Glancing at the Falcons
Just how meaningless is this game? Well, the Seahawks backups are already practicing with the first team. And if you're Patrick Kerney, you're going against your former team to try and cement the '07 most-sacks title. And, as we all know, the 'Hawks want to keep the momentum rolling and their starters clicking. Here are a few links to the coverage of the Seahawks v. Falcons matchup:
The Atlanta Constitution has a column today about ex-Falcon Patrick Kerney, and how Kerney is sympathetic to Atlanta's current woes. The poll on the page? Would the Falcons have had a better season if they had Kerney on their roster (one may also add, what if they'd kept Mora as the coach?).
The Falcons also made a couple of roster moves. OT Terrance Pennington was placed on IR, DE Kevin Huntley was waved and OT Kurt Quarterman was brought up from the practice squad.
And (not that it matters) oddsmakers are picking the Seahawks to win in Atlanta by three points, with an O/U of 38.
Comments
I like what Peter King at 'Fan Nation' had to say about the game: Talk about a waste of of jet fuel, with an awful infusion of greenhouse gases in the environment. I mean, wouldn't the crowd at the Georgia Dome prefer to see a nice scrimmage between the Falcons and the Sugar Bowl-bound Georgia Bulldogs?
Hysterical.
Posted by: Dean | December 27, 2007 11:09 AM
One could argue that these meaningless games shouldn't even be played.
Posted by: Michael | December 27, 2007 11:41 AM
Yeah, I agree particularly about Sat.'s NE/Giants game. It sounds like the Giants are just going to give the game away by not even starting their starters. Can't say I blame them, but c'mon! How anti-climactic for the end of an amazing season for them. {{sigh}}
Posted by: jason | December 27, 2007 12:08 PM
So, has it been decided who we are playing the first round?
Posted by: jeff | December 27, 2007 2:26 PM
Theyre playing either the vikings, saints or the redskins,im hoping its th redskins because they seem the easiest.
Posted by: Zane Hashmi | December 27, 2007 3:35 PM
thanks, ok, so how do those scenarios play out to determine who we play?
Posted by: jeff | December 27, 2007 3:46 PM
Not a meaningless game:
1. Hackett needs to shake the rust off - again, 2. The O-line needs to continue the strong coverage so 3. Alexander can continue to RUN, 4. Hass needs to keep this shotgun offense going 5. D needs to whale on some more people, 6. Kerney needs more sacks and 6. MOMENTUM.
jeff - we're the #3 seed so we play the #6 seed in round 1; redskins and vikings are both 8-7 as of now so we play either whichever team wins or if they both win we play the skins, hope that helps.
Posted by: kcg | December 27, 2007 4:45 PM
How many times have we seen teams rest their starters to come out flat in the playoffs. This is the NFL. You should play to win every game. Momentum shifts quickly in this league. As well as the Hawks have played in the last few weeks, who would not want to keep rolling. They should take a page out of the Pats play as if each game was the last.
Posted by: Mike K. | December 27, 2007 7:41 PM
I don't believe there are any meaningless games. Teams going into the post-season need to work on specific weaknesses and alternate player pairings, not to mention timing of the running/blocking.
Posted by: Mike | December 28, 2007 4:18 PM