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  [ 43 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:07 pm 
*PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
*PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
Posts: 8660
Location: Is Everything
Its going to be a long offseason.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:12 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
Posts: 1405
Location: Blaine, WA
theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
The 4-3 under scheme is designed to create pressure from the LEO and three-technique. The whole point of the scheme is to create favourable match-ups for those two players and exploit one side. The five-technique isn't asked to do a lot of pass rushing.

The reason this scheme doesn't work in terms of a pass rush is because we have a 6-6, 325lbs monster playing the three-technique, and not a 295lbs athletic interior pass rusher.


Great points and people are being idiots to think Red is the problem.

_________________
<A>
<IMG></A>


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:49 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm
Posts: 612
I would expect Red Bryant to play as well inside as he does outside. I just don't see how a roof over his head will alter his game.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:25 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
The 4-3 under scheme is designed to create pressure from the LEO and three-technique. The whole point of the scheme is to create favourable match-ups for those two players and exploit one side. The five-technique isn't asked to do a lot of pass rushing.

The reason this scheme doesn't work in terms of a pass rush is because we have a 6-6, 325lbs monster playing the three-technique, and not a 295lbs athletic interior pass rusher.


You just explained why we need to change it up. Thank you.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:30 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
McGruff wrote:
theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
The 4-3 under scheme is designed to create pressure from the LEO and three-technique. The whole point of the scheme is to create favourable match-ups for those two players and exploit one side. The five-technique isn't asked to do a lot of pass rushing.

The reason this scheme doesn't work in terms of a pass rush is because we have a 6-6, 325lbs monster playing the three-technique, and not a 295lbs athletic interior pass rusher.


Great points and people are being idiots to think Red is the problem.


Great points to explain why we need to change it up, actually. And it's ridiculous to label someone as an "idiot" who questions the scheme. Some of us aren't sheep that march in step with everything this team does, especially when it's clear we need to adjust. The losses to Detroit, Miami and Atlanta are red lights blinking in every possible direction what the issue is.

So you think it's working the way it is?? Really? What other team just pisses away a pass rusher like we do?

Get off the Red suck fest and objectively evaluate.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:33 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm
Posts: 1840
McGruff wrote:
theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
The 4-3 under scheme is designed to create pressure from the LEO and three-technique. The whole point of the scheme is to create favourable match-ups for those two players and exploit one side. The five-technique isn't asked to do a lot of pass rushing.

The reason this scheme doesn't work in terms of a pass rush is because we have a 6-6, 325lbs monster playing the three-technique, and not a 295lbs athletic interior pass rusher.


Great points and people are being idiots to think Red is the problem.


If he fails with the 2 gap that is a problem. Perhaps due to injury, but the first 49er game watch the video and see what they did


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:42 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 1:00 pm
Posts: 1141
scifly wrote:
His run stopping skills are mediocre if that. Now his production comes from special teams only, he's invisible otherwise. Kudos for getting his money tho, that's one crafty, fat burglar.


He definitely had a rough year

To say he is playing out of position is silly, the five technique is supposed to be a bigger guy who can set the edge. The Hawks need a stud three-technique who can rush the passer. We tried to make Mebane that guy and it never worked out, Mebane seems like an adequate nose tackle. I'm not against bringing Branch back but I think if we could get a better pass rusher inside we'd be a much more effective defense.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:38 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
Posts: 1405
Location: Blaine, WA
He had a rough year due to injury, and we still had a top five defense and the top scoring defense in the league.

We need to upgrade the pass rush. Obviously. But there is multiple ways to do that that don't involved cutting your team captain and defensive leader. Add an interior pass rusher. Add a rotational end. Add a blitzing WSLB. Design better blitz schemes. Stop playing a stupid arse soft zone with 200 pound corner backs and inexperienced linebackers.

But cutting one of the two guys you've designed your entire defense around? It's idiotic.

_________________
<A>
<IMG></A>


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:45 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm
Posts: 1414
FlyingGreg wrote:

Get off the Red suck fest and objectively evaluate.

How objective...

