Defense: The Path to Redemption in 2010

by Fightfightfight on Dec 3, 2009 3:01 PM PST

A healthy Seattle defense is talented. Stacked at linebacker, deep in the defensive line and decent in the secondary. However, even when completely healthy, it does not dominate. Seattle cannot win on it's defense alone right now. That has been obvious this year. It cannot be on the field as long as our offense forces it to be and continue to stop NFL offenses. However, this defense we have right now would carry us to the playoffs if our offense was even slightly competent. Our offense is at least two years from winning us a game, but our defense is on the verge of taking us back to relevance. Teams that hang their hat on defense are consistent winners. The Steelers, the Ravens and the Titans (last year) are all evidence for why a great defense is better than all but the best offenses.

One of the main problems with the SeaFence is the utilization of our talent. Seattle has the group of LB's in the NFL in Hill, Tatupu, Curry, Hawthorne and Lewis and Herring. All of them (excluding Lofa who is too big and slow right now) can consistently get to the quarterback, and all are good against the run. One of the Hawks biggest issues this year has been their inability to apply consistent pressure. Any NFL quarterback can have a good game with no pressure in his face. DB's can only cover so long. This has led to our already depleted secondary getting exposed by quarterbacks having all day to pick their targets. The NFL is a passing league, and stopping the pass will win you more games than stopping the run.

Alas, I feel there is a solution! A way that Seattle's defense can take the Seattle offense to the playoffs in 2010!

First, The Scheme Change and Utilization of Our Talent:

Seattle should switch to a 3-4 defense. Yea, I said it! A 3-4 is about the linebackers, and that is something Seattle would benefit from. Hill, Lofa, Lewis/Hawthorne and Curry on the field at the same time would mean our four best defensive play makers could wreak havoc in beautiful four part harmony. Curry is Big. Curry is Fast. Curry is Smart. As a blitz-first linebacker Curry is 15+ Sacks. Lofa is a killer on the run, as is Hill, and Hawthorne just seems to find the ball. The pass rush generated from our linebackers causes hurried throws, tipped balls and incompletions/interceptions. So who do we do it with, and more importantly, who do we do it without?

Players to Drop (like bad habits):

Patrick Kerney. Doesn't fit the 3-4 and can no longer produce in the 4-3. He should go no matter what. Colin Cole. I can no longer watch him get pushed 3 yards back every play and my television is cracked from my throwing of a remote at him. D Lineman, especially in the 3-4, have to be able to hold ground against a double team, and Cole simply cannot. Redding/Bryant can also go. Also, Jennings can go, along with Malloy. If Jennings stays, he can battle with Wilson for the nickle/dime back position, where I think both could play well.

Now, Players to Add:

A dominant DT. Richard Seymour would be perfect. He is dominating at the position and takes up blockers like no other, which is essential in the 3-4. And he is a free agent. Next, a play maker in our secondary. Preferably a safety who can punish the middle and make plays all over the field. I move that we use our first overall pick on Taylor Mays. Mays is the hardest player in college football, and can do everything. He hits, he picks, he covers, he stuffs the run and can pressure the quarterback. Pete Carroll rarely has him do anything besides play center field, but it does not matter with his closing and pursuit speed.

Ideal 2010 Starting Lineup:

RDT: Lawrence Jackson/Bryant. NT: Mebane: LDT: Seymour/Redding ROLB: Leroy Hill. RMLB: David Hawthorne/ DD Lewis. LMLB: Lofa Tatupu LOLB: Aaron Curry. RCB: Ken Lucas/Josh Wilson.. SS: Deion Grant. FS:Taylor Mays. LCB: Marcus Trufant. Reed, Tapp and others could be used situationally.

And that, my True Blue (and neon green) friends, is one of the best defenses in the NFL.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'm probably a bit of a rare bird, here

I like the 4-3 better than the 3-4. I like the difference the talent, when it’s the right talent, brings. The 3-4 is about surprise. I like that it’s relatively easier and cheaper to assemble. But with the right talent in each, I think the 4-3 is better built for today’s NFL. More meat and speed up front and better suited for substituted coverage behind it. Going nickel in the 4-3 take a little away from your run defense, but going nickel in the 3-4 also takes a little away from your pass rush. Generally speaking.

So I like the 4-3 better. But I would be fine with a move to the 3-4. It’s crazy that Hawthorne could be the difference in the appeal that move would be. I’ve heard this suggestion by dozens, every year for the past 5 years. Maybe 6. never liked it. This time, it does make some sense, it does have some appeal.

But I think we’re too poor in talent and resources to dedicate more to DT. we’re currently 6th in DVOA against the run. We have talent, there, and it’s getting better. Maybe Mebane at 3-tech is a bad idea, I can’t tell. But utilized right we’re fine there.

The secondary is not simply lacking in pass rush up front. I don’t like what Grant’s become. We could use another fast young corner. Let who starts fall out of training camp, but we don’t need depth there, we need improvement from the starters.

But I’m with you, we have a lot of talent to build off of, on the defense. In either alignment.

by jacobstevens on Dec 3, 2009 3:26 PM PST reply actions

What?

All of them (excluding Lofa who is too big and slow right now) can consistently get to the quarterback

Lofa has done nothing but improve his blitzing but most of the time is asked to be the decoy.

abender20 hates freedom.

by Scruffy Lefty on Dec 3, 2009 3:37 PM PST reply actions

You lost me on Taylor Mays.

