Talking heads = Revis not important against SEA

[TomPatriot]

I've heard some of the dopey talking heads on the radio comment that Revis's effectiveness is nullified against a running team like Seattle with no dominant WR.

STUPIDITY.

With a highly successful running team...what's better than to be able to commit 8 or 9 Guys to the box because you don't have to worry about any potential receiving threat ala Revis

With Revis and McCourty playing safety valve, Chung and Browner can free themselves up against the run a bit. With a lesser CB..you don't have that flexibility. I expect ****y Seattle to test that safety valve. So how important is Revis?

Expect a few plays where Revis doesn't have coverage duty. Plus, Baldwin is a pretty good receiver. Nice day against GB.

 

[PATS16N0]

You think this is funny?

I saw a guy open a segment with the following:

"For more insight, we turn to a man who knows more about big games than anyone.

*camera pans to the right, revealing the guest*

Chris Carter, glad you could join us."

No. I'm not joking. This actually happened.

 

[Fencer]

The argument equates to looking at Seattle's line-up and then concluding "A lesser CB than Revis would be pretty much as effective as he will."

Looking just at Seattle's receivers, that makes sense. But if you look instead at Seattle's QB, and his ability to extend plays for many seconds, the argument is not persuasive.

 

[obgod3]

I wouldn't sleep on Seattle WR's. Seahawks are in the SB for a reason.

 

[SVN]

Seattle WRs are like the pats WRs in 2003/04. No one thought that great of branch and givens outside of NE. Even in the 2 SBs, steve smith and then TO were bigger named players and they outplayed them. So Iam not going to count them out. Plus I dont know how good revis will be vs these smaller shiftier WRs espcially if wilson manages to get outside.

 

[fnordcircle]

They're right, Revis is worthless, cut that bum.

 

[Sticky Caulk]

After the way those guys played in last years Super Bowl, I would not just assume Revis will be yawning while he jogs with his man.

 

[RayClay]

Well they claim that seattle has no #1 WR so putting him on just one doesnt help much since they can collectively be effective according sharpe with rubs and picks on revis

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-playbook/0ap3000000462651/Playbook-Should-Seahawks-avoid-Revis

like the interception?

 

[RayClay]

Who among us felt last summer that re-signing Chung would be a key element in our defense and a key asset in the SB? Not I!

maybe not that far, but i took a lot of ridicule for suggesting veteran chung would have a big role.

 

[strngplyr]

Yeah, and if we didn't have Revis we'd be talking about "how do they cover those receivers AND stop the run?"

It's the media, it'll be spun to create the story wherever it fits best, never doubt that.

 

[Gronk]

And since he's not that important for them on the field, that makes for better stories when ESPN reports on which teams in the Pats division have told their sources they will be pursuing him in free-agency. Despite the fact that he's, you know, technically still under contract through next season.

 

[Patriot Missile]

And since he's not that important for them on the field, that makes for better stories when ESPN reports on which teams in the Pats division have told their sources they will be pursuing him in free-agency. Despite the fact that he's, you know, technically still under contract through next season.

They better not file another tampering charge or else we may have sodgate or cleatgate upon us from the NFL tomorrow.

 

[1960Pats]

Who among us felt last summer that re-signing Chung would be a key element in our defense and a key asset in the SB? Not I!

I still don't. Chung is clearly our weakest link.

 

[SVN]

I still don't. Chung is clearly our weakest link.

I expect the seahawks to go after him with luke wilson.

 

[Slagathor]

I still don't. Chung is clearly our weakest link.

Chung and Ryan are by far the weakest links on D.

 

[RIpats88]

I still don't. Chung is clearly our weakest link.

ive actually been pretty impressed with his coverage of tight ends this year. he seems to have improved in that area

 

[1960Pats]

ive actually been pretty impressed with his coverage of tight ends this year. he seems to have improved in that area

I know I'm in the minority here, but he scares me. He bites too much on the play action and has given up some big plays because of it.