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  [ 47 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:14 am 
NET Practice Squad
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:24 pm
Posts: 98
Location: Vancouver,WA
The problem was like Browner said we went Soft Zone, Which no matter if we blitzed or not the CB's should not have been 10 yards up the field. Should have been up to bump the WR to throw them off rout and buy our Dline more time.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:24 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:48 pm
Posts: 2268
Sgt. Largent wrote:
Grahamhawker wrote:
Problem I see, especially for a guy like Browner, is when you are taking away his strength by going to the prevent.


Again, it wasn't the prevent. We blitzed on both plays.

If Trufant doesn't bite down on Gonzales the first play and leave too much space behind him for Douglas, then it's an 8-10 yard completion to Gonzales, and not a 20 yard completion to Douglas.

2nd play Guy didn't time his blitz right and allowed Rodgers time to slide all the way across the line to pick him up.

Once again, right call..........poor execution. No one was complaining about the zone blitzes last week when we knocked Cousins in the mouth twice at the end of the Redskins game.


good points. The blitz didn't get home and Wagner couldn't stay with Gonzo.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:24 am 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:48 pm
Posts: 387
I thought they backed off. I don't know enough of the little things that go on. Thank you


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:26 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2437
Grahamhawker wrote:
Not "prevent" techincally, but the corners were definitely in deep/soft coverage.


So what's your solution, to play man on man coverage and risk two of the fastest WR's in the league more time to get open?

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:27 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am
Posts: 1051
Grahamhawker wrote:
Not "prevent" techincally, but the corners were definitely in deep/soft coverage.


This!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:28 am 
NET Practice Squad
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:24 pm
Posts: 98
Location: Vancouver,WA
Sgt. Largent wrote:
Grahamhawker wrote:
Not "prevent" techincally, but the corners were definitely in deep/soft coverage.


So what's your solution, to play man on man coverage and risk two of the fastest WR's in the league more time to get open?


I would have rather risked that than give them 10-20 yards to make 2 easy catches on us.. like they did..


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:30 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am
Posts: 1051
How do you get more time? Less time to get open. As it was they were open the moment the ball was snapped. tighter coverage could have forced Matt to hold on to the ball long enough for pressure to get there.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:43 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2437
Seahawks4life wrote:
Sgt. Largent wrote:
Grahamhawker wrote:
Not "prevent" techincally, but the corners were definitely in deep/soft coverage.


So what's your solution, to play man on man coverage and risk two of the fastest WR's in the league more time to get open?


I would have rather risked that than give them 10-20 yards to make 2 easy catches on us.. like they did..


.........and I'm telling you with our horrible pass rush, it wouldn't have mattered. Whether you're playing man to man or zone you still have to get pressure on the QB, which we were unable to do.

So hindsight comments like yours don't matter. Ryan would have had time to throw no matter what coverage we were playing.

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:49 am 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:19 pm
Posts: 193
Location: Graham, WA
Sgt. Largent wrote:
Grahamhawker wrote:
Not "prevent" techincally, but the corners were definitely in deep/soft coverage.


So what's your solution, to play man on man coverage and risk two of the fastest WR's in the league more time to get open?


Agreed that that is probably SOP in that situation, and had the players executed better it would have been the correct defense. That said, its clearly not the strength of our secondary. Give Browner a chance for press coverage against anybody in the league and I think he stands a reasonable chance of taking that receiver out of the play.

I'm sick of "what-iffing" too. But the bitterness has not completely disappeared yet.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:59 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2437
Grahamhawker wrote:

I'm sick of "what-iffing" too. But the bitterness has not completely disappeared yet.


Hey I'm with you. I sat and watched the highlights last night like somehow they'd change.

I just don't like Monday morning "hindsighting." If people want to criticize play calling or icing the kicker, that's all fine. But the defensive call WAS the correct call, it just wasn't executed. 100% of teams would have done the EXACT same thing, played zone and either blitzed or dropped 8 into coverage.

Nobody, and I mean nobody presses and plays one on one when you're trying to kill 30 seconds. That's freakin' suicide.

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:16 am 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:41 pm
Posts: 467
Location: Ventura, CA
Sgt. Largent wrote:
Grahamhawker wrote:

I'm sick of "what-iffing" too. But the bitterness has not completely disappeared yet.


Hey I'm with you. I sat and watched the highlights last night like somehow they'd change.

