Q&A with Saints Fans/Seahawks-Saints Game Preview ...

[kearly]

I've refrained from this thread up til now mainly because I've been so busy, but also because I don't know as much about the Saints as I'd like to.

Regarding MNF, unlike Scott I don't mind bringing it up. West Coast teams have historically dominated night games against teams from the central and eastern time zones. For the Saints, this is their equivalent of a 10am start. I agree with Scott though that discussion shouldn't end there. It's just one factor.

As far as the matchups, Brees plays the game fast and like Wilson has to work to find his reads. His receiving corps is actually pretty similar to Seattle, in that (other than Graham) they aren't always the best at getting open but only rarely drop passes and can make plays deep. I thought Stills was a steal in the draft, I compared him to Golden Tate before he was drafted (speed, balance, movement, deep threat, but sometimes he's a bonehead).

I have Brees on fantasy football and have watched him most weeks. I think he is an MVP candidate but I think Wilson at his best is the deadlier QB. Brees processes faster and is far better at punishing the blitz, but he also makes a few reckless throws a game which Wilson does not. Even with some backups in, I think Seattle gets a pick or two. I also think Brees will be a checkdown machine in this game similar to Alex Smith. Manning and Rodgers and even Brady were afraid to throw 10+ the last time each of them faced our defense.

The Saints defense I know little about. If they are a great blitzing team, they could cause problems. If not, I expect Seattle to walk all over them.

I think Pierre Thomas will have a good game. Seattle has struggled a little against quick/medium-build/physical hybrids at RB this year.

I'm not worried about Graham because like Vernon Davis, he doesn't have any #1 WRs to pull attention away from him, and when Seattle puts a CB on the TE it's pretty much game over.

 

[kearly]

Well, you can only play the opponents on your schedule. but you guys have played a lot of dumpy Qb's so playing Brees might be a good pre-playoff test for you guys. When your corners were out I'm pretty sure you guys played 3 or 4 of the worst teams in the league at the time. This time it's arguably the worst time to lose corners.

Keep in mind that only one member of Seattle's legion of boom (Browner, Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas) was drafted in the first four rounds. Most of those guys were dudes nobody had heard of before 2011. Not to take anything away from some of those guys, but they are the beneficiaries of a terrific head coach who played corner himself during his playing days. Nobody else in the league comes remotely close to Pete's ability to coach up DBs and put them in position to succeed.

On that note, just because you haven't heard of some of our corners, don't assume they suck. Maxwell would be starting for most teams, Lane is a decent corner and a superstar special teams player, and Shead, while inexperienced, looked terrific in the preseason. The real reason Seattle went 4-0 last season without Browner and Thurmond was because the dropoff wasn't earth shattering.

 

[saints2k8]

Why do you consider the Saints D-Line as a good one? Don't they allow roughly 5 yards per rush over the season? Taking into consideration the teams you've played, to have 5 yards per rush average --that's pretty bad. I wouldn't consider the Saints elite on defense, not even close. I'd say they are pretty average.

Seahawks defense - 16 PPG allowed
Saints defense - 17 PPG allowed

pretty average.

All this talk is quite irrelevant though and just for fun. We will see the truth on Monday. As a prediction, I just can't see how the Saints do not get destroyed by the Hawks. I think the Saints are an overrated team. They allow roughly 5 yards per rush on defense. They are forced to blitz from every direction in order to get some pressure on the QB. Their offense is great passing wise, they do not have a good rushing game at all. The Saints are the epitome of a soft team. I expect the Seahawks to bulldoze right over them.

hilarious

 

[citysaint]

Well, you can only play the opponents on your schedule. but you guys have played a lot of dumpy Qb's so playing Brees might be a good pre-playoff test for you guys. When your corners were out I'm pretty sure you guys played 3 or 4 of the worst teams in the league at the time. This time it's arguably the worst time to lose corners.

