Seahawks look scary

Gronk said:

That's not all that's being said. There's been a lot of talk (albeit completely but unfortunately not totally irregularly premature) about how NE can't score on them, how they can't stop Wilson, etc. No one knows anything. They played in Seattle in 2012. Both teams are better now than they were then. Both teams have great rosters top to bottom. Both teams have 3-4 games to win from now to get to an potential rematch. One game at a time. The same approach that has provided unprecedented success to the team we revere around these parts. Why are we hand-wringing over this? If it happens, awesome, should be a great game. If not, well, whatever.

Absolutely they're the team to beat, they're the defending champs, they're playing well in all the ways one would/could expect them to be playing well. The win streak they're on features 2 games against a Niners team that picked the wrong QB and is in freefall, 2 games against the Cardinals playing QBs that shouldn't be on NFL rosters, and the Eagles featuring Mark Sanchez. All you're saying is that Seattle is a tough matchup for NE personnel-wise. Got it. All we're saying is, slow your roll.

Click to expand...

Nah dude he's right. The sky is falling and the secret potion to stop gronk fell right into Seattle's hands. Nervemind the AFC though.

if they get the #1 seed only the cowboys got a shot at beating them in there house

Sicilian said:

It's not being a homer to think that a 12-3 team (could finish 13-3) with the highest scoring average in the NFL and one of the greatest QB's in NFL history has a CHANCE to score 20+ points in the super bowl. The post you're quoting (and the argument that blossomed from it) mark that as a distinct impossibility, which I found to be silly.

Click to expand...

Well, in the last two Super Bowls he has played in that QB's high-powered offense put up 14 and 17 points respectively. Last year another all-time great QB with the highest scoring offense in history put up 8 whole points.

Week 2 Seattle allowed 30 to SD. In week 6 Seattle allowed 30 to Dallas. In week 7 they allowed 26 to STL. In week 9 they allowed 24 to OAK. In week 11 they allowed 24 to KC.
Since that KC game loss, the Seattle offense has put up 19, 19, 24, 17 and they put up 35 yesterday (in the 35 score they had 14 thru 3 quarters against a conspicuously hapless AZ offense giving the ball right back to Wilson immediately over and over and over). Seattle's D is having a hand in more than their share of the scoring.

Seattle is a formidable opponent. IMHO, they play excellent complimentary football (understanding their strengths and weaknesses and utilizing them unfailingly). It's very possible Seattle is the most formidable team out there as well as the worst positional match up for the Patriots (as Kontra believes). Yet even the suggestion that Seattle is so "scary" and so formidable that the Patriots all but can't win is so stupid as to be mind numbing.

What makes me most concerned with Seattle is how the OL will perform. Is it the OL from the previous few weeks or the OL who played the 6 weeks before that (a day and night difference)? Yet if the Patriots OL doesn't right themselves by next Monday, Seattle won't require any thought -- the Patriots will not even make it to the SB to play them. That would be a big disappointment for me as a fan not seeing the Patriots make it to the SB. It appears it would a big disappointment to a handful of posters who will get robbed of that incredible opportunity to say "I told you the Patriots had no chance against Seattle!". I mean that's the kind of moment that one who posts on Patriots fan board regularly should dream of having......

As a Seahawks fan, if the Hawks are good /lucky enough to make it back to the Super Bowl the last team I want them to play for it is the Pats.

This is Tom fricking Brady we are talking about here, with a game plan developed over a two week period by the emperor himself.

Scared? No, but I would much rather the Hawks play the Donks again than the Patriots. They are a handful no matter what kind of game it is and where they play.

I am more concerned about the week 17 game against the Rams than I am Dallas or any other NFC team. They will do everything possible to injure or frustrate the Hawks into cheap penalties. Fisher is a rat bastard. Losing that game in week 17 would reduce the chances of the Hawks returning greatly.

The Cowboys? Yeah... they won here earlier in the year. The perfect storm of getting on a defense that wasn't quite itself in the first 6 games of the season plus an offense that was trying to hard to get Harvin the ball rather than staying with the run. It was painful to see Lynch run for 11 yards and then make 3 pass attempts. The Hawks had a decent lead in that game and passed themselves out of it. No sustainable drives means more snaps for Dallas. The staff cost them that game for sure.

As long as the Hawks take care of business this week I am not nearly as concerned about the Cowboys as I would be if the game was on the road. Dallas isn't coming in here and winning a playoff game, but that still puts Seattle on a collision course with the Pats which is not very comforting.

Guys here talked about how hard it is with the target on your back and it took the Seahawks 6 weeks to realize they were getting everyone's best. All of you were dead on about that, making the Pats run even more impressive.

Sicilian said:

Oh please. So now because I don't have a specific gameplan mapped out, I'm not allowed to say that there's a chance that the Pats can score 20 points in the Super Bowl?

Click to expand...

Not at all. You're perfectly allowed to say that just as I'm allowed to say that I don't believe that this offense, as is currently constructed, would be able to post more than 17 against Seattle and that I believe we would have to win a defensive contest against them.

