One Seahawk I love, who I want replaced next year

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • If Red could be as effective from the DT position as he has been at DE then I would be totally for moving him inside, but that's the big question - Pete said that he was just too big to play at DT and found it difficult going against Guards that are smaller than him (as opposed to TEs and Tackles who are rarely under 6'5) but seeing as Branch does alright I think there's reason for trying him out in there again. If Irvin can have some impact in the run game then he could become the 3-down lineman across from Clemons that strikes fear into the QB EVERY down and not just on 3rd downs.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2536
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • SilNWest wrote:
    -The Glove- wrote:You lost me at "Brandon Browner is ok"


    Yea I know. I just don't think Brandon Browner is a world beater. He's a guy who plays his heart out on every down, but just can't quite play quick enough to be a consistent cornerback against any good receiver. I'm not saying he's a bad player, its just that now that opposing offenses know what he's all about he can be schemed against. I don't think he should be replaced immediately, but I do think that Thurmond is the better all round player.

    I'm probably just splitting hairs though honestly, I'm always looking to upgrade our team, and I see Browner as the most easily upgraded player in our secondary (even though he would be starting for 20 other teams lol)


    BB can be beaten, the huge plus he brings is that WRs don't want to go up against him, like Kam in the middle - they hear footsteps and start worrying. He's always going to be targetted more simply because we have Sherman on the other side that QBs want to stay away from, so Browner will be matched up against number 1 receivers more often than most good CBs would be.

    Remember Brandon Marshall is an elite WR on the same level as Megatron and Fitz - the guy had 2 1000 yard seasons with Matt Moore at QB, and another one with benched-for-Tim-Tebow Kyle Orton tossing the ball. The only 2 seasons he had with Cutler were Cutler's first 2 seasons as a starting QB (and he still hit over 1000 yards in each)
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2536
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Does anybody think the fact that Red's injury lining up on the timeline pretty well with the overall regression of the defense is maybe a little more than just a coincidence?
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 14765
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


  • I agree with the upgrade Leroy Hill view. I like Red, the man has saved the bacon of this team on more than one occasion.
    Image

    “There’s no reason, with Mr. Allen and the fan base here and the stadium, that this can’t be a stable, long-term winning organization.” - John Schneider
    User avatar
    Bakergirl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3302
    Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:13 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • Here is my problem with the Red Bryant situation:

    Red Bryant is basically like a good 3-4 end. 3-4 ends are not expected to be pass rushers, they are expected to keep linemen busy and stop the run. Pass rush is a bonus.

    That's all well and good, and honestly I don't think Bryant would be a problem at all if Seattle's defense operated more like a 3-4 style defense.

    3-4 defenses are built around the blitz. 4-3 defenses are built around "base" (aka front four) pressure. Since Irvin, Clemons, and Bryant are all closer to being 3-4 types, it makes sense that Seattle's pass rush has always looked it's best on the blitz. As I recall, only 8 of Clemons 22 sacks in 2010 and 2011 came from a base pass rush.

    So short answer- yes, we'd definitely be better off with a typical 4-3 end manning Bryant's spot so long as Pete insists on trying to get sacks with a base pass rush. But if Pete is willing to blitz more, then I think Bryant would fit that kind of defense well enough.

    But in the meantime, the team is basically paying Bryant $7 million per season as a guy that's basically a misfit in Pete's ultimate 4-3 defense. I hope Pete realizes this, and either reverts his defense to being more blitz heavy or searches for Bryant's replacement. Nothing against Bryant, but the $7 million salary average he has is a really big piece of incentive to look for his replacement.

    Keep in mind- Bryant's salary in 2013 is fully guaranteed. So if the team wants to move on from Bryant, it won't be painless to do so until 2014 (barring a trade).
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11282
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • kearly wrote:Here is my problem with the Red Bryant situation:

    Red Bryant is basically like a good 3-4 end. 3-4 ends are not expected to be pass rushers, they are expected to keep linemen busy and stop the run. Pass rush is a bonus.

    That's all well and good, and honestly I don't think Bryant would be a problem at all if Seattle's defense operated more like a 3-4 style defense.

    3-4 defenses are built around the blitz. 4-3 defenses are built around "base" (aka front four) pressure. Since Irvin, Clemons, and Bryant are all closer to being 3-4 types, it makes sense that Seattle's pass rush has always looked it's best on the blitz. As I recall, only 8 of Clemons 22 sacks in 2010 and 2011 came from a base pass rush.

    So short answer- yes, we'd definitely be better off with a typical 4-3 end manning Bryant's spot so long as Pete insists on trying to get sacks with a base pass rush. But if Pete is willing to blitz more, then I think Bryant would fit that kind of defense well enough.

    But in the meantime, the team is basically paying Bryant $7 million per season as a guy that's basically a misfit in Pete's ultimate 4-3 defense. I hope Pete realizes this, and either reverts his defense to being more blitz heavy or searches for Bryant's replacement. Nothing against Bryant, but the $7 million salary average he has is a really big piece of incentive to look for his replacement.

    Keep in mind- Bryant's salary in 2013 is fully guaranteed. So if the team wants to move on from Bryant, it won't be painless to do so until 2014 (barring a trade).


    Thanks Kearly, that was part of what I was trying to say, but I've had a couple too many drinks to expand on every thought as thoroughly as you do. :th2thumbs:
    User avatar
    SilNWest
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:51 am
    Location: Auburn, Wa


  • I agree with all your points except Red. We just need to start using him more efficiently/effectively. Will extend his career and help the team at the same time.

    Good point about Red being basically a 3-4 DE Kearly, and, to extend your point, if indeed PC wants to generate pressure from just the front 4, ala the G-men, then we could use another 4-3 DE to replace Clem.
    seedhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2563
    Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 am


  • I think Red is a big part of this defense still.

    Trufant and Hill though, we had some good times, but I think it's time to bid adieu to both of them. Hope WT3 pans out (or Lane or Maxwell for that matter)

    I am quite confident JS/PC will find extremely good replacements via the draft though.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 5212
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm




It is currently Thu Oct 30, 2014 9:02 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information