Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Does our defense suck because they practice against Russell?

The Original Seattle Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute for Seahawks Talk, News, Rumors, Trades, and Analytics. LANGUAGE: PG-13
  • Serious question hear me out...

    Let's say every practice our defense has is based on plays for Russell Wilson and his skill set.

    93% of teams don't run plays like what we do with Russell Wilson. Maybe Kyler Murray does? I can't think of another QB who would excel in a similar offense.

    So we are practicing and preparing for other teams with plays THAT NO OTHER TEAMS RUN AGAINST US???

    That would explain why our team has no idea how to cover the middle of the field, Wilson doesn't throw there very often!

    Seems like common sense but I've never heard anyone make this conclusion.

    We need to start preparing the defense to play well against what other teams do! Not what Russell Wilson does!

    If this theory is true, the defense might start improving by practicing with Geno Smith.
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 809
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • No. They suck because the scheme is broken. If you play 10 yards off of the receivers and have linebackers on receivers, you know something has gone terribly wrong. We don't make teams work for it, all they have to do is throw 5-10 yard passes all day and there is nothing our defense can do about it.

    It's a death by 1000 paper cuts. Eventually they get worn out and give up plays over the top, or massive runs for big gains. This is 100% the scheme and likely a lack of talent at CB.
    Spin Doctor
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3740
    Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:31 am


  • No :34853_doh:
    seabowl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3222
    Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:20 am


  • No they suck because of coaching and scheme.
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 491
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • No they suck because of scheme and coaching.

    #KNJ
    pmedic920
    * .NET Official Stache *
     
    Posts: 22965
    Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 9:37 am
    Location: On the lake, Livingston Texas


  • What's worse, this question or the "<insert coach here> doesn't prepare for games!" sentiment?
    bmorepunk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2755
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:56 pm


  • I think the way it works is that when they are prepping for an opponent, they'll have the 2nd team offense emulate the offense of the upcoming opponent against the no 1 defense. That's how they get the looks and formations the next opponent will run. That allows our no1 offense to focus on installing their game plan. Could be wrong tbough.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 496
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • I thought it was because our film room has been closed all year since that part of the VMAC is under construction
    Jerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4244
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 8:39 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


  • I thought the practice squad players were supposed to emulate the opponent. Regardless, Wilson was the QB in the LOB days
    cymatica
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1751
    Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2014 8:40 am


  • How was the 2012-2015 defense that practiced against Russell?
    seabowl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3222
    Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:20 am


  • keasley45 wrote:I think the way it works is that when they are prepping for an opponent, they'll have the 2nd team offense emulate the offense of the upcoming opponent against the no 1 defense. That's how they get the looks and formations the next opponent will run. That allows our no1 offense to focus on installing their game plan. Could be wrong tbough.


    your not wrong

    lth
    LTH
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 1685
    Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:58 pm


  • Tokadub wrote:Serious question hear me out...

    Let's say every practice our defense has is based on plays for Russell Wilson and his skill set.

    93% of teams don't run plays like what we do with Russell Wilson. Maybe Kyler Murray does? I can't think of another QB who would excel in a similar offense.

    So we are practicing and preparing for other teams with plays THAT NO OTHER TEAMS RUN AGAINST US???

    That would explain why our team has no idea how to cover the middle of the field, Wilson doesn't throw there very often!

    Seems like common sense but I've never heard anyone make this conclusion.

    We need to start preparing the defense to play well against what other teams do! Not what Russell Wilson does!

    If this theory is true, the defense might start improving by practicing with Geno Smith.



    Jesus christ what's next to its Wilson's fault the Fg kicker is missing FGs? Are you going to blame him for the rain too? When preparing fo rth other teams' offense it is not Wilson running it.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5013
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • Nope, it's all Ciara's fault for being so pretty. :curious:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7654
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • John63 wrote:Jesus christ what's next to its Wilson's fault the Fg kicker is missing FGs? Are you going to blame him for the rain too? When preparing fo rth other teams' offense it is not Wilson running it.


