Interesting parallel between past Ravens and current 49ers Ds

[ravensdan]

After reading alot of analysis about how the 49ers D had a great pass rush which is lessened w/o Justin Smith and how teams can beat them by attacking their secondary. I am reminded of how all of the analysis against past great Raven's D's with great pass rush by any multitude of linebackers over the years was to attack the secondary. PS the complete exception to this analysis is the 2000 D which is in a whole different class by itself as one of the top 3 in the history of the NFL with really no weakness at any level. My theory is that the 49ers secondary is vulnerable because it is not used to being tested. throughout the season there is consistent pressure on QB's which results in the DBs naturally covering differently as they don't have to cover for very long. Also once you reach the playoffs you are playing the best oposing offensive lines with the best oposing QB's and WR's. Passes will be thrown against your secondary much more regularly and they won't be used to being attacked like this and give up more big plays as well as points. Very similar to how past Raven's D's have performed (examples 2006, 2008, 2011, etc).

This year the tables are turned. The 2012 Super Bowl Raven's D was tested again and again througout the year including many games with no pass rush whatsoever. now that the secondary is used to being tested, it is almsot easy on them as the playoff pass rush has been much more potent than the regular season. Another example of this working to perfection is last years Giants team, picked apart all year, got healthy going into the playoffs and the pass rush as well as secondary is much more stout.

So my conclusion... This Ravens team is going to win the Super Bowl BECAUSE the defense was so bad for a good portion of the year. How ironic is this?

[Midnight toker]

The 49ers havent been tested defensively? Really? Umm, they played Seattle, Green Bay, Atlanta, New England, New Orleans, Detroit, and New York. Beat them all but 1.