Kevin Hobbs and Other Students of Jim Mora
When your head coach is your former secondary coach, it's troubling when the secondary screws up major. When your team allowed the most passing yards in the NFL last season, it's troubling when the secondary screws up major. When the team retains the two people that coached that secondary, promoting one, it's troubling when the secondary screws up major. When the team hires a respected secondary coach, Tim Lewis, to replace the new head coach, Jim Mora, it's troubling when the secondary screws up major. It's troubling even if it's insignificant. It was a major screw up that laid the rails for San Diego's first scoring drive. And though it was the second team, and though Kevin Hobbs might not make the team, if there's one unit the Seahawks should have invested enough resources in to be competent top to bottom, it's the secondary. When clear incompetence is demonstrated, it's troubling.
Only three things stuck out from this drive and only one is revealing.
3. Kelly Jennings swung about Vincent Jackson's hips in the most coquettish manner. Jennings is ever the tease.
2. Will Herring was covering the wrong man/location before correcting to tackle Jacob Hester on the goal line. I am not too worried about Herring's awareness against the pass, so seeing him make two good open field tackles and against two reasonably tough runners, Jackson and Hester, is encouraging.
1. San Diego runs play action. Hobbs covers Michael Bennett releasing into the flat, loses that responsibility when Herring assumes it and then begins backpedaling. Philip Rivers passes it over his head, he turns and tracks, but Kris Wilson receives for 31 and strides out of bounds untouched. Hobbs looks like the one in the wrong place without a man to cover, but I'm not sure.
Norv Turner runs a lot of unbalanced formations. The above play was shifted right. Both wide receivers were set right and the backfield was in a right offset I. Only Wilson was on the left. It certainly screwed up Seattle's coverage scheme. Herring tracked Bennett and then broke back to cover Wilson. Maybe he reacted to Rivers eyes or maybe Wilson was his assignment. Wallace was doubling someone in the end zone, but after the reception that's the first direction Hobbs looked. Pass rush begets good secondary play, but good secondary play abets the pass rush. When a receiver is wide open thirty yards down the field, no pressure is enough to stop the completion.
It could have been one man's screw up, or it could have been failure by the entire secondary, but no matter the insignificance of the play, it's troubling.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
But Hobbs was great in practice!
Or something.
As far as point 1, I knew I saw this somewhere, took me awhile to find the link, but per Danny O’Niel and according to Mora this should clarify things a little:
First, we start with a verdict regarding cornerback Kevin Hobbs, who was largely pinned for blame when tight end Kris Wilson caught a 32-yard pass. After all, Hobbs was the closest defender and the one the cameras caught looking around all flustered.
Except there was a reason he was flustered. Coach Jim Mora said Monday Wilson wasn’t Hobbs’ responsibility on that play.
“The secondary didn’t blow that coverage, that was a linebacker,” Mora said.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawksblog/2009683397_site_seeing_tue.html
Still a defensive breakdown, and I share the same concerns you listed with pass defense / Mora secondary coach. It’s unnerving. As is Mora’s defensive track record, though I hope they put these nerves to rest this year. Having a good second corner (Lucas) and Wilson where he ought to be at this stage in his career should help immensely.
So Hobbs was supposed to cover the RB
and Herring was supposed to cover the lone wideout to the left?
by jacobstevens on Aug 19, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
It's troubling that Trufant is still out
but I’m a little more at ease after reading how the PUP list works. I guess they want that extra roster spot right now and Trufant fully healthy before they give up that extra roster spot.
I had the same feelings from that game
The secondary was very unimpressive. I didn’t expect a complete turnaround, but I expected improvement. I didn’t see much.
Granted, Trufant didn’t play. He is the cornerstone of our secondary.
Let’s all hope and pray that his back fully heals before the season.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
At first I thought you were being alarmist so I went back to Mora's first days as a secondary coach
Rankings are for NY/A. Ideally you’d want ANY/A but whatever.
