Does our defense suck because they practice against Russell?

OP
OP
Tokadub

Tokadub

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
964
Reaction score
12
keasley45":3v3aebv3 said:
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...
 
OP
OP
Tokadub

Tokadub

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
964
Reaction score
12
seabowl":1071w0nh said:
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.
 
OP
OP
Tokadub

Tokadub

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
964
Reaction score
12
ZagHawk":1885cjsb said:
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???
 
OP
OP
Tokadub

Tokadub

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
964
Reaction score
12
I need to take a break from this forum for tonight after reading these responses. Everyone is just in denial or lacking critical thinking.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
Tokadub":1jcp2971 said:
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.
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
6,903
Reaction score
1,082
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.
 

seabowl

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
4,487
Reaction score
1,299
Tokadub":2to68two said:
seabowl":2to68two said:
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.
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
29,711
Reaction score
10,129
Location
Sammamish, WA
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)
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
SoulfishHawk":35jstxft said:
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.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,594
Reaction score
1,607
Location
Roy Wa.
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.
 

MyrtleHawk

Can I get a hoyyaaa
Joined
Sep 8, 2021
Messages
2,146
Reaction score
2,001
John63":2rm5oqzq said:
SoulfishHawk":2rm5oqzq said:
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.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,611
ZagHawk":15ekyztj said:
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.
 

ZagHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
2,153
Reaction score
176
Sgt. Largent":1pxxk032 said:
ZagHawk":1pxxk032 said:
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?
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,611
ZagHawk":fj6w1pak said:
Sgt. Largent":fj6w1pak said:
ZagHawk":fj6w1pak said:
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.
 

ZagHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
2,153
Reaction score
176
Sgt. Largent":1o08bx5r said:
ZagHawk":1o08bx5r said:
Sgt. Largent":1o08bx5r said:
ZagHawk":1o08bx5r said:
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?
 

LTH

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
4,326
Reaction score
1,012
ZagHawk":3orklbmf said:
Sgt. Largent":3orklbmf said:
ZagHawk":3orklbmf said:
Sgt. Largent":3orklbmf said:
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
 

Scorpion05

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2016
Messages
1,722
Reaction score
10
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
 

JayhawkMike

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
2,073
Reaction score
795
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.
 

jammerhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
10,177
Reaction score
1,781
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.
 

JayhawkMike

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
2,073
Reaction score
795
jammerhawk":3c0i9dug said:
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.
 
Top