Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:01 am 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Everett, WA
Why on earth does Trufant start over Lane as our 5th DB? Lane played very well in Browner's absence on the outside yet he's not good enough to start over Trufant in the slot? This is one of the few Carroll decisions where I think Carroll is dead wrong in his choice. The only time it appears Trufant makes a play is when the WR drops the pass. Guys are constantly beating Trufant in coverage. IMO, it's plain as day that Lane or even Maxwell should be playing that spot instead of Trufant.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:02 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2064
Location: Marysville, WA
Experience can be the only answer. Trufant has playoff experience, Lane doesn't. I'm with you though, it is hard watching play after play Trufant get beat.

_________________
Image Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:04 am 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Everett, WA
What good does experience do if you're constantly getting beat? I can see Pete's thinking in leaning towards experience but hasn't he been watching Trufant in the game film? It's brutal to watch and completely maddening that Carroll either doesn't see it or is too stubborn to make that change. He's willing to play Sweezy over Moffitt based on upside, why isn't he willing to do the same with Trufant/Lane?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:12 am 
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am
Posts: 2465
Location: Skagit, WA
I asked the same question yesterday. I love Tru but the guy has lost a step and can't stay with these guys in the slot anymore. Surprised that more teams don't try and take advantage of it more often.

_________________
______________________


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:15 am 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:48 pm
Posts: 387
It is puzzling as Carroll preaches competition. Best man up


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:15 am 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Everett, WA
Trufant is the 2nd biggest weakness on our D, right after not having a consistent pass rush. Trufant will continue to be attacked until Carroll stops being stubborn and puts him on the bench where he belongs.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:22 am 
NET Practice Squad
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:33 am
Posts: 54
Location: Lake Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
Assignment Tony Gonzales

Trufant savvy vet or Lane with Speed and size ?

_________________
If They Pass On You, Pass on Them !


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:28 am 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Everett, WA
Lane is the clear cut choice. Trufant just gets beat constantly so being a "savvy vet" isn't helping him at all, against much lesser players than Tony Gonzales.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:29 am 
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am
Posts: 2465
Location: Skagit, WA
I don't want either of them on Gonzales - the dude is huge and we will never win that matchup. Have to keep an LB around or safety up to help on Tony.

_________________
______________________


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:51 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:05 am
Posts: 665
Location: Canada
When playing the Falcons in the Georgia Dome with Ryan throwing to all those playmakers? Speed, Speed and more speed, Lane.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:51 am 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:33 am
Posts: 388
Okungfu wrote:
Assignment Tony Gonzales

Trufant savvy vet or Lane with Speed and size ?


If you put a nickel corner on a HOF TE, you deserve to lose.

Kam or one of the LB's will be on him all day.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:01 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Everett, WA
According to Danny O'Neil today when he was on with Brock and Salk, it sounds like we're stuck with Trufant starting in the slot once again.

Pete, please don't keep doing this. Trufant is going to get torched and you have better options available. I really don't get what he sees in Trufant other than he has playoff experience, and that experience isn't stopping him from getting torched. SMH on this decision.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:08 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 4267
Name that Seahawk

(the first person to answer was correct.)

_________________
Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:10 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 12380
Location: Anchorage, AK
I find it funny how everyone picks on Trufant. Sure he's not as good as he once was, and I definitely don't think he's got the ability to be a starting CB in this league any longer, but if there's one thing I know and this is without a bit of doubt or uncertainty, it's that Carroll and Bradley know MUCH more than anyone on this board as to which player is best prepared to start for us on any given Sunday.

We heard all these complaints that they weren't starting Thurmond when he was off the PUP, but now looking back, it becomes more obvious that he probably wasn't as "ready" as you'd like him to be. Pete has been very consistent in putting the best players on the field. I for one find it funny how quickly people's attitudes can be swayed on this when it's one player that they perceive to be better than another.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:11 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Everett, WA
If that's the case, why did Trufant not start in Browner's place instead of Lane?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:15 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10044
kidhawk wrote:
I find it funny how everyone picks on Trufant. Sure he's not as good as he once was, and I definitely don't think he's got the ability to be a starting CB in this league any longer, but if there's one thing I know and this is without a bit of doubt or uncertainty, it's that Carroll and Bradley know MUCH more than anyone on this board as to which player is best prepared to start for us on any given Sunday.

We heard all these complaints that they weren't starting Thurmond when he was off the PUP, but now looking back, it becomes more obvious that he probably wasn't as "ready" as you'd like him to be. Pete has been very consistent in putting the best players on the field. I for one find it funny how quickly people's attitudes can be swayed on this when it's one player that they perceive to be better than another.


