Is it Seattle's defensive system or the players

[TwentyOne]

Watching Seattle play defense was night and day compared to Dallas. Seattle blitzed, change coverage, and played aggressive. It was the complete opposite of how Dallas played defense. So, I'm wondering is it the players that made Seattle's defense so good or was it the system. Its probably a combination, but how much of an improvement can Dallas make on defense this year with the right coach?

If Eberturd was the Seattle's coordinator with the same players, how good would Seattle's defense be? And if McDonald was Dallas coordinator with Dallas players, how good would their defense have been?

Of course its both. Good system and the right players for it.

Interessting is how big is the influence of each side. And in Seattle case i think they have a lot of very good players on defense. So id say that they are that good its 65% players and 35% system.

 

[Beaker42]

As with any system, BOTH. But you need another key cog, and that's coaching. The coaching makes it all flow.

IMO, it was more the system. It wasn’t working yet he NEVER ADJUSTED. Sure our guys weren’t as good as some other teams’ guys but he never tried being aggressive.

 

[kskboys]

I think our D was a 100% both as well.

Possibly, but no one has explained to me yet why Eber had a top 10 D 3 out of 4 years in INDY, then got here and suddenly forgot how to coach.

 

[atlantacowboy]

Mike McDonald is a great coach who has a certainty in player selection to fit his defensive scheme. Seattle got way more out of Dlaw than they ever could have hoped and he became a force multiplier to an already deep and talented defensive line. But what really separates them from the pack is their secondary. Witherspoon might be their best player. He does it all and they don't put guys out there who aren't willing to tackle. There are no personnel weaknesses or lack of talent on defense (no jags) and the scheme is flexible and adaptable. Against the Patriots, they showed alignments they hadn't used in months and that the Patriots were obviously not expecting.

 

[kskboys]

Mike McDonald is a great coach who has a certainty in player selection to fit his defensive scheme. Seattle got way more out of Dlaw than they ever could have hoped and he became a force multiplier to an already deep and talented defensive line. But what really separates them from the pack is their secondary. Witherspoon might be their best player. He does it all and they don't put guys out there who aren't willing to tackle. There are no personnel weaknesses or lack of talent on defense (no jags) and the scheme is flexible and adaptable. Against the Patriots, they showed alignments they hadn't used in months and that the Patriots were obviously not expecting.

And they have 3 starting quality S's.

I wish someone would explain to Jerry what a S does and how much a good S can cover up any mistakes or open WRs.

 

[rags747]

Do you mean draft picks?

Do you mean draft picks?

No. These kids were 4and 5 star rated players out of high school, Patriots had many more of them. Now obviously what they do or did in college is a different matter.

 

[gimmesix]

It may not have been as good but generally I agree. That D is loaded with talent. But I think coaching is what puts that talent over the top. When to blitz, design of blitz and such

It's just that if you can't cover, then you are going to get burned when you blitz or when you rush four. I would have preferred that Eberflus sold out with the blitz when it became clear that rushing four was not going to work. Instead, he tried to zone away the coverage problem because he believes in the zone scheme.

To me, this was the biggest failure with him. It wasn't that we were going to suddenly turn into a great defense if he blitzed and designed/disguised them well. But it was clear that we didn't have the personnel for great man or zone coverage, so the only real choice was to try to bring pressure. What we would have likely have seen were some really big plays by offenses, but we saw those anyway.

Eberflus would have fared better than he did here with what he likes to do with the personnel he would have had in Seattle, but it's hard to say how much better. He's had top-10 defenses before when he had the personnel for them. But some coaches are much more dependent on personnel than others.

Eberflus had to go because he did not show the ability to adapt to what he had. There have to be signs that if the team gives you the talent, you can shine with it, and we saw no signs of that here.

So I guess that's the long way of me saying that I 100 percent agree that coaching puts the talent over the top. It maximizes what you've got. We didn't have much last year, but Eberflus also did not maximize it IMO.

 

[kskboys]

It's just that if you can't cover, then you are going to get burned when you blitz or when you rush four. I would have preferred that Eberflus sold out with the blitz when it became clear that rushing four was not going to work. Instead, he tried to zone away the coverage problem because he believes in the zone scheme.

To me, this was the biggest failure with him. It wasn't that we were going to suddenly turn into a great defense if he blitzed and designed/disguised them well. But it was clear that we didn't have the personnel for great man or zone coverage, so the only real choice was to try to bring pressure. What we would have likely have seen were some really big plays by offenses, but we saw those anyway.

Eberflus would have fared better than he did here with what he likes to do with the personnel he would have had in Seattle, but it's hard to say how much better. He's had top-10 defenses before when he had the personnel for them. But some coaches are much more dependent on personnel than others.

Eberflus had to go because he did not show the ability to adapt to what he had. There have to be signs that if the team gives you the talent, you can shine with it, and we saw no signs of that here.

So I guess that's the long way of me saying that I 100 percent agree that coaching puts the talent over the top. It maximizes what you've got. We didn't have much last year, but Eberflus also did not maximize it IMO.

