It has to be said...
I don't think anyone one would argue that the game Sunday was lost on defense. And I think most would agree that Herndon's interception was more luck, than payoff for a day of exceptional play. In fact, whom was he covering at the time? Herndon was so lost most of the day he needed a map to find the sideline. Sadly though, you can't blame yesterday's collapse on a single player, or group of players--or even Josh Brown.
The defensive problem yesterday, and over the last 2 seasons, is Rhodes' scheme and play calling. Rhodes failed to adjust to the Redskins' tendencies in the first half--where the game was lost—and gave new meaning to predictable. It's time to stop blaming the defensive failures on the players--many teams do more with less--and begin questioning the architect.
How many passes to the flat in 3rd and long, which go for a first down, do you need to see before you make an adjustment? How many times do you think you can run the same coverage on 3rd and long before a HOF coach figures it out? If the halftime adjustments were made in the first or second quarter, the offense would have played a60 minute game, rather than a 30 minute one. Rhodes' predictable play calling lost the game.
The blitz packages are pathetic. They don't even bother trying to hide that they're coming. The only one in the stadium that doesn't know when the Hawks are blitzing is the red headed cheerleader who takes the short yellow bus to the game. "Hey look, it's 3rd and long and two LBs are near the line, wonder what's gonna happen."
This is Rhodes 3rd year, has the defense really progressed? It's the same song and dance--fast start, faltering around week 4, and by week 8 back in the bottom 10. How long can the "injury" and "depth" excuse be played.
It did have to be said. Ray Rhodes has not allowed this defense to play aggressive, and for some reason allows soft underneath stuff on third and long. He was fired from Green Bay for a reason, and now we're getting the brunt of that.
ReplyDeleteWith Ken Hamlin and Marcus Trufant in the secondary, our pass defense should be a lot better than it is.
The Seahawks themselves don't lack the mental toughness that the pundits complain about. Its the coaching staff's unwillingness to adapt that has and will continue to cost us wins.
Posted by Alan
Slow down, Bokonon...say what you will about coach Rhodes, but do you really need to bash on redheads and my boy Herndon??!!
ReplyDeleteI was calling for Rhodes' head at the end of last season, and our own Vinny talked me down off that ledge. If we don't turn things around this Sunday, I'm going to relight my torch and sharpen my pitch fork!
Posted by alba
I want to know how many of you would be calling for his head if we'd won? I'm not going to pretend to excuse everything he does. But let's be careful how we word things. He was fired from Green Bay unjustly. He spent one year there after winning coach of the year honors in Philly. He's repeatedly improved defenses around the league, and was/is one of the most sought after defensive coordinators in the league. How long can we use the injury/depth excuse? As long as it's valid. Rhodes didn't miss those field goals. Rhodes didn't call the plays that came up short of what we apparently needed to make those field goals. Rhodes didn't run or throw the ball on that last drive. Did he do everything correctly? No, but let's not start storming the castle yet. We have a good defense, it's only getting better as players mature. It took the entire team to lose the game this weekend, let's not hang the loss on the guy who hasn't even settled back into his routine yet.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
To me, this game epitomizes everything that is wrong with the Seahawks. Not just on defense, but on offense too. They too often play "not to lose", rather than playing to win. The defense stops being agressive, and waits back and hopes to stop the next play. The offense tries two run plays in a row, rather than being agressive and going for a pass with time ticking away and trying to set up a better field goal. I'm sure everyone in DC knew it was going to Alexander. Holmgren even defends his decision to run rather than pass, because he didn't want to risk an interception that might be returned for a touchdown. But this is the NFL!! You have to take some risks to win the big games.
ReplyDeleteIf you have a good team, and each week go out and play the way you always play, and do what you always do, if you're better than other teams, you'll probably win more than you loose. That's just what the Seahawks have been doing. They have the talent to execute more often than not. They win a bit more than they lose.
