What is up with this?

After 1/2 of a season and our DC can't shut down the middle on short and effective passes?

Teams are seeing this and beating us. Why can't Bradley see it?

Lasik?

Is it scheme? Would more 3-4 type looks be more effective?

Our linebackers and slot corners play one sucky zone in that soft middle. It is stupid how deep some of them are dropping into their zone.

Most are simple slants. we are getting torched on a regular basis. That is on the LB's. And the DC puts them into position.

After 8 games of seeing this, you would think that since what we are doing is not working that maybe we should do something different?

And, why not try that nickel package defense that we used to play when Pete first got to Seattle? Why not try using that specifically on third downs?

They are trying to stop the deep routes, if we have a strong pass rush, this problem won't be there. We need to improve our pass rush by rushing 5 and then take away the short passing routes, I think they will game plan well for the next game. When you give the QB more time, bad things happen.

Scottemojo wrote:Our linebackers and slot corners play one sucky zone in that soft middle. It is stupid how deep some of them are dropping into their zone.

I think it may be due to how they got beat against the Rams. That game it seemed that those 3rd down conversions Sherman was getting hit with were over the linebacker's head into the zone area between Sherm and the safety. Then against Brady or Rodgers, I forget which one, the linebackers were not biting up on the 3rd and long play-action and denying that same area.

KJ Wright and Wagner were dropping 10-15 yds off the LOS against the 49ers it seemed. I am not sure they have a solution this year with the current LBs. Maybe the Bandit? Sounding dubious to me whether Thurmond makes it off PUP, either that or Pete not showing his cards until later in the week. Not blaming Tru but TEs and slots are giving the team fits. Wonder if Roy Lewis would have helped with this?

Scottemojo wrote:Our linebackers and slot corners play one sucky zone in that soft middle. It is stupid how deep some of them are dropping into their zone.

Whoa, wow, whoa WTF have you been, creep? I tend to enjoy reading smart-assholes, and you my friend, are a smart-asshole.

they addressed this on one of the national radio shows, can't remember which one.. with our current scheme, something has to give either the long ball protection or the underneith stuff... the underneith stuff is what they are willing to give up... problem is they're not tackling the player at the spot of the catch, they're allowing YAC way too much, and that's on the line backers.... i hate that scheme, because it builds confidense and momentum for the apposing teams, and also keeps our guys out on the field much longer to get tired....

pehawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:Our linebackers and slot corners play one sucky zone in that soft middle. It is stupid how deep some of them are dropping into their zone.

Whoa, wow, whoa WTF have you been, creep? I tend to enjoy reading smart-assholes, and you my friend, are a smart-asshole.

I dropped into the Grand Canyon the day of the Niners game, and a week later crawled out of that hole with the freeze dried farts and a passion for salad, not football. Refocused my perspective.

Its hard to defend the middle when you have to scheme against the most dangerous "large" receiver in the game.

This was a problem for Lions game. Not every team we play.
Sometimes you have to give the opposing team credit for putting us between a rock and a hard place.
Stafford and his O.C. used Johnson to create match ups and they killed it......and barely won...... at home.

I know alot of people say we should mix it up.They do and they did alot on Sunday.People like blame the scheme.The scheme is sound.They have kept the score down in almost every game.This week we just got beat by a team that was due a breakout game.There is a lot of talent on that offense,Stafford can hang 35 on just about anyone when he is rolling and he was on fire Sunday.The biggest problem in my mind is both LBs are green still and the secondary is still young and learning.
They have stood toe to toe with some of the best offenses in the league and this time they just came up short.That game was right where we wanted it to be.The offense got the lead and the game was came down to are D holding them. I will take those odds every game

It's a balance. You really can't defend EVERY part of the field, by and large. Something is going to be vulnerable at some point.

Right now, it's the underneath stuff. We can't over-shift to protect that and then start giving up the 40-yard bombs every week (which I certainly don't miss from Seahawks defenses of days past). Yeah we still give up a few here and there (Welker in the Pats game, Givens in the Rams game, Young yesterday) but we used to routinely get scorched on deep stuff. The idea is to keep everything in front of you.

