Superbowl Vet: Seahawks Defense would have dominated any offense in NFL history

What happens frequently with these writers/analyst is:

A) "Team A has one of the best offenses in NFL history"
B) Team A is trashed scoring 8 points
C) Logic argues Team B > by 40 points > "one of the best offenses in NFL history"

They fall victim to their earlier bonehead opinions. Instead of back peddling, they just add more BS.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
He's correct. They got a Legion of Boom secondary that nobody can compete with.

Our s**tty offense led by everyone's favorite whooping boy Colin Kaepernick almost (should have) beaten them IN SEATTLE.

Yeah, nobody can compete with the legion of boom...child please....

Originally posted by Forty_Niners:

Originally posted by Niners816:

I don't think any of the last 10 championship teams could touch any of the pre-salary cap(or early cap teams ie '94 niners, '95 boys and '96 packers) Super Bowl teams

I'd include 97/98 Broncos. Solid defense, great running game and versatile offense. Once their special teams click, they didn't have a flaw. I hope some don't discredit them merely because we won a very emotional home game versus the 1997 Broncos at home. 1998 Denver started the season 13-0, even with Bobby Brister starting 4 of those wins.ns.

I agree with those broncos teams, but I always seen 1996 as the tipping point of the dynasty era. In 1996 you had both second year expansion teams make the conference title games. The fact that a second year team could be within a game of a title always signaled the on set of parity and death of the true dynasty.

Originally posted by Forty_Niners:
What happens frequently with these writers/analyst is:

A) "Team A has one of the best offenses in NFL history"
B) Team A is trashed scoring 8 points
C) Logic argues Team B > by 40 points > "one of the best offenses in NFL history"

They fall victim to their earlier bonehead opinions. Instead of back peddling, they just add more BS.

Yup, this pretty much happens every year. They tend to over-sensationalize everything.

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by Forty_Niners:
What happens frequently with these writers/analyst is:

A) "Team A has one of the best offenses in NFL history"
B) Team A is trashed scoring 8 points
C) Logic argues Team B > by 40 points > "one of the best offenses in NFL history"

They fall victim to their earlier bonehead opinions. Instead of back peddling, they just add more BS.

Yup, this pretty much happens every year. They tend to over-sensationalize everything.

There was an "expert" that gave the Seahawks an "F" for their 2012 draft which included Irvin, Wagner, and RW. Admittedly Irvin and Wagner aren't all-pro or even pro-bowl players in their second year. But I think it's safe to say all three players contributed their fair share in helping the Hawks win the championship this year. All the "experts" also predicting the Broncos AND the Niners would beat the Seahawks this year. There will be times they will be right, and there will be many times they're wrong. As others have said, they pretty much have to make bold statements to be more entertaining, who the hell would want to read articles and/or watch TV with analysts doing nothing but saying EH I could see it going either way...

Originally posted by zaghawk:

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by Forty_Niners:
What happens frequently with these writers/analyst is:

A) "Team A has one of the best offenses in NFL history"
B) Team A is trashed scoring 8 points
C) Logic argues Team B > by 40 points > "one of the best offenses in NFL history"

They fall victim to their earlier bonehead opinions. Instead of back peddling, they just add more BS.

Yup, this pretty much happens every year. They tend to over-sensationalize everything.

There was an "expert" that gave the Seahawks an "F" for their 2012 draft which included Irvin, Wagner, and RW. Admittedly Irvin and Wagner aren't all-pro or even pro-bowl players in their second year. But I think it's safe to say all three players contributed their fair share in helping the Hawks win the championship this year. All the "experts" also predicting the Broncos AND the Niners would beat the Seahawks this year. There will be times they will be right, and there will be many times they're wrong. As others have said, they pretty much have to make bold statements to be more entertaining, who the hell would want to read articles and/or watch TV with analysts doing nothing but saying EH I could see it going either way...

Wilson, Wagner and Irvin are all overrated. I give that draft a D-. And i give this post an D+ for effort.

