It has been raining, HARD, for the past 12 hours or so, and at least some part of the day for the past four days.  The question is, does this work for or against the Seahawks this afternoon, or is it not a factor at all?

At home, the Indianapolis Colts are an indoor team, used to "perfect" weather when they play there--no sloppy, muddy or snowy fields; minmal danger of slipping and falling from same; no precipitation clouding the vision; and a pretty constant temperature.

Even if it stops raining by game time (and, for some mysterious and miraculous reason, it always seems to--the Hawks haven't had a serious rainy day game here since the home opener in QWest Field in 2002), the Field Turf artificial surface will still be at least somewhat wet and slippery (the temperatures, though, are supposed to be downright tropical at 57 degrees for today's high). The wind is also supposed to be blowing from the south at somewhere between 12 MPH (if you believe the Weather Channel) to  35 MPH (if you believe the local TV meterologist), so let's take an average and say about  23 MPH. 

And, of course, we have to factor in the Hawks' 12th man, AKA the fans. Now that they have sufficient provocation (i.e. home field advantage throughout the NFC playoffs and a team that has been playing like they finally mean it this year), look for the decibel level to rise even more at QWest Field (if such is possible--look at how rattled the Giants got by the noise level). Add to this the fact that the Hawks have a 21-4 home record since the end of 2002 (the only other team with as sterling a record--you guessed it, the three time Super Bowl Champion New England Patriots). All in all, this would seem to add up to somewhat tricky and/or hazardous environmental conditions at game time of 1:00 pm PST.

That said, if you are Indianapolis' Acting Head Coach Caldwell, you probably have a few things swimming around in your head right now (pun intended): you want to respect Coach Dungy's instructions to the team that they are to "play on" and forge ahead without him, just as if he were there; and the fact that Peyton is still a little banged up from last week and so are quite a few of his teammates.

The first factor is pretty much uncontrollable. These men are a family and, though they will try to go out and win one for the coach, it is almost humanly impossible to put such a senseless and tragic death in the family completely out of your mind so that you can focus totally on your job (I know, I've been there and, try as you might, it just doesn't go away). And, while Coach Holmgren has said that it is going to be "awkward" coaching against the Colts today, he is going to do just that.

Which brings the second issue into play. Since they still DO have something to play for, and since they, like everyone else, have thoroughly studied the films of what the Chargers did to the Colts last week, the Hawks are coming into the game playing to win, and playing hard. So, how long does Coach Caldwell leave his "top of the rotation" starters in? If I'm him (though I'm not, obviously), about long enough for them to feel like they have contributed, but then I sit them for safety's sake, though that may be a little hard for some of them to swallow.

It's still going to be a hard fought game, but I think that the advantage is on the Seahawks' side today. I look for them to win in regulation, and by at least a TD.

Saturday, 24th December 2005--Christmas Eve here in Seattle, and everywhere else, too. A day to finish up your last minute shopping if you are a Christmas procrastinator; give your presents one last shake to see if you can guess what they are before you actually open them; and to realize that the new year is just seven days away (OMG--wasn't it just New Year's 2005 yesterday?). It is also the day that the Indianapolis Colts are coming to town for a football game that now means considerably less to them than it did five days ago.

For a good many weeks, it has been all about the Colts and their run at history, and deservedly so.  They are a great football team, who were pursuing something that hasn't been done since I was a young 21 years of age.  But that all changed last Sunday, at the hands of a hungry and playoff desperate San Diego Chargers team. Now that the Colts have lost a game, and have already secured a first week bye and home field advantage for the balance of the AFC playoffs, players will be doing more resting than previously planned for this Saturday's game.

The game DOES mean something to the Seattle Seahawks, though, on several levels. The first being the need for home field advantage for the playoffs, which a win this weekend will earn for them. Another is a need to overcome a widely held perception that this is a team of lightweights, who are only winning because the NFC is the "weak sister" of the two NFL conferences.

Consider this: The vaunted Colts' offense is 4th overall in the NFL at 371 yards per game. Who is first? The Seahawks, at 381.3 yards per game. The Colts are 12th in rushing yards at 117.8 yards per game. The Seahawks? 3rd--at 156.1 yards per game.  Total points scored year to date:  Indianapolis 235 (4th in the NFL), Seattle 407 (2nd in the NFL). MVP candidates?  Peyton Manning again? Well sure, he was just voted the best mannered person in the US by the Junior Cotillions, and his football/quarterbacking skills cannot be denied. But what about Shaun Alexander?  Does he not currently own the NFL lead in total rushing yards? Is he not poised to break Priest Holmes' record for number of touchdowns in a season? Has he not had 5 1000+ plus yard rushing seasons (not to mention two in a row of 1600+)?