Herein lies the challenge of the modern NFL defensive coordinator. We will adjust...

Hmmm. the middle has been open all season. The defenses job is to defend tendencies. Since we have not defended this, it is a defensive weakness that will be exploited until a change is made.

I posted in another thread that we know where the marker is, and we drop both Lb's and Db's about 2 yards deeper so we can break on the ball. Other teams just shorten their routes and give their recievers an extra step to make a move and convert. And, their strategy is working.

lol we should drop a DL into coverage and blitz the nickel back on third downs. Also, we could just choose to blitz our fast-long-armed linebackers. We are severely limiting our offensive possessions by allowing so many 3rd down conversions.

Hell why not go crazy and play a 5-5-1 defense on third downs. Drop Kam into the 2nd level with the linebackers and back Earl up 5-10 yards. Rushing 5 and having 5 in the second level will effectively combat the slants and "soft" middle. However, Earl would need to be on top of his game as he would be the deep safety/ball hawk in case they go deep or one of our corners get beat.

or what about a dime flat look.

I sure don't understand why we would drop into the zone coverage that gives up short routes in favor of defending against long routes, when the ball is on the 1 yard line at the end of a game. I really don't. WTF were we defending against a long route there? (This is based on Browner's post-game comment about being in zone on that last Detroit play.)

I should have paid a little more attention to the defensive formations the Seahawks have in place on plays where they get beat by a RB straight up the gut. Also the offensive formations.

I am pretty sure the Niners were at least running a TE and FB (sometimes 2 TE's) on the plays where they pounded it up the middle with Frank Gore. When you see two tight-ends and a full back, you know it will probably be coming right up your a$$. So the defensive play calling should drop Chancellor in to have 8 men in the box. If the play isn't called like that, then Bobby Wagner should audible the D. One thing I rarely see is Wagner adjusting coverage. Tatupu was good at that, reading defense and adjusting the coverage accordingly. Wagner is a rookie, so he is just running the plays exactly how Bradley calls them. I don't think Bobby wants to piss Bradley off by adjusting the play on the field and end up making a big mistake that leaves someone wide open.

Not sure what people think of Gus Bradley. But I think he's an average to fairly good play caller, usually, against the right offenses. While Bobby Wagner is a skilled player, physically and mentally he can read plays. But I don't think he's quick enough to read the defense then adjust all the players on the defense accordingly. I really only see him calling in one of the safeties to blitz (Thomas when he thinks its going to be a pass play and Chancellor when he thinks they're going to run it) and i've seen him call out to KJ Wright on a few plays. Don't think i've seen him run up and adjust the D-line and definitely haven't seen him move LeRoy Hill anywhere. But I think that's because Hill is a seasoned veteran while Wagner is a rookie. He may be hesitant to tell Hill where to go and what to do.

Young Lb (wagner, who is otherwise doing well) not feeling sure enough to commit to a decision. This would be compensated by a strong nickle on coverage making that available pass option not open. which will be solved this week with the official return of you know who.

I am not seeing a lot on how good the Offense was. a huge marshawn run (not the norm and don't expect it to happen all the time) and a few smooth redzone drives (people fear our pass now) against a great front line. I don't expect this d to allow this many points every game and i expect this middle to get less and less soft as WTIII gets back up to speed. remember, seahawks plus WT3 = seahawks + a guy who is better than even richard sherman, he also specializes in nickle (which tru is struggling in).

Seeker wrote:Young Lb (wagner, who is otherwise doing well) not feeling sure enough to commit to a decision. This would be compensated by a strong nickle on coverage making that available pass option not open. which will be solved this week with the official return of you know who.

I am not seeing a lot on how good the Offense was. a huge marshawn run (not the norm and don't expect it to happen all the time) and a few smooth redzone drives (people fear our pass now) against a great front line. I don't expect this d to allow this many points every game and i expect this middle to get less and less soft as WTIII gets back up to speed. remember, seahawks plus WT3 = seahawks + a guy who is better than even richard sherman, he also specializes in nickle (which tru is struggling in).

