Can anyone Breakdown the Philly Game?

[Vegaseahawk]

I'm reading posts here of some who believe that we will have little trouble defeating Philly next week, while others seem to be worried about the game. Monkey says we are specifically built to beat teams like the Eagles. Can anyone elaborate on this matchup on a more detailed, (position), basis?

[HumanCockroach]

I suppose we can start with the obvious. Philly is built very similar to teams like NO, Atlanta, Denver, they are built to win track meets outscoring the opponent and hoping to get big plays from their ST or Defense giving them additional opportunities. Seattle is built to "grind" out games, hold onto the football, and eventually break the opponents defense while keeping the opposing offense from scoring.

I'm not going to say I'm not worried about playing Philly, as things could go wrong for Seattle, but Monkey is indeed correct in the assertion that Seattle is built to beat teams assembled like Philly is. Philly hasn't created an invinceable team, just one that is fast. I pointed out in another thread that Philly has two wins against teams with winning records ( on the road) and I think it is worth noting that those two teams have winning records in large part due to who they play as well. The combined record of teams Philly has beat at home is abysmal ( like 13-58-1 bad) with NONE of those wins against a quality opponent. It really IS a list of who's who fighting for the number one draft pick ( Jacksonville, Tennessee, Washington, Giants etc).

Philly can indeed win this game, but IMHO it will take early mistakes by Seattle that will allow that to happen. ST turnovers, Interceptions and or fumbles, early and often. If Seattle wins the turnover battle in this one, I could see this getting bad for Philly.

[c_hawkbob]

I don't have time to go in depth from work but the Reader's Digest version is we'll win 19-3. It's tradition.

[obiken]

Sanchez drops back to pass, Hawks rush, Sanchez-who is a turnover machine against average Defenses anyway-Christmas comes early for LOB.

[Vegaseahawk]

I don't have time to go in depth from work but the Reader's Digest version is we'll win 19-3. It's tradition.

How about Hawks, 38-6?

[THX-1138]

Man, I hope you guys are right. The Iggles under Chipper seem to be this abberation that runs a bunch of plays as fast as they can and tracks weird stats like "points per drive" and "plays run per game". I guess if you run a lot of plays quickly in order to score often then you end up giving your opponent a bunch of opportunities to get the ball.

[NorthHawk]

It's interesting that posters here say we are built to beat teams like Philly and posters there say Philly is built to beat teams like Seattle - or comments here that we match up well against them and they say they match up well against us.

I think we have to worry about their DL/front 7 vs our OL. Their front 7 are playing pretty well and I think Russell will have to be on the move again this week.
We might have to go deep early to get them to back off from stuffing the run and give Marshawn some room.

Defensively we have to stop their run game as well - McCoy can change the game if he gets on a roll.
Add in pressure on the QB and maybe Sanchez will revert to his Jet days and start throwing picks.

[Zorn76]

The generic Eagles' profile is that they rank high in offense (5th passing/6th rushing), and low on defense (26th vs pass/13th vs run).

They are 3-3 vs teams with a .500 record or better (W's vs Indy, Hou, Dallas/ losses vs SF,AZ, and GB).
Six of their 9 wins have been by double digit margins, though as others have mentioned, these have come at the expense of losing (record) teams.

Sanchez has been playing decent overall - 4-1 - since he took over from the injured Foles.
The Eagles did get Smoked in GB (losing 53-20), but are perfect at home this year (6-0).

It's going to be a tough game.
The Seahawks are 3-3 away, with the last big road win being SF on Thanksgiving. That should give us a confidence boost heading into this thing. Philly crushed Dallas, so they're coming off a big win as well.

IMO, it's the usual recipe for Seattle to win - run the ball, stop the run. We're gonna load the box and force Sanchez to win by passing. We also got to get our s*** wired tight in terms of our special teams. We were very fortunate that we avoided yet another disaster last game during one of Ryan's punts, which should have been blocked. We have been extra sloppy there in several games this season.

Weather right now is forecasted to be around 50 degrees by kickoff, no snow or rain (from what I read), so we should be good there. We play fine in bad weather anyway.

