Alan Branch

[Goodyear Card]

94. Alan Branch, DT, Seattle Seahawks
During his time as a Cardinal we’d seen flashes from Branch, but nothing to suggest he was capable of playing like he did in 2011. None of his numbers really jump out, but his game was about so much more than what can be measured on a stat sheet. A disruptive presence, Branch was the type of player who redirected runs and facilitated others on his team racking up the stats. The Seahawks player personnel department is doing a great job of finding defensive players; using them to highlight their strengths, and reaping the rewards.
Best Performance: Week 14 versus St Louis (+3.3).
Key Stat: Had our third-highest grade of all defensive tackles in run defense (+19.2).


http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/04/29/pff-top-101-of-2011-101-to-91/

 

[RugbyMuffin]

I do not like Alan Branch.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[1DS]

Branch was always a talented yet selfish player, he just didn't like playing NT because it's not a glamour position.

It was obvious what a good player he was the ONE year we played him @ DE. He constantly made plays and was very disruptive. We just refused to let him play DE on a consistent basis. It's like the coaching staff didn't want to "give in" to his request to play DE because they didn't want to send the message to other players that anyone other than the staff was calling the shots. I can understand that.

Too bad it didn't work out here. Eff him now.

 

[THESMEL]

He had more range than anybody his size in the NFL at NT. He was always around plays way down the field. He could occupy 2 blockers 50% of the time at NT. that was good enough for me but others always ragged on him.

He did a good job for us, but another example of this staff getting the least out of its talent. great RB's must prioritise blocking- great run blockers must prioritise pass blocking. WATCH WHAT DEUCE DOES!

 

[Goldfield]

Loads of talent. Motivation, not so much.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

He had more range than anybody his size in the NFL at NT. He was always around plays way down the field. He could occupy 2 blockers 50% of the time at NT. that was good enough for me but others always ragged on him.

He did a good job for us, but another example of this staff getting the least out of its talent. great RB's must prioritise blocking- great run blockers must prioritise pass blocking. WATCH WHAT DEUCE DOES!

That would be the whoppers of all BS I have heard in my life.

This staff saved Branch's career, after he decided he knew what was best. Branch could have made millions as a NT, but instead he decided he would make a very average salary to be an average DE.

Blaming anything Branch or Deuce has failed to do on anyone else but themselves is just enabling poor work habits, and selfish attitudes.

Loads of talent. Motivation, not so much.

+1.

There is a reason he is in Seattle. Our staff, tho complete failures in the eyes of some, were smart enough to cut their losses and add actual football players like Campbell, Dockett, Carter, Eason, etc., etc. Strange "the staff" seems to be able to get all kinds of talent out of players that actually work to be better professional football players. Seems like they expect that when they give a man money to do a job, that they expect them to do the job like a man. Not like a 5th grader that has to be driven to baseball practice, and convinced that he should go out and play to what he committed to.

 

[cardpa]

That would be the whoppers of all BS I have heard in my life.

This staff saved Branch's career, after he decided he knew what was best. Branch could have made millions as a NT, but instead he decided he would make a very average salary to be an average DE.

Blaming anything Branch or Deuce has failed to do on anyone else but themselves is just enabling poor work habits, and selfish attitudes.



+1.

There is a reason he is in Seattle. Our staff, tho complete failures in the eyes of some, were smart enough to cut their losses and add actual football players like Campbell, Dockett, Carter, Eason, etc., etc. Strange "the staff" seems to be able to get all kinds of talent out of players that actually work to be better professional football players. Seems like they expect that when they give a man money to do a job, that they expect them to do the job like a man. Not like a 5th grader that has to be driven to baseball practice, and convinced that he should go out and play to what he committed to.

So what suddenly turned to light on for Branch? He was so so here and then he goes to Seattle and boom he is playing and contributing more than he ever did here. You have to question that.

Now is Deuce plays lights out too, its another question that has to be answered. It seems that once you get in Whiz's doghouse it's almost impossible to get out of it. I remember when James ended up there for half a season. Then in the playoffs he was so instrumental in running the ball because THT could not get it done.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

So what suddenly turned to light on for Branch? He was so so here and then he goes to Seattle and boom he is playing and contributing more than he ever did here. You have to question that.

Now is Deuce plays lights out too, its another question that has to be answered. It seems that once you get in Whiz's doghouse it's almost impossible to get out of it. I remember when James ended up there for half a season. Then in the playoffs he was so instrumental in running the ball because THT could not get it done.

I'll question the handling of Edge before I question the handling of Branch and Lutui.

It is their job to come in, in-shape, and ready to play where their coaches tell them to. Regardless of the fact they are football players, it is their JOBS!

Pretty basic things that a coach is asking from a football player, and they were no doing it. In these cases, I will side with the coaches. Why? Cause this team hasn't won jack but for two seasons, and changes on how things are approached around the organization have always been needed.

Branch and Lutui don't want to act like pros, then they shouldn't be treated like pros, or paid like them.

Let'em play for Carroll, where the inmates run the asylum.