We don't know that he's better than Sherman. I'm a big fan of WT3 but he's looked good in very limited time.

Need Walter Thurmond back on the field.

Richard Sherman is playing today because WT got injured. people forget that was his spot sherms in.
Best part about it, WT3's speciality? the freakin nickle. we are back in business folks.

Wow, someone saying Thurmond is better than Sherman in here? Crazy talk. Not saying it's not possible somewhere down the line it could happen although that would make Thurmond one hell of a db. Saying it right now though, crazy talk. I would venture to say IF he is healthy would be an instant upgrade over Trufant in the nickel. Don't think that would be too crazy to assume.

Seeker wrote:Richard Sherman is playing today because WT got injured. people forget that was his spot sherms in.
Best part about it, WT3's speciality? the freakin nickle. we are back in business folks.

Nobody's forgetting how Sherm got the starting job. But like other great, talented athletes, once he got the job, he'll hold onto it.

WT3 may have been more polished than Sherman, but better, I don't think so. Let's not forget Sherman was a rookie last season and played only 2 seasons as a CB in college.

Yeah, I doubt many people anticipated how good Sherman would become. Thurmond was ahead of him on the depth chart prior to being injured, but that's not saying much because he didn't play long enough to prove much. I think this becomes a bit like comparing apples to oranges though. IMO, Thurmond is quicker than Sherman and Browner, so he'll be better at covering the smaller, quicker/shiftier slot receivers. He was very good in coverage at Oregon, and was looking promising as a pro before his injuries happened. Though he doesn't have Sherman's size, I think he'd do farely well at L or R CB in a pinch. At 5'11" 190lbs, I think he will be most at home in the slot. He probably has much better ball-hawking skills than other midgets such as Jennings and most likely will be better than Trufant in that regard.

WOW. I never noticed that. I guess that explains how easy it is to break off 15 yard runs also. If anyone slips that first level, (gore)They are gone to the races.

djb28 wrote:WOW. I never noticed that. I guess that explains how easy it is to break off 15 yard runs also. If anyone slips that first level, (gore)They are gone to the races.

That had more to do with the 9ers showing pass, then running a trap play. Next stop was Earl! ...not to mention a lack of gap discipline. :-)

-The Glove- wrote:

Seeker wrote:Richard Sherman is playing today because WT got injured. people forget that was his spot sherms in.
Best part about it, WT3's speciality? the freakin nickle. we are back in business folks.

Nobody's forgetting how Sherm got the starting job. But like other great, talented athletes, once he got the job, he'll hold onto it.

WT3 may have been more polished than Sherman, but better, I don't think so. Let's not forget Sherman was a rookie last season and played only 2 seasons as a CB in college.

nahhh, can't believe that cuz that's saying the guy who originally wins the job shouldn't have to begin with and the coaches were wrong. Can't leave the window of possibility that our best QB is sitting on the bench.

But back to WT3. He beat out Ultimas Prime AND a former lock down pro bowl corner in Tru. The guy came with the skills needed to win the job. He'll need to catch up, he's still basically a rookie, but he's a definite upgrade to our D and hopefully it show. Of course, this all depends on if the injury didn't take anything away from him.

FlyingGreg wrote:It's a balance. You really can't defend EVERY part of the field, by and large. Something is going to be vulnerable at some point.

Right now, it's the underneath stuff. We can't over-shift to protect that and then start giving up the 40-yard bombs every week (which I certainly don't miss from Seahawks defenses of days past). Yeah we still give up a few here and there (Welker in the Pats game, Givens in the Rams game, Young yesterday) but we used to routinely get scorched on deep stuff. The idea is to keep everything in front of you.

Herein lies the challenge of the modern NFL defensive coordinator. We will adjust...

Whoa, what's this? Perspective? You need to post more.