It's gonna be about dictating the pace. We'll want to grind it out, Philly wants to be on a fast break. I like our chances against Sanchez. I don't think he'll do well against a defense like ours, and he's gonna be asked to throw a lot more than he'd like. When he does, I believe our D will force him into turnovers.

I think it'll be close, but we're on a roll right now.

Seahawks, 23-20.

[HumanCockroach]

It's interesting that posters here say we are built to beat teams like Philly and posters there say Philly is built to beat teams like Seattle - or comments here that we match up well against them and they say they match up well against us.

I think we have to worry about their DL/front 7 vs our OL. Their front 7 are playing pretty well and I think Russell will have to be on the move again this week.
We might have to go deep early to get them to back off from stuffing the run and give Marshawn some room.

Defensively we have to stop their run game as well - McCoy can change the game if he gets on a roll.
Add in pressure on the QB and maybe Sanchez will revert to his Jet days and start throwing picks.

Not really understanding how a team to win a track meet, aka score more points, like a lot of points to the point of simply scoring obscene amounts of points, while ignoring defense is "built to beat" a pound it out, throttle the clock kind of team??? Could you explain that? I see Philly as a Denver with a worse defense, and built to beat the Dallas, Broncos, New Orleans of the NFL landscape, not one that is built to play it close to the vest and win in the fourth quarter with a FG kind of set up....

Seattle's whole plan is to keep the ball from the opposing offense and limit opportunities, while Philly seems to be built with a plan of who cares, lets keep taking shots, and eventually we'll outscore the other team because we had MORE opportunities...

Just really curious how you see that as "built to beat" the style of team Seattle plays with. Seems like the whole crux of the issue, is Seattle does NOT give you those opportunities, which is what those types of teams COUNT on to do their damage.

[obiken]

The pressure, the Das Boot pressure!!! They will crack like a walnut. 3 weeks ago I would have predicted them.

[monkey]

I don't have time to breakdown all of the reasons I can think of that show how we are specifically built to beat teams like the Eagles, but I can do this really quickly.
Read this: http://www.fieldgulls.com/seahawks-notes/2014/2/4/5377238/seahawks-XLVIII-extinction-level-event-manning-mediocre-mediocre-me-di-o-cre-mixing-metaphors
I was telling anyone who would listen, at and through the beginning of last year, that 1. we would win the Super Bowl, and 2. the Broncos were NOT the team to beat, and in fact, were a TERRIBLE match-up for us, and as a result we would easily beat them.

The reasons I said that? 1. We had footballs best team, by far. 2. Seattle was built by Pete and John SPECIFICALLY to destroy those teams in the NFL who are lucky enough to have drafted a good QB, and who are built around a high volume passing game.
My evidence for that is all the destroyed top tier QB's left in our wake since Wilson became our QB. He's beaten Manning (Peyton) twice (Eli) once, Brees twice, Rodgers twice, Brady once etc... in fact, the Seahawks since Wilson are perfect against the top three QB's Brees Manning and Brady, because we are built to beat those teams. The list of good NFL QB's we've beaten since Wilson has taken the reigns is quite extensive, and not coincidental.

We counter high volume passing teams with the exact opposite strategy; we run, control the clock, keep games close and relatively low scoring, and pour the majority of our monetary resources, not into offense, but into defense, and SPECIFICALLY the secondary! The LOB!

We are, as the article I linked above called us, an "apex predator". Pocket passers, who would otherwise be at the top of the food chain, are OUR FOOD!
This is why it seems at times we have more trouble with the Rams, or with back up QB's or teams that are built similar to us (the Chiefs for example), than we do with Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady.

[RiverDog]

There's a lot of good, unbiased 12's that think we will have no problem with the Eagles. Most of them cite the fact that they haven't done well against teams with top 10 defenses, but a lot of those games came before Mark Sanchez re-invented himself. He's playing the best football of his career.

I have a good feeling about this game because we've gotten some key players, specifically Wagner and Kam, healthy again and we're starting to play that great Seahawk defense that we're so used to seeing that has been absent for the better part of this season. Russell seems to have gotten over his slump and the offensive line did a little better job protecting him the past couple of games. As long as we don't turn the ball over, take advantage of our scoring opportunities, and don't give up any big plays, I think we'll be fine.

