Who has a great D?

[pittpnthrs]

You might want to reconsider this thread LTH.

PS - I told you so

 

[LTH]

LMAO!!! Ok then... but truthfully u know as well as i do that this loss was not on the D.. they played well enough to win...no starting corners huge TOP to cards...this loss was on the O... but if u want to rub it in thats fine i have thick skin go for it

 

[pittpnthrs]

LMAO!!! Ok then... but truthfully u know as well as i do that this loss was not on the D.. they played well enough to win...no starting corners huge TOP to cards...this loss was on the O... but if u want to rub it in thats fine i have thick skin go for it

The defense was awful today. Allowing long sustained drives, cant tackle at all, cant cover (McCoy was 35/44 for 328 and 2 TD's), cant get off the field. The Hawks finally score to get them within 3 (due to Prater leaving 7 points off the board) and the defense immediately gives up another TD drive. The defense had every bit as much blame for that loss than the offense did. They stunk. Same old defense.

 

[Stud]

LOL! What? If not for 7 points Prater left off the board for the Cardinals, they would've scored 30 points against you. This seems like a weird thing to talk crap about.

 

[pittpnthrs]

LOL! What? If not for 7 points Prater left off the board for the Cardinals, they would've scored 30 points against you. This seems like a weird thing to talk crap about.

Well the defense made a turn and is now formidable. Never forget that.

 

[LTH]

LOL! What? If not for 7 points Prater left off the board for the Cardinals, they would've scored 30 points against you. This seems like a weird thing to talk crap about.

Well the defense made a turn and is now formidable. Never forget that.

This is true... i never said this was a great d i said this D was improving every week andbit was a formidable D...

 

[LTH]

LMAO!!! Ok then... but truthfully u know as well as i do that this loss was not on the D.. they played well enough to win...no starting corners huge TOP to cards...this loss was on the O... but if u want to rub it in thats fine i have thick skin go for it

The defense was awful today. Allowing long sustained drives, cant tackle at all, cant cover (McCoy was 35/44 for 328 and 2 TD's), cant get off the field. The Hawks finally score to get them within 3 (due to Prater leaving 7 points off the board) and the defense immediately gives up another TD drive. The defense had every bit as much blame for that loss than the offense did. They stunk. Same old defense.

I am on my 25th wedding aniversary dinner and so i dont have time to look at the stats but i think TOP was 40 cards 20 hawks so even if the hawks had a top 5 D there is no way that D is going to be competitive in thev4th quarter... especially having lost both starting corners...LTH

 

[TwistedHusky]

Well the defense got carved up by a backup QB.

And run all over.

But the offense did nothing to help.

Neither did the coaching staff.

So complaining about the D for this game seems misguided.

Plenty went wrong, with everything. The D was not great, or even good. But it wasn't the biggest problem today.

 

[Jville]

So the offense was on the field for 45 snaps and the defense was on the field for 77 snaps. That's 32 more snaps that the defense was on the field. The defense was exhausted by the fourth quarter again this week.

Is it time to consider taking a few roster spots away from the offense and giving those spots to the defense?

 

[John63]

Well the defense got carved up by a backup QB.

And run all over.

But the offense did nothing to help.

Neither did the coaching staff.

So complaining about the D for this game seems misguided.

Plenty went wrong, with everything. The D was not great, or even good. But it wasn't the biggest problem today.

This I agree with.

 

[pittpnthrs]

LMAO!!! Ok then... but truthfully u know as well as i do that this loss was not on the D.. they played well enough to win...no starting corners huge TOP to cards...this loss was on the O... but if u want to rub it in thats fine i have thick skin go for it

The defense was awful today. Allowing long sustained drives, cant tackle at all, cant cover (McCoy was 35/44 for 328 and 2 TD's), cant get off the field. The Hawks finally score to get them within 3 (due to Prater leaving 7 points off the board) and the defense immediately gives up another TD drive. The defense had every bit as much blame for that loss than the offense did. They stunk. Same old defense.

I am on my 25th wedding aniversary dinner and so i dont have time to look at the stats but i think TOP was 40 cards 20 hawks so even if the hawks had a top 5 D there is no way that D is going to be competitive in thev4th quarter... especially having lost both starting corners...LTH

I'm sick of hearing about the TOP all the time when the defense is at much fault for it as the offense. They cant get off the field.

Anyways here is the definition of formidable -

for·mi·da·ble
/ˈfôrmədəb(ə)l,fərˈmidəb(ə)l/
inspiring fear or respect through being impressively large, powerful, intense, or capable.
"a formidable opponent"

LOL. The Seahawks defense is not that. Just the opposite actually.