Keep in mind that only one member of Seattle's legion of boom (Browner, Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas) was drafted in the first four rounds. Most of those guys were dudes nobody had heard of before 2011. Not to take anything away from some of those guys, but they are the beneficiaries of a terrific head coach who played corner himself during his playing days. Nobody else in the league comes remotely close to Pete's ability to coach up DBs and put them in position to succeed.

On that note, just because you haven't heard of some of our corners, don't assume they suck. Maxwell would be starting for most teams, Lane is a decent corner and a superstar special teams player, and Shead, while inexperienced, looked terrific in the preseason. The real reason Seattle went 4-0 last season without Browner and Thurmond was because the dropoff wasn't earth shattering.

C'mon man, who did you guys play? Do you think that's irrelevant to the 4-0. You guys lost them last year at a time that couldn't have been better, this year your losing them at a time that couldn't have been worse.

 

[SuperVillain]

The whole "we have the best win percentage on the road since 09" crap from saints fans is getting old quick. What does your road record from last year or any other prior to THIS YEAR have to do with anything? Every year is different from the next and this year the saints are a different team at home then they are on the road. This being a home game gives me confidence that the Hawks will beat the Saints, not only does the crowd factor in but the team feeds from their energy and you can bet there will be plenty of that.

Also, these type of statistics rely entirely on subjective decisions. For instance, they picked 09. Why? Why not 2011 or 2010 or 2007? I haven't looked at the stats, but ten bucks says if you start at a different year going back, you'll have 5-6 teams with the "best road record since 20XX." If you choose this year, it may be the Seahawks at 5-1. If you choose 2001, it won't be the Saints. So stats like this are really meaningless. The stats with meaning have the least amount of subjective variables.

Your line is back healthy, why is everyone so impressed and enamored so early. It takes time for lines to gel, they were thoroughly unimpressive to me against a weak defensive unit in Minny. This will be their 2nd LIVE game together, this time against a really good D-line. What makes everyone so sure of a line with little to no cohesion against a top notch D-line? Are you guys banking that smoke and mirrors, fakes, delays, and playaction will negate a handicapped O-line?

Why do you consider the Saints D-Line as a good one? Don't they allow roughly 5 yards per rush over the season? Taking into consideration the teams you've played, to have 5 yards per rush average --that's pretty bad. I wouldn't consider the Saints elite on defense, not even close. I'd say they are pretty average.

The Saints are not a great road team. They lost to the JETS for Pete's sake, they barely got past the Falcons on Thursday, Seattle beat them up just a few weeks ago in ATL. I think the Saints are a good team, but they aren't unbeatable, I think they are terrific passing team, but they are mediocre running unit- Averaging less than 100 yards and less than 4.0 yards a carry. Seattle is the more complete team., IMO. They can run and pass and they have the homefield advantage.

Bree's road numbers are merely average with a 88-89 QB rating on the road. In the end I think it will come down to who can capitalize in the redzone and who can run the ball effectively- considering there's a chance at snow on that day.

You can't judge how good the saints are by how the struggled on the road to beat a Division team. Division games are always harder since you play those teams twice and one of those games being on the road. If you want to make that case then same can be made about the Seahawks struggling barely beating the Rams and barely escaping with a win in Seattle to the then 0-7 Tampa Bucs. The Saints have enough run game to Run against the the hawks who currently rank just below the Saints in run defense. So both teams will be able to run in this game.

The Bucs are a good team, and they were a good team when they played the Hawks. Since the Hawks game they have dominated in 3 wins in a row, so it is a bit disingenious to bring up the 0-7 record which is a month old and leave out their current record. The Bucs also DOMINATED that same Falcons team you had trouble with. It wasn't just a small domination either. The Rams are the same, as we saw when they trampled the Colts last week and beat the Bears this week --that's two division leaders the Rams left in their dust.