But I'm not nearly as confident as others. The Eagles didn't win those 9 games with smoke and mirrors. They're a legitimate playoff team that won big in their last game and are looking forward to facing the reigning SB champs. It's definitely the toughest game remaining on our schedule. I'm picking us to win, but I am doing so with some degree of trepidation. I expect this game to have a playoff type atmosphere about it.

[monkey]

The Eagles didn't win those 9 games with smoke and mirrors.

Hmmmm.... well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
Every time the Eagles play a good team, they get killed. Why? Because your description is EXACTLY how they have been winning, they have been winning by smoke and mirrors. First, they've played almost no one, and the few good teams they've played beat them; and second, It's a gimmicky offense, one that Pete Carroll knows all about, knows quite well. Tough, physical teams give the Eagles problems. Mark Sanchez (who Pete also knows quite well) is still Mark Sanchez, he's NOT Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers or...well... actually I almost wish he was, because we're perfect against those guys.

Look at who has beaten the Eagles this year, the Packers (a good team, but one who we've already beaten once this year), the Cardinals, and the Niners, (Two teams who are built similarly to the Seahawks, with physical defenses). Does that give you an idea of what it takes to beat the Eagles? Either outscore them with a superior offense (Packers killed them ugly) or beat them down with physical defense, (Niners and Cards both did this).

Look, I'm not saying we're unstoppable or that the game will be easy, or that it's fate that we'll win, I'm simply saying that this type of team is EXACTLY who Pete built the Seahawks to beat. We may not win, we certainly won't if we play poorly on the road, BUT, we are a better team, and we are built and designed to beat teams like the Eagles. That gives me confidence.

[RiverDog]

"The Eagles didn't win those 9 games with smoke and mirrors."

Hmmmm.... well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
Every time the Eagles play a good team, they get killed. Why? Because your description is EXACTLY how they have been winning, they have been winning by smoke and mirrors. It's a gimmicky offense, one that Pete Carroll knows all about, knows quite well. Tough, physical teams give the Eagles problems. Mark Sanchez (who Pete also knows quite well) is still Mark Sanchez, he's NOT Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers or...well... actually I almost wish he was, because we're perfect against those guys.

Look at who has beaten the Eagles this year, the Packers (a good team, but one who we've already beaten once this year), the Cardinals, and the Niners, (Two teams who are built similarly to the Seahawks, with physical defenses). Does that give you an idea of what it takes to beat the Eagles? Either outscore them with a superior offense (Packers killed them ugly) or beat them down with physical defense, (Niners and Cards both did this).

Look, I'm not saying we're unstoppable or that the game will be easy, or that it's fate that we'll win, I'm simply saying that this type of team is EXACTLY who Pete built the Seahawks to beat. We may not win, we certainly won't if we play poorly on the road, BUT, we are a better team, and we are built and designed to beat teams like the Eagles. That gives me confidence.

They just got through beating a team that cleaned our clock in our own house by holding the league's leading rusher to a paltry 73 yards on 20 carries. They're undefeated at home this season. They have one of the best pass rushes in the league matched up against one of our major weaknesses, protecting the QB. They lost two games by under a touchdown and could easily be 11-1. Sanchez is a lot different QB than when Pete had him eons ago. They've had an extended break just as we have. This is not a team or a situation to be taken lightly. We're gonna have to bring our 'A' game.

I like us in this game for the reasons you mentioned, but it could very easily turn into a very bad experience. This is one of the better teams in the conference.

[kalibane]

I won't go so far as to call it Smoke and Mirrors but they are not as good as their record either.

They would worry me more if they had DeSean Jackson but Maclin and Cooper are not the types of receivers that give the Seahawks trouble. Sanchez is still Sanchez and if you get pressure on him he'll make poor decisions and turn the ball over.

The whole key to playing Philly is to not get rattled by their pace and don't give up big plays. If you force them to actually execute long drives they aren't as scary as you think. They are straight middle of the road (16th) in offensive DVOA. Their pass rush is a lot like the pass rush of the Greatest Show on Turf Rams. If you let them get out on you and they can pin their ears back then it's a problem. If you are ahead or keep the game close they are wholly unspectacular.

