“It’s a scheme thing”

[I-5]

Though it wasn’t a blowout, have the Seahawks ever looked so lost in the Pete Carroll era? I’m not a huge KNJ fan, but I supported him through last year - until today. Yes, our CB’s are mediocre at best, but its interesting to hear them both call out the scheme. This will be an interesting week, to make an understatement.

Of course, the real issue might be PC - I told my brother before the season began that I can see this being PC’s final year whether we make it to the SB or whether we dont make it out of the Divisional Round, meaning I can see him retiring or being fired, respectively.

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2021/9/26/22695686/notes-from-seahawks-post-game-press-conference-after-disturbingly-bad-loss-vikings

[NorthHawk]

The scheme doesn't fit the talent - or the other way around.
This is Pete's defense and his scheme. His DC's just run it like Pete wants. That's why it hasn't changed much
all through his tenure here. Norton might not be a good DC on his own, but he's just a pawn in Seattle.
I think the real problem starts with the DL and not being able to create pressure. In the LoB years, the
CB opposite Sherman didn't have to be very good - but got a lot of chances to make plays on the ball
because of the pressure up front. Today, our DBs don't have that advantage and they are exposed on a
regular basis. Everyone talks about Flowers, but he would have thrived opposite Sherman if he played
here in 2012 and onward because of the talent around him and pressure up front. Now our average
CB's are forced to cover top talent WR's while the QB waits comfortably for them to get open. Unfortunately
there is no talent in the drawer to help with the pass rush and if history is any indication, no hope of drafting
someone who can develop into a dominating DL.

[Hawk Sista]

I agree North. 100%.

[RiverDog]

The scheme doesn't fit the talent - or the other way around.
This is Pete's defense and his scheme. His DC's just run it like Pete wants. That's why it hasn't changed much
all through his tenure here. Norton might not be a good DC on his own, but he's just a pawn in Seattle.
I think the real problem starts with the DL and not being able to create pressure. In the LoB years, the
CB opposite Sherman didn't have to be very good - but got a lot of chances to make plays on the ball
because of the pressure up front. Today, our DBs don't have that advantage and they are exposed on a
regular basis. Everyone talks about Flowers, but he would have thrived opposite Sherman if he played
here in 2012 and onward because of the talent around him and pressure up front. Now our average
CB's are forced to cover top talent WR's while the QB waits comfortably for them to get open. Unfortunately
there is no talent in the drawer to help with the pass rush and if history is any indication, no hope of drafting
someone who can develop into a dominating DL.

I agree, but will add that Pete doesn't have the same sideline-to-sideline safety that he had in Earl Thomas. ET was the one that gave our corners the confidence to challenge WR's because they knew he could back them up should a receiver get a step or two on them. Add that to your observation about not having the same up front pressure and you get very passive corners that put lots of green between them and opposing receivers.

However, what is disturbing to me is that some of the players seem to be blaming their coaches without acknowledging their own mistakes. DJ Reed had this to say:

The Seattle Seahawks sustained their second straight loss and the team’s secondary is under a lot of scrutiny after allowing Kirk Cousins to complete 30-of-38 passes for 323 yards and three touchdowns. After the team’s second straight loss, Seahawks starting cornerback D.J. Reed did not hold back, noting the Vikings “schemed our a** up.”

Here's what Tre Flowers had to say:

“It’s a schematic thing, I feel like. I’ve got my own questions to ask.”

Although what they say may be true, it concerns me that they are putting themselves in the position of publicly coitizing their coaches without taking responsibility for their own failings. This is the type of thing I've been talking about when I noted Pete's challenge of keeping the locker room together.

And BTW, welcome back, I5! You've been missed!

[Hawktawk]

Pc and his stubborn insistence on his old school macho defensive scheme is a huge problem . The Seahawks are # 1 in the league in not disguising their coverage . They simply line up . As has been said line play has been very sporadic but as RD points out we haven’t had a free safety that can cover ground since ET. We don’t have sherm , we especially don’t have Kam. You can’t just play the same game without the players . It reminds me of Holmgren sad swan song in 2008 after 5 playoff teams in a row . Hass was banged up early on and the team went through so many receivers they resigned cannibas Koran the one eyed wonder . Yet Holmgren insisted on running his pure WCO instead of ground and pound to the tune of 4-12.

