Ken Norton Jr, Think this should be his last season

[MontanaHawk05]

Not sure it's his fault that Pete and John didn't get him a D-line this year.

 

[Shanegotyou11]

Pete is 10 and 0 when a QB throws for over 400 yards.

 

[ronnieboycefanclub]

I was watching on Gamepass and I thought in the 4th quarter I hope an effort is being made that the Defence keep their focus. The commentators said that the Falcon's kicker made three successful on side kicks in a game last season and also one in this game, which he made look very easy. Also he recovered at least one fumble on a kick off last year as well.

 

[olyfan63]

As far as Norton, in Pete I trust on this one. One of Norton's superpowers is kicking ass and lighting a fire under guys. Pete needs a bad cop.

Last year I was on the Fire Norton! bandwagon at times, but we also didn't really have the talent and speed on our D that we'd had in the past. We couldn't match up with the Rams offense, for example. I'd hate to bail on a guy over personnel/talent issues and bring in a replacement who had to face the same issues and then have him do no better than Norton.

Giving up 25 points to ATL, most in garbage time, isn't a bad showing. The D did enough to win.

I, too, miss the Dan Quinn days. Ken Norton, Jr. may not be Dan Quinn, but I'm not sure he needs to be. Pete is the architect of this defense, and maybe all that's really needed is a chief ass-kicker who truly understands the D, and Norton is a good fit for that role.

We saw Jamal Adams' abilities being utilized and having a serious impact. Good start. Maybe Norton isn't, and wasn't, the problem. Like Pete evaluating his assistants at season's end (and firing Cabevell), I don't think we should evaluate until the end of the season.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

It was 38-18 with 3:45 left in the game when the Hawks scored their dagger TD. This game was a blowout. I'm not buying that the Defense still sucks one bit. Much of it was garbage time yardage and points. Meh.
Also, when you stop a powerful offense for converting on 4th down 4 times? That's damn good defense. They absolutely need to get better, and I suspect they will.

 

[Fade]

I'm not a big fan of Norton as a DC, but this isn't the game to criticize.

They have a lot of new pieces, didn't play a pre-season, and the O built a big lead, leading to Matt Ryan to pile up a bunch of yards in garbage time.

The Seahawks are now lead by their offense, the defenses job is to not screw it up.

They should improve as the season goes along, if they do not, then it will be worth talking about mid-season.

 

[olyfan63]

Not sure it's his fault that Pete and John didn't get him a D-line this year.

Yup. But the season is young... signings and trades still out there, for D-Line help, and for sure they are working this every day.

On the bright side, Pete and John did get Norton an upgraded secondary, as well as some speedy LB energy, Irvin and Brooks, and the program has several sophomores and juniors starting to perform a little better all the time on the D side of the ball. Mayowa had a fantastic sack on Ryan on 4th down too.

Aint it fun so far though, watching the offensive juggernaut and Russell the gunslinger?

 

[PNW]

D played a great game! Very happy with how Norton jr had the D performing.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Garbage time or not.

It bothers me to allow huge chunks of yardage in a soft zone.

The “let them have it” mentality is lost with me even when Seattle is up a few touchdowns.

It’s that kind of thinking and rationale that allows a good team to comeback and win.

I’m more so of the put your foot on their throat and suffocate them until the game is over.

My approach may not be popular among coaches wanting to be respectful on each other and not become points greedy, but if you aren’t playing to win the game, then what are you doing exactly?

The best teams impose their will on the other.

I wish these Seahawks coaches had that killer instinct.

But apparently not.

And that bothers me, I’ll admit it.

You do not want teams being able to make comebacks against you.

Remember the Falcons/Patriots SuperBowl?

I rest my case.

 

[olyfan63]

Garbage time or not.
It bothers me to allow huge chunks of yardage in a soft zone.
The “let them have it” mentality is lost with me even when Seattle is up a few touchdowns.
It’s that kind of thinking and rationale that allows a good team to comeback and win.
I’m more so of the put your foot on their throat and suffocate them until the game is over.
My approach may not be popular among coaches wanting to be respectful on each other and not become points greedy, but if you aren’t playing to win the game, then what are you doing exactly?
The best teams impose their will on the other.
I wish these Seahawks coaches had that killer instinct.
But apparently not.
And that bothers me, I’ll admit it.
You do not want teams being able to make comebacks against you.
Remember the Falcons/Patriots SuperBowl?
I rest my case.