    Well, Russ hasn't been telling people "Let's be great" this year. I blame him for not being a mental cheerleader this year. I also blame him for slimming down, it's making me look bad in front of my wife.
    MyrtleHawk
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 79
    Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:53 pm


  • Tokadub wrote:Serious question hear me out...

    Let's say every practice our defense has is based on plays for Russell Wilson and his skill set.

    93% of teams don't run plays like what we do with Russell Wilson. Maybe Kyler Murray does? I can't think of another QB who would excel in a similar offense.

    So we are practicing and preparing for other teams with plays THAT NO OTHER TEAMS RUN AGAINST US???

    That would explain why our team has no idea how to cover the middle of the field, Wilson doesn't throw there very often!

    Seems like common sense but I've never heard anyone make this conclusion.

    We need to start preparing the defense to play well against what other teams do! Not what Russell Wilson does!

    If this theory is true, the defense might start improving by practicing with Geno Smith.


    Or...maybe they are getting the defense ready to play against Russ next year when he's playing for SF.
    You didnt think this through very well!!!
    BChawkfan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1050
    Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:13 pm


  • keasley45 wrote:I think the way it works is that when they are prepping for an opponent, they'll have the 2nd team offense emulate the offense of the upcoming opponent against the no 1 defense. That's how they get the looks and formations the next opponent will run. That allows our no1 offense to focus on installing their game plan. Could be wrong tbough.


    I imagine at this level, the practice squad guys get a lot of that duty along with 2/3 deep players. These days I'm not sure how much of that actually happens on the field anymore. Lots of film and maybe some full speed no tackling stuff, then a walk through to finish it off
    OrangeGravy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 686
    Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:47 pm


  • MyrtleHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:Jesus christ what's next to its Wilson's fault the Fg kicker is missing FGs? Are you going to blame him for the rain too? When preparing fo rth other teams' offense it is not Wilson running it.


    Well, Russ hasn't been telling people "Let's be great" this year. I blame him for not being a mental cheerleader this year. I also blame him for slimming down, it's making me look bad in front of my wife.



    Lol
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5013
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • As others have said, coaching and the scheme.

    You pick a scheme that will work against your opponent and your current team CAN execute. Not the scheme your 2011-2013 team could execute.
    ZagHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1786
    Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:42 pm


  • While not a fan of MOST of your posts

    I have felt this way for about 3 years now
    balakoth
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 389
    Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:41 pm


  • Spin Doctor wrote:No. They suck because the scheme is broken. If you play 10 yards off of the receivers and have linebackers on receivers, you know something has gone terribly wrong. We don't make teams work for it, all they have to do is throw 5-10 yard passes all day and there is nothing our defense can do about it.

    It's a death by 1000 paper cuts. Eventually they get worn out and give up plays over the top, or massive runs for big gains. This is 100% the scheme and likely a lack of talent at CB.


    Yeah that's kind of my point. They throw 5-10 or even (15-25) yard easy completions. I don't think we "eventually get worn out", it's more like we don't know how to stop what they do for 80% of the game with the 5-10 yard throws over the middle.

    I will agree our scheme is broken, but I still think it's very possible our players are performing WAY worst (if you believe we have any talent) due to practicing against Russell Wilson and he doesn't play like 93% of the other QBs in the league.

    Our defense is spending all their time and effort on how to defend stuff that ONLY RUSSELL WILSON DOES!!!

    This is what you call "tunnel vision" Wilson is so obsessed to get every rep on offense that our defense can't practice adequately! Our coaches should be the ones responsible for that but I don't think they do anything based on our results...


    PS:
    KJ WRIGHT, Bruce Irvin, and a prime Bobby Wagner would disagree that if you have a linebacker covering a receiver that's a problem. The difference was we had Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor so it worked... now we have Jamal Adams so EVERYTHING DOESN'T WORK!!!
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 809
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • keasley45 wrote:I think the way it works is that when they are prepping for an opponent, they'll have the 2nd team offense emulate the offense of the upcoming opponent against the no 1 defense. That's how they get the looks and formations the next opponent will run. That allows our no1 offense to focus on installing their game plan. Could be wrong tbough.