I just don't like Monday morning "hindsighting." If people want to criticize play calling or icing the kicker, that's all fine. But the defensive call WAS the correct call, it just wasn't executed. 100% of teams would have done the EXACT same thing, played zone and either blitzed or dropped 8 into coverage.

Nobody, and I mean nobody presses and plays one on one when you're trying to kill 30 seconds. That's freakin' suicide.


If you don't like Monday morning hind-sighting why are you here? We're here to talk football.

If you'd asked most of us BEFORE the drive if we wanted to blitz one guy and play soft zone, you seriously believe we would have advocated that play? It was not the right play call.

Seattle has been beaten numerous times on scheme at the end of games this year despite having the #1 scoring defense. We have the talent. Scheme was bad.

We could have played a tighter zone. I also don't think we would have been killed in man. I would have preferred almost anything to soft zone. Sherman stayed with his guy step for step most of the game. I would have trusted him to make a play if they tried to go deep. Ryan was choking. If you give him easy wide open targets he can hit those. I don't think he could have landed a clutch deep ball.

Two defensive backs, Browner and Davis, disagree with you. I know who to believe.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:29 am 
NET Ring Of Honor
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
Posts: 21063
Location: NFL WORLD CHAMPIONS 2013-2014
Regardless of pass rush, all Ryan saw was a ton of green grass in front of him. He is good enough, and has done it enough times to take perfect advantage of that situation, and we should not have given it to him.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:36 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2437
formido wrote:

We could have played a tighter zone. I also don't think we would have been killed in man. I would have preferred almost anything to soft zone. Sherman stayed with his guy step for step most of the game. I would have trusted him to make a play if they tried to go deep. Ryan was choking. If you give him easy wide open targets he can hit those. I don't think he could have landed a clutch deep ball.


If this is true, they why weren't you here last week criticizing the zone blitzes on the final plays of the Skins game? Oh that right, cause they worked.

This is not a scheme thing, it's an execution thing.

If Trufant does what he was suppose to do, which is give up the short rout and make sure nothing goes over his head, we're not having this conversation. If Guy doesn't come late on his blitz, we're not having this conversation. If Wagner doesn't get spun around and allow Gonzales the catch and miss the tackle to allow him another 5-6 yards, we're not having this conversation.

You can hindsight all you want, but be consistent. NOBODY on this entire forum criticized the zone blitz scheme last week.

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:21 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:06 am
Posts: 10
We have the most physical corners in the nfl why not just play press and if they beat us deep so be it but too let them have 2 passes almost completely undefended until the tackles were made is what is tearing me apart still today its gonna linger till next year....... go hawks

_________________
JERSEYHAWK


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:26 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
If Jacquizz Rodgers doesn't stonewall our blitzer, this conversation is entirely different. That single blitz pickup might have been the most important non-scoring play of the game for Atlanta.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:59 pm 
NET Veteran
Online

Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm
Posts: 3177
Largent80 wrote:
You simply DO NOT leave the middle of the field open. And it was open enough to drive a semi through it. Terrible defensive calls right there, and extremely-poorly executed.

This, the Defense was pretending to blitz Ryan on those last two plays, and most of the secondary foot raced PASSED the recievers, leaving the passing lanes........................W I D E............................. O P E N
Dumb.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:09 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:36 pm
Posts: 206
Quote:
.........and I'm telling you with our horrible pass rush, it wouldn't have mattered. Whether you're playing man to man or zone you still have to get pressure on the QB, which we were unable to do.

So hindsight comments like yours don't matter. Ryan would have had time to throw no matter what coverage we were playing.


This. Julio, White, Gonzo, Douglas, etc... One of them would have gotten open. Had they been getting pressure on Ryan at all during the game I might feel different, but he had all day to throw that whole game. Clearly not having Clemons hurt more than some (myself) might have thought.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:18 pm 
NET Veteran
Online

Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm
Posts: 3177
Seahawks4life wrote:
The problem was like Browner said we went Soft Zone, Which no matter if we blitzed or not the CB's should not have been 10 yards up the field. Should have been up to bump the WR to throw them off rout and buy our Dline more time.

EXACTLY,,,The Corners played precicely as they were instructed, and the Falcons Coaching found that by watching the Seahawks tendencies from the Redskins game, they already knew how to position their three best recievers to succeed.
Hell, even IF Browner and Sherman had blanketed Jones & White, that the Seahawks Defense didn't have an answer for Gonzo.
By the way,, Where the hell was Chancellor?, he did the Kam Bam to Vernon Davis, but came nowhere near Gonzalaz.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:24 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2437
Seahawks4life wrote:
The problem was like Browner said we went Soft Zone, Which no matter if we blitzed or not the CB's should not have been 10 yards up the field. Should have been up to bump the WR to throw them off rout and buy our Dline more time.


