2 Things About this match up that should make you nervous...

[DohBoy]

I will condense my argument to just two sentences. Then you can read my explanation for why I feel that way above...

Reason 1: Seahawks have been playing sub-par quarterbacks since Week 6. They have not yet faced a Quarterback playing at an "ELITE" level.

Reason 2: Seahawks don't have a 4 man pass rush that can consistently get after Brady.

I was hoping for some more educated responses but alas I may not get a return volley. <BELCH>

Actually, it's a bit telling that you believe your arguments to be original and your own. Other playoff team's fans have been whining about "reason 1" for the last month...and they'll continue to do so, thanks to the fact that their season's are over. Did you happen to see Erin Rodgers NFCCG stat line? Discount Double Crap! Seattle will handle Uggs Brady in the same manner as they did the likes of Ryan Lindley, Mark Sanchez and Rodgers; it doesn't matter to our defense if the opposing QB is a 3rd stringer or a prima donna who wears women's blouses to his Boston pressers.

As to "reason 2," Donkey fans also mouthfarted that during the two weeks leading up to the previous Super Bowl. That somehow an immobile, ancient QB was going to sit behind his big, bad OL and shred the 'Hawks for 300+ yards and 4/5 TD's. That the passing clinic he would put on would set up a potent running attack and it would all result in a last great moment in the sun for our heroic old timer! Well, how'd they like them apples? One shouldn't extrapolate future success based upon a season of playing in an inferior conference.

And now, here are some observations as to why you're days away from being Donkey stuntdoubles:

1) The AFC is SLOWWW. We all watched the AFC playoffs and we are pretty aware of the lack of speed (and urgency) on the part of your defenses. On offense, it's a plodding pace...since nobody plays defense in the AFC, the offenses are conditioned for sustained drives. Get them out of that rhythm and they get frustrated; get them frustrated and your weak defenses get gassed.

2) Seattle has the #1 defense, again. What happened last year when the #1 defense went up against the #1 offense? Did the resulting outcome strengthen the overwhelming historical trend concerning such matchups? Does the trend weaken if the Seahawks face a Papsmears squad that isn't even as potent as last season's Donkeys?

3) Marshawn Lynch. Sometime in the third quarter, when your frustration is full tilt, you're going to see Beastmode in top gear. A tired defense that is not conditioned to play hard for an entire game is going to have to do the impossible: Shut down the "thug." Well, good luck with that, Cupcakes. As has been the case for many seasons now, arm tackles and fleeting hope do not make for a good defensive scheme when facing the Beast.

4) Our fans travel better. It's going to look like a home game for the 'Hawks...and we may even have more gingers in attendance if Jon Ryan's extended family shows up. Do you even airplane, Norm Abram?

"...I may not get a return volley."

I wouldn't use the word "volley" too much if I were you. Being as Brady doesn't know what properly inflated footballs feel like, there's a good chance his pretty little mind might be befuddled by one. "Why is this volleyball brown? Why are are they all brown?!? I BET HANSEL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS!!!" The next thing you know, he'll strip off that Papsmear's uni and start prancing around in a gold Speedo on the 50 yard line...thinking he's on Ipanema Beach, sipping a Zima and worrying about his split ends.

Oh no...you need to keep him motivated, Friend. No more "volley" talk! The shame of modeling dresses for his older sisters, the lack of respect for his mediocre stats at Michigan, the indignity of only being a sixth round draft pick....it's almost too much. And now having to face this hurtful accusation about his under-inflated balls? How does one get up for the Super Bowl when facing so much adversity?!?

I hate to break it to you, but a storm is coming.

You saw it last year.

You'll see it this year.

It's unavoidable.

And you literally can't outrun it.

Enjoy!

 

[ZagHawk]

My worry...healthy Gronk.

It's been obvious for sometime now that the "weakness" of the Seattle defense is the middle working a TE. Witten and Gates come to mind. There was success against Graham because as I think Irvin put it best "he's soft". But Gronk is not, and he's maybe not as tall, but he sure as hell about as big as they come. Gronks good. That's all.

