Clint Hurtt is optimistic

[SoulfishHawk]

What is a coach supposed to say? We're gonna' suck!

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

What is a coach supposed to say? We're gonna' suck!

The Arizona Cardinals say this every year without saying it!

 

[Sgt. Largent]

If Seattle’s defense again isn’t good this year, the problem is maybe Hurtt, but last year, Seattle had a lot of holes they were in the process of repairing, so I give Hurtt another year. Since there are more defensive pieces this season, Hurtt, can prove himself this season. If it’s terrible, I can see him being let go after this season.

We shall see.

I don't put a lot of stock in the X's and O's of Pete's coordinators, they run the schemes, fits and playbooks Pete wants them to run.

Now are they good communicators? Good motivators? Can they push back on Pete when he's wrong about in-game adjustments, or coordinate with Pete on those adjustments week to week and series to series?

THAT'S what I look at when evaluating our coordinators, on both sides of the ball. The players seem to love Hurtt, and he seems like he has a good grasp of scheme and formation, etc.

I think he had 0% to do with how bad the interior defense was, he did not let Bobby walk or sign a bunch of bargain bin interior D-linemen. Or trade for a broken safety who was suppose to be the lynchpin of the defense.

 

[keasley45]

I don't put a lot of stock in the X's and O's of Pete's coordinators, they run the schemes, fits and playbooks Pete wants them to run.

Now are they good communicators? Good motivators? Can they push back on Pete when he's wrong about in-game adjustments, or coordinate with Pete on those adjustments week to week and series to series?

THAT'S what I look at when evaluating our coordinators, on both sides of the ball. The players seem to love Hurtt, and he seems like he has a good grasp of scheme and formation, etc.

I think he had 0% to do with how bad the interior defense was, he did not let Bobby walk or sign a bunch of bargain bin interior D-linemen. Or trade for a broken safety who was suppose to be the lynchpin of the defense.

I think Pete sets the course, but it's been shown pretty conclusively (and often to the team's detriment) that he gives TOO much leeway to his coaches. He let Norton run his bass akwards, LB centric version of the defense for years before pushing him out. For two years on offense, he let Schotty and Russ stall the offense before altering it and then in 2021, let Russ do his thing before correcting course over thr last few games.

Last year on D, it was Hurtt who was the 3-4 mind. The defense was abysmal until we went back to what we used to run.

Just hoping Hurtt and Pete have had a chance to mind meld now over a year and get things right in 23.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I think Pete sets the course, but it's been shown pretty conclusively (and often to the team's detriment) that he gives TOO much leeway to his coaches. He let Norton run his bass akwards, LB centric version of the defense for years before pushing him out. For two years on offense, he let Schotty and Russ stall the offense before altering it and then in 2021, let Russ do his thing before correcting course over thr last few games.

Last year on D, it was Hurtt who was the 3-4 mind. The defense was abysmal until we went back to what we used to run.

Just hoping Hurtt and Pete have had a chance to mind meld now over a year and get things right in 23.

The defense was decent until what, the Germany game where the interior line got exposed badly? Then it was all downhill from there.

So what you're saying isn't entirely true, and the defense is far more fluid than just 3-4, or 4-3, bear front, whatever.

Teams run all of the above, sometimes in the same game. We're no different. It's personnel that matters most, and our defensive personnel last year was awful. Especially after Brooks went down and Woods started wearing down and missing games.

I feel the same way about Hurtt as I did about Norton, they're the worker bees of the defense, not the architect. It's why the defense is still mediocre even after everyone on here wanted Norton's head. Doesn't matter, raise George Halas from the dead, bring in Mike Ditka, it wouldn't matter. Until you start getting playmakers and dogs all up and down that defense, it'll continue to struggle.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

The Arizona Cardinals say this every year without saying it!

good point, very good point

 

[BASF]

The pass rush was mediocre and as good as it could be with what they had to use.

Minor quibble. A defense that finishes seventh in sacks is not a mediocre pass rush. They were not great by any means, but they were not mediocre.

 

[CalgaryFan05]

Ask Hurtt in person if he is big on giving lip service! I like the guy and I believe he says what he means. I also think there is no one more disappointed with our defensive result last year than Clint. He has to be enthused about the influx of new talent. I know I am.

I have to say -

I haven't seen a ton of rookie training camp - BUT - what I HAVE seen impressed me.

Hurtt's out there working those boys! And kicking in at the same time. I was surprised just how much he was rocking it out in the short videos that I've seen.

Gets an A for effort from me. Hope he's right on the rest.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Minor quibble. A defense that finishes seventh in sacks is not a mediocre pass rush. They were not great by any means, but they were not mediocre.

Yeah, I'd say inconsistent more than mediocre. Our sacks seemed to come in bunches with long dry spells inbetween those games.

I'd still love to see a cheap Frank Clark signing to drop into the rotation. But I don't think so, unless they can open up some more cap.

 

[bileever]

Minor quibble. A defense that finishes seventh in sacks is not a mediocre pass rush. They were not great by any means, but they were not mediocre.

The pass rush was mediocre last year. You could see for yourself--the eye test was pretty clear, and if you think we had a good pass rush, then you're fooling yourself.

