Bleacher Report Vid/Article about Hawks Cover 3

Came across this thought i might share it with some of you guys. They are saying that the seahawks scheme is getting old and is figured out . You guys agree? They still had the #1 scoring defense so they are still effective on D but i have seen teams start to beat it.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2663 ... le-defense

Think its time for pete and richard to start doing some type of exotic blitzes and coverages?

I think it has been "figured out" as far as short to intermediate routes go. Quick, controlled passing to tight ends, backs and possession WRs by capable QB's seems to be the formula.

That is a big factor why you don't see us force many turnovers anymore. Teams are incredibly cautious with play calls.

There are natural weak spots in any zone. But, you need an accurate QB and good route running WRs who are not afaid of getting hit to make it happen. And, time in the pocket.

I still think it is hard to get chunk plays against us. Now, Miami arguably had two big ones there for the taking (the one Stills dropped and the one to Stills that Tannehill just missed on their final drive), but I think that was rust more than scheme breakers. I don't expect we will see #29 play that poorly again.

Our defense is predicated on pressure from the front four. When we get there, it's had for teams to do much (see: time in the pocket comment above).

P.S. I am not sure Chris Simms has the pedigree to judge the simplicity of our D.

FlyingGreg":2wdccs6v said:

I think it has been "figured out" as far as short to intermediate routes go. Quick, controlled passing to tight ends, backs and possession WRs by capable QB's seems to be the formula.

There are natural weak spots in any zone. But, you need an accurate QB and good route running WRs who are not afaid of getting hit to make it happen. And, time in the pocket.

I still think it is hard to get chunk plays against us. Now, Miami arguably had two big ones there for the taking (the one Stills dropped and the one to Stills that Tannehill just missed on their final drive), but I think that was rust more than scheme breakers. I don't expect we will see #29 play that poorly again.

Our defense is predicated on pressure from the front four. When we get there, it's had for teams to do much (see: time in the pocket comment above).

Click to expand...

I agree, teams can figure it out all they want. Hawks still have the personnel to make it a tough day even if you know exactly what coverage is coming. It still going to take alot of patience and accurate throws with minimal mistakes to beat them. And if the pass rush is on point thats when QBS make mistakes and when turnovers happen.

It's been "figured out" as far as short and intermediate routes, but that's kinda the point. Give the opponent 3-4 yards every play if they want it.

How can that succeed since 3-4 every play means a new set of downs every time? Because it doesn't mean that. One incomplete pass, one holding call, one sack, one interception, one mistake of any kind, and the drive dies because it's really difficult to get *more* than those 3-4 yards when necessary.

So the bet isn't that you can't get a first down going 3-4 yards per play, but that you can't do it 8 times in a row. And you can't do it 8 times in a row all day long. And that you don't have the patience to do *only* that 8 times in a row all day long.

I think some people might be taking that video out of context, they weren't saying the Seahawks defense has been "figured out" per say but more the scheme its-self, which most fans know by now that the strength of the defense really isn't so much of the scheme its the players in the scheme "obviously" I mean I couldn't help but laugh at the pure obviousness of this video, especially when they talked about the former defensive coordinators turned head coaches who are struggling on defense, Atlanta, Jacksonville. I mean c'mon seriously? Seattle has 3 All-Pros in the secondary alone lol, neither of those teams have an All-pro ANYWHERE on thier defense so its just laughable that they sit there and say "oh its figured out I mean look at what Drew Brees did to the Raiders!"....yeah the Raiders...I mean do they think Ken Norton Jr, Bruce Irvin and Malcolm Smith are going to turn that team into a defensive powerhouse?

RussB":2lqqgh5f said:

Came across this thought i might share it with some of you guys. They are saying that the seahawks scheme is getting old and is figured out . You guys agree? They still had the #1 scoring defense so they are still effective on D but i have seen teams start to beat it.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2663 ... le-defense

Think its time for pete and richard to start doing some type of exotic blitzes and coverages?

Click to expand...

Cover-3 has been around for a long time, it isn't considered anything exotic, the Seahawks just made a variation on it w/press-man on the line, force an outside release, with single deep safety and then variations of that. Are teams catching on? Of course, everything is cyclic in one form or another, look at how the emphasis was on offense in the 2013 season. We have Denver rolling into the SB w/the all-time best offense and then Seattle w/the best defense. Go back and read the SB projections, "Seattle's not going to be able to stop THAT offense" blah-blah-blah. Result? Denver's #1 goal after that is to build a defense like Seattle's. In fact, the entire league started putting more emphasis on defense. What comes around, goes around.

