The NFL Is A Copycat League: The Seattle Seahawks and the New York Jets
This is just a loose theory and is probably the byproduct of way too much time during the lockout to think about this stuff, but when you look a little bit at the main characteristics of the New York Jets, you might start to see similarities to the Seattle Seahawks. When you try and predict the long-term strategy that Pete Carroll and John Schneider have in mind, I would venture a guess that it pretty closely resembles that of the Jets. I'll explain:
First, and this is probably more of a coincidence than a purposeful strategy, but both teams have a boisterous, big-personality, defensive-minded players' coaches in Rex Ryan and Pete Carroll. These guys are both known for getting the most out of their players and for being media darlings. Both are popular with their players, albeit different in their choice of language. Both have a lot of control and both work in relative harmony with their GMs. Both love the spotlight and both are jokesters.
Ok, past that: strategically thinking if you look at how New York has built their team in the last few years it could closely resemble the way that the Hawks are going about their business. Go back to 2006; New York possessed two first round picks and spent them on T D'Brickashaw Ferguson and C Nick Mangold in an attempt to re-build their offensive line. Using your first two picks to shore up the line...sound familiar?
In '07, they built up the defense by selecting Darrelle Revis and ILB David Harris. In 2008, they signed Alan Faneca and Damien Woody to further bolster their line. In 2009 they fired Eric Mangini and brought in Rex Ryan. Ryan inherited a very good offensive line and went about drafting a 'franchise' QB in USC's Mark Sanchez and a feature back in Shonn Green. The next draft, they chose another running back in Joe McKnight, and a fullback in John Connor. Think they wanted to run the ball?
Guess who was watching the 2009 Jets season? Pete Carroll- that's who. After publicly chastising Sanchez for leaving school early to go to the NFL, Pete wanted to see if he would be proven correct in his assessment. And what did he see? He saw a rookie QB with mediocre to terrible numbers 'lead' his team to the AFC Championship game behind the NFL's best offensive line and rushing attack and league-best defense. The Jets averaged 172.2 yards per game on the ground and featured a very good defense directed by Rex Ryan.
I'm not saying that Pete Carroll had an epiphany watching the 2009 Jets, but it couldn't have hurt his previous notion that a strong defensive team, armed with a potent rushing offense and game-managing quarterback could have great success at the NFL level (the Jets got to the AFC Championship game again in 2010). Carroll is a defensive minded coach and I have no doubt that he believes he can mold a top-tier defense for the Seahawks. Apart from that, he's going about building his offensive line so the run game will be the main identity of the offense. Once that is intact, you go about drafting your QBOTF. This is all a theory of course (with a tip of the cap to Davis Hsu for pointing out similarities), but it seems to hold some water anyway.
Carroll, apart from fostering a culture change in Seattle, has made the run game a top priority - he originally brought in Zone Blocking Scheme guru Alex Gibbs to run this part of the offense but Gibbs resigned after bumping heads with other coaches. This season, in part because the run game got absolutely no traction, Carroll fired his Offensive Coordinator and hired on Tom Cable, a Gibbs protege and ZBS savant, as Assistant Head Coach (a title that shouldn't be overlooked) and Offensive Line Coach. No doubt this was done with revitalization of the run game as priority number one. Well, they wasted no time in the fix by using their first two draft picks on offensive linemen. Most of the rest of the draft was defensive minded as they picked up a linebacker, KJ Wright, in the 4th round, a safety, Mark LeGree in the 5th, and two corners in the 5th and 6th rounds, in Richard Sherman and Byron Maxwell, respectively.
There's a theory out there that QBOTF will be next year. We'll see.
In Carroll's 4-3 Under defense, arguably the most important cogs in the wheel are the middle linebacker, the safeties, and the 3-tech defensive lineman. Carroll wasted no time in selecting Earl Thomas last season. He still has belief that Lofa Tatupu can get the job done at MLB, and the 3-tech spot has yet to be addressed. I'm not sure if they view Brandon Mebane as the answer there.
(As a sidenote), one of the most successful 4-3 Under Tampa-2 defenses ever run in the NFL - from approximately 1999 till 2002, had Hall of Famer Warren Sapp at the 3-tech, 4-time All-Pro Hardy Nickerson at MLB (left in 1999; replaced by Jamie Duncan and later Shelton Quarles in 2002, when he made the pro-bowl), and 9-time Pro-Bowler John Lynch at safety. Though the Seahawks run a different defense than Tampa Bay's dominant teams of the 1990's and 2000's, it would behoove them to make it a priority to draft/trade for/sign very good players at these three positions. UPDATE: It's also been pointed out to me that I was remiss (criminal, really) in leaving probable future Hall of Famer Derrick Brooks off this list. It's true that the weakside linebacker in a Tampa-2 system is as integral a position as any so that's another spot that should not be forgotten while the Seahawks build. I think I should have just said that it's important to have elite players in key positions in order to compete year in and year out. Which positions are the most key is something that can be argued.