To win some of these big games, they need to take some risks. I'd much rather see the defense burned when they blitz on 3rd and long than have prevent defense give up the 1st down. Blitz and make the 50 year old QB pay for the first down! Play to WIN!! Throw a pass to try and get Brown a better field goal try. Or heck, go for a TD! Play to WIN!!
Posted by highwater
"I want to know how many of you would be calling for his head if we'd won? "
ReplyDeleteI'll say I would've. 13 of 18 3rd downs allowed. Not all of those were on the players. Our 3rd down numbers were much better in week 2 and 3, but similarly crappy week 1. The constant is Ray, and this isn't the first post or discussion about how much he sucks. And not to say he hasn't been successful, or that he won't be again, but he isn't here.
And I think that the 2 minute offense sucked post pick. They couldn't run one more play? 30 seconds to walk 4 yards and run again? I like the safe run calls, I just think they could've got another one in, they give you three tries, take em. At least we spent all our timeouts in this game. Jax we had two with 9 seconds left before the pick. If only we could donate them to hurricane victims or something...
Posted by JoSCh
FYI, it shoots down my Ray Rhodes game 4 theory, but Sando says on his blog, Tuesday Update post 40 that Marshall called the game. Not sure if Ray had more input than week 2 and 3, but never will know so I'll drop that line of thinking. I still don't think Ray is effective here.
ReplyDeletePosted by JoSCh
id still blame Holmgren over Rhodes...good to know noone has sympathy for the guy despite his stroke...in the old Seattle, the 'respect everyone' Seattle...everyone would feel sorry for him...good to see that change, its a good thing...no attaching
ReplyDeleteanyways, i cant really worry about coaches when we're stuck with them for the next game, against SAINT LOUIE LOSER (its a catchy song if you sing it that way outloud)...
my biggest concerns right now
-the 2 WRs and 1 TE that may or may not miss the most important game of the season (notice the no injury crap bit us in the ass...)
-playing not to lose...very annoying...Carolina did it last night and they almost lost the game (ironic huh?)
-Holmgren's brain...hes getting old...
-im running out of Mountain Dew
-Howard Lincoln staying with the Mariners
-conceded about how conceded i am
-little girl my friend cusses in front of when a store closed 10 mins before we got there...made a big scene at the clerk and a poor 7 year old had to hear the F bomb several times
-the Rams...yes im worried about the Rams...this game will put ONE team above .500 while the rest of the division will be under...i dont want to be under .500...and worst thing is that we're better then them (like last year, which obviously didnt matter)...and these injuries concern me...they will get about 21-28 points...and we need DJack at least (though I think Engram is more important for this matchup then DJack)...and we need Stevens to play well despite his finger...we're a splitting image of the Rams, only we have a defense...but they have home field...
THIS GAME IS HUGE
Posted by adp
"If the halftime adjustments were made in the first or second quarter, the offense would have played a 60 minute game, rather than a 30 minute one. Rhodes' predictable play calling lost the game."
ReplyDeleteTHINK ABOUT THIS FOR A SECOND...
Last I heard, Rhodes:
1. Has had a very limited role in the defense since the stroke. While he is the DC in name, Marshall is the DC in effect. Rhodes has been in the booth during games, but not calling the shots. He has been more of a consultant and a motivating figurehead than anything else.
2. Hasn't been calling the plays on defense. That's Marshall's job for now.
"The blitz packages are pathetic. They don't even bother trying to hide that they're coming."
3. The blitz packages and looks this team his given vary more than they ever have in his tenure is Seattle, and are on par for other teams. Already this season we are seeing effective pressure from the Safety position (didn't have that last year), from the Corner (that either), and he has thrown in extra zone blitz schemes that we never saw last season. We are even seeing DT's in coverage so LB's can blitz, which is new.
In any case, I am very disappointed in this post. Baseless smearing is not something 12 Seahawks Street is about. Calling out a stroke victim for doing a bad job at something that has actually been handed off to someone else is pretty low.
