SoonerPatriot said:
Sorry Box. I think we've all been a little touchy here this week. You're the film guy so I'll make a point and you can help me by telling me if it's accurate. I'm not a film guy at all so I have respect for people who can sit and break it down.
In a nutshell, it's always been my feeling that we don't stop the run as well with Seymour out of the lineup as with him in it. WHen he returned this year from his injury I felt like that was the point our defense started to gell. We were controlling the line of scrimmage. I know that's basic but just an opinion.
What is your opinion of the way our defense plays with and without Seymour?
No worries Sooner!
It's a limited focus that doesn't take into account how well Wilfork and Colvin were playing, not to mention everybody's favorite LB duo. By player;
Colvin started out subbing for Vrabel and being eaten up at the point of attack, as the season progressed you could see him progress as he got in more time, by the KC game he was a run stopping monster who required a TE/FB double team while Seymour was being handled by a single OL (1st half).
Wilfork was trying to do too much and leaving his gap assignments open, this meant Beisel and Brown had to pick up his slack in the middle when they were struggling with their own assignments. By KC, Wilfork was starting to get it and in the second half of the game settled down and did a better job controlling the middle. Bruschi and Vrabel inside helped a heck of a lot.
I use the KC game as a measuring stick because that was where the tide turned on the line. It was Sey's 2nd or 3rd game back from injury and in the first half they shoved the ball down his throat. In the second half he shut them down and from there to the end of the season was the dominate SOB we've come to love.
While Sey was out Jarvis was in his spot most of the time, and playing with a bum shoulder alongside struggling players in Wilfork, Colvin, Beisel, and Brown. Vrabel was in there a lot, but Rosie was getting more and more time. You can see Jarvis control his gaps, and the running plays going inside through holes left by the 3-some in training, or outside whenever Colvin was in.
Seymour is, in general, a better run stopper then Jarvis. There were specific times, like the Oakland game, where the LT kicked Sey's butt, while Jarvis subbing in controlled the LT. That was when they had to go to the four man front because Sey couldn't control the LT, and Wilfork was playing doormat to the C. Once Sey was moved inside with Vince things got disruptive - you may remember Vince's Int that was turned into a fumble recovery, Jarvis jarred the ball loose coming off the edge because they had shifted blockers inside to manage Sey and Wilfork.
Seymour is the best DL in the NFL today, I'm convinced of that, controlling for Patriots' bias. Still, if BB is unable to extend Sey, I'm also convinced we can still have an excellent run defense. Let's face it, Pittsburgh and other teams have strong run defenses with players I'd rate well below Seymour.
Jarvis is a better third down man, but he is a solid DL who will control his gaps well. If the other players do the same then the damage is limited. Hill has been written off by some, but I'm remembering that it took Warren and Wilfork two years to develop into the space eaters they are today. Hill hasn't had anywhere near their playing time to improve his technique and reads in actual combat. I believe that if he were to wind up on the line for half a season or better, we would see a dramatic improvement.
To sum up, extending Seymour is the best option, but if the cost is prohibitive, Hill and Jarvis platooning will still plug up their assignments. Hill will actually get better as the season progresses and he finally gets to apply what he has learned but doesn't have memorized in his reflexes.
Hope this makes sense, midnight has snuck up on me again and I'm feeling that old mental pumpkin dropoff!