Right now this looks a lot like that . And I always like reading I-5 but did you say it “wasn’t a blowout “ bro? From about 5 minutes left in the first half till the final gun it was a blowout . Seattle was utterly hapless in every phase . It was as nauseating a regular season loss as I’ve seen since 2010 , right up there with last week. I see a disturbing trend . Better stock up on beer and Maalox

[I-5]

Right now this looks a lot like that . And I always like reading I-5 but did you say it “wasn’t a blowout “ bro? From about 5 minutes left in the first half till the final gun it was a blowout . Seattle was utterly hapless in every phase . It was as nauseating a regular season loss as I’ve seen since 2010 , right up there with last week. I see a disturbing trend . Better stock up on beer and Maalox

Ok fine it was a blowout lol. More like a beating I’d say, since 2 scores is not impossible to come back from. But it was definitely the most helpless and clueless Seahawks team I’vr seen since Pete arrived. I guess it took me longer to smell the coffee!

I’ll say it again: I believe this might be Pete’s final year (regardless of contract). Something drastic has to change in the near future - everyone can see we have big problems, and not just on defense. For example, why don’t we have an effective screen game the way Cousins schooled us? We still live or die on big plays. I was hoping we would be more balanced with Waldron, but so far its been sporadic at best.

[RiverDog]

Right now this looks a lot like that . And I always like reading I-5 but did you say it “wasn’t a blowout “ bro? From about 5 minutes left in the first half till the final gun it was a blowout . Seattle was utterly hapless in every phase . It was as nauseating a regular season loss as I’ve seen since 2010 , right up there with last week. I see a disturbing trend . Better stock up on beer and Maalox

Ok fine it was a blowout lol. More like a beating I’d say, since 2 scores is not impossible to come back from. But it was definitely the most helpless and clueless Seahawks team I’vr seen since Pete arrived. I guess it took me longer to smell the coffee!

Two scores plus Meyers missed a very makeable FG, which hardly ever happens. I don't think you were off base at all. This was not the Norwegians on the ice sheet clubbing seal pups as some would have us believe. We get a break or two, a pick six or scoop and score and we would have been right back in it. A lot of credit has to go to the Vikings. They played mistake free football.

But I do agree that these past two games were Gawd awful. I just want a little larger sample size, which is why I'm keeping my powder dry to some degree and waiting a couple more weeks.

I’ll say it again: I believe this might be Pete’s final year (regardless of contract). Something drastic has to change in the near future - everyone can see we have big problems, and not just on defense. For example, why don’t we have an effective screen game the way Cousins schooled us? We still live or die on big plays. I was hoping we would be more balanced with Waldron, but so far its been sporadic at best.

Pete signed a contract last year that carries him through 2025. Unless he has had a change of heart....and a train wreck of a season with near mutinous players could push him in that direction...I don't think he willingly steps aside. He still looks like he enjoys what he's doing.

[I-5]

Pete signed a contract last year that carries him through 2025. Unless he has had a change of heart....and a train wreck of a season with near mutinous players could push him in that direction...I don't think he willingly steps aside. He still looks like he enjoys what he's doing.

Yes train wreck scenario (or SB appearance) is what I meant. Unless something changes drastically to our approach esp defense, the former looks like a possibility - similar to how Holmgren finished here.

[I-5]

But I do agree that these past two games were Gawd awful. I just want a little larger sample size, which is why I'm keeping my powder dry to some degree and waiting a couple more weeks.

Totally agree with sample size, which is why the next 2 games with division foes will be a big indicator of exactly where we are. I'm not counting them out yet, but...

[RiverDog]

Yes train wreck scenario (or SB appearance) is what I meant. Unless something changes drastically to our approach esp defense, the former looks like a possibility - similar to how Holmgren finished here.

