HawkShack.com

It might be a little premature to start this thread, but I saw something a bit unusual about this game.

I looked at the point spreads this morning as I'm planning a trip to Vegas this weekend and will want to bet on a couple of games, and to my amazement, the Hawks are listed as a 2.5-point underdog to the Cards. This seems very strange for a couple of reasons: (1) We beat the Cards just a week ago, our defense completely smothering Kylar Murray and keeping them out of the end zone. (2) We have won our last 3 straight games while the Cards have lost two in a row, and (3) although the Cards are playing at home, we always have a huge turnout of 12's, negating any home field advantage they might otherwise enjoy. I've been to 4 Hawks/Cards games in Glendale, and every one of them has had at least 40% Seahawk fans of those in attendance. Additionally, the Cards never have had a very passionate fan base, one of the worst in the league IMO.

We are still relatively healthy, with the only significant players appearing on the injury list being wide receiver DK Metcalf and punter Michael Dickson, both listed as questionable.

I felt better about this game before we played the Jets but given how Murray continued to struggle against the Vikings...he was 31-45 for 252, 1 TD and 2 INT's...and that the Cards scored just one TD, I still think that we should be favored in this game.

Hawks 17, Cards 13.

Maybe you make a big bet and win some good money. Beat Vegas, Riverdog. Make enough money to at least make your trip free.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Maybe you make a big bet and win some good money. Beat Vegas, Riverdog. Make enough money to at least make your trip free.

Hehe! Thanks for the advice and well wishes.

As a rule, I'd rather bet against the Hawks as it sets up a win-win for me. If we win the game, I'm usually so happy that it doesn't bother me to lose the bet and if we lose, I have a nice little consolation prize. But this week, I'm tempted to lay down some money on the Hawks because I think it is a good bet. But I'm not going to wager enough money to pay for my trip if I were to win. I'm a casual gambler. A $100 bet is a huge amount for me.

As a little side note, I read where Mike Macdonald missed the team meeting on Monday as his wife went into labor and had their first child. Leslie Frazier took over for him.

River Dog wrote:It might be a little premature to start this thread, but I saw something a bit unusual about this game.

I looked at the point spreads this morning as I'm planning a trip to Vegas this weekend and will want to bet on a couple of games, and to my amazement, the Hawks are listed as a 2.5-point underdog to the Cards. This seems very strange for a couple of reasons: (1) We beat the Cards just a week ago, our defense completely smothering Kylar Murray and keeping them out of the end zone. (2) We have won our last 3 straight games while the Cards have lost two in a row, and (3) although the Cards are playing at home, we always have a huge turnout of 12's, negating any home field advantage they might otherwise enjoy. I've been to 4 Hawks/Cards games in Glendale, and every one of them has had at least 40% Seahawk fans of those in attendance. Additionally, the Cards never have had a very passionate fan base, one of the worst in the league IMO.

We are still relatively healthy, with the only significant players appearing on the injury list being wide receiver DK Metcalf and punter Michael Dickson, both listed as questionable.

I felt better about this game before we played the Jets but given how Murray continued to struggle against the Vikings...he was 31-45 for 252, 1 TD and 2 INT's...and that the Cards scored just one TD, I still think that we should be favored in this game.

Hawks 17, Cards 13.

I can agree with the spread. The Cardinals Losses this season

Buffalo (10-2) 34-28
Lions (11-1) 20-13
Commanders (8-5) 42-14
Packers (9-3) 34-13
Seahawks (7-5) 16-6
Vikings (10-2) 23-22

They have only lost to teams with winning records. I know at the time the Hawks didn't have a winning record, but we do now. We both played the Jets with in the month, we barely squeaked by with a win and by all intensive purposes should have lost to them considering how many chances we gave the Jets to win that game. Where as the Cards waxed them 31-6. I think Vegas sees our recent game where we barely beat an inferior team, and the Cards barely lost to an elite team, so it makes sense to give them the edge at home.

