Anyone else feeling surpremely confident about this game?

[kearly]

I'm curious where you guys get all of your facts/stats from?

Football Outsiders.

As far as matchups go, that's a reference to Brees throwing a lot of "interceptable" passes every game, trusting his WRs and Jimmy Graham to win those battles. That's not a slam on Brees, but do that to Seattle's secondary and it won't have a happy ending. They lead the league in takeaways and big reason is because their secondary is loaded with talented ball hawks. Though Brees really is an MVP candidate, Jimmy Graham is almost as valuable to the Saints offense as Brees is, and Seattle has done very well defending elite TEs the last couple seasons.

Then you have a 30th ranked run D vs. Seattle's high ranked rush O, a Seahawks team that lead the NFL in carries last season and is on a similar pace this year. Seattle absolutely loves facing teams that can't stop the run. It is extremely rare for Seattle to run with effectiveness and lose.

The Saints probably won't win throwing soft passes into Seattle's secondary, and I think they know that. Also, it's a cold weather game. For both those reasons I'm guessing we'll see the Saints use the same dink and dunk strategy most QBs use when facing Seattle. Brees will get TDs and score some points, but he'll labor to break 24 points with a game plan like that. If Lynch runs for 130 and Wilson has a typical 110 passer rating outing at home, plus our NFL best contribution from special teams, and you can pretty much pencil in Seattle for 30 plus. It's going to be tough for the Saints to win this game. Not that they can't, but they will probably need a combination of some Seattle mistakes, insanely clutch play and officiating help to pull it off.

 

[BlueThunder]

I'm pretty sure we're gonna win being in the CLink and all, but if the ball bounces funny and we do manage to lose, I will calmly post the 49ers forums then disappear for the week. I would want no part of the ensuing meltdown that would occur in this place. In fact, I would not watch ANY football coverage of any kind all week until kickoff next Sunday at the 'stick.

 

[Alexander]

I have a premium subscription to football outsiders. I'm well aware of the strengths and weaknesses of each respective group.

You sure don't act like it. In one sentence you claim to be well aware of their work, and then in the very next sentence you cite an inferior set of statistics.

 

[DaneM1983]

Luck was 16/29 for 229 yards. Is that who shredded our defense? Just over 50% completion percentage is "shredding?"

Thad Lewis went 22/39 for 232 against the Saints. Is that also considered "shredding."

How did those games turn out for each team?

On what planet will the Hawks and Saints ever play on a neutral field?

You lost a game to Geno Smith. And he sucked.

It's hypothetical. It means if all "outside factors" removed and these teams lined up with no one watching based purely on coaching, talent, gameplan etc that the Saints would win 7 out of 10 times.

If it were possible for these teams to play in the Superbowl for example the Saints would be favored.

But still. When an elite QB enters the picture, you just can never count a team out on the road. It's the same reason I'd give us a chance to win @NO. Because Russell Wilson.

:141847_bnono: Nothing against Russell Wilson but he's "elite" yet.

 

[hawk45]

Luck was 16/29 for 229 yards. Is that who shredded our defense? Just over 50% completion percentage is "shredding?"

Thad Lewis went 22/39 for 232 against the Saints. Is that also considered "shredding."

How did those games turn out for each team?

On what planet will the Hawks and Saints ever play on a neutral field?

You lost a game to Geno Smith. And he sucked.

It's hypothetical. It means if all "outside factors" removed and these teams lined up with no one watching based purely on coaching, talent, gameplan etc that the Saints would win 7 out of 10 times.

If it were possible for these teams to play in the Superbowl for example the Saints would be favored.

But still. When an elite QB enters the picture, you just can never count a team out on the road. It's the same reason I'd give us a chance to win @NO. Because Russell Wilson.

:141847_bnono: Nothing against Russell Wilson but he's "elite" yet.

Was going to edit my post because I agree with you, elite status requires more time. That sentence didn't come together the way I wanted it to.

A bit douchey of you to point it out in a post where I'm admitting Brees is a reason to be concerned about NO, but hey, as you were.

 

[kearly]

:141847_bnono: Nothing against Russell Wilson but he's "elite" yet.

I can already hear the new tune you'll be singing on Tuesday. Nobody respects Wilson apparently, not until he carves their defense up for 40 points.

I am with Colin Cowherd on this. Why does there have to be a waiting period to state the obvious? If you've watched Wilson, there is no question he is one of the elite QBs in the game. He was elite even in college but people forget that because he was a 3rd round pick.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I don't think this guy understands that Football Outsiders basically figures for strength of schedule against each player on the field, not just overall teams.

Besides, strength of schedule isn't really something you can accurately quantify until the season is over.

In any case, Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings are peerless. They're the best in the business, and no one else is really close. The only thing they rank with DVOA that is weak or nowhere near as good as the rest is pass protection.

