There Is No Weak Side
by John Morgan on Aug 26, 2010 5:48 PM PDT
Email
PrintGreen Bay allowed the most sacks in the NFL last season.
1-10-GB 9 (8:44) 32-B.Jackson up the middle to GB 18 for 9 yards (36-L.Milloy).
Green Bay aligns one wide, left.The Packers offensive line surges right but the Seahawks are game, filling lanes and maintaining gaps. Except on the left. Andrew Quarless stuffs Nick Reed into the pile and opens a huge cutback lane. Brandon Jackson obliges.
Marcus Trufant is playing over the left tackle. He squares in the hole, but it's too big and ever widening and what was a sound position fails when Jackson cuts in and around Trufant. Lawyer Milloy cleans up.
I hate the Leo package. I really, really do. With all due respect to the Seahawks defensive brain trust, how the hell is this supposed to work?
2-1-GB 18 (8:11) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to GB 19 for 1 yard (97-E.Wilson).
E.J. Wilson fights off Breno Giacomini and plugs the hole. A generous spot awards Jackson the first.
1-10-GB 19 (7:32) 10-M.Flynn sacked at GB 12 for -7 yards (98-N.Reed).
My TV cut out for this play. No joke. I am sure it was suitably eternal.
2-17-GB 12 (6:55) (Shotgun) 10-M.Flynn scrambles left end ran ob at GB 20 for 8 yards.
Seattle sets in a 4-2 nickel, but Craig Terrill drops into a useless zone. Seattle rushes three and it costs them the sack.
Aaron Curry and Chris Clemons are the ends. Red Bryant plays nose. Curry and Clemons get after it. Clemons runs a pure edge rush, the kind the Colts use: he doesn't run towards the quarterback but straight and once he's outrun the tackle to the spot, then he turns the corner. Curry attempts a more traditional rush and powers through Giacomini. It's Curry that applies the fatal pressure. Clemons flashes free but doesn't close. Curry is right there ready to grasp and fell Flynn, but that extra blocker, that blocker that would have otherwise been assigned Terrill, the right guard, screams back and bullies Curry over and Flynn scrambles free for eight.
And, really, what's the use of putting Terrill into cover?
3-9-GB 20 (6:23) (Shotgun) 10-M.Flynn pass incomplete short right to 16-B.Swain (23-M.Trufant).
Tru shadows and tips away a pass targeting Brett Swain. And sometimes it's as simple as that.
22 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I would pin some of it on scheme.
Seattle has two sides of its defensive line. One with an end too big and clumsy to be much of a pass rusher. The other with an end too small and light to anchor against the run. The scheme matches the big end on the side with a tight end and the small end on the side without. Teams are motioning the tight end to the Leo side and undermining the entire scheme.
I have seen both Clemons and Reed single-blocked by a tight end and that puts an enormous amount of pressure on the rest of the defense. Seattle was supposed to mitigate the weakness of the Leo end by standing him up. So, instead of plowing into the blocker, a player could run around in space like a 3-4 outside linebacker. Instead, we have Clemons and Reed plowing into the tackle and disappearing from the play.
It just seems so futile, so DOA.
Maybe their hands are in the dirt on purpose
during the preseason. Trying not to show too much. Or is that just being too optimistic?
by ErictheHawksFan on Aug 26, 2010 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I was having similar thoughts.
Maybe it’s explainable as “just preseason”.
Maybe.
by John Edwards on Aug 26, 2010 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I really hope that's the case.
It makes sense, but wasn’t last year preseason “vanilla” defense too? That didn’t work out so great. They better have something more….effective.
by PhoneHomeET29 on Aug 27, 2010 2:06 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
See, when you first mentioned how the teams responded by just motioning the tight end.. I found that extremely alarming.
Just how do you respond to that? Do you just follow the tight end with the OLB over him and everyone adjusts assignments, or what?
In this case, I would have appreciated a replacing the Leo with a more traditional DE who can fight through the addition of a TE on his side, perhaps rendering the motioning of the tight end a little pointless in the first place, and a DT to go with Mebane who can draw double teams.
Maybe it could work, with a certain combination of talent on the D-line, and let’s face it: The Seahawks, outside of Mebane, don’t have anyone who requires serious game-planning against.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 26, 2010 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Adjustments maybe able to be made.
What if Clemmons and Curry switched spots at that time. I wonder if Clemmons could play LB while Curry rushes freely. Just a thought, I’m sure there’s flaws in that though. Curry seems like he would be able to power through the TE and others easier than Clemmons.
by PhoneHomeET29 on Aug 27, 2010 2:11 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
That kind of switch would be better with Davis/Curry
instead of Clemons/Curry I think.
Though they sink through the Sea, they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion...
Clemons dropped into coverage later in the game and looked alright.
Probably not something you want to ask him to do very often though.
The more I think about it
the more I’m convinced that this Leo experiment is simply that, and we’re trying to create pressure through scheme this year because we lack the talent to run a true 3-4. I think we’re headed in that direction based on the personnel we’ve gotten for the d-line. We’re just waiting to draft a true NT and a true 3-4 DE to make it work, then we’ll transition fully. This just seems like a tweener hybrid to soften the transition when we make that happen and in the meantime, maybe hopefully catch lightning in a bottle in our pass rush.