I can't really argue with your overall reasoning, but consider this:
The NFL *wants* games to be high-scoring and close, for fan engagement purposes. We saw the Patriots come back and nearly win but be stopped by a heroic play by the Seahawks D on the game's final play.

Throwing deep on 3rd-and-1, when a 2 yard run ends the game? I'd say the "intent" matches your concept of "put your foot on their throat and suffocate them until the game is over", but the execution did not. The bad snap screwed the play.

Norton wasn't the problem vs NE, the problem was our lack of pass rush from the D-Line and Cam playing great and being on target in the passing game. Plus us being down 2 DBs, including our ace Free Safety Diggs, and NE doing their best to take advantage of that.

I'll take the W and breathe a sigh of relief.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The Falcons game was not a game to criticize Norton but this game certainly is.

The Patriots had 1 good receiver, another guy named Byrd, and a bunch of guys that nobody can remember or care about.

They still threw for near 400 yds.
(I am going to laugh ruefully when Cam looks a lot more mortal of a passer against all the other defenses in the NFL. )

It was weird to win a game but be filled with a sense of dread.

Norton might be a lead anchor that Wilson will have to overcome all year.

This team is going to have to score 30+ points every game to have a shot at winning. And even then, QBs will be fighting for the opportunity to play against our substandard, bottom-half DC.

It was an amazing game that should have never been that close but for our DC being completely inept. To the point where a win almost feels like a loss because you just know this is going to bite us, hard, later. And teams with this bad a defense have almost no chance in the playoffs.

We lived with years of Carroll holding Wilson back, even still our QB was putting up top QB numbers while essentially only playing a half. Who knows how great this team could have been had Carroll not been so rigid in trying to run the ball with a HOF QB being asked to sit on his talent? Now we finally unleash our QB, after allegedly being threatened into it, and that QB puts up #s exceeding the best in the NFL. And now, all that opportunity may be for naught because our DC is terrible. (Just like he was for the Raiders)

 

[MontanaHawk05]

This place is funny. Win convincingly but let's fire someone because the other team got some meaningless stats when the game was no longer in doubt.

Never change Seahawks.net, never change.

We didn't win convincingly, and the game was never "no longer in doubt".

I'd just like to see someone present a schematic explanation of why Norton is struggling, other than just purely the results, which can be caused by all kinds of things - including losing two safeties, or having no pass rush personnel.

 

[Hockey Guy]

This place is funny. Win convincingly but let's fire someone because the other team got some meaningless stats when the game was no longer in doubt.

Never change Seahawks.net, never change.

We didn't win convincingly, and the game was never "no longer in doubt".

I'd just like to see someone present a schematic explanation of why Norton is struggling, other than just purely the results, which can be caused by all kinds of things - including losing two safeties, or having no pass rush personnel.

You do understand my comment was about the Falcons game don't you? Seriously!

 

[hawks85]

This place is funny. Win convincingly but let's fire someone because the other team got some meaningless stats when the game was no longer in doubt.

Never change Seahawks.net, never change.

We didn't win convincingly, and the game was never "no longer in doubt".

I'd just like to see someone present a schematic explanation of why Norton is struggling, other than just purely the results, which can be caused by all kinds of things - including losing two safeties, or having no pass rush personnel.

