Originally posted by vermonator:
Every time he opens his mouth it's Belichick this (old team), Drew Brees that (old team), and now he's riding the Seahawk's jock (old team). Whenever he's asked about the 49ers, he begins with a condescending chuckle. On the Game, yesterday, I could not believe the homerism with this guy, I doubt he watches any film, but claims all these over whelming match-ups the Seahawks have over the 49ers. Miller over Vernon Davis, Wilson over Kaep, Lynch over Gore, Golden Tate over Crabtree. Bobby Wagner over Willis, and so on. I would agree Richard Sherman is better than any of our DBs but the rest, not even close. Your thoughts.
Originally posted by vermonator:
He didn't name names, he just said if you look at the match-ups on paper, the Seahawks have the edge on nearly every position. Who else could he be talking about?
I don't agree with the assessment but, most likely, if he was saying the Seahawks have match-up advantages, he didn't mean RB vs. RB or WR vs. WR...he meant, for example, Crabtree vs. Sherman, Davis vs. Chancellor or Thomas, Tate vs. Brown, etc. Again, I don't agree with it but I've heard this in a couple of places this week (i.e. Seahawks secondary can shut down the 49ers WR's and Davis, Lynch has had 3 of the last 5 100 yard plus games against the 49ers defense over the last 3 years, etc.)
It ignores a lot, including, but not limited to, the 49ers OL has against the Seahawks DL, Gore has consistently had good games against the Seahawks as well, Aldon Smith and Brooks vs. the Seahawk tackles, etc.
This isn't rocket science...this game comes down to: (1) withstanding the initial avalanche in the first half of the first quarter; (2) not turning the ball over and (3) winning the battles in the trenches. The match-up advantages the 49ers have should allow them to all three of those and if they do, they'll win.