kearly
New member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 15,975
- Reaction score
- 0
How I think the Patriots offense will fare:
I think the Pats are a very good football team, every bit on par with Seattle. However, it is critical to note that this strength is derived from taking full advantage of the realities and conditions of the AFC. I don't mean that as a passive aggressive put down, but when you are used to playing teams built around 1st round pick QBs supported with slow defenses, it's not easy to adapt to the some of the tendencies that have dominated the NFC. This is especially true for a team like the Patriots who's success is built around precision, something which is impacted so negatively by teams built to win by disrupting their opponents.
Before the SB last year, I felt Seattle deserved to be a 10 point favorite, and I had all the respect in the world for Denver, who had been putting up dynasty level DVOA numbers themselves. The reason for the edge to Seattle? A quick glance at Denver's 2013 schedule showed a team that hadn't played a truly physical or freakish team all year. Sure, the Broncos dominated, but they dominated teams with no clear vision on defense. Teams that had little to no ability to frustrate or disrupt. Teams that sorely lacked speed on defense. With that kind of conference environment working in Denver's favor, their finesse style of offense dominated in historic fashion. But when that team faced an opponent that could actually make those easy plays suddenly feel fruitless, Denver got frustrated and imploded.
Did Denver play a bad game? Not really. They prepared poorly, yes, but their execution was mostly in line with what they had always done. They were simply not used to facing a super-fast defense with all-pro level tackling that made a YAC based offense completely shut down.
In this same way, there are signs that New England is a fish out of water against the NFC's fastest, nastiest juggernauts. The Pats lost to Carolina's fast and bruising defense in 2013. They were horrifically blown out by the 49ers in the Pats own stadium in 2012 (where Tom Brady had previously been undefeated in December) before mounting an insane comeback against the 49ers prevent D, only to ultimately lose (a game that I think cost Seattle the NFC West that year). They lost to Seattle in 2012, of course, and they also found a way to lose against a nasty Arizona D. The Pats did stomp the Rams that year, but the Rams are a notorious for being the NFL's most mercurial team.
The Pats did have success against the Lions in 2014, winning 34-9. But the Lions are more of an AFC style defense with their reliance on elite defensive line play to cover up for weak areas elsewhere. There really wasn't a team that New England played in 2014 that compares adequately to the fast and nasty style of NFC defenses they struggled against in 2013 and 2012.
If Super Bowl XLIX were somehow a best of seven series, the Pats could eventually acclimate and adjust. But there will only be one game, and New England will be at a handicap attempting to adjust with the 2014 version of their team facing such a defense for the first time. This handicap alone is probably worth a TD in Seattle's favor.
All that being said, I think New England will have more success than Denver did. Gronk aside, they are not really a YAC based offense, but more of a timing and 'take what the defense gives you' type. Seattle will happily give up a 5 yard reception if it means bruising a WR or TE. But who wins when this is what New England wants too? New England won't lack for long drives in this game.
The bigger question will be, can they finish them? As the red zone nears and the Seahawks become less willing to concede short completions, the Patriots will have to earn the final 20 yards, and risk interceptions to do so. In the 2012 'U Mad Bro' match (featuring a Patriots team that had a much higher offensive DVOA than the 2014 version), the Pats racked up an eye-popping 475 yards, but could only convert that gaudy yardage into 23 points. The biggest reason? Red zone interceptions. Once the field got small, Brady stopped getting the looks he was accustomed to seeing from slower, less talented AFC defenses.
Maybe the most amazing thing about those 475 yards was that it took New England 85 plays to get there. Just 5.6 yards per play, a number that is right around the NFL median (5.45 in 2012). It speaks to how efficient Brady was on that day, while passing (a then Tom Brady record) 58 times. Of the 85 plays New England ran, only 26 were carries.
I fully expect that trend to continue in this Super Bowl, as Seattle dominates slow RBs and Belichick will know this. Even before this game, Blount had served mostly as a decoy, except in instances where the Patriots opponent offered a miserable run defense.
Of course, this is still more success than Denver has ever had against Seattle, and the 2012 Pats game felt like a lot of points were left on the table.