This is an appeal to authority, and it is wrong. (not that you are wrong about if Trus should be the slot, just please don't appeal to authority)

Know how I know? Pete stuck with Tru last year against the Falcons and was wrong to do so. Just a couple of weeks later he was forced by injury to start Sherman, and Sherman was awesome from day one. Sherman would have been better on Roddy White in week 4, just like he was awesome on the Bengals receiver Green in his first start.

Pete makes mistakes, you know. Like playing Mebane out of position for a whole season.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:19 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
SalishHawkFan wrote:
Name that Seahawk

(the first person to answer was correct.)



Thou shalt not defend the .NET whipping boy.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:20 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 118
Lane has superior speed and is aggressive. That said has anybody actually seen him cover inside much this year? I have a wild theory...Pete has NOT abandoned his "best player plays" mantra. He has watched these guys in practice all year and Tru IS the best option we have right now. A lot of the Tru hate is being whipped up by Mike Salk....don't buy the in-depth analysis by a guy who never played the game past HS. Is Trufant doing a good job....no. We can only assume Pete has decided he is still better than his other options right now or the guy would not be playing!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:22 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 12380
Location: Anchorage, AK
Scottemojo wrote:
kidhawk wrote:
I find it funny how everyone picks on Trufant. Sure he's not as good as he once was, and I definitely don't think he's got the ability to be a starting CB in this league any longer, but if there's one thing I know and this is without a bit of doubt or uncertainty, it's that Carroll and Bradley know MUCH more than anyone on this board as to which player is best prepared to start for us on any given Sunday.

We heard all these complaints that they weren't starting Thurmond when he was off the PUP, but now looking back, it becomes more obvious that he probably wasn't as "ready" as you'd like him to be. Pete has been very consistent in putting the best players on the field. I for one find it funny how quickly people's attitudes can be swayed on this when it's one player that they perceive to be better than another.


This is an appeal to authority, and it is wrong. (not that you are wrong about if Trus should be the slot, just please don't appeal to authority)

Know how I know? Pete stuck with Tru last year against the Falcons and was wrong to do so. Just a couple of weeks later he was forced by injury to start Sherman, and Sherman was awesome from day one. Sherman would have been better on Roddy White in week 4, just like he was awesome on the Bengals receiver Green in his first start.

Pete makes mistakes, you know. Like playing Mebane out of position for a whole season.


Sherman was an unproven commodity. He hadn't even had a start in his career. We've seen Lane play, and if you watch those games, the positional analysis wasn't any different than the games when trufant was playing. When you have 2 of the best corners in the league playing, you are going to have your nickel corner getting picked on A LOT more. The Seahawks defensive strategy, isn't so much putting our best against the opponents best. We put our players into position and they take the matchups the opposing offenses put out there. For instance, teams are more apt to put the speed guy on Browner and the larger receivers against Sherman because Browner's weakness is getting beat by the double move, Where Sherman is the less likely of the two corners to be physical off the line of scrimmage. Teams often take advantage of this philosophy by using the slot guy to go across the middle and take the quick in routes against the nickel, no matter who is out there.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:23 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 1111
If we are thinking about it, then they have thought about it.

Moving from corner positions to slot positions is most likely not an easy transition. I think I remember hearting that when Turfant moved from corner to nickle. The coaches most likely don't want to put lane in that position during the playoffs.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:25 pm 
*NET FCC Liaison*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 22736
Location: Kirkland, WA
Trufant on Gonzalez is going to be the reason we lose this game, if we do lose it.

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:28 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 12380
Location: Anchorage, AK
RolandDeschain wrote:
Trufant on Gonzalez is going to be the reason we lose this game, if we do lose it.


Trufant shouldn't be on Gonzalez. Trufant should be on the number 3 receiver in 3 receiver sets. Chancellor or Wagner should be on Gonzalez. If we have Trufant (or any nickel corner) on Gonzalez on a regular basis for this game, Bradley can kiss any chance of a head coaching gig goodbye

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:49 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 4:14 pm
Posts: 1516
even in his prime, tru was very mediocre. Now he's just bad. Dude would never get his heaed turned around on coverage. it was maddening.

_________________
Image
"God Bless Russell Wilson"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:52 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
Posts: 2368
Location: Sammamish, WA
Tru on Gonzalez??? Geez, he'll shred us if that's the case.

