Article on the linebackers on espn.com

[niveky]

https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seaha ... -than-ever

brief excerpt...

Two numbers that support that claim: Seattle's base defense has allowed almost the same passer rating (85.5) this season against formations with at least three wide receivers as its nickel defense did in such situations over the previous two seasons (85.3), per ESPN charting. They've allowed 4.62 yards per carry in those situations this year, as compared to 4.82 from 2017 to 2018.

 

[Jville]

Pete made reference to those numbers in a press conference this week. Pete's been a trend setter before with a defensive backfield that was ridiculed as being high school stuff that couldn't work in the NFL. He schooled his critics then. So, it shouldn't be surprising to see hm do it again. More evidence that Pete ignores the noise and is comfortable with his crew and with what he is about.

It's great to have that link posted here. Terrific Article. Much Appreciated. :2thumbs:

"Statistically, we're ahead of where we've been," Carroll said. "We've been checking it really carefully just for obvious reasons because we're departing a little bit from the norm, so I want to make sure that we're doing it right. There's a lot of positives that are coming from it. What I'd like to do is just be able to hit them a little bit more, make it hard on the offense with our rushes. But the running game is really intact like we had hoped, and the numbers are comparable to where they've been in the past in the throwing game." -- Pete Carroll

 

[niveky]

Pete made reference to those numbers in a press conference this week. Pete's been a trend setter before with a defensive backfield that was ridiculed as being high school stuff that couldn't work in the NFL. He schooled his critics then. So, it shouldn't be surprising to see hm do it again. More evidence that Pete ignores the noise and is comfortable with his crew and with what he is about.

It's great to have that link posted here. Terrific Article. Much Appreciated. :2thumbs:

no problem. with all the scattered complaining about the problems with the defense being in the base so much and the linebackers not being good enough overall to keep up with recievers/tight ends/rb's in space, it's good to see that the defense with this setup is performing better overall than it has in the last two seasons when comparing the traditional nickel for those situations vs the 4-3 they run so much. a 2 2/10th of a point opponent passer rating against the hawks passing defense in those situations vs lowering the amount per carry against the same defense by basically a couple of feet if I am estimating it right pretty much seems like an overwhelming win for me on that. Teams seemingly have burned us pretty well on passing downs with runs, and when it comes down to stopping a first down that 1 1/2 to 2 feet make all the difference.

 

[knownone]

I've been saying this for the past couple of weeks: Our overall numbers make us look like a bad defense, but dig into the situational numbers and we're slightly above average overall. For instance, we're currently 6th in 3rd down defense, 9th in adjusted pass defense, and 4th in power success (run defense on 3rd/4th down or within 2 yards of the end zone).

I think most people have correctly diagnosed half of the problem, pass rush, while missing the big picture as to why the coaching staff is ok giving up a ton of passing yards instead of taking more risk with exotic blitzes, coverages, etc...

Pete and Norton do not trust the safeties in coverage. That is why they've built the defense around the Tampa 2. In the Tampa 2, you are asking the safeties to cover the sidelines leaving the most important responsibility, the deep middle, to your best defensive player, Bobby Wagner. That's why people think Bobby doesn't look the same as he did in previous season, he's essentially the Earl Thomas of the Tampa 2, he's the safety valve in the middle rather than the hammer up front. Now, one of the biggest weaknesses of the Tampa 2 is the space underneath the corners/safetie's zones and the OLB's zones which where we've been exploited. Some people think that our linebackers are not doing great in pass coverage because there is often a few yards of separation between them and the opponent when they get beat, but that's a reflection of the QB/WR finding space between the zones rather than our LB's getting exposed.

Ultimately, the weakness of our defense is one that I don't think Pete and Norton foresaw being such a glaring issue and that's obviously the pass rush. If they can generate pass rush, then it becomes much harder for the offense to exploit the space between the zones because those routes are largely timing based. That is where we are at on defense. For the most part we're not giving up big plays in our base defense unless guys miss tackles, and offenses are slowly dicing us up because we don't have the pass rush to stop them from exploiting the only major weakness of our scheme. In every other area our defense is above average or great.

So one of two things need to happen for this defense to be elite, either the safeties (maybe Diggs) need to provide enough stability on the back end that the coaching staff trusts them in a wider variety of coverages, or the defensive line needs to generate more pressure to mitigate the weakness of the Tampa 2. Otherwise, we're a bend but don't break defense that is more or less a buffer to facilitate our offense rather than a force to be reckoned with.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I have a problem with the underlying basis for that article.

