Super Bowl 49 discussion thread: Seahawks vs Patriots (Poll added) (2 Viewers)

[JIslander]

Brady's due for a bad game. I can see this going by way of week 4. Except Seattle D is better than Chiefs. Throwing into tight coverage he hasn't had to deal with in awhile...couple of pick sixes -- Lynch and Wilson running wild -- probably see Garoppolo with 6 minutes left in game.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

Seahawks only a slight advantage on defense

Seahawks defense phenomenal at home. Not quite as good away from home without all the noise. Still excellent, but I don't think they are the 85 Bears or 00 Ravens good.

As I said earlier, the Sea D is overrated and they aren't anywhere near as good as the 85 Bears or 00 Ravens. Should be another great SB; NE will move the ball on that D for sure and I'm confident they come out on top.

Green Bay had the best offense in the league by many metrics, including points scored. Having accomplished that they managed one TD and 5 field goals against the Seattle defense when handed starting field position of SEA 19, SEA 23, GB 44, SEA 33, GB 44 in the first half alone. In the second half they only scored 6 points against a Seattle D with two compromised players in the secondary.

I don't know what game you were watching, but the Seattle defense was the only keeping them in the game-against the leagues best offense with the field tilted against them-until Marshawn Lynch could start beasting in the second half.

To further put this into perspective: Russell Wilson (he of the 44.3 passer rating) finished with more passing yards and combined TD's than Aaron Rodgers-the best QB in the game-and he did it playing drunk.

Or, put another way

1. Yes, GB with a healthy NFL MVP caliber type year from A. Rodgers did manage to nudge ahead of NE for most points scored, in the last week of the season, when NE throttled down for a meaningless game and GB went full throttle in a must win game.

2. Rodgers wasn't healthy, if he were Sea would have had no chance to win that game (not the way the Sea O played that day).

3. I promise you NE isn't going to settle for FGs from the GL; they will either punch it in or give u the ball back going for the TD.

4. GB played too passively on O in the 2nd half and should have been more aggressive; I don't see NE making that mistake.

5. I watched the same game you did (most of it anyway) and yes Sea's def kept them in the game against one of the best offense's in the league whos QB was unfortunately playing on 1 leg and had a HC and team who took their foot off the pedal and made unforced monumental mistake after another to gift the seahawks the win. 6. When Sea needed to stop Rodgers at the end of the game he went through them like a hot knife through butter.

7. Yes, your QB playing at home had a horrific day playing against another QB who was playing on 1 leg and he was lucky enough that his team recovered an onside kick which enabled them to steal the game.

It's all good, can't wait for this game to get here

You're already in excuse making/conjecture mode. Best of luck, sounds like you think you'll need it.

I don't know what you mean by my QB. Do you have a lease (WAOTB) on Brady?

ETA: Belichick is singing the Seattle QB's praises

Don't know what you mean by excuse making? Just called it like i saw it, albeit with a little bit of good natured spice. I assume the way you were talking about Wilson beating Rodgers while drunk (whatever that means, ftr, not sure what waotb means either) he was your guy. I am already on record as a Wilson fan; just pointed out he had a horrendous game. I wish he hadn't since I doubt he will play anything like that in the SB.

 

[Neofight]

Seahawks only a slight advantage on defense

Seahawks defense phenomenal at home. Not quite as good away from home without all the noise. Still excellent, but I don't think they are the 85 Bears or 00 Ravens good.

As I said earlier, the Sea D is overrated and they aren't anywhere near as good as the 85 Bears or 00 Ravens. Should be another great SB; NE will move the ball on that D for sure and I'm confident they come out on top.

Green Bay had the best offense in the league by many metrics, including points scored. Having accomplished that they managed one TD and 5 field goals against the Seattle defense when handed starting field position of SEA 19, SEA 23, GB 44, SEA 33, GB 44 in the first half alone. In the second half they only scored 6 points against a Seattle D with two compromised players in the secondary.

I don't know what game you were watching, but the Seattle defense was the only keeping them in the game-against the leagues best offense with the field tilted against them-until Marshawn Lynch could start beasting in the second half.

To further put this into perspective: Russell Wilson (he of the 44.3 passer rating) finished with more passing yards and combined TD's than Aaron Rodgers-the best QB in the game-and he did it playing drunk.

Or, put another way

1. Yes, GB with a healthy NFL MVP caliber type year from A. Rodgers did manage to nudge ahead of NE for most points scored, in the last week of the season, when NE throttled down for a meaningless game and GB went full throttle in a must win game.

2. Rodgers wasn't healthy, if he were Sea would have had no chance to win that game (not the way the Sea O played that day).

3. I promise you NE isn't going to settle for FGs from the GL; they will either punch it in or give u the ball back going for the TD.

4. GB played too passively on O in the 2nd half and should have been more aggressive; I don't see NE making that mistake.

5. I watched the same game you did (most of it anyway) and yes Sea's def kept them in the game against one of the best offense's in the league whos QB was unfortunately playing on 1 leg and had a HC and team who took their foot off the pedal and made unforced monumental mistake after another to gift the seahawks the win. 6. When Sea needed to stop Rodgers at the end of the game he went through them like a hot knife through butter.

7. Yes, your QB playing at home had a horrific day playing against another QB who was playing on 1 leg and he was lucky enough that his team recovered an onside kick which enabled them to steal the game.