    That would be wonderful but everything I've heard is that Wilson plays pretty much every rep in practice so that can't be possible.

    Give me a source of news if you know otherwise...
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 809
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • seabowl wrote:How was the 2012-2015 defense that practiced against Russell?


    They were good enough to defend ANYTHING. EZ

    They were smart and incredibly gifted athletically. We are the opposite of that for the most part now.

    They also changed the rules for THE ENTIRE NFL based on our success... so to compare anything we've done in contrast to the 2012 or 2013 Seahawks is fallacious.
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 809
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • ZagHawk wrote:As others have said, coaching and the scheme.

    You pick a scheme that will work against your opponent and your current team CAN execute. Not the scheme your 2011-2013 team could execute.


    Well this is the first intelligent response in this entire post. I agree the coaches SHOULD pick a scheme our team CAN execute against our opponent.

    However, I believe by all accounts (this is public knowledge) Russel is a "ball hog" in practice and our defense has to practice against him for nearly every rep.

    I'd love to find any shred of evidence that Russell doesn't play basically every offensive rep in practice... give me one link???
    Last edited by Tokadub on Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 809
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • I need to take a break from this forum for tonight after reading these responses. Everyone is just in denial or lacking critical thinking.
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 809
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • Tokadub wrote:I need to take a break from this forum for tonight after reading these responses. Everyone is just in denial or lacking critical thinking.



    You should take a break from writing your own lame responses. Wilson does not qb against the defense when the defense practices against what they think will be what the other team runs. He is busy practice the game plan they are implementing against the defense they will face. So this stupid and lame attempt to blame Wilson is FACTUALLY BS, and has NO evidence to support it.
    Last edited by John63 on Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5013
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • It isn't Russ.

    Norton has been a terrible DC his entire career
    On fact, he had NEVER been good.

    And the HC is a meddling control freak that probably is having an extended senior moment.

    We don't need Wilson to make the defense bad. It was already terrible.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5287
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:48 pm


  • Tokadub wrote:
    seabowl wrote:How was the 2012-2015 defense that practiced against Russell?


    They were good enough to defend ANYTHING. EZ

    They were smart and incredibly gifted athletically. We are the opposite of that for the most part now.

    They also changed the rules for THE ENTIRE NFL based on our success... so to compare anything we've done in contrast to the 2012 or 2013 Seahawks is fallacious.


    I'll say it another way. What does playing 8-10 yards off the ball in a scheme from Mars have anything to do with the D in practice? Respectively your hypothesis is a huuuge reach. The scheme they run on D is not of this world and should be shipped off into space on the next Shatner flight.
    seabowl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3222
    Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:20 am


  • Funny. Well, at least when they lose some games coming up, we can FINALLY go a few weeks w/out Russ being blamed for everything. (relax, it's a joke)
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17979
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Funny. Well, at least when they lose some games coming up, we can FINALLY go a few weeks w/out Russ being blamed for everything. (relax, it's a joke)



    lol the unfortunate part is he will still get blamed for something.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5013
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • 1's do play against 1's in pre season, during the season not so much, also Pete has the team with almost zero contact drills during the season and scrimmage.

    Not sure that is good for the young pups, I know the injury bug had bit us hard in the past and maybe this is their solution but it does bite into some of the skill set week to week.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 36996
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • John63 wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Funny. Well, at least when they lose some games coming up, we can FINALLY go a few weeks w/out Russ being blamed for everything. (relax, it's a joke)



    lol the unfortunate part is he will still get blamed for something.


    :sarcasm_on: Why didn't he just scramble from the pocket instead of sitting there waiting to get injured by Donald?! He probably did it on purpose so he could show everyone how much of a difference this team is without him.
    MyrtleHawk
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 79
    Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:53 pm


  • ZagHawk wrote:As others have said, coaching and the scheme.