 

[Shadowhawk]

It's hypothetical. It means if all "outside factors" removed and these teams lined up with no one watching based purely on coaching, talent, gameplan etc that the Saints would win 7 out of 10 times.

If it were possible for these teams to play in the Superbowl for example the Saints would be favored.

No, it's completely irrelevant. The teams aren't playing on a neutral field, never have played on a neutral field, and never WILL play on a neutral field. And because of that, you have absolutely nothing to back up your contentions about who would win X out of 10 times or who would be favored in a Seahawks-Saints Super Bowl. Tell yourself otherwise if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you are pulling this "7 times out of 10" stuff out of your ass.

 

[Alexander]

The Seahawks have played the easiest schedule in the NFL while the Saints have played Matt Ryan twice, Tom Brady & Tony Romo.

Matt Ryan isn't an elite QB this year. Not even close. Tom Brady played very poorly to start the season. Only recently has he looked like himself.

Speaking of Matt Ryan, let's look at how he did against Seattle/NO:

Against NO (2 games): 55/77 (71.4%), 596 yds (298 yds/game), 2 TD, 1 INT (7.74 yds/att)

Against Seattle: 23/36 (63.9%), 172 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT (4.78 yds/att)

Given how well he did against the NO defense, I suppose you could be forgiven for thinking that Matt Ryan was still playing at an elite level this year.

If you are willing to look at strength of schedule I'll remind you that Seattle has played one of the easiest schedules in the NFL.

DVOA adjusts for strength of opponent, and Seattle still come out way ahead. Try again.

 

[Scottemojo]

So, what you are saying about the neutral field is that you expect the saints to lose this week?

I know what a neutral field means, genius. However, since they will never meet on one, it's all bullshit.

 

[Shadowhawk]

So, what you are saying about the neutral field is that you expect the saints to lose this week?

I know what a neutral field means, genius. However, since they will never meet on one, it's all bullshit.

Yep, but give the guy credit for having a ready-made excuse. If we win, he'll be back on Tuesday talking about how we only won because we played at home, and how the Saints are still a better team, etc.

 

[RolandDeschain]

It's alright guys, the Saints will get two shots to beat us this season. When they fail at both, they'll be out of excuses.

 

[Alexander]

So, what you are saying about the neutral field is that you expect the saints to lose this week?

I know what a neutral field means, genius. However, since they will never meet on one, it's all bullshit.

Yep, but give the guy credit for having a ready-made excuse. If we win, he'll be back on Tuesday talking about how we only won because we played at home, and how the Saints are still a better team, etc.

He doesn't come across as the kind of guy who will come back if his team loses.

 

[jhawk91]

These saints fans sure are a cocky bunch, win 7-10 on a neutral field? that's just crazy talk, I think we match up pretty well. Our run offense vs their run defense and even our defense to their offense. I think sproles could be an issue but otherwise I think we are fine

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Ignorance is bliss fo' fools befo' they actually have to play the SEAHAWKS. Lessons be learnt HARD at the CLink. Booooooyyyyeeeeee!!!

I'm paraphrasing Flavor Flav, obviously.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Ignorance is bliss fo' fools befo' they actually have to play the SEAHAWKS. Lessons be learnt HARD at the CLink. Booooooyyyyeeeeee!!!

I'm paraphrasing Flavor Flav, obviously.

Remember Tom Brady last year? We're much better this year. :stirthepot:

 

[Blitzer88]

The factor that worries me is the long layoff. If this was a regular schedule week, playing 7 days after our last game, I think we win easily.

But I think the hawks may come out flat after the long layoff.

Hope I am wrong!

Feel the same way. We never seem to play well after a bye week. Hope that changes this time around.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

The factor that worries me is the long layoff. If this was a regular schedule week, playing 7 days after our last game, I think we win easily.

But I think the hawks may come out flat after the long layoff.

Hope I am wrong!

Feel the same way. We never seem to play well after a bye week. Hope that changes this time around.

We never play at home or have MNF game after the bye either, specifically in Pete's tenure or with Russ driving the bus. You actually worried about that? Considering our actual history no matter our record or if it's a home or away game concerning MNF?

 

[Blitzer88]

The factor that worries me is the long layoff. If this was a regular schedule week, playing 7 days after our last game, I think we win easily.

But I think the hawks may come out flat after the long layoff.

Hope I am wrong!

Feel the same way. We never seem to play well after a bye week. Hope that changes this time around.

We never play at home or have MNF game after the bye either, specifically in Pete's tenure or with Russ driving the bus. You actually worried about that? Considering our actual history no matter our record or if it's a home or away game concerning MNF?

I'm always worried about everything.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Ok Blitzer...but really look it up and relax we got this.