It's all good, can't wait for this game to get here

You're already in excuse making/conjecture mode. Best of luck, sounds like you think you'll need it.

I don't know what you mean by my QB. Do you have a lease (WAOTB) on Brady?

ETA: Belichick is singing the Seattle QB's praises

Don't know what you mean by excuse making? Just called it like i saw it, albeit with a little bit of good natured spice. I assume the way you were talking about Wilson beating Rodgers while drunk (whatever that means, ftr, not sure what waotb means either) he was your guy. I am already on record as a Wilson fan; just pointed out he had a horrendous game. I wish he hadn't since I doubt he will play anything like that in the SB.

Just having fun with a Fletch reference. Wilson was, IMO, concussed after the Matthews hit. He pretty well admitted as much in the tongue-in-cheek post-game interview. Be interesting what the league says and what we hear coming from Seahawks practice this week...

As for me, I'm a Dallas fan since birth, but I'd take Wilson in one game over Romo, especially if it was the playoffs.

 

[biju]

If the Patriots win...

If you previously didn't think Brady was the best QB ever would this change your mind? Ehhhh. No way to prove either way. There are a couple guys in the discussion.

How about Belichick? Valid argument to be made, but again, couple guys in the discussion.

Do Brady or Belichick call it quits? Not a chance... esp with Brady's recent deal restructure.

If the Seahawks win...

If it is a defensive "shutout" would this make you think they are the greatest defense ever? Hell no.

If it is an offensive win, does this erase any thoughts of Wilson being a game manager? No.

I was kind of hoping to generate a little more discussion. So if the Seahawks shut down Manning and Brady in back-to-back Super Bowls they receive a "hell no" on greatest defense ever and there's no discussion around that? How about top 3?

Am I going to be disappointed for two weeks in Patriots fans who are going to just use their gut and don't want to talk football?

Anyway, I'm going to keep on pushing for a real dialog. Here are the current problems with the Seahawks the Patriots may look to exploit...

- Much like in week 2 vs. San Diego, the Packers created early turnovers and kept the Seattle defense on the field, limiting their ability to rest. Once the ball started rolling down the defense being on the field too much it led to a Packer TD. Although I think it's difficult to plan for turnovers, but if NE can get some quick outs and chain together some long drives this is one way to limit the damage Seattle can do on defense.

- Obviously Sherman and Thomas were severely injured during the GB game (although I've heard a weird rumor Sherman may have been playing possum) and McCarthy and Rodgers didn't challenge him to see how hurt he was. I assume Belichick will test that early, but I also see a real play for sending someone like Blount off tackle and scheme it so Sherman needs to make the tackle. That could cause problems if he isn't 100%, and even if he is that's a big back against someone not accustomed to tackling as much.

- Bevell very badly wants to spread the field wide in an attempt to get less defenders in the box. But with the current CBs the Patriots have I don't see why they wouldn't put them on an island and load up the box. Of course, the problem is a perfectly blocked play would lead to a big gain, but stopping the run will get you a first series 3 and out most of the time against Seattle. In a game with limited time, taking the first series away is a great 1st goal.

- Seattle knows the weakness of Brandon Browner (actually, probably everyone does). You can simply take that away by giving him help over top (not sure if you do this anyway) so he doesn't become susceptible to the double move and feel like he needs to hold.

- A really bad idea is to spy Russell Wilson. In almost all cases a team does this it doesn't work. Instead just keep containment on him and force him to throw from the pocket. Don't worry about trying to sack him, just limit the damage he can do on the ground and by scrambling outside the pocket giving his WRs time to get open. The Seattle O-line is probably bottom 10 if forced to play straight up pass protection.

On the other hand...

- If Seattle establishes a run game and Marshawn gets going, look out. I'm sure he's not happy with that offensive output in last year's SB and Seattle has been purposely giving him fewer carries this year. I think Lynch is more rested than he's ever been and this is heading into the last game of the year, and if you believe the reports, perhaps the last game of his career.

- If the Patriots fail to contain Wilson, he will rack up rush yardage.

- If the Patriots don't remain patient the Seahawks have the ability to turn small mistakes into big advantages. I would have said this before last weekend, but I think now it is even more apparent. This is a team that truly does not give up (unlike what you hear about teams fighting to the end when you know they've given up) and if you don't keep going you will find yourself in trouble. The Seahawks are patient and usually stick to plan. And that plan is often the previous two points.

 

[proninja]

Interesting Stat

Over the course of the season, the #Patriots defense has played 99 more snaps than the #Seahawks defense. ~1.5 more games than Seattle.

One benefit to playing a slower tempo is that your team has a lot fewer miles on it once you get to this point in time in the season. One downside is that message board jockeys thinks your offense is trash based on yards/points. I'll take that trade.

 

[Road Warriors]

If the Patriots win...

If you previously didn't think Brady was the best QB ever would this change your mind? Ehhhh. No way to prove either way. There are a couple guys in the discussion.

How about Belichick? Valid argument to be made, but again, couple guys in the discussion.

Do Brady or Belichick call it quits? Not a chance... esp with Brady's recent deal restructure.

If the Seahawks win...

If it is a defensive "shutout" would this make you think they are the greatest defense ever? Hell no.

If it is an offensive win, does this erase any thoughts of Wilson being a game manager? No.