    You pick a scheme that will work against your opponent and your current team CAN execute. Not the scheme your 2011-2013 team could execute.



    It's this easy everyone, just pick a scheme that makes your defense amazing!


    This isn't rocket science, every team in the NFL runs the same defensive schemes, mostly cover 2 and cover 3 through either a 4-3 or 3-4. Teams have different verbiage, and obviously depending on the coordinator and personnel some complicate up those schemes with disguise, misdirection, movement and blitz packages.

    So translate this to the Hawk's defense, which primarily runs cover 3, but has had to implement more cover 2 because of how bad our DB's are in man to man or press coverage, and even MORE importantly how bad our D-line has been at getting pressure on the QB.

    So no, this isn't just a simple fix because Pete's trying to run the same scheme as 2011-2013. Run whatever scheme you want, it's not going to work unless you have good cover corners and a D-line that can generate disruption and pressure.

    We have NEITHER. Add in a LB corp that can't cover or drop into their proper underneath zone spots and a SS that's a glorified weakside LB that can't cover or tackle particularly well.
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 19588
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    ZagHawk wrote:As others have said, coaching and the scheme.

    You pick a scheme that will work against your opponent and your current team CAN execute. Not the scheme your 2011-2013 team could execute.



    It's this easy everyone, just pick a scheme that makes your defense amazing!


    This isn't rocket science, every team in the NFL runs the same defensive schemes, mostly cover 2 and cover 3 through either a 4-3 or 3-4. Teams have different verbiage, and obviously depending on the coordinator and personnel some complicate up those schemes with disguise, misdirection, movement and blitz packages.

    So translate this to the Hawk's defense, which primarily runs cover 3, but has had to implement more cover 2 because of how bad our DB's are in man to man or press coverage, and even MORE importantly how bad our D-line has been at getting pressure on the QB.

    So no, this isn't just a simple fix because Pete's trying to run the same scheme as 2011-2013. Run whatever scheme you want, it's not going to work unless you have good cover corners and a D-line that can generate disruption and pressure.

    We have NEITHER. Add in a LB corp that can't cover or drop into their proper underneath zone spots and a SS that's a glorified weakside LB that can't cover or tackle particularly well.



    Did anyone say making a scheme was easy?

    Is it fair to have expectations that the HC making $8M a year and the DC making (not public info, but fair to assume way more than a majority of us) should be able to come up with a NOT EASY Scheme that would be more effective with the roster they're given?

    You know what is easy though? not changing a scheme and then blaming your players for lack of execution game after game after game.

    Combine coaching with scheme as well, if the D-line isn't getting pressure, then create a D-Line scheme that may create a whole for a DL to get through. It's pretty much the reverse of an O-Line "scheme" if you're o-line isn't full of probowlers that can't push the d-line back 3 feet, then you're gonna have to get more creative create traps etc. If it was only about the talent, then we'd seen the team with the best talent win all the time without any need for a coach or chemistry.

    Also yes, changing the scheme is not a simple fix, there are talent issues, no one is ignoring that, but again the entire game of football is so connected. Talent issues aren't the only problem, just like it's not the only solution. Our high paid coaches and coordinators should be constantly evolving to figure out what is and is not working. And we've all been watching this team under the PC era, it's not like when things aren't working it's because they're trying new stuff and they're silly, it's the fact we keep seeing more and more of the same. How many years have we seen this team get sliced and diced over and over all the way to the red zone?
    ZagHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1786
    Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:42 pm


  • ZagHawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    ZagHawk wrote:As others have said, coaching and the scheme.

    You pick a scheme that will work against your opponent and your current team CAN execute. Not the scheme your 2011-2013 team could execute.



    It's this easy everyone, just pick a scheme that makes your defense amazing!