If this game wasn't sandwiched between two SF and two Cardinals games a piece I wouldn't be all that worried about it. What worries me is that they are just a good team in the middle of a fairly brutal stretch of scheduling and it's on the road.

[BelizeHawk]

One telling statistic that may indicate the Eagles are not quite as good as their record is 28 turnovers. That is more than 2 a game and leads leads the league. The top 4 teams in ball security?
Green Bay 8
New England 9
Seattle 9
Denver 12

The Bottom 4 teams?

NYG 25
Oakland 25
Tampa Bay 26
Philadelphia 28

With the exception of Philly these rankings could be interchangeable with most power rankings.
Philly has been able to somewhat mitigate their high number of turnovers by forcing a lot of turnovers (they are fifth in the league with 22).
Our ability to hold on to the ball coupled with the Eagles propensity for turnovers is the number one reason the Hawks will win.
I think the second reason is our ability to run the ball and limit the other team's TOP. The Seahawks are ranked 6th in TOP and that is with the abysmally lopsided games against SD (17 minutes TOP for Hawks)and Dallas (22 min TOP). Keeping that Eagles offense off the field by sustaining long time gouging drives will be critical.

[HumanCockroach]

Big difference between week 5 and week 14 RD. In between, Dallas has lost games to teams like the Skins, Dallas isn't the same team ( and hasn't been since playing Seattle) and neither is Seattle, I would avoid trying to base play based on who a team lost to or didn't 9 weeks ago, Seattle and Dallas are not the same teams that faced off in week five and there are insane amounts of evidence to that.

I agree that Seattle can lose this game ( they can, and anyone can lose any game at any point) but basing it on a seriously inept home schedule and one win against a team Philly IS actually built to beat ( that whole "track meet" thing with little defense) doesn't preclude Seattle from winning this game, or make it tougher than it is. Philly beats inferior opponents, is Seattle that? We'll see in a few short days. If I was placing a wager on the game, I know which of the two I would be placing said wager on, and it would be the team that has three times the amount of "quality wins" which isn't Philly at this point.

[monkey]

To add to what HC was saying, the Eagles have gotten HUGE breaks this year, especially on special teams, where the breaks have offset a lot of stupid mistakes they've made and gotten away with. They've let a lot of turnovers get away from them, and somehow gotten lucky enough to not have been largely affected by them. Will that hold up against the Seahawks? Maybe...the Seahawks offense has had some difficulty turning turnovers into points, BUT the Seahawks defense is once again forcing them, unlike earlier in the season, and seems to be playing with the intensity we saw from them last year.
Generally speaking, you CANNOT make the kinds of mistakes the Eagles have gotten away with against other teams, against the Seahawks.

The way I see it, Sanchez will throw some picks, he just will and we all know it, (I'd say two for certain, maybe more) and those two likely picks ought to be enough for the win, since we should win the overall turnover battle quite easily.
IMO Philly is just like the Cardinals, HUGELY overrated, based mostly on a favorable schedule. Yes, they've beaten the teams they should beat, but they've lost to LITERALLY every team that I thought they would on their schedule before the season started.
Philly looks to me like a good regular season team that will rack up wins against lesser opponents, then fold quickly in the playoffs when they play legitimate contenders which the Seattle Seahawks are.

[HumanCockroach]

I'm not discreditting Philly beating teams they SHOULD beat if they are even a somewhat good team, I'm simply pointing out the quality of the opponents lined up in front of them. Philly is 3-3 against teams with .500 records or better ( guess I didn't include Houston originally, but honestly, I wasn't aware they WERE a .500 team, and again that comes back to opponents and schedule right? ) Philly isn't "doing it with smoke and mirrors" IMHO, but there is a vast difference between beating "bad" teams at home ( 6-0 in that circumstance) and playing .500 against quality opponents. I'm not even sure how "quality" those opponents they beat were to be quite honest. Dallas? Maybe, but since the week after Seattle they are also a .500 team, Houston? Not what I would call a "quality" team by any stretch, Indy? Maybe, I suppose I would agree with that, but again, what has Indy played?? And THAT is EXACTLY the type of team I pointed out Philly was BUILT to beat ( all offense, track meet) when faced with rugged, smash mouth teams, Philly has wilted, and lost.

