They're Getting Pressure on the QB

[MontanaHawk05]

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.

There's a lot of problems with this post, but I'll settle to addressing the idea that a scheme is just plug-and-play. Every scheme requires some time to adapt and learn in the pros. It might only be a few games, but remember, we've only PLAYED a few games - five - and thanks to injuries to Adams and Dunbar, our intended secondary has been on the field together for even fewer.

Additionally, this is a COVID offseason where the players have had less time to acclimate to each other than usual, and Quinton Dunbar reported to the team extremely late due to his legal issues. Throw all that in there and yeah, there's every reason to think our defense might be behind schedule figuring things out. They've cited communication issues themselves.

Finally, though this is kind of tangential to your point, there was no scheme-related slow decline after the Super Bowl. These guys remained the #1 scoring defense pretty much up to the time Earl got injured in 2016.

 

[keasley45]

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.

There's a lot of problems with this post, but I'll settle to addressing the idea that a scheme is just plug-and-play. Every scheme requires some time to adapt and learn in the pros. It might only be a few games, but remember, we've only PLAYED a few games - five - and thanks to injuries to Adams and Dunbar, our intended secondary has been on the field together for even fewer.

Additionally, this is a COVID offseason where the players have had less time to acclimate to each other than usual, and Quinton Dunbar reported to the team extremely late due to his legal issues. Throw all that in there and yeah, there's every reason to think our defense might be behind schedule figuring things out. They've cited communication issues themselves.

Finally, though this is kind of tangential to your point, there was no scheme-related slow decline after the Super Bowl. These guys remained the #1 scoring defense pretty much up to the time Earl got injured in 2016.

Mmmm. The ranking doesn't tell the whole story. The decline in passing yards allowed has been precipitous since 2013. In fact the difference was almost 1000 total yards over that period (2013 to 2016). Point is, the LOB was intact while that was happening. The decline hastened after their departure, but it was there undeniably.

 

[Ozzy]

The only person to blame is Pete. I know people don't like to hear it but this is his defense and he overseas it. He watches the same game tape and can and does, tell Norton and the defense to make changes. Norton is in charge of in game calls but this is all built around Pete and his vision of the defense. The league has adapted on the offensive side of the ball and Pete needs to adapt as well.

I do think Bullard and hopefully Snacks can help the line moving forward and we contine our trend of giving up less explosive plays but we can't keep letting offenses run 80 plays either.

 

[keasley45]

Passing Yards allowed
2013 - 2751
2014 - 2970
2015 - 3363
2016 - 3612 thomas didn't get injured until week 13

By 2019, passing yards given up rise another 600 yards to 4200. The decline has been constant.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Passing Yards allowed
2013 - 2751
2014 - 2970
2015 - 3363
2016 - 3612 thomas didn't get injured until week 13

By 2019, passing yards given up rise another 500 yards to 4200. The decline has been constant.

3363 was still good for #2 in the league in 2015.

The decline has been statistically insignificant and not indicative of any scheme change. They were still a top-flight scoring defense up until Earl was hurt and everyone knew it.

 

[AubHawk71]

...and they are on pace for, what, allowing 7,000+ passing yards this season?

Pete's philosophy is straight up War of Attrition.

- He doesn't care if the opponent passes for 1000 yards as long as they win.

- He doesn't care if we win every single game by one point, as long as they win.

- Pete doesn't care if the Hawks go 0-7 on 3rd down, as long as they get two 4th down conversions in the last drive of the game. (Minnesota was 6-14 on 3rd downs.)

The thing about attrition/rope a dope is that it is only sustainable if you have a world class sharpshooter like Wilson to bail you out.

It's been discussed ad nausea on here, but it bears repeating until somebody somewhere listens to the constructive criticism. Just like with letting Russ cook. Enough with the soft zone already. I don't want to regress where it is only fun watching the 4th qtr of the game like the last couple of years and hoping for another Wilson miracle. FUN!

 

[LTH]

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.

Fade your a conventional thinker... we really dont understand why Carroll or Norton are doing the things they are on D because we are not sitting in the meetings :141847_bnono: ... So from an outside perspective your post could sound right on point... Lets just say you are right in your assessment. what I do know is that Norton isn't going anywhere this year ...there is still time for the Hawks to improve on D the season is young... If Norton is such a liability than you would think that Carroll would address it... again we dont know whats happening cause were not in the conversation...

