They're Getting Pressure on the QB

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
They're getting pressure on the QB. They just have bass-ackwards principles on the backend. They play outside leverage 7-15 yards off the LoS. Slants, crossers, and, hitches, are always open due to this style choice.

This isn't a this year problem, either. The is what they started doing since showing Richard the door and made the switch to Norton.

Opposing QBs get far too many easy, pitch and catch throws. Yay, you didn't get roasted for the TD over the top, but you just gave up the easy first down, and can't get off the field to save your life.

The Seahawks have long, physical corners that they should be pressing, with inside leverage, forcing throws over the top where their length can be a factor. If you want to play off-coverage then get smaller, quicker, more agile corners that can play that style.

Until that changes it won't matter who they got rushing the passer. Opposing teams are going to continue to feast in the passing game, regardless, as they have been for YEARS under Ken Norton's watch. This is not a new problem, Quinn can fix this. He played more press coverage in his 2 years as DC, than all other PC-DCs, in Seattle combined.

Quinn was terrible in ATL you say?

My retort to that would be, look at Pete right now here in SEA, a tremendous, defensive head coach who has a terrible defense. Quinn wasn't the DC in ATL, he was the head coach. Those are two different jobs, that require two different skill sets. Gus Bradley was terrible in JAX as a head coach, doing very well again as a DC with the Chargers. Some guys are just good coordinators. Bring back Quinn!

Realistically, I don't see Pete demoting Norton, though. Think about it. He isn't going to walk into Norton's office and be like "I know we're 5-0, but we're bringing in Quinn, so can you please head to the LBer meeting room?"

I mean, that is what should happen. They're on a bye week, which makes it even easier to transition. At the very least bring Quinn onboard as a consultant. But no, Pete is going to continue to ride with his buddy, we're screwed on that side of the ball. The defense is going to keep getting worse like it has been (going on 7 consecutive seasons.) Russ and the Offense are going to have to carry this thing.

There is hope. The 2018 Chiefs were really, really bad on defense and almost made and won the Superbowl that year. If not for Dee Ford lining up offsides in the AFC Championship Game, when they all but had that game won.

==========

And on a final note:

Pete is going to kill his defense if he keeps playing this style. I know he doesn't like it, but they are going to have to play more aggressive, and take more chances, which can potentially lead to giving up more big plays, and TDs. But the alternative is having the defense on the field for 70-80 plays a game, and they all get injured. Pick your poison, Pete.
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
6,888
Reaction score
1,054
This is a terrible defense and it is very likely forced on us by Pete.

Norton was horrible anyway. Not sure that would matter.

(Quinn could fix this.

Bradley had the same players and never fielded as good a defense.)

The problem is will Pete bother to change since we are 'winning'? Likely not.

It took Wilson literally threatening Pete and the FO for Pete to change the offense.

We don't have anyone on defense that can threaten Pete. So we are probably stuck with it.
 

IndyHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
7,958
Reaction score
1,597
Fade..You among others wanted more $$$ to the offense
and that's what happened..
I'm not saying the talent isn't there on D but it's not close
to previous LOB years..
It's going to take awhile for guys to become seasoned and
they still will have to recycle players in certain spots till they
find a good one but good depth on a budget?
that is going to be difficult.
 

hawks85

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2014
Messages
1,054
Reaction score
396
Location
Seattle, Washington
Fade":1iiqxrpo said:
They're getting pressure on the QB. They just have bass-ackwards principles on the backend. They play outside leverage 7-15 yards off the LoS. Slants, crossers, and, hitches, are always open due to this style choice.

This isn't a this year problem, either. The is what they started doing since showing Richard the door and made the switch to Norton.

Opposing QBs get far too many easy, pitch and catch throws. Yay, you didn't get roasted for the TD over the top, but you just gave up the easy first down, and can't get off the field to save your life.

The Seahawks have long, physical corners that they should be pressing, with inside leverage, forcing throws over the top where their length can be a factor. If you want to play off-coverage then get smaller, quicker, more agile corners that can play that style.

Until that changes it won't matter who they got rushing the passer. Opposing teams are going to continue to feast in the passing game, regardless, as they have been for YEARS under Ken Norton's watch. This is not a new problem, Quinn can fix this. He played more press coverage in his 2 years as DC, than all other PC-DCs, in Seattle combined.

Quinn was terrible in ATL you say?