I was kind of hoping to generate a little more discussion. So if the Seahawks shut down Manning and Brady in back-to-back Super Bowls they receive a "hell no" on greatest defense ever and there's no discussion around that? How about top 3?

Am I going to be disappointed for two weeks in Patriots fans who are going to just use their gut and don't want to talk football?

Anyway, I'm going to keep on pushing for a real dialog. Here are the current problems with the Seahawks the Patriots may look to exploit...

- Much like in week 2 vs. San Diego, the Packers created early turnovers and kept the Seattle defense on the field, limiting their ability to rest. Once the ball started rolling down the defense being on the field too much it led to a Packer TD. Although I think it's difficult to plan for turnovers, but if NE can get some quick outs and chain together some long drives this is one way to limit the damage Seattle can do on defense.

- Obviously Sherman and Thomas were severely injured during the GB game (although I've heard a weird rumor Sherman may have been playing possum) and McCarthy and Rodgers didn't challenge him to see how hurt he was. I assume Belichick will test that early, but I also see a real play for sending someone like Blount off tackle and scheme it so Sherman needs to make the tackle. That could cause problems if he isn't 100%, and even if he is that's a big back against someone not accustomed to tackling as much.

- Bevell very badly wants to spread the field wide in an attempt to get less defenders in the box. But with the current CBs the Patriots have I don't see why they wouldn't put them on an island and load up the box. Of course, the problem is a perfectly blocked play would lead to a big gain, but stopping the run will get you a first series 3 and out most of the time against Seattle. In a game with limited time, taking the first series away is a great 1st goal.

- Seattle knows the weakness of Brandon Browner (actually, probably everyone does). You can simply take that away by giving him help over top (not sure if you do this anyway) so he doesn't become susceptible to the double move and feel like he needs to hold.

- A really bad idea is to spy Russell Wilson. In almost all cases a team does this it doesn't work. Instead just keep containment on him and force him to throw from the pocket. Don't worry about trying to sack him, just limit the damage he can do on the ground and by scrambling outside the pocket giving his WRs time to get open. The Seattle O-line is probably bottom 10 if forced to play straight up pass protection.

On the other hand...

- If Seattle establishes a run game and Marshawn gets going, look out. I'm sure he's not happy with that offensive output in last year's SB and Seattle has been purposely giving him fewer carries this year. I think Lynch is more rested than he's ever been and this is heading into the last game of the year, and if you believe the reports, perhaps the last game of his career.

- If the Patriots fail to contain Wilson, he will rack up rush yardage.

- If the Patriots don't remain patient the Seahawks have the ability to turn small mistakes into big advantages. I would have said this before last weekend, but I think now it is even more apparent. This is a team that truly does not give up (unlike what you hear about teams fighting to the end when you know they've given up) and if you don't keep going you will find yourself in trouble. The Seahawks are patient and usually stick to plan. And that plan is often the previous two points.

On Browner, for much of the season they've had Browner on a teams #1 /Big receiver with safety help, leaving Revis in man coverage. Against Indy, I think Browner spent more time on TE, with Arrington / Ryan in coverage on Hilton with safety help and Revis on Moncrief. They don't tend to leave Browner on an island, so I'm not that concerned with his exploitable weakness to the double move. I'm more concerned about his 2-3 penalties a game that keep drives going for the opposition.

I fully agree on keeping Wilson in the pocket. If they can keep contain and collapse the pocket, the back end should be able to hold up well. If he escapes, big plays always seem to follow, both for SEA and against NE. I do not feel comfortable playing a "extend the play" QB.

I don't see much of SEA. I checked the stats, and they're middle of the pack in sacks. Overall, how do you rate their Def. front getting to the QB? Brady's not mobile, but he is effective moving in the pocket. If SEA can get quick pressure, it will be a long day for NE ( see the 2007/2011 SB ). However, if they don't get quick pressure, and Brady has a clean pocket, he's shown he can move the ball in small chunks very effectively against top coverage. While the set of Lafell/Edelman/Amendola don't scare anyone, they are all capable of making plays in the offense, along with Gronk. This is not an offense you can take one weapon away and shut down. Indy held Gronk to 3/28/1.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Interesting Stat

Over the course of the season, the #Patriots defense has played 99 more snaps than the #Seahawks defense. ~1.5 more games than Seattle.

One benefit to playing a slower tempo is that your team has a lot fewer miles on it once you get to this point in time in the season. One downside is that message board jockeys thinks your offense is trash based on yards/points. I'll take that trade.

 

[proninja]

Interesting Stat

Over the course of the season, the #Patriots defense has played 99 more snaps than the #Seahawks defense. ~1.5 more games than Seattle.

One benefit to playing a slower tempo is that your team has a lot fewer miles on it once you get to this point in time in the season. One downside is that message board jockeys thinks your offense is trash based on yards/points. I'll take that trade.

Players who have played less may not be as worn down

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Interesting Stat

Over the course of the season, the #Patriots defense has played 99 more snaps than the #Seahawks defense. ~1.5 more games than Seattle.

One benefit to playing a slower tempo is that your team has a lot fewer miles on it once you get to this point in time in the season. One downside is that message board jockeys thinks your offense is trash based on yards/points. I'll take that trade.

Players who have played less may not be as worn down

wut

 

[Freelove]

Interesting Stat

Over the course of the season, the #Patriots defense has played 99 more snaps than the #Seahawks defense. ~1.5 more games than Seattle.