:roll:

_________________
SUPERBOWL!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:35 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm
Posts: 1840
The question I have is if Branch is a free agent and we have a lot sunk into Red ( and is healing from plantar fasciitis we have a few options. Both Julius Peppers and Kevin Williams have played with it and had similar performance drop offs, but came back

However when Red is not 100% we drop off. He has been hurt to some degree this year and last , so I think it would be wise to address it , unless we go to a conventional 4-3 that I don't see happening. We can:

sign Branch
Replace Branch with another Free Agent
Draft
Replace Red with another

I agree Red didn't work well inside and I don't see it.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:12 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
Posts: 1142
Location: Vancouver, WA
I'd probably move Red to 3 tech and let Branch walk. I realize Red has had a foot injury for the latter half of the year, but teams have been rolling to his side for the last couple years knowing he can't close the distance. His INT TD against the Bears was the best thing to come of it. And at 3 tech he won't have the problem getting out of his stance with the long legs for the most part. He moves inside on some passing situations anyway.

I'd also draft another DT and let McDonald walk. He was a liability in run D when he came in for Mebane.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:14 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:01 pm
Posts: 2356
FlyingGreg wrote:
McGruff wrote:
theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
The 4-3 under scheme is designed to create pressure from the LEO and three-technique. The whole point of the scheme is to create favourable match-ups for those two players and exploit one side. The five-technique isn't asked to do a lot of pass rushing.

The reason this scheme doesn't work in terms of a pass rush is because we have a 6-6, 325lbs monster playing the three-technique, and not a 295lbs athletic interior pass rusher.


Great points and people are being idiots to think Red is the problem.


Great points to explain why we need to change it up, actually. And it's ridiculous to label someone as an "idiot" who questions the scheme. Some of us aren't sheep that march in step with everything this team does, especially when it's clear we need to adjust. The losses to Detroit, Miami and Atlanta are red lights blinking in every possible direction what the issue is.

So you think it's working the way it is?? Really? What other team just pisses away a pass rusher like we do?

Get off the Red suck fest and objectively evaluate.


So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:04 am 
NET Veteran
Online

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 2260
HawKnPeppa wrote:
So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


I don't have a short memory, but I don't remember much of Red Bryant at defensive tackle because he started a whole 1 game (10 total games) for one of the worst teams in memory over 2 years before he moved to End.

I'd presume that he's a better player now than he was 3 years ago and might actually have improved as a DT in that time


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:59 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 1:00 pm
Posts: 1141
The three tech has to get off blocks and pressure the QB, that's never been Red's strength. His strength are his gap integrity, strength and ability to bat passes.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:01 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am
Posts: 2735
themunn wrote:
HawKnPeppa wrote:
So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


I don't have a short memory, but I don't remember much of Red Bryant at defensive tackle because he started a whole 1 game (10 total games) for one of the worst teams in memory over 2 years before he moved to End.

I'd presume that he's a better player now than he was 3 years ago and might actually have improved as a DT in that time


Red became the the Red we love after he moved to Defensive End. He got paid to be a DE. He's not going to be moved to DT. You can't have your cake and eat it in this situation.

Changing a players position when he's not effective at his current position (Red at DT, Mike Rob at QB, Sweezy on D) is one thing. Changing a person's position when they ARE effective is another. (ET to corner despite being a pro-bowl safety, Kam to LB despite being a pro-bowl safety, Mike Robinson to full-time backup qb despite being a pro-bowl fullback).

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:25 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
HawKnPeppa wrote:
So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


Not sure what my military rank has to do with a football forum discussion. I guess it's a matter of "when you don't have anything reasonable to offer to a discussion, default to the baseline and take a shot at the individual"? Stay in your lane, dude.

Ayways, back on point: So you think it's working having him play DE exclusively as a run-stopper? Like, seriously? I guess we'll see how he plays when he is healthy again. Red played "worse" at DT which was three seasons ago. The theory is he may be better moving back now with more game experience under his belt. But more importantly, the idea to move him back to DT is a concession that it's not working really well at DE and there's nowhere else to play him. He is expensive and has a long term deal on the books. Something has to give.

And it's not bonkers to want the defense to improve, especially when our biggest weakness is rushing the passer and we are starting off behind the 8-ball having a non-pass rushing DE take the majority of the snaps. Sometimes it helps to take off the homer glasses and honestly assess players we really like, which isn't easy.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:28 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
Basis4day wrote:
themunn wrote:
HawKnPeppa wrote:
So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


I don't have a short memory, but I don't remember much of Red Bryant at defensive tackle because he started a whole 1 game (10 total games) for one of the worst teams in memory over 2 years before he moved to End.

I'd presume that he's a better player now than he was 3 years ago and might actually have improved as a DT in that time


Red became the the Red we love after he moved to Defensive End. He got paid to be a DE. He's not going to be moved to DT. You can't have your cake and eat it in this situation.