San Diego – Secondary Coach
89 – 4th
90 – 14th
91 – 24th
New Orleans
92 – 1st
93 – 4th
94 – 22nd
95 – 22nd
96 – 13th
San Francisco
97 – 1st
98 – 22nd
(DC) 99 – 31st
00 – 29th
01 – 14th
02 – 21st
03 – 17th
Atlanta – Head Coach
04 – 19th (up from 31st)
05 – 8th
06 – 31st
Seattle – Secondary
07 – 9th (up from 17th)
08 – 26th
Seems kind fo up and down.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 19, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
If you mean they start up and consistently trend downward then yes
I don’t really know what his talent situations were, who came and who went, and NY/A is sacks and yard instead of ANY/A which accounts for picks, sacks and yards which would seem more appropriate. It’s not anything more than a cursory look at pro-football-reference but it kind of continues the them of things that are troubling.
Mora's first year will be his best
If you follow history. He’ll take a well coached team and hype them up, get them playing at a level they’ve never played at before. Then, a la Wade Phillips, the structure beneath them that they once knew will crumble and the team will sag back to the pack. Rankings aside, the success on the scoreboard goes hand in hand with those rankings.
Holmgren built a solid foundation. Maybe Mora learned enough from him, and with the help of Ruskell can sustain that foundation. But history says- the fire on this team will not be as bright in the future as it is today.
That sounds a bit illogical.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 19, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Everything in context...
Two points to make here.
First, last year’s secondary was abysmal as the entire team was abysmal, but they weren’t any more abysmal than the rest of the team. However, they looked more abysmal because of their situation — the spotlight was on them. The offense was horrendously injured and ineffective, and couldn’t stay on the field, resulting in a tired defense. The defense had injuries as well, though not so many as the offense — but I clearly remember our top three defensive players starting the season with a giant Q-tip where one of their hands should have been. One large contributing factor to the secondary’s appearance of abysmality was the freelancing and undiscipline of Julian Peterson. The guy was fun to watch when he made plays, but last year he didn’t make plays nearly enough to make up for his mistakes. He was fundamentally unsound, and he left assignment gaps that had to be compensated for by the other LBs, which then had to be compensated for by the corners… $#!T rolls downhill, and our secondary was stuck at the bottom. This year, with our front seven being far more disciplined and effective, our back four are going to look a whole lot better. Oh yeah — the fact that someone else besides Marshall is drawing up schemes and assignments can’t hurt, either.
Second, if we understand that the poor performance of last year’s secondary isn’t directly related to the performance of this year’s secondary, we need to stop linking the two. Yes, Mora was the seconday coach last year and he’s now the head coach. Mora himself has stated that the secondary was horrible last year (he mentioned that one of the other D coaches watching film was hesitant to criticize the secondary play shortly after he was hired exactly because the current head coach was last year’s secondary coach, and when Mora saw it, he demanded the coaches say exactly what they think even if it reflected poorly on him). But we now have new secondary coaches, new defensive schemes, new personnel up front, and all we have to go on this season is a bunch of practices and one pre-season game. A bit to early to draw conclusions, good or bad, and especially too early to hit the panic button IMO.
Christ, MY FACE!
4-5 sentences per paragraph, plz. Those two bricks hit me in the face without prejudice.
I liked and agree with the second brick. It’s too early to panic, but I think John is simply pointing out that the team shows signs of residual stinkage in the secondary.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Aug 19, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
"signs of residual stinkage in the secondary."
Especially considering that (harken back to brick one) the front 7 did just fine for the bulk of the San Diego game (citing our 4 sacks and stiff run defense) and time of possession wasn’t an issue.
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
Nah. They looked the part but they were as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
It was exciting to see what they were doing, and they showed promise for a lot of disruption during the season when it’s gameplanned and counts, but ultimately the first string gave Rivers and Volek all the time they needed. The second string made some good plays, and made it a little harder, but Whitehurst in the end made some noise and didn’t look bad.
The run defense looked good but the pass rush left a lot to be desired, as in hitting home, in the first half.
by jacobstevens on Aug 19, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions

by 























