Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

I actually think this is just fallout from the Baltimore game. Blache blitzed only twice all game long, and the defense played a very good game. Unfortunately, on the second blitz, Rogers got owned on the outside by the best receiver no one ever talks about, Derrick Mason, who (as I noted in my game breakdown) had been setting Rogers up all day for that double move, and ran a textbook route. Rogers looked awful, Blache gave him zero safety help, no pressure on Flacco, and the result was predictable. After that, apparently, he wasn't good enough to play for us.

I mean, you tell me. If Blache is really afraid of making Rogers look that bad, there seems like a better way to do it than benching him. How about, don't blitz if the opponent has been doing max protect stuff all game long?

This is only my opinion, but Rogers is simply the one guy that Blache didn't feel bad about blaming for his own mistakes. Coaches do tend to develop relationships with their players, and Blache was commenting on how well Rogers was playing earlier in the year, how far ahead of schedule he was. But if Blache doesn't value his relationship with CR, then all he has to do to make people forget the defensive collapse at the end of the year is trade the guy.

Then we can collapse all year! Yay!

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=The Goat;523884]What do you want to bet Grilliams would be in the market for Los if our FO is really going to shop him?[/quote]
hadn't thought of that but sounds reasonable

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;524000]What it tells me is that our coordinator on that side of the ball is clueless.[/quote]

I know you're not a fan of Blache but I think it's a stretch to call him clueless. If that's the case then we must have a hella talented team to overcome his cluelessness.

He must have had his reasons for benching Carlos, and they are reasons we'll probably never know.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

Re-sign Hall, then cut Springs (who can't stay on the field anyway). Problem solved. Hall & Rogers start.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;524043]Re-sign Hall, then cut Springs (who can't stay on the field anyway). Problem solved. Hall & Rogers start.[/quote]

that's probably what we should do.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=Mattyk72;524037]I know you're not a fan of Blache but I think it's a stretch to call him clueless. If that's the case then we must have a hella talented team to overcome his cluelessness.

He must have had his reasons for benching Carlos, and they are reasons we'll probably never know.[/quote]The act was one of cluelessness. One act does not define a man, but what scares me is that his reasons most likely weren't good reasons.

It's true that we don't know what they were. He's never come out and actually justified his reasoning. He's just sort of dodged the issue and openly worked to trade him.

I think he should man up and handle the issue like an adult, but I'd be cool if we just fired him.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

When did Blache openly work to trade Rogers?

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;524072]When did Blache openly work to trade Rogers?[/quote]Well, Rogers openly discussed being traded due to Blache's mismanagement of his situation.

So perhaps both parties are responsible for the trade rumors. Either way, this shouldn't have happened.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

i agree i dont like how we've handled Los situation. seems this year there has been alot of non-communication going on between the players and coaches. jansen is benched and not told why, portis not knowing or caring to check in with the coaches to see if he should be on the field or not, portis not knowing whether he should stay and block or chip and release then cites communication errors in coaches telling him to do 2 different things, los getting benched not told why, man i know theres more.

ABOUT D HALL, i originally wasnt for signing him b/c of his attitude (got burnt by a reciever, then missed the tackle then hits the guy late gets falgged all b/c he was made to look stupid), the way he plays off receivers then tries to jump routes for ints (yeah i know ints are great and we need them but not at the expense of hall gambling by baiting a qb), the fact that as talented as he seems he has been bounced around alot in his relatively short career .. . . with all that said, the current situation we are in we now have made a situation where we cant afford to lose hall and create another area of need. we just are not set up cap or draft wise to beable to handle another area of need beyond OL, DT, OLB.

go skins!!

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

Carlos Rogers was not "mishandled" or "misused" his play was horrible which is why he got benched, and his hands were a liability as well. Ranking 4th overall defensively tells me Blache is doing something right. As for Hall, we can agree to disagree, but if you look at production over the course of 3 years Hall is at least a top 15 corner.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;524068]The act was one of cluelessness. One act does not define a man, [B]but what scares me is that his reasons most likely weren't good reasons.[/B]

It's true that we don't know what they were. He's never come out and actually justified his reasoning. He's just sort of dodged the issue and openly worked to trade him.

I think he should man up and handle the issue like an adult, but I'd be cool if we just fired him.[/quote]

If you don't know what those reasons were, how can you say they likely weren't good reasons??

I guess the easy thing to do around here is to just assume the worst. And for some reasons the players are always the ones in the right. I don't get it. Even going back to the whole Arrington fiasco a lot of people were so convinced it was the coaches screwing him over and Arrington was somehow an innocent victim. Perhaps this happens because we rarely hear the coach's side of things, and it's always the players spouting off in the media.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;523950]Vilma isn't a lock to come back, though it's likely. And the Saints are definitely looking for another linebacker. They have cap issues though, so it will likely come via the draft.[/quote]

On a side note, I don't know if it was mentioned, but wasn't Dan Morgan talking about coming back? That would work out nice for them if he's still in game shape.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

[quote=vallin21;524090][B]Carlos Rogers was not "mishandled" or "misused" his play was horrible which is why he got benched[/B], and his hands were a liability as well. Ranking 4th overall defensively tells me Blache is doing something right. As for Hall, we can agree to disagree, but if you look at production over the course of 3 years Hall is at least a top 15 corner.[/quote]

I would hardly say his play was horrible. No one will argue that he has bad hands, but he was being talked about as a pro-bowl caliber player emerging as an elite defender during the first half of the season. He may have faded a bit and had a rift with Blache prior to being benched, but calling him horrible is a huge overstatement IMO.

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

Carlos "Stone Hands" Rogers was actually a pretty good corner. I was looking for, but could not find, the article demonstrating that, in many ways Rogers was a top 10 corner. At the time of his benching, I thought he was doing very well in stopping receivers and, when the inevitable catches did happen, he made some nice tackles to limit YAC.

IMHO, if the guy caught half of the balls that hit him in the hands, he would be a pro-bowl corner....

or a star in the sequel "Brokeback Mountain II".

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 

haha that last part was wrong on some many levels, lol.

go skins!!