 |
| Author |
Message |
|
CANHawk
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:20 pm |
|
| * Gangnameister * |
 |
 |
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 8726 Location: Vancouver BC, Canada
|
|
I agree with the OP. a penetrating pass rushing 3-tech is priority numero uno. Whether that's achieved by bringing in a FA, trading for a vet, or drafting one early in the draft, I neither know nor care. I just know it's a priority because the entire personality of our defense changed when we lost Jason Jones. And that sucks.
The only way we need to even start thinking about getting a starting Leo is if the Clem we get back in September is significantly less than the Clem we had back in December. What we DO need though is adequate depth at Leo (or to figure out a means to better mobilize what we've got because Irvin and Scruggs are good football players). That being said though, I think Irvin will figure it out. In that Atlanta game, he looked like he was trying extra hard not to screw up. That's a recipe for mediocrity when you play DE like Bruce does. He needs to be able to play balls out with only one objective (kill the guy with the ball), and I think Gus (and his doppleganger Todd Wash) had him thinking about too many things. I think Dan Quinn is going to work wonders with Bruce Irvin, and the whole D-line.
_________________   Papaki douchebag love turtle long time   What...? it's not like anyone banged a turtle or anything. Just chill.....
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Scottemojo
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:50 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am Posts: 7322
|
|
Hey, I agree we need a pass rushing 3 tech badly. When I say we need another LEO, I am not saying a first round pick. But good pass rush 3 techs are damn rare, and if a impactful LEO player is there, grab him. In fact, I would lay odds that we are way more likely to go DE than DT in the first round.
This defense begins, and damn near ends with the ability to stop the run. And as long as Pete is here, that will be the case. Irvin might get better against the run, but any of you hanging his struggles with the run on being a rookie are basing your hopes for next year on something you can't prove, namely the fact that he will get better. Just like anybody thinking Quinn will be an improvement on Bradley is basing their hopes on something they can't prove.
Irvin has never in his life played a read and react position. Clemons was a linebacker in college. There is not a doubt in my mind that for that reason, and many more, Irvin is not, and will not be ready to simply replace Clemons adequately next year.
Not getting another LEO would be a betrayal of comPete.
_________________ SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
McGruff
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:53 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am Posts: 566 Location: Blaine, WA
|
|
Agree we need another LEO . . . But cannot fathom that we are drafting one early or signing one big.
_________________ <A>
<IMG></A>
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
ivotuk
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm |
|
| * NET Nobody * |
 |
 |
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm Posts: 4861
|
|
I agree with the OP on this. The lack of pressure from anywhere else demonstrsted the need for help in the middle, something that we lacked all season long. You can't take the Atlanta game as a definition of Irvins abilities. According to Brock, Pete said Bruce hit the rookie wall, and that's to be expected after 17 games. Irvin had never before in his life been exposed to that much playing time our that kind of environment. Looking back at that game, I wonder how Bruce would have fared had the rest of the d line gotten pressure. Imaho, w need Kawaan Short, but I would be hard pressed to pass on Corey Lemonier were he available :-)
_________________ Joe Vellano, DT, 6'1", 300lbs, 61 tkls 14 TFL, 6 sacks" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc_yzeVi-eU, Mike Catapano 6'4" 271QB Jordan Rodgers 6'1" 212# 2539 Yards, 60% completion 15td/5int
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
DJrmb
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:31 pm |
|
| NET Practice Squad |
 |
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm Posts: 98
|
|
I'm glad someone finally posted this. It was mind boggling seeing so many posts about needing to draft or bring in a big name FA for the LEO position. DO we want to always have guys coming in that could fit that role and give Irvin some competition? Yeah. But that's not something you throw a 1st or 2nd round pick out for. I agree with the others that a good 3-tech would go a long ways for this defense and it would help the other guys be more productive because the QB can't just step forward to avoid their rush on the ends every time.
It just seems people have already given up on Irvin which is hilarious. He was the best rookie pass rusher last year. He's going to get stronger and better. Clemons was known as a very poor run stopper years into his career before being coached up.
I absolutely hate the myth that Irvin is too small too. Irvin is freaking 9 pounds less than Clemons. That's it. 9 Pounds. If 9 Pounds is the difference between ideal and being too small then just give him a couple big mac meals lol. Nah but seriously, he'll gain more than 9 pounds this off-season. He's got the frame to carry plenty more weight if they want him to. So Irvin is to small to play the leo every down = Myth!
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
tomahawk
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:38 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am Posts: 2415 Location: Skagit, WA
|
|
What makes people believe that Clemons will be back? He tore his knee in January, there's no way a 31 year old is coming back from that to be productive piece this year. Rarely happens.
We need to bring in whoever can relieve that pressure off from Irvin so he can continue to learn - but we still need to fix the pass rush with or without a new LEO.
_________________ ______________________
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
DJrmb
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:55 pm |
|
| NET Practice Squad |
 |
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm Posts: 98
|
tomahawk wrote: What makes people believe that Clemons will be back? He tore his knee in January, there's no way a 31 year old is coming back from that to be productive piece this year. Rarely happens.