You’re pretty much saying that if we drafted Taylor Mays and Richard Seymour and switched to a 3-4 that it would improve our defense from below average, to top 10?

by LantermanC on Dec 3, 2009 3:45 PM PST reply actions

It's about the utilization of our talent

And seattle has 5-6 starting NFL linebackers and is only putting three on the field. Our defensive line is OK. Nobody on their is an elite lineman though.Mebane is good, Tapp is good, but has lost some of his pas rushing ability in order to be better against the run. Jackson is good. Kerney is BAD. Cole is BAD. Both are liabilities to the team and need to go even if we stay in the 4-3.
And when you look at this years draft and match it with our needs, I think Taylor Mays is our best fit. Not only is he probably the most gifted player in this years class, but safety is a pressing need. Not as pressing as QB maybe, but with all the very talented QB’s in the draft this year there should be excellent value in the 2nd-3rd round. And with two first round picks the Seahawks should be able to spend one on defense, where a rookie will make a quicker and likely stronger impact than most quarterbacks would.

by Fightfightfight on Dec 3, 2009 4:42 PM PST up reply actions

At QB, you don't take value

you take The Guy. Value is David Garrard in the 4th.

I get your point, though. We have a need at safety. But QB, tackle, skill position x 2. Free agency might alleviate one or two of those, but they’re bigger needs.

by jacobstevens on Dec 3, 2009 4:50 PM PST up reply actions

Clausen, Bradford, McCoy, Locker?

Pike, Mallet, Snead. All of these guys have great potential in the NFL, and assuredly some of them will fallout of the first. There are only two real NFL safeties in the draft IMO, and they are Mays and Berry. The rookie QB sits a year or two, (or at least SHOULD) and the safety enters a 3-way battle with babs and grant right away, and probably takes a spot. Either of those safeties have an opportunity to contribute in a big way immediately, while a QB at best takes two seasons to contribute positively. The question is where do we want Top 10 money tied up? On the bench or on the field?

It should also be noted that Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russel, Tim Couch and Ryan Leaf have all been “The Guy.” Tom Brady, Matt Hassleback, Drew Brees and Matt Schaub have all been “Value.” They were picked in the 6th, 6th, 2nd and 3rd, respectively.

by Fightfightfight on Dec 3, 2009 5:14 PM PST reply actions

If we're not going to be great next year, what's wrong with having a guy sit on the bench?

by LantermanC on Dec 3, 2009 9:23 PM PST up reply actions

I disagree about Taylor Mays

everything I’ve seen from him, and everything I’ve seen from professional scouts have said that he’s a great athlete, but he doesn’t have any ball skills, he just always goes for the big hit and it usually happens after the first down is already made. We don’t need any more liabilities getting off the field on 3rd down.

by Trepidation on Dec 3, 2009 8:10 PM PST reply actions

Yep, Eric Berry >>>>>Taylor Mays

It's Great to be a Florida Gator!

"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett

All I want for Christmas is Joe Haden, Eric Berry, and Nandamukong Suh in Seahawks blue.

by Wayward Llama on Dec 4, 2009 4:34 AM PST up reply actions

I thought Seymour was a 3-tech

If you’re proposing a switch to 3-4, would you move him to NT or DE? Surprised you’re willing to give up on Bryant. He’s, what, 23 or 24? Still 5 years from physical peak and should get better with experience. Looking forward to seeing him displace Cole myself.

by diehard82 on Dec 3, 2009 8:17 PM PST reply actions

He put Bryant in the rotation. Next to LoJack.

by LantermanC on Dec 3, 2009 9:24 PM PST up reply actions

Seymour's going to be tagged

He won’t sign long-term, but there’s no way even Oakland let him walk after giving up a 1st. I like the idea of moving to a 3-4, lack of consistent pressure on the QB has been a huge problem of ours for years, and a base 3-4 would seem to give us more of an edge. The big potential problem for me is Mebane’s development in the spot. He’s had to spend a whole off-season adapting to the 3-tech, and if we make the move he’s going to have to make an even more dramatic shift to NT. It seems like a lot of time learning, as opposed to polishing a specific skill-set to become a dominant presence in one position. I think Lo-Jack could adapt, and Bryant could possibly shift to end, so some of the pieces are there. Of course we’d also have the option of shifting to 4-3 on run-downs etc

by ciarannh on Dec 4, 2009 2:56 AM PST reply actions

Seymour is a DE.

I like the idea of using all the LBs, but finding the linemen required for running a 3-4 is very tough, esp. a good NT. There are some in this draft. If that key piece goes down, you are a hurtin’ unit. CLE w/out Rodgers or DAL w/out Ratliff, or the Jets w/out Jenkins would be in deep kimchee. When Hampton doesn’t play for PIT, they decline a great deal. Look at SD this year w/out the 6’3 348 NT Jamal Williams. They’ve brought in players cut from KC to help fill the void left by him.

I think our best chances of landing a great DT are with 4-3 players, such as Suh and G.McCoy.

Staying w/ a 4-3 doesn’t transform Curry into Harrison or Ware overnight (15+ sacks? Really?).

Staying w/ a 4-3 doesn’t mean we can’t run 3-4 looks and blitz-packages with our wealth of linebackers.

by Misfit74 on Dec 4, 2009 11:06 AM PST reply actions