I may give them the nod for best secondary ever but they are tons of great coaches and players it's silly to say that they would dominate every QB in NFL history.

Originally posted by 9er2k:
I may give them the nob for best secondary ever but they are tons of great coaches and players it's silly to say that they would dominate every QB in NFL history.

Yup. It would be wrong as well. Especially when Kapernick beat them this year and almost did it again in their vagina looking stadium. And this is a second year starter we are talking about.

Everything that could have gone wrong for the donkys did.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2014/02/05/cbs-tasker-seahawks-would-have-dominated-in-qb-in-nfl-history/


LOL is this guy on crack? Those niner teams from the 80s would have dismantled this Seahawks team. Colin Kaepernick was nearly a foot away from beating this Seahawks team in Seattle. Joe Montana is about 1000 times better than Kap. The 1989 49er team would beat any team in the history of the game. We dominated every opponent and won 55-10 against Elway in the superbowl. Sherman would have none chance of covering Rice. You got the greatest QB, WR, and Safety of all time on that team. Seahawks offense might not even score on that 89 SF defense. It would be a major ass kicking.

My, my, how the passage of time turns extraordinary teams into super-human legends. Don't get me wrong. I loved those teams. But let's try to remember that 1986's #2 defense in the league, the NY Football Giants beat the same team you're talking about 49-3 in the divisional playoffs. There wasn't a lot of difference in the offense from 86 to 89. That team also got beaten in 87 by the wildcard Vikings team and that team also went to 6-5 in '88 before turning their season around and going on a run to win that year's Super Bowl. The '89 team was amazing and I believe still holds the record for the greatest point differential through the playoffs. But let's not pretend that even that team wouldn't have had a problem and a challenge with this year's Seahawk defense. Come on. That's a great defense and in that Super Bowl, they were playing at their best.

The difference between the 80's teams and the 2013 Broncos is we actually showed up to play and they didn't we had a QB who was the definition of the word clutch they have a known choke artist as a QB who can only win in the regular season. The Broncos are soft and only rely on the Manning lead offense any one see how terrible there defense was??? the seahawks just showed what the Broncos are with out Manning. If Manning get hurts in pre season and is done for the year this Broncos team goes 8-8 or worse.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Yup. It would be wrong as well. Especially when Kapernick beat them this year and almost did it again in their vagina looking stadium. And this is a second year starter we are talking about.

Everything that could have gone wrong for the donkys did.

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2014/02/05/cbs-tasker-seahawks-would-have-dominated-in-qb-in-nfl-history/


LOL is this guy on crack? Those niner teams from the 80s would have dismantled this Seahawks team. Colin Kaepernick was nearly a foot away from beating this Seahawks team in Seattle. Joe Montana is about 1000 times better than Kap. The 1989 49er team would beat any team in the history of the game. We dominated every opponent and won 55-10 against Elway in the superbowl. Sherman would have none chance of covering Rice. You got the greatest QB, WR, and Safety of all time on that team. Seahawks offense might not even score on that 89 SF defense. It would be a major ass kicking.

My, my, how the passage of time turns extraordinary teams into super-human legends. Don't get me wrong. I loved those teams. But let's try to remember that 1986's #2 defense in the league, the NY Football Giants beat the same team you're talking about 49-3 in the divisional playoffs. There wasn't a lot of difference in the offense from 86 to 89. That team also got beaten in 87 by the wildcard Vikings team and that team also went to 6-5 in '88 before turning their season around and going on a run to win that year's Super Bowl. The '89 team was amazing and I believe still holds the record for the greatest point differential through the playoffs. But let's not pretend that even that team wouldn't have had a problem and a challenge with this year's Seahawk defense. Come on. That's a great defense and in that Super Bowl, they were playing at their best.

I think the parts that gets people is they said dominate.There were too many great coaches and players in history to say that word.That's like saying the 49ers team year x would every Superbowl team ever.Silly.I mean come on they may have dominated the Broncos but had trouble with the Texans this year.

