Seahawks Run Defense

I am so tired of every time I read about the Seahawks it's not addressing the pass rush this offseason. Everyone do a little homework please. The Seahawks gave up 4.9 yards per rush last season far to high. Compare that to the 3.9 yards per rush of the 2013 season then Jordyn Brooks makes sense. Brooks was considered by many as the finest run stopping in the Draft makes sense. At least two NFL Evaluators stated his comp was Bobby Wagner I am good with that.

By the way Bruce Irvin and Benson Mayowa accounted for 15.5 sacks last season. Irvin in thirteen games Mayowa working in a rotation.

tersal":3hojm05s said:

I am so tired of every time I read about the Seahawks not addressing the pass rush this off season.Everyone do a little homework please. The Seahawks gave up 4.9 yards per rush last season far to high. Compare that to the 3.9 yards per rush of the 2013 season then Jordyn Brooks makes sense. Brooks was considered by many as the finest run stopping in the Draft makes sense. At least two NFL Evaluators stated his comp was Bobby Wagner I am good with that.

By the way Bruce Irvin and Benson Mayowa accounted for 15.5 sacks last season. Irvin in thirteen games Mayowa working in a rotation.

Click to expand...

I like this post. Truth here.

All together our defense was getting slashed and it started with the run game. No one respected us anymore. I'm not sure what came of this, but the only difference was our d line and lb aging. We havent had that I bet you won't run...run stuffer on the line in years and our lb's cant cover against 3 wr sets anymore. It's pretty easy to figure out. Ecspecially since we play soft zone and Emmanuel Sanders can successfully catch a slant route at 8 yards consistently. I cant believe in two games last year how many slants were completed against us. It's like we cant adjust or dont have the team to adjust or we don't see it coming. If it wasnt a slant it was a slant covered and drop it over the lb's in zone just before the safeties. I'll give it to defending the run game which is weird, because I felt like Bobby took a step back, but the whole defense as a weakness was crazy. No way that happens again this year. I cant fathom bobby being done as the biggest contributor on defense. I think we figure it out.

Jet sweep against our soft edges inflates those numbers. How many jet sweep plays did you see run against the 13 or 14 Hawks? Kam crashed the edge with violence. Don't believe me, ask Eric Winston his thoughts. Dude got light up!

You'd figure with the way they'd staffed the D line, with more power D ends in the 270-290lb range like Green and Collier that the run stats would have been better than having 240-260lb speed type D ends.

But then again those guys are still young in their careers and Collier barely played.

I see it getting better though. Least we still have Poona.

tersal":26hduqg6 said:

I am so tired of every time I read about the Seahawks not addressing the pass rush this off season.Everyone do a little homework please. The Seahawks gave up 4.9 yards per rush last season far to high. Compare that to the 3.9 yards per rush of the 2013 season then Jordyn Brooks makes sense. Brooks was considered by many as the finest run stopping in the Draft makes sense. At least two NFL Evaluators stated his comp was Bobby Wagner I am good with that.

By the way Bruce Irvin and Benson Mayowa accounted for 15.5 sacks last season. Irvin in thirteen games Mayowa working in a rotation.

Click to expand...

I don't think Benson Mayowa and Irvin our answers to our pitiful pass rush. Both of these guys are players that work well in a rotation, but they're not players you want to count on. Irvin in particular is a one trick pony and he can easily be shutdown. Irvin would have been a great pickup if we resigned Clowney or signed Griffin but as our sole threat he isn't going to be potent. Mayowa is the same story. What is more concerning is both of these guys haven't exactly been consistently good pass rushers, or in Mayowa's case he only has one year where he did much.