They are comparing this season, which is incomplete and where 6 of our hardest 8 opponents have yet to play us (including the top 3 toughest) with the last 2 full seasons, with tough competition baked in. Seattle has had a lot of breaks go their way in the first 8 games (not playing Brees or Ryan. Rams missing a ~78% chance field goal to win etc.).

This 8 game stretch has been incredibly cushy. It's not reasonable to think that our statistical success will improve over the next 8 games where our schedule is heavily backloaded with superior opponents.

I simply reject this article's conclusion on this basis alone. It's possible we continue this stretch, but I don't see any reason or flashes of competency that leads me to expect that this defense will start to gel and play better. If anything, these first 8 games have more or less established firmly that this defense is consistent and is exactly what we've seen it to be. Basically about as good as our previous seasons, only without having played the vast majority of tough opponents. I fully expect this team's defensive numbers to crater this second half.

I'd love to be wrong. But this piece is based on a logical fallacy that doesn't support a predictive conclusion.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I remember last year when so many said that Vikings were gonna' go up and down the field on the Hawks. They put out their best defensive performance in a long time and held them to 7 points. I'm not saying the D is going to be great, but I certainly can see them improving over the next couple months. They won't be dominant at all, they just don't the talent for that, YET.
But, if they can keep teams to more FG's than TD's, they have a shot against any team in the league. And they still are making plays when it counts, they wouldn't be 6-2 w/out making some plays. But, there is obviously a lot of room for improvement. It's going to be an interesting 2nd half, especially seeing who gets playing time in the secondary and who steps it up on the D Line. We desperately need to get a pass rush. I wish they would blitz Wags and Kendricks more.

 

[bmorepunk]

I've been saying this for the past couple of weeks: Our overall numbers make us look like a bad defense, but dig into the situational numbers and we're slightly above average overall. For instance, we're currently 6th in 3rd down defense, 9th in adjusted pass defense, and 4th in power success (run defense on 3rd/4th down or within 2 yards of the end zone).

I get that, but the number that really matters, points allowed, is 20th in the NFL (24.5). All this situational stuff is good, but if the team, primarily the defense, can't cut down on this significantly this team is in trouble over the course of the season.

 

[chris98251]

Really need to look at our opponents offensive rankings also, Rams, Saints, I bet will be in the top end of points scored as well.

 

[niveky]

I remember last year when so many said that Vikings were gonna' go up and down the field on the Hawks. They put out their best defensive performance in a long time and held them to 7 points. I'm not saying the D is going to be great, but I certainly can see them improving over the next couple months. They won't be dominant at all, they just don't the talent for that, YET.
But, if they can keep teams to more FG's than TD's, they have a shot against any team in the league. And they still are making plays when it counts, they wouldn't be 6-2 w/out making some plays. But, there is obviously a lot of room for improvement. It's going to be an interesting 2nd half, especially seeing who gets playing time in the secondary and who steps it up on the D Line. We desperately need to get a pass rush. I wish they would blitz Wags and Kendricks more.

If the Diggs, Blair, McDougal rotation improves the back end enough just from better coverage and teams not able to get the quick outs so much, I am sure they will start getting a lot more pressure. Especially if Reed gets back to how he was last year in the next couple of games.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/33409/seahawks-leaning-on-tackle-king-bobby-wagner-and-their-lbs-more-than-ever

brief excerpt...

Two numbers that support that claim: Seattle's base defense has allowed almost the same passer rating (85.5) this season against formations with at least three wide receivers as its nickel defense did in such situations over the previous two seasons (85.3), per ESPN charting. They've allowed 4.62 yards per carry in those situations this year, as compared to 4.82 from 2017 to 2018.

I'd buy this argument if the QB's we've played so far weren't named Andy Dalton, Mason Rudolph, Jared Goff, Teddy Bridgewater, Kyler Murray, Baker Mayfield, Lamar Jackson and Matt Schaub.

That's a murder's row of mediocrity in the passing game.

I've see FAR too many mismatches of LB's chasing WR's across formations and too much cushion given by our DB's to keep everything in front of them giving up a bazillion easy 5-8 yard completions getting dinked and dunked to death by bad QB's for me to believe this is better, or even just as good as our old cover 3 or nickel coverage schemes.