We need to bring in whoever can relieve that pressure off from Irvin so he can continue to learn - but we still need to fix the pass rush with or without a new LEO. Huh? There's many players that come back from ACL tears. Especially recently, doctors and medical knowledge have gotten to such that most players come back fine and usually stronger because of all the rehab. Just a few Notable players to come back and do fine after an ACL tear: Juliane Peterson (edit: oops sorry his was an Achilles tear) Jamaal Charles Adrian Peterson Jamal Lewis Edgerrine James Terry Allen Casey Hampton (3 ACL reconstructions) As a matter of fact it's harder to find guys that can't or don't come back from ACL injuries. Clem will be fine. We might not get him back right away and if we don't, why not see what a fresh Irvin can do in a full time Leo role early in the season?
Last edited by DJrmb on Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
kearly
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:58 pm |
|
| * Mr Random Thought * |
 |
 |
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am Posts: 7229
|
Largent80 wrote: I really don't want to see us draft the same position 2 years in a row with more obvious needs glaring us in the face. DE is the teams #1 need IMO. Lack of depth at LEO just ended our season. I think we'll go DT in round 1 though just because you almost have to take one that early this year to get a difference maker. You could probably wait til rounds 2-4 for a backup LEO and be fine. And by backup I really mean "future starter." Seattle clearly wants at least 2 outside pass rushers (DE) full time. Even if Irvin is a LEO, you'd still need to replace Irvin when he moves over to cover Clemons' departure. So either way, we need a defensive end. Better to be proactive about finding that guy especially when our current LEO turns 32 this year and is coming off an ACL. I'd even argue that we need 3 LEOs at all times just to avoid another Atlanta situation.
_________________  "I believe there’s merit to the idea that once something in life becomes conventional, it’s no longer the safest path to success." -Matt Waldman "If everyone's thinking alike, no one's thinking." -Bill Walsh
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
kearly
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:05 pm |
|
| * Mr Random Thought * |
 |
 |
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am Posts: 7229
|
McGruff wrote: Agree we need another LEO . . . But cannot fathom that we are drafting one early or signing one big. I don't think we'll see anything in FA. As far as the draft goes, I think Seattle would have to strongly consider LEO in round one if Jarvis Jones or Bjoern Werner are there. I'd be completely fine with them going LEO in round 2 for someone like Lemonier. I know Clemons was a UDFA, but the longer you wait, the lower the odds that you'll get a difference maker. And Seattle doesn't need a career backup- they need to swing for the fences here and hope to find a long term starter in future seasons. And I'm sure they will view this situation exactly like that.
_________________  "I believe there’s merit to the idea that once something in life becomes conventional, it’s no longer the safest path to success." -Matt Waldman "If everyone's thinking alike, no one's thinking." -Bill Walsh
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Lady Talon
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:11 pm |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
 |
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 3:55 am Posts: 322
|
|
Clemons wasn't the run defender he is now early in his career either.
Atlanta is a terrible excuse to lay the blame on Irvin, it was a DL wide failure due to injury. There's little a rookie 3rd down specialist in his first start matching up against a good left tackle could do, obviously he wasn't going to turn into Michael Strahan.
He needs time to develop into a starter, that's all. You underestimate our coaching staff if you don't think they can polish BI into Clem's role. He needs some serious upgrades or the other players to step up to succeed either way.
_________________ So, we have Calvin Johnson as Megatron, and Richard Sherman as Optimus Prime...when will Jim Harbaugh be anointed for the role of Starscream?
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
CANHawk
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:20 pm |
|
| * Gangnameister * |
 |
 |
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 8726 Location: Vancouver BC, Canada
|
Scottemojo wrote: Hey, I agree we need a pass rushing 3 tech badly. When I say we need another LEO, I am not saying a first round pick. But good pass rush 3 techs are damn rare, and if a impactful LEO player is there, grab him. In fact, I would lay odds that we are way more likely to go DE than DT in the first round.
This defense begins, and damn near ends with the ability to stop the run. And as long as Pete is here, that will be the case. Irvin might get better against the run, but any of you hanging his struggles with the run on being a rookie are basing your hopes for next year on something you can't prove, namely the fact that he will get better. Just like anybody thinking Quinn will be an improvement on Bradley is basing their hopes on something they can't prove.
Irvin has never in his life played a read and react position. Clemons was a linebacker in college. There is not a doubt in my mind that for that reason, and many more, Irvin is not, and will not be ready to simply replace Clemons adequately next year.
Not getting another LEO would be a betrayal of comPete. I'm not trying to argue that Irvin was not a liability against the run against Atlanta (because he clearly was) but I'm wondering if an upgrade at Will LB might help to compensate for Irvin's shortcoming in that area. If we had a real heady, athletic "Derrick Brooks type*" of Will over there taking out the trash, it would let Irvin play more of a "ballistic missile" "ears pinned back" style of head hunting DE than the read and react type they seemingly wanted him to play last year. If a DE is the very best player available where we pick in the draft, then I won't be upset if JS pulls the trigger. He knows best and nobody has ever complained about having too many capable pass rushers in the stable. However, I'd almost rather see us trade it for a mid rounder + a high pick next year or take a slight reach on a 3-tech who could possibly address our biggest need. Outside of that DT, I don't see us in need of a big talent injection anywhere else on the roster. *I say that like Derrick Brookses just grow on trees...