4XPIPS wrote:I can agree with the spread. The Cardinals Losses this season

Buffalo (10-2) 34-28
Lions (11-1) 20-13
Commanders (8-5) 42-14
Packers (9-3) 34-13
Seahawks (7-5) 16-6
Vikings (10-2) 23-22

They have only lost to teams with winning records. I know at the time the Hawks didn't have a winning record, but we do now. We both played the Jets with in the month, we barely squeaked by with a win and by all intensive purposes should have lost to them considering how many chances we gave the Jets to win that game. Where as the Cards waxed them 31-6. I think Vegas sees our recent game where we barely beat an inferior team, and the Cards barely lost to an elite team, so it makes sense to give them the edge at home.

The Vikings are elite? I'll agree with that whenever they beat a really good team, such as the Bills, Ravens, Eagles, Lions, or Chiefs. They're a very good team and look to make the playoffs, but elite? I think you have a broad definition of the term.

As far as the Cards being favored goes, maybe I'm biased, but I personally think that we've turned the corner, that last Sunday was a freak game, almost like it was Halloween or something. And trust me, the Cards playing at home is no big deal. Our record there proves it.

River Dog wrote:The Vikings are elite? I'll agree with that whenever they beat a really good team, such as the Bills, Ravens, Eagles, Lions, or Chiefs. They're a very good team and look to make the playoffs, but elite? I think you have a broad definition of the term.

As far as the Cards being favored goes, maybe I'm biased, but I personally think that we've turned the corner, that last Sunday was a freak game, almost like it was Halloween or something. And trust me, the Cards playing at home is no big deal. Our record there proves it.

I do believe the Vikings are one of the elite teams, they have one of the best defenses, and explosive offense. However, as the season winds down a lot of division games to be played, we will see how that NFC North Shakes out.

I lived in Arizona, and went to every Hawks game there, and I agree their home crowd isn't very committed as the team would like. I think when it comes to the pecking order of opposing fans in Glendale, it would be

#1 Cowboys, when the Cowboys come to town it's like 60%+ Cowboys fans easily
#2 Seahawks, Lots of blue and green in the crowd
#3 Packers, well considering the weather is much nicer in the desert come NFL season you will see cheeseheads in Glendale

I am looking at it from a Vegas standpoint, and +2.5 isn't calling the Cards heavy favorites. I don't know about you, but a lot of times Vegas gets it right. I can see us losing this by 2 points and covering, or winning by 1 point at the end.

Cards 18
Hawks 17

We lose in a close battle in Glendale.

4XPIPS wrote:I do believe the Vikings are one of the elite teams, they have one of the best defenses, and explosive offense. However, as the season winds down a lot of division games to be played, we will see how that NFC North Shakes out.

I lived in Arizona, and went to every Hawks game there, and I agree their home crowd isn't very committed as the team would like. I think when it comes to the pecking order of opposing fans in Glendale, it would be

#1 Cowboys, when the Cowboys come to town it's like 60%+ Cowboys fans easily
#2 Seahawks, Lots of blue and green in the crowd
#3 Packers, well considering the weather is much nicer in the desert come NFL season you will see cheeseheads in Glendale

I am looking at it from a Vegas standpoint, and +2.5 isn't calling the Cards heavy favorites. I don't know about you, but a lot of times Vegas gets it right. I can see us losing this by 2 points and covering, or winning by 1 point at the end.

Cards 18
Hawks 17

We lose in a close battle in Glendale.

The odds set by bookies are expectations on how they think the bets are going to come in. Their object is to even up the bets on each team, so they reduce their risk of losing money if a certain team wins. They make their money on a percentage they take from the winning bet plus the losing bet, so they don't care who wins. That's why they adjust the odds during the week, as bets sometimes come in differently than they expected. So all that 2.5 point spread means is that more people likey to bet on the game expect the Cards to win than the Seahawks. I just think that it's wrong, and I'm going to play my hunch.