But there is yet one more challenge the Patriots offense will face, and it might be the biggest one of them all. When the Patriots played Seattle in 2012, Wes Welker exploited Brandon Browner and the LOB as a whole. He took the top off our defense and scored on a bomb from Brady. Not only was that worth 7 points, but it forced Seattle to respect the deep ball all game, loosening up the short attack that is the Patriots bread and butter.
Fast forward to now. There is no more Wes Welker. No more Hernandez. None of the Patriots weapons are serious threats to beat Seattle deep. Tom Brady is 37 years old and doesn't quite have the arm he used to. If Seattle wants to treat the entire field like it's the red zone, like they did against Manning, what is Brady going to do to punish them for that? Nothing. It makes racking up another 475 yards on 85 plays MUCH more difficult than it was two seasons ago.
Since I expect the Patriots to be ultra pass heavy, their game plan won't change much whether they are leading or behind. Even if the Pats somehow grab a 14 point lead I expect them to remain aggressive, as it was Seattle's ability to stuff Lacy in predictable rushing downs that helped key their comeback against Green Bay. The downside of this game plan is that it is hella predictable, especially when you run it 60, 70, 80 times.
Overall, I expect New England's offensive output to strongly resemble Green Bay's in the NFCCG. Both teams have slow RBs that break tackles against lesser defenses, both have outstanding offensive lines and a precision passing attack with a QB who forces a 4 man rush with his blitz beating acumen. Aaron Rodgers had too much time to throw and did move the ball a bit better than we'd have liked, but at the end of the game the Packers still had less than 300 yards of offense to show for it. I think the Patriots will get closer to 350 or 400, and I think Brady might get to 300 yards, but this will only happen because of sheer pass attempt volume, not because Brady is carving the Seahawks up.
How I think the Patriots defense will fare:
The Patriots have a better defense than the Broncos had in 2013 when they were slaughtered in XLVIII. That said, the Broncos defense won a key matchup the helped delay the blowout, as the Seahawks didn't score their 2nd offensive TD until they were well into the 3rd quarter. That matchup advantage was Pot Roast on Unger, who more or less shut down Seattle's ability to run up the middle and kept Lynch quiet all game long. But the Broncos defense lacked for speed and was horribly prepared for Russell Wilson's dynamism. Once Wilson ran his first bootleg and it wasn't auto-blitzed, I knew the Seahawks were world champions in that instant. The Broncos were also very weak in the secondary and relied far too much on an aging Champ Bailey.
By contrast, the Patriots are very strong in the secondary, it is full of big names and needs no introduction. One thing I would point out about this secondary is that it is not equipped with ball hawks. Revis has averaged roughly 2 interceptions per year since 2010, and Browner is around the same number since 2011. McCourty is feast or famine for picks, like pretty much any safety not named Ed Reed.
Over the past two seasons, these three players have combined to start 80 games and intercept just 9 passes, roughly one interception combined between them for every three games they take the field together. This is all the more incredible considering the existence of Ryan Tannehill, EJ Manuel, and Geno Smith. The Pats secondary is built to cover and tackle, but it is not built to break opponents' backs. Wilson can take chances on these guys if need be.
But I don't think he will need to very often. Which is probably for the best, since this is far and away the greatest strength of a pretty good defense for the Patriots.
The more I study the Patriots run defense, the more confident I am that Seattle will give them serious trouble. The Pats do NOT look good against good zone blocking teams. Wilfork is not yet a bad player, but Baltimore slapped clown shoes on him in the Divisional round with their cut blocking. Baltimore runs a very similar brand of Power Zone to Seattle, and they had that defensive front reeling all game long, while the LBs stood still and let Forsett come to them deep down the field.
The Chiefs also put up 200+ rushing, though their version of zone is more finesse and most of the credit for the rushing performance in that game falls on the Chiefs RBs, who were stellar. The Pats defensive line wasn't terrible against KC, but their LBs were still being passive and never tried to stop Charles from dancing and finding lanes to exploit. In both games, the Patriots appear to have very poor run support from their LB group. And if those guys are making business decisions against slasher RBs, just imagine how it will go over with Lynch.