 

[chris98251]

LMAO!!! Ok then... but truthfully u know as well as i do that this loss was not on the D.. they played well enough to win...no starting corners huge TOP to cards...this loss was on the O... but if u want to rub it in thats fine i have thick skin go for it

The defense was awful today. Allowing long sustained drives, cant tackle at all, cant cover (McCoy was 35/44 for 328 and 2 TD's), cant get off the field. The Hawks finally score to get them within 3 (due to Prater leaving 7 points off the board) and the defense immediately gives up another TD drive. The defense had every bit as much blame for that loss than the offense did. They stunk. Same old defense.

I am on my 25th wedding aniversary dinner and so i dont have time to look at the stats but i think TOP was 40 cards 20 hawks so even if the hawks had a top 5 D there is no way that D is going to be competitive in thev4th quarter... especially having lost both starting corners...LTH

I'm sick of hearing about the TOP all the time when the defense is at much fault for it as the offense. They cant get off the field.

Anyways here is the definition of formidable -

for·mi·da·ble
/ˈfôrmədəb(ə)l,fərˈmidəb(ə)l/
inspiring fear or respect through being impressively large, powerful, intense, or capable.
"a formidable opponent"

LOL. The Seahawks defense is not that. Just the opposite actually.

The irony is they could be if allowed to play aggressive and down hill rather then on their heels back pedaling all day.

 

[pittpnthrs]

The irony is they could be if allowed to play aggressive and down hill rather then on their heels back pedaling all day.

I agree with you there. Still cant tackle or rush the QB though.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The biggest problem with the D is the sheer amount of draft capital we have dumped into it for years, just to get something that is barely palatable - if not middling to poor.

And yes, part of the problem is we regularly give up long drives which gives our offense precious few spins of the wheel.

Yes, our offense has the highest paid player. But we have dumped tons of draft and trade capital into the D to just make it barely worthwhile.

The D SHOULD be the strongest part of this team, because we keep spending on it.

The question is why?

 

[Somos doces]

I've been curious about something that yesterday's game seemed to highlight: Why does Seattle's defensive line always seem to rush straight ahead, all at the same speed? It looks like their collective goal is just to get upfield as quickly as possible, with no consideration of what their teammates are doing.

On the other hand, d-lines such as Arizona's appear to rush with actual strategy — stunts, guys opening lanes for their teammates, pushing upfield with the ends while hanging back a bit with the tackles in order to contain potential escape routes for the QB.

I'm not an Xs and Os expert, but what I'm seeing is the Hawks' defense madly rushing with no particular strategy, which often turns out how you might expect a mindless, every-man-for-himself push to turn out. Is anyone else seeing this?

 

[hox]

The irony is they could be if allowed to play aggressive and down hill rather then on their heels back pedaling all day.

Yes like they did against Peyton in 48.

They gave up the soft underneath stuff, but punished any receiver, TE, or back as soon as they caught the ball.

Now they give up the soft underneath stuff and there is no punishment. Instead, there is a gaping hole for a first down on 3rd and 10.

I miss Kam Chancellor.

 

[chris98251]

The irony is they could be if allowed to play aggressive and down hill rather then on their heels back pedaling all day.

Yes like they did against Peyton in 48.

They gave up the soft underneath stuff, but punished any receiver, TE, or back as soon as they caught the ball.

Now they give up the soft underneath stuff and there is no punishment. Instead, there is a gaping hole for a first down on 3rd and 10.

I miss Kam Chancellor.

I know people will argue oh the rules have changed, yet I see other teams punish our guys regularly and hit people. There is a line we can move to that will make a statement, just don't cross it frequently.

 

[massari]

So the offense was on the field for 45 snaps and the defense was on the field for 77 snaps. That's 32 more snaps that the defense was on the field. The defense was exhausted by the fourth quarter again this week.

Is it time to consider taking a few roster spots away from the offense and giving those spots to the defense?

Snap counts against the Cards:

Dunlap 17
Robinson 19
Mone 27
Neal 11
Barton 9

Hard to blame this on the D being exhausted.

 

[chris98251]

So the offense was on the field for 45 snaps and the defense was on the field for 77 snaps. That's 32 more snaps that the defense was on the field. The defense was exhausted by the fourth quarter again this week.

Is it time to consider taking a few roster spots away from the offense and giving those spots to the defense?

Snap counts against the Cards:

Dunlap 17
Robinson 19
Mone 27
Neal 11
Barton 9

Hard to blame this on the D being exhausted.

Mone is the only one that really isn't situational but still in a rotation, you kind of left out the other 10 or so guys............

 

[massari]

Mone is the only one that really isn't situational but still in a rotation, you kind of left out the other 10 or so guys............

Point being those guys would've had a lot more snaps if cardio was an issue