Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

Brandon Browner, Walter Thurmond, Richard Sherman & the Seahawks' Remaining Defensive Backs

With the news that Marcus Trufant has been placed on the injured reserve it got me wondering a bit how the Seahawks might use their remaining cornerbacks and safeties, and if they might change up the schemes or philosophies. I went back and re-watched the Seahawks/Giants game because Troof was out of that game and it might give us a glimpse of what to expect going forward.

What I found wasn't too surprising. The Hawks run out of their base or nickel package, with little variation in personnel (mostly on the line - Hargrove in for Branch/Mebane, Brock in for Red/Clemons), almost the entire time. Kam Chancellor and Earl Thomas see nearly every snap, as does Brandon Browner

If the Hawks continue with this methodology, you'll see Brandon Browner at RCB and a combination of Walter Thurmond and Richard Sherman at LCB. In the nickel, Sherman takes Thurmond's spot on the outside at LCB and Thurmond moves to the nickel, taking the place of K.J. Wright, typically. 

The first time I saw the Hawks put in anybody else was when the Giants went into 2-minute drill at the end of the first half, following an untimely Tarvaris Jackson interception. Kennard Cox was the defensive back in this series, and he both blitzed and dropped back on different plays as the Giants marched down the field. I'm not sure why he got the nod over Sherman in that drive, but that's what happened. The Giants scored a touchdown. I didn't see him in any package outside of special teams for the rest of the game. 

Here's one example, with Cox in the slot as the nickel, Browner at RCB, and Thurmond at LCB. 

1_medium

One thing that was interesting about this game was that I didn't see the Seahawks use their "Bandit" package one time. They made a living off of that last year but it's been pretty insignificant for Gus Bradley this season. Why? Well, it could have to do with a lot of things: philosophical changes, personnel changes, and opponents to name a few reasons. Roy Lewis and Lawyer Milloy were studs in the bandit last season, as was Jordan Babineaux, very effective on blitzes and in coverage, thus masking the defense very well. 

But with the three of them gone the Hawks have moved away from it. This is something that Beekers has brought up during the early part of the season and is worth noting again, and it will be interesting if they start phasing it back in as Roy Lewis gets healthy. 

Here are some looks you'll see the Seahawks in:

Star-divide

5_medium

Their base package. Four linemen, three linebackers. Browner is at RCB and Thurmond at LCB. You can see that Thurmond is playing up close on the line and Browner is off as the Giants WR goes into motion. I didn't keep exact track of the numbers, but Thurmond/Browner play both press and off-man coverage fairly evenly, mixing it up and keeping the offense guessing.

2_medium

Here's a look at their Nickel package. Richard Sherman is LCB, Browner RCB. I've used arrows to indicate that Thurmond, the nickelback here, is responsible for the outside slot receiver, and Kam Chancellor has his eyes on the inside slot.

3_medium

Here is it flipped to the other side. The Giants lived in this formation.

Thoughts:

The Giants finished with 420 yards of passing so the first thing you might ask yourself is, 'why didn't the Seahawks roll out more dime/Bandit packages to stop Eli?" Well, first off, if you take away that ridiculous Victor Cruz reception that should have been knocked down or intercepted by Kam Chancellor (or could have, in fairness), Manning's passing total goes down to a less eye-popping 352 yards. 

Second, with this defense that is geared toward stopping the run on first and second down and forcing a third down situation, the Seahawks actually did quite well for themselves when given that opportunity - the Giants went 1 for 12 on third downs, and that one success was on that ridiculous Victor Cruz reception. Anyway, you can make the argument that the defense did, more or less, what it was designed to do: Bend but don't break.

They limited the Giants to 11 points in the second half, - respectable-, and did enough to get the win. They forced the Giants to be one-dimensional by holding them to 2.8 yards per carry on 25 rushes. That probably wouldn't have been the case if we would have seen the bandit and dime stuff more often. 

I thought that Thurmond, Sherman and Browner played well - Thurmond broke up at least two passes and looked to have the quickness we've been hoping for. Sherman played well enough - I didn't notice any egregious mistakes. I'm excited about this trio.

Overall though, it is interesting that the Seahawks have almost completely abandoned the Bandit, something that was such a staple last season. The first time I saw Atari Bigby was in the fourth quarter, on one play. That's not official, but my perception. I never saw Jeron Johnson

It is of note though that Byron Maxwell has been hurt, Malcolm Smith has been hurt, and Roy Lewis has been on the PUP. These three guys figure to be players in those packages so perhaps when they're healthy we'll see a resurgence of the DB-heavy packages? Bigby played fine in Chancellor's absence against the Falcons so perhaps he'll see more time?