As far as Jordyn Brooks goes, I'm going to have to disagree -- he doesn't look much like Bobby Wagner did in college. They look like two different players, the only thing that is similar is their builds and combine performance. Hell, Jordyn Brooks spent most of his collegiate career as an OLB. My issue with him is he tends to run himself out of the play. Doesn't seem like the most sure tackler around in the 6 games I watched. Wasn't particularly impressed, the only thing that really stood out to me is he looks like he was good at blitzing, and in a straight line he was fast. I'm not exactly sure how much he is going to help the running defense in his rookie season. He looks very raw to me.

Which brings up another issue, our D-Line once again. We didn't really do anything to address the middle of our line. Our DT position is a weakness. This is another reason why I don't think Brooks is going to be particularly effective. He didn't do the best job shedding blocks against better competition in the running game. Perhaps that is a skill he can work on, perhaps I just watched games that he looked bad in. Either way he's not going to have much support from our D-Line. Really this is the case with most LBs, in fact even Bobby Wagner had a hard time at points this year. People thought he regressed a little, but what I saw is a line that made it hard for him to do his job.

"what I saw is a line that made it hard for him (Wagner) to do his job."
This. Wagner did not have "a job" to do. He and KJ were forced into trying to do 3 jobs at the same time. Because they were trying to cover so such ground on nearly every down people say they lost a step. It's impossible to provide coverage on deep slants and still cover against the run due to a deficient DL. It takes a TEAM.

Very good replies everyone thank you very much. The point of the post is that while the lack of a strong pass rush stuck out like a sore thumb the run defense was not much better. My hope is that Jarran Reed not missing so much of the season helps alog with Brooks loving up to the team expectations. Also Green and Collier taking huge steps forward taking. Of course bring back Clowney at a fair price will help. Finally either UGI or Dunbar will probably play the slot and give the linebackers a break. Also Irvin and Mayowa in the pass rush rotation should help both have to be better than Ziggy.

Good thread tersal.
I had high hopes Dunbar would provide a big boost to our secondary, which would take pressure off our DL and LBs, but despite all the shady lawyering going on I am having serious doubts Dunbar will actually be part of our active roster any time soon, if ever. That would hurt.
I see Harrison as our best shot for a new Red Bryant run stuffing DT, and Clowney as the difference maker he is.

Football is a team game. If you just look at stats sometimes you will miss what is really going on.

The 2013 Seahawks defense faced about 63 plays a game and were defending a lead for about half those snaps. So they did not have to face a lot of rushing attempts. In close games, they could be had in the running game. The 2013 Seahawks gave up 200 yards rushing in back to back weekend against the Rams and Buccaneers. They gave up 161 yards rushing at a 5.8 yards per carry. So lets not get crazy about how good the 2013 Hawks were at run D.

The Hawks defense has been bad to average the last few seasons. The number one problem is they get killed on deep crossing routes. So the Linebackers have to drop deeper which makes them weaker to runs up the middle, so the team got fat guys to plug up the middle, then teams started to attack the edges in the run game.

Basically, the team got really old and slow at linebacker and did not add an effective two-way player to the secondary.

I feel the D overall has and will have a decent group . What i saw last year wasn't lack of talent but lack of teamwork .

xray":2gqk4qbu said:

I feel the D overall has and will have a decent group . What i saw last year wasn't lack of talent but lack of teamwork .

Click to expand...

We didn't have a decent group last year, defensive line especially was a huge liability. Clowney was the only guy that was able to hold his own. Our pass rushers were non-existent outside of Clowney, the sacks that did happen usually came about because of Clowney setting the play up. Our DT's couldn't create any penetration in the backfield, and they got absolutely destroyed. Clowney was consistently double teamed, and even triple teamed, yet our line wasn't able to hold. At secondary Griffin played well, but Flowers regressed big time. Our other CB's didn't do much better, our situation improved quite a bit with Diggs at FS. At SS McDougald is just another guy, not a liability, but also not a huge asset. At LB I think Wright is near done. For a few seasons he has looked noticeably slower, I'm not sure he is an asset any longer.