My retort to that would be, look at Pete right now here in SEA, a tremendous, defensive head coach who has a terrible defense. Quinn wasn't the DC in ATL, he was the head coach. Those are two different jobs, that require two different skill sets. Gus Bradley was terrible in JAX as a head coach, doing very well again as a DC with the Chargers. Some guys are just good coordinators. Bring back Quinn!

Realistically, I don't see Pete demoting Norton, though. Think about it. He isn't going to walk into Norton's office and be like "I know we're 5-0, but we're bringing in Quinn, so can you please head to the LBer meeting room?"

I mean, that is what should happen. They're on a bye week, which makes it even easier to transition. At the very least bring Quinn onboard as a consultant. But no, Pete is going to continue to ride with his buddy, we're screwed on that side of the ball. The defense is going to keep getting worse like it has been (going on 7 consecutive seasons.) Russ and the Offense are going to have to carry this thing.

There is hope. The 2018 Chiefs were really, really bad on defense and almost made and won the Superbowl that year. If not for Dee Ford lining up offsides in the AFC Championship Game, when they all but had that game won.

==========

And on a final note:

Pete is going to kill his defense if he keeps playing this style. I know he doesn't like it, but they are going to have to play more aggressive, and take more chances, which can potentially lead to giving up more big plays, and TDs. But the alternative is having the defense on the field for 70-80 plays a game, and they all get injured. Pick your poison, Pete.

This is exactly my point. Look at Spags Chiefs DC, he was a Horrible head coach for the Rams, but he's a good DC. Norton isn't a DC he's a position coach and Quinn isn't a HC he's a D-coord. It isn't out of reality to bring Quinn in at some capacity. If this team is serious about getting deep into the playoffs and even winning a SB, they need to do the right thing and make Quinn the DC tomorrow. We will not win a SB with this current D. it just wont happen. Making the switch can't hurt, hell we're already giving up freaking 500 yards a game, it can't get any worse, and Quinn is a CLEAR upgrade over Norton and no one will convince me otherwise. Nothing is fair in this life, and Pete needs to stop being friends with these coaches and start thinking business. He doesn't want to demote Norton, why? because they are buddies. Do the right thing Seattle
 

getnasty

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,462
Reaction score
659
TwistedHusky":2n55cfds said:
This is a terrible defense and it is very likely forced on us by Pete.

Norton was horrible anyway. Not sure that would matter.

(Quinn could fix this.

Bradley had the same players and never fielded as good a defense.)

The problem is will Pete bother to change since we are 'winning'? Likely not.

It took Wilson literally threatening Pete and the FO for Pete to change the offense.

We don't have anyone on defense that can threaten Pete. So we are probably stuck with it.

Quinn had a year old and more experienced roster, ohh and also added a couple guys named Michael Bennett and Cliff Averill who weren't bad. Imagine Clemons and Irvin being your 3rd and 4th best pass rusher oppose to 1 and 2.

Quinn also had 2nd and 3rd year Russell Wilson who was much better then rookie Russell Wilson.

Quinn might be better then Noron but at the same time the best player on this defense (Adams) probably doesn't even start on the 13 team and if he does it's over Kam.

Regarless Quinn isn't taking over but maybe he comes in and helps in some form.
 

getnasty

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,462
Reaction score
659
I also thought the pass defense was fine tonight, the run defense on the other hand was the problem
 

QuahHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
5,641
Reaction score
108
Location
Issaquah, WA
Snacks, Bullard, and Moore have been solid adds on the DL. I think we are getting better on the DL front and are not as bad as people think.
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,888
Reaction score
404
Good to see someone bring some tangible criticism against Norton.

Pretty sure nobody else had any idea how to look at the tape and break down the problems.
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
6,888
Reaction score
1,054
Bradley had those same players as Quinn.

He did not do nearly as well.

The narrative that this was just Quinn having amazing players is laughable. Quinn had amazing players. So did Gus.

Quinn turned them into one of the best defenses of all time. Gus made us break many many TV remotes (back when people used those)

Also, plenty of fantastic DCs were failed HCs. Not sure how being fired as a HC is relevant.

Would Quinn be better than Norton? Of course.

Norton is historically bad (as a DC). Quinn was historically great (as a DC).
 

themunn

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
3,946
Reaction score
463
TwistedHusky":ksspquni said:
Bradley had those same players as Quinn.

He did not do nearly as well.

The narrative that this was just Quinn having amazing players is laughable. Quinn had amazing players. So did Gus.

Quinn turned them into one of the best defenses of all time. Gus made us break many many TV remotes (back when people used those)

Also, plenty of fantastic DCs were failed HCs. Not sure how being fired as a HC is relevant.