All this talk is quite irrelevant though and just for fun. We will see the truth on Monday. As a prediction, I just can't see how the Saints do not get destroyed by the Hawks. I think the Saints are an overrated team. They allow roughly 5 yards per rush on defense. They are forced to blitz from every direction in order to get some pressure on the QB. Their offense is great passing wise, they do not have a good rushing game at all. The Saints are the epitome of a soft team. I expect the Seahawks to bulldoze right over them. I really see no way that this Saints team can win on Monday. I also expect them to get bulldozed by a superior Panthers team. The Panthers arer a team that i would be worried about, just like in Week 1 when the Hawks barely beat them 12-7 in CArolina. That's a tough team. I put them on the level of the 49ers. The saints I put 1 peg below Seahawks/49ers/Panthers.

The Saints do have a 12-2 record against Atlanta in the Sean Payton Era. The Bucs play hard but the Saints usually beat them. Carolina games are usually split in which each home team wins. I would like to point out that when the Bucs came to Seattle they had a 0-7 record and it took Seattle to over time for them to win, now if the 0-7 Bucs can come to Seattle and do that, why would you expect the Saints who have the leagues top passing offense and the leagues top 5 overall defense to come to Seattle and get blown out?

The Seahawks defense is good especially its secondary but defenses have many aspects and the Seahawks Run defense has had them on the ropes many times this season. The Texans, the Rams, the Panthers, and The Bucs ran up a lot of yards. Right now the the Seahawks rank below the saints in run defense. Now the Saints don't have a feature running back like Lynch but our runnings backs have different styles and will get their yards. The only running back to really torch the Saints this year was Chris Ivory of the Jets and every Saints fan saw that coming because Chris was a Saint last year and got traded to the Jets. Most Saints fans wanted to keep Chris Ivory.

I am not trying to convince you guys that the Saints will win...Im just trying to prove that even though the Seahawks are good they are not blowing out the Saints.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

There are more bad QBs in this league than good ones. By simple probability, we will have faced more bad ones than good.

Yes, but that can go to extremes. 2007's slate of opposing QBs was bizarrely, unusually awful and did manage to completely mask a bad defense. 2013's has not been quite that horrible, but it's gotten us some Chiefs-esque whisperings.

That aside, our defense is still rated tops by DVOA, which takes our strength of schedule into account. Additionally, Seattle has held some good QBs down this year, and we handled Tom Brady decently last year. We'll bend some on Monday, but I doubt we break unless Earl Thomas really has an awful day.

 

[Scottemojo]

Well, you can only play the opponents on your schedule. but you guys have played a lot of dumpy Qb's so playing Brees might be a good pre-playoff test for you guys. When your corners were out I'm pretty sure you guys played 3 or 4 of the worst teams in the league at the time. This time it's arguably the worst time to lose corners.

Keep in mind that only one member of Seattle's legion of boom (Browner, Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas) was drafted in the first four rounds. Most of those guys were dudes nobody had heard of before 2011. Not to take anything away from some of those guys, but they are the beneficiaries of a terrific head coach who played corner himself during his playing days. Nobody else in the league comes remotely close to Pete's ability to coach up DBs and put them in position to succeed.

On that note, just because you haven't heard of some of our corners, don't assume they suck. Maxwell would be starting for most teams, Lane is a decent corner and a superstar special teams player, and Shead, while inexperienced, looked terrific in the preseason. The real reason Seattle went 4-0 last season without Browner and Thurmond was because the dropoff wasn't earth shattering.

C'mon man, who did you guys play? Do you think that's irrelevant to the 4-0. You guys lost them last year at a time that couldn't have been better, this year your losing them at a time that couldn't have been worse.

Smoked a SB team in the Niners 42-13 minus those two corners. I think we might just be OK.

 

[Hawkscanner]

Sorry, I did not intend the snark in one of my previous posts.

Wasn't aimed at you actually. It was just an in general comment, as I was noticing somewhat of a trend.

I don't have that much to add. You are making me blush, I'm no expert, just a video grinder.

[Winking] So modest. LOL!

