Our Man in Chicago
New member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 1,188
- Reaction score
- 0
Article/video link, with quote at 4:43 and relative context at 4:16.
Pete Prisco's rationale - as well as that of Chad Johnson - is that Seattle's not exotic enough to stop Manning with their secondary formations, amongst other points I won't spoil here.
Maybe so. Maybe not. I think he's selling Seattle's historically good secondary as being exactly the sum of their Cover 3 parts. I want to point out that Prisco's not just spouting off here; he backs up what he says to a degree. His rationale is that one safety deep is not going to be as effective as two against Manning, even when it means ceding the ground game to Moreno/Bell.
I don't want this to turn into another boring "bash the sportswriter" thread - purposeful teaser title aside - but I would like to read your opinions on the potential strengths and weaknesses of our Cover 3 vis-à-vis Manning.
Pete Prisco's rationale - as well as that of Chad Johnson - is that Seattle's not exotic enough to stop Manning with their secondary formations, amongst other points I won't spoil here.
Maybe so. Maybe not. I think he's selling Seattle's historically good secondary as being exactly the sum of their Cover 3 parts. I want to point out that Prisco's not just spouting off here; he backs up what he says to a degree. His rationale is that one safety deep is not going to be as effective as two against Manning, even when it means ceding the ground game to Moreno/Bell.
I don't want this to turn into another boring "bash the sportswriter" thread - purposeful teaser title aside - but I would like to read your opinions on the potential strengths and weaknesses of our Cover 3 vis-à-vis Manning.