Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

User avatar
Sibelius Hindemith
Posts: 11260
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by Sibelius Hindemith » Thu May 19, 2022 3:00 pm

D-train wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:23 pm
Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:10 pm
Clint Hurtt was on with Salk yesterday and it was a very good interview. He sounds likehe won't be running that mamby pamby bullshit coverage scheme that they did under Norton. He wants to be more aggressive with the corners.
Yeah I think people are underestimating how huge trashing that dogshit scheme will be. Throw in a healthy Adams playing in that new improved scheme, the two new drafted corners, the two drafted Edge rushers and the FA LBs and I think our D might even be close to top 10.
Here's the link. Interview starts at 1:25. Definitely worth a listen and will relieve a lot of our worries about the D going forward.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/category ... =Mike+Salk

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 67892
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by D-train » Thu May 19, 2022 3:14 pm

Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 3:00 pm
D-train wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:23 pm
Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:10 pm
Clint Hurtt was on with Salk yesterday and it was a very good interview. He sounds likehe won't be running that mamby pamby bullshit coverage scheme that they did under Norton. He wants to be more aggressive with the corners.
Yeah I think people are underestimating how huge trashing that dogshit scheme will be. Throw in a healthy Adams playing in that new improved scheme, the two new drafted corners, the two drafted Edge rushers and the FA LBs and I think our D might even be close to top 10.
Here's the link. Interview starts at 1:25. Definitely worth a listen and will relieve a lot of our worries about the D going forward.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/category ... =Mike+Salk
Thanks its awesome. Key takeaway is the shift away from the passive reactive "Vision and Break" zone coverage to Match up Zone which sounds like a Man to Man/Zone hybrid.
dt

SeattleAddict
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by SeattleAddict » Thu May 19, 2022 4:25 pm

D-train wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:23 pm
Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:10 pm
Clint Hurtt was on with Salk yesterday and it was a very good interview. He sounds likehe won't be running that mamby pamby bullshit coverage scheme that they did under Norton. He wants to be more aggressive with the corners.
Yeah I think people are underestimating how huge trashing that dogshit scheme will be. Throw in a healthy Adams playing in that new improved scheme, the two new drafted corners, the two drafted Edge rushers and the FA LBs and I think our D might even be close to top 10.
top 10??? hahahaha OK it's betting time. This defense is bottom half for sure, more likely bottom 5-10 (unless they sign some people).

I mean, I agree on the dogshit scheme, but not having BWagz out there reading the offense and putting people in position to stop them counteracts that. Plus we still have no #1 CB and a bunch of mediocre pass rushers. Even the rookies and Nwosu haven't been the double digit sack guy that we need.

User avatar
ddraig
Posts: 5190
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 1:17 am

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by ddraig » Thu May 19, 2022 4:54 pm

Just out of spite I watched the Seahawk/Bronco Super Bowl game last night. It was glorious!

auroraave
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:35 pm
Location: Beverly Hills, Ca.

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by auroraave » Thu May 19, 2022 5:14 pm

SeattleAddict wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 3:56 am
auroraave wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 9:39 pm
The RB situation was so unsettled as no one knew if Carson would be back, so Seattle went out and drafted the top rusher in the country in Rashaad Penny, a Heisman finalist with no injury history, the same guy some people call one of the worst draft picks. When your top need is an RB and you draft an RB, seems pretty logical. Carson returning and Penny getting injured were not data the team had available at the time. But on here - the meltdowns have been priceless and, as always, never take any context into account. lmao!
No, the selection of a RB wasn't the problem, the problem was taking PENNY. Michel, Chubb, Jones and Guice were rated higher, Penny having a second round grade. The problem was they reached for him, and besides Carson, they also had Rawls, although he was for some reason in the doghouse. Hell, imagine if they'd drafted Lamar Jackson and made him a RB. We'd have been 16-0.

Besides that, the complaint about Penny wasn't the injuries, it was the fact that he absolutely sucked. Could not break a tackle, couldn't AVOID a tackler, and couldn't hit a hole for 3 1/2 years. The injuries were just a punchline about him, not the complaint.

I am still dumbfounded by what I saw the last 5-6 weeks of the season. That could not be the same guy. It was just bizarre how he looked like a completely different player.
I will tell you that I generally dismiss 'the experts' and their 'opinions' because they are usually just going with the popular pick, the easy pick, yada yada yada. Same with PFF - I dismiss that stuff outright. So many fundamental errors are possible and it's all opinion based and 'hot takes.'