 

[aawolf]

In this matchup, I'm not as concerned with our secondary or our d-line. Brady doesn't scare me, nor does Blount. We've been consistant all year at shutting down QBs and RBs. I'm more concerned with the Patriots' secondary against Russell Wilson. Our WR's have shown great skill at getting deep balls under pressure, but they have not been great at getting separation. While Russell is accurate, my anxiety about our passing attack was heightened last weekend in the 4 INT performance. You have a great secondary that can disrupt RW's rhythm and tip a few balls to cause turnovers. We need to get the running game going early and give RW time to find open receivers. That is my biggest concern.

Don't get me wrong, I still think we will win, but I'm concerned about how the WRs match up with the secondary.

 

[gulliver]

Hey OP, your talking points are so last week. "You haven't faced any good QBs since Week X" is what you were supposed to say a week ago before we held the best QB in the league to a 55.8 passer rating despite benefiting from 5 extra drives from turnovers AND great field position. Now that it happened, it's time to get some new talking points.

Even a week ago that argument was silly. Honestly, if we faced turd QBs "since Week X" and those QBs were having decent success against us, we'd have to be very worried about facing Brady. But we curb-stomped those bad QBs. We humiliated them. Many of them will not be starting for their teams next year, in part because of what we did to them. You can't blame us for taking care of business in a BIG way against those turd QBs--so you're drawing the wrong conclusion there. Then we play A-Rod and he embarrasses himself once again.

I mean, what else can we do to show you it is YOU who should be worried? I'm excited for the matchup--it should be a good one--but your post is as half-baked as it gets.

Let's jump into the Week of 1/19/2015 with these talking points. Try again.

 

[marko358]

My worry...healthy Gronk.

It's been obvious for sometime now that the "weakness" of the Seattle defense is the middle working a TE. Witten and Gates come to mind. There was success against Graham because as I think Irvin put it best "he's soft". But Gronk is not, and he's maybe not as tall, but he sure as hell about as big as they come. Gronks good. That's all.

Regarding Witten and Gates, we had injury issues in the middle of the defense for both of those games. Kam and Wagner are 100% for this one.

 

[12th_Bob]

My worry...healthy Gronk.

It's been obvious for sometime now that the "weakness" of the Seattle defense is the middle working a TE. Witten and Gates come to mind. There was success against Graham because as I think Irvin put it best "he's soft". But Gronk is not, and he's maybe not as tall, but he sure as hell about as big as they come. Gronks good. That's all.

IDK, last I saw putting a cb on him was working well for the Colts. Too bad the Colts were terrible at stopping the run or getting a lot of interior pressure. He's the best receiving option they got in NE though followed probably by Lafell/Edleman maybe Vereen as an outlet option.

 

[Scottemojo]

Rather than look as a list of QBs we faced, perhaps the OP would be better served to examine how common opponents passed on us and them?

(hint, those stats show that our secondary is statistically substantially better than yours vs common opponents, which kind of blows number one out of the water)

Number two, a stat line will show you that Seattle does not have the sack totals some teams have. But find some pressure stats, and it becomes clear that last year we applied pressure 37 percent of passes, this year 30 percent. A drop off to be sure, but not a horrible number at all. Also, we have been substantially better the last two years at middle pressure, the kind that makes Tommy boy get faint.

 

[marymoorhawk]

Reason 1 doesn't concern me all that much - we have proven time and again over the last 3 years that our defense can shut anyone down and they are playing at a very high level right now (and have been for quite some time).

Reason 2 doesn't concern me either - we don't blitz very often so that isn't an issue and both Avril and Bennett are quality pass rushers.

I feel confident our D will step up and hold down a good offenses like they have done time and again over the last 3 years (and did last week against the #1 offense in the league while being put in a bad spot time after time). I don't see us giving up more than 20 points if we play field position and make NE sustain long drives.

What worries me is the efficiency of our offense. We can't give away points like we did last week. We do that again and we lose. If we play a clean game offensively and stick to our style of smash mouth offense we will wear NE down by the 4th quarter like we have seen time and time again and will win.

