What is Wrong with Seattle's Secondary?
David Hawthorne shot the gap and tackled Felix Jones for a loss of three. It was the kind of quick turnaround Seattle needed to escape a potentially damning fumble. Then everything crumbled in front of Seattle's high priced secondary.
Roy Williams ran a ten yard curl and ran off Marcus Trufant. Tru was caught in his backpedal and Williams was wide open for the reception. Trufant managed to wrestle him down before the first, but Dallas was left with an easily convertible first and back in field goal range.
The Cowboys motioned Miles Austin into the backfield, using Marion Barber as the up back. They ran a toss sweep off of right end. Seattle's linebackers fought off and broke through Austin's lead blockers, but Austin exploited a crack to effort past the line. He was upright and exposed and stumbling through the marker when Jordan Babineaux sunk his helmet into his arms and popped the ball from his grasp. Seattle failed to recover. The play was called back on a Martellus Bennett hold.
Dallas was third and eleven and either about to pass or about to run and settle for the field goal. We know how this ends.
Seattle's persistent third down futility reminded me of something Brian Burke wrote in an email exchange.
My theory is that this may be why run defense appears so unimportant. Say teams are not operating at the game equilibrium, and passing is, on balance, a more lucrative strategy than running. In other words, there really is a considerable passing premium where the payoff for a pass is generally higher than a run, all things considered.
Having a good run defense would therefore be somewhat self-defeating. Take the 2007 Vikings defense that gave up only 3.1 yards per run (good) but 7.0 yards per pass (bad). Facing such a solid run defense, a good offensive coordinator is forced to pass more...which would be a far more effective thing to do in the first place, especially against a relatively weak pass defense. A team like the 2007 Vikings would essentially be forcing their opponent to unwittingly play a more efficient and effective strategy, all the while exploiting their own weakness.
Seattle's ability to force third and long by stifling the run game was undermining the overall defense. It's maddening. It's infuriating watching Patrick Crayton run past the marker and quick-curl without a man within three yards of him. Deon Grant was assigned over coverage and dropped deep. Josh Wilson was assigned under coverage and played the passing lane. Romo effortlessly split the two and found Crayton for 16 and the first.
The Cowboys reset with Austin in the backfield and Barber again the up back. This time Austin was a decoy. Leroy Hill chased him into the right flat, but Barber had the ball. Babineaux, David Hawthorne and Aaron Curry controlled the interior gaps and Babs shot up and tackled Barber after two.
Seattle blitzed five, dropping right defensive end Darryl Tapp into cover, and Curry closed on Jason Witten before he could receive. Witten twirled and juggled and dropped the ball.
It was again third and long. Seattle rushed seven, Trufant covered Austin, Austin initiated contact and Trufant was flagged for pass interference. A play later, Barber ran off right tackle for the touchdown. In seven plays, Seattle had forced two third and longs, it had forced a fumble it couldn't recover and a hold that negated the play, but it couldn't defend the pass. Why can't Seattle defend the pass?
0 recs |
24 comments
|
Comments
I don't even know what a good secondary looks like.
by jacobstevens on Nov 4, 2009 12:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Kelly Herndon, Kelly Jennings, Brian Russell, Michael Boulware.
by LantermanC on Nov 4, 2009 1:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Andre Dyson
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Nov 4, 2009 1:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because they can't generate a consistent pass rush
All the shut down corners in the world won’t help when the quarterback is given enough time in the pocket.
The main issue, imo, is the pass rush or lack thereof.
The secondary (heh heh) issue is safety play. I can’t remember the last time Seattle had good safety play. Maybe Grant/Russel 2007. Marquand Manual was pretty good I guess.
Finally, in the scenario described above, Seattle would have gotten a stop if not for a very questionable PI call. You can’t scheme or plan around blown calls. Nor fumble luck.
by Keasley on Nov 4, 2009 12:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It takes a wide receiver less than two seconds to run a 15 yard hook route
No pass rush can account for a wide open receiver.
by John Morgan on Nov 4, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How long does it take a receiver to run a 15 yard hook route
when pressed vs. zone?
Also, I do agree that it is somewhat the rush. As you mentioned earlier this week, Seattle is getting decent pressure on the edges, but we are not pushing the middle. Perhaps Mebane is a 1-tech and Bernard, or what Benard used to be, is sorely missed?
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 4, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Cowboys sacked Hasselbeck in less than a second on one play
Just sayin’
by Keasley on Nov 4, 2009 12:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Except for the drive where Hasselbeck was sacked twice in a row,
our pass protection was pretty adequate I thought. Especially when you compare it to the Arizona game.
by LantermanC on Nov 4, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd call that "induced passing."
This can work but we must force turnovers. The secondary should be able to sit on deep curls, slants, and out routes but nobody in our secondary outside of maybe Josh Wilson can be considered a ball hawk. So yes, I’d agree it is a self defeating strategy for us. We need that ever so slight inkling of doubt in the QB’s mind… God I want Eric Berry.
by Hawkhammer19 on Nov 4, 2009 2:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Zone defense.
I hate it.
Broncos 12 Bengals 7: The story of the 2009 Seattle Seahawks.
by SSreporters on Nov 4, 2009 4:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree with Keasley
Romo had a lot of time to throw the ball. It makes our secondary look worse than it is
by TheSteelersRuinedMyBirthday on Nov 4, 2009 4:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It's the same problem over and over and over and over and over and over
again.
It feels like we are cursed with a bad secondary, but I know things are better now than they were in 2003 (I don’t think someone like Marcus Robinson will torch us for over 10 catches and a couple of TDs). But you know you have problems when a defense does better on 3rd-and-2 than it would on 3rd-and-8, and this has been true for many years.
When will Seahawk coaches finally notice that a gap in the zone always open up AT THE EXACT SPOT where the 1st down marker is? I still remember the horrible drive by the Steelers in Pittsburgh only 2 seasons ago, when they converted a million thrid-and-longs during a drive that lasted over 10 minutes in the 3rd quarter. It’s like not a single thing has changed.
I’m not asking for 4 Champ Bailey’s-in-his-prime in the secondary, just some improvement; I just want to see a covered receiver near the hashmarks. Is that too much to ask?
by J.L. White on Nov 4, 2009 4:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but
What was the deal with that play where Austin ran right over Trufant? how is that PI?
by Ocho on Nov 4, 2009 7:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't know how the rule reads on plays like that
Is it like basketball, where the defender has to establish his position in order to draw a charging call?
by Mr Fish on Nov 5, 2009 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DB is not allowed to impede the receiver's progress
technically a foul, but an egregious call in my book. I have had a lot of empathy when that’s happened to the opposing team.
by jacobstevens on Nov 6, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What is Wrong with Seattle's Secondary?
Most of them are too short, one is not talented enough to start for another team in the NFL. One is rusty from being on the pup list all season. That leaves Lucas. One man doth not a secondary make.
by mrcoffee1969 on Nov 5, 2009 7:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Two short players out of six isn't most
And Jennings isn’t so much short as he is slight.
by Nate Dogg on Nov 5, 2009 7:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You were right about Jennings talent level though
I wish he was still good :(
by Nate Dogg on Nov 5, 2009 8:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Getting rid of Russell was an improvement
The problem is, we didn’t add anyone to replace him.
OK, we did add Lucas, but that’s just another example of going back to guys we’ve tried before.
by Mr Fish on Nov 5, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Short DBs are pretty common, but
I think the only short CB we’ve got is Wilson. The rest of the guys are at least 5’10" or 5’11".
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 5, 2009 4:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