I'm starting to ramble a little bit, but the main point is to reassure and remind that a roster rebuild takes a lot of time. It's not going to happen in one or two drafts. It will take four to five years in most cases and until Carroll and Schneider have had a chance to put some of their players on the field, I find it hard to make a judgement on them one way or another. What I am sensing though is that the ultimate goal is to build something of a proxy of what the Jets have assembled now. A team built on an elite run game and defense. Get a game-managing and effective quarterback to distribute the ball. Win on time-of-possession and getting turnovers.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Someone's gonna have to start doing some serious knocking-up
So Carroll can have his Antonio Cromartie.
I've got ridiculous upside.
by Jacson Bevens on Jun 20, 2011 8:54 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Whitehurst == Sanchez Lite?
It sounds possible. They are actually really similar in style and arm strength. TD Jesus is a little taller, and possibly a bit more mobile with less knee issues that “Sancho”.
It’s a little closer comparison than realized, when looked at a little closer. Good post.
Win Forever: Live, Work and Play Like a Champion
Your argument about key players in the best Tampa defense is confusing
The only key player you got right is Sapp the three-tech. Lynch played strong safety, not free safety (though these are mostly interchangable in this defense). Nickerson left in 1999, well before the D hit its peak, and he was never the most important player on the D. In fact, none of the guys you named were the key to this defense, weakside OLB and future hall of famer Derrick Brooks.
Not saying you’re wrong about who will be key for our defense, but you’ve got the Tampa-2 defense about as wrong as you can get it.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 20, 2011 10:29 AM PDT reply actions
*key for this defense, as the most important player with doubt was weakside OLB and future...
Man this place needs an edit button. Or I need some sleep.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 20, 2011 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
I wouldn't say my summation of that defense was spot on
But I think “about as wrong as you can get it” is pretty hyperbolic (and dickish). Yes, Derrick Brooks was very important in the Tampa-2. Should have (and did earlier in my defensive explanations) mentioned that the WLB is going to get a ton of tackles because of the way the gaps and responsibilities are set up.
The MLB for Tampa’s great D was an important player because of the Tampa-2 and his coverage responsibilities in the deep middle of the field. In general, the MLB in a 4-3 is always important.
I was wrong in pointing out just the free safety being important – really it’s both safeties because of the fact they’re pretty interchangeable; they’re very important in both pass coverage and run support so they need to be instinctual and savvy.
I wouldn’t say it’s wrong that Warren Sapp and his ability to create pressure, get sacks and generally disrupt at the line of scrimmage was any less important than what Derrick Brooks was able to do. Brooks was a special talent but he was also given the perfect scheme to maximize his abilities.
I honestly do appreciate the corrections and/or critiques and it’s not like I pretend to be the authority on everything. It would be nice if you were a little more politic in your discussions because I know you have a lot of football knowledge that’s beneficial to this blog.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
by Danny Kelly on Jun 20, 2011 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Fine, fine, allow me to straighten my tie for a bit
Sorry for being dickish. There are factual corrections in there though. Most noticeably Nickerson leaving after the 1999 season (which was, despite what I said before, one of their best)
I think what Brooks proves in this case is worth highlighting though: talent always trumps scheme to some extent. If you find a Brooks, you damn well build your defense around a Brooks no matter what your system is. In many ways, Tampa-2 is a perfect example of that, because it is a system that was defined by the players, not a system thought up and then noted to slot the perfect players into. People might forget Brooks was in Tampa before Dungy was. Dungy did have the basics of this system in place in Pittsburgh and later jobs, but it was when he joined Tampa and found Brooks that he could grow the Tampa-2 as we knew it from its peak days.
Now you’re presenting it as if the scheme is in place and put “on” Brooks. To some extent that’s true since the roots of Tampa-2 are much older than Brooks, but as I said above, Tampa-2 as we had it in Tampa 1999-2002 is very hard to imagine without Brooks. Sapp too was a key part, yes, and hard to take out of it. Lynch is already easier. Nickerson? Well he was in fact taken out and the system ran on.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 20, 2011 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Shoot, yes, you're right I screwed up the year Nickerson left. I'll make the correction.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
by Danny Kelly on Jun 20, 2011 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Also, I agree with you 100% that talent should trump scheme in most cases
I think my rambling that included the erroneous Tampa Bay paragraph was misconstrued. I do agree though that in most cases a team is great because they have great players at key spots and the schemes run are of secondary importance.
