SilNWest wrote:I disagree J.
I think Red is fine where he's at. What we need is a replacement for Leroy Hill (like you said) with a 3rd rounder or so, someone who can rush the passer from the linebacker position, and we need to spend next years 1st round pick on a pass rushing monster of a DT who can collapse the pocket and force the QB to go outside to Clemons or Irvin. Red Bryant is fine where he's at, although he's had somewhat of a down year. We really need to get more creative with our blitzing. I really think that if we use what we already have (plus a pass rushing monster DT) we can be one of the best pass rushing teams out there.
purpleworld wrote:Dudes got a bad wheel....he's doing his best under the circumstances! When healthy, he is still a monster....
Bigpumpkin wrote:purpleworld wrote:Dudes got a bad wheel....he's doing his best under the circumstances! When healthy, he is still a monster....
Exactly...he cannot push off on that foot with plantar fasciitis. You try moving around quickly with a rock under your heel.
SilNWest wrote:To be honest, I love Red too much to give up on him after one mediocre year. (its not even a BAD year!) He gives it his all, and is normally a force in the run game. I just think that with the addition of Irvin that the defense is having trouble balancing a great pass rusher with a great run stopper. IMO, our defense would be better as a 3-4 with Branch, Mebane, Red and Clem, KJ, Wagner, Irvin as the linebackers on passing downs. We just need to get more creative with how we use our talent, but if we draft a strong defensive lineman who can collapse the pocket, I think that will move us up into the next level.
I don't know if Gus Bradley is the guy to coordinate our defense... There I said it.
We need to change, our offense is going to get more and more dynamic, and Pete's overwhelming emphasis is turnovers. We aren't getting enough of them. Earl Thomas is a great Safety. Richard Sherman is a great corner back. Walter Thurmond can BE a great corner back. Brandon Browner is ok. They can get those turnovers if the pass rush can generate pressure. A vanilla defense just doesn't force turnovers in this league. If we can draft a strong pass rushing DT in the first, (we don't need ELITE!) draft a linebacker in the 3rd, and replace Gus Bradley with a mad genius of a Defensive coach, we can get to that elite defense status.
We will win a Superbowl. I will place my sig on that.
If Gus Bradley is replaced next year (or the year after), and we draft a DT in the first or second round, I guarantee we will win a Superbowl within 2 years of that happening. GUARANTEE! (I've had a drink or seven, so hopefully I got my thoughts across)
-The Glove- wrote:You lost me at "Brandon Browner is ok"
Rat wrote:I'm fine with Red. He's way down the list of players I would want replaced.
I kind of want Steven Hauschka replaced, but I think that's because I live in St. Louis and have had to watch Greg Zuerlein all season. That dude is unreal. His 54-yard game winner today looked like it had another 15 yards on it.
SilNWest wrote:-The Glove- wrote:You lost me at "Brandon Browner is ok"
Yea I know. I just don't think Brandon Browner is a world beater. He's a guy who plays his heart out on every down, but just can't quite play quick enough to be a consistent cornerback against any good receiver. I'm not saying he's a bad player, its just that now that opposing offenses know what he's all about he can be schemed against. I don't think he should be replaced immediately, but I do think that Thurmond is the better all round player.
I'm probably just splitting hairs though honestly, I'm always looking to upgrade our team, and I see Browner as the most easily upgraded player in our secondary (even though he would be starting for 20 other teams lol)
kearly wrote:Here is my problem with the Red Bryant situation:
Red Bryant is basically like a good 3-4 end. 3-4 ends are not expected to be pass rushers, they are expected to keep linemen busy and stop the run. Pass rush is a bonus.
That's all well and good, and honestly I don't think Bryant would be a problem at all if Seattle's defense operated more like a 3-4 style defense.
3-4 defenses are built around the blitz. 4-3 defenses are built around "base" (aka front four) pressure. Since Irvin, Clemons, and Bryant are all closer to being 3-4 types, it makes sense that Seattle's pass rush has always looked it's best on the blitz. As I recall, only 8 of Clemons 22 sacks in 2010 and 2011 came from a base pass rush.
So short answer- yes, we'd definitely be better off with a typical 4-3 end manning Bryant's spot so long as Pete insists on trying to get sacks with a base pass rush. But if Pete is willing to blitz more, then I think Bryant would fit that kind of defense well enough.
But in the meantime, the team is basically paying Bryant $7 million per season as a guy that's basically a misfit in Pete's ultimate 4-3 defense. I hope Pete realizes this, and either reverts his defense to being more blitz heavy or searches for Bryant's replacement. Nothing against Bryant, but the $7 million salary average he has is a really big piece of incentive to look for his replacement.
Keep in mind- Bryant's salary in 2013 is fully guaranteed. So if the team wants to move on from Bryant, it won't be painless to do so until 2014 (barring a trade).