I found the run blocking dominance of the Baltimore game to be particularly encouraging. The Pats got their asses kicked by a very straight forward rushing attack, and it's not like they had to worry about the read option or a 4.55 speed QB either.
So long as our interior lineman can cut block Wilfork effectively, Seattle should be very effective running the football in this game, no matter who is carrying the rock. In fact, this might be a very good game for Michael to get some touches, as the Pats have been burned badly by slasher RBs this year.
Super Bowl XLIX will be played on a grass surface. As was mentioned to me by Scottemojo, the Pats record on grass this year is only 1-2, and it's a not a pretty 1-2 either. Back in December the Patriots beat the spread vs. San Diego on grass, which ended 8 consecutive games where the Patriots had failed to beat the spread on grass dating back to 2012. By contrast, Seattle has been very good on grass this season.
This all paints the picture of Seattle having a massive advantage in the trenches on Sunday. Especially since the Patriots pass rush is known to rely on coverage sacks and only ranked 19th in adjusted sack rate. Wilson is going to have all the time in the world to throw, especially if the Pats are wise enough to commit a defender to spy him.
It's not going to be easy for any of Seattle's targets to get open on Revis, but Browner received one of the lowest PFF scores for a starting corner this season (77th, IIRC). I'm not suggesting that Seattle will go after Browner, but they know him well and they will run at least a few plays designed to exploit him.
The biggest threat Seattle will have in the passing game will come from TEs and RBs, especially on plays were Wilson holds the ball or extends coverage time with his mobility and elusiveness. The Patriots are one of the very worst teams in the NFL (30th) at defending passes to RBs, and Lynch is one of the most adept receiving RBs in the NFL. The Pats are equally miserable at defending tight ends, and Luke Willson's 4.50 speed against the 4.64, 4.68, 4.80, and 4.91 times of the Patriots starting LB group might be the biggest mismatch in the entire game. With Moeki also playing and all three of Seattle's RB's being very good receivers, I expect less than half of Wilson's passes will be completed to WRs.
While the Patriots do have a good defense, the bad news for them is that the Seahawks offense may as well have been designed in a laboratory to be their worst nightmare. It's big strength on big weakness everywhere you look, aside from the WRs vs. Revis and McCourty. And that's not even getting into Wilson's impact as a runner or as a magic maker.
So it sounds like the Pats are going to get their asses kicked doesn't it? How can the Pats still win?
Lots of ways.
First, Tom Brady could play the game of his life. If he converts 75% of his passes and a similar rate of 3rd downs, while being money in the red zone, he could get to 30 points the way that Philip Rivers did in week 2. This is pretty much exactly what Brady did to survive the Baltimore game, despite the rest of his team getting their asses kicked up and down the field all game long. Austin Davis played a game like this against Seattle. Tom Brady is capable, but it will be hard as hell and will require some luck, since Baltimore's secondary is their biggest weak point and for Seattle it is their greatest strength.
Second, the Pats could bust out trick plays saved for this game and steal one the way the Rams did in week 7. It's worth noting that the biggest edge for the Pats in this game is on special teams.
Third, Seattle could shit the bed like they did in the Packers game.
Fourth, the injuries to Kam, Earl, and Sherm (or his absence from the game due to childbirth) change the entire complexion of Seattle's defensive outlook, just enough to lose if the game is tight enough. Tom Brady has the heart of a champion just like Russell, you can never count him out and he will rarely hang his head.
Fifth, Seattle draws up a terrible game plan. And it would need to be terrible. Typical Bevell would get the job done in this one without issue.
Sixth, the officials screw Seattle. I think this is incredibly unlikely given the publicity nightmare it would create.
But otherwise, I think this game represents one of the most favorable possible matchups for Seattle from the AFC side of the ledger, despite the fact that the Patriots are without question the class of their conference. The exploitable matchups overwhelmingly favor Seattle, as do the trends such as game surface, Brady's record against fast and nasty NFC defenses, and the fact that, given that ticket sales skew 5-to-1 in Seattle's favor, this will feel like a true road game for New England.
Don't be totally shocked if New England wins, but Seattle should have this one.
