I'm not gonna lie about the Patriots

Sports will always have upsets, shockers, and surprises, but I won't lie about who these two Super Bowl teams really are

John Wooden once said, “If there’s anything you could point out where I was a little different, it was the fact that I never mentioned winning.”

There will be a lot more talk between now and next Sunday’s Super Bowl about who will win, but if you choose to evaluate the matchup between the Seahawks and Patriots there are plenty of ways to do that fairly without attributing it to a predicted outcome.

A better question than “Who will win?” would be:

Who are the Seahawks?

Who are the Patriots?

These are more important questions to answer than who will win.

Speaking of which: Who will the Seahawks become in 2026? That’s the question I answered in Thursday’s BONUS newsletter.

Another Woodenism:

“The best competition I have is against myself to become better.”

The Seahawks enter Super Bowl LX playing arguably the most complete football that Seattle has ever played as a 50-year franchise. It’s only good enough if the “next Sunday Seahawks” compare themselves to the “last Sunday Seahawks” and work hard over the next 10 days to be better than the last version of the team that we watched.

But looking back is one of the most important things we do at Seaside Joe:

“I like to spend time in the past, with the things that have been important to me.” - John Wooden

I have more questions to answer from Super Joes. If you want to join the next one and ask a question, or just share your thoughts, upgrade to Super Joes here:

Defjames: Is there any plausible way in which the Pats score enough points to win this game? I don’t see how and I’m looking for a reality check.

Drake Maye was getting some MVP buzz this year. Yet the Patriots O seems REALLY bad. I know the broncos D is a top unit but the pats only scored 1 TD and that was gifted to them by a turnover and short field.

I am trying not to overlook our opponent but I just don’t see how this game is competitive.

The Seahawks gave up over 20 points six times in 19 games and HALF of those were the L.A. Rams:

• Bucs, 38 points

• Rams, 37 points (OT)

• Rams, 27 points

• Titans, 24 points

• Cardinals, 22 points

• Rams, 21 points

Is the Patriots offense as good as L.A.’s? Not even close.

Okay, so then how did the other three teams score over 20 points? Well, the Cardinals were down 35-0 by the time they started scoring touchdowns. That doesn’t count.

The Titans were down 23-0 when Chimere Dike had a 90-yard punt return touchdown. They slapped on a meaningless touchdown with less than a minute in the game. That doesn’t count.

So then it comes down to that really funky outlier game against the Bucs. Setting aside that Seattle’s secondary was very short-handed and that two touchdowns came against Nehemiah Pritchett, who isn’t even CB4, how about just the fact that the game was four months ago by kickoff?

The only offense that Seattle has had any slip-ups against since then is the Rams. Drake Maye or may not win MVP over Matthew Stafford, but New England’s offense hasn’t been on the same level as L.A.’s, because their offensive line is much worse, because they don’t have anyone like Puka Nacua, because they haven’t been running the ball well recently.

If the Rams were in the AFC playoffs they’d probably run through the postseason with 20+ point wins in each game.

“Plausible”? The past suggests that the Seahawks defense is too good for that.

“Possible”? Of course. But it’s not something I expect if the two teams play the same as they’ve been playing for the last 2-3 months.

Bob: Are the Pat's O-line as good as the Ram's O-line? If so, what adjustments are needed to put more pressure on their QB than we did on Stafford? Stafford seemed pretty comfy in the pocket throwing pocket change past our DB's, mostly dimes.

There were some good replies to this question in the comments:

zezinhom400: I think the consensus is NE's OL is the team's weak spot -- but Maye being mobile has made work out fine. If they shadow Maye with Emmanwori for example, would that be enough?

Largentium: I'd like to see the Hawks overload the line on the offense's right, leaving Lawrence or Nwosu one-on-one with Campbell and force them to keep a back or TE in to help or have a great matchup.

Paul G: The Patriots are weak at LT. Campbell will need help which in turn will open up the middle.

The O-Line Committee also did an 18-minute film breakdown of the Patriots, which I’d recommend watching if you’re interested in good OL evaluations.

In case anyone missed it, I posted almost 20 Seahawks Xs and Os videos on Wednesday.

Here’s a quote from Matt Verderame of SI:

If there’s been one consistent problem for the Patriots this year, it’s been trying to keep Drake Maye upright. Maye was sacked 47 times this season, more than anybody not named Cam Ward, Geno Smith or Justin Herbert.

All told, New England allowed a pressure rate of 38.3% and a sack rate of 8.7%, ranking sixth- and seventh-worst respectively. The offensive line also has a pair of rookies in left tackle Will Campbell and guard Jared Wilson. The inexperience has shown through in the playoffs, as the Patriots have allowed 15 sacks in three games.

Meanwhile, Seattle’s defense has the fourth-best pressure rate at 38.9% despite blitzing at the 25th-highest rate in football (22.0%). With a front consisting of DeMarcus Lawrence, Leonard Williams, Byron Murphy II, Boye Mafe, Uchenna Nwosu and others, the Seahawks pose a major issue for New England.