This offseason was a bit rough. I don't think we did much to alleviate the defensive line situation. We let our best two players last season walk. We replaced them with Irvin and Mayowa. If Irvin faces constant double teams it is not going to be pretty. Mayowa had 7 sacks last season, so perhaps he will be a help. I'm a bit worried about his other seasons though. He is a wildcard at this point. Our interior line is still suspect -- we don't really have players capable of getting penetration, which is one of the reasons why we were vulnerable to outside runs. Reed should have been that guy, but he looked hopeless last season. His 10 sack season is starting to look like a fluke.

What I'm getting at is we have some massive holes that we didn't fill, and we had some massive holes last season. There was a talent deficit on defense and this has been a trend for a long time now. Since our last SuperBowl run the defense has been getting worse every season in practically every metric. We have not done a good job on defense for a long while, and this is the culmination of bad drafting and overall management on the defensive side of the ball, especially the defensive line. We've had a lot of misses there in both trades and drafts.

I wouldn't put it all on the players. I do know that our LBs are aging and that our secondary couldn't recognize slants and middle screens to save their lives, but IMHO I believe that ever since Norton became the DC we have digressed into where we are defensively now. He didn't really do all that great when he was the DC for Oakland.

nrayorr":17g3vloe said:

I wouldn't put it all on the players. I do know that our LBs are aging and that our secondary couldn't recognize slants and middle screens to save their lives, but IMHO I believe that ever since Norton became the DC we have digressed into where we are defensively now. He didn't really do all that great when he was the DC for Oakland.

Click to expand...

Del Rio ran the show in Oakland for the most part just as Pete does here, Norton uses the game plan Pete wants not his own, and any major decision on our defense is Pete's. Not saying Norton doesn't have input or calls many alignments, but when it comes down to a major decision it's Pete's.

chris98251":p7g8n11l said:

nrayorr":p7g8n11l said:

I wouldn't put it all on the players. I do know that our LBs are aging and that our secondary couldn't recognize slants and middle screens to save their lives, but IMHO I believe that ever since Norton became the DC we have digressed into where we are defensively now. He didn't really do all that great when he was the DC for Oakland.

Click to expand...

Del Rio ran the show in Oakland for the most part just as Pete does here, Norton uses the game plan Pete wants not his own, and any major decision on our defense is Pete's. Not saying Norton doesn't have input or calls many alignments, but when it comes down to a major decision it's Pete's.

Click to expand...

I can understand that and point is taken as far as a game plan is concerned. However, when it comes to coaching players to recognize schemes and adjust to it then that is when it comes down to coaching. Audibles are used for a reason and when it comes to recognizing an offensive play that the current defensive scheme probably cannot stop then go from zone to man and vice versa. Audible to bring up the strong safety to help cover for slants and screens, etc. Our defense was very good at doing that before Norton came along.

nrayorr":jnju0skt said:

chris98251":jnju0skt said:

nrayorr":jnju0skt said:

I wouldn't put it all on the players. I do know that our LBs are aging and that our secondary couldn't recognize slants and middle screens to save their lives, but IMHO I believe that ever since Norton became the DC we have digressed into where we are defensively now. He didn't really do all that great when he was the DC for Oakland.

Click to expand...

Del Rio ran the show in Oakland for the most part just as Pete does here, Norton uses the game plan Pete wants not his own, and any major decision on our defense is Pete's. Not saying Norton doesn't have input or calls many alignments, but when it comes down to a major decision it's Pete's.

Click to expand...

I can understand that and point is taken as far as a game plan is concerned. However, when it comes to coaching players to recognize schemes and adjust to it then that is when it comes down to coaching. Audibles are used for a reason and when it comes to recognizing an offensive play that the current defensive scheme probably cannot stop then go from zone to man and vice versa. Audible to bring up the strong safety to help cover for slants and screens, etc. Our defense was very good at doing that before Norton came along.

Click to expand...

