11/21/24
January 14, 2006
Seahawks Soar Over Washington: On the 27th consecutive day of rain, the NFL's longest playoff victory drought ended in Seattle. The Seahawks won a postseason game for the first time since 1984, defeating the Washington Unfortunate Nicknames 20-10.
I'm not a fan, but that's an argument for another day. I can't believe that Seattle could go so long between playoff wins without getting a rep for being bad. They've had some good teams in the years they lost the five preceding playoff games.
posted by rcade at 07:57 PM on January 14, 2006
The seahawks deserve this they have had a long dry spell, they played like a superbowl team.
posted by Troy Crites at 08:05 PM on January 14, 2006
I am impressed with the play of Hasselbeck under those weather conditions and w/o Shawn Alexander. Congrats to the Seahawks for winning despite the bad breaks. Well Done!
posted by skydivedad at 08:58 PM on January 14, 2006
Having only followed the Seahawks since the addition of Shawn Alexander (1 of only 3 NFL players ive had the opertunity to meet) I am surprised at how long the drought has been. I can see them makeing it to the superbowl this time around.
posted by Folkways at 09:05 PM on January 14, 2006
this team still has somethin to prove to me. I can't wait til the Chicago Bears get a piece of the HAWKS, and show them what its like not to fly as high...GO BEARS!!!!
posted by biggin77 at 09:46 PM on January 14, 2006
No one deserve to be in and win again as the Chicago Bears! They are not only one of the most storied franchises, but they come from a tough division usually dominated by the Vikings and the SUPER-FARVE led Packers. The times are changing and i think it's going to be Da Bears time for a long while...GO BEARS!!!
posted by biggin77 at 09:51 PM on January 14, 2006
Well all I can say is na na na, na na na goodbye skins WAY TO GO HAWKS!!!!!!!! and as far as the bears are concerned they won't even beat the panthers tommorow, and thats ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT!!!!!! Hasselbeck stepped up when he had to gave me a few scares with some of his crazy plays but he did what he had to. Oh and what about D JACK what a baller. Next week with Shaun back no team has a chance against my SEACHICKENS as us Washingtonias like to call them.
posted by BigDogintheCity at 10:10 PM on January 14, 2006
What's with all of the cheerleading lately? Nobody wants to wade through a bunch of my team rocks, your team sucks yadda yadda in a comment just to see if you have anything intelligent to say about a game. GO JAGS!!!1!
posted by rcade at 10:17 PM on January 14, 2006
The Hawks really played great today; I had to wonder if they were going to be able to keep up sans-Alexander. Hass's cool through losing his RB was really impressive. On a Lighter note, I sat behind Joey Harrington at the Ducks game today... hahahahaha... Detroit Lions... hahahahaha
posted by everett at 10:30 PM on January 14, 2006
they come from a tough division usually dominated by the Vikings and the SUPER-FARVE led Packers. Yes, Favre has dominated the NFC North for 40 years. Except that division has only been around for like two years.
posted by yerfatma at 11:09 PM on January 14, 2006
I guess the Seahawks are able to do it even without the league MVP. Way to show up for work guys. Well done.
posted by skydivemom at 11:09 PM on January 14, 2006
yeah, the bears and seahawks would be a great matchup... TOO BAD THE BEARS WONT GET THAT FAR
posted by pantherphan at 12:11 AM on January 15, 2006
Alexander may have been the NFL's MVP, but how about Hasselbeck bein' the Seahawks' MVP, or at least the MVP of today's game. This guy really kept his cool after Alexander went out and led the 'Hawks to a great victory. Congrats to the team and their long suffering fans. Also about Hass that gets overlooked, but has mentioned a few times, this guy has a history of rarely turning the ball over once they get in the red zone. I think at one point last year, he had 20 RZ TDS and only 1 RZ INT. As for the Bears, I think they'll win tomorrow. They have a great D, and they've already beat CAR, and they've proven that you can win on a consistent basis with a good defense, no matter how badly the offense sucks. They have overcome alot this year: a bad offense, having to start a rookie at QB because of a near season ending injury to their starting QB, and sweeping Brett Favre, who almost always beats da Bears. Just one other thing, Rex Grossman, just like many other Bears, has never been in a playoff game and just 2 years ago the Panthers nearly won the title themselves. They better take advantage of their playoff experience and hope Delhomme doesn't get sacked 8 times again if they wanna win.
posted by headgames at 01:59 AM on January 15, 2006
Attaway boys. I was at work tending bar all day and the patrons were batshit insane.