Changing a players position when he's not effective at his current position (Red at DT, Mike Rob at QB, Sweezy on D) is one thing. Changing a person's position when they ARE effective is another. (ET to corner despite being a pro-bowl safety, Kam to LB despite being a pro-bowl safety, Mike Robinson to full-time backup qb despite being a pro-bowl fullback).


That's the debate - you say Red is effective at DE? I'm not so sure about that.

Besides, this is a fan forum - the crazy ideas are welcome here. We aren't the defensive staff - and I doubt they move him.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:35 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
FlyingGreg wrote:
HawKnPeppa wrote:
So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


Not sure what my military rank has to do with a football forum discussion. I guess it's a matter of "when you don't have anything reasonable to offer to a discussion, default to the baseline and take a shot at the individual"? Stay in your lane, dude.

Ayways, back on point: So you think it's working having him play DE exclusively as a run-stopper? Like, seriously? I guess we'll see how he plays when he is healthy again. Red played "worse" at DT which was three seasons ago. The theory is he may be better moving back now with more game experience under his belt. But more importantly, the idea to move him back to DT is a concession that it's not working really well at DE and there's nowhere else to play him. He is expensive and has a long term deal on the books. Something has to give.

And it's not bonkers to want the defense to improve, especially when our biggest weakness is rushing the passer and we are starting off behind the 8-ball having a non-pass rushing DE take the majority of the snaps. Sometimes it helps to take off the homer glasses and honestly assess players we really like, which isn't easy.


I agree with you that Bryant's contract is not favorable given his role and his, so far, decreased production in his role as DE.

However, moving him inside won't help us, either, because as ENGLISH posted, Seattle is trying to get pressure from the DT position and Red doesn't offer that. We either need to make it work by drafting the proper 1 and 3 techs and leave the 5 tech alone or we have to abandon the entire scheme which also means dumping the LEO - in essence leaving us in need of 2 defensive ends.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:39 pm 
*Host of .NET Awards*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm
Posts: 8833
Location: With a white girl
FlyingGreg wrote:
Basis4day wrote:
themunn wrote:
[quote="HawKnPeppa"]So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


I don't have a short memory, but I don't remember much of Red Bryant at defensive tackle because he started a whole 1 game (10 total games) for one of the worst teams in memory over 2 years before he moved to End.

I'd presume that he's a better player now than he was 3 years ago and might actually have improved as a DT in that time


Red became the the Red we love after he moved to Defensive End. He got paid to be a DE. He's not going to be moved to DT. You can't have your cake and eat it in this situation.

Changing a players position when he's not effective at his current position (Red at DT, Mike Rob at QB, Sweezy on D) is one thing. Changing a person's position when they ARE effective is another. (ET to corner despite being a pro-bowl safety, Kam to LB despite being a pro-bowl safety, Mike Robinson to full-time backup qb despite being a pro-bowl fullback).


That's the debate - you say Red is effective at DE? I'm not so sure about that.

Besides, this is a fan forum - the crazy ideas are welcome here. We aren't the defensive staff - and I doubt they move him.[/quote]

What's funny is that somebody here brought up the idea of big Red moving to DE before it actually happened and it wa met with ridicule. Then it happened and we all went "WHOA". He's actually really good at his job when his feet are right. I'm pretty sure his feet weren't right the whole second half of the season though.

_________________
Legal Notice: Only a very small percentage of the things I do and say can be taken seriously. If ever.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:43 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
Sarlacc83 wrote:
FlyingGreg wrote:
HawKnPeppa wrote:
So do YOU think it was working the way it WAS??! Red played WORSE at DT. He's already been there, done that and bombed the exam. Why do you insist on putting him in a position he's terrible at... or is your memory actually that short? Last time I checked there were two stars on top of your anchor, so I'd assume that something is very functional between your ears. Knock it off already. This is completely bonkers.


Not sure what my military rank has to do with a football forum discussion. I guess it's a matter of "when you don't have anything reasonable to offer to a discussion, default to the baseline and take a shot at the individual"? Stay in your lane, dude.

Ayways, back on point: So you think it's working having him play DE exclusively as a run-stopper? Like, seriously? I guess we'll see how he plays when he is healthy again. Red played "worse" at DT which was three seasons ago. The theory is he may be better moving back now with more game experience under his belt. But more importantly, the idea to move him back to DT is a concession that it's not working really well at DE and there's nowhere else to play him. He is expensive and has a long term deal on the books. Something has to give.

