RolandDeschain":1k7jjjko said:
Erebus":1k7jjjko said:
Losing Avril isn't exactly like losing JJ Watt,
While this is true, remember what happened in Super Bowl 49 when Avril went out. Night and day difference; Patriots all of a sudden looked worthy of being on the field that day. If only Edelman had been forced to follow the concussion protocol like he was supposed to...
While I get what you are saying, we didn't have Frank Clark nor Sheldon Richardson in 2014.
Remember with Mebane on I.R... 9 or 10 games in. Jordan Hill as well 12 to 13 games in. Our starting unit was Tony McDaniel and 35 Year Old Kevin Williams supported by 1-2 street free agents like Demarcus Dobbs and David King (both of whom were lengthy but undersized listed around 280. Bennett had to play inside almost exclusively on every pass rush. FB Tukuafu also saw snaps.
Today, Richardson and Reed are developing into an elite inside force. Both strong against the run, both capable of disrupting the pocket. Seahawks have solid depth with promising rookie Naz Jones, Garrison Smith, and inside/out capable Quentin Jefferson. No, not the greatest or most experienced depth but certainly more upside than what we had in the Superbowl.
Health withstanding. Knock on wood.
The DE rotation looks a lot stronger as well than it did in '14. That rotation was only 3 deep with Bennett, Avril, and Irvin who starting at SAM. Dobbs probably saw most of his snaps at DE.
Bennett and Clark are an above average starting bookends. Both can be absolutely dominating at times. I know Bennett is hindered but we have players that can limit his snaps.
I've liked what I've seen from Smith but more so in Jackson. Both of these players have the most to learn from incoming Hall of Famer, Dwight Freeney.
Smith needs to develop and refine his pass rush technique especially his speed rush.
Jackson looks adept at applying what he does in practice and put it on the field. I want Freeney to hopefully take Jackson under his wing as a mentor and teach Jackson the art of the spin.
Freeney isn't going to come in and be great or a dominant force but he has tremendous value in his experiences. Freeney has played in 3 Superbowls, and has been to NFC CG the last 2 years. He's battled and saw significant snaps against the very best of the NFC. For a mid-season free agent addition, that's pretty solid.
Even if you don't truly believe in Freeney' s impact, look at Atlanta this season specifically Vic Beasley who was not as dominant as he was last year. I'm betting Freeney was a great influence in the lockerroom, in the classroom, on the practice field, on the sidelines, and on the field.
That's what I'm looking forward the most with Freeney, not really the impact on the field but more so in all the other areas of the game. And DF might fit in sooner rather than later. Quinn's scheme isn't far from the Seahawks. Quinn's philosophy isn't far from Carroll's. That and Freeney as also played the Seahawks, 4 times in the last 2 years. Freeney probably has more experience with the Seahawks than he himself possibly knows or he does and that's better.
It's also been reported today that Dion Jordan will now begin to work his way back on the field as in practicing.
TL
R:
Seahawks DL depth as it stands right now is much deeper than it was in 2014. It has the bodies to still be a dominate front without Avril. The biggest thing though, where the Seahawks lost Avril in the Superbowl. With little chance to adjust.
Seahawks have another 12 to 13 games to develop, adjust, and adapt to missing Avril.
Furthermore:
The last 6 quarters Avril has played, Seahawks D allowed 49 points. Not even counting the safety vs Indy.
In the 10 quarters Avril has been out, after adjustments, the defense as allowed only 17 points. That's about 1/3rd of the points in one less game.
It's not all on Avril nor blaming him for bad performamce,... im just saying... Seahawks seems to be adjusting fine without Avril and with Clark.
Biggest issue now moving forward is improving and developing the depth, in case of more injuries.
Note: At some point I went on a tagent that was more for general discussion, rather than it seeming trying to enlighten the quoted party. .