SalishHawkFan wrote:

-The Glove- wrote:

Seeker wrote:Richard Sherman is playing today because WT got injured. people forget that was his spot sherms in.
Best part about it, WT3's speciality? the freakin nickle. we are back in business folks.

Nobody's forgetting how Sherm got the starting job. But like other great, talented athletes, once he got the job, he'll hold onto it.

WT3 may have been more polished than Sherman, but better, I don't think so. Let's not forget Sherman was a rookie last season and played only 2 seasons as a CB in college.

nahhh, can't believe that cuz that's saying the guy who originally wins the job shouldn't have to begin with and the coaches were wrong. Can't leave the window of possibility that our best QB is sitting on the bench.

But back to WT3. He beat out Ultimas Prime AND a former lock down pro bowl corner in Tru. The guy came with the skills needed to win the job. He'll need to catch up, he's still basically a rookie, but he's a definite upgrade to our D and hopefully it show. Of course, this all depends on if the injury didn't take anything away from him.

I don't doubt he was the best man for the job at the time. I was/still am a huge WT3 fan. Everytime he was on the field, I was drawn to his play.

Can't wait til he gets back up to speed though, but we need him BAD right now.

GeekHawk wrote:I sure don't understand why we would drop into the zone coverage that gives up short routes in favor of defending against long routes, when the ball is on the 1 yard line at the end of a game. I really don't. WTF were we defending against a long route there? (This is based on Browner's post-game comment about being in zone on that last Detroit play.)

Because rational thinking would be we could stop at least one third down in that situation...(Detroit..AZ...etc)

We would have had two more wins

Two stops and in two games in two fourth quarters and we would have two more wins

That was somewhat poetic...in a manly football way of course!!

Which Walter Thurmond injury is being discussed here? Somebody mentioned they hope the injury didn't take anything away. Hasn't he blown out both knees at least once? I believe he dropped a great deal in the draft due to a horrific college injury. Correct? I'm just not sure why everybody thinks that his coming back = problem solved. It may help, but there are much bigger problems than one player. It isn't as if teams are consistently beating the same player. I know people want to act like it's all Tru's fault, but how many of those 3rd down passes were actually completed to a guy he was covering? Even if it is a high percentage, there is still the problem that teams have figured out that they just need to complete the ball and then their guy can run for 5-7 more yards to get the first down due to our horrible scheme.

SharkHawk wrote:Which Walter Thurmond injury is being discussed here? Somebody mentioned they hope the injury didn't take anything away. Hasn't he blown out both knees at least once? I believe he dropped a great deal in the draft due to a horrific college injury. Correct? I'm just not sure why everybody thinks that his coming back = problem solved. It may help, but there are much bigger problems than one player. It isn't as if teams are consistently beating the same player. I know people want to act like it's all Tru's fault, but how many of those 3rd down passes were actually completed to a guy he was covering? Even if it is a high percentage, there is still the problem that teams have figured out that they just need to complete the ball and then their guy can run for 5-7 more yards to get the first down due to our horrible scheme.

This was my thought too. It would be bad form to set the over/under on how many games Thurmond will play, but there is no evidence this guy can line up and play even half a season without getting injured.

Scottemojo wrote:

SharkHawk wrote:Which Walter Thurmond injury is being discussed here? Somebody mentioned they hope the injury didn't take anything away. Hasn't he blown out both knees at least once? I believe he dropped a great deal in the draft due to a horrific college injury. Correct? I'm just not sure why everybody thinks that his coming back = problem solved. It may help, but there are much bigger problems than one player. It isn't as if teams are consistently beating the same player. I know people want to act like it's all Tru's fault, but how many of those 3rd down passes were actually completed to a guy he was covering? Even if it is a high percentage, there is still the problem that teams have figured out that they just need to complete the ball and then their guy can run for 5-7 more yards to get the first down due to our horrible scheme.

This was my thought too. It would be bad form to set the over/under on how many games Thurmond will play, but there is no evidence this guy can line up and play even half a season without getting injured.