One benefit to playing a slower tempo is that your team has a lot fewer miles on it once you get to this point in time in the season. One downside is that message board jockeys thinks your offense is trash based on yards/points. I'll take that trade.

Players who have played less may not be as worn down

Alas, the top two Pats defenders in terms of worn-down snapcount over the course of the year are Revis and McCourty. Both are right around 1000 snaps for the regular season, plus about 120 in the playoffs.

The top two Hawks in terms of snapcount were Sherman and Thomas, at around 950, plus about 130 in the playoffs.

How is staying fresh working out in that analysis?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I'm already getting disillusioned by seattle fans -- where's scientist?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Seahawks Fan Giving Game-Winning Football Back, Then Serving Jail Time

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2015/01/seahawks-fan-giving-game-winning-football-back-then-serving-jail-time/

 

[biju]

I don't see much of SEA. I checked the stats, and they're middle of the pack in sacks. Overall, how do you rate their Def. front getting to the QB? Brady's not mobile, but he is effective moving in the pocket. If SEA can get quick pressure, it will be a long day for NE ( see the 2007/2011 SB ). However, if they don't get quick pressure, and Brady has a clean pocket, he's shown he can move the ball in small chunks very effectively against top coverage. While the set of Lafell/Edelman/Amendola don't scare anyone, they are all capable of making plays in the offense, along with Gronk. This is not an offense you can take one weapon away and shut down. Indy held Gronk to 3/28/1.

Great observation, and I think the easiest place to start is Seattle coverage is usually cover-3, but also will play a cover-1. Instead of trying to be succinct here, I'll point you to Danny Kelly's Xs and Os here:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/1/29/5355360/super-bowl-xlviii-seahawks-defense-richard-sherman-earl-thomas-covering-peyton-manning

Not that we aren't trying to sack the QB, but in a lot of cases there is a distinct design to get QB pressures and hurries and also dropping 7 or 8 back in coverage.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

If the Patriots win...

If you previously didn't think Brady was the best QB ever would this change your mind? Ehhhh. No way to prove either way. There are a couple guys in the discussion.

How about Belichick? Valid argument to be made, but again, couple guys in the discussion.

Do Brady or Belichick call it quits? Not a chance... esp with Brady's recent deal restructure.

If the Seahawks win...

If it is a defensive "shutout" would this make you think they are the greatest defense ever? Hell no.

If it is an offensive win, does this erase any thoughts of Wilson being a game manager? No.

I was kind of hoping to generate a little more discussion. So if the Seahawks shut down Manning and Brady in back-to-back Super Bowls they receive a "hell no" on greatest defense ever and there's no discussion around that? How about top 3?

Am I going to be disappointed for two weeks in Patriots fans who are going to just use their gut and don't want to talk football?

Anyway, I'm going to keep on pushing for a real dialog. Here are the current problems with the Seahawks the Patriots may look to exploit...

- Much like in week 2 vs. San Diego, the Packers created early turnovers and kept the Seattle defense on the field, limiting their ability to rest. Once the ball started rolling down the defense being on the field too much it led to a Packer TD. Although I think it's difficult to plan for turnovers, but if NE can get some quick outs and chain together some long drives this is one way to limit the damage Seattle can do on defense.

- Obviously Sherman and Thomas were severely injured during the GB game (although I've heard a weird rumor Sherman may have been playing possum) and McCarthy and Rodgers didn't challenge him to see how hurt he was. I assume Belichick will test that early, but I also see a real play for sending someone like Blount off tackle and scheme it so Sherman needs to make the tackle. That could cause problems if he isn't 100%, and even if he is that's a big back against someone not accustomed to tackling as much.

- Bevell very badly wants to spread the field wide in an attempt to get less defenders in the box. But with the current CBs the Patriots have I don't see why they wouldn't put them on an island and load up the box. Of course, the problem is a perfectly blocked play would lead to a big gain, but stopping the run will get you a first series 3 and out most of the time against Seattle. In a game with limited time, taking the first series away is a great 1st goal.

- Seattle knows the weakness of Brandon Browner (actually, probably everyone does). You can simply take that away by giving him help over top (not sure if you do this anyway) so he doesn't become susceptible to the double move and feel like he needs to hold.

- A really bad idea is to spy Russell Wilson. In almost all cases a team does this it doesn't work. Instead just keep containment on him and force him to throw from the pocket. Don't worry about trying to sack him, just limit the damage he can do on the ground and by scrambling outside the pocket giving his WRs time to get open. The Seattle O-line is probably bottom 10 if forced to play straight up pass protection.

On the other hand...

- If Seattle establishes a run game and Marshawn gets going, look out. I'm sure he's not happy with that offensive output in last year's SB and Seattle has been purposely giving him fewer carries this year. I think Lynch is more rested than he's ever been and this is heading into the last game of the year, and if you believe the reports, perhaps the last game of his career.

- If the Patriots fail to contain Wilson, he will rack up rush yardage.

- If the Patriots don't remain patient the Seahawks have the ability to turn small mistakes into big advantages. I would have said this before last weekend, but I think now it is even more apparent. This is a team that truly does not give up (unlike what you hear about teams fighting to the end when you know they've given up) and if you don't keep going you will find yourself in trouble. The Seahawks are patient and usually stick to plan. And that plan is often the previous two points.