BTW, Pauilie I agree with your take 100%. This defense needs until mid-season gel and really prove its mettle.
sorry dad, are you going to send us all to our rooms now??!! :-)
ReplyDeletePosted by alba
Lol
ReplyDeleteDon't come out until we beat the Rams!
Posted by Bluefoot
Great. I'll see you at 4:00pm EST on Sunday then!
ReplyDeletePosted by alba
Hey Bok -
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna sign you up for the email alert thing, since this post never went out on email either.
And I feel like I gotta respond to the Herndon crack, but it's late and all I can come up with is "your girlfriend rides scooters!" :-)
Posted by alba
Glad to see teh Koolaid still tastes all right.
ReplyDeleteWell said gentlemen of wisdom as well as passion.
You others can't let your hearts win over your heads. This team has most definitely improved during Ray's tenure here. And, as has been mentioned all too often to need repeating........but I will ;)......This is an already young team with new additions to a system that depends on players playing on instsinct, and when you have guys still getting to know each other at 'game speed', there are going to be mistakes. But this Defense is probably one of the best squads to play for the Hawks. And I'll go so far as to repeat...perhaps the best 'Team' to play as Hawks.
I know you all think I'm 'freakin' "NUTS!", but I really think this is 'the' team. I'm convinced. The talent's there, the Coaching's there they jut need to figure it out!
For instance......the penatly thing.....no I'm not talking the bad refing (though we could all day), I'm talking about real penalties, the Hawks were best in the league in penaties last season and now their right back to square one this season.....what the !!!!!!!!
It's still about stupid mistakes and failures in performing at their best. Lack of concentration? It was mentioned before the game...."Don't look past this team!"....I know someone said it. Well, I think they did just that. Were they already looking ahead to the 'big' Rams game?
Anyway, my point is that wanting Rhodes head on a platter for teh performance of the Defense through 4 weeks, and with only one really weak showing.(sunday).
I just don't see the need for all the panic in week 4, being 2-2 and tied for 1st in the division with a weak looking Rams team. To quote Alfred E. Newman ......"What me worry?!??!"
I'm out.............. ;)
Posted by Vin
"Rhodes has been in the booth during games "
ReplyDeleteNot this game. He was on the sidelines.
"Hasn't been calling the plays on defense"
Agree, I shot myself without prompting.
"Baseless smearing "
I have a base.
"Calling out a stroke victim for doing a bad job at something that has actually been handed off to someone else is pretty low."
If you can't do the job, don't, see Bannister, Alex. I mean, great, thanks for try to be courageous, but you don't need to be here, get better, come back when you are effective. Same way I would treat someone where I work, and same way I'd expect to be treated.
"This defense needs until mid-season gel and really prove its mettle. " and "This team has most definitely improved during Ray's tenure here."
I agree with Paulie/Blue, but if at mid-season this team is back to the bottom 10, then Vins statement is B.S. cuz they haven't, not appreciably.
Also, Vin, that is a well though out, optimistic, great post. Thank you.
Posted by JoSCh
I thought they circled Ray Rhodes being up in the booth during the Skins game? Was I imagining it?
ReplyDelete(damn,and I just erased the game from my DVR last night!)
Posted by alba
He actually may have been up there most of the time, I saw on "Sounds of the NFL" this week on NFL Network that he was on the sidelines, but that may have been temporary. Also, according to Mike Sando, he was "by Marshalls side", I assumed Marshall was on the field. Regardless, he may have had some hand in the playcalling, but that doesn't matter, at the advice of Dr's Blue and Vin I will discontinue this line of thinking, take my kool-aid at regular intervals, and wait until mid season.
ReplyDeletePosted by JoSCh
My points aren't baseless--they're Kool-aid free.