27-13 Hawks.
I think the Pats are a very good football team, every bit on par with Seattle. However, it is critical to note that this strength is derived from taking full advantage of the realities and conditions of the AFC. I don't mean that as a passive aggressive put down, but when you are used to playing teams built around 1st round pick QBs supported with slow defenses, it's not easy to adapt to the some of the tendencies that have dominated the NFC. This is especially true for a team like the Patriots who's success is built around precision, something which is impacted so negatively by teams built to win by disrupting their opponents.
Before the SB last year, I felt Seattle deserved to be a 10 point favorite, and I had all the respect in the world for Denver, who had been putting up dynasty level DVOA numbers themselves. The reason for the edge to Seattle? A quick glance at Denver's 2013 schedule showed a team that hadn't played a truly physical or freakish team all year. Sure, the Broncos dominated, but they dominated teams with no clear vision on defense. Teams that had little to no ability to frustrate or disrupt. Teams that sorely lacked speed on defense. With that kind of conference environment working in Denver's favor, their finesse style of offense dominated in historic fashion. But when that team faced an opponent that could actually make those easy plays suddenly feel fruitless, Denver got frustrated and imploded.
Did Denver play a bad game? Not really. They prepared poorly, yes, but their execution was mostly in line with what they had always done. They were simply not used to facing a super-fast defense with all-pro level tackling that made a YAC based offense completely shut down.
In this same way, there are signs that New England is a fish out of water against the NFC's fastest, nastiest juggernauts. The Pats lost to Carolina's fast and bruising defense in 2013. They were horrifically blown out by the 49ers in the Pats own stadium in 2012 (where Tom Brady had previously been undefeated in December) before mounting an insane comeback against the 49ers prevent D, only to ultimately lose (a game that I think cost Seattle the NFC West that year). They lost to Seattle in 2012, of course, and they also found a way to lose against a nasty Arizona D. The Pats did stomp the Rams that year, but the Rams are a notorious for being the NFL's most mercurial team.
The Pats did have success against the Lions in 2014, winning 34-9. But the Lions are more of an AFC style defense with their reliance on elite defensive line play to cover up for weak areas elsewhere. There really wasn't a team that New England played in 2014 that compares adequately to the fast and nasty style of NFC defenses they struggled against in 2013 and 2012.
If Super Bowl XLIX were somehow a best of seven series, the Pats could eventually acclimate and adjust. But there will only be one game, and New England will be at a handicap attempting to adjust with the 2014 version of their team facing such a defense for the first time. This handicap alone is probably worth a TD in Seattle's favor.
All that being said, I think New England will have more success than Denver did. Gronk aside, they are not really a YAC based offense, but more of a timing and 'take what the defense gives you' type. Seattle will happily give up a 5 yard reception if it means bruising a WR or TE. But who wins when this is what New England wants too? New England won't lack for long drives in this game.
The bigger question will be, can they finish them? As the red zone nears and the Seahawks become less willing to concede short completions, the Patriots will have to earn the final 20 yards, and risk interceptions to do so. In the 2012 'U Mad Bro' match (featuring a Patriots team that had a much higher offensive DVOA than the 2014 version), the Pats racked up an eye-popping 475 yards, but could only convert that gaudy yardage into 23 points. The biggest reason? Red zone interceptions. Once the field got small, Brady stopped getting the looks he was accustomed to seeing from slower, less talented AFC defenses.
Maybe the most amazing thing about those 475 yards was that it took New England 85 plays to get there. Just 5.6 yards per play, a number that is right around the NFL median (5.45 in 2012). It speaks to how efficient Brady was on that day, while passing (a then Tom Brady record) 58 times. Of the 85 plays New England ran, only 26 were carries.
I fully expect that trend to continue in this Super Bowl, as Seattle dominates slow RBs and Belichick will know this. Even before this game, Blount had served mostly as a decoy, except in instances where the Patriots opponent offered a miserable run defense.
Of course, this is still more success than Denver has ever had against Seattle, and the 2012 Pats game felt like a lot of points were left on the table.