The question stands, I have spent the last week catching up on Saint's games so that I could get a handle on the matchups, so anytime I see a post that has an appeal to what some dude said, I call it, "how many of our games have you actually watched?". Also, the they haven't played anybody stuff wears thin. As do trends like "we good on Monday night", neither of those things have a single thing to do with the matchups we will see on the field.

In my experience, people appeal to those things because they don't have a grasp on the matchups.

... And that is precisely why I value your opinion, Scott -- because you know your X's and O's and DO watch all the games.

 

[Mindsink]

C'mon man, who did you guys play? Do you think that's irrelevant to the 4-0. You guys lost them last year at a time that couldn't have been better, this year your losing them at a time that couldn't have been worse.

Yeah, our offense is finally clicking, our O-line is finally healthy, we now have Percy Harvin. No major injuries on our team outside of our backup WR who suffered a concussion. Yeah, what could be worse? :roll:

Btw, who did we play in that 4-0 stretch last year...hmm...We DESTROYED the Cards, Bills, and the 49ers (you know, the NFC champions that year). Last game was vs the fiesty Rams, who went 4-1-1 in the division last year.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

C'mon man, who did you guys play? Do you think that's irrelevant to the 4-0. You guys lost them last year at a time that couldn't have been better, this year your losing them at a time that couldn't have been worse.

There is no good time to lose two Pro Bowl caliber cornerbacks. This is an especially inopportune moment. However, a trio of things.

1. The real underpinning of our defense is Earl Thomas. He's the reason our cornerbacks can do what they do. The man has sideline-to-sideline range like nobody else and frees our CB's up to do their thing at the line. He's also fast enough to assist in run support. THAT'S the guy we'd be really worried about losing. Richard Sherman has actually regressed slightly since last year, giving up a few more plays than usual, and nobody here bats an eye because we know it's really all about Earl.

2. I'd expect Brees to make some plays even with those two CB's in, just because he's thrice the QB of anyone we've faced in a while. He's awesome. But keep in mind that while we're losing a little on defense, we're gaining quite a bit on offense. Percy Harvin is going to be the great equalizer here. The field will be wide open in a way nobody has film on.

3. The QB's we have faced, in retrospect, are not the jobber's row you're implying. We contained Newton, Kaepernick, and Luck. Fitzpatrick and Clemens are capable backups, though certainly far from being starters, and while I wish our defense had done a little more against them, their presence in the game had little to do with them ever being in the game (and we never did actually lose to them). Mike Glennon, for his part, looks like he might be a rising star now. The rest are pretty much disasters, but none of them won.

 

[BleedGreenNblue]

i watched the Jets tear bree's apart. This is no contest. I believe the saints will give us their "best shot" but will fall short. Who cares about about MNF records or if were at home. I expect a sharp seattle team. the Saints will Blitz every play like everyone does now and we will counter

Did you just put "best shot" in quotations? Like we are the Jaguars trying to salvage our season with a moral victory? Sean Payton and Drew Brees have already solidified our championship pedigree... so try and act like a knowledgable NFL fan.

Did you watch the Jets game? If you had then you would know it was a breakdown of our offensive line that cost us that game. The adjustments have been made so don't expect your juiced up pass rushers to have the same success.

I love how it's week 12 and our defense still is not being respected. We Blitz every down? You clearly haven't watched the Saints play this season. We play scheme in Ryan's defense and rely on our front four to get pressure. If you don't know who Cameron Jordan is, I guarantee you that you will after MNF. He is unblock-able, and will be in the backfield all game. Some of y'all are in for a rude awakening from our defense. If this becomes a defensive battle then Seattle loses more times than not.

I have read this whole thread and was coming in peace until I read this last post. Although most posts are long winded and watered down, you guys have a respect and realization that the Saints are one of the best teams in recent years, and vice versa. For those of you with the blinders on and can't get past how "awesome" your own team is, just remember that we are the team with the hall of fame QB that is coached by Sean Payton. We are the ones that have matchup nightmares in Graham and Sproles. And whether you choose to acknowledge it or not our defense is for real.