Or am I the only one seeing it this way?
by ErictheHawksFan on Aug 26, 2010 8:06 PM PDT reply actions
Not far-fetched.
Unlikely.
Carroll’s USC teams traditionally employed a base 4-3 defensive philosophy. The only notable exception was in 2008, when USC was more of a 3-4, but that was due more to the amount of talent they had on hand at USC in their LB corps.
With the Seahawks, it would go beyond just getting a true 3-4 NT and 3-4 DE. They’d need to find a premiere pass-rushing OLB in the DeMarcus Ware or Shawne Merriman mold. And perhaps another linebacker. Then they’d have to acquire the depth behind those players.
And usually, teams who make a coaching change, the new coach tends to reveal what the base defensive philosophy he will be carrying over to the team is. I’d have thought that if Carroll was serious about transitioning to a 3-4 defense, he’d have said so, and not have spent all offseason with John Schneider making all the personnel moves that they have on the defensive side of the ball to try and fit with his 4-3 Leo scheme.
Then, they’d have to install the philosophy and teach it. It would be the Seahawks’ 4th philosophy in as many years if they made that change last year.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 26, 2010 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I see what you're saying
It would require a crap ton to build a true 3-4 base defense from what we have. I’m not certain it’s what we should do by any means. I just look at the way we’ve been lining up and envisioning a point where that Leo stands up and moves around prior to the snap… wouldn’t one of the DT’s adjust over to allocate some ass to that side so we don’t get completed mowed over on that side in the event of an audible? I reckoned that’s why we’ve invested in larger d-linemen to help block some holes and re-direct RB’s towards our LB’s. That to me sounds like a 3-4 mentality, at least when we’re actually in that Leo package. In that mold it doesn’t sound so different from a 3-4 defense. I don’t see us transitioning into a 3-4 base defense any time soon, but to me at least it seems like we’re more in that direction than we have been in recent years.
by ErictheHawksFan on Aug 26, 2010 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Except our second DT is terrible.
Mebane is amazing and awesome in every way. But he has no real support inside (or outside for that matter). That’s why many of us have been so worried about the DL. Cole is terrible unless he’s only single blocked, and even then it’s iffy. And the depth is worse. I’m hopeful Vickerson can step up (or the DT we got from the 49ers, his name escapes me at the moment), but other then that our interior is largely a steaming pile of crap.
Now with more lemon bars!
And I should mention that Mebane is more of a 4-3 DT
and not a 3-4 NT. A 3-4 requires a big NT that can soak up all the pressure. Mebane isn’t built like that. He might be able to bulk up and do it, but I highly doubt it. That’s just a radical change for a player at the NFL level. So if we would have to go hunting for a NT if we went to a 3-4, which is pretty damn hard these days. Because the 3-4 is so popular, true 3-4 NTs are very hard to find.
Now with more lemon bars!
I agree with that assessment
Were we to go to a 3-4 we’d either need to try and convert Mebane to a DE (highly unlikely) or move him for a DE and draft a big ‘ol NT. Not sure that’s entirely the direction we want to go.
Vickerson’s looked disruptive thus far but I’ve seen him mainly taking the under tackle role. He’s got the size to be a 1-tech like Cole, and I’d kind of like to see how he’d perform in that role opposite Mebane. The DT from the Niners you’re thinking of is Balmer.
by ErictheHawksFan on Aug 26, 2010 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions
What hurts the most
is in Mike Kahn’s mailbag, he actually said TIMMAY tried to trade up to select Demarcus Ware. Makes me a sad panda that a deal couldn’t be worked out, if it were true.
by Trepidation on Aug 27, 2010 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions
.
My TV cut out for this play. No joke.
No, your TV was fine. Nick Reed just warped reality.
At the snap of the ball Nick was in his stance, a moment later, and without any visible movement, he was in the backfield making the sack. Unfortunately, video camera devices work by recording in the visible light spectrum and transmitting that information. Reed’s reality warping pass rush move actually sucked all of the light and sound back into the spot he vacated, thus your black screen. The physics of it get really complicated…
by John Edwards on Aug 26, 2010 8:22 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
There are a couple schematic adjustments to be made
when the TE motions across the offense. Let’s say the line, starting at the offensive weak side is Clemons, Vickerson, Me! Bane! and Bryant. The LB’s, also starting from the weak side, are Heater, Tats and Curry. If the TE motions over Clemons, I see a few possibilities for adjustments.
Firstly, the line shifts a half gap towards the TE after he motions. Curry, now on the weakside, goes for the weakside blitz, filling the responsibility of Clemons. Clemons has two options. With the line shifted to the strongside, he will likely have a 1 on 1 with the TE. He can either blitz, sending a total of 5, or he could slide out into the flat.
These are the simpler adjustments that I see being made. It would not surprise me if the motioning of the TE triggered a lot of man coverage blitzes for the hawks, with Tats, Heater and Curry looking to get after the QB when the leo is compromised.
by Fightfightfight on Aug 27, 2010 10:11 AM PDT reply actions
Very good accessment!
I just think we are staying vanilla in the preseason as to not totally tip our hand.
The future is looking better
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