[SIZE=9pt]If Pats Win: N/A, N/A and hell no BB & Brady will play at least a couple more years [/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]If Sea wins with a shutout (aint happening) I still wouldn’t call them the best, but I would certainly take back my overrated comments and likely stop throwing up in my mouth whenever I hear them compared with Bears and Ravens teams. I don’t think Wilson is just a game mgr so that one is N/A[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]In response to some of your other comments & Q’s.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]NE will certainly look to chain together long drives, often substituting short passing plays for run plays. its what they do . They certainly will try to run with Blount and I’m not sure how much success they will have if they can’t first move the ball via the air.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]NE will load the box and take their chances with their DBs; they have no chance if they can’t slow down Lynch. I expect them to load the box and be very disciplined with their pass rush in order to try and keep Wilson in the pocket. They have done this with every scrambling QB to date with mixed results and I don’t expect them to change now. They will absolutely try and make Wilson beat them from the pocket.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]I don’t see browner being a huge factor, he will take penalties and can’t be relied on in coverage, but NE knows this and often gives him help.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]I don’t think they will spy Wilson, they will look to contain mostly and make him beat them with his arm from the pocket, with the occasional blitz up the middle.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]As you say, if Lynch gets going it’s probably good night Irene. In fact we may well know early what kind of night it will be for NE. In both SB losses the Giants came out and ran the ball and controlled the clock right off the bat. If NE can’t handle Lynch, Wilson & the option read it will be near impossible for them to win.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium] Seattle’s resilience was on full display in the nfcc, but if there is one word I have used more than any other to describe this patriots edition it is resilience. They have shown tremendous resilience all year, most recently in the divisional round vs the ravens.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Question for you:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Sea doesn’t generate a lot of sacks, how do you think they will play Brady? Do they just rush 4 and try to play coverage? Edit to add that I asked this before the above link was posted. Seems like Sea doesn't like to blitz and tends to play back, give up the short stuff and try to make teams string long drives together; which is pretty much exactly what NE likes to do anyway. [/SIZE]

 

[Run It Up]

Everyone go home, superbowls canceled.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Everyone go home, superbowls canceled.

Ok, I'm home. Now what?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

 

[Road Warriors]

I don't see much of SEA. I checked the stats, and they're middle of the pack in sacks. Overall, how do you rate their Def. front getting to the QB? Brady's not mobile, but he is effective moving in the pocket. If SEA can get quick pressure, it will be a long day for NE ( see the 2007/2011 SB ). However, if they don't get quick pressure, and Brady has a clean pocket, he's shown he can move the ball in small chunks very effectively against top coverage. While the set of Lafell/Edelman/Amendola don't scare anyone, they are all capable of making plays in the offense, along with Gronk. This is not an offense you can take one weapon away and shut down. Indy held Gronk to 3/28/1.

Great observation, and I think the easiest place to start is Seattle coverage is usually cover-3, but also will play a cover-1. Instead of trying to be succinct here, I'll point you to Danny Kelly's Xs and Os here:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/1/29/5355360/super-bowl-xlviii-seahawks-defense-richard-sherman-earl-thomas-covering-peyton-manning

Not that we aren't trying to sack the QB, but in a lot of cases there is a distinct design to get QB pressures and hurries and also dropping 7 or 8 back in coverage.

Great link. Very informative.

I thought this was a good summary of the defensive mindset.

The only difference will be press-man bump and run vs. press-man bail. Really, that's what the [seahawks] want to do - they want to bail, they want to give you flat routes all day, and just say hey, we dare you to have the patience to just dink and dunk it down the field."

If there is a team that has the patience to dink & dunk down the field, it would be the Patriots. Short crossing stuff is their bread & butter. If SEA stays true to this, I have little doubt the Patriots will be able to move the ball. The big key will be scoring TDs instead of kicking FG. Red Zone defense will be huge in this game.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

pats just ran down the field on them for 2 early td like they were playing the colts

15 plays on that last possession and I don't think a ball hit the ground on either drive

 

[Neofight]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

pats just ran down the field on them for 2 early td like they were playing the colts

15 plays on that last possession and I don't think a ball hit the ground on either drive

Weird to see Hernandez in there. They should lose draft picks for him as well.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

pats just ran down the field on them for 2 early td like they were playing the colts

15 plays on that last possession and I don't think a ball hit the ground on either drive

Weird to see Hernandez in there. They should lose draft picks for him as well.

yeah, it is weird -- and creepy

pats destroying lynch

 

[Neofight]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

pats just ran down the field on them for 2 early td like they were playing the colts

15 plays on that last possession and I don't think a ball hit the ground on either drive

Weird to see Hernandez in there. They should lose draft picks for him as well.

yeah, it is weird -- and creepy

pats destroying lynch

Yep, the suspense is terrible...

 

[Neofight]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

pats just ran down the field on them for 2 early td like they were playing the colts

15 plays on that last possession and I don't think a ball hit the ground on either drive

Weird to see Hernandez in there. They should lose draft picks for him as well.

yeah, it is weird -- and creepy

pats destroying lynch

Yep, the suspense is terrible...

Gronk taking a beating. Think he makes it through the Superb Owl?

