0, beat the Lions 32-20, beat the 49ers 20-17, and lost to the Titans 17-13.

With a 7-9 record in 2010, Seattle went 5-3 at home. They beat the 49ers 31-6, beat the Chargers 27-20, beat the Cardinals 22-10, beat the Panthers 31-14, beat the Rams 16-6. In the playoffs, they beat the defending champion Saints 41-36.

Seattle went 4-4 at home in 2011 but were a much different team in the second half of the year. After an early 30-28 home loss to the Falcons and a 34-12 beating to the Bengals, the Seahawks beat the Ravens 22-17, then lost a bullshit (not a typo, I'm just calling the game "a bullshit") 23-17 to the Redskins, then beat the Eagles 31-14 and the Rams 30-13. In the home finale, they lost 19-17 to the very good 49ers.

Finally, even ballers with zero control said that the 2012 home Seahawks were "ballin' outta control, son!"

The Seahawks went 8-0 at home, with an average score of 30.4 to 11.9.

They beat the Packers. They beat the Patriots. They beat the Vikings. They beat the 49ers. They beat the Cardinals 58-0.

Unquestionably if the Seahawks managed to grab some home playoff games last year, it would have been a different story. The good news is that with a perfect 16-0 record next year, Seattle will have homefield advantage throughout the playoffs and then they'll move the home of the Super Bowl to the Northwest by Week 14.

We are a good team now, but the best news is that even when we're a bad team, the Seahawks are rarely not a treat to watch at home.

Follow Kenneth on Twitter