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

oldskool138 said:

I dunno, man. The Pats looked pretty unprepared/listless when they played Denver a couple of weeks ago.

Click to expand...

They played maybe their worst game of the year in the AFCCG, on the road, against a red-hot Bronco team playing in perfect weather, IN DENVER, and lost by 10.

I think Seattle would rightfully be the favorite against NE, but I could see the Patriots keeping this a one score game. It was just a tsunami last night that probably wouldn't happen again even if they replayed that game today.

I'm a die-hard Patriot fan as any..

..but the objectivity in this thread makes me proud.

It is hard to say because what game plan would Seattle use? Would the Pats have made the same kicking mistake and given Seattle the kick return TD?

pats with gronk or without gronk ? Because denver had all its offensive players

They would have got smoked. I'm actually glad that they lost.

Claremonster said:

They would have got smoked. I'm actually glad that they lost.

Click to expand...

This.

Now fully healthy, it would've been a field goal game. But at our current state, smoked.

Best thing that happened to us was that we got rocked and then Manning ran into a buzz saw and fell flat on his face. Killing the talk (temporarily) that he is "better" than Brady.

Seattle would have scored more... much more.

Pats might have not have scored at all. Edelman + scrubs against the Legion of Boom? Running Blount against those linebackers? Would have been a massacre

2001 Patriots, a close win

2013 Patriots, not a hope in hell. It would have still been a massacre.

Claremonster said:

They would have got smoked. I'm actually glad that they lost.

Click to expand...

I would like to think that they wouldn't have allowed Seattle to score quite as many points, but I had similar thoughts to you as I watched the game last night.

I never thought I'd feel glad the Patriots had lost the AFC Championship Game, especially to the Broncos, but last night that's exactly how I felt.

The Seahawks have an excellent defense and they were able to put up a lot of points. I don't know how the Pats would have been able to compete against them with their current roster and so many of our best players out with injuries.

Superbowl XLVIII was meant for Seattle to win.

Rob0729 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I agree. It would have been more competitive than last night's display. I don't think we would have won at all but it would have been a better game.

That said, I definitely don't want another Super Bowl loss to get over. The way Manning lost is even worse. They got smoked from the first snap, literally. Better them than us.

Hard to say. I don't think the Pats would have given up a KR TD, a safety or put themselves in so many bad situations as the Broncos did. I also think the Pats D would have tackled much better than the Broncos D.

The way Seattle played, I think they win but I think the Pats would have made it a much closer game.

The Seahawks to a man played like a team possessed. That defense looked like a buzzsaw and was swarming all over the place. I don't think we would have choked as badly as the Broncos. But I see that as a very tough game for us to win. But thanks to our lackluster perfomance in the AFCCG we'll never know.

Football is very interesting in that matchups are more important than anything. Sure Denver got severely outmatched (just like New Orleans does), but that does not mean that New England would have. Even this year with so much injury to the defense, they were in most games till the end. Last year in Seattle, I think Brady threw for over 400 yards, but an interception in the end zone and another turnover was the ultimate difference as they lost in the last minute by 1 point. Even this year against 'great defenses' they have been able to move the ball up and down the field. I think New England's defense would have done their part and kept the team in the game. They tend to struggle against great passing teams, Seattle is not one of them.

Though Seattle has been dominant at home, they have been OK on the road, and my personal take is that the game would have been won on the last possession (like most of the games this year) and the difference between winning and loosing would have been a matter of inches.

id like to think brady would have put up at least 17 points.

Brady wouldnt have puked all over himself like manning. Maybe they would have lost. But I dont see brady closing his eyes and throwing up ducks in order to avoid getting sacked like manning did.

this pats team seems to never quit. this broncos team seems like they just folded when things went wrong.

RIpats88 said:

Brady wouldnt have puked all over himself like manning. Maybe they would have lost. But I dont see brady closing his eyes and throwing up ducks in order to avoid getting sacked like manning did.

this pats team seems to never quit. this broncos team seems like they just folded when things went wrong.

Click to expand...

I agree with that part. One thing I know about Tom is he's very much aware when he's beat, that he would tuck it and drop down as opposed to attempting to throw some of those ducks. Manning clearly doesn't have the pocket presence and decision making ability Tom does under pressure in a collapsing pocket. Not saying Tom doesn't have his share of tipped balls and strips, but I do see him quite often knowing when it's very much appropriate to take a damn sack. Sometimes you really have nowhere to go and you need to know to tuck it. Then again, isn't that something Tom's always done better than Manning? Protecting the ball? That's always been his key.

To this day I say his biggest accomplishment is the number of passes without an interception.

Most consecutive passes attempted, none intercepted: 358, Tom Brady 2010-2011[1]:s-11

Click to expand...

And it's been there since the very beginning:

Most consecutive passes attempted, none intercepted to start a career: 162, Tom Brady 2000–2001

Click to expand...

Whereas Peyton still holds this "honorable" mention:

Most passes intercepted, rookie season: 28, Peyton Manning, 1998

List of National Football League records (individual) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Sometimes how you start matters. And by that I mean developing instinctual good habits for your basics. Guys like Farve, Peyton....these guys never changed. And I'm seeing another in the making in Andrew Luck. When you have the job security of being a franchise QB from the get go, and throw the ball as much as you want, with no repercussions, yeah you will set passing records, touchdown records and you'll develop your passing skills. But I think it also affects one of the most fundemental QB skills: Don't turn over the damn ball! That pass completion is just not worth the turnover. And sometimes, there's just no substitute for fear of losing your job and being relegated to a career backup, or worse, out of the NFL, as the necessary motivator in order to learn that skill. Probably why Wilson's got that job, and won his team the SB against Manning. He learned that one quick too.

The game would have been closer, but likely still a loss.

Point differential over the course of a season is a pretty good indicator of how good a team is. In 2010, the Patriots were a positive 205, best in the league; in 2011, +171, third in the league; in 2012, +226, best in the league. But in 2013, the Patriots had a positive point differential of only 106, eighth in the league and well behind Denver (+206 which led the league) and Seattle, (+186, which was second). The 2013 edition of the Pats was exciting and full of heart, but with the injuries, not up to the caliber of previous teams.

Footnote: The 2007 Patriots had a +315 point differential, way beyond the next closest team, the Colts who were +188. Unfortunately, the +22 Giants got hot at the right time.

Pats wouldve lost maybe by a lot, but they wouldve not hung their heads down 15-0 and 22-0. Brady wouldve fought till the end.
The last pats/giants SB i thought pats were terrible at 9-0 and 9-3 but he marched them down 90+ yards for a TD.

At risk of repeating many points by not reading up first - unavoidable with this topic - my hunch is that it would have played out much like other losses this season. Hawks would have jumped to an early multi-score lead, Pats would have regrouped and made things a bit interesting, but eventually the decimated roster would leave them short.

37-23 ish score, maybe?

I'd like to think they'd have avoided the Pick-6 and kick return TD and safety, so that's 16 points right there. But, man, I'd have a hard time seeing that Gronk-less offense do much against that D, unless the OL was able to runblock like crazy.

I'd expect a similar result to the Bengals game, just totally frustrated on O and eventually just giving up too much on D.

As another poster said, a garbage TD late to make it look respectable, but I don't think they'd ever really be in contention.

28-13 or or something, maybe lucky enough to cut it to one score 28-20 with 30 seconds left, so it doesn't look as bad as it really would have been in the history books.