That does NOT mean I am saying Phillyh has zero chance, to me the ONE important facet is how Seattle handles Shady, Sproles and Polk, IF Seattle can shut down the run game ( as they have done to Arizona and SF the last two weeks) it could be a long , long day for the Eagles, if not? The reverse could be true. Not in the least interested in seeing Sanchize able to run effective play action for this game...

[monkey]

to me the ONE important facet is how Seattle handles Shady, Sproles and Polk, IF Seattle can shut down the run game ( as they have done to Arizona and SF the last two weeks) it could be a long , long day for the Eagles, if not? The reverse could be true. Not in the least interested in seeing Sanchize able to run effective play action for this game...

One of the biggest advantages we have now that Bobby Wagner is back. and Wright is back to his spot, is our ability to sniff out and quickly extinguish the screen plays and the swing passes to the half back that Philly has lived off of.
Both McCoy and Sproles have the ability to take a swing pass to the house on any given play, and the Eagles have used that play to their advantage all year. Our linebackers and our safeties are too fast, too good at flying to the ball quickly for the Eagles get away with that short stuff.
That's a BIG advantage for the Seahawks against the Eagles style of offense. Having Wagner back is HUGE for this game, HUGE.

[Hawktawk]

Stop the run, catch the picks.LOB,Russell and Beast be who you are. Move the chains,9-4 welcome to town 9ers

[RiverDog]

I don't think there's a whole lot of disagreement between any of us, just matters of degree here and there. Philly is a good club. I do like the way we're peaking as with the exception of the Packers game, we're playing the best football that we have all season and at just the right time of year. Last year was a little different as we seemed to have peaked a little early in the New Orleans game then lost 2 of our last 4, perhaps because we got a little complacent thinking we had HFA in the bag. This season, we'll have to scratch and claw just to make the playoffs, so perhaps the way this year's gone could end up being a blessing in disguise and make us stronger going into the playoffs.

[obiken]

They are good club, but their playoff run is over, unless NF, comes back. There is talk of him trading up to get Marcus Mariota in April, that would cause his offense to just take off. I think, as I have said that we beat them, too many turnovers.

[RiverDog]

Playing at our best, there is no team that can expect to beat us. The question is, are we playing at our best?

The last couple of weeks would indicate that we are. The SF game was about as clinical as it gets in this league. And the Arizona game was similar.

Philly needs to hope that there is a travel effect, and that the Seahawks are not ready to play. The good news on that part, is that it is not an early game. The game starts at 1:30 Pacific, which works for us very well.

This is not a must win, but it will be a win.

The other part of that travel consideration is that we're coming off a mini bye not having played for 10 days. They are, too, but considering that we've had some injuries we're just now getting over, IMO it will help us get some rest and come out breathing fire.

The other thing is that Kelly's offense is unique, to say the least. Those extra few days might come in handy for our defense to see just a little more film and come in prepared.

We're as healthy as we're going to be coming into this one. I expect us to win but as is my tendency, I'm nevertheless nervous as hell about it. I felt A LOT more confident going into the Cards and Niners games, perhaps because we've seen them so many times in the past. How well we'll match up against the Eagles is still very much a mystery.

[wait_a_sec]

It isn't a must win game, but looking at the rest of our schedule it really is. If they can get the W and Cards get the L, that would make for a very good day indeed.

[monkey]

I think, as I have said that we beat them, too many turnovers.

+1

Of all the points made in this thread, this is by far the single most salient.
Turnovers.
The Seahawks are VERY good at not turning over the ball, and just recently have started getting the ball to bounce their way again.
The Eagles?
Very bad. They turn the ball over with abandon.

In this battle of teams with almost polar opposite philosophical approaches, (especially in terms of tempo), the ONLY way that the Eagles will be able to use tempo to create an advantage against an intentionally slow moving team like the Seahawks, is if they win the turnover battle.
Two words. AIN'T HAPPENING!
The Seahawks run first approach is tailor made to take the Eagles fast tempo, and bend it to their advantage. This becomes even more of an advantage, if the Eagles cough up the ball, which they do far too often.

