Let's also pretend that this game is in Seattle in December-early January where it's cold, wet, and loud. How do you think our Jags teams from the 90's to early 00's would have matched up against today's Seahawks? I only picked the 99-00 Jags, simply because that was our best season yet. How do you think our D-line with Brackens would have performed up against Beast Mode? how would Thunder & Lightning have fared against the Legion of Boom? which defense do you think is better? How would Freddy T handle going up against guys like Michael Bennett, Bobby Wagner, Malcolm Smith, and Bruce Irvin? Who do you think is a harder hitting safety? Donovan Darius or Kam Chancellor?

 

 

If you think about it, Seattle is built almost exactly the same way that our Jags were built in the 90's. I wouldn't be surprised if they served as the model for John Schneider and Paul Allen. This would be a really intense, and hard fought game, but without bias, I think our Jags would win in an epic defensive struggle. I'm talking like a 9-6 game.

 

 

I'm interested in hearing what other people have to say about this. Do you see any similarities between these two teams?

---

I'd give the Seahawks the edge at QB. Russell Wilson is the type of dynamic playmaker that Brunell no longer was in 1999.

 

At RB and WR, it's pretty hard not to give the edge to the Jaguars.

 

I'd call TE a draw. Zach Miller was no longer an elite player in 2013, and Pete Mitchell never really was elite, but he was good for a few years there.

 

Along the OL, Boselli was by far the best on either team. After that, I'd give the edge at LG and C to Seattle, RG and RT to the Jaguars. That said, Okung is a better player than Leon Searcy ever was, and if he played the right side, it'd be no contest. Overall, I think the Seahawks have a slight edge on the line.

 

The DL goes to Seattle on depth. Brackens was probably the best player on either team's defensive line, and Gary Walker played at a very high level as well, but the Seahawks have/had a rotating cast of solid players that they could plug in anywhere to keep everyone fresh for the entire game. The Jaguars were lacking in depth behind the starters.

 

LB goes to Seattle, and it's not even close.

 

The 1999 secondary may well have been the best in Jaguars' history, but we still didn't have anyone near the caliber of Richard Sherman or Earl Thomas back there. Seahawks.

 

Special teams would go to the Seahawks as well. Steve Hauschka made 33/35 that year and had the type of booming leg needed to handle all kicking duties. Mike Hollis had a good year as well, hitting 31 of 38, but Hauschka nailed three from beyond 50 while Hollis only attempted one from that range. Bryan Barker was Mr. Reliable, and I'd go with him over Jon Ryan, and the returners were pretty much a wash.

 

I think Seattle would win the game. Brunell didn't have the mobility to escape their pass rush at that point, and that may well have been the deciding factor. The Seahawks' 2013 defense was, imo, one of the all-time greats, and I believe that constant rotation on the DL would have kept Brunell off balance, and the secondary would have been able to single-cover everyone except Jimmy Smith. If they'd put Sherman and Thomas on Smith, they could have limited his effectiveness. The Jaguars' 1999 D was outstanding, but remember how easily Steve McNair shredded it in the 41-14 game, then how he sliced it open with his feet in the AFCCG? Russell Wilson is, imo, better than McNair was, he had a better supporting cast in Seattle than McNair did in Tennessee, and he would have been able to carry the Seahawks to a close win.

---

I'd give the Seahawks the edge at QB. Russell Wilson is the type of dynamic playmaker that Brunell no longer was in 1999.

 

At RB and WR, it's pretty hard not to give the edge to the Jaguars.

 

I'd call TE a draw. Zach Miller was no longer an elite player in 2013, and Pete Mitchell never really was elite, but he was good for a few years there.

 

Along the OL, Boselli was by far the best on either team. After that, I'd give the edge at LG and C to Seattle, RG and RT to the Jaguars. That said, Okung is a better player than Leon Searcy ever was, and if he played the right side, it'd be no contest. Overall, I think the Seahawks have a slight edge on the line.