 

[biju]

I don't see much of SEA. I checked the stats, and they're middle of the pack in sacks. Overall, how do you rate their Def. front getting to the QB? Brady's not mobile, but he is effective moving in the pocket. If SEA can get quick pressure, it will be a long day for NE ( see the 2007/2011 SB ). However, if they don't get quick pressure, and Brady has a clean pocket, he's shown he can move the ball in small chunks very effectively against top coverage. While the set of Lafell/Edelman/Amendola don't scare anyone, they are all capable of making plays in the offense, along with Gronk. This is not an offense you can take one weapon away and shut down. Indy held Gronk to 3/28/1.

Great observation, and I think the easiest place to start is Seattle coverage is usually cover-3, but also will play a cover-1. Instead of trying to be succinct here, I'll point you to Danny Kelly's Xs and Os here:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/1/29/5355360/super-bowl-xlviii-seahawks-defense-richard-sherman-earl-thomas-covering-peyton-manning

Not that we aren't trying to sack the QB, but in a lot of cases there is a distinct design to get QB pressures and hurries and also dropping 7 or 8 back in coverage.

Great link. Very informative.

I thought this was a good summary of the defensive mindset.

The only difference will be press-man bump and run vs. press-man bail. Really, that's what the [seahawks] want to do - they want to bail, they want to give you flat routes all day, and just say hey, we dare you to have the patience to just dink and dunk it down the field."

If there is a team that has the patience to dink & dunk down the field, it would be the Patriots. Short crossing stuff is their bread & butter. If SEA stays true to this, I have little doubt the Patriots will be able to move the ball. The big key will be scoring TDs instead of kicking FG. Red Zone defense will be huge in this game.

I'm 100% positive they will continue. The big trick for them is to contest every catch and punish the WR if the ball is caught. I don't doubt there will be times when NE moves the ball--actually, I kind of expect it early on until they see how they plan to attack.

They are also pretty old school in trying a bunch of different stuff early on offensively to see how the Patriots plan to defend. Bevell, for all of the #####ing and moaning Seattle fans do, is highly misunderstood. The guy is a fantastic strategist--he simply needs time to execute and the hope is the game is still within reason and we don't have terrible breaks (much like the Packers game with all of the early turnovers).

You're going to hear me say this a lot, but I'm really excited for this game. It's about as even as I can think and hope bravado doesn't get the best of everyone in the lead-up.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

funny how much a roster turns over in 2 years in the nfl, and amazing how the pats keep winning with all these different rosters

 

[Neofight]

Is it? I don't find it so.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

that was just depressing

 

[Jercules]

Can NE run the ball on Seattle? The Seahawks are the lightest team in the league, and the Patriots have no issue with ramming Blount down their throats if it's the path to glory.

Can the Patriots stop Seattle's offense? They generally fare pretty good against the run--then again that effort against Baltimore was awful.

Can they stop Wilson? Green Bay just did, and that defense is nothing special. NE have certainly mastered the art of the 'controlled rush', where they never actually get any sacks but they do keep the QB contained. If Seattle can't get playaction going, and are forced to rely on precision passing from Wilson, they'll be in rough shape.

I dunno, seems to be a minority opinion on here but I like the Patriots' chances.

How did GB "just stop" Wilson? He killed them in just a few minutes.

ETA: if anything came out of this game, Rodgers is totally overrated, can't overcome adversity like Wilson had, and this was a QB game. I think Wilson can stand up to Brady and play all 4 quarters and then some. Wilson was like Joe Montana today. His team never stopped playing for him, unlike GB did under Rodgers.

He had over 200 yards on 14 completions.

Wilson had below 50% completion rating, a 0 QB rating at halftime, a mere 209 yards passing (80 of which came in OT), 4 interceptions, and a mere 25 yards rushing (which is actually what I meant when I said GB stopped him, as he never kills anybody with his passing anyhow).

He was like Joe Montana? I guess if you're playing the "moxie" card, sure, but those numbers I just listed are seriously bad for a QB at home in the NFCCG. Joe Montana might have had one or two games in his whole career that were that ugly.

If GB doesn't: A) stop playing a little too soon (note Burnett giving himself up after that 4th int); and B) see a million things go wrong in succession, they go through to the SB and Seattle is left nervous as hell about the Brinks truck of money they'll have to pay to keep Wilson around.

In fact, just to make things interesting, I'll even go this far: Wilson is a glorified option QB, like RGIII or Kaepernick with better coaching.

NE is not a defensive juggernaut, but they do do certain things well. They know how to hem mobile QBs in the pocket (e.g. Luck), and they're disciplined against the read option. They also have the talent in the secondary to man up on Seattle and load the box against Lynch. if they can stop Lynch, thereby also nullifying playaction, the Seahawks are going to struggle big time offensively.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

He was like Joe Montana? I guess if you're playing the "moxie" card, sure, but those numbers I just listed are seriously bad for a QB at home in the NFCCG. Joe Montana might have had one or two games in his whole career that were that ugly.

over a 3 year stretch in the prime of my career I was 0-3 in the playoffs, 46/88 52% for 503 total yds with 0 td and 4 picks

WHO AM I?

sry if I'm peeing on anybody's childhood icons

 

[devouredbychaos]

Brady's due for a bad game. I can see this going by way of week 4. Except Seattle D is better than Chiefs. Throwing into tight coverage he hasn't had to deal with in awhile...couple of pick sixes -- Lynch and Wilson running wild -- probably see Garoppolo with 6 minutes left in game.