There are some key differences between the end of the Holmgren era and what we may be looking at with Pete. Holmgren left for another job, the GM/President of the Cleveland Browns. He liked that side of the business, which is why he came to Seattle in the first place, because he wanted to run the entire show. He didn't retire and wasn't pushed out. Our owner wasn't called on to make a decision.

If Pete leaves, it's likely that he'll go one or two ways: Either he retires or he's fired. If he retires, then it makes the decision easy. But if he doesn't...

I haven't a clue how our owner views our team. She's been virtually silent since she became the owner, which in many ways, is a positive thing when you compare her to egocentric, meddlesome personalities like Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder. But when it comes to a big decision like firing the head coach, it requires a person with a high degree of intestinal fortitude (notice that I didn't say balls) that generally isn't present in reclusive type personalities.

[RiverDog]

Totally agree with sample size, which is why the next 2 games with division foes will be a big indicator of exactly where we are. I'm not counting them out yet, but...

10-4. I'm waiting for the Rams game, and it's not just about our record, but that of our divisional foes. And yes, you'd be a blind man if you can't see that this team is in deep trouble. It's not the end of the world, but we can damn sure see it from here.

[Hawktawk]

If this team has any designs on postseason they absolutely must win the next game . Yeah I know mathematically blah blah blah. As I said the team was dominated , throttled in every respect . Talk all you want about it being a 2 score game . Sure a pick or fumble would have changed things but in terms of physically regaining control of that game minus some fluke turnover it was clear to me by halftime we were totally outmatched . After being quite critical of his corner play Sunday Carroll said today his corners played a “solid conservative game “. Yeah he said that today . We have a problem . Pull
It together and win next week and they have a shot . Go 1 and 3 and lose to the most beatable team in the division it’s over .

[I-5]

Either he retires or he's fired.

That's exactly what I said in the OP, and in my response to the comment about it.

[RiverDog]

Either he retires or he's fired.

That's exactly what I said in the OP, and in my response to the comment about it.

Understood. I was drawing a contrast between how Holmgren left and how Pete, if this is the end of the road, is likely to depart.

[obiken]

HT, your a smart guy but I dont think the scheme is the problem, its personnel. I would take a Brandon Mebane or a Red Bryant in the worse way right now! BM Never made a pro bowl, but was just a good solid guy that could clog the middle we have no one on even his level right now.

[I-5]

Can it be both a scheme and personnel thing at the same time?

I rewatched the second half again, and what I saw was that 1) our corners were giving at least 7 yards cushion at the LOS almost every play outside of the red zone and they couldn't stay with Jefferson and Thielen in the open field, and 2) the defense never ever disguises its looks before the snap. You can do that when you have LOB, but with a mediocre defense, smoke and mirrors is all you have...why not use it?

[c_hawkbob]

It's always a scheme thing and a personnel thing at the same time. It takes the right personnel for any scheme to make that scheme work properly. Conversely, it takes proper scheming for the personnel that you have to get the most out of their capabilities.

In the offseason you try to draft and acquire talent that fits the scheme you want to run but once that is done you need to be able to adapt your playbook to best suit the people you have once your roster is set.

[RiverDog]

Can it be both a scheme and personnel thing at the same time?

I rewatched the second half again, and what I saw was that 1) our corners were giving at least 7 yards cushion at the LOS almost every play outside of the red zone and they couldn't stay with Jefferson and Thielen in the open field, and 2) the defense never ever disguises its looks before the snap. You can do that when you have LOB, but with a mediocre defense, smoke and mirrors is all you have...why not use it?

We need to name this secondary the Legion of Room.

I've seen the same thing, and it's something we've talked about in another thread. IMO the difference between the LOB and the LOR has to do with two things: We do not get a consistent pass rush from our front 4, so we're having to send LB's and safeties in order to get pressure, leaving the corners vulnerable. The other big difference is that there is no Earl Thomas, a safety that can cover the field from sideline to sideline and giving the corners confidence that they don't have to worry about a receiver getting behind them because Earl will be there to bail them out.

[Hawk Sista]

Legion of Room.

I think the legion of bloom (flowers) may be benched in favor of the rookie soon. Just a hunch.

[RiverDog]

Legion of Room.