I had a friend who lived in Phoenix, and he once told me that everyone is from somewhere else. Compared to Philadelphia or Detroit, it's a very young, new city. Percentage wise, there's not as many people who grew up being Cardinals fans as there are Bears or Packers fans. Arizona has a huge retirement population. My brother-in-law, a die hard Hawks fan born and raised in Washington, now lives about 20 miles north of Tucson in a retirement community. Plus, in the winter, there's more things to do in Arizona than there is in Wisconsin. All those cheeseheads have to do is watch football. All that factors in when it comes to the allegiances on game day in Glendale.

I agree with your assessment of how well teams 'travel.' The Packers travel the best. There was a time during the Kingdome days when we had a horrible team that the Packers had about 80% of the crowd, and that was before the days of Ticketmaster and StubHub. The Bears, when they have a decent team, travel well, too. The Cowboys are one of a handful of teams that have a nation wide following that includes the Steelers, Raiders, and Niners. Our Hawks are almost exclusively a regional team...with all due respects to our friend Mack Strong is my Hero.

As I mentioned above, I'm going to Vegas this weekend as I love going there on an NFL Sunday as everyone wears their colors, including dealers and other employees in the casinos. It identifies where you're from, and I like striking up a conversation with someone from the opposite side of the country. I see jerseys from coast to coast, but the least represented are the Rams and Chargers, and outside of the Raiders, they're the closest franchises to Las Vegas.

For the history buffs, there are two players going into this game that wrote history together in the past week. Leonard Williams 92 yard Pick 6, is the longest pick 6 in history by a DL. I would have thought someone else would have done it prior to this, but I guess it would be tougher for a DL to out run a WR or RB, so it would make sense they wouldn't be able to house one for that distance.

Also tight end Trey McBride made history as the only TE ever to catch at least 12 passes in back to back weeks. This one to me is a bit of a shocker to me, as I would have guessed with all the great tight ends we have been blessed to witness over the years of Gonzalez, Gronk, Witten, Gates, Sharpe that none of those ever strung 12 catches back to back. This would make a great trivia question one day.

4XPIPS wrote:For the history buffs, there are two players going into this game that wrote history together in the past week. Leonard Williams 92 yard Pick 6, is the longest pick 6 in history by a DL. I would have thought someone else would have done it prior to this, but I guess it would be tougher for a DL to out run a WR or RB, so it would make sense they wouldn't be able to house one for that distance.

Also tight end Trey McBride made history as the only TE ever to catch at least 12 passes in back to back weeks. This one to me is a bit of a shocker to me, as I would have guessed with all the great tight ends we have been blessed to witness over the years of Gonzalez, Gronk, Witten, Gates, Sharpe that none of those ever strung 12 catches back to back. This would make a great trivia question one day.

Williams also was awarded NFC Defensive Player of the Week and probably should have won it the week before as well. He's come up huge for us the past couple of weeks.

I saw the tidbit about Williams setting an all-time record for a pick 6 by a DL but I didn't see the one about Trey McBride. Hell, most people don't even know who he is or who he plays for let alone that he set a record for back-to-back 12 catch games.

In other news, it looks like Nwosu is going to be back in the lineup. They've activated him off IR and he's practiced this week without limitations. If he does play, it will be the first time this season that our defense has been at full strength. Another reason to bet on the Hawks this weekend.

You don't see too many 290 lb. dudes rumble 92 yards for a TD, especially an int.

He's a big dude to be running that fast. I heard he was over 300 lbs and it's the longest run by a 300+ lb player in NFL history.
It used to be players that large were fat and sloppy, but now they carry it so well they look like they are 250 at times.

He was listed at 290 coming out of college, 300 on Wikipedia and 310 on Seahawks.com. Pretty normal weight progression for an NFL big man.

Dee Williams cut, looks like it’s Kenny McIntosh and possibly JSN returning kicks or punts. Looks like K9 may miss the game, so may see more Zach and Kenny this week

4XPIPS wrote:Dee Williams cut, looks like it’s Kenny McIntosh and possibly JSN returning kicks or punts

I vote no for JSN returning kicks or punts. He's too important to the offense now.

They picked up Jaelon Darden on waivers from I think the Browns who is a WR but mostly returned kicks and punts.