This would make more sense if EITHER of the two completions were to Cruz or White.

Pressing WR's doesn't matter if your LB's and nickel DB can't cover my grandma. Press coverage requires getting to the QB just as much as zone coverage does. More time = someone's open.

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:27 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 10:03 am
Posts: 267
Location: MD
Largent80 wrote:
You simply DO NOT leave the middle of the field open. And it was open enough to drive a semi through it. Terrible defensive calls right there, and extremely-poorly executed.


This ^^^

My gut sank through the floor when we scored and 30 seconds remained. I had a bad feeling we would sit back and let them get the yards. Man...I cant stop replaying that last ATL drive through my head...:(

_________________
**ME LONG YOU LOVE TIME**


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:08 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
Posts: 9826
Sgt. Largent wrote:

I would have rather risked that than give them 10-20 yards to make 2 easy catches on us.. like they did..

.........and I'm telling you with our horrible pass rush, it wouldn't have mattered. Whether you're playing man to man or zone you still have to get pressure on the QB, which we were unable to do.

So hindsight comments like yours don't matter. Ryan would have had time to throw no matter what coverage we were playing.

You a peewee coach?

_________________
42-13, 29-3, and 23-17 and a Lombardi trophy from THIS century, deal with it niner trolls

SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:34 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:48 pm
Posts: 387
Sarlacc83 wrote:
If Jacquizz Rodgers doesn't stonewall our blitzer, this conversation is entirely different. That single blitz pickup might have been the most important non-scoring play of the game for Atlanta.


I agree,I didn't notice myself. One of the sports shows highlighted Rogers. A great lock unfortunately


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:19 pm 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:49 pm
Posts: 411
Not an X's and O's guy,

but my question is:

Since we use a Press coverage for our Corners to disrupt get-off of receivers and thereby disrupt the timing of the route and make the QB
hold the ball longer so the blitz or pressure can get there at the very least to impact the accuracy of the throw

Why don't we use a similar Press/Bump coverage at the line on the slot receiver or TE for the same purpose?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:41 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm
Posts: 1182
The first play, Browner was assigned deep third. Rule 1 = Don't get beat deep. He got to the spot on time to make a hit and the underneath guy was a foot away from making the play as well. The OC guessed right. It was a perfect offensive playcall, a perfect route, a perfect throw, and the guy held onto the catch. Not a lot you can do.

The second play was a fantastic playcall, and great chemistry between Gonzalez and Ryan. You don't see that kind of stuff to a TE. It was a special play. Gonzalez gave a post look, and Wagner took a step to be all over it. Then right when it looked like Ryan was going to throw the post, Gonzales comes to a dead stop and turns the other direction. Must have been some kind of option route with just perfect timing. When you time it the way they did, it is almost an unstoppable play. They executed it perfectly.

They could have gone press on the first play I guess, but after watching the Ravens game, you know the coaches don't want to get beat deep and lose the game on one play. Besides that, I really don't know what other coaches would have done differently. The Atlanta OC called two perfect plays and a good QB and receivers executed the plays flawlessly. I know it hurts, but you just gotta tip your cap and move on.

_________________
Ummm, no sig to see here, especially not a sig referring to Tarvaris Jackson in any way.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:01 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:29 pm
Posts: 1554
brimsalabim wrote:
FWIW former NFL DB and NFL network analyst Eric Davis said he was disappointed in “the legion of boom” for giving such huge cushions to the receivers on those last plays after playing such tight bump for most of the game. He said players play and no matter what the coaches call if you believe you are a top NFL cover man you can’t give that cushion.


seriously though, jeez, Matt was told to do one thing and one thing only, sideline receptions, stop clock, repeat

how was that NOT visioned by every one on the Seahawks team?

maybe just caught up?

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Prevent "from winning" defense
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:03 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:29 pm
Posts: 1554
Tical21 wrote:
I know it hurts, but you just gotta tip your cap and move on.


you can't move on if you cant realize your mistakes and fix them, however, you can think you have moved on and fixed them...

critical thinking, its huge

http://editorialnation.hubpages.com/hub ... ing-Skills

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 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.