im speaking hypothetically, of course we should have won but even if we did advance to the candle stick, do you think Bruce Irvin and the rest of the d-line have another horrible day stopping the run?

I have no doubt our offense would put up atleast 25+ points on the board but only if our defense doesnt have another horrible start.

Seeing how Jaquizz Rogers and Michael Turner ran all over us, I have to believe the 49ers would have steamrolled us in the running game.

I think we would have won ultimately, but the 49ers would have had a lot of success on the ground.

_________________

I think Irvin would have had a hard time with the running game. Playing in San Fran, I would expect their running game results to match their first game against the Seahawks and not the second. That is one point I can agree with from the McGrath article being discussed on the board.

_________________

"The Seahawks are now known league wide as the team sooooooo badass and smashmouth and hard hitting that they couldn't even go thru their own practices without laying smack down on fools." - JSeahawks

I would've been okay with that as long as we also kept them to about the same number of points as the 1st game.

But the Falcon's passing game is far far far more effective than the Niners', and one of the reasons they did so well on the run is because we were defending the pass first (and probably didn't gameplan for Turner the way we should have, expecting him to be a non-factor)

We are every bit the team the Niners are.

_________________
60 percent of the time..........it works........every time

9ers RBs > Falcons RBs.

9ers O-line > Falcons O-line.

I think the answer is fairly obvious. I feel like we are 2-3 high picks away from being able to manhandle the 9ers in an away game, but we are NOT there yet.

_________________
Cheesehead Seahawk Extraordinaire

hard to say, but I really wanted to find out.. with a different scheme, how that team struggles against any team is beyond me, they truly are world beaters in the right hands and only getting better as a team..

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

42-13

_________________
60 percent of the time..........it works........every time

-- You can't stop a running game as solid as the 9ers, but the crux of what they did to the Packers, was all about the read option. The Packers are a 3-4 with below average inside linebackers. I would argue their outside backers are VERY overrated vs. the run. When a 3-4 has to defense the read option with outside backers who are not stout against the run, they have to split their ends a little wider, which exposes you to the inside run game which Gore took advantage of. They started squeezing to stop Gore, which allowed the QB to run absolutely wild.

-- I would argue that any 4-3 team with disciplined DEs, (think the Rams), can handle the read option better than anyone. The Rams and Falcons both handled ours pretty well. The Bills didn't largely because Mario Williams kept playing to the inside. We ran pretty freely on the Niners, Cardinals, Redskins, even back to the Cowboys. We can handle the read option very well, because we are a 4-3 with a VERY stout LDE, and well as a very strong at the point of attack OLB like Wright.

-- The Niners may still win this game, but I think it will have to be through the air. I don't think they will run with anywhere near the success on Atlanta that they did on Green Bay.

Mase

stop being a hater. No excuses

_________________

sig by Ramster

Won't know till next season. Can't wait

The Hawks really hadn't stopped anyone of the good run attacks this year, so the answer is easy, no.

_________________
If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.

How is he being a hater? We beat the hell out of the Whiners already

I think with Clemons out, Miller probably out with a torn plantar fascia (I don't think painkillers would work a week later), the game being away, and the 49ers being so pumped up after the win over Green Bay, we were in fairly bad shape to win this conference game.

They would kill us in the run. Gore would gash us early and often, much like game 1...but the difference is, Russell Wilson on offense would keep it close and give us the edge. It would probably go like the first 2 games of the post-season...we would find ourselves down in a 2-score game and around the mid-3rd, 4th qtr, our O would kick in and we would pull it out in the end.

...somewhere, some alternate reality, this is all playing out.

_________________

My thoughts too. Love the Hawks but I don't see them winning that game

Bad way to phrase the question.

Could we have? Yes, of course.

Would we have? I still think so, different team, different game plan. Plus we easily shut them down a few weeks ago.

_________________
Team Hansen

I think it's naive to think that's how another Hawks vs. Niners game would go, especially for the NFC Championship game at their house.

Sure we crushed them here, but that IMO was an aberration, not the norm.........and more of a product of;

- Niners coming off a huge exhausting win on the road against the Pats
- Hawks coming off of two blowout wins where we rested our starters in the 4th Qtr.
- Two years of pent up frustration of losing to the niners by our players and fans being unleashed

Believe me, we'd be fighting for our lives if we had to go to SF this weekend........and I certainly don't think our D could stop SF's run game. We couldn't even stop Atlanta's terrible run game.

_________________
If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.

Which is why I said "I think so" not "we definitely would." Saying we crushed them earlier points to that fact. I don't think there was that much regression on the Hawks side to not being able to "stop" them fully. We've stopped them before, so we definitely could stop them again.

At the same time, you saying we couldn't stop ATL equals we wouldn't stop SF doesn't work. We played an entirely different game plan against the falcons than we would the niners.

_________________
Team Hansen