It's been the same result last week. and the entire year of 2019. Losing 2 safeties, C'mon bro, really, Your gonna blame losing 2 safeties when clearly there is a deeper issue. Explain to me on how Norton isn't struggling since your so confident.
For starters our weak link is the D-line but Norton keeps rushing the 4 D-linemen and the LB's are ALWAYS dropping in coverage, all 3 of them all the time. Why not incorporate the LB's in the the pass rush, like in a 3-4 Defense. I like the idea of blitzing Adams but they are doing way to much. They need to include the other DB's and the LB's. There is no excuse for Wagner to be in the deep second level breaking up passes like what I saw yesterday a few times. I don't see anyone spying the QB at all. Everyone is always in coverage.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Losing 2 safeties, C'mon bro, really, Your gonna blame losing 2 safeties when clearly there is a deeper issue. Explain to me on how Norton isn't struggling since your so confident.
For starters our weak link is the D-line but Norton keeps rushing the 4 D-linemen and the LB's are ALWAYS dropping in coverage, all 3 of them all the time. Why not incorporate the LB's in the the pass rush, like in a 3-4 Defense. I like the idea of blitzing Adams but they are doing way to much. They need to include the other DB's and the LB's. There is no excuse for Wagner to be in the deep second level breaking up passes like what I saw yesterday a few times. I don't see anyone spying the QB at all. Everyone is always in coverage.

You don't just recklessly blitz Cam Newton. Nor do you blitz a Bill Belichick-coached offense, even if the pretty-boy has moved on. The gameplan really wasn't that crazy.

And yes, losing TWO STARTERS on a defense is going to matter. Did you seriously just imply it shouldn't?

 

[TwistedHusky]

That is weird.

Kris Richard lost 2 starters when we played Arizona.

He didn't allow a has-been QB to throw for nearly 400 yds against him. Those were lynchpin players too. He kept the defense at least reasonably effective without them.

Also, was Norton missing those starters back when he sucked in Oakland too?

The problem with Norton wasn't just last night. That was just another poor performance and some new excuses. The problem has been festering for a while.

Last year, against the pass, I think we were 26th. This year we are dead last.

 

[olyfan63]

Losing 2 safeties, C'mon bro, really, Your gonna blame losing 2 safeties when clearly there is a deeper issue. Explain to me on how Norton isn't struggling since your so confident.
For starters our weak link is the D-line but Norton keeps rushing the 4 D-linemen and the LB's are ALWAYS dropping in coverage, all 3 of them all the time. Why not incorporate the LB's in the the pass rush, like in a 3-4 Defense. I like the idea of blitzing Adams but they are doing way to much. They need to include the other DB's and the LB's. There is no excuse for Wagner to be in the deep second level breaking up passes like what I saw yesterday a few times. I don't see anyone spying the QB at all. Everyone is always in coverage.

You don't just recklessly blitz Cam Newton. Nor do you blitz a Bill Belichick-coached offense, even if the pretty-boy has moved on. The gameplan really wasn't that crazy.

And yes, losing TWO STARTERS on a defense is going to matter. Did you seriously just imply it shouldn't?

Overall, I'm with MontanaHawk05 on this one, can someone provide more convincing and specific examples on how it's NORTON who is failing? The Hawks certainly used Jamal Adams well, and Adams was personally responsible for +6 points on the night, aka the margin of victory. The D got a pick, should have been 3, off of Cam, with 2 of them being pick-6's.

So the assertion that nobody was spying Newton, that's a place to start. Is it true? Is it because the Hawks D strategy was to rush in lanes with a pocket contain on Newton? Who would we have spy Newton? The fast-enough candidates are, Bruce Irvin (out with ACL), Jamal Adams (we blitzed him instead of spying), Jordyn Brooks (a green rookie), and Bobby Wagner (super-valuable in coverage and all-around). On top of that, Cam presents a unique challenge, on account of his running threat, as does Kyler Murray. So some of what we saw could be Cam-specific game-plan choices coming from Carroll.

Last year I was on the "Fire Norton!" bandwagon, at times, and to a certain extent. Yet Pete brought him back, and clearly has faith in him. What I see is that Norton is also the "bad cop" that Pete needs at times, to get in people's faces, because Pete is much more "good cop".

Can we crowd-source a clearer list of what Norton be doing with the available personnel that he isn't doing, to have a clearer indictment of him? And to see if those flaws and issues are consistent issues over time?

NORTON'S POOR CHOICES LIST:
* Only rushing 4, no LB blitzes, LBs always drop into coverage, no DB blitzes aside from Adams
* No spy on Cam Newton (not sure if this is accurate; did we NEVER spy Cam, or just seldom spy him?)