_________________
60 percent of the time..........it works........every time


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:53 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 12380
Location: Anchorage, AK
Chukarhawk wrote:
even in his prime, tru was very mediocre. Now he's just bad. Dude would never get his heaed turned around on coverage. it was maddening.


So, Pro Bowl players are just "mediocre"...tells me all I need to know about this post

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:58 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm
Posts: 1935
kidhawk wrote:
Chukarhawk wrote:
even in his prime, tru was very mediocre. Now he's just bad. Dude would never get his heaed turned around on coverage. it was maddening.


So, Pro Bowl players are just "mediocre"...tells me all I need to know about this post



Or, it may just tell you all that you need to know about Pro Bowl voting.

_________________
I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:58 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2447
Chukarhawk wrote:
even in his prime, tru was very mediocre.


No. From 2005-2008 he was one of the best corners in the league. Especially considering he played opposite corners like Kelly Jennings for most of his career going up against every team's #1 WR.

Richard Sherman's been fantastic, but let's not forget who he's playing with in the defensive backfield. It sure as hell helps when you have safeties like Cam and Thomas covering your ass. Marcus didn't have that.

_________________
If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:02 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 12380
Location: Anchorage, AK
CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
kidhawk wrote:
Chukarhawk wrote:
even in his prime, tru was very mediocre. Now he's just bad. Dude would never get his heaed turned around on coverage. it was maddening.


So, Pro Bowl players are just "mediocre"...tells me all I need to know about this post



Or, it may just tell you all that you need to know about Pro Bowl voting.


Nope, it tells me that some people's idea of mediocre may be a little skewed. Trufant, in his prime was a VERY good CB in this league. He has definitely lost a step, and I would no longer put him at that high of a level, but when someone says that he was never more than mediocre, it shows that someone either has a very off opinion on what mediocre is, or they just didn't actually see Trufant play in his prime. I dont' know which, but anyone who watched Tru play in his prime weren't calling him "mediocre"

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:06 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:51 pm
Posts: 1883
Love tru but he just looks like a liability out there at times

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:15 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:08 am
Posts: 612
I see a lot of angst for Carroll being stubborn about keeping Tru in. Do you really think this is an issue of Carroll being stubborn? Remember, this is the guy who benched Flynn for RW and was questioned about it for the first couple months of the season. If PC is starting Tru over Lane, it is because he thinks Tru is the best option for the team right now.

We need to trust him a bit more. It has worked out well the past few years and I have no reason to doubt his call on this decision now.

_________________
http://neilkhess.com
http://soulwinningstudents.org/welcome/


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:15 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:44 pm
Posts: 286
Location: Washington
maybe Carroll was lying to us the whole time? There is no such thing as... compete?

_________________
TOUCHDOWN SEAHAWKS!!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:18 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10044
I suspect there are two reasons to not have 20 in the nickel. First, he is the backup corner for either Sherman or Browner and needs to be ready for that role, and 2nd, Trufant is a better tackler.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:25 pm 
NET Ring Of Honor
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
Posts: 21070
Location: NFL WORLD CHAMPIONS 2013-2014
It's not our call, but it is a legit. bitch.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:02 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
to those that think Trufant was one of the best Corners in the league, he had one maybe two good years, mediocre the rest... just like one poster said, always in position to make a play, very seldom making it, ALA Josh wilson... now as far as thinking we know more than the coaching staff, BS... i don't have to know more than the coaching staff, because i watch the games every week, and every week, he gets beat , burned, and has a butt load of missed tackles, he doesn't even get into position to make a play any more.. yes he's had a couple good plays since he's been back.. but has been beat far more times... he is not the 3rd best CB on this team.... gives you one heck of an effort every game, but if you were mediocre in your career in your prime minus a couple years, you sure as heck are not going to be competing at a level you need to be in the twilight of your career...

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:17 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 12380
Location: Anchorage, AK
hawker84 wrote:
to those that think Trufant was one of the best Corners in the league, he had one maybe two good years, mediocre the rest... just like one poster said, always in position to make a play, very seldom making it, ALA Josh wilson... now as far as thinking we know more than the coaching staff, BS... i don't have to know more than the coaching staff, because i watch the games every week, and every week, he gets beat , burned, and has a butt load of missed tackles, he doesn't even get into position to make a play any more.. yes he's had a couple good plays since he's been back.. but has been beat far more times... he is not the 3rd best CB on this team.... gives you one heck of an effort every game, but if you were mediocre in your career in your prime minus a couple years, you sure as heck are not going to be competing at a level you need to be in the twilight of your career...