Since we have a severe lack of talent on D, what are you claiming he didn't maximize? If you can't cover, you cannot blitz. We can't cover.

 

[gimmesix]

Since we have a severe lack of talent on D, what are you claiming he didn't maximize? If you can't cover, you cannot blitz. We can't cover.

You have to try instead of doing the same thing and expecting a different result. I don't agree with you that you cannot blitz if you can't cover. If you can't cover, then you need to blitz. Letting the QB stand back in the pocket with no pressure when you can't cover is not a formula for success.

Eberflus should have been blitzing in every way possible. After getting Quinnen Williams, he should have been using the five-man front more and bringing pressure. We showed some effectiveness out of that front.

Would we have still been a bad defense? Yeah, because we were deficient on talent. But sticking to a four-man rush and zone coverage clearly wasn't effective, so you've got to adjust and try everything to create pressure and shorten those coverage windows.

A better coach would have adjusted his attack more, even if the results weren't much better.

 

[kskboys]

Of course its both. Good system and the right players for it.

Interessting is how big is the influence of each side. And in Seattle case i think they have a lot of very good players on defense. So id say that they are that good its 65% players and 35% system.

Sounds about right.

 

[kskboys]

You have to try instead of doing the same thing and expecting a different result. I don't agree with you that you cannot blitz if you can't cover. If you can't cover, then you need to blitz. Letting the QB stand back in the pocket with no pressure when you can't cover is not a formula for success.

Eberflus should have been blitzing in every way possible. After getting Quinnen Williams, he should have been using the five-man front more and bringing pressure. We showed some effectiveness out of that front.

Would we have still been a bad defense? Yeah, because we were deficient on talent. But sticking to a four-man rush and zone coverage clearly wasn't effective, so you've got to adjust and try everything to create pressure and shorten those coverage windows.

A better coach would have adjusted his attack more, even if the results weren't much better.

No, if you can't cover and you blitz they will eat you alive. I mean, this is just common sense.

There is no formula for success when you have like 8 players on your D who are not starting quality.

 

[gimmesix]

No, if you can't cover and you blitz they will eat you alive. I mean, this is just common sense.

There is no formula for success when you have like 8 players on your D who are not starting quality.

You have to try something. You've got the worst defense in the league and you are going to keep doing the same thing? I'd rather get eaten alive if that's the case bringing all-out pressure than just sitting back and getting picked apart.

I'm not saying Eberflus would have succeeded if he changed up what he was doing. Maybe it would have even been worse (although I don't see how). I just think better coaches would have actually schemed up pressure instead of Jerry saying Eberflus said he could do that when they traded Parsons.

I think we saw an improvement in play when we used the five-man front, so we had some evidence that the defense could play better with some changes. However, Eberflus was very limited in his use of it. This is what I mean by maximizing what you've got. I think there are ways he could have maximized the talent on hand that he refused to do.

 

[MisterWaffles]

This is the second year in a row of a dominant defense being the real Super Bowl MVP, and carrying the winning team to victory. That Seahawks performance Sunday may have been even more impressive than Philly's defense completely stiffling Mahomes last year.

Hey Jerry, our esteemed general manager, are you watching this stuff? See what side of the ball is kind of important in the postseason?

 

[DuncanIso]

those Corner "Cobra" blitzes are brutal.

SHawks show overload pre-snap....

its overload at the snap.

so simple. extremely effective.

 

[kuyyo_morro]

Both teams were so disciplined that the first foul/yellow flag was thrown in 3rd quarter.

 

[FVSTONE]

Watching Seattle play defense was night and day compared to Dallas. Seattle blitzed, change coverage, and played aggressive. It was the complete opposite of how Dallas played defense. So, I'm wondering is it the players that made Seattle's defense so good or was it the system. Its probably a combination, but how much of an improvement can Dallas make on defense this year with the right coach?

If Eberturd was the Seattle's coordinator with the same players, how good would Seattle's defense be? And if McDonald was Dallas coordinator with Dallas players, how good would their defense have been?

Seattle has a real GM, who allows everyone below him to do their job, which gives him more time to do his job. The Cowboys have a meddling owner who has anointed himself as a football god, who thinks his football mind walks on water!

 

[Kwyn]

It's both. Seattle's got some registered dudes, but the amount of unblocked pressures they got last night showed that there was some excellent scheming going on as well.

Word is out now from Seattle players that their coach had solved the Patriots in the film room and found thst their linemen had a tell that allowed the Hawks to know what was coming on almost every play.

Here is some video

https://bsky.app/profile/fourverts.bsky.social/post/3mehloptya223

 

[Kwyn]

Here is an idea.

The Coaches draft and sign FA's that fit their scheme.

We’ve tried that and it was a mess

 

[stilltheguru]

Both. They have Dawgs at ever level and he's a great coach. You need both to win a title

 

[Kwyn]

““We had a good tell on what they like to do and how they like to play and how they were going to attack us.”

“We had a tell on their guards and their tackles, how they like to set, they’re going to overset on certain rushes, they’re going to fall for certain moves any time a group of guys get after them, and today I think we did that”

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profo...emen-had-a-tell-seahawks-knew-what-was-coming