Would Quinn be better than Norton? Of course.

Norton is historically bad (as a DC). Quinn was historically great (as a DC).

Bradley took one of the worst units in the league and by the time he left it was the top scoring defense in 2012.

Under Quinn we added the missing pieces in Bennett and Avril, but had we those players under Bradley I'm certain we would have seen the same result.
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,888
Reaction score
404
TwistedHusky":8z20t9qk said:
Bradley had those same players as Quinn.

He did not do nearly as well.

The narrative that this was just Quinn having amazing players is laughable. Quinn had amazing players. So did Gus.

Quinn turned them into one of the best defenses of all time. Gus made us break many many TV remotes (back when people used those)

Also, plenty of fantastic DCs were failed HCs. Not sure how being fired as a HC is relevant.

Would Quinn be better than Norton? Of course.

Norton is historically bad (as a DC). Quinn was historically great (as a DC).

Bradley didn't have the prime pass rushers Quinn did, and he still got the defense to #3 DVOA pass-ranked and #4 scoring defense in the league.
 
OP
OP
Fade

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
IndyHawk":2u1o38v8 said:
Fade..You among others wanted more $$$ to the offense
and that's what happened..
I'm not saying the talent isn't there on D but it's not close
to previous LOB years..
It's going to take awhile for guys to become seasoned and
they still will have to recycle players in certain spots till they
find a good one but good depth on a budget?
that is going to be difficult.

They don't need to be LOB level though?

They had $60M+ in 2020 cap space, they were not on a budget, comparatively speaking. They blew it on a dozen JAGs. I was calling for a stud OT, 2 very good to great pass rushers, a CB, and maybe take a luxury on a WR/TE if they have some money leftover. Quality over quantity. I plugged the numbers in and showed how it would work in a previous thread recently… https://seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=166781&p=2467472#p2467472

Oh, wait… aren't you the guy who wanted to trade Russell Wilson to save cap space? :D :D :D :D :D

I'm sure another $30M to spend on JAGs with $20M of that going to a JAG at QB to replace Wilson, would put the Seahawks in a much better position going forward. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
2Fmediagiphycom2Fmedia2FSu0aljmbFVghW2Fgiphy
 
D

DomeHawk

Guest
Fade":1kn8atax said:
They're getting pressure on the QB. They just have bass-ackwards principles on the backend. They play outside leverage 7-15 yards off the LoS. Slants, crossers, and, hitches, are always open due to this style choice.

This isn't a this year problem, either. The is what they started doing since showing Richard the door and made the switch to Norton.

Opposing QBs get far too many easy, pitch and catch throws. Yay, you didn't get roasted for the TD over the top, but you just gave up the easy first down, and can't get off the field to save your life.

The Seahawks have long, physical corners that they should be pressing, with inside leverage, forcing throws over the top where their length can be a factor. If you want to play off-coverage then get smaller, quicker, more agile corners that can play that style.

Until that changes it won't matter who they got rushing the passer. Opposing teams are going to continue to feast in the passing game, regardless, as they have been for YEARS under Ken Norton's watch. This is not a new problem, Quinn can fix this. He played more press coverage in his 2 years as DC, than all other PC-DCs, in Seattle combined.

Quinn was terrible in ATL you say?

My retort to that would be, look at Pete right now here in SEA, a tremendous, defensive head coach who has a terrible defense. Quinn wasn't the DC in ATL, he was the head coach. Those are two different jobs, that require two different skill sets. Gus Bradley was terrible in JAX as a head coach, doing very well again as a DC with the Chargers. Some guys are just good coordinators. Bring back Quinn!

Realistically, I don't see Pete demoting Norton, though. Think about it. He isn't going to walk into Norton's office and be like "I know we're 5-0, but we're bringing in Quinn, so can you please head to the LBer meeting room?"

I mean, that is what should happen. They're on a bye week, which makes it even easier to transition. At the very least bring Quinn onboard as a consultant. But no, Pete is going to continue to ride with his buddy, we're screwed on that side of the ball. The defense is going to keep getting worse like it has been (going on 7 consecutive seasons.) Russ and the Offense are going to have to carry this thing.

There is hope. The 2018 Chiefs were really, really bad on defense and almost made and won the Superbowl that year. If not for Dee Ford lining up offsides in the AFC Championship Game, when they all but had that game won.

==========

And on a final note:

Pete is going to kill his defense if he keeps playing this style. I know he doesn't like it, but they are going to have to play more aggressive, and take more chances, which can potentially lead to giving up more big plays, and TDs. But the alternative is having the defense on the field for 70-80 plays a game, and they all get injured. Pick your poison, Pete.