Who's the CB we got from GB during the Holmgren era who was touted as the best cover corner to come out of his draft class? Vinson? The poor guy spent almost his entire times with us on IR. Thurmond harkens memories of that, though I really wish proves me wrong.

Yes, I believe it was Vinson, and we traded Ahman Green to get him. We had the same kind of situation with Nate Odoms. We signed both he and House Ballard away from the Bills for big money. House played his contract out and then some (he was a steal and a half), and Nate never played a game for us. I think he blew his knee out in a charity basketball game in the offseason just prior to the start of training camp.

SharkHawk wrote:Yes, I believe it was Vinson, and we traded Ahman Green to get him. We had the same kind of situation with Nate Odoms. We signed both he and House Ballard away from the Bills for big money. House played his contract out and then some (he was a steal and a half), and Nate never played a game for us. I think he blew his knee out in a charity basketball game in the offseason just prior to the start of training camp.

I think we traded Green for MacIntosh who was a killer lineman. But got injured in his neck or back in either training camp or the first game and because of the severity of the injury never played a down for us.

i'm not saying our defensive whoa's are all on trufant, obviously, but he is a weak spot on the D... in my opinion he was never a lockdown probowl corner to begin with, he had one good year... all the other years when he wasn't hurt, he was constantly beat badly, contantly over matched and undersized... i said a few years back we need a lock down corner and move fant to the nickle... now that that's happend, he's to old and slow... good recievers like welker, abadabu or whatever his name is from the rams have already exploited this.. great hawk, but it's time to move on from him just like we did with sean springs..

I love Tru, but yeah this should be his final year with the team.

The Radish wrote:

SharkHawk wrote:Yes, I believe it was Vinson, and we traded Ahman Green to get him. We had the same kind of situation with Nate Odoms. We signed both he and House Ballard away from the Bills for big money. House played his contract out and then some (he was a steal and a half), and Nate never played a game for us. I think he blew his knee out in a charity basketball game in the offseason just prior to the start of training camp.

I think we traded Green for MacIntosh who was a killer lineman. But got injured in his neck or back in either training camp or the first game and because of the severity of the injury never played a down for us.

We drafted Chris McIntosh in the first round out of Wisconsin. No trade involved that I can recall... unless we got Vinson AND a pick for Ahman Green. Then he held out and everybody was booing him and such. Holmgren was griping that he was so far behind due to holding out (Holmgren seemed to hate all linemen, remember the stuff with Pete Kendall? He also hated Ahman Green and talked extensively about how he didn't fit the system... and then drafted a very similar runner in Shaun). Then Chris finally started to play like what we expected and was just destroying guys and his neck blew out, just like Mack Strong's did. He wasn't ever able to play again. I think he played around 8 or 9 games maybe in total. I think McIntosh would have gone down as an all-time Hawk Great if he'd not injured his neck, but afterward there was some talk that he had a narrowed spinal canal and the team should have picked up on it in pre-draft physicals. I have the same condition, suffered the same injury, and wouldn't you know it... had the same surgery both he and Mack had. I can still throw the ball around and stuff, but it's obvious why he never played a down again. It's playing with fire. If I move slightly wrong I'll get a stinger from hell and my arm won't work for a week. But usually it just feels totally normal like pre-injury.

hawker84 wrote:i'm not saying our defensive whoa's are all on trufant, obviously, but he is a weak spot on the D... in my opinion he was never a lockdown probowl corner to begin with, he had one good year... all the other years when he wasn't hurt, he was constantly beat badly, contantly over matched and undersized... i said a few years back we need a lock down corner and move fant to the nickle... now that that's happend, he's to old and slow... good recievers like welker, abadabu or whatever his name is from the rams have already exploited this.. great hawk, but it's time to move on from him just like we did with sean springs..

Funny there is a string on the main forum today explaining the way they are playing defense and that what Tru is being for is actually the fault of the way they are positioning him.

I think we should rename it the Twinkies defense or something more appropriate until the Legion of Boom decides to make a return. That zone is softer than the cream filling in the middle of the unspoilable spongecake.