chris98251":1rbwwa0z said:
Denver was the best AFC team, I would pit all the NFC West against them and would say the Seahawks, 49ers, and Rams would have beat them 9 out of ten times and the Cards probably 7 of ten. Carolina 7 of ten as well.
They showed take the RAC away and they are a different team, beat them up and they collapse, all the NFC West teams play that way and Carolina as well.
I do think that Denver faces a matchup issue against physical defenses, but I also think Denver would fare okay against any non-Seattle team in the Super Bowl.
The reason being that Peyton Manning is a master of neutralizing the pass rush with his quick throws, and the reason Seattle was so tough for him was because Seattle's press scheme takes time to unravel and is extremely strong in the early seconds of a play due to the impact of press coverage. We also stop offenses from the secondary first rather than the pass rush, really the only reason Manning was bothered by Seattle's rush was because there were almost never good targets to find within the first four seconds. It was a matchup nightmare for Manning, unique to Seattle's defense.
But with other defenses like SF, STL, and Carolina, they are weighted much, much more to the pass rush / front seven side of the spectrum and are the kind of defenses Manning has beaten for years and years. Last year's Cardinals team had a decently talented back seven so they might have given Manning a little trouble, but nothing like what Seattle did.
Seattle's "vanilla" cover 3 scheme also served as a big disadvantage for Manning, as it basically eliminated his ability to impact a game with the audibles he makes on every single play. Again, this is something that is unique to Seattle, at least among the good NFL defenses.
Lets not forget that a better SF team in 2012 still lost in the Super Bowl to the 10-6 Baltimore Ravens. I don't think it is any kind of shoe in that they would beat Denver, in fact I would probably favor Denver slightly in that matchup. The rest of the NFC teams would have a tough time as well.
As far as the 43-8 game, not to diminish how awesome Seattle was but that is not a performance we can expect every week. Wilson was phenominal on 3rd down, our receivers were extra clutch, Harvin made some huge plays, and the turnovers we got seemed to come at the most backbreaking moments. Denver also quit basically just after halftime, so the final score was a bit inflated.
Scottemojo":1rbwwa0z said:
I have difficulty really saying anyone is the best right now, I simply see them as who has a chance to win the Bowl and who doesn't.
Looking backwards, I would say that Seattle has been the best NFL team over the last two seasons, I would even go so far as to consider it "obvious."
Looking forward, that is always a challenge. Teams change, new problems emerge. Bowie and Coleman crippled our offense last year and they are currently in pole position to start in 2014. Maybe they improve, or maybe a healthy Harvin offsets things. Maybe some "meh" players become good like McDonald last year, or maybe some good players turn to crap (Unger). The only thing I can expect for sure is change. And when you are as good as Seattle, it is hard to retain that level of excellence with all those changes.
I think about how Seattle went from such a dominant run heavy team from 2001 to 2005 to a crappy finesse pass happy team overnight when Hutch left and Alexander racked up injuries. Sometimes things change dramatically, suddenly.
Despite Lynch's excellence, I thought our offense looked a bit more finesse last season compared to 2012, and 2014 feels like another step in the finesse direction. There are also some cloudy areas on defense too. I could see 11-5 or maybe even 10-6 if the offense falls too much out of tune. I could also see 19-0 if the O-line finally plays up to its full ability and fullback formations stop being throwaway plays. Thanksgiving game aside, I really like the sched for a 19-0 scenario.