^^Local Patriots radio was openly questioning the OL a couple of weeks ago though, so I’d say that’s a context clue that’s as important as any stat.^^

You don’t see Seattle media questioning the Seahawks offensive line anymore, not even Anthony Bradford, indicating that there’s a much more “dire situation” narrative on the Patriots than the other side. Which is funny considering that last summer, if you remember, I wrote about the “Seahawks OL is still so bad!” narratives and questioned the validity of those reports.

Maye has already set a new NFL record with three 5-sack games in a single postseason. Making it 4-of-4 looks realistic.

Beezo: The most prevalent narrative around the Pats is how easy their schedule was. I would love to hear a contrarian take about why that isn’t important. I know that’s more a statement, rather than a question. I guess the question is: I’ve heard the same thing was constantly said about the Tom Brady Pats. Yet they won a lot of SB’s, could we be in for the same rude awakening 6 (is that the correct #?) other NFC teams had against the Pats of old?

It is true that the Patriots had the easiest schedule in the NFL, which brings me back to the arguments I was making against the 2015 Carolina Panthers as an elite team because they too had the easiest schedule en route to 15-1 that year.

Well, here’s the contrarian take on an easy schedule:

The Panthers may have still won the Super Bowl that year if Cam Newton falls on his fumble.

(It was 16-10 with 4:16 left but if we’re being honest Carolina’s offense was getting nowhere against the Broncos defense.)

I don’t we NEED to discount New England’s easy schedule, especially because the Seahawks had such a difficult road to win 16 games, including playoffs, and that Seattle didn’t lose to the Las Vegas Raiders. However, it’s just one game. It’s a football game under very weird circumstances known as being “the Super Bowl” and that alone creates chaos.

But since you mentioned “the Pats of old”, let’s look at the last Patriots team to win 14 games and win the Super Bowl:

The 2016 Patriots.

The AFC East was still bad in 2016, even though the Dolphins snuck into the playoffs as a wild card. The AFC didn’t have any serious challengers for Tom Brady the year after Peyton Manning retired (no Patrick Mahomes, no Josh Allen, no Lamar Jackson…even the Raiders made the playoffs), and the Patriots schedule was very easy.

• That Patriots team outscored opponents by an average of 12 points per game

• That Patriots team blew out two playoff teams, including a Steelers team that had won nine in a row going into the AFC Championship

• That Patriots team had a QB/HC going into their 7th career Super Bowl

So if you’re asking “What’s different between the 14-win Patriots team in the old AFC East and this 14-win Patriots team in the weak AFC against a weak schedule?”, I’d have to see similar outcomes from 2016 and 2025:

• This Patriots team outscored opponents by 10 points per game

• This Patriots team is clearly struggling to score in the playoffs (and getting a lot of help from opponents)

• This Patriots team has no Super Bowl experience, other than the offensive coordinator

Don’t twist this into “But the Seahawks don’t have any Super Bowl experience either!”

I’m not comparing the Patriots to the Seahawks! I’m comparing the Patriots to the Patriots!

From what I’m seeing, the 2025 Patriots do lord over their bad opponents similarly to how the 2016 Patriots did by beating them by 10 points per game. However, the clear difference is how the 2025 Patriots play against their good opponents. Whether that’s a product of circumstances, luck, or playoff experience, the 2025 Patriots did not clearly established that they there were better than all three playoff opponents (Chargers, Texans, Broncos) that they beat in the same way that the 2016 Patriots did with the Texans and Steelers.

And I would ask if the 2016 Steelers were better than any team in the AFC this year, including the Patriots.

Teams like the Bills, Broncos, Texans, Jaguars, and Chargers all ended up looking very fraudulent based on their playoff exits.

Does that guarantee that the Patriots will also look like frauds in the Super Bowl? Of course not. It’s one football game and six weeks ago Seattle barely beat Philip Rivers…AT HOME!

But do I believe that the 2025 Patriots going 14-3 off of a weak schedule is exactly the same as past Patriots teams going to the Super Bowl by emerging out of the NFL’s worst division year after year? I don’t believe that it is. Because I don’t believe that anyone ever questioned that Brady’s Patriots were a juggernaut that you wanted to miss in the playoffs:

Aside from 2001, 2009, 2015, and 2019, Brady’s Patriots always blew out at least one team, sometimes two, before the Super Bowl. (That sounds like a lot of examples but it’s over almost 20 seasons.)

Conversely, the media and fans everywhere are all saying the same thing and I don’t think it’s because Maye is inexperienced. Patrick Mahomes was inexperienced in 2018, but didn’t everybody kinda want to avoid the Chiefs at all costs that year (Mahomes MVP, Kelce and Hill first team All-Pro, Chris Jones All-Pro) regardless of experience? Who did the Chiefs lose to that year?

The Patriots.

Of course, 2016 was also the year that New England found themselves down 25 points in the Super Bowl. They also won it.

The Patriots could beat the Seahawks in the Super Bowl. Just as the Colts could have beat them in December. But are we overrating New England’s weak strength of schedule?

No, it has to be something that we factor into expectations.

It doesn’t mean that the Seahawks will beat the Patriots.

“Who will win?” should be something that goes without mentioning.

Seaside Joe 2523

Who will the Seahawks become in 2026? That’s the question I answered in Thursday’s BONUS newsletter.