I think the legion of bloom (flowers) may be benched in favor of the rookie soon. Just a hunch.

Pete said in his post game presser that there's "not much" holding Sidney Jones back from playing. Does anyone know what side he's likely to end up playing?

[Hawktawk]

Our defense was following protocols socially distancing

[obiken]

It's always a scheme thing and a personnel thing at the same time. It takes the right personnel for any scheme to make that scheme work properly. Conversely, it takes proper scheming for the personnel that you have to get the most out of their capabilities.

In the offseason you try to draft and acquire talent that fits the scheme you want to run but once that is done you need to be able to adapt your playbook to best suit the people you have once your roster is set.

Maybe your right Bob, but I dont think for example going to a 3-4 would change this defense one iota.

[I-5]

I've seen the same thing, and it's something we've talked about in another thread. IMO the difference between the LOB and the LOR has to do with two things: We do not get a consistent pass rush from our front 4, so we're having to send LB's and safeties in order to get pressure, leaving the corners vulnerable. The other big difference is that there is no Earl Thomas, a safety that can cover the field from sideline to sideline and giving the corners confidence that they don't have to worry about a receiver getting behind them because Earl will be there to bail them out.

What I saw Riv is that Cousins consistently got rid of the ball quickly before pressure could get to him, and his receivers did a good job giving him open looks. He also threw the ball before the receivers got open, the sign of a good QB. The problem I saw - besides all the social distancing as HT put it - was an inability to do anything about their screen passes. It didn't help that we don't try to disguise any of our pass rushes like the Vikes did to our O line. Mind-boggling.

[Aseahawkfan]

I don't consider it a scheme thing. I consider it Pete and John replenishing this team with talent that would be a backup at best no teams with good defensive personnel. We're fielding a second string defense right now except for a few players like Bobby, Jamal Adams, and Dunlap.

Years of not drafting people who have taken positions has taken its toll on the defense. The talent on defense has not been replenished. It's been player after player who hasn't stepped up or worse like Malik McDowell. Pete and John trading away draft capital to pick up players to help win a championship. Pete and John weren't confident they could build in the draft, so they did trades that have not worked out like they wanted.

This is not scheme. This is risky personnel management that has led to a bad defense because Pete and John have not been focusing on the draft like they did in the past. Once you forget the philosophy that turned you into a championship team and you get shiny toy psychosis, this is where you end up. Pete has had Shiny Toy Psychosis for a while and the team has paid the price.

[RiverDog]

It's always a scheme thing and a personnel thing at the same time. It takes the right personnel for any scheme to make that scheme work properly. Conversely, it takes proper scheming for the personnel that you have to get the most out of their capabilities.

In the offseason you try to draft and acquire talent that fits the scheme you want to run but once that is done you need to be able to adapt your playbook to best suit the people you have once your roster is set.

Truth. The same thing applies to the offensive side of the ball. You're not going to force Tom Brady to play in the same offense as you would Lamar Jackson.

[RiverDog]

I've seen the same thing, and it's something we've talked about in another thread. IMO the difference between the LOB and the LOR has to do with two things: We do not get a consistent pass rush from our front 4, so we're having to send LB's and safeties in order to get pressure, leaving the corners vulnerable. The other big difference is that there is no Earl Thomas, a safety that can cover the field from sideline to sideline and giving the corners confidence that they don't have to worry about a receiver getting behind them because Earl will be there to bail them out.

What I saw Riv is that Cousins consistently got rid of the ball quickly before pressure could get to him, and his receivers did a good job giving him open looks. He also threw the ball before the receivers got open, the sign of a good QB. The problem I saw - besides all the social distancing as HT put it - was an inability to do anything about their screen passes. It didn't help that we don't try to disguise any of our pass rushes like the Vikes did to our O line. Mind-boggling.

I haven't been able to replay the game as I've been having some problems with my DVR, but I'm hearing the same thing on the other forum I frequent, that we don't do a good job of disguising our defense.