And it's not bonkers to want the defense to improve, especially when our biggest weakness is rushing the passer and we are starting off behind the 8-ball having a non-pass rushing DE take the majority of the snaps. Sometimes it helps to take off the homer glasses and honestly assess players we really like, which isn't easy.


I agree with you that Bryant's contract is not favorable given his role and his, so far, decreased production in his role as DE.

However, moving him inside won't help us, either, because as ENGLISH posted, Seattle is trying to get pressure from the DT position and Red doesn't offer that. We either need to make it work by drafting the proper 1 and 3 techs and leave the 5 tech alone or we have to abandon the entire scheme which also means dumping the LEO - in essence leaving us in need of 2 defensive ends.


Makes sense. Nice to see people can provide an intelligent counter-response without defaulting to being a moron. Thanks! :th2thumbs:

I think the line of demarcation for fans is you either like the Carroll scheme ... or you don't. The strong/traditional defenses have BOTH edge rushers and a penetrating DT on the line. It seems like have to settle for a mixed bag, as dictated by the scheme. Conceptually, I get the idea of it -- I just don't know if it's functioning correctly.

Ultimately, the pass rush must be fixed in any possible way. We can't keep letting teams drive down the field and snatch wins from us. A pocket collapser is probably the #1 need.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Last edited by FlyingGreg on Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:43 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am
Posts: 2735
Quote:
That's the debate - you say Red is effective at DE? I'm not so sure about that.

Besides, this is a fan forum - the crazy ideas are welcome here. We aren't the defensive staff - and I doubt they move him.


Until the plantar fasciitis became an issue, yes, absolutely he was effective at DE in the context of our defense. That's why he got paid. Most injured players tend to have a dropoff in production.

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:46 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
Basis4day wrote:
Quote:
That's the debate - you say Red is effective at DE? I'm not so sure about that.

Besides, this is a fan forum - the crazy ideas are welcome here. We aren't the defensive staff - and I doubt they move him.


Until the plantar fasciitis became an issue, yes, absolutely he was effective at DE in the context of our defense. That's why he got paid. Most injured players tend to have a dropoff in production.


Yes....fair enough.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Playing Red Bryant inside?
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:51 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
FlyingGreg wrote:
Sarlacc83 wrote:
FlyingGreg wrote:

Not sure what my military rank has to do with a football forum discussion. I guess it's a matter of "when you don't have anything reasonable to offer to a discussion, default to the baseline and take a shot at the individual"? Stay in your lane, dude.

Ayways, back on point: So you think it's working having him play DE exclusively as a run-stopper? Like, seriously? I guess we'll see how he plays when he is healthy again. Red played "worse" at DT which was three seasons ago. The theory is he may be better moving back now with more game experience under his belt. But more importantly, the idea to move him back to DT is a concession that it's not working really well at DE and there's nowhere else to play him. He is expensive and has a long term deal on the books. Something has to give.

And it's not bonkers to want the defense to improve, especially when our biggest weakness is rushing the passer and we are starting off behind the 8-ball having a non-pass rushing DE take the majority of the snaps. Sometimes it helps to take off the homer glasses and honestly assess players we really like, which isn't easy.


I agree with you that Bryant's contract is not favorable given his role and his, so far, decreased production in his role as DE.

However, moving him inside won't help us, either, because as ENGLISH posted, Seattle is trying to get pressure from the DT position and Red doesn't offer that. We either need to make it work by drafting the proper 1 and 3 techs and leave the 5 tech alone or we have to abandon the entire scheme which also means dumping the LEO - in essence leaving us in need of 2 defensive ends.


Makes sense. Nice to see people can provide an intelligent counter-response without defaulting to being a moron. Thanks! :th2thumbs:

I think the line of demarcation for fans is you either like the Carroll scheme ... or you don't. The strong/traditional defenses have BOTH edge rushers and a penetrating DT on the line. It seems like have to settle for a mixed bag, as dictated by the scheme. Conceptually, I get the idea of it -- I just don't know if it's functioning correctly.

Ultimately, the pass rush must be fixed in any possible way. We can't keep letting teams drive down the field and snatch wins from us. A pocket collapser is probably the #1 need.


I think it's a work in progress. By not having the same scheme as the other 4-3 defenses, Carroll and Schneider can look for those 'tweeners' who won't get drafted in the higher rounds. In terms of what we can get in value, it's a good idea.

However, as we're seeing this year, it leaves us very vulnerable where it comes to finding the pocket collapsing interior rusher because we really need one and everyone who plays a 4-3 wants one, so we're not going to find value there. It's a tough spot.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 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.