I understand WHY we're doing it, Pete doesn't trust our pass rush or defensive backfield to play cover 3 or nickel. So damned if he does, and damed if he don't..........but that's his and John's fault.

 

[knownone]

https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/33409/seahawks-leaning-on-tackle-king-bobby-wagner-and-their-lbs-more-than-ever

brief excerpt...

Two numbers that support that claim: Seattle's base defense has allowed almost the same passer rating (85.5) this season against formations with at least three wide receivers as its nickel defense did in such situations over the previous two seasons (85.3), per ESPN charting. They've allowed 4.62 yards per carry in those situations this year, as compared to 4.82 from 2017 to 2018.

I'd buy this argument if the QB's we've played so far weren't named Andy Dalton, Mason Rudolph, Jared Goff, Teddy Bridgewater, Kyler Murray, Baker Mayfield, Lamar Jackson and Matt Schaub.

That's a murder's row of mediocrity in the passing game.

I've see FAR too many mismatches of LB's chasing WR's across formations and too much cushion given by our DB's to keep everything in front of them giving up a bazillion easy 5-8 yard completions getting dinked and dunked to death by bad QB's for me to believe this is better, or even just as good as our old cover 3 or nickel coverage schemes.

I understand WHY we're doing it, Pete doesn't trust our pass rush or defensive backfield to play cover 3 or nickel. So damned if he does, and damed if he don't..........but that's his and John's fault.

The defense was better against those teams on a down to down basis than QB rating would indicate. Dalton, Rudolph, Bridgewater, and Mayfield all capitalized on turnovers or short fields that weren't exactly the defense's fault.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/33409/seahawks-leaning-on-tackle-king-bobby-wagner-and-their-lbs-more-than-ever

brief excerpt...

Two numbers that support that claim: Seattle's base defense has allowed almost the same passer rating (85.5) this season against formations with at least three wide receivers as its nickel defense did in such situations over the previous two seasons (85.3), per ESPN charting. They've allowed 4.62 yards per carry in those situations this year, as compared to 4.82 from 2017 to 2018.

I'd buy this argument if the QB's we've played so far weren't named Andy Dalton, Mason Rudolph, Jared Goff, Teddy Bridgewater, Kyler Murray, Baker Mayfield, Lamar Jackson and Matt Schaub.

That's a murder's row of mediocrity in the passing game.

I've see FAR too many mismatches of LB's chasing WR's across formations and too much cushion given by our DB's to keep everything in front of them giving up a bazillion easy 5-8 yard completions getting dinked and dunked to death by bad QB's for me to believe this is better, or even just as good as our old cover 3 or nickel coverage schemes.

I understand WHY we're doing it, Pete doesn't trust our pass rush or defensive backfield to play cover 3 or nickel. So damned if he does, and damed if he don't..........but that's his and John's fault.

The defense was better against those teams on a down to down basis than QB rating would indicate. Dalton, Rudolph, Bridgewater, and Mayfield all capitalized on turnovers or short fields that weren't exactly the defense's fault.

25th in points allowed
30th in passing yards allowed
18th in rushing yards allowed
23rd in yards per game allowed
9th in defensive penalties
25th in sacks


Yep, all cause of a couple games with bad teams with short fields. That's the ticket, nothing to see here. All is well!

 

[Ad Hawk]

I've been saying this for the past couple of weeks: Our overall numbers make us look like a bad defense, but dig into the situational numbers and we're slightly above average overall. For instance, we're currently 6th in 3rd down defense, 9th in adjusted pass defense, and 4th in power success (run defense on 3rd/4th down or within 2 yards of the end zone).

I get that, but the number that really matters, points allowed, is 20th in the NFL (24.5). All this situational stuff is good, but if the team, primarily the defense, can't cut down on this significantly this team is in trouble over the course of the season.

How many points has our D given up when we already had a lead and were playing soft in order to burn out the clock and preserve a win?

The situation absolutely matters in the points allowed area, too.

 

[Scorpion05]

The Base defense criticism was always kind of lazy to me. The main issue of our defense has been safety play. We've been allowing some big plays. Earlier in the season, it was somewhat cornerback play. We were giving up a lot of underneath stuff.

I think this defense is going to turn a corner. With Diggs on board, McDougald healthy, and Blair possibly starting.