4XPIPS wrote:Dee Williams cut, looks like it’s Kenny McIntosh and possibly JSN returning kicks or punts

Aseahawkfan wrote:I vote no for JSN returning kicks or punts. He's too important to the offense now.

Me. too. Put Lockett back there if need be. He's someone that you can trust to hold onto the ball.

Michael Dickson is questionable. Hopefully we don't have to punt very often.

A lot of movement on the roster that pertains to the special teams. There is a chance Dickson won’t punt. And we may have to use a practice squad member to be a returner as well. This could be quite interesting as we won’t have K9. I can see Mike Macdonald rolling the dice on some 4th downs if Mike Dickson isn’t in there, and I am not sure trusting a replacement punter to pin the Cards in the 20.

Good news is we are getting healthier on defense with Uchenna looks to be a full go. More pass rotation is a good thing.

Also just saw Dickson is punting today, so that is good

Where has this run game been all year?! Love it! JSN is a star in the making.

What was that at the end of half? 2 timeouts and we run the clock down. I get the feeling Mike Macdonald didn’t want to risk a turnover and was happy to go into the half with the score the way it was. Well good first half. Let’s keep this rolling. If we can keep this run game up and with our defense playing well, this could be a great run to the post season.

well played game!!!! Defense is awesome!

Arizona crushed twice.

I said 3 weeks ago that these 3 games would tell us who we really are this year, I like what I see! We're not SB contenders but I do believe we've got it in us to win the division and I am very pleased with the way the defense is responding to Coach MacD's recent tweaks.

Beware the Rams……

c_hawkbob wrote:I said 3 weeks ago that these 3 games would tell us who we really are this year, I like what I see! We're not SB contenders but I do believe we've got it in us to win the division and I am very pleased with the way the defense is responding to Coach MacD's recent tweaks.

It's like the offense is slowly catching up with the defense now. The offense let off the gas in the 2nd half, but I will take it and it was mistake free football and that is all we need from Geno and Co. The EJ4 trade is looking every bit like a golden move by JS, as he is stepping as the "field general" we need. We got a great test coming next week withe Packers coming over to the Seahawks for Sunday night football, it will be must see football!

curmudgeon wrote:Beware the Rams……

We will have to worry about the rams when we play them. The rams are certainly a threat to dethrone us, and they have 3 division games left on their schedule including us at the end of the season. So it will be time before we need to worry about them. Rams got us in a game where we shot ourselves in the foots multiple times, I think our team today would be able to beat the rams on either field.

If we can get the O-line built and develop a QB while maintaining the defense, we can compete for the Super Bowl again.

Hopefully you won some money Riverdog.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Hopefully you won some money Riverdog.

Yep, I sure did! But I lost it by taking under 43 points on the Chargers-Chiefs game a few hours later. That's how it goes, win some, lose some.

River Dog wrote:Yep, I sure did! But I lost it by taking under 43 points on the Chargers-Chiefs game a few hours later. That's how it goes, win some, lose some.

They did score under 43 points. 19-17 right? So did you pick the wrong team to win?

River Dog wrote:Yep, I sure did! But I lost it by taking under 43 points on the Chargers-Chiefs game a few hours later. That's how it goes, win some, lose some.

Aseahawkfan wrote:They did score under 43 points. 19-17 right? So did you pick the wrong team to win?

I didn't bet on either team to win. What I bet on was that the combined score would equal or exceed 43 points. The final score was 19-17, or a total of 36 points, so I lost the bet. It was an odd betting line as most of the time, they'll assign a half point so as to avoid ties. But in this case, had either team had scored a TD and icked the extra point, I would have gotten my money back.

The damn Chiefs are getting so lucky, banking a chip shot FG off the upright to win a game. They've won several games via unusual last minute plays. If the Bills don't do anything else the rest of the season, they did a huge favor in beating the Chiefs and prevent them from attaining a perfect season and being mentioned in the same breath with the '72 Dolphins. They aren't that good, should realistically be something like 9-4.