    This isn't rocket science, every team in the NFL runs the same defensive schemes, mostly cover 2 and cover 3 through either a 4-3 or 3-4. Teams have different verbiage, and obviously depending on the coordinator and personnel some complicate up those schemes with disguise, misdirection, movement and blitz packages.

    So translate this to the Hawk's defense, which primarily runs cover 3, but has had to implement more cover 2 because of how bad our DB's are in man to man or press coverage, and even MORE importantly how bad our D-line has been at getting pressure on the QB.

    So no, this isn't just a simple fix because Pete's trying to run the same scheme as 2011-2013. Run whatever scheme you want, it's not going to work unless you have good cover corners and a D-line that can generate disruption and pressure.

    We have NEITHER. Add in a LB corp that can't cover or drop into their proper underneath zone spots and a SS that's a glorified weakside LB that can't cover or tackle particularly well.



    Did anyone say making a scheme was easy?

    Is it fair to have expectations that the HC making $8M a year and the DC making (not public info, but fair to assume way more than a majority of us) should be able to come up with a NOT EASY Scheme that would be more effective with the roster they're given?

    You know what is easy though? not changing a scheme and then blaming your players for lack of execution game after game after game.

    Combine coaching with scheme as well, if the D-line isn't getting pressure, then create a D-Line scheme that may create a whole for a DL to get through. It's pretty much the reverse of an O-Line "scheme" if you're o-line isn't full of probowlers that can't push the d-line back 3 feet, then you're gonna have to get more creative create traps etc. If it was only about the talent, then we'd seen the team with the best talent win all the time without any need for a coach or chemistry.

    Also yes, changing the scheme is not a simple fix, there are talent issues, no one is ignoring that, but again the entire game of football is so connected. Talent issues aren't the only problem, just like it's not the only solution. Our high paid coaches and coordinators should be constantly evolving to figure out what is and is not working. And we've all been watching this team under the PC era, it's not like when things aren't working it's because they're trying new stuff and they're silly, it's the fact we keep seeing more and more of the same. How many years have we seen this team get sliced and diced over and over all the way to the red zone?


    This is what I'm trying to tell you, there is no scheme fix.

    Your entire premise is false. Install whatever scheme you want, you still have bad players playing in that scheme that good teams will easily pick apart as soon as they recognize what you're doing.

    This is not a scheme issue, if it was it'd already be fixed. This is a personnel issue, as in we don't have enough playmakers on defense, specifically the DB and D-line positions.

    Play 4-3, play 3-4, play press man, play cover 2, cover 3, cover 4, 5-2, 3-3 stack...........whatever. Won't matter until either these players play better, or we get new players.
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 19588
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    ZagHawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    ZagHawk wrote:As others have said, coaching and the scheme.

    You pick a scheme that will work against your opponent and your current team CAN execute. Not the scheme your 2011-2013 team could execute.



    It's this easy everyone, just pick a scheme that makes your defense amazing!


    This isn't rocket science, every team in the NFL runs the same defensive schemes, mostly cover 2 and cover 3 through either a 4-3 or 3-4. Teams have different verbiage, and obviously depending on the coordinator and personnel some complicate up those schemes with disguise, misdirection, movement and blitz packages.

    So translate this to the Hawk's defense, which primarily runs cover 3, but has had to implement more cover 2 because of how bad our DB's are in man to man or press coverage, and even MORE importantly how bad our D-line has been at getting pressure on the QB.

    So no, this isn't just a simple fix because Pete's trying to run the same scheme as 2011-2013. Run whatever scheme you want, it's not going to work unless you have good cover corners and a D-line that can generate disruption and pressure.

    We have NEITHER. Add in a LB corp that can't cover or drop into their proper underneath zone spots and a SS that's a glorified weakside LB that can't cover or tackle particularly well.



    Did anyone say making a scheme was easy?

    Is it fair to have expectations that the HC making $8M a year and the DC making (not public info, but fair to assume way more than a majority of us) should be able to come up with a NOT EASY Scheme that would be more effective with the roster they're given?