Is that really how you want to play this? You're welcome to live in your gloom cave where everything that has ever sucked will continue to suck forever,

Click to expand...

I literally have no idea what this even means, especially given how complimentary I've been about certain units of this team over the last couple of months and my opinions on how the Patriots would fare in other match-ups.

and that unless your team goes into a post season without a single weakness they have no shot against a team that has a strength opposite to it. I choose to live in the real world where sports isn't a math formula, and instead is played by human beings in a variety of conditions. And once again, I'm not saying they WILL score against Seattle if they meet them there, just that they CAN. Are you honestly telling me there's NO chance that they can? If so, have fun with that, but I vehemently disagree with your philosophy.

Click to expand...

I'm talking about match-ups. The thread title is centered upon how good Seattle looks and my comment was in the context of a couple of things...

1. Seattle looks really good right now.

2. Seattle has an defense, probably the best in the NFL.

3. Seattle is the defending champion and, aside from a few pieces, is returning that Super Bowl-winning team.

4. The Patriots offense doesn't match up well with Seattle's defense.

When looking at specific match-ups, the current playoff teams that I would feel most comfortable with the Patriots playing are as follows:

1. AFC: Everybody, especially now that Denver is falling apart. But, even before Manning began showing his age, I've long thought that we match up well against them because of how the defense is built.

2. NFC: Lions, Cardinals, Cowboys, and Panthers.

I would like to avoid Green Bay because Rodgers is capable of exploiting corners not named Revis and Browner, as we saw in the last match-up. That said, I don't think their defense would have that kind of success slowing down our offense again outside of Lambeau and on neutral territory. I would like to avoid Seattle because LaFell would be easily contained by Sherman 1 on 1 the majority of the time, Maxwell is physical and athletic enough to stay with Edelman, and the combo of Wright and Thomas/Chancellor can contain Gronk. Further, they're stout up front against the run while our OL has been inconsistent at best opening holes against some of the better run defenses we've faced (as a matter of fact, we usually just go pass-heavy against those teams) and they're capable of pressuring Brady with just four guys (and we know what that usually does to our offense). Like I said, we don't have the offense to make them pay. We would have to win a defensive stalemate in this one while, hopefully, pulling down a turnover for 6.

JMC00 said:

Ok so if you are so sure about it, if the Pats and Seahawks meet in the SB put your membership on the line that Seattle will dominate the Pats offense.

Click to expand...

This is what's known as a deflection. In my experience, these sorts of deflections are usually trotted out when the "challenger" knows he can't make a cogent counter-argument. So let's stick to the debate at hand. Here, I'll even lay a format out for you. Tell me which match-up or match-ups you feel that the Patriots are best equipped to exploit on offense and why:

1. LaFell vs. Sherman
2. Edelman vs. Maxwell/Simon
3. Tyms/Amendola vs. Maxwell/Simon
4. Gronk vs. Wright and Chancellor/Thomas
5. Patriots run offense vs. Seattle's run defense
6. Patriots OL vs. Seattle's DL

I get the feeling we have the Seattle conversation at least 3-4 weeks to early. And I am not talking about whether the two teams make it there but as always who knows what set of players will be available for either team.

If you want to waste your time discussing the current snapshot of the two teams go ahead but all it takes is one unfortunate collision (Revis out, Gronk out, Wilson out, Wagner out) and it is a totally different ball game.

luuked said:

I get the feeling we have the Seattle conversation at least 3-4 weeks to early. And I am not talking about whether the two teams make it there but as always who knows what set of players will be available for either team.

If you want to waste your time discussing the current snapshot of the two teams go ahead but all it takes is one unfortunate collision (Revis out, Gronk out, Wilson out, Wagner out) and it is a totally different ball game.

Click to expand...

Yup. Seattle still has a game against St. Louis that they need to win in order to lock up HFA. As others have suggested in this thread that could be an ugly game. St. Louis has nothing to lose and a dirty coach. That game could be a real bloodbath.

The Brandon Five said:

Yup. Seattle still has a game against St. Louis that they need to win in order to lock up HFA. As others have suggested in this thread that could be an ugly game. St. Louis has nothing to lose and a dirty coach. That game could be a real bloodbath.

Click to expand...

I hope so.

If St. Louis beats Seattle, and we go on to win the Super Bowl this year, we should probably send them a fruit basket for making both Seattle and Denver's roads harder with upsets.

The Seahwaks defense has had a great 5 week run.
However, they have done that against
Drew Stanton
Colin Kapernick
Mark Sanchez
Colin Kapernick
Ryan Lindley

please show me any team at any point this season that has consecutively faced worse QBs than that over any 5 game stretch.

Sicilian said:

If St. Louis beats Seattle, and we go on to win the Super Bowl this year, we should probably send them a fruit basket for making both Seattle and Denver's roads harder with upsets.

Click to expand...

I don't like jeff fisher, so he won't be getting anything from me

Sicilian said:

Bah, I saw this after my rant above, which in hindsight might have been a bit hot and heavy. I respect you as a poster as well, I'm probably just edgy due to holiday stress. I stand by my opinion, and I won't scurry away by editing it, but I apologize if any of it came across personal. It was not intended.