Also not talked about is the crowd advantage. I expect this to be a psuedo home game for us so NE is going to have to silent count, etc like its a road game. If they don't they are crazy.

 

[Year of The Hawk]

IMHO it comes down to philosophy. We dont run anything crazy exotic on defense. We give you something and say now beat us. This will prove harder to prepare for since we are disciplined and crazy fast. They can try to attack our weakness on D but we are pretty good all around and thats what makes us special. No one weakness to exploit. Plus we are good at the adjustment thing.
On offense there is also no magic wand for us. We will run the ball with either ML or Russell. IF you load up to stop us we will beat you deep with the pass. Yes they do have a good secondary but remember our offense practices against the BEST secondary. Browner scares me in that he likes to hit but not the best in coverage. The fact what we are familiar with him works both ways.
As most Seahawk games this year it will come down to the 4th quarter. Bill will never let off the gas in ANY game so we can not expect that. BUT can there players last the whole game (ala Clay Mathews)?

 

[Largent80]

It seemed like every Quarterback we played had monster games against us. I really don't think it matters who it is. This defense Just gets it done.

I would say the patriots had better worry about ours.

Gawd, posting from my new phone is bollocks. Had to edit that mess at home

 

[Scottemojo]

It seemed. Like every. Quarterback we played had monster. Games against. Us. I really. Don't. Think it matters. Who it is. This defense. Just gets it done.

I would. Say the patriots. Had better worry about ours.

You must be on your period.

 

[Year of The Hawk]

We can only play who we are given. We have proven we can beat ANY QB. The times we had trouble this year we were shorthanded on D and those QBs had the games of there lives. Doubtful for the SB.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Reason #1: Lack of quality passers testing the Seahawks defense.

To me this is one of the most overlooked aspects going into the Super Bowl. Reviewing the Seahawks schedule they have not faced a decent quarterback (not here to discuss Kaeperdick) since Week 6. Furthermore in Week 6 that quarterback was Tony Romo who went into Seattle and beat you guys. Even in the two playoff games you have played, Cam Newton isn't scary and Aaron Rodgers was at most 60%. Let me put it out there:

Week 6: Tony Romo
Week 7: Austin Davis
Week 8: Cam Newton
Week 9: Derek Carr
Week 10: Eli Manning
Week 11: Alex Smith
Week 12: Drew Stanton
Week 13: Colin Kaperdick
Week 14: Mark Sanchez
Week 15: Coin Kaperdick
Week 16: Ryan Lindley
Week 17: Shaun Hill
Divisional: Cam Newton
Conference: Aaron Rodgers

There is the list... not very impressive.

You act as if this is the first season our defense has seen the field or something.

In previous seasons, this defensive back seven has faced and beaten Tom Brady, Peyton and Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Matt Ryan, Philip Rivers, and Tony Romo. That's pretty much every elite quarterback out there. They lost to Rivers and Romo due to crucial injuries. This defense IS proven against elite quarterbacks.

As far as front four pressure, I won't deny that losing Brandon Mebane and Jordan Hill has taken away our ability to generate quick interior pressure. But the quality of coverage provided by our Legion of Boom usually makes up for that. Keeps the football in the QB's hands until our edge rushers can make things happen, after which you'd better hope your QB can make some plays with his feet. (Rodgers did, despite his calf.)

In the end, the most time-honored way to beat elite quarterbacks is to keep them off the field with your own offense. We've got just the run-first offense to do that, as long as we can keep things clicking. Once Brady sees the field, our defense will force him to dink and dunk. Granted, Brady's just the kind of QB to do that. He can chip away with the best of them.

In a way, these two teams are each other's kryptonite. The game will boil down to turnovers, and Seattle doesn't create many.

 

[Dizzlepdx]

(apologies in advance for repeating some previous arguments, I got most of this typed out early on and then I actually had to do some work) I think your two points are worthy of debate. As always, depending on what aspects you want to focus on, and how you weigh certain criteria, you can come to very much opposite conclusions.