Consider this also. When the Seahawks beat the Indianapolis Colts on Saturday (notice that I said when, not if--being ever the eternal optimist), both teams will own exactly the same season to date won/loss records--13 and 2.  Seattle has already earned a first week bye. This week they are playing for home field advantage throughout the NFC playoffs, and the right to say that the road to Detroit runs through Seattle (techically, for the Colts anyway, it already does). With Sunday's win over the Tennessee Titans, the Hawks won their 10th game in a row--a franchise record.

All of that being said, what more do the Seahawks need to do to earn a little respect? I say nothing. What do you say? Call me......

Say what you want about George Steinbrenner (and I often do, though sometimes not in terms fit for mixed company or youthful audiences), he is passionate about winning and fielding a winning baseball team, although he sometimes goes about it in ways that others find questionable and/or amusing (see "$200MM+ payroll" and "a team of aging superstars that 'don't play well with others'," and a decimated/sadly lacking farm system).  He has a stated goal of keeping his fans happy and providing them with a product that they will continue to come out, support, and--most of all--pay to see on a regular and ongoing basis.

On the other hand, Howard Lincoln--CEO of the Seattle Mariners--has publicly said that the organization's goal is to field a "competitive" team, but that the organization also has to consider the bottom line and ROI (return on investment) to the corporate partners, and not "mortgaging the future at the expense of the present".  This has been frequently construed by the local fanbase  (including myself on numerous occasions), and even some of the local media, to mean that being cellar dwellers is not the object, but neither is the World Series. 

When I arrived in Seattle in mid-summer 2001, the city was in the throes of Mariner-mania, for lack of a better term.  Everyone on the team seemed to be having a career year at the same time, the chemistry was sublime, and they were on their way to a record-tying 116 victories in the regular season.   Were it not for that unfortunate Game 6 of the ALCS in New York City, I would not be writing this entry today, because they would have gone to the World Series (might even have won, you never know). As it is, they didn't and they didn't, and it has been downhill ever since--slowly at first, but downright cataclysmically the past two seasons.

One thing that George Steinbrenner KNOWS, that Howard has yet to find out, is that going deep into the post-season and (gasp) even to the World Series generates loads of revenue, and not just for the team, but for the entire local economy. For example, had the World Series chanced to come to town during 2001, my brother-in-law was prepared to pay more than I make in six months to obtain four field level seats to each game of the Series played in Seattle.  And that would have been only the beginning, because he lives in Los Angeles County, so he would have enriched not only the Mariners' bottom line, but also Alaska Airlines, some hotel here in town, and other establishments like restaurants and so on. Multiply this by however many seats were available to non-season ticket holders and other VIP's, and you can imagine the positive effects that it would have had.

Mariners' fans have continued to come out to Safeco Field despite the two back to back 90 loss seasons, but in less numbers than the normal 3 million plus per season. I went to several games during the 2005 season, but not as many as I normally would have, figuring that I could save more than $200.00 per home game by sitting home and watching the team lose (again) on TV for free. And I was far from alone. If you pay attention to local bloggers, sports writers, and "men in the street" (and it is hard NOT to), there is going to be a lot more of that going around in the 2006 season, because--even with King Felix, Yuniesky Betancourt, and some of the other youngsters that are helping to rebuild the team--barring a miracle, we are looking toward at least one more losing season.

Why? Well, it's this way, my friends.  According to Forbes Magazine (yes, Howard, it's that pesky Forbes article, yet again), the team is valued at $415MM (bought for by the current ownership group in 1992 for $125MM), which places them at #5 in the MLB, behind the Dodgers, Mets, Red Sox, and Yankees, all of which are major market teams (there is no consensus on whether Seattle is a small or mid-market team at this point), but ahead of all of the other teams. By my calculations, that is a 332% increase in valuation in a little over 10 years. The Mariners have one of the best TV contracts going in MLB, and they are the only franchise for the states of WA, OR, MT, AK, and HI, not to mention all of western Canada.

Could they afford to spend more money than the announced $92MM payroll and still make a profit? Undoubtedly. Will they? Not likely. Are they in danger of losing fans and, therefore, revenue, to staying at home to watch games on TV or--worse yet--not watching at all in 2006? Definitely.

So, Howard, here is what I am suggesting.I'm willing to chip in $2.00, and I'm sure a lot of other Mariners fans would be, too, to buy you a plane ticket to Tampa to talk to good ol' George about the profitability of winning for a change. (The old adage you have to spend money to make money is a true one more often than not).  Call me.........