There's a lot of grumbling going on with our defensive backs. Everyone is saying the PC thing out loud, but I get the sense that there's a lot of finger pointing going on. If we can't get this defense turned around soon, start getting some turnovers and give them something to feel good about, I'm afraid that the locker room will begin to fracture. We've had zero interceptions and just two turnovers total in three games this season. Defenses feed emotionally on turnovers. That's why you see defenses doing these stupid celebrations. The absence of turnovers has to be building up a lot of stress with those guys.

[TriCitySam]

I’ve complained since preseason about the space were giving these guys....part DBs playing off and part LBs not staying back enough,result is there is a LOT of room, and it’s just too easy to sustain drives and have 9 minute drives. But pressure is weak as well. So it’s a defense-wide issue. Pete says we’re not getting the turnovers, but a defense that can’t get off the field without a TO is a problem. Does Pete’s scheme have issues in today’s passing game? I don’t know. Surely he’s seen enough to know the issues. He says “We have plans”. I’ll be interested to see what changes. Personally, even with a losing record I’ll bet Pete stays. His record has earned him the right and he would not want to go out that way......unless he has a longing to return to the college game, but I seriously doubt it.

[Hawktawk]

I think Pete is probably safe this year , maybe longer with the hands off owner . I’d be interested to know who has the hammer between he and JS . Neither ? I guess he’s earned some slack but we haven’t been past the divisional in 7 years , missed the playoffs entirely one year and were dead as a doormat against the Rams at home without Donald half the game . Our qb went 11-29 with a pick 6 and our defense couldn’t stop a qb with a broken throwing hand and a coach who couldn’t wait to get rid of him. The second half of the last 2 games has been similar to that . I don’t want to be Debbie downer but this team may well be 1-4 and in free fall in 2 weeks . What I’ve seen will not beat the Rams , no way and I think is at least 7 points short of the 9ers . Bosa may eat Wilson for lunch .

[RiverDog]

What I saw Riv is that Cousins consistently got rid of the ball quickly before pressure could get to him, and his receivers did a good job giving him open looks. He also threw the ball before the receivers got open, the sign of a good QB. The problem I saw - besides all the social distancing as HT put it - was an inability to do anything about their screen passes. It didn't help that we don't try to disguise any of our pass rushes like the Vikes did to our O line. Mind-boggling.

Here's an article that speaks to your observation of the Hawks not disguising their defense:

Seahawks lead NFL in not disguising their defensive coverages pre-snap

According to Pro Football Focus, the Seahawks are staying in the same coverage they show pre-snap on over 92% of their plays, the most in the NFL this season.

https://seahawkswire.usatoday.com/2021/ ... e-carroll/

[NorthHawk]

We've been saying it's Carrolls Defense. How many DC's have come through here and the Defense is still playing the same way?
Clearly this is on Carroll and JS for not finding the talent to run this type of D and for giving away draft picks to try to get a flash
player to help. They've simply gotten away from their core philosophy of how to build a team and this mess is the result.

[RiverDog]

The rumor is that Sidney Jones will be starting over Flowers at RCB this week. If that's true, it will be interesting to see how Jones plays the position vs. Flowers, if he's giving 8-10 yards at the snap. If he is, then I'll need to take back a lot of the things I've been saying about Flowers.

[Aseahawkfan]

If your CBs are playing off the receivers it's because they're not good enough to do otherwise. We have backup talent. So you design the defense like you would for backups who can't cover tight on opposing receivers. That's what we're doing. We don't have CBs we can trust to cover tight. So we're playing a careful, try not to give up the big play coverage. These guys can't even seem to jam at the line. And our safeties are nowhere near able to cover well enough if the receivers run by the CBs like Earl could cover.

[NorthHawk]

As well, Pete preaches not to let a WR get behind them, so it’s natural for a young or not confident DB
to play off against fast WRs. So last week we saw a lot of underneath throws for completions.

[TriCitySam]

As well, Pete preaches not to let a WR get behind them, so it’s natural for a young or not confident DB
to play off against fast WRs. So last week we saw a lot of underneath throws for completions.

Perhaps, but this a road to nowhere. They have to be more aggresive, while a risk, I agree with those who say I'd rather give up a big play TD than a 9 minute one. We don't get enough snaps.