To answer your question, I think we have already seen our DC start to adapt, or innovate if you will. We saw more stunts and blitzes this game than usual and even the announcers were commenting on that. Also, the team was seen practicing the 425 "Big Nickel" in training camp. Some have speculated that as an answer to out TE seam route problems and it is also a hot trend in the NFL. PC is a big believer in modern management theory and innovation is a big part of that, innovation is no longer thought of as a "light-bulb" Aha! moment, it is continuous and you are always trying to improve on what you have until another disruptive innovation comes along.

- just my 2c

Edit: What I forgot to say is this is right where we want to be, i.e., teams are figuring US out, not the other way around. As long as that continues we are ahead of the curve, not behind it.

Good posts all of you.

I'd add that in addition to quick passes cutting into our turnovers, we haven't gotten great pressure on QB's last year. That's why Pete made it such an emphasis this year.

I know some football, but I don't pretend to be on the level these NFL guys are. Even the worst DC is more technical than I am so I just watch what Pete does.

The wrinkle this year is the Big Nickle, as another poster already stated. The progression was simple: they didn't place much of an emphasis on the SAM this year, other than to find someone that can set the edge in the run game. As much as teams pass, you're going to drop a LBer in favor of a DB roughly 60% of the time or more this year. So, we went with a hybrid, which is already being done in LA and AZ. A bigger guy that can cover TE's.

It used to be you could find a good LBer to cover TE's in coverage. Teams started responding by finding "move" TE's that were smaller but also faster than most LBers. Now it's always a mismatch (think Luke Willson vs. AZ's Lbers last year for a good example). Part of this is also the prevalence of spread offenses in college but that's another post entirely.

I also see us going more stunts this year. This is going to work because: A. we have 3 very good CBs that won't allow immediate separation, and B. teams have to guess right and then get the right play call/adjustment to make it hurt really badly. If we have someone that can cover TE's, we're going to get more sacks or turnovers.

RussB":3fn808cb said:

Came across this thought i might share it with some of you guys. They are saying that the seahawks scheme is getting old and is figured out . You guys agree? They still had the #1 scoring defense so they are still effective on D but i have seen teams start to beat it.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2663 ... le-defense

Think its time for pete and richard to start doing some type of exotic blitzes and coverages?

Click to expand...

Well, you can't really figure out talent. People supposedly figured out the Tampa Two by 2003. Yet in 2004 and 2005 they once again had a top 5 (number 1 in 2005) ranked defense. They lost Warren Sapp, John Lynch, and shortly after Simeon Rice and Derrik Brooks, Dexter Jackson, etc.

The cover 3 was never the reason Seattle has been great on defense. The 1995-96 49ers ran the exact same scheme. Pete Carroll didn't dream this up in Seattle (with Eric Davis and Marquez Pope in press zone coverage on the outside, Tim McDonald roaming nearer to the line and Merton Hanks playing the deep middle). The reason the Seahawks have been great on defense the last few years is the three Elite players in the secondary, the very fast linebackers, and the Pro Bowl team on the defensive line- and the fact that these great players matched the scheme, not the scheme itself.

If they've dropped a little, it's because of age and a couple of roster changes (some role players they've lost).


If anything scheme-wise has been "figured out," it isn't the Cover 3. It's the Seahawks defensive play-call tendencies.

If a team can execute fifteen plays in a row to move 40 yards and kick a field goal, I would say they deserve the three points. I would also say that the defense is designed for that exact outcome.

Seattle will allow the fewest points....again.

#1 scoring defense for four years in a row.

Typical Bleacher Report garbage.

Click click click.

Not watching the vid because I'm at work but is this the one w/ Chris Simms babbling? If so, huge fail by BR. This was the topic after Seattle gives up 10 points? Oh well.

I was glad to read some good comments in this thread, so I wouldn't have to ever click on a link to the bleacher report. Because I just won't do it.

"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."

Going by BR's logic, Seattle should change their defense every year.

Not sure what the point of the interview was. Results don't lie.