That's why sacks are a weird stat. We may have been 9th in sacks (not 7th, btw) but that doesn't tell the whole story. We just didn't get as much pressure on the QB as an elite pass rush would. We were 28th in hurry rate, and 19th in pressure rate. I would say that qualifies as mediocre, if not downright poor. That's why we signed Dre'mont Jones and why we drafted Derick Hall with pick #37.

2022 NFL Opposition & Defensive Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Check out the 2022 NFL Opposition & Defensive Statistics including AFC and NFC results and standings on Pro-football-reference.com

www.pro-football-reference.com

 

[toffee]

Our defense hasn't been good for quite a few seasons, detail countdown read @Fade 's posts. We went from historic good of '13 to one of the historic bad '22. How the mighty has fallen. What I like of this off season? We seems to finally ready to click the reset button, making wholesale changes. Result? We shall see. New faces (red for FA and yellow for rookies)

DE	Jarran Reed	Mario Edwards	Mike Morris	Jonah Tavai, Jordan Ferguson
NT	Cameroon Young	Robert Cooper	Mone (injured)
DE	Dre'Mont Jones	Myles Adams		M.J. Anderson, Ifeanyi Maijeh
OLB	Boye Mafe	Taylor	Vi Jones	Cam Bright
MLB	Bobby Wagner	Nick Bellore	Joshua Onujiogu	Michael Ayers
MLB	Devin Bush	Jordyn Brooks (injured)	Jon Rhattigan	Robert Barnes
OLB	Uchenna Nwosu	Derick Hall	Tyreka Smith	Patrick O’Connell
LCB	Devon Witherspoon	Michael Jackson	Chris Steele	James Campbell
RCB	Tariq Woolen	Isaiah Dunn		Arquon Bush
NCB	Cody Bryant	Tre Brown		Lance Boykin
SS	Julian Love	Jamal Adams (Injured)	Jerrick Reed II	Mo Osling, Christian Young
FS	Diggs	Joey Blount		Ty Okada

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Minor quibble. A defense that finishes seventh in sacks is not a mediocre pass rush. They were not great by any means, but they were not mediocre.

I feel like the number of sacks needs to come from certain points of the season, versus certain teams.

If you have a bunch of sacks but they are against Chicago, is it really great?

However, if you are able to consistently pressure and sack the Niners and the Eagles, and even the Cowboys in December, that’s saying a lot.

Being 7th in sacks don’t count for much if games in Week 14, 15, 16, 17, you aren’t pressuring as much.

Stats can be misleading. It’s all about when and where, more so than the general overall number.

 

[Ruminator]

I feel like the number of sacks needs to come from certain points of the season, versus certain teams.

If you have a bunch of sacks but they are against Chicago, is it really great?

However, if you are able to consistently pressure and sack the Niners and the Eagles, and even the Cowboys in December, that’s saying a lot.

Being 7th in sacks don’t count for much if games in Week 14, 15, 16, 17, you aren’t pressuring as much.

Stats can be misleading. It’s all about when and where, more so than the general overall number.

Oh yeah, that's right, we racked up tons of sacks vs Mr. Sack-a-lot who used to play for us!

 

[BASF]

We may have been 9th in sacks (not 7th, btw) but that doesn't tell the whole story.

Tied for seventh is seventh, not ninth. If you want to delve deeper to determine, we had the same amount of sacks as Tampa and NY Jets. We faced less pass attempts than both teams, so we had the higher sack percentage of the three, hence seventh.

 

[Crizilla]

I'll believe it when I see it

 

[toffee]

Tied for seventh is seventh, not ninth. If you want to delve deeper to determine, we had the same amount of sacks as Tampa and NY Jets. We faced less pass attempts than both teams, so we had the higher sack percentage of the three, hence seventh.

I am a bit lazy to look up the stats, but could it be a case of our boys not getting hurries, pressure, etc., when they are not getting sacks?

 

[bileever]

Tied for seventh is seventh, not ninth. If you want to delve deeper to determine, we had the same amount of sacks as Tampa and NY Jets. We faced less pass attempts than both teams, so we had the higher sack percentage of the three, hence seventh.

You're right about that. I was lazy and didn't look at the sack totals, just counted down to where we were listed on a different list that had us ranked 9th. But you're right, the Bucs and the Jets had the same number of sacks as we did. I apologize for the error.

However, I still stand by what I wrote about our pass rush and agree with @TheLegendOfBoom that it was mediocre at best. You have to look at not just sack totals but pressures and hurries as well. Surely, if you watched the games last year, you couldn't have possibly thought that we had an awesome D-line against the pass or the run.

 

[keasley45]

The defense was decent until what, the Germany game where the interior line got exposed badly? Then it was all downhill from there.

So what you're saying isn't entirely true, and the defense is far more fluid than just 3-4, or 4-3, bear front, whatever.

Teams run all of the above, sometimes in the same game. We're no different. It's personnel that matters most, and our defensive personnel last year was awful. Especially after Brooks went down and Woods started wearing down and missing games.