But there is yet one more challenge the Patriots offense will face, and it might be the biggest one of them all. When the Patriots played Seattle in 2012, Wes Welker exploited Brandon Browner and the LOB as a whole. He took the top off our defense and scored on a bomb from Brady. Not only was that worth 7 points, but it forced Seattle to respect the deep ball all game, loosening up the short attack that is the Patriots bread and butter.
Fast forward to now. There is no more Wes Welker. No more Hernandez. None of the Patriots weapons are serious threats to beat Seattle deep. Tom Brady is 37 years old and doesn't quite have the arm he used to. If Seattle wants to treat the entire field like it's the red zone, like they did against Manning, what is Brady going to do to punish them for that? Nothing. It makes racking up another 475 yards on 85 plays MUCH more difficult than it was two seasons ago.
Since I expect the Patriots to be ultra pass heavy, their game plan won't change much whether they are leading or behind. Even if the Pats somehow grab a 14 point lead I expect them to remain aggressive, as it was Seattle's ability to stuff Lacy in predictable rushing downs that helped key their comeback against Green Bay. The downside of this game plan is that it is hella predictable, especially when you run it 60, 70, 80 times.
Overall, I expect New England's offensive output to strongly resemble Green Bay's in the NFCCG. Both teams have slow RBs that break tackles against lesser defenses, both have outstanding offensive lines and a precision passing attack with a QB who forces a 4 man rush with his blitz beating acumen. Aaron Rodgers had too much time to throw and did move the ball a bit better than we'd have liked, but at the end of the game the Packers still had less than 300 yards of offense to show for it. I think the Patriots will get closer to 350 or 400, and I think Brady might get to 300 yards, but this will only happen because of sheer pass attempt volume, not because Brady is carving the Seahawks up.
How I think the Patriots defense will fare:
The Patriots have a better defense than the Broncos had in 2013 when they were slaughtered in XLVIII. That said, the Broncos defense won a key matchup the helped delay the blowout, as the Seahawks didn't score their 2nd offensive TD until they were well into the 3rd quarter. That matchup advantage was Pot Roast on Unger, who more or less shut down Seattle's ability to run up the middle and kept Lynch quiet all game long. But the Broncos defense lacked for speed and was horribly prepared for Russell Wilson's dynamism. Once Wilson ran his first bootleg and it wasn't auto-blitzed, I knew the Seahawks were world champions in that instant. The Broncos were also very weak in the secondary and relied far too much on an aging Champ Bailey.
By contrast, the Patriots are very strong in the secondary, it is full of big names and needs no introduction. One thing I would point out about this secondary is that it is not equipped with ball hawks. Revis has averaged roughly 2 interceptions per year since 2010, and Browner is around the same number since 2011. McCourty is feast or famine for picks, like pretty much any safety not named Ed Reed.
Over the past two seasons, these three players have combined to start 80 games and intercept just 9 passes, roughly one interception combined between them for every three games they take the field together. This is all the more incredible considering the existence of Ryan Tannehill, EJ Manuel, and Geno Smith. The Pats secondary is built to cover and tackle, but it is not built to break opponents' backs. Wilson can take chances on these guys if need be.
But I don't think he will need to very often. Which is probably for the best, since this is far and away the greatest strength of a pretty good defense for the Patriots.
The more I study the Patriots run defense, the more confident I am that Seattle will give them serious trouble. The Pats do NOT look good against good zone blocking teams. Wilfork is not yet a bad player, but Baltimore slapped clown shoes on him in the Divisional round with their cut blocking. Baltimore runs a very similar brand of Power Zone to Seattle, and they had that defensive front reeling all game long, while the LBs stood still and let Forsett come to them deep down the field.
The Chiefs also put up 200+ rushing, though their version of zone is more finesse and most of the credit for the rushing performance in that game falls on the Chiefs RBs, who were stellar. The Pats defensive line wasn't terrible against KC, but their LBs were still being passive and never tried to stop Charles from dancing and finding lanes to exploit. In both games, the Patriots appear to have very poor run support from their LB group. And if those guys are making business decisions against slasher RBs, just imagine how it will go over with Lynch.
