New England ran for 2,065 yards on 470 carries, (4.4 ypc) and scored 19 rushing TDs
Seattle ran for 2,188 yards on 509 carries, (4.3 ypc) and scored 18 rushing TDs
If you remove QB rush stats from the equation:
NE ran for 2,047 yards on 438 carries (4.7 ypc) and scored 19 rushing TDs
SEA ran for 1,649 yards on 413 carriees (4.0 ypc) and scored 17 rushing TDs
So, which team has the better ground game? It seems obvious, right? Don't let your lyin' eyes deceive you. It's crystal clear that New England's running game is better.
Brady passed for about 1,000 more yards (4,343 to 3,357), but Wilson had more pass TDs (26 to 25), fewer Ints (9 to 11), a higher completion pct. (63 to 60) and Wilson averaged 8.2 yds per attempt vs. 6.9 for Brady. His receivers aren't better than New England's either.
So, if you're preparing to face Denver's defense and you're coaching Seattle having watched how the Pats (and everybody else) played them, what is your game plan?
Do you stop running altogether if Lynch gets stuffed for minimal gain in the first few carries? Do you go into the game, knowing how prolific Denver's passing attack is, thinking it makes any sense whatsoever to engage in a passing contest? Does that give you the best chance to win the game?
You have an excellent defense, but do you want to let Manning and co. have more possessions, or would it make more sense to try and keep him off the field as much as possible?
Do you emulate what the Patriots did last week, or do you look to what San Diego did in week 15 when they held the ball for 38 minutes?