You also had a Kam and Sherman back there, Kam doesn't get the credit for being a coach on the field that he was, he lined up the D line, made calls and recognized coverage, Sherman called a lot of the assignments for the alignments he seen.

Remember that secondary spent almost as much time viewing film as Wilson does.

McDougald is sort of that guy now, I expect Diggs to be more involved this year as well.

chris98251":232tspg0 said:

nrayorr":232tspg0 said:

chris98251":232tspg0 said:

nrayorr":232tspg0 said:

I wouldn't put it all on the players. I do know that our LBs are aging and that our secondary couldn't recognize slants and middle screens to save their lives, but IMHO I believe that ever since Norton became the DC we have digressed into where we are defensively now. He didn't really do all that great when he was the DC for Oakland.

Click to expand...

Del Rio ran the show in Oakland for the most part just as Pete does here, Norton uses the game plan Pete wants not his own, and any major decision on our defense is Pete's. Not saying Norton doesn't have input or calls many alignments, but when it comes down to a major decision it's Pete's.

Click to expand...

I can understand that and point is taken as far as a game plan is concerned. However, when it comes to coaching players to recognize schemes and adjust to it then that is when it comes down to coaching. Audibles are used for a reason and when it comes to recognizing an offensive play that the current defensive scheme probably cannot stop then go from zone to man and vice versa. Audible to bring up the strong safety to help cover for slants and screens, etc. Our defense was very good at doing that before Norton came along.

Click to expand...

You also had a Kam and Sherman back there, Kam doesn't get the credit for being a coach on the field that he was, he lined up the D line, made calls and recognized coverage, Sherman called a lot of the assignments for the alignments he seen.

Remember that secondary spent almost as much time viewing film as Wilson does.

McDougald is sort of that guy now, I expect Diggs to be more involved this year as well.

Click to expand...

I would love to see that. I agree that Diggs definitely will be a general back there, kinda iffy on McDougald but we'll see. We did have a great defensive backfield then and certainly can get there again. I guess I'm just not a big fan of Norton as DC, but as a LB coach I thought he did pretty well.

nrayorr":szn01zy9 said:

chris98251":szn01zy9 said:

nrayorr":szn01zy9 said:

chris98251":szn01zy9 said:

Del Rio ran the show in Oakland for the most part just as Pete does here, Norton uses the game plan Pete wants not his own, and any major decision on our defense is Pete's. Not saying Norton doesn't have input or calls many alignments, but when it comes down to a major decision it's Pete's.

Click to expand...

I can understand that and point is taken as far as a game plan is concerned. However, when it comes to coaching players to recognize schemes and adjust to it then that is when it comes down to coaching. Audibles are used for a reason and when it comes to recognizing an offensive play that the current defensive scheme probably cannot stop then go from zone to man and vice versa. Audible to bring up the strong safety to help cover for slants and screens, etc. Our defense was very good at doing that before Norton came along.

Click to expand...

You also had a Kam and Sherman back there, Kam doesn't get the credit for being a coach on the field that he was, he lined up the D line, made calls and recognized coverage, Sherman called a lot of the assignments for the alignments he seen.

Remember that secondary spent almost as much time viewing film as Wilson does.

McDougald is sort of that guy now, I expect Diggs to be more involved this year as well.

Click to expand...

I would love to see that. I agree that Diggs definitely will be a general back there, kinda iffy on McDougald but we'll see. We did have a great defensive backfield then and certainly can get there again. I guess I'm just not a big fan of Norton as DC, but as a LB coach I thought he did pretty well.

Click to expand...

To be aggressive up front you have to trust that your DB's can make reads and cover for at least 3 to 4 seconds, Thompson was getting abused and with no slot guy to speak off they were able to make a hot read easy, Diggs helped a lot there as well as Amadi in the slot later on, why we started looking better. Norton is aggressive by nature, I am sure he wants to unleash the hounds but Pete won't allow it till we prove we can cover.