Does size matter?

[laram0]

The Seattle Seahawks have an above average starting secondary when it comes to size.

Richard Sherman (6' 3"- 195)
Brandon Browner (6' 4"- 221)
Kam Chancellor (6' 3"- 232)
Earl Thomas (5"10"- 202)

Our list of receivers:
Amendola (5' 11"- 188)
Gibson (6' 0"- 210)
Smith (5' 11"- 195)
Pettis (6' 3"- 207)
Quick (6' 3"- 220)
Givens (6' 0"- 198)

Our starters Amendola, Gibson and Smith can hopefully make up for the size issue with speed?

[sosa39rams]

Yes size does matter. Why do you think there hasn't been a top 5 WR drafted thats under 6'3 at least? I think skill prevails at the end of the day, but unfortunantely, their CB's have that too. 3 out of their 4 guys got into the pro bowl last year( Browner, Thomas, and Chancellor, and Sherman was definitely a worthy candidate). Hopefully we can run the ball effectively, and work the short passing game, sprinkled in with a few deep shots to Givens.

[Chrome_CW]

Yes size does matter. Why do you think there hasn't been a top 5 WR drafted thats under 6'3 at least? I think skill prevails at the end of the day, but unfortunantely, their CB's have that too. 3 out of their 4 guys got into the pro bowl last year( Browner, Thomas, and Chancellor, and Sherman was definitely a worthy candidate). Hopefully we can run the ball effectively, and work the short passing game, sprinkled in with a few deep shots to Givens.

You are pretty much dead on with this analysis - Running the ball is NOT easy on the Hawks though - the Hawks had a top 5 Run defense last year and have been NAILS against some pretty decent backs this year. It would really benefit the Rams to go 4 and 5 wide and force us into more zone coverage because the Hawks are clearly better when they play press man coverage and are able to have time to get after the passer.

[swatter555]

You know, I find it hard to predict games these days, because there is so much parity in the NFL. Matchups are important, but I find intangibles and home field advantage mean a lot.

I personally see the Rams bouncing back a bit after last week. The Seahawks are away from home and coming off a strange victory. I would agree, on paper, the Hawks have a strong defensive advantage matching up agains the Rams offensive line, plus they have a great secondary. I think height is a bit hyped, because you can be tall and suck too. They have good corners who are also tall, it does make it that much harder, though.

I expect a low scoring game, perhaps the defenses will score most of the points. Right when you say that, though, they come out and have a shoot out. Im done trying to make detailed predictions.

[Rambos]

It would really benefit the Rams to go 4 and 5 wide and force us into more zone coverage because the Hawks are clearly better when they play press man coverage and are able to have time to get after the passer.

We tried that last week and it did not go so well, our receivers can't get separation and Bradford takes a beating. I hope we run the ball like we did in Detroit, even though we never establish it we did not give up on it. It paid off in the forth quarter when we hit on some play action passes.

[r8rh8rmike]

The Rams definitely need to have an effective game plan, be creative, make the right calls, and hope something can happen with the run game. Bradfords life might depend on it. This game hinges on what the OL can manage.

[ManofGod]

Oh my bad, I came to this page thinking the subject matter was of a more "adult" nature.

[AvengerRam]

From what I've seen of the Seahawks' CBs, the best strategy is to shield them from the ball. They both (Browner, in particular) are very likely to try to run through a receiver to get to the ball. With the real refs on the field, I think those types of plays will result in a pass interference call (as they should).

[Rambos]

There is a lot of talk about the Hawks DB's and how good, big and physical they are and it's all true. That being said they have 2 INT thru three games and we have five. We have one of the best CB's that can play at the highest level in two positions on the outside and in the slot.

So the myth of size is just a myth

[AvengerRam]

To back up my point, here is a list of the top 5 most penalized DBs from 2011:

S.Routt, Oakland - 17
B.Browner, Seattle - 16
P.Peterson, Arizona -11
D.Florence, Buffalo - 11
R.Sherman, Seattle - 9

[laram0]

To back up my point, here is a list of the top 5 most penalized DBs from 2011:

S.Routt, Oakland - 17
B.Browner, Seattle - 16
P.Peterson, Arizona -11
D.Florence, Buffalo - 11
R.Sherman, Seattle - 9

So then we go right at them especially Browner who averages 1 penalty per game...

[Rambos]

Do we counter them with bigger receivers?

Pettis 6'3 and Quick 6'3 over Smith 5'11.

[Chrome_CW]

Do we counter them with bigger receivers?

Pettis 6'3 and Quick 6'3 over Smith 5'11.

No, the Hawks have shut down taller and better receivers than that the past two weeks - you are better off having quicker and more shifty guys

[Chrome_CW]

From what I've seen of the Seahawks' CBs, the best strategy is to shield them from the ball. They both (Browner, in particular) are very likely to try to run through a receiver to get to the ball. With the real refs on the field, I think those types of plays will result in a pass interference call (as they should).

It isn't a bad strategy...honestly, Browner had some plays early last year where he was horribly out of position and interfered in trying to make up for it....but he's gotten better. To be honest, a lot of those calls were ticky tack fouls that really didn't show up on replay - ones where the receiver baited the ref into throwing the flag. Having said that, it is certainly possible that the Rams may be able to bait some similary calls...because the Hawks ARE physical. (but hey, so are the Rams DBs....lets just BOTH hope that we don't have to watch both teams march up and down the field in a sea of yellow on Sunday from ticky-tack calls from the newly returned refs)