Skip to main content

Washington at Seattle

This week's playoff previews starts with the weekend's first game, the Washington Redskins at the Seattle Seahawks (2:30 pm Mountain-not sure why I used Eastern last time, FOX).

On paper this may not look like much of a matchup. The Redskins were 10-6 and couldn't even beat out the New York Giants for the division title. The Seahwaks went 13-3, have a real quarterback, and ran away with the NFC. I tend to agree with paper on this one.

However for this preview I will employ the completely contradictory tone and tell you why each team could win Saturday:

Why Washington Will Win:

1. Better coaching.
Though there are scores of coaches who can pile up regular season victories, only the elite few win consistently in the postseason. Look at the last five coaches to win Super Bowls: Bill Belichick, Jon Gruden, Brian Billick, Dick Vermeil, and Mike Shanahan. Not a weak link in the bunch.

Though Mike Holmgren and Joe Gibbs have each won a Super Bowl themselves (three, in Gibbs’ case), Gibbs clearly gives the Redskins an advantage. Holmgren has had a mostly up-and-down career, at least in terms of coaching teams up to expectations. Gibbs, meanwhile, has racked up an absurd 17-5 postseason record.

2. Defense. Linebacker LaVar Arrington had a monster game against Tampa Bay, topping off his ten tackles with a forced fumble and an interception. The scheming of defensive coordinator Gregg Williams may give them just enough of an edge to blunt the Seattle offensive.

Why Seattle Will Win:

1. Better offense.
That alone says absolutely nothing about Seattle, considering Washington racked up just 120 total yards against the Buccaneers. But points-wise, Seattle outscored everyone-even the mighty Colts-this season. Oh yeah, and which team has the MVP?

2. Better balance. No, the Seahawks can’t match the Redskins’ defensively-but then, they won’t have to. The numbers say Seattle’s run-stopping is even better than Washington’s, and controlling the line of scrimmage is, as Gibbs knows, crucial in postseason showdowns. Seattle has enough defense to slow Washington and more than enough offense to put points on the board.

Considering the above, and also the fact that Seattle’s team name isn’t a cruel reminder of abysmal race relations, I’m going to go with the Seahawks.

Comments

Mike said…
Why would you be a jerk and bring that up? Yes, Brunell's last good game was '96, or following that season, anyway. I'm going to go home and cry.

Popular posts from this blog

And now that it’s gone, it’s like it wasn’t there at all

I never thought this blog would last longer than Jay Cutler's career with the Denver Broncos. He was a talented young prospect so good that the Broncos, a powerhouse organization only one game removed from the Super Bowl the season before, traded up to get him—or, in other words, a player whose upside was so huge, the team sacrificed its present to get his future. And now? He's gone . How did it come to this? * * * Often I'll play devil's advocate with a move like this; you know, I'll try and explain how it makes sense from the other side of the table. Today, during the most disastrous Broncos offseason in memory—and the draft hasn't even happened yet, so settle in—I just don't have it in me. I don't think move is really defensible from a football standpoint. But what the heck: as the article above says, the Broncos are sending Cutler and a fifth-round draft pick this month to the Chicago Bears for quarterback Kyle Orton, Chicago's first-rounder in t...

Who cares?

So we finally got done with the NBA playoffs after nearly two months of stretched-out play, and tomorrow's the draft. I really couldn't care less. I'm so burned out on the sport. Sadly, there's nothing else going on worth mentioning, so we might as well get into it. (Yes, baseball, Pugs, but I haven't really started following that this year yet, sorry.) Would the NFL hold its draft five days after the Super Bowl? Of course not, and not just because the league doesn't want to distract from the highlight of its annual calendar, the Pro Bowl. Of course, the NBA's situation is a little different. College play ended two and a half months ago, and the teams want to get draftees ready for the all-important summer league play (because the kind of guys that need the summer league always end up players). Not that when college basketball is over is relevant, anyway-the league is overrun by a bunch of high school players "just months removed from their prom" (...

Did CU ever win the Pac-12?

In 2010, I bet a college buddy of mine (who longtime readers may remember as the only other contributor to Hole Punch Sports) that CU’s football team would not win the Pac-12 in the next 15 years. Guess what? It’s time for me to gloat, because I was right. Why we were doomed Back in the day, a lot of people made the argument that CU should join the Pac-12 because we’d get so much more TV money there. Of course, given college football is the answer to the question, “what if you had a sport where multiple teams were like the Yankees, and you created a whole universe of haves and have-nots?”, then yeah, you want to be aligned with some of the haves. But the question in my mind wasn’t, “will CU be better off with more money?” That’s an obvious yes. The question I asked was, will CU be any more competitive in their own conference if they’re competing against teams who are also getting more money? I couldn’t see why they would be. The mathematical angle Legend has it that Cowboys runn...