ReplyDeleteThe D has been in the bottom 10 the last 2 seasons after being in the top ten at the start. Once a O-line has a chance to review game photos on the sideline, the blitzes get handled. Simply blitzing more doesn't make you a good blitzing team. It's naive to think Rhodes is quietly sitting in the box. A personality like Rhodes doesn't give up control. It's Rhodes system, Marshall is Rhodes guy. If Marshall does something different, Rhodes will remind him. I feel the talent is there to be an above average defense and should be held to that standard, not "it's more than last year". You can't be critical of Josh Brown, or Holmy's clock management, and give poor playing calling on the defense a pass. The inablity to make defensive adjustment during the first half, is where the game was lost.
Posted by bokonon
I was reading an article last week on The News Tribune site where they inteview Shawn Springs. This was before the game last week. U can read the article here.
ReplyDeleteShawn Springs was sort of talking smack on "Ray-Bob’s system" in the nicest way possible. You can tell he has repect for him, but that he didn't really think the defense took full advantage of the talent they have.
I see other teams with way less talent not having these problems on defense. I mean the Patriots had a WR playing in their secondary last year and won the Super Bowl. Someone has to take some blame here.
Granted that I don't think that Ray has that much control at the moment, but it is still his system and schemes that they are running.
I'm pretty much at a loss for what they should do. It seems that if they play zone coverage they give up big plays underneath. If they play man to man they get burned deep. They cannot get pressure with the front four, but most of the time can't even get pressure with the blitz and give up a huge play on a swing pass or something.
This is just frustrating. I hope we see a change in STL this weekend.
Dusto
"Rhodes' predictable play calling lost the game"
ReplyDeleteThat was baseless. Rhodes hasn't been calling plays since the stroke. Marshall has. That was my point.
Posted by Bluefoot
If it isn't the system, which is Ray Rhodes's system, then why have Springs and Lucas played better AFTER they left Seattle? Most of the problems I have seen from the defense so far this season is we can't seem to cover anybody. I thought the secondary was supposed to be the stregnth of the defense? I have just named two secondary players we had that are better now that they've left. Whos to say the guys we have now wouldn't do the same? This defense has done one thing consistently since Rhodes got here, and that is lose football games.
ReplyDeletePosted by Mike K.
That's easy to answer. Because they CONTINUED to develop as players.
ReplyDeleteRemember, Lucas had a breakout season under Rhodes, and should get some credit for that.
And if you don't have an effective pass rush, which we haven't, you aren't going to cover anyone well.
This defense has done one thing consistently since Rhodes got here, and that is lose football games.
Serious overstatement. The defense is what has kept them in games this season. If you look at the losses, both the offense and defense are culpable.
Posted by Bluefoot
You can't blame the pass rush for what Brunell did to the Hawks on third down Sunday. He was taking two and three step drops and firing. It is very difficult to get a rush that way. Maybe if the DBs weren't 8 yards off the WRs, he would have to hesitate, and then the rush could get there. There is a very good reason that opposing QBs get in a good rhythm agains Seattle. It is because they don't have to wait for receivers to break open. There is such a huge cushion, they don't have to wait!
ReplyDeleteThis Defense you claim has kept us in games gave up 26 points to the Jags! They gave up 20 to a very bad Washington offense, and nearly gave away a 3 score lead in ONE HALF to the Falcons. What game exactly did they "keep us in"? Arizona? Come on, the Cards looked like a college offense for most of the year. I would hardly write home about stopping them!
Posted by Mike K
Can't blame the D for Jax, Matt was serving up INTs like they were cocktails at happy hour. The D actually held its ground on very short fields only giving up FGs a few times.
ReplyDeletePosted by alba
It was still Jacksonville. I blame Holmy more than Matt, because he shouldn't have been throwing so friggin much, but that is beside the point. Non of these offenses we have played have exactly been power houses, and yet the secondary has still looked pedestrian at best. Despite Hasselbeck's turnovers, Jimmy Smith beat us deep for TDs TWICE!