LTH

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Enough with the soft zone already. I don't want to regress where it is only fun watching the 4th qtr of the game like the last couple of years and hoping for another Wilson miracle. FUN!

Pete's argument would probably be that without the soft zone, we'd be giving up far MORE passing yards, and probably touchdowns, via the long ball. That is what soft zone exists to prevent - give up the underneath stuff but prevent the 60-yard bomb, then crank up the pass rush when they get into field goal range.

I don't like it either, but there's a reason it's done.

 

[AubHawk71]

Also:

- Pete is OK being down by 14 (or 21) to zero at the half as long as they win. Like Fade says, that's killing your own D.

The LOB is long done. You can't keep hoping to catch lighting in a bottle like that again. Adapt. Hopefully the D (by which I mean Pete) adapts in the bye week. I'm not holding my breath.

It would interesting to see how much of Pete's success rests on Russ' shoulders. I know the QB is the man, and Russ is insane right now. But I'm trying to think of any other team that has relied SO MUCH on the QB to cover for pedestrian coaching in the last 5-10 years. And we don't even have a Teddy Bridgewater level backup to go 5-0 if the unthinkable happened. Actually, Dallas is a good example of that. Dak is a great QB, but he's no Russ Magic. If the Hawks had mirrored their record the last few years, Pete would be as gone as Garrett. McCarthy probably has another season or so.

 

[AubHawk71]

Enough with the soft zone already. I don't want to regress where it is only fun watching the 4th qtr of the game like the last couple of years and hoping for another Wilson miracle. FUN!

Pete's argument would probably be that without the soft zone, we'd be giving up far MORE passing yards, and probably touchdowns, via the long ball. That is what soft zone exists to prevent - give up the underneath stuff but prevent the 60-yard bomb, then crank up the pass rush when they get into field goal range.

I don't like it either, but there's a reason it's done.

Maybe it's just that he doesn't have faith in his corners? You don't get a lot of Richard Shermans.

I guess my question is, why play soft zone the whole game like you are up 19 points with 9:49 to go in the 4th? You are ceding time of possession (attrition) for an entire game and wearing out your D. And putting all of your eggs in the Wilson basket for another miracle finish. Not sustainable.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The problem is that winning these games this way exhausts your defense.

You think we aren't getting pressure now?

Wait until the end of the year when we have defensive players that have piled up hours on the field. See how well they rush the opposing QB in the playoffs after having made it to the end of regular season that keeps them on the field for 3/4 of the game every game.

It is stupid.

Give up a few extra TDs. That gives the ball back to our offense that can turn around and score TDs again.

It is better to have an aggressive defense that gives up a few big scores, but gets stops...than a soft punchless defense that for the most part allows teams to methodically march up the field to score almost every possession.

This aversion to giving up the big play makes sense when you are a run first team that takes time to score. Not when you are a big play machine yourself that can march 94 yards in under a minute. When we do give up a score, we have the ability to make up for it with a score of our own.

The objective should not be to win every regular season game.

That is rare and in most cases counterproductive. The objective is to go the farthest in the playoffs. You don't do that by reaching the finish line with a roster of wiped out, injured, and overused defensive players.

It does not matter if it works. It matters if it is the best long term approach and clearly, clearly this is not.

 

[AubHawk71]

Also, soft zone is asking for trouble against TEs like Thielen. Or Kittle. Or Kelce. Thielen got 9 catches for 2 tds. Is he a deep ball threat?

Adapt or die!

 

[keasley45]

Passing Yards allowed
2013 - 2751
2014 - 2970
2015 - 3363
2016 - 3612 thomas didn't get injured until week 13

By 2019, passing yards given up rise another 500 yards to 4200. The decline has been constant.

3363 was still good for #2 in the league in 2015.

The decline has been statistically insignificant and not indicative of any scheme change. They were still a top-flight scoring defense up until Earl was hurt and everyone knew it.