If the game comes down to what almost every game comes down to, winning the turnover battle, then...well...I see this as a very likely blowout victory for Seattle.

This one could get ugly.
I could see a game where the Seahawks win something like 58-12 and it won't even be that close.

My actual prediction: awww heck, actually 58-12 sounds good to me.

[NorthHawk]

I can't get past the 10am start.
We usually start slowly in these time slots and the Eagles start most of their games fast.
This, in my mind will keep the score close and maybe even be the reason for a loss if we do lose.

I think this game will be tougher for us to win than a lot of posters on this forum think.

[HumanCockroach]

Well, get past it, because we don't start at ten AM. Kickoff at 1:25 our time ( afternoon game)

[RiverDog]

I can't get past the 10am start.
We usually start slowly in these time slots and the Eagles start most of their games fast.
This, in my mind will keep the score close and maybe even be the reason for a loss if we do lose.

I think this game will be tougher for us to win than a lot of posters on this forum think.

I think we pretty much slayed that 10:00 am thing last year when we went 4-1 in 10:00 am starts, which was about what you would expect from a 13-3 season.

[monkey]

After all the things I've said about how I truly believe the Seahawks are going to beat down the Iggles, I wanted to make a couple of points to demonstrate that it's not just blind homerism talking when I say that. It's really not just blind homerism, it's analysis of the match ups, which I believe favor the Seahawks HEAVILY.

First, to show that I can really see where the Eagles have advantages; defensively, Fletcher Cox and Connor Barwin are two names that all Seahawks fans ought to get to be familiar with if they aren't already.
Those two have made the Eagles front 7 look much better than I would have guessed it would when the season began. The Eagles front 7 has not only been especially good vs. the run, but it's been scary good at getting pass pressure and sacks.

Our offensive, offensive line is going to have their work cut out for them if they aren't able to open holes in the run game, because if the Eagles force the Seahawks into abandoning the run at all, then they will pin their ears back and get after Wilson.
Our O-line is decent run blocking, but pass blocking, if it comes down to it, the Eagles have a HUGE advantage there.

Second, the Eagles may very well have one of the leagues best pair of bookend tackles on their offensive line. Jason Peters is an absolute STUD. He may very well be the best in the NFL. He's certainly a top 5 tackle. If the Iggles are able to get enough running room for McCoy, so that Mark Sanchez doesn't have to throw 30+ times, they can easily beat the Seahawks.
If McCoy has a big day, and remember it's just three weeks ago that a VERY similar RB for the Chiefs tore up our defense, then I think the Seahawks lose in Philadelphia.

I just wanted to throw that stuff out there for the sake of fairness and balance.

Having said all of that stuff, I see the Seahawks winning and probably winning handily. I think our defense stops McCoy cold, and turns Sanchez back into...well, Sanchez. I think Sanchez throws AT LEAST two picks.
I think Beastmode, with the extra rest for his aching back, will batter the Eagles defense until they eventually crack.
I think that Wilson will get sacked a few times, 3-4 probably, but otherwise find a way to made big plays with his arm against what is a very weak Eagles secondary, as well as with his legs.
I look for Baldwin and Moeaki to have nice games catching the ball. I see the Seahawks offense starting slow, then getting going as the game wears on and the Eagles defense wears out, until by the fourth quarter, the Seahawks lead by three scores.

That's just how I see it.

[monkey]

I find it interesting that after a week of having an open roster spot, they finally choose to fill it with Chris Matthews.http://mynorthwest.com/292/2661940/Seahawks-promote-WR-Chris-Matthews-from-practice-squad
After all the times he's been cut and resigned, after trying to fit another player in there who failed his physical, they seemingly "settle" for Matthews.
To me it tells me two things. It tells me that 1. he is physically the exact type of player they WANT to have starting as a split receiver, and 2. he's not good enough to be that guy, but they REEEEEALLLLY want him to be.

I bring that up here, because I will be curious to see if, just MAYBE he's come along far enough that he can make a difference. It will be interesting to see if he plays in this next game, that may tell us something.
His size would be ideal for the red zone problems we've been having...