After y'all devastated what I thought was our best Saints team ever in the 2011 playoffs... you can bet we are coming to claim the top spot in the NFC!

Ive watched plenty of saints games. I never Said the saints weren't a good team. I do believe they will give us their "best" shot. I recognize fine that we don't have the only good team in the league. Everyone can sit here and go back and forth but no one knows until monday night

 

[citysaint]

Do you guys expect Thomas to play more slot... it certainly would negate his ability to roam. Regardless of the level of quality depth you guys have currently, going from fully stocked to 3 ready corners for game day is NOT good, especially against a team that loves going 5 wide.

 

[AbsolutNET]

Well, you can only play the opponents on your schedule. but you guys have played a lot of dumpy Qb's so playing Brees might be a good pre-playoff test for you guys. When your corners were out I'm pretty sure you guys played 3 or 4 of the worst teams in the league at the time. This time it's arguably the worst time to lose corners.

Keep in mind that only one member of Seattle's legion of boom (Browner, Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas) was drafted in the first four rounds. Most of those guys were dudes nobody had heard of before 2011. Not to take anything away from some of those guys, but they are the beneficiaries of a terrific head coach who played corner himself during his playing days. Nobody else in the league comes remotely close to Pete's ability to coach up DBs and put them in position to succeed.

On that note, just because you haven't heard of some of our corners, don't assume they suck. Maxwell would be starting for most teams, Lane is a decent corner and a superstar special teams player, and Shead, while inexperienced, looked terrific in the preseason. The real reason Seattle went 4-0 last season without Browner and Thurmond was because the dropoff wasn't earth shattering.

C'mon man, who did you guys play? Do you think that's irrelevant to the 4-0. You guys lost them last year at a time that couldn't have been better, this year your losing them at a time that couldn't have been worse.

You really want to bring last year into this conversation? Or do you only do that when it helps your team?

 

[Polaris]

Do you guys expect Thomas to play more slot... it certainly would negate his ability to roam. Regardless of the level of quality depth you guys have currently, going from fully stocked to 3 ready corners for game day is NOT good, especially against a team that loves going 5 wide.

Do you know why Winfield who was a pro-bowl corner retired at the end of Seattle's Training camp? He wasn't good enough to secure a roster spot! I don't think you have any conception of just how deep Seattle's depth at corner actually is (and Seattle is restocking that depth as we speak). I am not saying that Maxwell and Lane are as good, but they are good enough that any dropoff should be minimal....and Browner was not going to play anyway.

So no, I don't expect much if any drop-off in the Legion of Boom this coming Monday.

 

[Tech Worlds]

This thread would actually be pretty good if people actually cared to read what each other posted.

 

[jlwaters1]

Why do you consider the Saints D-Line as a good one? Don't they allow roughly 5 yards per rush over the season? Taking into consideration the teams you've played, to have 5 yards per rush average --that's pretty bad. I wouldn't consider the Saints elite on defense, not even close. I'd say they are pretty average.

Seahawks defense - 16 PPG allowed
Saints defense - 17 PPG allowed

pretty average.

All this talk is quite irrelevant though and just for fun. We will see the truth on Monday. As a prediction, I just can't see how the Saints do not get destroyed by the Hawks. I think the Saints are an overrated team. They allow roughly 5 yards per rush on defense. They are forced to blitz from every direction in order to get some pressure on the QB. Their offense is great passing wise, they do not have a good rushing game at all. The Saints are the epitome of a soft team. I expect the Seahawks to bulldoze right over them.

hilarious

The last time SEattle faced a Rob Ryan Defense they took their manhood (Seattle vs Dallas week 2 2012- 27-7) just saying.