I feel the same way about Hurtt as I did about Norton, they're the worker bees of the defense, not the architect. It's why the defense is still mediocre even after everyone on here wanted Norton's head. Doesn't matter, raise George Halas from the dead, bring in Mike Ditka, it wouldn't matter. Until you start getting playmakers and dogs all up and down that defense, it'll continue to struggle.

The defense started the season poorly (remember the Atlanta game), then asjusted to play reasonably well in the weeks prior to the Munich game. From the Munich game on, it was hit or miss again (mostly miss).

Pete's entire philosophy in sport and from what one can glean from him, indeed in life, , good or bad, is all about empowering people to do what THEY do best. We have risen and fallen by way of his trust for the poeple he elects to play specific roles on this team. Whether QB, DC, OC, or by soliciting input from staff during the draft and letting position coaches and coordonators heavily inform draft selections, the guy is all about the process of building men and culture and letting the wins come as a result. NOT by prescribing an approach and relying on folks to simply do what theyre told. Honestly, i wish that over the years he HAD been a bit more results oriented in adhering to an approach because i'd bet we'd have been more successful. Decisions like giving Norton a shot, (not because he was a yes man, but because Pete saw him as a viable candidate that was 2nd to Richard for the job previously, worth investing in)... and then giving him such a long lead to make his approach to the defense work, could have been avoided.

I just hope that, like in 2012 to 2015, this time, Pete has selected the right folks. I think Clint has the makings of a good coach. He's been handed talent to be successful and an overall approach that has seen success in the league. By all accounts, the problem last year was personnel AND communication of responsibilities. You could reason that comms are a result of talent, but they are also a result of teaching. You can also reason that last year, we had too many teachers teaching and as a result, confusion. The message wasn't getting in and when it did, we often didn't have the right guys to execute the plan.

I think there's reason for optimism as both issues have now been addressed. A simplified teaching structure, and better players.

The arrow is pointing up. How high? We'll see. Clint seems to agree.

 

[BASF]

I am a bit lazy to look up the stats, but could it be a case of our boys not getting hurries, pressure, etc., when they are not getting sacks?

That is pretty much it. We were getting home with the sacks while other teams were not.

Of the six teams that had more sacks than the Seahawks had, only the Saints and Ravens had lower pressure rate.

Of the six teams that had more sacks than the Seahawks had, only the Saints had lower hurry rate.

All of them had higher blitz percentage though, so when the Seahawks brought four rushers, we were more effective in getting home. Only the Saints weren't five percent or more higher than the Seahawks.

Interestingly, of those six only the Chiefs and Cowboys had more QB knockdowns than the Seahawks.

I never claimed that the defense or the D-Line was good. No one in their right mind would. However, I have to mention that a lot of the problems defensively from last year was that several of the players were more interested in getting sacks than playing their assignment. When we were actually playing well defensively for the few weeks that it happened, several of the players were speaking about the philosophy that had been talked about with the coaches during their struggles was "Stop the run, then have fun." Essentially, we were screwing ourselves.

It is a little surprising how little we blitzed last season with being thirty-first in blitz percentage. I think the determining factor was that we could not fill gaps normally, and blitzing makes that so much worse by literally opening up gaps. In the end, last season's defense was a complete disaster. It literally cost us winning at least four more games. I am not defending them in the least, but calling the pass rush mediocre was not accurate.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The defense started the season poorly (remember the Atlanta game), then asjusted to play reasonably well in the weeks prior to the Munich game. From the Munich game on, it was hit or miss again (mostly miss).

Pete's entire philosophy in sport and from what one can glean from him, indeed in life, , good or bad, is all about empowering people to do what THEY do best. We have risen and fallen by way of his trust for the poeple he elects to play specific roles on this team. Whether QB, DC, OC, or by soliciting input from staff during the draft and letting position coaches and coordonators heavily inform draft selections, the guy is all about the process of building men and culture and letting the wins come as a result. NOT by prescribing an approach and relying on folks to simply do what theyre told. Honestly, i wish that over the years he HAD been a bit more results oriented in adhering to an approach because i'd bet we'd have been more successful. Decisions like giving Norton a shot, (not because he was a yes man, but because Pete saw him as a viable candidate that was 2nd to Richard for the job previously, worth investing in)... and then giving him such a long lead to make his approach to the defense work, could have been avoided.

I just hope that, like in 2012 to 2015, this time, Pete has selected the right folks. I think Clint has the makings of a good coach. He's been handed talent to be successful and an overall approach that has seen success in the league. By all accounts, the problem last year was personnel AND communication of responsibilities. You could reason that comms are a result of talent, but they are also a result of teaching. You can also reason that last year, we had too many teachers teaching and as a result, confusion. The message wasn't getting in and when it did, we often didn't have the right guys to execute the plan.

I think there's reason for optimism as both issues have now been addressed. A simplified teaching structure, and better players.

The arrow is pointing up. How high? We'll see. Clint seems to agree.

Good post, but the jury's still out on the "Hurtt's been handed talent."

Other than Woolen, who would you consider an elite defender on our defense?

That's my point, personnel matters. I do think the D will be better this year, but how much better is to be seen. We really have no idea how most of the free agents and rookies will play.