I tend to agree, especially the last part. This is the softest Seahawk's zone we have ever seen.
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,888
Reaction score
404
Another thought I had - soft zone is often what you see when a defensive coordinator doesn't trust his safeties. It could be a play-it-safe measure Pete and Ken are employing while they get Jamal Adams, and now Ryan Neal, up to speed schematically (and the rest of the safety crew is fairly green themselves, with Quinton Dunbar's newness adding to the communication issues).

Perhaps, as the season wears on, we'll start seeing tighter coverage.
 

CostaRicaHawk

Active member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
154
Location
Retired Costa Rica
MontanaHawk05":3j4gaxql said:
Another thought I had - soft zone is often what you see when a defensive coordinator doesn't trust his safeties. It could be a play-it-safe measure Pete and Ken are employing while they get Jamal Adams, and now Ryan Neal, up to speed schematically (and the rest of the safety crew is fairly green themselves, with Quinton Dunbar's newness adding to the communication issues).

Perhaps, as the season wears on, we'll start seeing tighter coverage.

We know this can not be the case! It is ALL Nortons fault, if he was not our coach we would only have 150 yards a game against us RIGHT!!!!! You guys amaze me. I do not know why we have not hired Peter Olsen as the DC. We would be awesome if we did!!! :141847_bnono:
 
D

DomeHawk

Guest
MontanaHawk05":3jkul3ak said:
Another thought I had - soft zone is often what you see when a defensive coordinator doesn't trust his safeties. It could be a play-it-safe measure Pete and Ken are employing while they get Jamal Adams, and now Ryan Neal, up to speed schematically (and the rest of the safety crew is fairly green themselves, with Quinton Dunbar's newness adding to the communication issues).

Perhaps, as the season wears on, we'll start seeing tighter coverage.

I think you are probably correct here but given the results it isn't working and as we enter the meat of our schedule it has to tighten up. I'm not blaming anyone in particular, that would be naive, it's a whole host of things.
 

TraderGary

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
372
Reaction score
101
Fade":31ii46pt said:
They're getting pressure on the QB. They just have bass-ackwards principles on the backend. They play outside leverage 7-15 yards off the LoS. Slants, crossers, and, hitches, are always open due to this style choice.

This isn't a this year problem, either. The is what they started doing since showing Richard the door and made the switch to Norton.

Opposing QBs get far too many easy, pitch and catch throws. Yay, you didn't get roasted for the TD over the top, but you just gave up the easy first down, and can't get off the field to save your life.

The Seahawks have long, physical corners that they should be pressing, with inside leverage, forcing throws over the top where their length can be a factor. If you want to play off-coverage then get smaller, quicker, more agile corners that can play that style.

Until that changes it won't matter who they got rushing the passer. Opposing teams are going to continue to feast in the passing game, regardless, as they have been for YEARS under Ken Norton's watch. This is not a new problem, Quinn can fix this. He played more press coverage in his 2 years as DC, than all other PC-DCs, in Seattle combined.

Quinn was terrible in ATL you say?

My retort to that would be, look at Pete right now here in SEA, a tremendous, defensive head coach who has a terrible defense. Quinn wasn't the DC in ATL, he was the head coach. Those are two different jobs, that require two different skill sets. Gus Bradley was terrible in JAX as a head coach, doing very well again as a DC with the Chargers. Some guys are just good coordinators. Bring back Quinn!

Realistically, I don't see Pete demoting Norton, though. Think about it. He isn't going to walk into Norton's office and be like "I know we're 5-0, but we're bringing in Quinn, so can you please head to the LBer meeting room?"

I mean, that is what should happen. They're on a bye week, which makes it even easier to transition. At the very least bring Quinn onboard as a consultant. But no, Pete is going to continue to ride with his buddy, we're screwed on that side of the ball. The defense is going to keep getting worse like it has been (going on 7 consecutive seasons.) Russ and the Offense are going to have to carry this thing.

There is hope. The 2018 Chiefs were really, really bad on defense and almost made and won the Superbowl that year. If not for Dee Ford lining up offsides in the AFC Championship Game, when they all but had that game won.

==========

And on a final note:

Pete is going to kill his defense if he keeps playing this style. I know he doesn't like it, but they are going to have to play more aggressive, and take more chances, which can potentially lead to giving up more big plays, and TDs. But the alternative is having the defense on the field for 70-80 plays a game, and they all get injured. Pick your poison, Pete.