[RiverDog]

As well, Pete preaches not to let a WR get behind them, so it’s natural for a young or not confident DB
to play off against fast WRs. So last week we saw a lot of underneath throws for completions.

Perhaps, but this a road to nowhere. They have to be more aggressive, while a risk, I agree with those who say I'd rather give up a big play TD than a 9 minute one. We don't get enough snaps.

Not to mention that the current scheme of playing off receivers isn't working. As measured by total yardage, we have the worst defense in the league.

Which brings up another point. Even though it's only 3 games, did anyone in here ever expect a Pete Carroll coached defense to be ranked dead last?

[NorthHawk]

Perhaps, but this a road to nowhere. They have to be more aggresive, while a risk, I agree with those who say I'd rather give up a big play TD than a 9 minute one. We don't get enough snaps

I agree, but that doesn’t fit within Pete’s Defense.

I didn’t expect Pete’s Defense to be dead last, but the writing was on the wall considering the weak DL
and not much upgrade in talent on the corners. This has been coming for the last few years.

[tarlhawk]

Anybody watching our last two games witnessed how the NFL has systematically destroyed great defences that play conservative. The hardest area on the field to protect is the middle. By manipulating what actually constitutes a "catch" (basically the receiver is allowed to tuck it in and head upfield) You used to be able to HIT the receiver and pop the ball loose or just "pop" the WR/TE who dared to cross the middle. He was often "defenseless" because crossing patterns carried the high risk of injury/turnovers. The enforcement of "defenseless" player rules that basically protect the receiver before and after the catch until he "transforms" into a running status just capped it all off.

A strong pass rush and tight coverage complement each others success...but quick passes to the middle negate both. Tennessee and more so Cousins and the Vikes exploited this to no end carving up our defense as it tired and wilted in frustration. Middle routes especially when "picks interfere with a DB covering the QB target" lend major advantage to the opponents WR...shorter routes allow quick breaks into the open unless a DB "jumps the route" ...but successfully jumping routes require experience at play recognition to even have a chance. In Baseball a pitchers will throw high and inside to keep the batter from crowding the plate. Football treated the middle for crossing routes the same way because it is so hard to defend...so you declared it as protected turf and PUNISHED anyone bold enough to cross there. Without this ability...the middle crossing patterns can make even a "pedestrian" QB a success.

This opening of the middle has negated the need to draft RB high in the draft...a quick toss to the middle to an opponents "playmaker" almost demands a safety respond immediately. Has College Football suddenly spawned an endless supply of playmaking receivers throughout the draft? ...or has manipulation of rules to open up the middle elevated their position/skill set?

Time and again Cousins used the middle routes to make long drives possible without even using play-action. To add insult they negated our aggressive team with well executed screens in both games. Our defense has excellent skilled players but the modern NFL requires experience at play recognition and a heavy dose of film study. Bobby and KJ would snuff out screens because an offensive scheme can't take out two experienced LB's

[RiverDog]

Anybody watching our last two games witnessed how the NFL has systematically destroyed great defences that play conservative. The hardest area on the field to protect is the middle. By manipulating what actually constitutes a "catch" (basically the receiver is allowed to tuck it in and head upfield) You used to be able to HIT the receiver and pop the ball loose or just "pop" the WR/TE who dared to cross the middle. He was often "defenseless" because crossing patterns carried the high risk of injury/turnovers. The enforcement of "defenseless" player rules that basically protect the receiver before and after the catch until he "transforms" into a running status just capped it all off.

A strong pass rush and tight coverage complement each others success...but quick passes to the middle negate both. Tennessee and more so Cousins and the Vikes exploited this to no end carving up our defense as it tired and wilted in frustration. Middle routes especially when "picks interfere with a DB covering the QB target" lend major advantage to the opponents WR...shorter routes allow quick breaks into the open unless a DB "jumps the route" ...but successfully jumping routes require experience at play recognition to even have a chance. In Baseball a pitchers will throw high and inside to keep the batter from crowding the plate. Football treated the middle for crossing routes the same way because it is so hard to defend...so you declared it as protected turf and PUNISHED anyone bold enough to cross there. Without this ability...the middle crossing patterns can make even a "pedestrian" QB a success.

