Defense, defense, defense...

[feltdizz]

According to a Sherman interview, it was almost exclusively Cover 1 and Cover 3 during the game. He also commented "Carroll simplified it to a few basic formations". That's OK and can work, IF you have the talent to pull it off.

Some of that "talent" is just young guys playing fast in a simplified defense.

Put those same guys in our D next year and ask them to learn 15 different blitz designs and formations and you will see these same guys a step late and blowing assignments. We would see the same excuses about late rounders and a lack of talent.

Outside of Thomas there aren't many players on this Seattle D that we knew of before they blossomed in Seattle.

This isn't a bunch of talent... its scheme and coaching.

[Slapstick]

Some of that "talent" is just young guys playing fast in a simplified defense.

Put those same guys in our D next year and ask them to learn 15 different blitz designs and formations and you will see these same guys a step late and blowing assignments. We would see the same excuses about late rounders and a lack of talent.

Outside of Thomas there aren't many players on this Seattle D that we knew of before they blossomed in Seattle.

This isn't a bunch of talent... its scheme and coaching.

I disagree.

The reason that the simplified D works is because of the talent...

They drafted talent that fit their scheme in the later rounds...something the Steelers haven't done well in a few years...

[phillyesq]

I disagree.

The reason that the simplified D works is because of the talent...

They drafted talent that fit their scheme in the later rounds...something the Steelers haven't done well in a few years...

I agree - it is the talent that drives the success of that defense. Same with the Tampa-2 Ds that the Bucs, Bears and Colts ran - they worked because of guys like Urlacher, Brooks, Freeney, etc. They didn't work as well without talent.

[feltdizz]

I disagree.

The reason that the simplified D works is because of the talent...

They drafted talent that fit their scheme in the later rounds...something the Steelers haven't done well in a few years...

we will agree to disagree.

Seattle's scheme is simplified D... so it's easy to draft "talent" when all they have to do is play ball. Line up, beat your man... that's it. No trickery, no complexity, no confusion... just simplified football.

Do you really think the light came on for Heyward? That guy has been waiting to attack and kill for years... but we asked him to "occupy blockers" and drop into coverage because it worked 5 years ago... once we turned him loose we saw his talent shine.

Timmon's is another one... Timmons was a mad man his second year flying around crushing guys but IMO we messed that up by asking or demanding he learn all 4 LB positions. DL was giddy with Timmons the same year most of us were asking what happened to him.

This philosophy applies to the OL as well. Asking guys to learn all 5 positions instead of letting them master one hasn't worked and its probably why so many of our guys stay injured.

It's football... there is no need to make it this complex. Simplify and draft players to play in a simplified D and you will see our D get back to playing good ball. The days of 5 year practice squad/special team guys turning into DPOY are over.

[feltdizz]

I agree - it is the talent that drives the success of that defense. Same with the Tampa-2 Ds that the Bucs, Bears and Colts ran - they worked because of guys like Urlacher, Brooks, Freeney, etc. They didn't work as well without talent.

Did those D's ask Urlacher to learn all 4 LB positions?
Did Freeney have to learn to occupy blockers and do anything other than rush the passer?

When you give a guy 1 or 2 assignments instead of 12 assignments it's much easier to see their talent.

[K Train]

we will agree to disagree.

Seattle's scheme is simplified D... so it's easy to draft "talent" when all they have to do is play ball. Line up, beat your man... that's it. No trickery, no complexity, no confusion... just simplified football.

Do you really think the light came on for Heyward? That guy has been waiting to attack and kill for years... but we asked him to "occupy blockers" and drop into coverage because it worked 5 years ago... once we turned him loose we saw his talent shine.

Timmon's is another one... Timmons was a mad man his second year flying around crushing guys but IMO we messed that up by asking or demanding he learn all 4 LB positions. DL was giddy with Timmons the same year most of us were asking what happened to him.

This philosophy applies to the OL as well. Asking guys to learn all 5 positions instead of letting them master one hasn't worked and its probably why so many of our guys stay injured.

It's football... there is no need to make it this complex. Simplify and draft players to play in a simplified D and you will see our D get back to playing good ball. The days of 5 year practice squad/special team guys turning into DPOY are over.

