What about Running a Seattle Defense? - Dallas Cowboys Forum

rwalters31 · 02-17-2013

Wow! I have been reading the post and now I am confused. I thought that the Tampa 2 was about pressing, simple, and produces takeaways. Now, we are the Seattle variant of the 4-3/3-4 because we have the supposed players to fit. We have also been told that the Tampa 2 is simpler but I hear that Seattle runs a complex scheme. So I think that this board is being led astray. Look at the two schemes and ask yourself this question. If you are going to change a scheme on the bases that one is superior to the one you are running. Now you are going to keep the scheme you sucked at with the players that sucked in it and add to that a scheme that does not fit the players you have. Now pour in a draft guy like Jerry then mix end a touch of Garret and now you have a defense that looks complex, not fitting, old players who are stupid, injured, and may I add not what you wanted in the first place. Sounds like championship to me????

Having said all that the Seahawks put a beat down on the Cowboys, I mean the boys never got off the plane. We were out coached, out played, out schemed, and not nasty enough. I read that they were a thug defense and I agree. But the two defenses that made it to the Super Bowl were both physical teams. Something we should think about.

FLcowboy · 02-17-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwalters31

Wow! I have been reading the post and now I am confused. I thought that the Tampa 2 was about pressing, simple, and produces takeaways. Now, we are the Seattle variant of the 4-3/3-4 because we have the supposed players to fit. We have also been told that the Tampa 2 is simpler but I hear that Seattle runs a complex scheme. So I think that this board is being led astray. Look at the two schemes and ask yourself this question. If you are going to change a scheme on the bases that one is superior to the one you are running. Now you are going to keep the scheme you sucked at with the players that sucked in it and add to that a scheme that does not fit the players you have. Now pour in a draft guy like Jerry then mix end a touch of Garret and now you have a defense that looks complex, not fitting, old players who are stupid, injured, and may I add not what you wanted in the first place. Sounds like championship to me????

[View Full Quote]

You seem to read and hear a lot about the variants, but going back to the Dallas/Seattle game, after the Cowboys came off a huge win in New York, Ryan's defense was shredded, and Garrett's offense sputtered, (remember O'tree's big letdown), it wasn't the players that failed. The scheme on both sides of the ball was a repeat of the New York game, and Seattle was ready for it. Hmmm, wonder how they knew Ryan and Garrett weren't going to game plan for a different team.

Marktui · 02-18-2013

Didn't Caroll learn the 4/3 under Kiffen? Kiffens style is yes Tampa 2, corners press or press bail. Corners can be a little more aggressive at the line and take away short to medium routes. They know anything deep up the sidelines will be covered by the safety on their side.

Marinelli will teach getting up field on the snap. Read the OL, high hat-pass, low hat -run. Adjust on the fly, not read and react. They will only be responsible for one gap each. He wants that because he wants pressure on the qb's by the 4 DL, Kiffens does not like to blitz. So he wants the DL to always be moving forward. Watch old film of Sapp he constantly was doing this. Brooks the old will on Tampa said the beauty of Kiffens d was its simplicity, but that it still takes time learn all the nuances of it. Know your gaps, and how to adjust responsibilities when formation changes.

Lee and Carter are better suited for the 4/3 they'd both can read and flow to the ball. Mo and Carr at the corners are good when they both can be physical and aggressive at the LOS. Ware will now just be asked to go after the qb's, his primary duty in the 3/4.

We ran a lot of 4/3 during last season as our nickel package, so it is not new. Will there be a transition period, yes! Anytime you change coordinators.

Doomsday101 · 02-18-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLcowboy

You seem to read and hear a lot about the variants, but going back to the Dallas/Seattle game, after the Cowboys came off a huge win in New York, Ryan's defense was shredded, and Garrett's offense sputtered, (remember O'tree's big letdown), it wasn't the players that failed. The scheme on both sides of the ball was a repeat of the New York game, and Seattle was ready for it. Hmmm, wonder how they knew Ryan and Garrett weren't going to game plan for a different team.

I have to disagree. There were a lot of plays there for the taking but Witten and the other WR were dropping balls all game long. You can't game plan dropped ball and giving up sure plays. That game was on the players coaches sure as hell can't go out on the field and make the plays for them.

speedkilz88 · 02-18-2013

Did anyone actually watch the coaches interviews? Kiffin said that the Seattle comparison was more for the secondary. That they will still be very much a Tampa Bay Bucs/Chicago Bears 4-3 defense.

AMERICAS_FAN · 02-18-2013

Whoever said we are running the Seattle defense?

All Kiffin told some of his players was to study their dedfense so that they can get AN IDEA of what his defense might be like.

It's rediculous how a coach says one thing, the media twists it into another, the fans misread into all of it and it further down the wrong path and all of sudden we're running the Seattle Defense, as if their defense has earned its own name like the Tampa-2 has.

Wow!

conner01 · 02-18-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by speedkilz88

Did anyone actually watch the coaches interviews? Kiffin said that the Seattle comparison was more for the secondary. That they will still be very much a Tampa Bay Bucs/Chicago Bears 4-3 defense.

exactly. sometimes we read too much into comparissons. the secondaries are very similiar. the fronts play a bit different because of the personeel they have