The New Seahawks Defense.

After the draft, this seemed like a good discussion to get back into.


After 5 days of camp and seeing how they are using BB I believe the Seahawks will use the TCU 425 defense as the BASE defense. Since NFL teams are almost always running 11 or 12 personnel (1 back 1 TE or 1 back 2 TE) this is a way to stop it. Gery Patterson at TCU started running this style of defense since he took over running the defense at TCU in 1998 he turned one of the worst defensive units in college football into one the top 10 scoring defense in the nation. This style of nickel is an attacking style with a hybrid safety/cornerback used as a Rover/Bandit. This is the role that BB and Kelcie McCray are almost perfectly suited for. We can also see something very similar with the Arizona Cardinals 335 defense using WSU Deone Bucannon as a Sam/3rd safety or "Landshark". Watching the Seahawks this camp they have almost never been in the base 43 over/under looks they have almost always been running this 425 with BB or McCray as the Sam/strong side defender. This is different than a regular nickel package that substitutes a linebacker for a cornerback. With the 425 a team needs a very strong safety/linebacker type that can still complete his run gap assignments on 1st/2nd down yet still be able to cover like a safety. A very interesting wrinkle to an already dominant defensive unit.

On the tin foil hat side of things. The Seahawk coaching staff spent a lot of time in Dallas and the TCU campus this offseason looking at the team, talking with coaches. They did get two TCU guys as well.Drafting Joey Hunt and signing Trevone Boykin.


Here is a link to a story done by Grantland describing the 425


http://grantland.com/features/hard-knoc ... patterson/

Well as long as it doesn't turn in to the 420 defense we are good.....................

chris98251":1ilemj6h said:

Well as long as it doesn't turn in to the 420 defense we are good.....................

Click to expand...

I see what you did there. 8)

Great observation and discussion topic. Thank you.

I for one applaud the staff coming up with a new wrinkle. Our defense was very good again last season, but I personally feel like, for whatever reason, we were exposed a little. The stats guys will immediately default to "but we led the league in scoring defense, so everything is great!" . . . but that was influenced a lot by the likes of playing Jimmy Clausen twice, the Browns, the 49ers twice, etc. Cary Williams, Earl clearly not 100%, Kam's holdout...everything added up. But, I also think teams have been able to find the weak spots of our Cover 3. It is no secret they kept coming back to the tight ends all season because we had a fit covering them. That game-winner the Panthers hit to Olsen would not have happened against the 2013 defense.

It's time for US to re-adjust and give some different looks, especially against tight ends.

chris98251":v02kdmuy said:

Well as long as it doesn't turn in to the 420 defense we are good.....................

Click to expand...

Brandon Browner would be an All-Pro running that D.

chris98251":2a55kg8s said:

Well as long as it doesn't turn in to the 420 defense we are good.....................

Click to expand...

LOL nice

FlyingGreg":1sk6uuk6 said:

Great observation and discussion topic. Thank you.

I for one applaud the staff coming up with a new wrinkle. Our defense was very good again last season, but I personally feel like, for whatever reason, we were exposed a little. Cary Williams, Earl clearly not 100%, Kam's holdout...everything added up. But, I also think teams have been able to find the weak spots of our Cover 3. It is no secret they kept coming back to the tight ends all season because we had a fit covering them. That game-winner the Panthers hit to Olsen would not have happened against the 2013 defense.

It's time for US to re-adjust and give some different looks, especially against tight ends.

Click to expand...

I think they want Browner to shadow and beat up TE's on a regular basis. Even the 2013 defence would get burnt by TE just remember the Texans game, Garrate Grahm running free down the seam.

sdog1981":2crxkj8x said:

After 5 days of camp and seeing how they are using BB I believe the Seahawks will use the TCU 425 defence as the BASE defence. Since NFL teams are almost always running 11 or 12 personnel (1 back 1 TE or 1 back 2 TE) this is a way to stop it. Gery Patterson at TCU started running this style of defence since he took over running the defense at TCU in 1998 he turned one of the worst defensive units in college football into one the top 10 scoring defense in the nation. This style of nickel is an attacking style with a hybrid safety/cornerback used as a Rover/Bandit. This is the role that BB and Kelcie McCray are almost perfectly suited for. We can also see something very similar with the Arizona Cardinals 335 defence using WSU Deone Bucannon as a Sam/3rd safety or "Landshark". Watching the Seahawks this camp they have almost never been in the base 43 over/under looks they have almost always been running this 425 with BB or McCray as the Sam/strong side defender. This is different than a regular nickel package that substitutes a linebacker for a cornerback. With the 425 a team needs a very strong safety/linebacker type that can still complete his run gap assignments on 1st/2nd down yet still be able to cover like a safety. A very interesting wrinkle to an already dominant defensive unit.

