It's true that the NFC is viewed as a weaker league right now, but it's not like the Seahawks can reject the schedule the league puts in front of them...you play all the teams on your schedule, rather they are good or bad. Although, people were saying the Hawks would lose to the Redskins and they beat them even without Alexander, then they said the Panthers would not only beat the Hawks but win the Super Bowl...then after the Hawks beat them the old saw that they never played anyone good continued. But what about those teams that were supposed to be better than they were...weren't they "good"? I know people viewed the Panthers as good. Supposedly the Hawks were not supposed to be able to do anything against that defense...same thing was said about the Steelers defense, but the Hawks had the time of possession and moved the ball pretty well...they just didn't get points. I do think they'll keep Alexander.
True you can't reject the schedule, but you can't expect to get more respect than the conference you play in. I'm not sure why anybody said they'd lose to the Skins or Panthers, the Skins sucked horribly against the Bucs and I had them losing badly, once Foster went down the Panthers were one dimensional and the Bears should have beat them. And remember this year the Hawks DIDN'T play anybody, they had a cupcake schedule and thanks to the vaguery of the playoff stuff they got as close to a cupcake playoff schedule as you can get (5 and 6 in your conference, 6 from the other), that is a perfectly legitimate hit on the Hawks.
THe Hawks didn't have that big an advantage on TOP. While I totally respect TOP I think until the difference is 10 minutes it's not that meaningful. All the predictions I heard said the weakness of both defenses was the secondary but the Hawks secondary was a little weaker than the Steelers and that would probably be the difference, and it was. I didn't hear anybody say the Steelers D would shut them down, shut down the run is about the most I heard predicted.