Probably will see Goatroppolo with 6 min left because the Pats will be up big Seattle has a weak front, their strength is in their secondary and LBs. Pats have played some great secondaries this year and had success. I don't see how Seattle puts up many points on the Pats secondary. The Seahawks just don't have the weapons.

 

[ShamrockPride]

I think it could be a good game, but Seattle is likely going to struggle to score points. I think New England wins unless Lynch runs wild (& I don't believe that will happen).

Well that's the thing about having a great defense. You don't need to score a lot of points.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

 

[MG345]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

Never said he was faking it. It looked like his elbow got hurt.

I'm suggesting that he played it up. If he wasn't, he's a moron for putting his team in a bad spot. But, then again, he believes a one-armed Richard is better than any backup they have...pretty sure about that.

 

[MG345]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

Never said he was faking it. It looked like his elbow got hurt.

I'm suggesting that he played it up. If he wasn't, he's a moron for putting his team in a bad spot. But, then again, he believes a one-armed Richard is better than any backup they have...pretty sure about that.

What do you think playing possum means?

Either way, he made the saving tackle for the first down which forced GB to punt. You can play what if all you want, but he didn't put them in a bad spot. I wouldn't want to see Simon covering anybody when the game counted.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

if he had some kind of ulnar nerve bruising his arm would be fairly useless

that's the funny 'bone'

 

[Freelove]

He was like Joe Montana? I guess if you're playing the "moxie" card, sure, but those numbers I just listed are seriously bad for a QB at home in the NFCCG. Joe Montana might have had one or two games in his whole career that were that ugly.

over a 3 year stretch in the prime of my career I was 0-3 in the playoffs, 46/88 52% for 503 total yds with 0 td and 4 picks

WHO AM I?

sry if I'm peeing on anybody's childhood icons

Are you Joe Montana, during the years he was recovering from a back injury so severe experts wondered if he'd ever have full mobility or play pro football again?Or are you just the same idiot who keeps trotting this sadly ignorant material out because you feel insecure and want desperately to believe 30 seconds on pro-football-reference can make up for being clueless about the game and its history?

Sry if I'm peeing on anyone's fragile ego.

 

[Freelove]

The ITS of Pats fans, except dimmer.

 

[Freelove]

Incidentally, that 3 year stretch sae Montana named Comeback PoTY for not only gutting it out and changing his game to adapt to his diminished abilities, but for actually leading his team to the playoffs.

Montana's finest statistical performances? Hardly. But those years are part of why Montana is a legend, not a reason he shouldn't be considered one.

 

[Neofight]

Beast

 

[Bad_Mo]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

Never said he was faking it. It looked like his elbow got hurt.

I'm suggesting that he played it up. If he wasn't, he's a moron for putting his team in a bad spot. But, then again, he believes a one-armed Richard is better than any backup they have...pretty sure about that.

What do you think playing possum means?

Either way, he made the saving tackle for the first down which forced GB to punt. You can play what if all you want, but he didn't put them in a bad spot. I wouldn't want to see Simon covering anybody when the game counted.

Here's what I think playing possum means...

A situation where he wasn't hurt at all and faking it. Another would be a situation where he was hurt (which I believe to be the case, although not as badly as he acted). I guess there are varying degrees of possum.

 

[MG345]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

Never said he was faking it. It looked like his elbow got hurt.

I'm suggesting that he played it up. If he wasn't, he's a moron for putting his team in a bad spot. But, then again, he believes a one-armed Richard is better than any backup they have...pretty sure about that.

What do you think playing possum means?

Either way, he made the saving tackle for the first down which forced GB to punt. You can play what if all you want, but he didn't put them in a bad spot. I wouldn't want to see Simon covering anybody when the game counted.

Here's what I think playing possum means...

A situation where he wasn't hurt at all and faking it. Another would be a situation where he was hurt (which I believe to be the case, although not as badly as he acted). I guess there are varying degrees of possum.

Ever had a hyper extended arm?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

pats @sea on nfl replay right now

I'm glad I watched that, will save me a lot of time not waiting for the Super Bowl.

 

[Spike]

Can NE run the ball on Seattle? The Seahawks are the lightest team in the league, and the Patriots have no issue with ramming Blount down their throats if it's the path to glory.

Can the Patriots stop Seattle's offense? They generally fare pretty good against the run--then again that effort against Baltimore was awful.

Can they stop Wilson? Green Bay just did, and that defense is nothing special. NE have certainly mastered the art of the 'controlled rush', where they never actually get any sacks but they do keep the QB contained. If Seattle can't get playaction going, and are forced to rely on precision passing from Wilson, they'll be in rough shape.

I dunno, seems to be a minority opinion on here but I like the Patriots' chances.

How did GB "just stop" Wilson? He killed them in just a few minutes.

ETA: if anything came out of this game, Rodgers Mike McCarthy is totally overrated, can't overcome adversity like Wilson Pete Carroll had, and this was a QB game.

Fixed.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

Never said he was faking it. It looked like his elbow got hurt.

I'm suggesting that he played it up. If he wasn't, he's a moron for putting his team in a bad spot. But, then again, he believes a one-armed Richard is better than any backup they have...pretty sure about that.

What do you think playing possum means?

Either way, he made the saving tackle for the first down which forced GB to punt. You can play what if all you want, but he didn't put them in a bad spot. I wouldn't want to see Simon covering anybody when the game counted.