What does being the 3rd best CB on the team have to do with anything? The Nickel position is not the same thing as your regular CB position. Not all players who can play the CB position well are good at the nickel slot and vice versa.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:40 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
ok you got me there... all i'm saying is Trufant > Lane? i don't know.. i think who ever has the ability to make the most plays should be the one out there, and i say that's Lane. JMO

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:59 pm 
*BRONZE SUPPORTER*
*BRONZE SUPPORTER*
Offline

Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts: 499
What if they go about it like shanahan did and not throw a single thing to whoever sherman is covering and just try to make the rest of our dbs stop the pass
I don't like our odds there so much but if we can run on em and use the pistol effectively we might just need two or three good defensive stands


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:36 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:07 pm
Posts: 1426
Playing the slot is completely different than playing on the outside.

Number one, you no longer have the sideline as your ally. Being able to work a receiver toward the sideline is one of the best things Browner does. Trufant is good at covering his man in a lot of space. Lane has not shown that skill yet. It's funny to say that he has been torched considering he hasn't given up many catches considering the amount of targets he has seen.

Number two, being able to flip your hips to either side at the snap to keep with the receiver in either direction is extremely important. Lane has not shown that skill yet. If you go back and watch the games that Lane started, you will notice that almost every play was the receiver going to the outside on Lane. A large part of that is that Thomas is patrolling the middle and they wanted to test Lane without help in the middle. In the few plays that Lane was taken to the inside by the receiver you could see that he was a step slow in his flip as opposed to the outside.

Number three, as much as anyone wants to discount the experience factor, being able to know which way your receiver is going in an instant by his initial hip and foot movement is essential to playing the slot.

Lane is absolutely the better athlete at this point in their careers, but he isn't the better choice right now for the slot. The weird thing is that we had a very good slot defender in Roy Lewis and we let him go due to injury. Perhaps he will be healthy next season and we can give him a look in training camp.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:34 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm
Posts: 1418
It's not like Lane doesn't play

_________________
SUPERBOWL!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:44 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
BASF:

we can agree to disagree, because Trufant is not good at covering in open spaces, he is constantly out of position and when he is in position he doesn't make the play, unless you want to count that tackle on Moss before the ball got there making a play.... i have nothing but love and admiration for trufant, but he is a liability.... the game films don't lie....

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:52 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 2644
Chukarhawk wrote:
even in his prime, tru was very mediocre. Now he's just bad. Dude would never get his heaed turned around on coverage. it was maddening.


Not only that but the guy just always looks out of position. He's a vet but appears to me the game moves to fast for him and he's always a step or two behind his coverage.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:03 pm 
* NET Eeyore *
User avatar
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
Posts: 10495
Location: Pasco, WA
I would like to see Lane, but the coaches seem to feel more comfortable with Tru in the slot because you know if they had confidence in Lane that he would already be up and running in the slot.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:14 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 10:40 am
Posts: 2609
Gus Bradley was on the KJR this morning talking about game planning for Atlanta. Mentioned their weapons and was asked about covering Gonzalez up the middle. He said something like "we are going to have to mix it up." Here's the link


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Slot/Nickel CB: Trufant vs Lane
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:45 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:08 am
Posts: 783
Location: Scotland
hawker84 wrote:
BASF:

we can agree to disagree, because Trufant is not good at covering in open spaces, he is constantly out of position and when he is in position he doesn't make the play, unless you want to count that tackle on Moss before the ball got there making a play.... i have nothing but love and admiration for trufant, but he is a liability.... the game films don't lie....


Naw, I'm with BASF on this one. Truf is playing slot because he is better suited than Lane to that, whilst they would play Lane outside. I think part of this board's problem with Tru is scheme related rather than his fault. He is asked to play a lot of zone in the middle with safety help over the top. If the QB gets too much time and finds a guy in a hole in the zone, orif Tru releases his man over the top, then if Tru makes the tackle it looks like he is trailing the play. His job is to keep the play in front of him and make the ta kle.
What has annoyed me about Tru for the last few years, is how much oc a cushion he ggives WRs. He always seemed to have a 10 yd cushion on 3rd and 7 when he was still being lined up wide. Likewise, there seem to be WRs catching the ball in front of him for first downs. The fact he is still play ing makes me suspect he is taking the drops he is being told to.

_________________
Machine-wrapped, with butter?

Yes, machine-wrapped, WITH BUTTER


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ] 

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]



 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.