posted by vito90 at 02:26 AM on January 15, 2006
If the Seahawks play as bad as they did on special teams in the championship game as they did against the Washington {insert politically correct nickname here}, they will not win. They are very lucky that they were playing a that did not have enough offense to really capitalize on anything.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:42 AM on January 15, 2006
Good game played in abysmal conditions. The Hawks showed some intestinal fortitude after the loss of Alexander, as Morris and Mack Strong really stepped up. D. Jackson also had a brilliant game with 143 yds and a TD. The NFC title game should be a good one no matter who wins between Carolina and Chicago. p.s. If the NCAA and others are successful in replacing any Native American references in sports with benign substitutes, they will further push that culture and its rich history from the national consciousness. It may sound absurd to some that a man dressed in war paint and feathers running along the sidelines at a football or basketball game will raise awareness and interest in our nation’s past. But if you look at it as a tribute rather than a slam — and I believe most people do — then yes, it will. And just think about the alternative: When there are no such cultural reminders, that segment of society is in greater danger of being forgotten.
posted by stockman at 08:40 AM on January 15, 2006
stockman: As rcade mentioned above (and below), this isn't the thread for that discussion (and we have had it before; do a search). But by your logic we should make sure we show lots of movies with blackface actors, and lynchings to make sure that we remember the atrocities that black people have suffered. No, I disagree. We don't need bad stereotypings to be reminded of such things. We need positive role models. And faux war chants at sporting events aren't cutting it.
posted by scully at 09:33 AM on January 15, 2006
I only called them the "Unfortunate Nicknames" as a goof on newspapers that won't refer to the mascot, but maybe this isn't an argument for another day. The mascot Redskins, Chief Wahoo and Chief Illiniwek raise about as much cultural awareness of Native Americans as the Lucky Charms leprechaun does for Irish people. The only reason sports fans fight for these mascots is because they are cherished traditions. They weren't created to honor anyone -- the schools and teams were blind to the way they would be look to Native Americans. If Washington ever loses the Redskins trademark because racial pejoratives are not legally protectable marks, they'll stop raising cultural awareness in a heartbeat.
posted by rcade at 09:33 AM on January 15, 2006
The thing is Chief Seattle's Predatory waterfowl beat the pre-Colombian indigenous inhabitants.
posted by kosmicdebris at 10:26 AM on January 15, 2006
Terrapin, i see zero correlation in "black face actors" and "lynchings" to sports mascots and/or nicknames. Perhaps I'm not as insightful or as deep as you in these matters. I'm just a poor honky that likes football.
posted by stockman at 12:47 PM on January 15, 2006
awesome game
posted by defrag3x at 01:43 PM on January 15, 2006
Perhaps I'm not as insightful or as deep as you in these matters. Illegal use of false modesty. 5 yard penalty and loss of down.
posted by rcade at 04:00 PM on January 15, 2006
You gotta love it when one comment starts a whole new discussion in a different direction. But let's face the music shall we? Soon there will be nothing left for teams but insect and animal names, until PETA gets all fired up that is...then we'll have to come up with something else. Remember the Bullits? How about the Generals? Too violent, too militaristic. I wonder if the muscicians union has complained about the Jazz team name.... certainly not the kind of vibes one would associate with milk toast Utah. (Oops, sorry, I've drifted into NBA territory again!) ...Go Sea-Slugs!!
posted by old school at 10:21 AM on January 16, 2006
Soon there will be nothing left for teams but insect and animal names old school, you missed quite a few discussions in which it was pointed out that pretty much all human mascot names fall somewhere on the scale between stupidly laughable and offensive. I remember a story about a high school that was picking a mascot and someone proposed the White Knights. One of the school's female athletes said, "So what are we supposed to be -- the Damsels in Distress?" As for the "jeez what next" wild exaggerations, they kinda undermine your point. Of course no one has complained that the Jazz name is offensive, but people have complained that it's stupid (Utah???). Meanwhile, in the WNBA they often follow a "sister team" name scheme (so Sacramento is the Monarchs, for example). They're also very big on "force of nature" or "natural phenomenon" names that seem to work out well: the LA Sparks, the Seattle Storm, the Detroit Shock, the Connecticut Sun, the New York Liberty, etc. Bottom line: there are plenty of good names out there without choosing offensive ones; you just have to think beyond the idea of, "Gee, I know what, let's get some drunk idiot to dress up in feathers and face paint, that'll be real original!"
posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:34 PM on January 16, 2006
I'm a Washington fan, and I'm proud of how my team ended a rotten season by making the playoffs and losing to the best team in the NFC. I think the Redskins name is offensive and should be changed. I also think the Fighting Irish name and mascot is deeply offensive and those who defend it as "tradition" would probably say the same about blackface and lynching.
posted by Hugh Janus at 11:20 AM on January 17, 2006
the Fighting Irish name and mascot is deeply offensive and those who defend it as "tradition" would probably say the same about blackface and lynching. Well, the two used to go hand-in-hand.
posted by yerfatma at 11:33 AM on January 17, 2006
just an observation rcade, what is your take on the nick. redskins? Ive noticed you find it offensive. Not a PC kinda guy Im at a loss.