Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seahawks will have to play a heck of a lot better then they did against Gb to win. If they can get pressure on Brady and rattle him early on, they have a chance. If they fail to get consistent pressure, it will likely be a long day for Seattle. The patriots will take a lot of exposure GB revealed against Seattle offense, which is already weak going into this game and keep Seattle in check in my opinion.
I don't know much about football really. I became a fan of the Seahawks in 1999 thanks to my husband who has been a fan since 1980. But what I do know is that it's almost impossible to predict a game like this. Almost everybody predicted the Broncos to win last year. And Seattle totally killed them. Just because they didn't play so great against GB doesn't mean anything when it comes to these guys.
What really matters is how they end that game and they came back in the last few minutes. It seems like this whole season they have come back in the second half.
I personally think they will win the SB.
Almost everybody predicted the Broncos to win last year. And Seattle totally killed them. Just because they didn't play so great against GB doesn't mean anything when it comes to these guys.
Truth. It's teams that grind out tough wins that win the big games usually. You can look back to last year when Denver killed NE (yes, I know it was only a 10 point game, but it wasn't even close) while Seattle won at the last second against SF (in a comeback win no less). Same thing this year. There's absolutely no value to place on NE blowing out Indianapolis.
Truth. It's teams that grind out tough wins that win the big games usually. You can look back to last year when Denver killed NE (yes, I know it was only a 10 point game, but it wasn't even close) while Seattle won at the last second against SF (in a comeback win no less). Same thing this year. There's absolutely no value to place on NE blowing out Indianapolis.
In watching every Pats game, I just put value on their resiliency. I've watched them play down to the not so good teams, and hang in against the better ones. I've watched them look terrible in the first half, and come back in the 2nd half lights out. I see the most well rounded Patriots team that I've seen in a decade.
Just like Seattle, the Patriots can beat any team on any day. I see no reason to vote against "my" Patriots, because I don't think either team has any distinct advantage against one another.
Truth. It's teams that grind out tough wins that win the big games usually. You can look back to last year when Denver killed NE (yes, I know it was only a 10 point game, but it wasn't even close) while Seattle won at the last second against SF (in a comeback win no less). Same thing this year. There's absolutely no value to place on NE blowing out Indianapolis.
There are all sorts of outcomes possible. I was watching an old broadcast of the 1992/3 NFC Championship Game between Dallas and San Francisco, which Dallas won 30-20. But there was a holding penalty against SF that was called bringing back an 80-yard pass play to Jerry Rice early in that game. What if that call got overlooked? What if Dallas special teams doesn't recover a fumble on a punt? What if Joe Montana plays instead of Steve Young. Maybe SF wins another squeaker and the SF dynasty rolls on and the Dallas dynasty never takes off. Who knows? What if Peyton Manning doesnt fumble in the end zone and connects on a huge pass play early?
Everything changes from play to play. I look at teams that are able to play bread and butter football. Which team can be confident of converting a 3rd and short running play? Which team's defense can effectively take away that confidence? Which team can own the line? Which team can effectively remove parts of the field?
When I look at this game, I think both teams are evenly matched. But Seattle probably has a better chance of playing 'bread and butter' football. Marshwn Lynch has a better chance of getting 4-5 yards on the Pats line than does Blount against the Seahawks line. Tom Brady is probably going to have a smaller field to work with than Russell Wilson will. And despite the fact that Brady is a more accomplished signal caller and passer, Russell Wilson has more ways to beat the opposing defense.
That's not to say that the Pats will lose. Maybe Brady can utilize tight space and force the secondary to cheat a little more, possibly opening up something big down field. Brady will have to hit his spots though. If he has a guy open down field, he has to connect. He probably won't get many of those opportunities, so every one counts, especially early.
There are all sorts of outcomes possible. I was watching an old broadcast of the 1992/3 NFC Championship Game between Dallas and San Francisco, which Dallas won 30-20. But there was a holding penalty against SF that was called bringing back an 80-yard pass play to Jerry Rice early in that game. What if that call got overlooked? What if Dallas special teams doesn't recover a fumble on a punt? What if Joe Montana plays instead of Steve Young. Maybe SF wins another squeaker and the SF dynasty rolls on and the Dallas dynasty never takes off. Who knows? What if Peyton Manning doesnt fumble in the end zone and connects on a huge pass play early?
Everything changes from play to play. I look at teams that are able to play bread and butter football. Which team can be confident of converting a 3rd and short running play? Which team's defense can effectively take away that confidence? Which team can own the line? Which team can effectively remove parts of the field?
When I look at this game, I think both teams are evenly matched. But Seattle probably has a better chance of playing 'bread and butter' football. Marshwn Lynch has a better chance of getting 4-5 yards on the Pats line than does Blount against the Seahawks line. Tom Brady is probably going to have a smaller field to work with than Russell Wilson will. And despite the fact that Brady is a more accomplished signal caller and passer, Russell Wilson has more ways to beat the opposing defense.
That's not to say that the Pats will lose. Maybe Brady can utilize tight space and force the secondary to cheat a little more, possibly opening up something big down field. Brady will have to hit his spots though. If he has a guy open down field, he has to connect. He probably won't get many of those opportunities, so every one counts, especially early.
This is one of my concerns. As great as Brady is, this year I have seen him multiple times in every game just be off target. Not a bad route by the receiver, but just his timing off. I guess I'm a bit nit picky given their record this year and the fact they are in the Super Bowl.
But to your point, since Brady can't do it with his legs, it's all on his arm (especially if the running game doesn't go anywhere). He has to be spot on because these teams are so evenly matched, and becuase Wilson poses a multiple threat.
Right now the Pats are the hottest team in football, they just kept the number 1 rated quarterback to 7 points. Have to go with whose hot. Actually the way both Green Bay and Seattle played today many teams with just a good game would have beat them. Its was a game of errors by offenses in those turnover ;not defense creating them. Only Lynch looked good in that game.
I not sure how you can say New England is the hottest team in football right now, considering they lost two of there final five game and barely beat the Jets in one of the weakest divisions in all of football. Whereas Seattle won eleven of their last twelve against some of the best teams in the NFL.
If you want to judge Seattle by one game then I have to point out the Jets and Bills games.
I think Seattle is a somewhat better team than New England.
I think the Patriots win the Super Bowl.
Why? Well, I think the uproar over the PSI of the footballs has left New England with a considerable chip on its shoulder. The last time their ability to win fairly was impugned (in 2007), the Patriots ripped off 18 consecutive wins and set a record for the most points ever scored in a season (since broken by the 2013 Broncos). Conversely, the Seahawks seem more preoccupied with the self-centered grandstanding and sneering typified by Marshawn Lynch.
Just my take. A victory by either team would not be all that surprising.
I don't see how the PSI stuff affects their motivation. They already have a chip on their shoulder. They've completely failed to win the big game for the past 10 years (minus a week) and many people, whether fair or unfair, place an asterisk next to their SB victories.
Pats win because they find a creative way to cheat. Just kidding....
This is a tough one to decide, but I will go Pats in a very close game, 27-23.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