 

The DL goes to Seattle on depth. Brackens was probably the best player on either team's defensive line, and Gary Walker played at a very high level as well, but the Seahawks have/had a rotating cast of solid players that they could plug in anywhere to keep everyone fresh for the entire game. The Jaguars were lacking in depth behind the starters.

 

LB goes to Seattle, and it's not even close.

 

The 1999 secondary may well have been the best in Jaguars' history, but we still didn't have anyone near the caliber of Richard Sherman or Earl Thomas back there. Seahawks.

 

Special teams would go to the Seahawks as well. Steve Hauschka made 33/35 that year and had the type of booming leg needed to handle all kicking duties. Mike Hollis had a good year as well, hitting 31 of 38, but Hauschka nailed three from beyond 50 while Hollis only attempted one from that range. Bryan Barker was Mr. Reliable, and I'd go with him over Jon Ryan, and the returners were pretty much a wash.

 

I think Seattle would win the game. Brunell didn't have the mobility to escape their pass rush at that point, and that may well have been the deciding factor. The Seahawks' 2013 defense was, imo, one of the all-time greats, and I believe that constant rotation on the DL would have kept Brunell off balance, and the secondary would have been able to single-cover everyone except Jimmy Smith. If they'd put Sherman and Thomas on Smith, they could have limited his effectiveness. The Jaguars' 1999 D was outstanding, but remember how easily Steve McNair shredded it in the 41-14 game, then how he sliced it open with his feet in the AFCCG? Russell Wilson is, imo, better than McNair was, he had a better supporting cast in Seattle than McNair did in Tennessee, and he would have been able to carry the Seahawks to a close win.

I would think that we would be able to knock off the Hawks if only due to our explosive offensive. The Cardinals managed to shut the Seahawks down in 2013 and they didn't have anywhere near the amount of talent we had in 99.

 

How do you think the Seahawks would have performed against the defense that we had in 2003-2007? with Stroud and Henderson up front, Mike Peterson in the LB corps, and Rashean Mathis at the height of his prime? People can say what they want about JDR, but he made our defense formidable during those years. The only negatives would be our QB situation and our WR corps on the offensive side of the ball.

---

I'd give the Seahawks the edge at QB. Russell Wilson is the type of dynamic playmaker that Brunell no longer was in 1999.


At RB and WR, it's pretty hard not to give the edge to the Jaguars.


I'd call TE a draw. Zach Miller was no longer an elite player in 2013, and Pete Mitchell never really was elite, but he was good for a few years there.


Along the OL, Boselli was by far the best on either team. After that, I'd give the edge at LG and C to Seattle, RG and RT to the Jaguars. That said, Okung is a better player than Leon Searcy ever was, and if he played the right side, it'd be no contest. Overall, I think the Seahawks have a slight edge on the line.


The DL goes to Seattle on depth. Brackens was probably the best player on either team's defensive line, and Gary Walker played at a very high level as well, but the Seahawks have/had a rotating cast of solid players that they could plug in anywhere to keep everyone fresh for the entire game. The Jaguars were lacking in depth behind the starters.


LB goes to Seattle, and it's not even close.


The 1999 secondary may well have been the best in Jaguars' history, but we still didn't have anyone near the caliber of Richard Sherman or Earl Thomas back there. Seahawks.


Special teams would go to the Seahawks as well. Steve Hauschka made 33/35 that year and had the type of booming leg needed to handle all kicking duties. Mike Hollis had a good year as well, hitting 31 of 38, but Hauschka nailed three from beyond 50 while Hollis only attempted one from that range. Bryan Barker was Mr. Reliable, and I'd go with him over Jon Ryan, and the returners were pretty much a wash.


I think Seattle would win the game. Brunell didn't have the mobility to escape their pass rush at that point, and that may well have been the deciding factor. The Seahawks' 2013 defense was, imo, one of the all-time greats, and I believe that constant rotation on the DL would have kept Brunell off balance, and the secondary would have been able to single-cover everyone except Jimmy Smith. If they'd put Sherman and Thomas on Smith, they could have limited his effectiveness. The Jaguars' 1999 D was outstanding, but remember how easily Steve McNair shredded it in the 41-14 game, then how he sliced it open with his feet in the AFCCG? Russell Wilson is, imo, better than McNair was, he had a better supporting cast in Seattle than McNair did in Tennessee, and he would have been able to carry the Seahawks to a close win.