I would first address your statement that the Hawks haven't even faced average quarterbacks, let a lone good ones, or high powered offenses. Cam Newton is a good quarterback but does make some errant throws. Played him twice and they were playing really well at the end of the year. The Eagles were putting up killer numbers until they ran into the Hawks.

I'm not sure why you chose week 6 as your starting point. Seems somewhat arbitrary. If you look at the whole year, you've got Rodgers twice, who, while indeed limited this last week, still managed to light up Dallas for 300+ yards the week before with basically the same level of health (it's not really the point of your argument, but he threw for less than 200 yards and 1 td in each game against us). Romo had a decent game but it was the ground game that hurt us. Rivers really killed us; mostly to Gates while Chancellor was a mess of injuries. And the you had Peyton while he was still healthy early in the year. So over 18 games, we've faced 6 above average QB's and a really good Eagles offense. And we went 5-2. I would also ask, how many other qb's would you consider as 'good' besides Brady? Would we have to play all of those guys to be impressive? So while you are correct in that they haven't faced all of the top qb's in the league, I would guess they have played more than most.

It has been proven that time after time, Brady will eat up blitzes. At this point in his career he has seen it all...But the Patriots receivers are many and shifty...Patriots are a team that executes on an elite level offensively and defensively while making few mistakes

That's exactly what everyone said about the Broncos last year, who were the greatest offense in the history of football according to many. And we know how that turned out. Regarding getting pressure with just 4; that's always the goal, right? I don't have all the pressure stats but I know that as other posters have noted, the d' line does just fine on their own as they have one of, if not the lowest blitz percentages in the league. I think it's a mistake to use the most recent games as a baseline for what you think the Seahawks are capable of in terms of creating pressure. Both Cam Newton and Rodgers have to be rushed with a lot of discipline to avoid opening running lanes. Yes, Rodgers was more limited but the Hawks still respected that part of his game. I expect to see a lot more activity up front with those guys rushing with more abandon than they have as of late.

My major concern revolves around the unpredictability of a Brady-led offense. Sherman has previously talked about how the Patriots have the least predictable route combinations. The exact opposite of the Broncos.

 

[jlwaters1]

Rodgers at 60% is probably better then the last two QB's you faced. Not sure what you are trying to argue here?

I will condense my argument to just two sentences. Then you can read my explanation for why I feel that way above...

Reason 1: Seahawks have been playing sub-par quarterbacks since Week 6. They have not since faced a Quarterback playing at an "ELITE" level.

Reason 2: Seahawks don't have a 4 man pass rush that can consistently get after Brady.

I was hoping for some more educated responses but alas I may not get a return volley.

We get your arguments but they are weak at best. Rodgers's wasn't @ 60%, His bum calf didn't affect his arm. Seattle's defense made him play bad more than his "injury".

Seattle defense makes teams execute long drives to score. The question will be can the PATs sustain drives consistently. (The Pats aren't a deep ball offense anyway) IF they aren't able to put together long drives than SEattle will have an advantage. If the PATS can be like the PATS of old (early 2000's) where they seem to be unstoppable on 3rd down than they will have a good shot. I honestly haven't watched a lot of PATS game this year. SEattle defense is more athletic & physical than any team the PATS have played this year.

If you expect the PATS to dominate this game than you are in for a rude awakening. Considering the PATS have NEVER dominated in a super bowl game (all have come down to the wire), and the fact that even with their prolific offenses they have yet to surpass 17 points in their last 2 super bowls. Seattle has been unbelievable on defense the last 8 games- yes even in the Packer's game in which the offense continued to give them bad positions the Pack was only able to score 1 TD.

It should be a fun game. The biggest factor IMO is which team can be the better tackling team. The PATS thrive off of YAC yards, Seattle has been good for most of the year of being sure tacklers. IF they can keep it up the PATs will be punting more than people will expect.

 

[StoneCold]

Are the Patriots offense a more difficult matchup than GB's?

SC

 

[marymoorhawk]

We get your arguments but they are weak at best. Rodgers's wasn't @ 60%, His bum calf didn't affect his arm. Seattle's defense made him play bad more than his "injury".

