PDA

View Full Version : No Marinelli!


jballa838
01-10-2009, 03:24 PM
the only coach to ever go 0-16 is not our DC! Its the TB LBC. Thoughts?

Xiomera
01-10-2009, 03:26 PM
He'll have you all believing in the invisible in no time.

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/3706/marinellianphilosophyvh1.png

summond822
01-10-2009, 08:24 PM
Please, please give me a DC who blitzes (effectively)!!!! Is that too much to ask?

That said, no to Marinelli. He doesn't impress me as someone who is going to fit in with the Mora's coaching style, and I think that Mora is planning on being heavily involved in the playcalling. We need someone who is going to place an emphasis on getting pressure on the QB.

bearsfan_51
01-10-2009, 08:28 PM
Looks like Jim Mora wants to run the Tampa 2. Not sure how the personel of the Hawks fits into that, although the d-line is good at getting after the QB.

GB12
01-10-2009, 08:29 PM
I thought they were running the Tampa 2

toonsterwu
01-10-2009, 08:36 PM
They should be alright switching to a Tampa 2, assuming they bring back Leroy Hill (haven't followed). They may need to tweak it somewhat, sort of like what Gregg Williams did in DC. Tatupu should be fine in the MIKE role.

The following statement is going to sound worse than I mean for it to sound. Anyhow, I do worry whether or not they have the elite DL talent ... or if they are more like the Lions. Now, that sounds horrible, but if Detroit had a dominant end and/or tackle, the role pieces they added would fit in a bit better. I think Seattle's talent is far better than Detroit's, and their depth is excellent, but to make that adjustment to a solid cover 2, they need an impact piece. I like guys like Tapp/Mebane, but they aren't guys that will really takeover. A rebound from Kerney may provide the necessary goods.

I will be curious about the Seahawks drafting, though. Say, Matt Stafford is there in the first. Do they pass? After all, they might not get a chance at a top QB. Give Stafford a year or two behind Hasselbeck, and they might transition better.

summond822
01-10-2009, 09:23 PM
They should be alright switching to a Tampa 2, assuming they bring back Leroy Hill (haven't followed). They may need to tweak it somewhat, sort of like what Gregg Williams did in DC. Tatupu should be fine in the MIKE role.

The following statement is going to sound worse than I mean for it to sound. Anyhow, I do worry whether or not they have the elite DL talent ... or if they are more like the Lions. Now, that sounds horrible, but if Detroit had a dominant end and/or tackle, the role pieces they added would fit in a bit better. I think Seattle's talent is far better than Detroit's, and their depth is excellent, but to make that adjustment to a solid cover 2, they need an impact piece. I like guys like Tapp/Mebane, but they aren't guys that will really takeover. A rebound from Kerney may provide the necessary goods.

I will be curious about the Seahawks drafting, though. Say, Matt Stafford is there in the first. Do they pass? After all, they might not get a chance at a top QB. Give Stafford a year or two behind Hasselbeck, and they might transition better.

Ruskell likes to add a OL and a DL player each year. In past years he has drafted to the position where they needed more help on defense (DE or DT). This year, with the injury to Kerney being a big problem, I fully expect them to spend an early round pick on a pass rushing DE. However, if they don't bring back Rocky Bernard then they will have a bigger need at DT and will likely spend the pick to replace him with a big run stuffing DT.

The Stafford question is an interesting one though, and I really don't know the answer to it. It is likely a smart move, but I don't think that Ruskell is going to want to pay big time money to a player that isn't even going to see the field, except in the pre-season, for at least 1-2 more years.

jballa838
01-10-2009, 09:30 PM
we drafted lojack in the 1st last year. Think he could help the pass rush this year?

summond822
01-11-2009, 02:11 PM
we drafted lojack in the 1st last year. Think he could help the pass rush this year?

No.

I didn't understand the lojack pick last year, he seems like he's more of a run stopper at defensive end. I thought that he was drafted to help in run support. They talked about sliding him over the guard in pass rushing situations, but I don't think that he will ever be a good pass rusher.

jballa838
01-11-2009, 02:15 PM
No.

I didn't understand the lojack pick last year, he seems like he's more of a run stopper at defensive end. I thought that he was drafted to help in run support. They talked about sliding him over the guard in pass rushing situations, but I don't think that he will ever be a good pass rusher.
I hated it last year, and still hate it. What about Larry English in the 2nd? Think he would be a good fit?

summond822
01-11-2009, 03:04 PM
I hated it last year, and still hate it. What about Larry English in the 2nd? Think he would be a good fit?

We do need a pass rusher...but until I see Ruskell select a small school prospect, I am going to have to say we pass on English. He may jump for someone like Michael Johnson in the second as a pass rush specialist...but I have way too many questions about Johnson, and I don't think that he is a Ruskell type of guy, meaning he doesn't go hard the entire time. If they did draft Johnson, and he was groomed by Kerney, then perhaps we could have a dominant DE for years to come.

I still think that Jackson was just another attempt to get a bigger DL that was more effective at stopping the run, but Mebane really stepped up, and I think that their platoon at DT stopped the run much more effectively this year. Meaning that Jackson was a wasted pick IMO.