 

[Duckjake]

Tough to compare Branch to how our Dline played last season. Who knows how good or bad Branch would have been if he played for Horton?

We have plenty of former players still in the NFL. Just shows that when it comes to drafting talent the Cards have done fairly well. As we all know they just don't keep them. Part of that's the Cards fault part of it the players and the largest part the salary cap.

 

[Chopper0080]

94. Alan Branch, DT, Seattle Seahawks
During his time as a Cardinal we’d seen flashes from Branch, but nothing to suggest he was capable of playing like he did in 2011. None of his numbers really jump out, but his game was about so much more than what can be measured on a stat sheet. A disruptive presence, Branch was the type of player who redirected runs and facilitated others on his team racking up the stats. The Seahawks player personnel department is doing a great job of finding defensive players; using them to highlight their strengths, and reaping the rewards.
Best Performance: Week 14 versus St Louis (+3.3).
Key Stat: Had our third-highest grade of all defensive tackles in run defense (+19.2).


http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/04/29/pff-top-101-of-2011-101-to-91/

I find it very ironic when a site ranking players using statistical analysis ranks a player because, despite his pedestrian numbers, "his game was about so much more than what can be measured on a stat sheet."

Makes me question ProFootballFocus's statistical analysis even more.

 

[football karma]

a couple thoughts:

1. Sometimes it just takes big men a few years to round into form

2. Branch went from a 3-4 to a 4-3. In the 3-4, he was no good at NT. Better at DE. Looks like he really fits a 4-3 D Tackle and what the Seahawks ask of them. Some schemes suit players better than others. It happens.


FWIW: in an interview with Bickley/ MJ, Whis noted that the FO has gotten much better at identifying the kinds of players that suit what they want to do. Not just talent, but fit. You could chalk Alan Branch up to that learning curve.

 

[BACH]

So what suddenly turned to light on for Branch? He was so so here and then he goes to Seattle and boom he is playing and contributing more than he ever did here. You have to question that.

Now is Deuce plays lights out too, its another question that has to be answered. It seems that once you get in Whiz's doghouse it's almost impossible to get out of it. I remember when James ended up there for half a season. Then in the playoffs he was so instrumental in running the ball because THT could not get it done.

Reality check! They suddenly realize that their not as coverted by other teams as they expected.

 

[joeshmo]

So what suddenly turned to light on for Branch? He was so so here and then he goes to Seattle and boom he is playing and contributing more than he ever did here. You have to question that.

Now is Deuce plays lights out too, its another question that has to be answered. It seems that once you get in Whiz's doghouse it's almost impossible to get out of it. I remember when James ended up there for half a season. Then in the playoffs he was so instrumental in running the ball because THT could not get it done.

You don't have to question it. Branch went from a 3-4 defense to a 4-3 defense. Him uping his game could be as simple as that.

As for Edge in the Dog House, there was very good reasons for him to have been in that dog house. Coaches had no choice to put him there. He never would have been in that dog house if he actually communicated with the coaches that he would not being showing up for some team activities because his girl friend and mother of his kids was on her death bed, but Edge didn't communicate that with anyone and no one knew about it until she finally passed away. Some people seem to always forget the actual facts of the situation.

 

[Duckjake]

You don't have to question it. Branch went from a 3-4 defense to a 4-3 defense. Him uping his game could be as simple as that.

As for Edge in the Dog House, there was very good reasons for him to have been in that dog house. Coaches had no choice to put him there. He never would have been in that dog house if he actually communicated with the coaches that he would not being showing up for some team activities because his girl friend and mother of his kids was on her death bed, but Edge didn't communicate that with anyone and no one knew about it until she finally passed away. Some people seem to always forget the actual facts of the situation.

Maybe that's because its the first time we've ever heard about this. Can't forget something you never learned.

 

[Assface]

Branch was a penetrating type of DL in college and expecting him to become a NT who occupies several linemen just because of his size is stupid. You draft the player that they are, not the player you want them to be.

 

[Darkside]

It seems that once you get in Whiz's doghouse it's almost impossible to get out of it. I remember when James ended up there for half a season. Then in the playoffs he was so instrumental in running the ball because THT could not get it done.

I just wanted to comment on this portion of your post. Totally agree. I think that's Whisenhunt's major flaw. Once you're in the doghouse you're done on this team, I think that's been proven time and again. Nothing you can do, no matter how hard you work, absolutely nothing, will get you out of it. You're done at that point. It's like once he makes up his mind, he just sections you off into a part of his mind that is like, he's a total waste of time to even contemplate. I totally agree with that assessment, and as I said I think that's his one major flaw. He has other flaws, don't get me wrong, but that's a glaring one. There's no chance to redeem yourself.

As a side note, Beanie is a smart man, because I think he was on the edge of that, but last year he played hurt and played in pain and Whisenhunt was glowing about him afterwards. But I really had the feeling that if Beanie hadn't sacrificed everything he had Whis would have been done with him.