The problem with the Seahawks is that they don’t have top tier talent at multiple spots and I think my main point, though nothing deep or innovative, is that the Hawks need great talent in several positions to be a great defense. I think the three I mentioned are important in Pete Carroll’s defense. Obviously, there are many different combinations of elite players in certain spots that will produce results. You may be right that WLB is more important in this defense than the MLB. I’m not going to disagree there because you could be right about that.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
by Danny Kelly on Jun 20, 2011 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it could be
We do have a system that devalues certain positions, perhaps mostly painfully Aaron Curry’s Sam position, but I think there is some flexibility between the Will and Mike where you can scheme to shift the load to whoever can bear the burden best. Barring a career revival by Tats we don’t have an outstanding talent at either position, sadly.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 20, 2011 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I think missing out on Brooks in pointing out the key Bucs players of that defense is nearly criminal, though
The one constant throughout all the Bucs’ good defenses from 1995-2008 was Derrick Brooks, and they ran the same scheme throughout. That defense was molded around Brooks’ skills, and if you want to run a successful Tampa 2 defense you need an OLB like that. In Chicago they built that defense around Urlacher, but they still have Lance Briggs to play the Brooks’ role. In Indianapolis they have…errr…Session, I guess, Cato June before that. But their defense is kind of terrible. The Vikings have Chad Greenway. Each good Tampa 2 defense has a rangy tackle machine at outside linebacker.
Schematically, it’s important to get an MLB capable of dropping back to the deep middle of the field (though that wasn’t Nickerson’s strength, really), but this doesn’t mean that you need a star at MLB. It’s also very important to get pressure with the front four. This is more important than a 3-tech, even: in Indy, they get it done with Freeney and Mathis and no-names at DT. In Chicago they had a great defense last season, but the key d-lineman was Peppers, not a 3-technique. As for safety, someone like John Lynch is important, but Earl Thomas isn’t going to be him. In the passing game the two safeties are somewhat interchangeable, both dropping back to a deep third, but I bet PC will use Earl Thomas’ range to change that. In the run game, though, John Lynch really shone: he was a hard-hitting tackler who could get past blockers and impact plays. You can see the same thing in Indianapolis with Bob Sanders. I don’t see Thomas doing that.
Really the Tampa 2 puts the focus on the front-seven, making the back four less of a priority. Get some small cornerbacks who can jump routes and tackle, then have them drop to spots and read QBs. The safeties need some range, and one of them needs to be good against the run. But all of that can be done by lower-tier players. Yes, the Bucs had some stars at those positions (John Lynch and Ronde Barber specifically), but they also had a lot of random bodies coming through, and they never really invested high picks on those positions. The Bucs were fortunate to have those players and they made the most of them, but I wouldn’t call having stars at those positions keys to that defense.
OK, I swung and missed because I excluded Brooks.
I should note that the Tampa Bay paragraph an aside, a very short paragraph, and obviously not well-thought out enough and should have been just left out. Mostly because the defense that Tampa Bay ran is different than the one the Seahawks are implementing so in that regard the comparison was dumb anyway.
And the 4-3 Under w/ elephant that Seattle runs is different than the one Chicago runs (which you yourself said was built around Urlacher). And it’s different than the defense Minnesota runs (which has utilized one of the better defensive lines in the NFL the last few years). And it’s different than the defense that Indianapolis runs (which you yourself said sucks anyway so really shouldn’t be used to back up your argument). So I guess what I’m saying is: there are many ways to skin a cat.
The defense that Pete Carroll runs has many important positions: the three most are ARGUABLY the 3-tech, the safeties, and the middle linebacker. YES.. every position is important. And yes, it’s up for debate, hence ‘arguably’.
I must apologize about the Tampa Bay comparison. Bad job me.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
by Danny Kelly on Jun 20, 2011 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
No worries
It’s tough to keep all that stuff straight. I couldn’t tell you much about the specific defenses Pete Carroll runs, either. It’ll be interesting to see how Carroll incorporates the Tampa 2 ideas into his defense. Having someone with the range of Earl Thomas can really give a DC a lot of freedom to be creative.
Yeah, and I'll be the first to admit that historical anecdotal evidence isn't my strong suit
I don’t have the historical knowledge past 4 years ago or so that I should.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
by Danny Kelly on Jun 20, 2011 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
It's so hard to acquire ex post facto.
I have a firm grasp on both the schema and politics of the league, but that encyclopedic recall eludes me. I started following football closely only after the XL run, so maybe it develops later. Ironically, I started following baseball closely after 2001; Seattle teams lure me in and then promptly revert to mediocrity (or worse), it seems. Except the Storm, which was never particularly alluring in the first place.
Teams (for foreign blogs): Seahawks, Mariners, Huskies and Broncos. Yes, I recognize the contradiction; I was born in Denver.
by THolt on Jun 20, 2011 2:08 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

by 

