 

[hawks85]

Losing 2 safeties, C'mon bro, really, Your gonna blame losing 2 safeties when clearly there is a deeper issue. Explain to me on how Norton isn't struggling since your so confident.
For starters our weak link is the D-line but Norton keeps rushing the 4 D-linemen and the LB's are ALWAYS dropping in coverage, all 3 of them all the time. Why not incorporate the LB's in the the pass rush, like in a 3-4 Defense. I like the idea of blitzing Adams but they are doing way to much. They need to include the other DB's and the LB's. There is no excuse for Wagner to be in the deep second level breaking up passes like what I saw yesterday a few times. I don't see anyone spying the QB at all. Everyone is always in coverage.

You don't just recklessly blitz Cam Newton. Nor do you blitz a Bill Belichick-coached offense, even if the pretty-boy has moved on. The gameplan really wasn't that crazy.

And yes, losing TWO STARTERS on a defense is going to matter. Did you seriously just imply it shouldn't?

Yes losing 2 starters does matter, but what I'm saying those 2 lost starters were in the game last week and they still got torched, and we got torched all last season. Matter of fact ever Norton has been DC. That scheme isn't working. They need to adjust and make some changes. If this continues our Passing D will be torched for 20 thousand yards at the end of the season. If I were DC I would have blitzed 50-60 percent of the time rattling the shit out of that QB. I would do stunts and twist's and a consistent spy on the QB, I would have created pressure from every angle.

 

[chris98251]

Losing 2 safeties, C'mon bro, really, Your gonna blame losing 2 safeties when clearly there is a deeper issue. Explain to me on how Norton isn't struggling since your so confident.
For starters our weak link is the D-line but Norton keeps rushing the 4 D-linemen and the LB's are ALWAYS dropping in coverage, all 3 of them all the time. Why not incorporate the LB's in the the pass rush, like in a 3-4 Defense. I like the idea of blitzing Adams but they are doing way to much. They need to include the other DB's and the LB's. There is no excuse for Wagner to be in the deep second level breaking up passes like what I saw yesterday a few times. I don't see anyone spying the QB at all. Everyone is always in coverage.

You don't just recklessly blitz Cam Newton. Nor do you blitz a Bill Belichick-coached offense, even if the pretty-boy has moved on. The gameplan really wasn't that crazy.

And yes, losing TWO STARTERS on a defense is going to matter. Did you seriously just imply it shouldn't?

Overall, I'm with MontanaHawk05 on this one, can someone provide more convincing and specific examples on how it's NORTON who is failing? The Hawks certainly used Jamal Adams well, and Adams was personally responsible for +6 points on the night, aka the margin of victory. The D got a pick, should have been 3, off of Cam, with 2 of them being pick-6's.

So the assertion that nobody was spying Newton, that's a place to start. Is it true? Is it because the Hawks D strategy was to rush in lanes with a pocket contain on Newton? Who would we have spy Newton? The fast-enough candidates are, Bruce Irvin (out with ACL), Jamal Adams (we blitzed him instead of spying), Jordyn Brooks (a green rookie), and Bobby Wagner (super-valuable in coverage and all-around). On top of that, Cam presents a unique challenge, on account of his running threat, as does Kyler Murray. So some of what we saw could be Cam-specific game-plan choices coming from Carroll.

Last year I was on the "Fire Norton!" bandwagon, at times, and to a certain extent. Yet Pete brought him back, and clearly has faith in him. What I see is that Norton is also the "bad cop" that Pete needs at times, to get in people's faces, because Pete is much more "good cop".

Can we crowd-source a clearer list of what Norton be doing with the available personnel that he isn't doing, to have a clearer indictment of him? And to see if those flaws and issues are consistent issues over time?

NORTON'S POOR CHOICES LIST:
* Only rushing 4, no LB blitzes, LBs always drop into coverage, no DB blitzes aside from Adams
* No spy on Cam Newton (not sure if this is accurate; did we NEVER spy Cam, or just seldom spy him?)

I seen at least one blitz from Dunbar, they are shooting other people.