Why was KJ Wright on Gronk?

seabowl · Feb 3, 2015

I along with probably many of you saw KJ on Gronk and was screaming "no" at the tv prior to the play where KJ gets beat for a Gronk TD. My only question was how does Quinn let KJ go one on one on the outside against Gonkowski? I know KJ did an admiral job in the past against Jimmy Graham but this is the bowl and Gronkowsi is very very hard to cover especially for a LB. Anyone else feel the same way?

SuperFreak · Feb 3, 2015

When Lane breaks his arm I think everything was a bit off as in the Seahawks were having to compensate one way or another. Really wish we had left Burley active instead of three TE's but it's over an done with now. I think KJ is a pretty good cover linebacker hindsight it would have been nice to see Irvin or Smith out there instead knowing the outcome.

seabowl · Feb 3, 2015

SuperFreak":bgw8bbl9 said:
When Lane breaks his arm I think everything was a bit off as in the Seahawks were having to compensate one way or another. Really wish we had left Burley active instead of three TE's but it's over an done with now. I think KJ is a pretty good cover linebacker hindsight it would have been nice to see Irvin or Smith out there instead knowing the outcome.

They had only 2 big receiving threats in Gronk and Edelman and the best we could come up with is KJ? Sherman, Maxwell, Kam etc... would have been a better cover. I just don't get it.

knownone · Feb 3, 2015

It looked like Seattle was expecting an underneath route. I don't know their assignments but it looks like Earl is KJ's help over the top, and he bites on the underneath route to Vereen. Which made KJ look bad. Sherman was actually lined up in the slot on Edelman, Maxwell was outside on Lafell and Simon was on Amendola. For those wondering, Amendola burned Simon and was actually more open than Gronk.

seabowl · Feb 3, 2015

knownone":2odjx4w6 said:
It looked like Seattle was expecting an underneath route. I don't know their assignments but it looks like Earl is KJ's help over the top, and he bites on the underneath route to Vereen. Which made KJ look bad. Sherman was actually lined up in the slot on Edelman, Maxwell was outside on Lafell and Simon was on Amendola. For those wondering, Amendola burned Simon and was actually more open than Gronk.

Everyone burned Simon.

Mick063 · Feb 3, 2015

Gronk didn't hurt us that bad. A better question is why did I accurately predict that Vereen would kill us?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=107365&p=1565662#p1565662
Maybe because Seattle has had no answer for running backs on the delayed wheel route. All. Season. Long.

Belichick watches film and saw exactly what I did.

It isn't a talent problem. It is a scheme problem. You kill the cover 3 with running back wheel routes. The team never did address it and now the blueprint is out there for everyone. Receiving backs will kill this scheme forever more.

Back to the OP. We handled Gronk as well as anyone has or could be expected. You didn't notice the real problem.

raisethe3 · Feb 3, 2015

seabowl":1voggc1n said:
knownone":1voggc1n said:

It looked like Seattle was expecting an underneath route. I don't know their assignments but it looks like Earl is KJ's help over the top, and he bites on the underneath route to Vereen. Which made KJ look bad. Sherman was actually lined up in the slot on Edelman, Maxwell was outside on Lafell and Simon was on Amendola. For those wondering, Amendola burned Simon and was actually more open than Gronk.

Click to expand...

Everyone burned Simon.

Pretty much this.

hawkfan68 · Feb 3, 2015

That was a bad matchup - KJ on Gronk. KJ is slow. He's basically "David Hawthorne" at coverage. Not bad but you don't want him to cover guys like Gronk. I would have rather seen Irvin covering him. However they needed Irvin to help out with the pass rush. Smith is too small to cover Gronk. He would have a difficult time bringing Gronk down.

seabowl · Feb 4, 2015

Mick063":3lmihrtq said:
Gronk didn't hurt us that bad. A better question is why did I accurately predict that Vereen would kill us?
http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f ... 2#p1565662
Maybe because Seattle has had no answer for running backs on the delayed wheel route. All. Season. Long.

Belichick watches film and saw exactly what I did.

It isn't a talent problem. It is a scheme problem. You kill the cover 3 with running back wheel routes. The team never did address it and now the blueprint is out there for everyone. Receiving backs will kill this scheme forever more.

Back to the OP. We handled Gronk as well as anyone has or could be expected. You didn't notice the real problem.

I don't think putting KJ on Gronk one on one on the outside was "handling Gronk as well as anyone expected". Result TD.

Grahamhawker · Feb 4, 2015

Mick063":q3il8y5i said:
Gronk didn't hurt us that bad. A better question is why did I accurately predict that Vereen would kill us?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=107365&p=1565662#p1565662
Maybe because Seattle has had no answer for running backs on the delayed wheel route. All. Season. Long.

Belichick watches film and saw exactly what I did.

It isn't a talent problem. It is a scheme problem. You kill the cover 3 with running back wheel routes. The team never did address it and now the blueprint is out there for everyone. Receiving backs will kill this scheme forever more.

Back to the OP. We handled Gronk as well as anyone has or could be expected. You didn't notice the real problem.

The pickups on Vereen were late, repeatedly.

jake206 · Feb 4, 2015

Only guy that got the best of Gronk was Wagner.

hawknation2015 · Feb 4, 2015

If Chancellor wasn't operating on a bum knee, I think we would have seen more of that matchup on Gronkowski.

12thbrah · Feb 4, 2015

There are no linebackers in the league that could hang with Gronk 1 on 1. Kam could have neutralized him if he wasn't playing with one leg.

hawknation2015 · Feb 4, 2015

12thbrah":284cu6rw said:
There are no linebackers in the league that could hang with Gronk 1 on 1. Kam could have neutralized him if he wasn't playing with one leg.

The coaches were forced to adjust on short notice after Kam got hurt. They ended up allowing six catches to Gronkowski, on ten targets, for 68 yards and one TD allowed by Wright. All things considered, that's not so bad.

HawkFan72 · Feb 4, 2015

Seems like KJ was burned a lot in coverage this year.

hawknation2015 · Feb 4, 2015

HawkFan72":3ug9cse7 said:
Seems like KJ was burned a lot in coverage this year.

He definitely was in the two games where Kam was playing the most hurt . . . San Diego and New England. Those were two similar games defensively.

jblaze · Feb 4, 2015

KJ is one of the best coverage LB's in the game if not THE best. However, lining up on the outside vs. Gronk is a matchup you cannot win. At least not without some over the top help.

I don't blame KJ, I blame the scheme that put a LB out there one on one with him. It was easy to tell that's where they were going and it's not difficult for Gronk in that situation at all.

Subzero717 · Feb 4, 2015

I wonder why Quinn hadn't received the same backlash for this as Bevel did for the the call.

hawknation2015 · Feb 4, 2015

CALIHAWK1":2op2n0ud said:
I wonder why Quinn hadn't received the same backlash for this as Bevel did for the the call.

Because there's absolutely no comparison?

Injuries necessitated it. And it had minimal impact on the game (10 targets, six receptions, 68 yards).

cesame · Feb 4, 2015

Because Seattle runs an extremely simple defensive scheme and teams can really dictate what matchup they want by different formations (Gronk on Wright, Edelman on Simon)

Against the best QBs that's just too easy for them.

Why was KJ Wright on Gronk?

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

Similar threads