I have no thesis or theory. I'm just bringing it up and I'm anxiously awaiting the rest of the season so we can find out. 

Comment 26 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

No huddle offense is back in favour this year

And that is one way to combat the Bandit line-up – prevent the defensive team getting those personnel on the pitch. On that basis, it may be a good thing not to be reliant on it

by Brunanburh on Oct 19, 2011 9:08 AM PDT reply actions  

I imagine that we'll see some more bandit package as the season progresses.

We’ve got a lot of young players stepping in, ie.. rookies, and second year players. Whereas last year we had players that had experience in roaming around, especially in Babs and Herring. Mix the lack of experience and a shortened offseason with a pretty intricate defensive design in the bandit package and you’ll get some pretty messy coverage.
 
Maybe Bradley is scouting his own team and waiting to see where each piece will fit? I like the idea of the bandit package with bigger cornerbacks that can hit like Browner, Thurmond, and speeders at LB like (a healthy) Malcolm Smith and the coverage ability of Wright. Things could be good once they fit it all together.

by RawkEmHawkEmBirdbots on Oct 19, 2011 10:17 AM PDT reply actions  

The problem with the Bandit is that it takes a lot of healthy bodies to work right

If you don’t have the quality depth (and/or flexibility) in the defensive backfield, then you’re going to have a lot of weak spots.

The other issue is the no-huddle offense: offenses can use it to keep opposing defenses in the same personnel group for multiple plays. The Bandit is going to be much more vulnerable to the run on an early down than on 3rd-and-long.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Oct 19, 2011 11:18 AM PDT reply actions  

With Trufant out, who is the oldest DB on our D?

Aside from Bigby? Browner?
This team is so young, and growing together every single game and practice. Can’t wait to see them develop moving forward.

by GriffinNW on Oct 19, 2011 12:09 PM PDT reply actions  

Just dismissing that Cruz ball because it was ridiculous is disingenuous

Lots of games have balls like that. This game had multiple. If you dismiss that catch, you’re also dismissing Browner’s pick six. Luck is a factor, not one to dismiss.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Oct 19, 2011 12:10 PM PDT reply actions  

The issue is whether the stats are predictive of future outcomes

While any given pass play is unlikely to result in an interception, a given defense may have a high likelihood of intercepting a given INT-prone QB. While the big Cruz pass was successful, the coverage was solid enough that you’d probably ask your DBs to play the same way, given similar circumstances.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Oct 19, 2011 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, yeah, true - and I didn't mean to completely dismiss it...

Just point out that the ‘luck’ factor, rather than lack of skill or personnel or poor scheming accounted for a very conspicuous 70 yards and a touchdown. Your point is correct, you can’t just ignore the lucky plays because they happen a lot, but when things like that happen you can’t necessarily negatively judge your defense on it.

"Scored a Deer Head" - Scruffy Lefty
Field Gulls | Follow me on the Twitters

by Danny Kelly on Oct 19, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I'm not sure if I'd call it "luck," exactly, but I think we're on the same page

If you have a 95% of doing something successfully (say shooting a free throw or defending a pass) and you are unsuccessful in a single attempt, does that make you a bad at it? If you have a 5% chance of doing something (like making a full-court shot or intercepting a pass or sacking a QB) you might not be able to do it on any given attempt, but the likelihood of doing it over the course of 20-30 attempts is relatively high.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Oct 19, 2011 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

So the fact that you miss a free throw or make an interception is less about luck

but more about probability and a low sample size.

(I think I forgot the point I was trying to make a few metaphors ago)

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Oct 19, 2011 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

hahaha

I think we’re on the same page though. Like you said, Kam did what he was taught to do, was in position to make the play, which he would probably do 9 times out of 10. Whether it’s luck or what, I don’t know. Sometimes the ball bounces your way, sometimes it doesn’t. It doesn’t mean that Kam is bad though, I think.

My overarching point was that the pass defense numbers looked awful but this pass defense might not be as awful as the numbers would suggest. Maybe.