We could be #1 this year too if everyone else was worse than us. Doesnt mean we aren't statistically worse year over year for the last 7 years. Thats a sign that what you were doing is no longer working as effectively as it once did. And I don't need the stats to tell me that. It was obvious in the last years of the LOb and its even more so now. The fact that Pete was able to keep the d from dropping off more initially is a testament to how sound the scheme was and how well suited the players were to it. We still have a good scheme, but it will never be as dominant as it was because the league has figured it out and we don't have the ideal players for it. Doesnt mean it can't be a top 10 defense with the right players or even occasionally top 5 if we have a great year where we tick over a high TO percentage. But I highly doubt we will ever see top 5 in scoring defense again unless the scheme gets a bit more exotic. If we aren't going to make offenses guess at what we are doing, we need phenomenal players to execute well above average consistently.

 

[potatohead33]

I'd rather get beat by the long ball than have the other team take eight minutes and seventeen plays to score a TD anyway. At least with a deep ball you get the ball back with a lot more time on the clock. Rip the band-aid off all at once opposed to slowly. The soft coverage and allowing a billion third down conversions a game is brutal. The only reason Seattle is winning is because of turnovers and I am not sure how sustainable that is.

 

[cymatica]

I don't think getting Adams back helps a whole lot. The philosophy of the defense allows 400+ dink and dunk yards all game. The games with Adams they still had a horrible defense. Getting a good pass rusher also doesn't help when your scheme is very predictable and you have a corner like flowers... qbs know where the holes in the zone are before the ball is snapped

 

[AubHawk71]

SEA is currently ranked 29th for allowing 3rd down conversions. I have to leave the room every time it is 3rd and 5 or greater because I know a slant pass for 12-15 yards is forthcoming. But that's fine. As long as the Hawks win.

Oh, and SEA is dead last in passing D. But that's fine.

Soft Zone 4ever.

 

[Grahamhawker]

I don't think getting Adams back helps a whole lot. The philosophy of the defense allows 400+ dink and dunk yards all game. The games with Adams they still had a horrible defense. Getting a good pass rusher also doesn't help when your scheme is very predictable and you have a corner like flowers... qbs know where the holes in the zone are before the ball is snapped

Exactly.

When underneath is soft and always open, why not take it. It also beats pressure. And it's been the formula since 2012.

 

[sc85sis]

...and they are on pace for, what, allowing 7,000+ passing yards this season?

Pete's philosophy is straight up War of Attrition.

- He doesn't care if the opponent passes for 1000 yards as long as they win.

- He doesn't care if we win every single game by one point, as long as they win.

- Pete doesn't care if the Hawks go 0-7 on 3rd down, as long as they get two 4th down conversions in the last drive of the game. (Minnesota was 6-14 on 3rd downs.)

The thing about attrition/rope a dope is that it is only sustainable if you have a world class sharpshooter like Wilson to bail you out.

It's been discussed ad nausea on here, but it bears repeating until somebody somewhere listens to the constructive criticism. Just like with letting Russ cook. Enough with the soft zone already. I don't want to regress where it is only fun watching the 4th qtr of the game like the last couple of years and hoping for another Wilson miracle. FUN!

I think saying Pete doesn’t care about those things is overstating it and not accurate. He cares and will do what he can to get improvement in those areas. But he’s also going to take what he can get in a given game/season because winning IS the most important goal.

 

[cymatica]

SEA is currently ranked 29th for allowing 3rd down conversions. I have to leave the room every time it is 3rd and 5 or greater because I know a slant pass for 12-15 yards is forthcoming. But that's fine. As long as the Hawks win.

Oh, and SEA is dead last in passing D. But that's fine.

Soft Zone 4ever.

As much as Brandon Marshall annoys me, he alluded to this and basically said teams know exactly where to go on 3rd downs against Seattle because they are predictable.

 

[cymatica]

I don't think getting Adams back helps a whole lot. The philosophy of the defense allows 400+ dink and dunk yards all game. The games with Adams they still had a horrible defense. Getting a good pass rusher also doesn't help when your scheme is very predictable and you have a corner like flowers... qbs know where the holes in the zone are before the ball is snapped

Exactly.

When underneath is soft and always open, why not take it. It also beats pressure. And it's been the formula since 2012.

I remember the fail mary game where we had the LOB and a good pass rush. Rodgers was shut down in the first half using their deep pass game, then they came out in the 2nd half using 2 tight end sets with a healthy dose of short routes and marched up and down the field. The elite talent on defense prevented teams from having their way for a couple seasons.