I'd disagree - I do think there is something to momentum, confidence & rhythm in the game. I know its a chicken & egg kind of conversation as you mention. But even after the Ravens put up that TD, the Pats did drive back down for a FG attempt. If they had gotten off the field on that 3rd & 7 play (pass to Mason), it would've been a 24-17 game in the 4th quarter. I like our chances at that point.
It would have been 27-14, not 24-17. Still a 2 score game going in the 4th quarter with only ONE WR and still passing situations. That final TD was the final nail in otherwise already solidly nailed coffin.
They ran on 13 out of 16 first downs, converted 10 out of 16 third downs, carried for 234 yards on 52 rushes, and had almost as many points (33) as they did passing yards (34). If that's not domination, I'm not sure what is.
Yea sure if we look at in a vacuum without context the 3rd down numbers look horrendous. The 52 rushes is once again indicative of the OFFENSE and the situation because apart from the 83 yard TD, there were 51 rushes for 2.96 YPC.
Let's break down the 3rd downs you claim as domination...
1st Quarter
------------
3rd & 4 on NE 11 - 5 yards left tackle for a 1st down
3rd & 11 - stopped, PUNT
3rd & 1 on NE 16 - QB Sneak for 1 yard, 1st down
3rd & 9 on NE 9 - stopped, FG
2nd Quarter
------------
3rd & 1 - 1 yard run, left side... next play INTERCEPTED
3rd & 13 - stopped, PUNT
3rd & 2 - 3 yards, right side (Warren)
3rd & 2 - 3 yards, left side
---- END OF HALF ----
First half ends 24-7, Seymour's absence may have been felt on 2 of the 3rd down conversions. The first one would still end up in a FG, the 2nd one the next play was an INT anyway. So 4 point swing assuming Seymour doesn't give up that 3rd & 4 run. 20-7 Ravens.
3rd Quarter
------------
3rd & 2 - stopped, PUNT
3rd & 6 on NE 7 - stopped, FG
3rd & 2 - Pass to Mason, 8 yards, 1st down
4th Quarter
------------
3rd & 7, 17 yard pass to Clayton, 1st down
3rd & 7, Flacco scramble
3rd & 3, 3 yards Mcgahee (left tackle) TD
--- Garbage Time basically with a gassed defense ----
3rd & 7, 16 yards (left takcle) Rice
3rd & 10, stopped, PUNT
In the second half, after an absolute pitiful 3 plays per drive 1st half from the offense, the defense comes out solid with 2 3rd down stops, one for a PUNT, one (another gift from the offense) stopped for a FG. Seymour's absence not felt there. Flacco comes alive for the game-killing drive, passing for 2 3rd down conversions and scrambling for another. Even if Seymour stops the 3rd & 3 run from McGahee and they kick a fg it's 27-14 in the 4th quarter with an anemic offense.
Any way you want to slice it, there is no Ravens domination of our defense. There is the offense gift wrapping the game for the Ravens. It's unfair to expect a perfect game from the defense especially in those horrendous conditions. They gave the offense MORE than enough opportunities, but the offense simply lacked options aside from Moss. They couldn't run as much as they wanted to help the passing game because of the early 24-0 deficit that they were primarily responsible for.
Seymour himself wouldn't have had to have stopped it. When you don't have a liability on your line, and instead you have Seymour, that's one less blocker that the Ravens have at their disposal since you have to double Seymour and Wilfork. Put Seymour on that line, and Wilfork is likely in better position to make that tackle, and if not him, then Mayo or Thomas. Saying that Seymour wouldn't have made a difference on that play because it wasn't run directly at where he would have been is a pretty simplistic interpretation of how the Pats' (or any) defense works. Line play dictates everyone else's positioning and assignments.
It's a big assumption that you believe a play designed to run up the middle would have doubled Seymour rather than Wilfork. It's quite possible that play doesn't happen, but it's not a sure thing. Seymour has been part of big botched plays like that in the past, he's not immune to that.
If that play gets stuffed (as it probably would have been), there's a very good chance that you're looking at a short possession and the Pats getting the ball back with decent field position. That lessens the need to answer with a quick strike, makes the threat of the Pats establishing the run more viable, and, even if Brady does get strip-sacked again, it makes the following touchdown less probable and less deflating if it does happen.
There is no reason to believe it "probably" would have been stuffed with Seymour there. It was a well blocked play and bad execution from the Patriots ILB and Safety. Seymour is actually unlikely to have effected the OL blocking scheme on that play and unlikely to have been able to get inside to stop the play.