    You know what is easy though? not changing a scheme and then blaming your players for lack of execution game after game after game.

    Combine coaching with scheme as well, if the D-line isn't getting pressure, then create a D-Line scheme that may create a whole for a DL to get through. It's pretty much the reverse of an O-Line "scheme" if you're o-line isn't full of probowlers that can't push the d-line back 3 feet, then you're gonna have to get more creative create traps etc. If it was only about the talent, then we'd seen the team with the best talent win all the time without any need for a coach or chemistry.

    Also yes, changing the scheme is not a simple fix, there are talent issues, no one is ignoring that, but again the entire game of football is so connected. Talent issues aren't the only problem, just like it's not the only solution. Our high paid coaches and coordinators should be constantly evolving to figure out what is and is not working. And we've all been watching this team under the PC era, it's not like when things aren't working it's because they're trying new stuff and they're silly, it's the fact we keep seeing more and more of the same. How many years have we seen this team get sliced and diced over and over all the way to the red zone?


    This is what I'm trying to tell you, there is no scheme fix.

    Your entire premise is false. Install whatever scheme you want, you still have bad players playing in that scheme that good teams will easily pick apart as soon as they recognize what you're doing.

    This is not a scheme issue, if it was it'd already be fixed. This is a personnel issue, as in we don't have enough playmakers on defense, specifically the DB and D-line positions.

    Play 4-3, play 3-4, play press man, play cover 2, cover 3, cover 4, 5-2, 3-3 stack...........whatever. Won't matter until either these players play better, or we get new players.



    We'll agree to disagree. Although I do agree the talent has issues, but i do think there can be a better scheme (combined with coaching) to work with the talent on hand so they aren't the worst defense in the NFL. Because although not as talented as the LOB years, there's enough talent on the defense to not be the worst defense of the entire league.

    Also random thought for the OP.

    Is it possible the offense also struggles, because the defense is so bad?
    ZagHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1786
    Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:42 pm


  • ZagHawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    ZagHawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:

    It's this easy everyone, just pick a scheme that makes your defense amazing!


    This isn't rocket science, every team in the NFL runs the same defensive schemes, mostly cover 2 and cover 3 through either a 4-3 or 3-4. Teams have different verbiage, and obviously depending on the coordinator and personnel some complicate up those schemes with disguise, misdirection, movement and blitz packages.

    So translate this to the Hawk's defense, which primarily runs cover 3, but has had to implement more cover 2 because of how bad our DB's are in man to man or press coverage, and even MORE importantly how bad our D-line has been at getting pressure on the QB.

    So no, this isn't just a simple fix because Pete's trying to run the same scheme as 2011-2013. Run whatever scheme you want, it's not going to work unless you have good cover corners and a D-line that can generate disruption and pressure.

    We have NEITHER. Add in a LB corp that can't cover or drop into their proper underneath zone spots and a SS that's a glorified weakside LB that can't cover or tackle particularly well.



    Did anyone say making a scheme was easy?

    Is it fair to have expectations that the HC making $8M a year and the DC making (not public info, but fair to assume way more than a majority of us) should be able to come up with a NOT EASY Scheme that would be more effective with the roster they're given?

    You know what is easy though? not changing a scheme and then blaming your players for lack of execution game after game after game.

    Combine coaching with scheme as well, if the D-line isn't getting pressure, then create a D-Line scheme that may create a whole for a DL to get through. It's pretty much the reverse of an O-Line "scheme" if you're o-line isn't full of probowlers that can't push the d-line back 3 feet, then you're gonna have to get more creative create traps etc. If it was only about the talent, then we'd seen the team with the best talent win all the time without any need for a coach or chemistry.