Click to expand...

Just saw this. No worries, bud. The holidays are stressful for us all... as are the playoffs.

Without getting into too much detail, because IF and when the time came, there would be plenty of time to go into it, these are the basic reasons I don't buy all the Seattle hype. Not that they aren't one of the elite teams in the league, because they are. But because the media hype has gone WAY past the reality.

1. The Seahawk Defense will close the season playiing no fewer than SIX QB's who were either back ups or rookies in the last 11 games.

2. After game 3, in those rare times when Seattle had to play even marginally better than average QB's they gave up 24+ points and lost (Romo, and Smith).

3. During this late season run that has brought Seattle from being considered a question mark to make the playoffs to the current near invisibility Colin Kapernick and the moribund SF offense has been the best QB they've faced (twice) Their ONLY good road win was against Mark Sanchez and the fraudulent Eagles.

4. They have lucked out and faced only 3 "elite" QB's. 2 came in the first 3 games, AT home, at a time when games are little more than preseason contests. The other one (cowboys) they lost.....at home.

5. If and when they actually play the Pats, I don't think the Pats pretty well against them.l (at least on the surface).

a. What hurts the Pats OL the most are big physical DLmen, like Richardson, not fast athletic ones like Seattle has.
b. Everyone thinks Chancellor is the ideal match up for Gronk. I think, not so much. Gronk is that much bigger and faster
c. In the games I've watched, most of Seattle's offense seems to be A. "let Wilson run around and eventually come up with something, and B. Give the ball to Lynch and hope for the best.

While I believe the Pats have the quickness and smarts to keep Wilson IN the pocket, stop the read option, and minimize the damage Lynch can do.

Not saying that it wouldn't take the Pats A game to win, but there are a LOT of reasons why facing Seattle, IF both teams get to the superbowl is NOT an impossible task.

The Brandon Five said:

Yup. Seattle still has a game against St. Louis that they need to win in order to lock up HFA. As others have suggested in this thread that could be an ugly game. St. Louis has nothing to lose and a dirty coach. That game could be a real bloodbath.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

That one game can give the playoffs a whole different look. I don't think the Hawks get back if they have to play 3 road games in the playoffs against the likes of Dallas and maybe GB. The confidence of winning two home playoff games is much higher.

As far as covering Gronk? The Hawks will be able to "cover" him but Gronk won't wimp out like Jimmy Graham or Vernon Davis. He will make those catches and take the hits. The Pats can score 20-24 points against Seattle IMHO.

I would have more to say if the Hawks make it through the Rams game without suspensions, injuries and a win.

AndyJohnson said:

The Seahwaks defense has had a great 5 week run.
However, they have done that against
Drew Stanton
Colin Kapernick
Mark Sanchez
Colin Kapernick
Ryan Lindley

please show me any team at any point this season that has consecutively faced worse QBs than that over any 5 game stretch.

Click to expand...

They've absolutely DOMINATED those QBs though.

But this defense did destroy Manning and Brees (twice) last year, and Rodgers earlier this year. They don't fear any QB.

hieroglyphics said:

They've absolutely DOMINATED those QBs though.

But this defense did destroy Manning and Brees (twice) last year, and Rodgers earlier this year. They don't fear any QB.

Click to expand...

Destroying crappy QBs and doing well against excellent ones are not the same thing. In some cases they actually conflict.
Not sure anyone in the NFL fears anyone else, or what fear or lack of it has to do with performing or winning.

Interesting that the last SB champs to make it past the divisional round the following season si the 2003-2004 Patriots. Would be suprised if the Seahawks don't end that drought, but I would have said the same about the 2010-2011 Packers at this point that season. I do recall Dallas was the last truly tough offense Seattle played and Dallas beat them pretty soundly in their house, score was alot closer than the game was. Then again, they ARE Dallas so who knows.

As far as the matchup goes if we meet up, I think we can take them if the interior OL plays like it did between the Cincy and Detroit games. I know, not the most intuitive analsysis but I believe it's simple as that.

KontradictioN said:

I hope so.

Click to expand...

Youre a bad man and karma and/or the baby jesus are going to make sure you burn eternally in Hellfire. Have a nice day

KontradictioN said:

This is what's known as a deflection. In my experience, these sorts of deflections are usually trotted out when the "challenger" knows he can't make a cogent counter-argument. So let's stick to the debate at hand. Here, I'll even lay a format out for you. Tell me which match-up or match-ups you feel that the Patriots are best equipped to exploit on offense and why:

1. LaFell vs. Sherman
2. Edelman vs. Maxwell/Simon
3. Tyms/Amendola vs. Maxwell/Simon
4. Gronk vs. Wright and Chancellor/Thomas
5. Patriots run offense vs. Seattle's run defense
6. Patriots OL vs. Seattle's DL

Click to expand...

I figured I wouldn't get a response on this. So basically, I said that the Pats are at a disadvantage on one side of the ball against another team and someone sprayed **** all over their pants, clicked a button, dodged a debate, and ducked out. Got it. I have a lot more respect for the people that actually debated me on the issue.