Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Joe Kidd;512695]The D has been solid this year but at times they are prone to getting gashed at the worst times. When we need a stop late in a game they just can't seem to get it. Not saying that's all coaching but it's a part of it. I think there's more talent on the D then some people are giving them credit for.[/quote]

There is talent but it's mostly on the back end and to be a dominant D it needs to be up front.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=vallin21;512686]Exactly. The redskins have more issues in the FO than with Blache. He's laying with guys who are underachievers and past their prime on the d- line. Thats not Blache's fault.[/quote]


By my count we've had 57 picks since 2000.

30 for offense
25 for Defense
2 for Special Teams

7 QB
7 WR(despite the claim by the Post recently we've been drafting a lot, we've picked the same number of QB's)
4 TE
4 RB
8 OL

6 DL
7 LB
12 DB

More than any position on the O. It even tops WR and TE put together if you want to, since I counted CB and S together.

I think this strongly points to DL not being a priority. But the defensive backfield is about as good as it's going to get.

I actually think there's a good chance we will go for the line this season, even if it's by process of elimination, unless we trade the pick. Draft a reciever and we have to give up on someone we probably don't want to. RB's one of out most talented positions. We don't need another first round QB. The secondary is loaded. The only position that can make a claim for help as much as the lines might be linebacker.

Re: On Blache
 

To be honest...the shiznit has been the 3-4 for several years now. I have wondered why we have not changed to that but obviously when Williams was here he like the 4-3 with his added twist. All of his pressure came from CB or Safeties and occassional LB blitzes. The whole up front scheme is based off of stopping the run unfortunatly out of 4 players 2 were run stuffers. The others were better at pass. In Blache it was for the most part similar. I however believe his scheme is based off of LB blitzes. We have not seen a whole lot of Safety or CB blitzes and when we try it they get picked up or caught up at the line.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=MrJL;512562]Thing is, I don't think you need to assign a lot of blame to Blache to feel it's time for a change.

With the offense struggling we need to switch from a D philosophy where they keep the O in the game, to where they try to win the game.[/quote]
How can the D keep the O in the game if the O cannot put points on the board or convert third downs?

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=firstdown;512748]How can the D keep the O in the game if the O cannot put points on the board or convert third downs?[/quote]

Personally, I've thought the O's come together a couple of times late in the game. Such as the fourth down TD against the Ravens and the 80-some yard drive that didn't get anything against the Bengals but still got them to the half yard line. That suggests something was coming together on the O. Then the D gives up another score and the O has to abandon what finally started working because a one score game is now a two score game.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=firstdown;512748]How can the D keep the O in the game if the O cannot put points on the board or convert third downs?[/quote]
What a catch 22?

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hog1;512770]What a catch 22?[/quote]

I would like to point out teams have won that way in the past. Remember the year the Ravens won the Super Bowl?

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=skinsfan69;512664]Every single expert that has followed the Redskins has basically said that the defense has done it's job. That Blache and his coaches are doing a nice job considering what they have to work with. These are people that played in the NFL and know more about football than you do. Yet you seem to try and over analyze everything...from some quote Blache said to talking about schemes that you probably know nothing about. Amazing.[/quote]I doubt most of the experts you cite has put as much work into figuring out the problem with the team that I have, but that's besides the point. It's sad that you have to take a low blow to discredit me, because you have no idea if I'm wrong, but because you want me to be wrong. Totally classless.

You can cover your eyes and stick your head in the ground if you want to, but his "nice job" probably was responsible for costing the team the playoffs, if you had to put it on any one thing.

Obviously, it's not just one thing. Our roster isn't as deep as it needs to be. Zorn's still feeling his way around at the expensive of offensive efficiency. The offensive line is old, and has really failed to get Portis going in the second half of the year. But we faced two teams in our division at home and definately not playing their best football, and the defense allowed 5.85, and 5.55 yards per play....PER PLAY...to Dallas and New York respectively.

With those offenses basically handicapped at the time we played them, those results are totally unacceptable. We knew going in that to have a chance in those games, we would have to have the advantage on defense. We got outplayed on defense in two must wins and that's not okay with me (three if you could Pittsburgh in the second half).

Re: On Blache
 

I don't think Blache and the defense is the problem. On West Coast offensive based teams like the redskins, the offense is the focus and drives the philosophy and identity of this team.

When defense is made to be the goat, I think that logic goes against what this team's philosophy is focused on - which is offense. The offense should drive the redskins and that's where the focus should be placed on first. Even though I like Zorn, Zorn and not Blache should be the target of discussion -when trying to place blame.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=warriorzpath;512793]I don't think Blache and the defense is the problem. On West Coast offensive based teams like the redskins, the offense is the focus and drives the philosophy and identity of this team.