The light didnt come on for heyward, hes always been a beast they just insisted Hood be the starter. In limited play heyward was stacking and shedding blockers and making arm tackles look routine. Now we have a Wilkerson-type impact player that no one really knows about because they finally moved on from Hood.

Timmons was horrible his first and into his second year, he is seriously king out there now though. I remember watching 2 videos...one of all the blocks frank the tank whiffed and landed on his face trying to make and one of how timmons was getting blown up in the run game like a small child. He is truly a player that grew into his position. Drafted to replace porter even though he was a WILL backer and slid to the inside and beasted up to 250+ pounds.

Worilds is one that was absolutely horrible for 90% of his career, I think he needs to be retained but its scary seeing him all of a sudden win battles and not just get straight line unblocked sacks.

[feltdizz]

The light didnt come on for heyward, hes always been a beast they just insisted Hood be the starter. In limited play heyward was stacking and shedding blockers and making arm tackles look routine. Now we have a Wilkerson-type impact player that no one really knows about because they finally moved on from Hood.

Timmons was horrible his first and into his second year, he is seriously king out there now though. I remember watching 2 videos...one of all the blocks frank the tank whiffed and landed on his face trying to make and one of how timmons was getting blown up in the run game like a small child. He is truly a player that grew into his position. Drafted to replace porter even though he was a WILL backer and slid to the inside and beasted up to 250+ pounds.

Worilds is one that was absolutely horrible for 90% of his career, I think he needs to be retained but its scary seeing him all of a sudden win battles and not just get straight line unblocked sacks.

That still says something about talent, coaching and scheme in regards to Heyward. Talent is there.. but we insisted on Hood due to???? Seniority? Ego? Scheme?

You may be right on Timmons.. maybe I'm thinking of year 3 instead of year 2 but there was a season where Timmons was flying all over the field running down RB's in the flat.. then we asked him to learn 4 positions and he had a lackluster year even thought DL said he was amazing due to learning those 4 positions.

I agree on Worilds but maybe it was a case of playing on Woodley's side. Now, a team like Seattle gave Flynn a ton of money to be the starter BUT they let Wilson battle for the starting job and ate that money they gave Flynn. We should do the same moving forward.

Best player should play regardless of draft, money, etc...

[phillyesq]

Did those D's ask Urlacher to learn all 4 LB positions?
Did Freeney have to learn to occupy blockers and do anything other than rush the passer?

When you give a guy 1 or 2 assignments instead of 12 assignments it's much easier to see their talent.

Oh yes, Vince Williams is the next Brian Urlacher, and Chris Carter is the next Dwight Freeney. We just missed seeing their talent because of the system. Come on.

[feltdizz]

Oh yes, Vince Williams is the next Brian Urlacher, and Chris Carter is the next Dwight Freeney. We just missed seeing their talent because of the system. Come on.

yes.. that is EXACTLY what I wrote...

cmon.

[K Train]

That still says something about talent, coaching and scheme in regards to Heyward. Talent is there.. but we insisted on Hood due to???? Seniority? Ego? Scheme?

You may be right on Timmons.. maybe I'm thinking of year 3 instead of year 2 but there was a season where Timmons was flying all over the field running down RB's in the flat.. then we asked him to learn 4 positions and he had a lackluster year even thought DL said he was amazing due to learning those 4 positions.

I agree on Worilds but maybe it was a case of playing on Woodley's side. Now, a team like Seattle gave Flynn a ton of money to be the starter BUT they let Wilson battle for the starting job and ate that money they gave Flynn. We should do the same moving forward.

Best player should play regardless of draft, money, etc...

I agree, it really had to have been ego with Hood....they just refused to let that project die. It was a terrible pick, he is a terrible player. Ive been bitching and moaning about that pick since before it happened and there were draft day rumors about it. I loathe evander hood, so glad they unleashed heyward

[JUST-PLAIN-NASTY]

Many are hard on Hood. He wasn't a "lottery" pick guys...He was the 32nd pick. He hasn't missed a game in 5 years tallying 80 straight. His numbers over the first 5 years were equal or better than Smith & Kiesel. They were 4th & 7th round picks...I know...But he will be 27 soon & if you get him for a modest contract you retain him. There is all guts & no glory in the front 3 of a 3-4...When you can find an unselfish football player who stays healthy with production...You don't cast him off. It appears Heyward has some "elite" in him like a Justin Smith...But consider yourself lucky when you find one like that...Not disappointed because the other one isn't a match.

