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]title="Confused" class="inlineimg" />
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. |
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.