(A Timorous) Case for the Seahawks

Just for the hell of it, I’ll avoid idiotic NRO-esque attempts to discuss which kind of blue city is better, or even about running slightly more (even in situations when you should pass–cf. Bill Cowher’s playoff record before he became less conservative this year) confers some inherent moral superiority on the team that does it, and talk about football.

Basically, Matt ends up in roughly the right place, although much of his analysis is highly problematic. I happen to agree that Barber had a marginally better year than Alexander, but the more relevant question is whether he’s better than Willie Parker, and he is (let alone the washed-up Bettis.) I don’t think this is a big deal, though, because both teams have good rushing games and good rush defenses, and these games tend to be decided in the air anyway. The better news for Seattle is that Hasselbeck is an excellent QB. The worse news is that Matt, like many Giants fans, not only somewhat overrates Eli “Trent Dilfer with a famous name” Manning but underrates the QB the Giants inexplicably avoided so they could trade significant value to draft Manning instead. Roethlisberger is, in fact, an exceptional QB; you’ll note that he was the 3rd-ranked QB in the league despite playing several games with a hand injury. He’s not significantly over his head in the playoffs; he’s really, really good. I might still give a slight edge to the veteran Hasselbeck, but the Steelers have a better secondary, so in terms of passing game it’s again pretty even. Essentially, the matchup is about as even as it could be, maybe a slight edge to Pittsburgh on paper. So to try to convince myself that the Seahawks are the elect, a few tiebreakers:

• In response to Dave, I think the line is actually quite rational, given the perception that the AFC is far better than the NFC. On the other hand, I think this effect has been somewhat overstated, and is further washed out by the fact that the Seahawks are so clearly the class of the NFC. The inter-conference record was actually a lot more even than the previous years–the AFC was only 6 over–and that effect is largely because the AFC has more depth: the Chargers are a better team than the division-winning Bears or Giants, I think. But I don’t know how much that’s relevant here. I’ll say this: I think the Seahawks are a clearly better team than the Broncos, the #2 seed in the AFC. Much better QB, running game just as good, defense as good or better. Alas, the Steelers are better than the Broncos too, but if you’re a betting person certainly take the points and/or line and the Seahawks. The game is more even than the line.
• Here’s where I think Matt is on to something: many people have used the more impressive road the Steelers have had to travel in the playoffs in their favor, but there’s an obvious downside. You may remember that the same people talking about the Steelers’ “momentum” or whatever were picking the Panthers last week too, and you may remember how that worked out. The fact that the Steelers have played more and tougher games is, on balance, an edge for Seattle, and certainly if Polamalu is banged up that’s a major advantage for the Seahawks. Given the even-ness of the game otherwise, I think this is the factor that should make Seattle a very slight favorite.
• And, finally, I’ll take Holmgren over Cowher in the playoffs. (Although, in fairness, it must be noted that Cowher looks a lot better now that he has a real QB.) Perhaps more importantly, the Steelers aren’t going to surprise everybody by throwing in the first quarter this time; the Seahawks, who can generate a good pass rush and rush defense without flooding the box, will be ready for it. Roethlisberger is good enough to win anyway, but I’ll be interested to see how Cowher reacts.

So Seahawks 27-24. But I’m a Seahawks fan and that’s the best I can do, so judge accordingly.

From Rob: This should serve as a game open thread.