How do you think the Pats would've performed against Seattle?

Maybe we'll see next year.

The last team that looked as dominant as Seattle was the 2007 Patriots. Before that it was the 2001 Rams. So, you know, anything can happen on any given day. OTOH, I think Seattle and SF are by far the two best teams in the NFL, and SF destroyed the Patriots in Foxboro in 2012. I think there is a significant drop-off before you get to Denver as the third-best team, and then there is another drop-off before you get to the Patriots.

I said for two weeks leading up to the game that we would have matched up better against Seattle than we did against Denver. With the lack of healthy talent we have, it comes down to scheme, and I trusted BB against a 2nd year QB, no matter how good Wilson is.

That didn't really change yesterday. I think we would have had a 45-50% chance of winning.

Spiral said:

The last team that looked as dominant as Seattle was the 2007 Patriots. Before that it was the 2001 Rams. So, you know, anything can happen on any given day. OTOH, I think Seattle and SF are by far the two best teams in the NFL, and SF destroyed the Patriots in Foxboro in 2012. I think there is a significant drop-off before you get to Denver as the third-best team, and then there is another drop-off before you get to the Patriots.

Click to expand...

Huh? They only won by 7.

Brady rarely throws it up for grabs like Peyton did. After that, we still have the lack of pocket pressure and big receivers, but in a close game, funny bounces happen.

Thanks to Peyton, there was no pressure on a very young team.

Pats win


Never bet against Brady

The Broncos were totally unprepared for this game. They took that cruise last week and got seasick, practiced without noise etc...

The Patriots would have probably lost but the Bonkos were embarrassed. Think of it, Seattle had 4 scores and were up only 15 -0. If the Broncos had any poise, they would have been able to come back and make it a game but one manning through that pick 6 it was all over. Also what was that kickoff after the half. They planned that? Great idea, give up a free extra 20 yards.

I think that Jacksonville would have done better than the Broncos did.

We could not have won with the players we have today. That said we don't get blown out.

Im thinking 23-13. WE would struggle to move the ball only 1 td and 2 fgs

I don't see us giving up TD returns and pick 6's but I do see Wilson converting a lot of 3rds with his legs.

Certainly with who was left at the end of the year Im sorta glad we weren't in this game.

I think the Pats (and virtually every other team) would've gotten soundly beaten. The only team as balanced is SF. I don't find any solace with the arguments that the Pats would have "only" lost by 20+ points instead of 30+.

Without the Gronk, the Pats couldn't score enough to beat Seattle. I'm not sold on WIlson, he made some seriously bad throws last night. They actually should have scored alot more than they did against Denver. It was interesting that Seatytle threw the ball late in that game, instead of running it. You figure Denver's defense did a pretty good job keeping the first quarter to only 8-0 (LOL, I wonder how many people had the 8 & 0 square yesterday and thought they didn't have a pray of winning anything).

I would take a BB gameplan anyday. Seattle's D is made to shut down WRs. LOL, luckily for the Pats, they don't have any!!!

Brady would get carried off the field. they'd get destroyed

The game would have been close until the end just like every super bowl we played and just like the last game we played against them.

The best offense in NFL history (stats wise) scored 8 points and was part of the worst beatdown since 2003 when the Bucks beat the Raiders 48-21.

As for not being prepared; don't act list pats are immune to this. There have been plenty of playoff games where the pats looked ill prepared as well.

Seahawks would have beat any team in the leauge last night. Pats, with their offense, would have been lucky to score 3 points.

the Seahawks would have played man coverage every snap and none of the pats WR's would have got open with Brady getting sacked 4 times and hit almost every pass the hawks would have won 13 to 17 with the pats only TD coming with about 90 sec left in the game

For those saying "The best offense ever only scored 8, we wouldn't score any!" bear in mind that both of these super bowl teams lost to Indy, who we handled without much trouble. Trying to predict how two teams will play based on how they looked against common opponents is pointless in the NFL.

I doubt we'd lose by 35 but we'd have no shot with an injury depleted team.

A healthy Pats team played well against the Seahawks in SEA in 2012 and arguably should have won that game, so I think a healthy Pats team could hang with the Seahawks.

Besides after the loss last night the amount of smack coming from fans and the naysaying from the media would have been insufferable. Glad to be spared of all of that.

tasmlab said:

Just for fun/hypothetical offseason conjecture...

Had the Pats beat Miami previously, got HFA, and then a Nor'easter struck the ACFCG helping them beat the Broncos, ultimately leading the Pats to proceed to the Superbowl to face the Seahawks,

How do you think they would've fared?

Unfortunately, I could imagine it looking like the same beat down. BB would've probably had to have divine inspiration to come up with some unthinkable and risky game plan to come out on top. And even then have some unexpected breaks.

Click to expand...

There would have been fewer mistakes by the Patriots than the Broncos but ultimately the better team would have won. Seattle 26-10.

Sicilian said:

For those saying "The best offense ever only scored 8, we wouldn't score any!" bear in mind that both of these super bowl teams lost to Indy, who we handled without much trouble. Trying to predict how two teams will play based on how they looked against common opponents is pointless in the NFL.

Click to expand...

As we know regular season means nothing. Rams beat the pats in 2001 then lost the superbowl, Pats beat the Giants then lost the superbowl. Pats beat the jets 45-3 in 2010 then lost to them in the playoffs. The list can go on and on.

I stand by the fact that the pats would have been lucky to score 3 points in the game.

Kam and Sherman are 5th round picks! Why can't we get players like that. Seattle would have won like 24-10. Their O is just OK and I doubt the Pats would have had as many TOs. But no chance our offense would move the ball vs. that beastly and fast and big and scary D. None.

Next year if the Pats come in there with a healthy dose of Ridley, Edelman, Gronk, Vereen, Dobson and maybe...Boldin or Maclin...then its a game.

I think the Pats probably would have lost, but it would have been more of a game. I can't see the Pats make nearly as many bad mistakes as the Broncos did.