 

[Mindsink]

The Saints do have a 12-2 record against Atlanta in the Sean Payton Era. The Bucs play hard but the Saints usually beat them. Carolina games are usually split in which each home team wins. I would like to point out that when the Bucs came to Seattle they had a 0-7 record and it took Seattle to over time for them to win, now if the 0-7 Bucs can come to Seattle and do that, why would you expect the Saints who have the leagues top passing offense and the leagues top 5 overall defense to come to Seattle and get blown out?

I don't know. The same Jets team that beat you soundly in week 9 also got blown out by a Buffalo Bills team this past Sunday, which the Saints blew out in week 8. The transitive property only works in mathematics. It doesn't apply to the NFL. You see that every week.

Also, if you watched our Bucs game, there were a series of fluke events in the 2nd quarter that led to that 21-point outburst. From the last Seahawks drive in the 2nd quarter (which led to a TD) to the rest of the game, the Seahawks dominated. Being down 21-7 at the half, I had no doubt in mind that we were going to come out of that game with a W. It was very similar to the Tennessee game. A fluke special teams play at the end of the half gave them a 10-7 lead at the break instead of being down 10-3. But, we were dominating the game and the outcome was never really in doubt.

 

[Scottemojo]

Do you guys expect Thomas to play more slot... it certainly would negate his ability to roam. Regardless of the level of quality depth you guys have currently, going from fully stocked to 3 ready corners for game day is NOT good, especially against a team that loves going 5 wide.

That is a valid question.
Shead has been practicing with the team all year, looked good in pre-season, and could be on the field in dime situations. Jeron Johnson might see some time in the dime as well. I doubt we see Earl in much slot. Though he does have good man cover skills.

 

[SuperVillain]

The Saints do have a 12-2 record against Atlanta in the Sean Payton Era. The Bucs play hard but the Saints usually beat them. Carolina games are usually split in which each home team wins. I would like to point out that when the Bucs came to Seattle they had a 0-7 record and it took Seattle to over time for them to win, now if the 0-7 Bucs can come to Seattle and do that, why would you expect the Saints who have the leagues top passing offense and the leagues top 5 overall defense to come to Seattle and get blown out?

I don't know. The same Jets team that beat you soundly in week 9 also got blown out by a Buffalo Bills team this past Sunday, which the Saints blew out in week 8. The transitive property only works in mathematics. It doesn't apply to the NFL. You see that every week.

Also, if you watched our Bucs game, there were a series of fluke events in the 2nd quarter that led to that 21-point outburst. From the last Seahawks drive in the 2nd quarter (which led to a TD) to the rest of the game, the Seahawks dominated. Being down 21-7 at the half, I had no doubt in mind that we were going to come out of that game with a W.
It was very similar to the Tennessee game. A fluke special teams play at the end of the half gave them a 10-7 lead at
the break instead of being down 10-3. But, we were dominating the game and the outcome was never really in doubt.

Yeah Mike James Had 158 yards rushing against the Seahawks. The rush defense for the seahawks had them on the ropes against Texans and they had to fight back from a deficit. Their run defense was against the ropes in St. Louis in which they had to really fight to win. And Mike James of the Bucs had 158 yards rushing against Seattle and once again you guys had to fight back from a deficit in Seattle. My point that you guys are still not addressing is Seattle's run defense which has been its weak point which ranks below the Saints rush defense.

 

[Polaris]

Yeah Mike James Had 158 yards rushing against the Seahawks. The rush defense for the seahawks had them on the ropes against Texans and they had to fight back from a deficit. Their run defense was against the ropes in St. Louis in which they had to really fight to win. And Mike James of the Bucs had 158 yards rushing against Seattle and once again you guys had to fight back from a deficit in Seattle. My point that you guys are still not addressing is Seattle's run defense which has been its weak point which ranks below the Saints rush defense.

Adrian Peterson is probably the best runningback in the NFL. How many yards did he have against Seattle's defense? That's a lot more recent than what you are poining to.

My point is that it's true that Seattle's run defense bottomed out for a couple of games a few weeks ago, but that was then and this is now.