_________________   Papaki douchebag love turtle long time   What...? it's not like anyone banged a turtle or anything. Just chill.....
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Largent80
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:30 pm |
|
| NET Pro Bowler |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm Posts: 16421 Location: SoCal
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
SacHawk2.0
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:35 pm |
|
| *Host of .NET Awards* |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm Posts: 4949
|
Largent80 wrote: Tebow. This
_________________ Legal Notice: Any references made by the online entity know as SacHawk 2.0 or "Sac" in regards to "Currystopstheruns" being a pre-op tranny with an anal tampon fetish are entirely accurate.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Missing_Clink
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:03 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am Posts: 1097
|
FlyingGreg wrote: :roll: I disagree completely. Irvin is not suited for LEO, at least not yet. LEO isn't just pass rushing, it's holding the point of attack and playing the run as well - which Clemons does well. Irvin gets moved out of the play way too easily to fill that role. He is still a situational pass rush specialist. We can't force him into the role of LEO because we need it. We definitely need a LEO. The need for a pass rushing DT is mutually exclusive. I completely agree with this assessment. I certainly will not rule out the possibility that Irvin will improve, but Irvin did not look like an every down DE in that Atlanta game at all. He was terrible. However, as a pass rush specialist, he has shown that he can absolutely excel. I really would not have a problem if that is all the Irvin ever becomes, but I really think we need another starting caliber LEO for next season.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
CANHawk
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:33 pm |
|
| * Gangnameister * |
 |
 |
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 8726 Location: Vancouver BC, Canada
|
SacHawk2.0 wrote: Largent80 wrote: Tebow. This Not this. never this...
_________________   Papaki douchebag love turtle long time   What...? it's not like anyone banged a turtle or anything. Just chill.....
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
McGruff
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:37 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am Posts: 566 Location: Blaine, WA
|
kearly wrote: McGruff wrote: Agree we need another LEO . . . But cannot fathom that we are drafting one early or signing one big. I don't think we'll see anything in FA. As far as the draft goes, I think Seattle would have to strongly consider LEO in round one if Jarvis Jones or Bjoern Werner are there. I'd be completely fine with them going LEO in round 2 for someone like Lemonier. I know Clemons was a UDFA, but the longer you wait, the lower the odds that you'll get a difference maker. And Seattle doesn't need a career backup- they need to swing for the fences here and hope to find a long term starter in future seasons. And I'm sure they will view this situation exactly like that. Pretty sure they a confident their long term starter is already on the roster . . . Irvin .
_________________ <A>
<IMG></A>
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Tical21
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:36 am |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm Posts: 487
|
|
Irvin has MILES to go before he starts for a good defense. You can't sit back and diagnose a play in the NFL. If you were to time each play he played that wasn't a third-and-long from the time the ball was snapped until the time he reacted to what was happening in front of him, he would be on the short list of longest times by any DE in the NFL.
Even if you pencil him in as a productive every down player, you still have a huge need. Considering this team has very few holes that need to be addressed, their lack of consistent pass rush last year, and the insane importance of a pass rush in the modern NFL, yes, they need to spend some major resources on the position if they want to maintain their momentum defensively or possibly take a step forward.
_________________ Ummm, no sig to see here, especially not a sig referring to Tarvaris Jackson in any way.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
BirdsCommaAngry
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:55 am |
|
| NET Rookie |
 |
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm Posts: 234
|
|
We don't need losses. Those are bad. Especially in the playoffs. We tried that last year and it didn't work.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
bestfightstory
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:09 am |
|
| * Glitter over Knives * |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm Posts: 6439
|
Largent80 wrote: Holy shit folks, We have larger needs than a LEO.
I really don't want to see us draft the same position 2 years in a row with more obvious needs glaring us in the face.
Saying it again doesn't make any less INCORRECT.
_________________ "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Largent80
|
Post subject: Re: What we do not need Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:36 am |
|
| NET Pro Bowler |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm Posts: 16421 Location: SoCal
|
bestfightstory wrote: Largent80 wrote: Holy shit folks, We have larger needs than a LEO.
I really don't want to see us draft the same position 2 years in a row with more obvious needs glaring us in the face.
Saying it again doesn't make any less INCORRECT. You are just jealous that I beat you to it.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Users browsing this forum: -seanhawk-, 12thManNorth, akula, arghawkfan, Barthawk, Bill Assumpcao, Bobblehead, captSE, CornerHawk, drdiags, EastCoastHawksFan, Evil_Shenanigans, gmor, Hawk Finn, Hawken-Dazs, IcedHawk, jawilljr, jdblack, JimZorn10, Majestic-12 [Bot], MontanaHawk05, onanygivensunday, quadsas, rightbench, sam1313, Scottemojo, seahawksTopGear, Spleenhawk2.0, T-Sizzle, TheHawkster, Throwdown, tomahawk, TorontoHawk, uncle fester, Uppercase, Wiseguy and 233 guests |
| |
|
|
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
|
 |
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.
|