The difference between Revis and Sherman played out

Revis shadowed Baldwin all game and essentially shut him down.

The Patriots let Sherman defend his side, went to Edelman the other way numerous times for 9 catches 109 yards. Second most yardage in a game for him this season.

Even when Matthews got hot, the Patriots adjusted their defense and out Browner on him, which essentially shut him down for the game.

Should the Seahawks have adjusted? Where does Brady go if Edelman is shut down? He pretty much avoided Sherman all game.

The Patriots were regularly able to get their best WR on Seattle's worst CB. How can a defensive coordinator allow that to happen? I know Seattle just sticks with what they do no matter what, but this is the SB.

Sherman did move around a bit, but I agree with the gist of your post.

Revis allowed a touchdown . . . . Sherman did not.

Revis was beat several more times as well, but Wilson was hesitant to throw the ball his way.

Why change what we've done for the last 3 years? We've been one of the most dominating defense of all time playing it the same way every game.

cesame":34u4p856 said:

Revis shadowed Baldwin all game and essentially shut him down.

The Patriots let Sherman defend his side, went to Edelman the other way numerous times for 9 catches 109 yards. Second most yardage in a game for him this season.

Even when Matthews got hot, the Patriots adjusted their defense and out Browner on him, which essentially shut him down for the game.

Should the Seahawks have adjusted? Where does Brady go if Edelman is shut down? He pretty much avoided Sherman all game.

The Patriots were regularly able to get their best WR on Seattle's worst CB. How can a defensive coordinator allow that to happen? I know Seattle just sticks with what they do no matter what, but this is the SB.

Click to expand...

Baldwin got covered most of the game but when it counted he got the TD even vs Revis...


LTH

Hard to argue with OP much. Although could be that Simon is even worse when not playing the side he's accustomed to...nah that's a mathematical impossibility.

getnasty":ohsu684d said:

Why change what we've done for the last 3 years? We've been one of the most dominating defense of all time playing it the same way every game.

Click to expand...

It all changes when Lane goes out and Simon comes in

Why let Edelman line up against Seattle's worst CB for a large part of the game? That's just too easy. Simon was outmatched out there and it was painfully obvious from the moment he took over for Lane.

hawknation2015":2hywdjsu said:

Revis allowed a touchdown . . . . Sherman did not.

Revis was beat several more times as well, but Wilson was hesitant to throw the ball his way.

Click to expand...

You mean the ref's block on Revis allowed the TD? I was in shock with the "now that's a veteran WR, he knows how to use the ref to his advantage" comment.

BillBelichick":27bkzz7s said:

hawknation2015":27bkzz7s said:

Revis allowed a touchdown . . . . Sherman did not.

Revis was beat several more times as well, but Wilson was hesitant to throw the ball his way.

Click to expand...

You mean the ref's block on Revis allowed the TD? I was in shock with the "now that's a veteran WR, he knows how to use the ref to his advantage" comment.

Click to expand...

You should re-watch that play. Revis was grabbing Baldwin's jersey and then released it to avoid the holding call, which allowed Baldwin to break free. The ref is just part of the field, and Revis exaggerated the obstruction after he was beaten.

I think ur right. I think Sherman is better but we dont move him around. I really never like that about are scheme.

How can you not like that about our scheme? It's the same scheme that has lead us to back to back Superbowls and the leagues best defense 3 years in a row. Sherman locking down one side of the field allows Earl to roll over to the other side of the field. Just because we didn't execute on the last 2 drives doesn't mean we should abandon what we've done the last 3 years.

Earl wasn't Earl yesterday.

CodeWarrior":3ilaftwu said:

Earl wasn't Earl yesterday.

Click to expand...

A deep free safety can't really do much when they dink and dunk all day

getnasty":18oyin0o said:

How can you not like that about our scheme? It's the same scheme that has lead us to back to back Superbowls and the leagues best defense 3 years in a row. Sherman locking down one side of the field allows Earl to roll over to the other side of the field. Just because we didn't execute on the last 2 drives doesn't mean we should abandon what we've done the last 3 years.

Click to expand...

All fair points

But at the same time, if you put Sherm on Edelman and eliminate him (assuming Sherman could), that totally changes NE offense.

Imagine it the other way around. Say Revis stayed on one side of the field and defended Lockette most of the day, leaving Baldwin to match up on Browner or Butler. That changes the entire offense for Seattle and makes it easier. If Seattle could consistently get Baldwin on the other teams #3 CB all game Baldwin would end up with no less than 100 yards receiving. Doug may not be a #1, but there's no doubt he can beat a lot of #2 CB's in the NFL, and definitely torches every #3 CB.

That's exactly what NE got with Simon on Edelman. That is way too easy. Their #1 WR against Seattle's #4 CB.

Edelman got 109 yds on bunches of little catches. Matthews got 109 yds on 4 catches. NE defense gave up the big plays. Seattle's did not. If Lane isn't injured, we probably win that game.

Well, if Lynch gets the ball we win that game.

Do you think Revis would have given up the 44 yard completion to Matthews or the Kearse bobble catch if he'd been playing the left side of the field like Sherman does?

Revis shut down one receiver at the expense of 4 others. Sherman shut down one half of the field at the expense of one other half. We wouldn't be having this conversation if New England's 4th string CB hadn't come up with a game clinching int. That tells you how important shadowing number 1s is.

Pretty sure they would have attacked and abused Simon even if Sherman shadowed Edelman

hawknation2015":2jn6whlx said:

Revis allowed a touchdown . . . . Sherman did not.

Revis was beat several more times as well, but Wilson was hesitant to throw the ball his way.

Click to expand...

I don't give a crap what Sherm allowed! What is important is what the Hawks defense allowed. The difference between the two may have just come down to one having a coach that is flexable and strong with his x's and o's and the other having a stubburn system coach who is no chess player but a great motivator.
I have little doubt Sherm could have shut down Eddleman but he was not allowed to do so. It probably didn't help that our DC was busy making Atlanta plans the last two weeks though.

Meeker":1pamvebi said:

Pretty sure they would have attacked and abused Simon even if Sherman shadowed Edelman

Click to expand...

Your pretty sure huh? Well I'm positive that we lost because we failed to even attempt to adjust at all.

brimsalabim":372qy6rx said:

hawknation2015":372qy6rx said:

Revis allowed a touchdown . . . . Sherman did not.

Revis was beat several more times as well, but Wilson was hesitant to throw the ball his way.

Click to expand...

I don't give a crap what Sherm allowed! What is important is what the Hawks defense allowed. The difference between the two may have just come down to one having a coach that is flexable and strong with his x's and o's and the other having a stubburn system coach who is no chess player but a great motivator.
I have little doubt Sherm could have shut down Eddleman but he was not allowed to do so. It probably didn't help that our DC was busy making Atlanta plans the last two weeks though.

Click to expand...

That's absurd. This defense has been No. 1 for three straight years. Belichick has never produced a Top 3 defense.

There are numerous advantages in our scheme for allowing Sherman to shut down the left side. A healthy defense destroys the Patriots. An unhealthy defense still put us in a position to win the game if they would just run the ball on the one-yard line.