I'm having flashbacks of Young and Shanahan going over flashcards for hours leading up to the Super Bowl.

Especially since Steve possessed the mobility to keep the chains moving, because our 1994 offensive line was the weakness. It's frustrating Steve is still somewhat discounted because of Joe's success. Steve Young is the prototypical Quarterback for todays NFL.

Originally posted by 9er2k:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Yup. It would be wrong as well. Especially when Kapernick beat them this year and almost did it again in their vagina looking stadium. And this is a second year starter we are talking about.

Everything that could have gone wrong for the donkys did.

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2014/02/05/cbs-tasker-seahawks-would-have-dominated-in-qb-in-nfl-history/


LOL is this guy on crack? Those niner teams from the 80s would have dismantled this Seahawks team. Colin Kaepernick was nearly a foot away from beating this Seahawks team in Seattle. Joe Montana is about 1000 times better than Kap. The 1989 49er team would beat any team in the history of the game. We dominated every opponent and won 55-10 against Elway in the superbowl. Sherman would have none chance of covering Rice. You got the greatest QB, WR, and Safety of all time on that team. Seahawks offense might not even score on that 89 SF defense. It would be a major ass kicking.

My, my, how the passage of time turns extraordinary teams into super-human legends. Don't get me wrong. I loved those teams. But let's try to remember that 1986's #2 defense in the league, the NY Football Giants beat the same team you're talking about 49-3 in the divisional playoffs. There wasn't a lot of difference in the offense from 86 to 89. That team also got beaten in 87 by the wildcard Vikings team and that team also went to 6-5 in '88 before turning their season around and going on a run to win that year's Super Bowl. The '89 team was amazing and I believe still holds the record for the greatest point differential through the playoffs. But let's not pretend that even that team wouldn't have had a problem and a challenge with this year's Seahawk defense. Come on. That's a great defense and in that Super Bowl, they were playing at their best.

I think the parts that get's people is they said dominate.There were too many great coaches and players in history to say that word.That's like saying the 49ers team year x would every Superbowl team ever.Silly.I mean come on they may have dominated the Broncos but had trouble with the Texans this year.

Exactly. They almost lost to third string QBs and bottom dwellers. Who knows, next year they could miss the playoffs. That is how the modern NFL is these days.

Originally posted by zaghawk:

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by Forty_Niners:
What happens frequently with these writers/analyst is:

A) "Team A has one of the best offenses in NFL history"
B) Team A is trashed scoring 8 points
C) Logic argues Team B > by 40 points > "one of the best offenses in NFL history"

They fall victim to their earlier bonehead opinions. Instead of back peddling, they just add more BS.

Yup, this pretty much happens every year. They tend to over-sensationalize everything.

There was an "expert" that gave the Seahawks an "F" for their 2012 draft which included Irvin, Wagner, and RW. Admittedly Irvin and Wagner aren't all-pro or even pro-bowl players in their second year. But I think it's safe to say all three players contributed their fair share in helping the Hawks win the championship this year. All the "experts" also predicting the Broncos AND the Niners would beat the Seahawks this year. There will be times they will be right, and there will be many times they're wrong. As others have said, they pretty much have to make bold statements to be more entertaining, who the hell would want to read articles and/or watch TV with analysts doing nothing but saying EH I could see it going either way...

LOL that expert should be shot. I remember many here on this forum thought it was a great draft.

EVERY year the experts fall in love with the offenses producing video game numbers. I think most people who really followed the Niners and Seahawks knew they would spank anyone the AFC had to offer, especially one-dimensional passing teams with average defenses.

Actually now that I'm thinking about it the 94-95 Niners would have won.Steve Young would have run against them like Colin but had the accuracy to make the passes needed and Deion and Eric Davis would not have let that Russell Wilson hail Mary go down(Thanks Carlos )