I would go so far as to say Rodgers bum calf made him basically Brady. Able to move around in the pocket as needed to be a very effective QB (MVP of the league, right?) but not a real threat to run. Seems pretty comparable to me.

Its also very convenient to throw out the first 5 weeks, including wins over Rodgers and Manning where the D played very well and both those guys were as fresh as they could get, and come up with some sort of arbitrary cutoff of "week 6".

There are reasons the Pats will win this game - I just have yet to see any reasonable Pats fan come on here and see that we also have a lot going in our favor but whatever. We'll find out a week from Sunday.

 

[jdemps]

Piggybacking off my first point, in past Patriots losses, typically the way that Brady gets flustered is when he faces a defense that gets pressure with a 4 man rush. This is why the Baltimores, Giants, Dolphins, Jets, Bills of the world tend to have success rushing Brady. Getting pressure with the front 4 allows the secondary to take more chances and cover the entire field. It has been proven that time after time, Brady will eat up blitzes. At this point in his career he has seen it all and besides some exotic looks from the Rex Ryan crew who at this point are in Bradys head, he does NOT get beat consistently by the Blitz. To the contrary, if he knows you are blitzing it often is a benefit to Brady.

The loss of Mebane and Hill is detriment to the Seahawks success against the Patriots. in that aspect, the Pats just match up well against this type of defense (as well I guess as anyone could match up against the best defense in the NFL). I know many Pats fans who would rather face the Broncos than the Dolphins for this exact reason. They types of teams that give the Pats offense problems are 4-3 teams with an elite pass rush (a.k.a Cameron Wake). If you blitz Brady, then he will score points. If you give Brady time, then he will score points. So how will the Seahawks accomplish this?

I understand the Seahawks have the best FS and the best SS in the game. Also arguably the best CB in the game. But the Patriots receivers are many and shifty. Edelman is very underrated and all the attention will be placed on stopping Gronkowski. So in what way do you stop both of them while also not allowing Amendola, Lafell, Vereen and Tim Wright to beat you? (they have proven capable).

Sounds like an echo from last year.



Can't push Manning off his spot.




Can't stop all his weapons.




Won't be able to score enough points to keep up.



But in my mind.
Broncos line last year is similar to the Pats this year. Brady gets the ball out quick. How quick will he get the ball out when the coverage causes him to hold on for an extra second. We've lost a good deal of our inside pressure pieces (Hill) but we still have Avril, Bennett, Irvin, OB.

Stop his weapons? By loose approximation....
Welker= Edelman
Gronk > JT
DT> Lafell
Erik Decker> Amendola
Green= Tim Wright
Vareen=Moreno> Bell
The only glaring difference is Blount, and he's definitely going to be a tough out. However, this isn't Indy's run defense. Blount is similar to Ed Lacey. I expect him to suffer a similar fate.

And scoring. Don't expect 4 Ints. In his career, Russ is 's 56 of 94 (59.5%) with 6 TDs and 1 Int in Az and that's with a hostile crowd and the AZ defense. Don't expect this to be Foxborough. Expect a heavy dose of beast mode, screaming 12s, and a few big plays by the Hawks receivers.

Here's to a good game and, of course, GO HAWKS!

 

[Hasselbeck]

The "haven't played an elite QB" argument was fun for awhile.. then they shut down Rodgers on Sunday. And yeah he was playing hurt.. but that injury was FAR exaggerated

The pass rush thing.. that I will agree with. Rodgers had way too much time to throw for most of that game. But they started to get some heat on him in the 4th quarter.

All that said.. Rodgers was a much bigger threat to throw the ball deep than Brady. Brady is Peyton of 2013 without the elite WR's. I have no concern about how our defense matches up with your offense.

My ONLY concern Super Bowl Sunday, involves Browner and Revis suffocating our WR's and allowing the rest of the defense to focus on stopping the RO and Lynch. The teams that have given us the most problems play press man coverage and stack the box to essentially dare Russ and these WR's to beat them.

 

[StoneCold]

Are the Patriots offense a more difficult matchup than GB's?

SC

If you can't honestly answer yes to this how do you expect to score more the GB?

SC