    Also yes, changing the scheme is not a simple fix, there are talent issues, no one is ignoring that, but again the entire game of football is so connected. Talent issues aren't the only problem, just like it's not the only solution. Our high paid coaches and coordinators should be constantly evolving to figure out what is and is not working. And we've all been watching this team under the PC era, it's not like when things aren't working it's because they're trying new stuff and they're silly, it's the fact we keep seeing more and more of the same. How many years have we seen this team get sliced and diced over and over all the way to the red zone?


    This is what I'm trying to tell you, there is no scheme fix.

    Your entire premise is false. Install whatever scheme you want, you still have bad players playing in that scheme that good teams will easily pick apart as soon as they recognize what you're doing.

    This is not a scheme issue, if it was it'd already be fixed. This is a personnel issue, as in we don't have enough playmakers on defense, specifically the DB and D-line positions.

    Play 4-3, play 3-4, play press man, play cover 2, cover 3, cover 4, 5-2, 3-3 stack...........whatever. Won't matter until either these players play better, or we get new players.



    We'll agree to disagree. Although I do agree the talent has issues, but i do think there can be a better scheme (combined with coaching) to work with the talent on hand so they aren't the worst defense in the NFL. Because although not as talented as the LOB years, there's enough talent on the defense to not be the worst defense of the entire league.

    Also random thought for the OP.

    Is it possible the offense also struggles, because the defense is so bad?


    Sgt L. is right Its not a scheme issue per say...yes the D has to make adjustments but what's happening is they have young players at certain positions and those players are not executing the scheme...Carroll made the choice to let the young guys play and not sign vets because that's the only way they get better. this is common for Carroll all the way back to college. The D is not playing to its potential right now but that's going to change as soon as those players get comfortable in the D.. The key is to stay close in the west... all is not lost but it's tightening up quite a bit...they need to win some games to keep pace...


    LTH
    LTH
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 1685
    Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:58 pm


  • LMAO

    I have to hand it to you guys. Each time I think "There's no way they hate Russ so much, they'll find something else to blame him for right?"

    If Geno ever struggles, I suspect the next thread will be "Is Geno struggling because he watches Russ prepare?"

    "Is the Penny struggling because he doesn't get enough reps, because of Russ?"

    Unbelievable
    Scorpion05
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1650
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:05 am


  • Haven’t read the thread but answering the thread title I would have to say that there is no evidence that our defense practices at all so I’d say no.
    JayhawkMike
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1070
    Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:06 pm


  • LOL, funny Jayhawk!

    I'm inclined to disagree with the it's the scheme argument myself, simply said we have had poor play form the CBs and LBs all season. I agree with Adams' remark : "We need more dogs, man."

    That said, the coaching is failing to recognize and properly use Adams as a roverback instead of as a traditional SS. There is evidence that has become clear as well that there has been a readily identifiable failure in communication between the DBs as to responsibilities in coverage. Blame is being placed on Adams when it rightly at times belongs elsewhere. It is also clear the D misses the contributions made by KJ Wright. Pete needs to hold KNJ's feet to the flames some as he'd not doing a good job as the DC and hasn't for some while. In this is is easy top blame PC instead of the guy who supposedly has the responsibility for coordinating the D. Unless the obvious problems in coverage tackling and communication are fixed the D will continue to look like it doesn't practice much.
    jammerhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 8033
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:13 pm


  • jammerhawk wrote:LOL, funny Jayhawk!

    I'm inclined to disagree with the it's the scheme argument myself, simply said we have had poor play form the CBs and LBs all season. I agree with Adams' remark : "We need more dogs, man."

    That said, the coaching is failing to recognize and properly use Adams as a roverback instead of as a traditional SS. There is evidence that has become clear as well that there has been a readily identifiable failure in communication between the DBs as to responsibilities in coverage. Blame is being placed on Adams when it rightly at times belongs elsewhere. It is also clear the D misses the contributions made by KJ Wright. Pete needs to hold KNJ's feet to the flames some as he'd not doing a good job as the DC and hasn't for some while. In this is is easy top blame PC instead of the guy who supposedly has the responsibility for coordinating the D. Unless the obvious problems in coverage tackling and communication are fixed the D will continue to look like it doesn't practice much.