"Scored a Deer Head" - Scruffy Lefty
Field Gulls | Follow me on the Twitters

by Danny Kelly on Oct 19, 2011 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes

To put it another way (and confuse the issue even more) it’s a “process versus results” argument. The process on the play was very good and the results were very bad.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Oct 19, 2011 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hate to say it, 'cause I still really like the guy,

…but Curry, alone, is accountable for a large chunk of those yards. NY’s last couple drives most of the length of the field, could’ve been far shorter had there been better LB on TE coverage.

It was kind of a bitter sweet victory to me; the sweetness goes without saying, but I had to watch a frustrating, yet still favorite, Hawk, and the only remaining active player I have a jersey of, literally play his way off of the team.
I think Cox will be out upon Roy’s return. I do remember seeing Johnson on the field, but I don’t remember for what situation.

Back on point though, it is amazing how quickly the secondary has gone from being the most discouraging and agonizing part of the team, to being the most promising and exciting.

by Dizzy Saturn on Oct 19, 2011 12:32 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

>>>Sings:<<<

What a difference a Kelly Jennings maaakes….

by nucleard on Oct 19, 2011 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ribbit.

Rrrrrrr-ibit.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Oct 19, 2011 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Am I wrong in thinking that the Bandit was implemented

As a crutch for negligable pass rush from the front four, especially after Mebane and Red were injured (no rush from Cole). The Seahawks don’t seem to have those problems yet this year.

As was mentioned, they’re doing awfully well at stopping 3rd down conversions in the base package.

by Groundhog on Oct 19, 2011 2:38 PM PDT reply actions  

Interesting, but not necessarily relevant

If you consider the Bandit is used most often on 3rd and long.

The first article on pass rush would be more relevent if it included 3rd down conversions. It’s not much use to say the Seahawks are giving up more yards than any other team at 8+ yards per pass play if the down is 3rd and 15. I also didn’t see QB pressures in there?

by Groundhog on Oct 19, 2011 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Exactly what I was thinking...

I seem to remember the Bandit in conjunction with 1 MLB and 4 down linemen that consisted primarily of Brock, one of the many replacement NTs, Curry and Clemons. I think it was more a function of personnel available and their respective strengths. As DK states “Roy Lewis and Lawyer Milloy were studs in the bandit last season, as was Jordan Babineaux, very effective on blitzes and in coverage, thus masking the defense very well.” Curry was very capable of occupying an interior blocker to free up the DB blitzes and Brock or Clemons one on one on the outside. To date this year, the experience and strength of our D is in the line and LB (at least Heater and Hill). Correct me if I am wrong, but Hill is playing on 3rd and long in the nickel and dime packages.

PC is raising Ground Chuck from the dead!

by oldschoolhawk on Oct 19, 2011 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bandit is 3 down linemen and a MLB

And seven DBs.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Oct 19, 2011 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SEA!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Help Me Understand How Irvin Will be Used
Turbin_game_uni_small
Hand Size and Quarterbacks
Einstein_www-txt2pic-com_small
On Pete Carroll and Previous QB Competitions

Recent FanPosts

Small
Just How Much Do Close Games Matter Anyway?
Horsey_small
Results from the 2012 Armchair GM Championship
Tasb_logo_small
Consider it Spun: The 5 Worst Moves of Carroll and Schneider Era in Seattle
Small
Plaxico Burress: viable option, or over the hill?
Small
Portland Seahawks Fans: Where You Be?
Small
Should Seattle Go After Kellen Winslow?
Small
Football where the head is sacred
Horsey_small
What Doug Baldwin Had to Say About Seahawk QBs (or How DB Throws MF Under the Bus)

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor/Lead Writer

Screen_shot_2012-05-04_at_10 Danny Kelly

Staff Writers/Editors

Screen_shot_2011-01-05_at_9 Scruffy Lefty

Small BrianL

Avatar_small Benne

Olympiabeer_small Tyler Jorgensen

Madhatter_small Thomas Beekers

Profilepic_small DJ C-Raig

897267_o_small Kenneth Arthur

Sbn_pic_small Jacson Bevens

Photo__1__small Charlie Todaro

Staff Writers

Small Joshua Kasparek

Photo_small Matt Erickson

Davis_small Davis Hsu

Profile2_small Rob Staton

208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small Scott Enyeart

Elephant_pink_clothes_small Chris Sully

Seattle_seahawk_white_1600_reasonably_small_small Derek Stephens

Ace_small Ben Harbaugh

Bu_fb_2_small Daniel Hill

Rob_small Rob Davies