That said, those backs would absolutely been good picks - but who's to say they would not have been injured too? That was always what I heard the most - complaints about his injuries. I seem to recall Penny struggling, but also showed flashes at times, but ultimately, never got enough carries to really give a quality sample size to be judged in - IMO. And yes - that is because he got injured too much.

I was at the Stanford/SDST game and watched him torch a very stout Stanford defense - so when Seattle picked him, I thought he was a good pick - knowing that RB was the most glaring need and having seen what he was capable of, live. That is why the pick made perfect sense to me. Too many 'in hindsight' drafters on here. Ironically, Penny is not who I was wanting - I was thinking lineman - so I am not defending the pick as my own - but the rationality behind it and seeing him live made the pick completely logical to me. Struggles and injuries cannot be forecast - he dominated in college and had NO injury history.

Penny now is arguably the #1 back in a very deep backfield - imagine it if all comes full circle and he dominates after all this time. All those other backs will be in decline and he will just be peaking. Funny how things can play out. Or he can strain his labia and be out all season. Really could go either way. :lol:

Hasslecracked
Posts: 936
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 2:23 am

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by Hasslecracked » Thu May 19, 2022 5:42 pm

SeattleAddict wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 4:25 pm
D-train wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:23 pm
Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 2:10 pm
Clint Hurtt was on with Salk yesterday and it was a very good interview. He sounds likehe won't be running that mamby pamby bullshit coverage scheme that they did under Norton. He wants to be more aggressive with the corners.
Yeah I think people are underestimating how huge trashing that dogshit scheme will be. Throw in a healthy Adams playing in that new improved scheme, the two new drafted corners, the two drafted Edge rushers and the FA LBs and I think our D might even be close to top 10.
top 10??? hahahaha OK it's betting time. This defense is bottom half for sure, more likely bottom 5-10 (unless they sign some people).

I mean, I agree on the dogshit scheme, but not having BWagz out there reading the offense and putting people in position to stop them counteracts that. Plus we still have no #1 CB and a bunch of mediocre pass rushers. Even the rookies and Nwosu haven't been the double digit sack guy that we need.
I personally felt Wags was out of position and a step slower last year. To me, Brooks outplayed Bobby by a wide margin. A lot of Wags tackles were cause he was the 3rd guy there and got credited with an assist

Michael K.
Posts: 11344
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by Michael K. » Thu May 19, 2022 7:44 pm

D-train wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 1:54 pm
Michael K. wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 1:47 pm
SeattleAddict wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 3:56 am

I am still dumbfounded by what I saw the last 5-6 weeks of the season. That could not be the same guy. It was just bizarre how he looked like a completely different player.
He is about to be up for a second contract. If he stays healthy he will probably get one too, but since he is a RB it won't be very long, and probably not as much money as he wants.
He just got one.

https://www.nfl.com/news/rashaad-penny- ... -deal-2022
Yeah, and even one year and 6.5 wouldn't have been possible without the finish to last year. He HAD to have that to make any money. But, name a first round RB that was successful and had his next deal be one year long? He had to save his career, and thanks to a very unimpressive beginning of his career, he has to again.

Michael K.
Posts: 11344
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by Michael K. » Thu May 19, 2022 7:46 pm

Hasslecracked wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 5:42 pm

I personally felt Wags was out of position and a step slower last year. To me, Brooks outplayed Bobby by a wide margin. A lot of Wags tackles were cause he was the 3rd guy there and got credited with an assist
Chicken or egg, player or scheme, that is the question. I thought a lot of his tackles were also because we asked a fucking MLB to cover on third down, and he gave up a first down catch and made the tackle. Lots of tackles behind the sticks, and I think more of that is on scheme than the talent. I wouldn't have paid B Wags, but I don't fully blame him for his decline last year either. We played probably the stupidest defensive scheme in the NFL last year, and made me wonder what the fuck was in the water in Seattle. What ever it was, Lake and Norton can keep drinking it now, for all I care!

Nwadventure
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Denver Radio v. Mike Salk

Post by Nwadventure » Thu May 19, 2022 11:31 pm

By game 3 Donkey fans gonna be like wait we gave up how much for this guy ? RW going to struggle with elevation/cold, luckily for him it doesn't rain much because the guy straight up cant throw a wet ball-) - Don't mean to be a Russ hater and appreciate what he has done but that last Rams playoff dud and him going Hollywood with baby mama really soured me- Ready for something fun and unpredictable with the new guys coming in and I don't really care if we lose I guess since winning with RW was always barely- predictable ugly ball if that makes any sense.

Post Reply