I agree with the majority of your post with the exception of 2 things. Kyle Brady signed in 1999 and was the better TE if comparing the teams. Also you mentioned McNair shredding us during the AFCC. I fully believe that the tacks had access to our playbook as it's been rumored.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

I agree with the majority of your post with the exception of 2 things. Kyle Brady signed in 1999 and was the better TE if comparing the teams. Also you mentioned McNair shredding us during the AFCC. I fully believe that the tacks had access to our playbook as it's been rumored.

My bad on Brady, I thought he signed in 2000 for some reason.

 

I don't know what to make of the playbook rumor. Renaldo Wynn backtracked on his story within a few days of it first getting out, and the whole incident has been made to sound like a misunderstood joke. Not saying it's impossible that Williams had the playbook, but I am saying that I don't really think he did.

---

My bad on Brady, I thought he signed in 2000 for some reason.

 

I don't know what to make of the playbook rumor. Renaldo Wynn backtracked on his story within a few days of it first getting out, and the whole incident has been made to sound like a misunderstood joke. Not saying it's impossible that Williams had the playbook, but I am saying that I don't really think he did.

There was actually another rumor circulating among the Ravens in 2000 that Fisher had allegedly stolen the Ravens playbook after a regular season game.

---

Wasn't there a website that could simulate things like this? I remember playing around on it a few years ago. Like, you can pick the 2013 Seahawks and the 1999 Jags and it would simulate it for you.

 

I remember I did it for the 1999 Jags and the 1999 Rams (what the Super Bowl should have been that year). I also did it for a few baseball games. You could pick any sport.

 

Man, I wish I could remember that website.

---

Wasn't there a website that could simulate things like this? I remember playing around on it a few years ago. Like, you can pick the 2013 Seahawks and the 1999 Jags and it would simulate it for you.

 

I remember I did it for the 1999 Jags and the 1999 Rams (what the Super Bowl should have been that year). I also did it for a few baseball games. You could pick any sport.

 

Man, I wish I could remember that website.

 

 

https://www.whatifsports.com/nfl/

 

I'm guessing that's the site.

---

https://www.whatifsports.com/nfl/

 

I'm guessing that's the site.

I did the sim. It says that the 2013 Seahawks would have won 12-7. I guess that answers my question lol.

---

Actually, in a series of other games the Jags actually split a couple of games with the Seahawks. It said that if the Jags were to play against Seattle with no weather increments, the Jags would have routed them out 27-3.

---

Just for kicks, I did a simulation with the 2013 Jags and the 1985 Bears; there was one simulation where the Jags actually ended up beating the 85 Bears 17-10! The rest of the time we got blown out by 50+ points lol.

---

I'll just say I think the 13-14 Seahawks are one of the most talented teams in NFL history, but so are the 99-00 Jaguars.

 

It'd be close, but I think the Seahawks are the more talented team.

---

THERE IS A SKELETON INSIDE OF YOU.

 

RIGHT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

I'll just say I think the 13-14 Seahawks are one of the most talented teams in NFL history, but so are the 99-00 Jaguars.

 

It'd be close, but I think the Seahawks are the more talented team.

 

 

  One of the reasons why that Seahawks team would be difficult to beat even by most other great teams is they had great depth on their Defensive Line.   The Seahawks were able to keep their D-Lineman fresh.   On the other hand,  they didn't have that same depth last season and combined with the injury to Cliff Avril during the Super Bowl and the injuries at CB,   it opened the door for the Patriots to make a sizable comeback.

---

I tried this sim out. The two teams combined for a little over 100 yards passing, with 5 INTs between the two QBs, but each ran for close to 400 yards. I think something is broken...

---