[feltdizz]

Many are hard on Hood. He wasn't a "lottery" pick guys...He was the 32nd pick. He hasn't missed a game in 5 years tallying 80 straight. His numbers over the first 5 years were equal or better than Smith & Kiesel. They were 4th & 7th round picks...I know...But he will be 27 soon & if you get him for a modest contract you retain him. There is all guts & no glory in the front 3 of a 3-4...When you can find an unselfish football player who stays healthy with production...You don't cast him off. It appears Heyward has some "elite" in him like a Justin Smith...But consider yourself lucky when you find one like that...Not disappointed because the other one isn't a match.

I agree with this... we need bodies and Hood shouldn't be expensive to keep.

I feel the same way about Sanders... if reasonable why would we get rid of him? Because he isn't a #1? As long as we pay him his worth I would keep him on the roster. If he want's to get rich then no, good bye.

[phillyesq]

Many are hard on Hood. He wasn't a "lottery" pick guys...He was the 32nd pick. He hasn't missed a game in 5 years tallying 80 straight. His numbers over the first 5 years were equal or better than Smith & Kiesel. They were 4th & 7th round picks...I know...But he will be 27 soon & if you get him for a modest contract you retain him. There is all guts & no glory in the front 3 of a 3-4...When you can find an unselfish football player who stays healthy with production...You don't cast him off. It appears Heyward has some "elite" in him like a Justin Smith...But consider yourself lucky when you find one like that...Not disappointed because the other one isn't a match.

Smith had 19.5 sacks after 5 years. Hood has 11.5 Aaron Smith had 7 pass deflections in his 5th year. Ziggy Hood has 7 in his career. Ziggy's high in tackles is 26. Aaron Smith's high was 55 and he only had 2 years with less than Ziggy's high, including his rookie year when he played sparingly.

On stats alone, Ziggy was not in the same ballpark, let alone better than Aaron Smith.

Of course, we both know that the true value in a 3-4 DE goes well beyond the stat sheet. How many games have we seen where an opponent comes out of the gate and runs right at Ziggy?

I get that Ziggy Hood was the 32nd pick. There were a ton of guys who were worse selected right after him. There were also guys like Max Unger left on the board. Even for the 32nd pick, you can expect a player to be an asset, but Ziggy is just a guy. He's obviously no Smith (Aaron or Justin, take your pick), and that is an awfully high standard. But I don't even think he is a KVO.

[K Train]

Many are hard on Hood. He wasn't a "lottery" pick guys...He was the 32nd pick. He hasn't missed a game in 5 years tallying 80 straight. His numbers over the first 5 years were equal or better than Smith & Kiesel. They were 4th & 7th round picks...I know...But he will be 27 soon & if you get him for a modest contract you retain him. There is all guts & no glory in the front 3 of a 3-4...When you can find an unselfish football player who stays healthy with production...You don't cast him off. It appears Heyward has some "elite" in him like a Justin Smith...But consider yourself lucky when you find one like that...Not disappointed because the other one isn't a match.

Thats not what I am doing at all. He gets washed out of the play constantly, he tries to bend the corner like an OLB and hes up on the ground, and the only time you see him win battles are lined up directly over center.

Year 1 TC: WOW look at his use of hands for a rookie, Even the great aaron smith says so
Year 2 TC: WOW Hood is dominating in one on ones, taking rookie pouncey to school
Year 3 TC: WOW look at Evander jump on tires and **** at Ultimate Extreme Sports place
Year 4 TC: WOW Evander is looking slim and explosive

Over it. Its not about glory, if he can do his job to make the defense better thats perfect, he doesnt.

[phillyesq]

yes.. that is EXACTLY what I wrote...

cmon.

The point was, the defenses that they were a part of succeeded because they had elite talent. Do you mean to suggest that they wouldn't have succeeded in another system?

Please, point out to me the elite defenses that don't have any good players.