ReplyDeleteI think the personel is at the very least decent! All of a sudden, guys who performed very well elsewhere (Dyson and Herndon) have looked horrible, and guys who have left (Lucas and Springs) have flourished. Is that a coincidence?
How long are you guys going to give these coaches free passes? This is a terrible division, and we could easily be 4 and 0. That would be a pretty comanding lead. How many games do we have to pi$$ away before you guys see what it going on?
The coaches themselves have no faith in this team. Holmgren going for it on fourth last week only proves the fact that deep down he knows his defense can't stop anybody. Then, late in the game, with a chance to win, he shows no confidence in the offense by defaulting to a 47 yard FG to win. Why not trust the offense to pick up some yards, make that FG more manageable. In the years these two (Holmgren and Rhodes) have been here, we are still left with a team full of guys that the coaching staff doesn't trust. When do you stop blaming anybody and everybody we bring in, and start blaming the guys who coach them when they get here?
Do you enjoy watching opposing receivers run free through the secondary? If you do, then you guys are right, Rhodes is just the guy we need! Denver was terrible on defense when he left. There D looks pretty good now, doesn't it?
Posted by Mike K.
Mike -
ReplyDeleteWe welcome all visitors here to the Street but we're really not about moaning and whining, more about supporting and encouraging.
What you say may be true, but that's for Ruskell and the front office to deal with. We can complain all we want here and it won't effect either Holmy's or Rhodes' employment situation.
It's a yound defense that is going to need time to gel, and at least it's good to see us blitzing more than we usually do, even if they are telegraphing it most of the time.
We can't allow receivers to run free like that in St. Louis, and I'm hoping we don't, but even so, it's a little early to start warming the tar and gathering the feathers!
Posted by alba
In my opinion, gelling is what you do in the off and pre-season. This defense is not that young. The players in question are secondary players. Not one of them is a rookie. How long do you need? IF that is the issue, why did we let the veterans we had go? Nobody complained when Springs left because most people thought he was done. My point is he was only done in this system. There is a reason we consistently fail to stop teams on third down. If you truely believe that the blitz schemes aren't unimaginative, and that the coverage is to soft, then you are fooling your self.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very highly regarded secondary, even after losing Lucas. I just fail to believe that guys come to Seattle and just forget how to cover. Two of the top three corners are new, yet this secondary looks much like the ones from the last two years. Both these new guys have had success elsewhere, especially Dyson. I don't care what system you run, when WRs are wide open on third all the time, the system needs to change. Nothing has changed in over three years.
Why is it if I question this team, I am whinning. I will never apologize for hating to lose! If you are a fan of this team, I can't see how in the heck you aren't sick of losing.
Posted by Mike K.
Mike you're a little off there....this defense is young, especially at key possitions. DT, LB, Secondary.
ReplyDeleteAnd the entire unit is completely different, so you are in error when you say that the gelling should have occured in off-season and camp. It's true that it starts there, but the great defenses in the past were units playing as a team, knowing who's going to be where and when they'll be there. It's about getting to know one another as player. And remember, everyone knows there's a difference between practice speed and game speed, and a difference between pre-season mode, regular season mode and post season mode.
My point? I forget.............oh yeah, these guys are still learning, and will improve with every game.
Trust me...... :)
Posted by Vin
And I think the open WRs on those plays were there purely due to the playcalling of Gibbs. There were 'picks' involved in most of those receptions. A DB would usually lose his man when running into an opponent while in persuit of his man. I saw this several times Sunday. And I don't see teh Rams having that kind of success, remember that Brunell had all kinds of time in the pocket, something Bulger won't have with the diminished Line he has.
ReplyDelete"We welcome all visitors here to the Street but we're really not about moaning and whining, more about supporting and encouraging. "
ReplyDeleteThat’s pretty sanctimonious, ya hippie. We have the right to moan and whine. Although I'd agree the moaning and whining should stop for last weeks game, time to get re-fired for this weeks game.
