Four changes that worked for the Seahawks defense vs Arizona...

[ivotuk]

Gregg Bell -- Tue, October 18, 2022 at 9:23 AM

1. Moved their defensive ends further outside

2. Lessened the tasks for the defensive line and front

3. Got Cody Barton off the field

4. They challenged themselves

I don't agree with #3. They went to smaller, faster players to defend against AZ. Not because of Cody's play, but because that's what the game plan called for.

Four changes that worked for the Seahawks defense vs Arizona. Now, can they sustain it?

Wide gap play, more attacking, less reading and an attitude shift worked wonders for Seattle’s defensive line. Is it sustainable?

news.yahoo.com

 

[Natethegreat]

They missed the most important part. They played the Cardinals.

 

[LickMyNuts]

Mike Sando mentioned on The Athletic Podcast that they let some of the D-Line pin their ears back a bit more against Arizona.

He mentioned the transition to more of a Fangio scheme has more layers and nuances and requires more communication and thinking for the players.

 

[Ruminator]

Mike Sando mentioned on The Athletic Podcast that they let some of the D-Line pin their ears back a bit more against Arizona.

He mentioned the transition to more of a Fangio scheme has more layers and nuances and requires more communication and thinking for the players.

So the coaches didn't encourage their players to play aggressively Weeks 1 through 5? I guess that was a totally novel concept to them, playing aggressively in the NFL!

 

[Smellyman]

Forget if it was locked on Seahawks or someone on 710, but they said they ditched the two gap assignment for the Dline and one gapped it. That is why Ford, Jefferson, Harris, Mone etc. looked so much better

 

[ivotuk]

Forget if it was locked on Seahawks or someone on 710, but they said they ditched the two gap assignment for the Dline and one gapped it. That is why Ford, Jefferson, Harris, Mone etc. looked so much better

710 Seattle Sports

 

[cymatica]

Every week the game plan should include #3

 

[CPHawk]

Weren’t they without their top RB?

 

[Smellyman]

Weren’t they without their top RB?

Not like James Conner is a huge loss. Benjamin probably better at this point of Conner's career.

 

[Rainger]

Weren’t they without their top RB?

So what the Hawks were without their top running back.

All this so and so wasn't playing which then negates a win on .net is exasperating.

Hawks only beat this team or that team because this guy or that didnt play. It is a big furphy.

That is the NFL no one or two players on either side of the ball make any team win or lose.

 

[LickMyNuts]

So the coaches didn't encourage their players to play aggressively Weeks 1 through 5? I guess that was a totally novel concept to them, playing aggressively in the NFL!

No more that they have more thinking to do with a new defense. Not unusual for coaches to cut back on thinking when players aren’t doing well. They do it on offense as well.

Is this a new concept for you?

 

[Seattle Person]

Yup. They moved Shelby Harris and Poona Ford to the B gap and told them to blow up that gap only. Sounds minor but Harris/Poona dealing with guards instead of tackles are huge. Pinning their ears back to blow up 1 gap instead of holding their blocks to see which way the play goes. They also moved Mone to the 0-tech and told him to blow up the center.

 

[GemCity]

I like……

Option 3.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Or maybe they just played BETTER than the cards. Why make excuses for why they WON the game? Same crap after every win for YEARS around here. Come on man. Believe it or not, sometimes they actually........wait for it.......play better than their opponent. Mind....blown. Hawks were without Penny or Adams. It goes both ways.
They played tough, and controlled the game. Other than the special teams handing them 6, Arizona was controlled, all game. 3 points of offense. 3, total.
It is strange af how people fight tooth and nail to downplay a WIN by the Hawks.

 

[Scout]

Patriots are known to use 2 gap and 1 gap to switch it up. If true it is a smart move to stick to 1 gap for now for the Hawks, because there isn't much difference between a 34 1 gap or a 43 1 gap.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I'm just looking forward to Monday, and reading all the excuses as to why that Hawks WON
Always great reading.

 

[morgulon1]

So the coaches didn't encourage their players to play aggressively Weeks 1 through 5? I guess that was a totally novel concept to them, playing aggressively in the NFL!

I believe it's in regard to the line hold the point of attack vs rushing upfield in the new system. just a Guess.

 

[sutz]

I believe it's in regard to the line hold the point of attack vs rushing upfield in the new system. just a Guess.

Yeah, went from a more 'read and react' to a more 'penetrate and attack' scheme. There are down sides to that as well, if they get too aggresive. Offenses have counters to that as well. All in the chess match that is football.

 

[Chukarhawk]

I'm just looking forward to Monday, and reading all the excuses as to why that Hawks WON
Always great reading.

good measuring stick game. they win here and it changes the rest of the season IMO.

 

[cymatica]

Or maybe they just played BETTER than the cards. Why make excuses for why they WON the game? Same crap after every win for YEARS around here. Come on man. Believe it or not, sometimes they actually........wait for it.......play better than their opponent. Mind....blown. Hawks were without Penny or Adams. It goes both ways.
They played tough, and controlled the game. Other than the special teams handing them 6, Arizona was controlled, all game. 3 points of offense. 3, total.
It is strange af how people fight tooth and nail to downplay a WIN by the Hawks.

The point being that they played better because the coaches put them in a position to succeed with certain changes.