On the tin foil hat side of things. The Seahawk coaching staff spent a lot of time in Dallas and the TCU campus this offseason looking at the team, talking with coaches. They did get two TCU guys as well.Drafting Joey Hunt and signing Trevone Boykin.


Here is a link to a story done by Grantland describing the 425

http://grantland.com/features/hard-knoc ... patterson/

Click to expand...

Timely post and link to a well presented article.

Thanks for posting .... much appreciated. :2thumbs:

FlyingGreg":6wy3tnv0 said:

Great observation and discussion topic. Thank you.

I for one applaud the staff coming up with a new wrinkle. Our defense was very good again last season, but I personally feel like, for whatever reason, we were exposed a little. The stats guys will immediately default to "but we led the league in scoring defense, so everything is great!" . . . but that was influenced a lot by the likes of playing Jimmy Clausen twice, the Browns, the 49ers twice, etc. Cary Williams, Earl clearly not 100%, Kam's holdout...everything added up. But, I also think teams have been able to find the weak spots of our Cover 3. It is no secret they kept coming back to the tight ends all season because we had a fit covering them. That game-winner the Panthers hit to Olsen would not have happened against the 2013 defense.

It's time for US to re-adjust and give some different looks, especially against tight ends.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute - didn't also play some of the top offenses in the NFL? Packers, Panthers, Cardinals, Steelers, Bengals? There's no caveat needed - we earned our top scoring defense position outright.

All teams play juggernauts and creampuffs, so the stats work the same for everyone.

Jville":1tnixea1 said:

Timely post and link to a well presented article.

Thanks for posting .... much appreciated. :2thumbs:

Click to expand...

Dont let the low post count fool you. I have been a lurker on this site since 2005

KiwiHawk":2ckcelyi said:

FlyingGreg":2ckcelyi said:

Great observation and discussion topic. Thank you.

I for one applaud the staff coming up with a new wrinkle. Our defense was very good again last season, but I personally feel like, for whatever reason, we were exposed a little. The stats guys will immediately default to "but we led the league in scoring defense, so everything is great!" . . . but that was influenced a lot by the likes of playing Jimmy Clausen twice, the Browns, the 49ers twice, etc. Cary Williams, Earl clearly not 100%, Kam's holdout...everything added up. But, I also think teams have been able to find the weak spots of our Cover 3. It is no secret they kept coming back to the tight ends all season because we had a fit covering them. That game-winner the Panthers hit to Olsen would not have happened against the 2013 defense.

It's time for US to re-adjust and give some different looks, especially against tight ends.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute - didn't also play some of the top offenses in the NFL? Packers, Panthers, Cardinals, Steelers, Bengals? There's no caveat needed - we earned our top scoring defense position outright.

All teams play juggernauts and creampuffs, so the stats work the same for everyone.

Click to expand...

Exactly. My thing is it's pretty obvious this defense works. Arizona already does the 3-4 version :17: and beats us even though they have no business doing so. So let's just start modifying and do a 4-3 version especially since we need to change something given EVERYONE AND THEIR MOTHER know exactly how to beat us. By the paint by numbers method no less. A defense that forces deep shots is EXACTLY what we want. It's way beyond time to have a way to counter a nine yard pass to some punk that shouldn't be in the NFL if you could actually touch him or bump him like it's football and not volleyball.

It's why good offenses average 30 points and good defenses give up 20 points. I hate it, good offenses should be around 26-28 points and good defenses should be around 12-15 points.

I wasn't aware we were running this against offendive sets with less than three wide. Interesting.

Tical21":24xrlg4i said:

I wasn't aware we were running this against offendive sets with less than three wide. Interesting.

Click to expand...

Isn't it? And doesn't it clarify why we brought Browner back? He's done as a cornerback but is a prototypical safety with serious experience. He's the classic hybrid type this kind of risky defense needs to actually work. If it does it will be beyond current understanding.

KiwiHawk":3c6fqfn6 said:

FlyingGreg":3c6fqfn6 said:

Great observation and discussion topic. Thank you.