I found the run blocking dominance of the Baltimore game to be particularly encouraging. The Pats got their asses kicked by a very straight forward rushing attack, and it's not like they had to worry about the read option or a 4.55 speed QB either.
So long as our interior lineman can cut block Wilfork effectively, Seattle should be very effective running the football in this game, no matter who is carrying the rock. In fact, this might be a very good game for Michael to get some touches, as the Pats have been burned badly by slasher RBs this year.
Super Bowl XLIX will be played on a grass surface. As was mentioned to me by Scottemojo, the Pats record on grass this year is only 1-2, and it's a not a pretty 1-2 either. Back in December the Patriots beat the spread vs. San Diego on grass, which ended 8 consecutive games where the Patriots had failed to beat the spread on grass dating back to 2012. By contrast, Seattle has been very good on grass this season.
This all paints the picture of Seattle having a massive advantage in the trenches on Sunday. Especially since the Patriots pass rush is known to rely on coverage sacks and only ranked 19th in adjusted sack rate. Wilson is going to have all the time in the world to throw, especially if the Pats are wise enough to commit a defender to spy him.
It's not going to be easy for any of Seattle's targets to get open on Revis, but Browner received one of the lowest PFF scores for a starting corner this season (77th, IIRC). I'm not suggesting that Seattle will go after Browner, but they know him well and they will run at least a few plays designed to exploit him.
The biggest threat Seattle will have in the passing game will come from TEs and RBs, especially on plays were Wilson holds the ball or extends coverage time with his mobility and elusiveness. The Patriots are one of the very worst teams in the NFL (30th) at defending passes to RBs, and Lynch is one of the most adept receiving RBs in the NFL. The Pats are equally miserable at defending tight ends, and Luke Willson's 4.50 speed against the 4.64, 4.68, 4.80, and 4.91 times of the Patriots starting LB group might be the biggest mismatch in the entire game. With Moeki also playing and all three of Seattle's RB's being very good receivers, I expect less than half of Wilson's passes will be completed to WRs.
While the Patriots do have a good defense, the bad news for them is that the Seahawks offense may as well have been designed in a laboratory to be their worst nightmare. It's big strength on big weakness everywhere you look, aside from the WRs vs. Revis and McCourty. And that's not even getting into Wilson's impact as a runner or as a magic maker.
So it sounds like the Pats are going to get their asses kicked doesn't it? How can the Pats still win?
Lots of ways.
First, Tom Brady could play the game of his life. If he converts 75% of his passes and a similar rate of 3rd downs, while being money in the red zone, he could get to 30 points the way that Philip Rivers did in week 2. This is pretty much exactly what Brady did to survive the Baltimore game, despite the rest of his team getting their asses kicked up and down the field all game long. Austin Davis played a game like this against Seattle. Tom Brady is capable, but it will be hard as hell and will require some luck, since Baltimore's secondary is their biggest weak point and for Seattle it is their greatest strength.
Second, the Pats could bust out trick plays saved for this game and steal one the way the Rams did in week 7. It's worth noting that the biggest edge for the Pats in this game is on special teams.
Third, Seattle could shit the bed like they did in the Packers game.
Fourth, the injuries to Kam, Earl, and Sherm (or his absence from the game due to childbirth) change the entire complexion of Seattle's defensive outlook, just enough to lose if the game is tight enough. Tom Brady has the heart of a champion just like Russell, you can never count him out and he will rarely hang his head.
Fifth, Seattle draws up a terrible game plan. And it would need to be terrible. Typical Bevell would get the job done in this one without issue.
Sixth, the officials screw Seattle. I think this is incredibly unlikely given the publicity nightmare it would create.
But otherwise, I think this game represents one of the most favorable possible matchups for Seattle from the AFC side of the ledger, despite the fact that the Patriots are without question the class of their conference. The exploitable matchups overwhelmingly favor Seattle, as do the trends such as game surface, Brady's record against fast and nasty NFC defenses, and the fact that, given that ticket sales skew 5-to-1 in Seattle's favor, this will feel like a true road game for New England.
Don't be totally shocked if New England wins, but Seattle should have this one.
27-13 Hawks.
