Seahawks will influence NFL 2014 draft

It's not a secret that the NFL is a copycat league, with general managers, coaches and scouts prone to copy the traits of the league's most successful teams. With the Seattle Seahawks emerging as the premier defense in football, particularly in the secondary, general managers are instructing scouts to take a long look at big, physical cornerbacks in the pre-draft process.

Click to expand...

[urltargetblank]http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000300139/article/seahawks-ability-to-develop-db-talent-will-influence-nfl-draft[/urltargetblank]

The NFL is a copy cat league and we all know that Pete and John have set a standard other GM's and coaches will emulate. The problem will be that how many tall physical corners are there in college football? The real question is this - have college coaches adopted the Hawks fantastic duo's vision of big physical corners? When that happens it will be common place in the NFL.

NFL teams can try it but if most fail the new fad will go by the wayside.

Only stands to reason imo. Not just the copycat thing even though that is real and always has been that way. I just look at it in a common sense kind of way - every other position has gotten bigger and stronger. I mean look at the average size of the wideout's - it's like they got bigger and stronger and the dbacks just stayed the same. I mean how is some 5'9" 190 lb cornerback supposed to not get manhandled by a guy like Megatron at 6'5" 230 some odd lbs. That's crazy, I don't care how speedy he is cause these big guys at WR are fast too.

Well big doesn't mean good, Sherman is quite intelligent and understands his limitations and works to offset them by using his expereinces as a WR to read and jump routes. Browner is big and a Mauler and is the Jammer enforcer Type. both are not shutdown level on their own, add Earl Thomas to the equation and he is the special talent that has the speed, smarts, and physical ability to make open field tackles. Kam is a Linebacker with Safety abilty and speed.

So the scheme and compliment of abilitys has to be there or the body type won't work. We have seen us pass on ranked players that fit the size mold but lack something only to pick guys later that didn't have the noteriety. Lane and Maxwell.

Well that goes without saying. Just like WR's with great size doesn't make them good for the mere fact. I was talking in a general sense, over the last 30 years seems like just about every position has become bigger and stronger on average but seems like it's more likely to see a 5'11" cornerback before a 6'2" or bigger even now.

This is a great topic.

While no doubt Bucky is correct, all this will mean is we will have to scour the waivers for cut players instead of drafting them. Or draft long tall guys who declare a year too early and get introuble with the cops a lil bit the day before the draft. Like we already did. Not every team will make these guys work.

Word was the Cowboys were going to look like the Hawks this year. But it takes more than big press corners to duplicate our secondary. In fact, I would say that those big corners are at risk of serious suckitude in the hands of some coaches. Just like our awesome corners looked like crap in soft zones on third and long last year. Some teams will draft those bigger coners, then put them in zones that minimize their talents. Revis and Nnamdi are good examples of players who declined when put in the wrong system.

I would actually say that just as much as the big tall corners, the coaches well versed in Seattle's press system will be in demand. Bradley already showed that.

If he means that safeties of Earl Thomas' caliber will start going in the top five every year, then he's right. This D is much less interesting without Earl.

I am not so sure how much the NFL scouts will change their model for DBs. If the coaches refuse to put them in schemes that play to their skill set I cannot see FO types beating the drum for this type of player in their war room. This is like Russell Wilson will force FO/Scouts to change how they evaluate QBs. The proof will be in the results.

I like Bucky's look at things with his scouting background. Just not sure the FO/Scout types are serious enough yet to get coaches to change their view on this trait.

drdiags":1yocs8ho said:

I am not so sure how much the NFL scouts will change their model for DBs. If the coaches refuse to put them in schemes that play to their skill set I cannot see FO types beating the drum for this type of player in their war room. This is like Russell Wilson will force FO/Scouts to change how they evaluate QBs. The proof will be in the results.

I like Bucky's look at things with his scouting background. Just not sure the FO/Scout types are serious enough yet to get coaches to change their view on this trait.

Click to expand...

You are correct about that. It takes a change in GM thinking. Last year, after we physically destroyed the Cowboys, Jerry changed his vision because his receivers were physically whipped by a secondary. Regardless of the actual outcome, Jerry hired Kiffen because of his connection to Pete and his promise that the Dallas D would resemble Seattle. Those were Kiffen's words last spring anyway, though it hasn't translated to the field there.

Jacksonville had the same thinking. The Jets already have that kind of personnel thinking, and that is probably why Idzik was considered a fit.

I don't think having big secondary players is some Pete inspired revolution, the revolutionary part is ONLY having those kind of players. Winfield was seen as a beastly little runstopper in Minnesota, but in Seattle he was just little. He stood out for his rare physical cornerback attitude there, here that attitude was mandatory to even be on the team in camp. And I think that is where Pete really changed the model. Have you ever seen a secondary where every single player was physical by nature? Long and tall is only part of the model.

Interesting comments.

One aspect the article neglected to mention was the selection of a playmaking safety with great range and instincts. Thomas was a prerequisite to the selection of the two big corners introduced the following year. I think it took the Seahawks two years to gather the talent needed to field the big defensive backfield we have all enjoyed.

If Carroll style cornerbacks and safeties do indeed move up in the draft, then retention becomes a bigger priority. Prior to Browner's problems, snap counts for the starting top 4 defensive backs tended to come in at 90% or more. So the salary justification and return is there for defensive backs.

But, something has to give to fit everthing into a viable defensive cap allowance. The top 2 linebackers have defensive snap count percentages of 82% & 75%. Their top (current) contributor among defensive lineman (Michael Bennet) comes in at only 57%. The last and only full time defensive lineman of the Carroll era is Chris Clemons. His snap counts have dropped from two back to back years at 98% to 87% last year and to a current 54% this year. So everyone is now a rotation lineman in the current Seahawk scheme.

I anticipate cap adjustments for the defensive line in 2014. I think annual turnover of a rotational roster of defensive linemen is an unavoidable feature of Seattle's defense. They have done a good job of finding good fits among veteran free agents falling off other rosters. And they stayed current (on schedule) thru out this year with developing projects and project interviews.

Carroll's defense should continue to intrigue us as it continues to evolve .... in year 5.