Great post Fade! I created a very similar post basically making the exact same points as you did here. This is the link if you would like to read it.
https://seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=167498

If I had read this thread beforehand, I would not have gone to the trouble because we're basically saying the same thing. Nice to know I have some company in my concerns/frustrations.
 

keasley45

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
6,773
Location
Cockeysville, Md
MontanaHawk05":2dj0zxmf said:
Another thought I had - soft zone is often what you see when a defensive coordinator doesn't trust his safeties. It could be a play-it-safe measure Pete and Ken are employing while they get Jamal Adams, and now Ryan Neal, up to speed schematically (and the rest of the safety crew is fairly green themselves, with Quinton Dunbar's newness adding to the communication issues).

Perhaps, as the season wears on, we'll start seeing tighter coverage.

I appreciate the perspective but I can't buy this. One of the core philosophies of this defense is that it's simple to grasp and that it is based not on complex coverages and alignments, but on a basic, fundamental, aggressive scheme. No gimics, just line up, straight up and play. And the gamble is that our expert execution of a simple scheme will eventually trump the occasionall failure of a more co plex offensive attack. If that's the case, then it doesn't make sense that our guys woukd need a ton of time to get up to speed. I think the issue is an enherant flaw in the scheme. The failures we've been experiencing predate the LOB dismantling. I remember pretty vividly Peyton manning waltzing in here in 2014 or so and for the first time exposing the holes in our zone coverage. It was that year or the year before that we also stopped playing aggressive press coverage. Our CB play actually forced a rules change across the league but rather than adapting to it, we wholesale abandoned the technique. With that we gradually lost our intimidation factor, other teams gradually further exploited the weaknesses in our D, and the slow decline even with the premier players we had, began. That was well before Norton's reign.

I think our problem is simple, without the players that exactly fit the position profiles this D requires, the answer is to retreat into a strategy that is good enough to limit massive single play losses, but without a splash play, is resigned to at times a death by a thousand cuts reality.

We need a big body run stuffer ala Red Bryant or Brandon Mebane to negate what the vikings did to us Sunday night without needing to force the backend to play zone. Good news there is that Harrison is on the way.

We need a pass rush specialist. We aren't bad here but are far from good enough to force opposing offenses to change schematically. Im hopeful the journeyman and rooks can help patch enough pressure together to make it work for the rest ofntye year. We haven't had it, which forces more zone.

We need safety play that is fast enough and intimidating enough to help to fill the holes in our zone coverages and put fear into the hearts of opposing receivers. I thought Diggs was a bright spot last year but his impact has been less noticeable in 2020. Adams is a huge player here but is borrowed far too often to bring pressure. Pressure up front and solid run stuffing d line play would allow the safeties to play the edges, and our bigger cb's inside leverage. Instead, we default to, youguessed it, zone.

And as someone posted earlier, we need our corners to play more inside leverage, press coverage. I think getting adams back to strengthen the back end will allow us to do that.

I think in a nutshell, our defensive scheme can still be successful. But its simplicity requires fairly extreme tradeoffs. Bring adams down to blitz because we can't create pressure otherwise and our corners who are prone to being beat because of hownfar off the los they are, are forced to play a more honest zone. Our bigger corner profile, when we aren't pressing, isn't ideally suited for covering small, fast receivers - so without a strategy to disguise coverages, we retreat to zone. We started the season with a strong commitment to stop the run - again, more zone to keep eyes on the backfield. But our zone has been decoded in the pass game, so without pressure... we constantky give up gap plays 10 yards at a time.

Pete doesn't believe in smoke and mirrors. He plays it straight up and man up. That scheme needs the big, fast players that made up our D in its heyday. Problem is it will never be that good again because it was new to the league when Pete took over. No one had seen it. Now its known and has been replicated across the league. And unfortunately we don't have those players anymore. Best we can hope for is that Pete gets the guys he needs (and that there are already enough of them on the roster now) to make this thing go.

Can DQ make a difference? Maybe in getting Pete to disguise things a bit or craft stunts and blitzes that are a bit more effective. But at the end of day, I think it's the scheme, and whether or not we have the players to make it go. Norton, Richard, Quinn... they will all basically be running the same system with all the same buttons and switches. Dont know how much difference it will make.

Id put more hope in snacks, brooks adams and our journeyman D line guys allowing the scheme to flow than changing the coordinator.
 

TraderGary

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
372
Reaction score
101
Outstanding post Keasley! Completely agree with everything you said.
 
Top