This opening of the middle has negated the need to draft RB high in the draft...a quick toss to the middle to an opponents "playmaker" almost demands a safety respond immediately. Has College Football suddenly spawned an endless supply of playmaking receivers throughout the draft? ...or has manipulation of rules to open up the middle elevated their position/skill set?

Time and again Cousins used the middle routes to make long drives possible without even using play-action. To add insult they negated our aggressive team with well executed screens in both games. Our defense has excellent skilled players but the modern NFL requires experience at play recognition and a heavy dose of film study. Bobby and KJ would snuff out screens because an offensive scheme can't take out two experienced LB's

Hey, Tarl! Welcome to the Jungle!

Excellent first post. Good point in how the rule changes has affected defenses. It's been a trend that's existed for decades dating back to when they eliminated the bump-and-run. I sympathize with defensive players as the majority of rule changes have been directed at the defense.

We've discussed how coverage is affected by our pass rush, or rather, the lack of. One thing that I will add is that for our team in particular, a lot of our pass coverage problems not only has to do with the lack of a consistent pass rush, it's been the absence of a sideline-to-sideline safety that we had in Earl Thomas. ET is the one that allowed a relatively slow Richard Sherman blossom into the premier cornerback in the league. Without Thomas, Sherman would not have been able to play receivers as tight as they did because they could run past him. IMO that's one of the reasons why you see our CB's playing 8-10 yards off the LOS.

Anyhow, thanks a lot for your thoughts. You sound like a good football mind and speaking for the rest of the gang, I hope you stick around.

[NorthHawk]

Yah, welcome, tarlhawk. It's good to hear other opinions.

I disagree with the notion that our Defense has excellent skilled players (relative to the rest of the league) outside of a couple.
Wagner is the best and the rest are solid types that are the glue of any team. I still haven't figured out Adams and we can see
that he hasn't lived up to his compensation (including draft picks) as of yet. Outside of that I don't see many stars on our D.
Brooks in time may be pretty good, Dunlap is good, but past his prime, Diggs is solid and doesn't get the credit he deserves, but
that's about it.
In the past, Pete's Defense required a strong 4 man pass rush combined with an aggressive secondary. This allowed the DBs to
play close and to take some risks with like RD said ET covering for missed assignments or helping out. I was hoping Adams would
be that ball hawk but it seems they want him to play a hybrid S/LB - at least so far. We questioned the DBs last year and before but
there hasn't been much of an effort to upgrade that talent base. It doesn't help that they traded away draft picks while swinging for
the fences only to let some of them go in FA. The bottom line to me is the overall talent on the Defense is nowhere near where it
has to be to be successful in Pete's style of Defense. The LoB was so successful in a large part because the out talented, out physicalled,
and out executed opposing Offenses. We don't have the personnel to do that today.

[tarlhawk]

Rasheem Green, Darryl Williams, Alton Robinson, Poona Ford, Jordayn Brooks, Marquise Blair and Diggs/Adams were the ones I was referencing. Wagner/Brooks/Adams and Williams/Robinson are all very capable of elevating a defense. Few rookies on defense become instant stars reflective of their skill-sets...mainly because NFL rules now cater more than before to TV ratings. Dominating defenses are boring to the casual fan and to boost ratings the casual fan is heavily courted. Also your casual fan doesn't want to see high touches go to a RB who needs those 3-4 yards and a pile of dust to get his rhythm going. Russel has great fan appeal and is well deserving of it...but the constant pointing at the offensive line was not quite fair. Downfield plays take time to develop and time to develop means the line must sustain their blocks much longer against physical "monsters" (unless they can disguise their holds on a consistent basis) which is why run-blocking is usually easier to coach than pass protection) Our team has the skills and enthusiasm to excel...but again the NFL requires experience over natural instincts. Traditional defensive schemes is what the NFL attacked with its rules manipulation. Pete is only guilty of trying to separate the fun of playing hard nosed football from the business aspect that overshadows every season. New arrivals...especially veteran free agents all comment on how refreshing it is to arrive and be a part of our coaches culture.