I for one applaud the staff coming up with a new wrinkle. Our defense was very good again last season, but I personally feel like, for whatever reason, we were exposed a little. The stats guys will immediately default to "but we led the league in scoring defense, so everything is great!" . . . but that was influenced a lot by the likes of playing Jimmy Clausen twice, the Browns, the 49ers twice, etc. Cary Williams, Earl clearly not 100%, Kam's holdout...everything added up. But, I also think teams have been able to find the weak spots of our Cover 3. It is no secret they kept coming back to the tight ends all season because we had a fit covering them. That game-winner the Panthers hit to Olsen would not have happened against the 2013 defense.

It's time for US to re-adjust and give some different looks, especially against tight ends.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute - didn't also play some of the top offenses in the NFL? Packers, Panthers, Cardinals, Steelers, Bengals? There's no caveat needed - we earned our top scoring defense position outright.

All teams play juggernauts and creampuffs, so the stats work the same for everyone.

Click to expand...

Fair point.

But what did your eyes tell you? My eyes told me we had a hard time covering TEs. Clearly.

Teams knew it. They exploited it.

It is clear our coaches want to address it. Good on them for adusting and implementing tweaks.

MizzouHawkGal":1aps2zd0 said:

Tical21":1aps2zd0 said:

I wasn't aware we were running this against offendive sets with less than three wide. Interesting.

Click to expand...

Isn't it? And doesn't it clarify why we brought Browner back? He's done as a cornerback but is a prototypical safety with serious experience. He's the classic hybrid type this kind of risky defense needs to actually work. If it does it will be beyond current understanding.

Click to expand...

He's saying that Browner is essentially our SAM linebacker in our base defense. I don't think we would use this against SF or St. Louis, or when we are facing run-heavy situations, but for most games I don't think it would hurt us too much.

I think we're in full experiment mode right now. If he isn't able to set the edge against TE's or pulling guards, Pete isn't going to let him stay there, simple as that. Pete takes setting the edge on the strong side very seriously. However, if he can do that decently well, and he just may be crazy enough to do it, it could be pretty cool. I doubt he's really that much smaller than Morgan or Pinkins or whoever else anyways.

FlyingGreg":h3u8mh5h said:

Fair point.

But what did your eyes tell you? My eyes told me we had a hard time covering TEs. Clearly.

Teams knew it. They exploited it.

It is clear our coaches want to address it. Good on them for adusting and implementing tweaks.

Click to expand...

Actually we were pretty much in the middle of the pack vs the TE, which is bad for us, I admit. When you're great everywhere else, it sucks to be merely average in one facet.

I'm positive about the change - it suits our personnel. With Irvin wanting a big salary for his less-than-elite coverage skills, and with a log-jam at corner/safety, it makes fantastic sense not only to improve coverage vs the TE but to save a ton of cap space as well. It's a microcosm of the sort of coach/GM synergy that makes the Seahawks so fantastic.

I'm curious as to whether they work on any "hot-read" corner/safety blitzes in this package. I believe we have some guys out there who are capable of calling their own number if they see opportunity.

Tical21":3pt0wlja said:

MizzouHawkGal":3pt0wlja said:

Tical21":3pt0wlja said:

I wasn't aware we were running this against offendive sets with less than three wide. Interesting.

Click to expand...

Isn't it? And doesn't it clarify why we brought Browner back? He's done as a cornerback but is a prototypical safety with serious experience. He's the classic hybrid type this kind of risky defense needs to actually work. If it does it will be beyond current understanding.

Click to expand...

He's saying that Browner is essentially our SAM linebacker in our base defense. I don't think we would use this against SF or St. Louis, or when we are facing run-heavy situations, but for most games I don't think it would hurt us too much.

I think we're in full experiment mode right now. If he isn't able to set the edge against TE's or pulling guards, Pete isn't going to let him stay there, simple as that. Pete takes setting the edge on the strong side very seriously. However, if he can do that decently well, and he just may be crazy enough to do it, it could be pretty cool. I doubt he's really that much smaller than Morgan or Pinkins or whoever else anyways.

Click to expand...

I did say this is a risky defense. I'm not convinced Pete would go for it but it's really New England style. The ability to go classic, run heavy or pass heavy depending on opponent. And Pete is unmatched at adjustments after the first half so this might be insanely interesting.

This is smart. Not that happy with any of the options at SLB, so they might as well use another field general like Browner on the field as much as they can.

This ability to switch personnel and go Bandit with a sledge Hammer having Safeties that cover like CB's and hit like LB's on teams that use the TE's a lot while maintaining run and WR coverage will be a new look for a lot of teams.

So basically they are using BB and Kam as linebackers and have mccray play the deep zone? Sounds like a good idea was hoping they put BB in the box like a linebacker.