    Agree 100% on paragraphs 2 and 3. It’s just tough to figure out if KNJ still has a job simply because he is doing 100% what PC says. If that’s so you can’t blame the sergeant for following the lieutenants orders and following them as ordered. Or he’s doing it more his way and is bad at it especially with the personnel he’s been given. I have no idea. What I do know is both KNJ and Flowers both look horrible but both of them might just end up as scapegoats for what Pete is doing.

    Thursday night halftime comments by Greg Olsen were interesting. He talked about the team culture and how incoming coaches have to conform to the culture. I believe he was talking about Waldron but the point was newcomers are entering a system with constraints. Wish I had a recording to make sure I am not reading more into the comments then there was there.
    JayhawkMike
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1070
    Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:06 pm


  • JayhawkMike wrote:
    jammerhawk wrote:LOL, funny Jayhawk!

    I'm inclined to disagree with the it's the scheme argument myself, simply said we have had poor play form the CBs and LBs all season. I agree with Adams' remark : "We need more dogs, man."

    That said, the coaching is failing to recognize and properly use Adams as a roverback instead of as a traditional SS. There is evidence that has become clear as well that there has been a readily identifiable failure in communication between the DBs as to responsibilities in coverage. Blame is being placed on Adams when it rightly at times belongs elsewhere. It is also clear the D misses the contributions made by KJ Wright. Pete needs to hold KNJ's feet to the flames some as he'd not doing a good job as the DC and hasn't for some while. In this is is easy top blame PC instead of the guy who supposedly has the responsibility for coordinating the D. Unless the obvious problems in coverage tackling and communication are fixed the D will continue to look like it doesn't practice much.


    Agree 100% on paragraphs 2 and 3. It’s just tough to figure out if KNJ still has a job simply because he is doing 100% what PC says. If that’s so you can’t blame the sergeant for following the lieutenants orders and following them as ordered. Or he’s doing it more his way and is bad at it especially with the personnel he’s been given. I have no idea. What I do know is both KNJ and Flowers both look horrible but both of them might just end up as scapegoats for what Pete is doing.

    Thursday night halftime comments by Greg Olsen were interesting. He talked about the team culture and how incoming coaches have to conform to the culture. I believe he was talking about Waldron but the point was newcomers are entering a system with constraints. Wish I had a recording to make sure I am not reading more into the comments then there was there.


    This supports the philosophical differences of many coaches leaving after their units have issues.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 36996
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • The 2012 - 2016 Seahawk defense practiced against Russell Wilson too. They didn't suck.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 8209
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Occom's Razor.

    The defense is poorly constructed and coached.

    The defense has inexplicably dumped the bulk of its assets into LBer and Safety, emphasizing stopping the run.

    Pete thinks the "always stay on top" philosophy is enough for coverage, and has made no significant investments in corner for YEARS. His logic is the offense will eventually screw it up. Turnover, penalty, missed throw, negative run, etc. And you will eventually force a punt, just have to stay on top.

    It is also why Pete on offense hates dink and dunk, preferring a quick strike explosive passing offense. Which creates the T.o.P disparity to boot.

    This WAS an excellent tactic in the 90's and early 00's when you were allowed to play defense, and it was much harder for offenses to move the ball.

    They have also fallen behind in the way modern defenses mask coverage, telegraphing what they are doing. Making it easy for any competent QB to slice and dice them.

    Back to the run defense and the biggest indictment of this staff. They are last in the league at stopping the run, despite playing two highly graded DTs in Poona and Woods, a 1st rounder known for his run defense in Brooks, the best box safety in Adams, deploying a 5 man front with long athletes to set the edge, Wagner in the middle. And they're ranked last?! Pathetic.
    Fade
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3367
    Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:26 am
    Location: Truth Ray




It is currently Fri Oct 22, 2021 7:01 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online