 

[Dayman]

You don't have to question it. Branch went from a 3-4 defense to a 4-3 defense. Him uping his game could be as simple as that.

I think this pretty much sums it up. Branch wasn't a fit for this scheme. He's an incredibly talented 325 lb player, so I understand what Whis was thinking. But his skills are much better suited for a four-man line. I'm not surprised he's doing well in Seattle. I just wish we didn't pass on Lamar Woodley to get him.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

I think this pretty much sums it up. Branch wasn't a fit for this scheme. He's an incredibly talented 325 lb player, so I understand what Whis was thinking. But his skills are much better suited for a four-man line.

He can't be that talented if he can only play one position, and one type of scheme.

You are correct on one thing, the Cardinals totally whiffed on picking Branch, and trading up for him no-less. There must have been a reason so many teams passed him in the draft, and IMO, he is showing why every season. Branch knows what's best, even if what he thinks costs him millions in pay, and production.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Branch was a penetrating type of DL in college and expecting him to become a NT who occupies several linemen just because of his size is stupid. You draft the player that they are, not the player you want them to be.

Precisely.

 

[LarryStalling]

Never could figure out how trying to fit a square peg into a round hole could work, but the Card staff sure has a strong tendency to do just that. This draft hopefully will be a departure from that problem.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Never could figure out how trying to fit a square peg into a round hole could work, but the Card staff sure has a strong tendency to do just that. This draft hopefully will be a departure from that problem.

Agreed.

This draft they drafted versatile players, that can play where you need them. Thank goodness for it.

 

[JeffGollin]

Never could figure out how trying to fit a square peg into a round hole could work, but the Card staff sure has a strong tendency to do just that. This draft hopefully will be a departure from that problem.

Didn't Branch get drafted while Pendergast was still our DC?

In the early days of the Wiz-era, our defense was in the very beginnings of transition from Dennis Green's 4-3 (NT/UT) defensive scheme to what would eventually be a Pittsburgh-style 34.

That transition typically does not magically occur at the push of a button because the two approaches require different prototypical players.

As I recall it, Pendergast eased us into a hybrid defensive employing both 4-3 and 3-4 fronts depending on the situation. (You could see brief flashes of dazzling plays being made, but equally as often, a defensive player would take a risk and get caught with his pants down).

Branch apparently did not fit the new scheme (He was originally drafted to become a NT in an eventual 3-4, but it turned out he was more effective playing defensive end in a 3-4 and apparently, he's even better-suited to play inside in a 4-3).

With the addition of more and more defensive players suited to the scheme, our defense continued to gradually morph each year into a more traditional (LeBeau-style) 3-4, but it wasn't until Horton arrived on the scene that the conversion was close to being fully implemented (We're still a couple of Woodley/Harrison-type OLB's away from fully fitting Horton's Pittsburgh model). But even so, our defense is operating at a higher level now than it has in recent history.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Didn't Branch get drafted while Pendergast was still our DC?

In the early days of the Wiz-era, our defense was in the very beginnings of transition from Dennis Green's 4-3 (NT/UT) defensive scheme to what would eventually be a Pittsburgh-style 34.

That transition typically does not magically occur at the push of a button because the two approaches require different prototypical players.

As I recall it, Pendergast eased us into a hybrid defensive employing both 4-3 and 3-4 fronts depending on the situation. (You could see brief flashes of dazzling plays being made, but equally as often, a defensive player would take a risk and get caught with his pants down).

Branch apparently did not fit the new scheme (He was originally drafted to become a NT in an eventual 3-4, but it turned out he was more effective playing defensive end in a 3-4 and apparently, he's even better-suited to play inside in a 4-3).

With the addition of more and more defensive players suited to the scheme, our defense continued to gradually morph each year into a more traditional (LeBeau-style) 3-4, but it wasn't until Horton arrived on the scene that the conversion was close to being fully implemented (We're still a couple of Woodley/Harrison-type OLB's away from fully fitting Horton's Pittsburgh model). But even so, our defense is operating at a higher level now than it has in recent history.

I think this often repeated point ignores the type and quality of our D-ends. At no point, to my recollection, did LeBeau have the talents of a DD and CC at his disposal. Horton has adjusted his scheme given this fact.

 

[Duckjake]

That transition typically does not magically occur at the push of a button because the two approaches require different prototypical players.

Whisenhunt even said that they wanted to go to the 3-4 in 2008 but didn't have the proper personnel. Found that in a couple of articles researching Karlos Dansby's production when people were claiming he played ILB in a 3-4 in 2008.

Heck of a player, Dansby, first 5 years in the NFL he had 24.5 sacks, 9 interceptions, and 10 Forced Fumbles. And of course we all saw what he did vs Green Bay in the '09 playoffs. You'd be hard pressed to find many NFL LBs over the last 10 years who had those kind of number across the board. Oddly enough one LB who had similar type numbers was Joey Porter. 35.5 sacks 5 INTs and 10 FFs his first 5 seasons.

Glad we got to watch Karlos play for 6 seasons.