Here's what I think playing possum means...

A situation where he wasn't hurt at all and faking it. Another would be a situation where he was hurt (which I believe to be the case, although not as badly as he acted). I guess there are varying degrees of possum.

Ever had a hyper extended arm?

Once, when I was a teenager and my mother almost walked in on me "doing homework" in my bedroom. Fell off the bed and really tweaked my left elbow good. However, in Sherman-esque fashion, I kept at the homework until it was completed.

Much like Sherman...I was a warrior.

 

[MG345]

Biju's comment about Sherman possibly playing possum is plausible. I wouldn't put it past that attention hungry Richard. Look how tough he is! Wow. Best and toughest in the game!

Did you watch the game? Go to the top of the 4th quarter, on Starks long run. Sherman and Chancellor knock him out of bounds, and you can clearly see Kam pin Sherman's arm against Starks and bend it back almost 20-30%, it was a bad hyperextension. On the last 3rd down GB had, Sherman makes the tackle short of the 1st down and doesn't even attempt to use his hurt arm. He wasn't faking it.

Never said he was faking it. It looked like his elbow got hurt.

I'm suggesting that he played it up. If he wasn't, he's a moron for putting his team in a bad spot. But, then again, he believes a one-armed Richard is better than any backup they have...pretty sure about that.

What do you think playing possum means?

Either way, he made the saving tackle for the first down which forced GB to punt. You can play what if all you want, but he didn't put them in a bad spot. I wouldn't want to see Simon covering anybody when the game counted.

Here's what I think playing possum means...

A situation where he wasn't hurt at all and faking it. Another would be a situation where he was hurt (which I believe to be the case, although not as badly as he acted). I guess there are varying degrees of possum.

Ever had a hyper extended arm?

Once, when I was a teenager and my mother almost walked in on me "doing homework" in my bedroom. Fell off the bed and really tweaked my left elbow good. However, in Sherman-esque fashion, I kept at the homework until it was completed.

Much like Sherman...I was a warrior.

Imagine "doing homework" and being hit by Kam Chancellor.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

He was like Joe Montana? I guess if you're playing the "moxie" card, sure, but those numbers I just listed are seriously bad for a QB at home in the NFCCG. Joe Montana might have had one or two games in his whole career that were that ugly.

over a 3 year stretch in the prime of my career I was 0-3 in the playoffs, 46/88 52% for 503 total yds with 0 td and 4 picks

WHO AM I?

sry if I'm peeing on anybody's childhood icons

Are you Joe Montana, during the years he was recovering from a back injury so severe experts wondered if he'd ever have full mobility or play pro football again?Or are you just the same idiot who keeps trotting this sadly ignorant material out because you feel insecure and want desperately to believe 30 seconds on pro-football-reference can make up for being clueless about the game and its history?

Sry if I'm peeing on anyone's fragile ego.

that must've been one of those trick backs that goes back in time a year, and then the following year goes in and out on him depending on whether or not he's in the playoffs

since I'm clueless on the game and it's history, could you fill me in on the niners payroll situation relative to the rest of the league?

I can learn all kinds of history today.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Imagine "doing homework" and being hit by Kam Chancellor.

pretty sure there are already people in this thread doing that

 

[Gandalf the Grey]

He was like Joe Montana? I guess if you're playing the "moxie" card, sure, but those numbers I just listed are seriously bad for a QB at home in the NFCCG. Joe Montana might have had one or two games in his whole career that were that ugly.

over a 3 year stretch in the prime of my career I was 0-3 in the playoffs, 46/88 52% for 503 total yds with 0 td and 4 picks

WHO AM I?

sry if I'm peeing on anybody's childhood icons

Are you Joe Montana, during the years he was recovering from a back injury so severe experts wondered if he'd ever have full mobility or play pro football again?Or are you just the same idiot who keeps trotting this sadly ignorant material out because you feel insecure and want desperately to believe 30 seconds on pro-football-reference can make up for being clueless about the game and its history?

Sry if I'm peeing on anyone's fragile ego.

I'm going to go with #2

 

[Jercules]

He was like Joe Montana? I guess if you're playing the "moxie" card, sure, but those numbers I just listed are seriously bad for a QB at home in the NFCCG. Joe Montana might have had one or two games in his whole career that were that ugly.

over a 3 year stretch in the prime of my career I was 0-3 in the playoffs, 46/88 52% for 503 total yds with 0 td and 4 picks

WHO AM I?

sry if I'm peeing on anybody's childhood icons

Are you Joe Montana, during the years he was recovering from a back injury so severe experts wondered if he'd ever have full mobility or play pro football again?Or are you just the same idiot who keeps trotting this sadly ignorant material out because you feel insecure and want desperately to believe 30 seconds on pro-football-reference can make up for being clueless about the game and its history?

Sry if I'm peeing on anyone's fragile ego.

that must've been one of those trick backs that goes back in time a year, and then the following year goes in and out on him depending on whether or not he's in the playoffs

since I'm clueless on the game and it's history, could you fill me in on the niners payroll situation relative to the rest of the league?

I can learn all kinds of history today.

Would never have guessed Joe Montana, but then again he was a little before my time.

I can see now why the anti-Pats vitriol is so strong. If people remember Montana as the greatest ever despite some of those performances, imagine what Brady's legacy will be. Nobody will be telling their great grandkids about sideline cameras and deflated footballs.