"This defense is not that young. The players in question are secondary players. "
Vin, you sorta missed that. He's right, Other than B-Ware, none of these guys is "young", or if they are, when are they not? 4 years? 5? Tru, Hammer, Dyson, Herndon all should be considered veteran IMO. He wasn't talking about the rest of the D. And the D-line isn't young either... just sayin'.
"There were 'picks' involved in most of those receptions. "
No lie there, I was pretty upset about them, that isn't legal is it? How does it not get called? Oh yeah, competition committee member.
Anywho, whup them lambs, GO SEAHAWKS!!
Posted by JoSCh
Sorry for going "sanctimonious" on everyone, I just don't want this blog to deteriorate personal attacks and hateful posts that are so commonplace on the other fan forums.
ReplyDeleteMike K.'s opinions are welcome, and pretty valid at that, but a few of his statements set off red flags for me:
How long are you guys going to give these coaches free passes?
How many games do we have to pi$$ away before you guys see what it going on?
I don't know, maybe I was being to oversensitive (you know how we hippies are!) but it I just don't want to see a lot of personal B.S. floating around on this site.
--alba
Posted by The Sanctimonious Hippie
Alba is probably right. I could have made my point without calling you guys out! I have just had it with losing games we should win. I don't see the kind of changes on defense I thought I would see.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong, I see bright spots. I am pleased to say that it looks like I was wrong about Tatupa. He looks like he is a "football player" just like we were told he was. I thought he was too slow and too small! Guess that't why I don't work in the NFL.
I also don't think I know more about defense than Rhodes, I just think he is not making adjustments to today's game. You absolutely can't let receivers run free. It was happening before the Skins game, it just stood out more against Washington. I seem to recall Smith tearing us apart on opening day. Jimmy Smith is a pretty good receiver, but he shouldn't have killed us the way he did. Leftwich and Brunell pretty much had their best games of the year against us. These guys aren't exactly Brady and Manning. These are the types of offenses we should be able to stop. At least that is what I thought coming into the season.
Posted by Mike K
Thanks for understanding, Mike.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on a lot of this. It's been driving me nuts how we're letting marquis receivers get off the line free and clear, instead of chucking them within the 5 yard zone.
Maybe they don't have faith in Dyson/Herndon yet, but there's no reason why Tru shouldn't be playing more aggressively, especially since we got Michael "Bring the Pain" Boulware roaming around as the free safety.
One of the differences I have noticed, which unfortunately hasn't equated into much difference in hte game, is that we are blitzing more often and agressively. Unfortunately though, we're not getting to the QB in time to make the sack, and this also leads to corners to play softer at the line of scrimmage, to guard against getting beat deep.
I've also been pleased to see that in the last two games the coaching staff HAS seemed to make some mid-game adjustments to get away from what's NOT working and exploit open areas of the opponent.
We'll need all this stuff to work on Sunday if we hope to beat the Lambs.
Posted by alba
OK Koolaid break!
ReplyDelete(who brought the Jack Daniels?)
Posted by Vinnyhawkalui
I must be the pessimist in my, but why did Holmy have to ruin my enjoument of the game by throwing three straight times with less than four minutes left and a six point lead. I don't get it. Someone please explain it to me. I can't be the only one that saw what happened after the fumble. The running game ran out the clock. Could have saved me a partial heart attack if they'd just done it earlier:-)
ReplyDeleteBack to the point of this topic. For giving up 31 points, am I the only one thinking the D played pretty well? Hard to believe you could say that about giving up 31, but I really believe it. Holt is going to make plays, but other than him and occasionally Jackson, I thought we kept a very high powered offense in check ON THE ROAD. Thumbs up for Rhodes this week! I can't recall too many WRs running free, and that was my biggest beef last week.
Posted by Mike K
Thank you, that was just an awesome post!!!
ReplyDelete