When defense is made to be the goat, I think that logic goes against what this team's philosophy is focused on - which is offense. The offense should drive the redskins and that's where the focus should be placed on first. Even though I like Zorn, Zorn and not Blache should be the target of discussion -when trying to place blame.[/quote]

I'm not trying to place blame. I'm simply saying the D isn't going to get any better with Blache.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=MrJL;512799]I'm not trying to place blame. I'm simply saying the D isn't going to get any better with Blache.[/quote]

It really was not getting any better with Williams either. Yes it was a top 10 every other year but people figured out it's weakness.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=skinsfan69;512664]Every single expert that has followed the Redskins has basically said that the defense has done it's job. That Blache and his coaches are doing a nice job considering what they have to work with. These are people that played in the NFL and know more about football than you do. Yet you seem to try and over analyze everything...from some quote Blache said to talking about schemes that you probably know nothing about. Amazing.[/quote]

Ouch, a little harsh considering he watches the games and breaks them down play by play for us. Gtripp knows his stuff, disagree or not there's no reason to cut him down like that.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GTripp0012;512776]I doubt most of the experts you cite has put as much work into figuring out the problem with the team that I have, but that's besides the point. It's sad that you have to take a low blow to discredit me, because you have no idea if I'm wrong, but because you want me to be wrong. Totally classless.

You can cover your eyes and stick your head in the ground if you want to, but his "nice job" probably was responsible for costing the team the playoffs, if you had to put it on any one thing.

Obviously, it's not just one thing. Our roster isn't as deep as it needs to be. Zorn's still feeling his way around at the expensive of offensive efficiency. The offensive line is old, and has really failed to get Portis going in the second half of the year. But we faced two teams in our division at home and definately not playing their best football, and the defense allowed 5.85, and 5.55 yards per play....PER PLAY...to Dallas and New York respectively.

With those offenses basically handicapped at the time we played them, those results are totally unacceptable. We knew going in that to have a chance in those games, we would have to have the advantage on defense. We got outplayed on defense in two must wins and that's not okay with me (three if you could Pittsburgh in the second half).[/quote]

I'm not trying to offend you. Sorry if you took it that way. We'll just agree to disagree.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GTripp0012;512599]Way to omit Leftwich, Fitzpatrick, Orlovsky, and Bulger because they don't support your argument. Better yet, thanks for checking to see that your argument is bunk, and then trying to throw out selective stats anyway, and hoping I wouldn't notice.

I thought we defended Warner and Brees pretty darn well [I]three months ago[/I]. Our offense also averaged 26.5 points between those games, and at the time, was clearly helping to contribute to our team success.

Thanks though, I needed a good chuckle. Carry on.[/quote]


Talk abut a laugher... wow.... you ARE the best analyist on this site...

1st) Bulger IS listed... 136 passing yards vs Skins... over 40 on the last heave... spectacular.. it's called READING... left to right, top to bottom...

2nd) Leftwich did well, but has not played any other significant time at ALL this season to compare...

3rd) Orlovsky' numbers were break even...60% comp/88 QBR - 58.4% comp/80.3 overall .. definitely NOT much worse against others like YOUR ignorant statement was...

YOU failed to mention Romo, who we played just FOUR games ago who had a 72.4 QBR and 2 Ints in the game. Matter of fact... he had his 2nd & 4th worst QBRs against us (out of 11 games)...

I can keep going...

How about McNabb? 196 yds, 58.6% comp, 0 TDs, 79.1 QBR vs Skins - 60.9% comp,86.7 QBR overall...

or Eli Manning?? 54.3% & 61.8% comp, 61.1 & 88.5 QBRs vs Skins - 60.3% comp, 86.4 overall...

So that leaves ONE QB this ENTIRE 14 GAME SEASON who had a remotely BETTER day than usual.. Ryan Fitzpatrick with an amazing 55% comp and one London Fletcher or Mike Green CATCH away from a QBR in the 60's...

I mean... obviously you WANTED me to call you out on being TOTALLY incorrect by carrying this on... right?

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;512886]Talk abut a laugher... wow.... you ARE the best analyist on this site...

1st) Bulger IS listed... 136 passing yards vs Skins... over 40 on the last heave... spectacular.. it's called READING... left to right, top to bottom...

2nd) Leftwich did well, but has not played any other significant time at ALL this season to compare...

3rd) Orlovsky' numbers were break even...60% comp/88 QBR - 58.4% comp/80.3 overall .. definitely NOT much worse against others like YOUR ignorant statement was...

YOU failed to mention Romo, who we played just FOUR games ago who had a 72.4 QBR and 2 Ints in the game. Matter of fact... he had his 2nd & 4th worst QBRs against us (out of 11 games)...

I can keep going...

How about McNabb? 196 yds, 58.6% comp, 0 TDs, 79.1 QBR vs Skins - 60.9% comp,86.7 QBR overall...

or Eli Manning?? 54.3% & 61.8% comp, 61.1 & 88.5 QBRs vs Skins - 60.3% comp, 86.4 overall...

So that leaves ONE QB this ENTIRE 14 GAME SEASON who had a remotely BETTER day than usual.. Ryan Fitzpatrick with an amazing 55% comp and one London Fletcher or Mike Green CATCH away from a QBR in the 60's...

I mean... obviously you WANTED me to call you out on being TOTALLY incorrect by carrying this on... right?[/quote]

What impresses me most about our defense is we have no pass rush to speak of. Plus how many INT's have we dropped?? If these guys could just catch the ball!!! Also Cinn had most of their yardage on the first few drives. After that Blache adjusted and shut them down. That's what I really like about him and that's a sign of good coaching. He makes adjustments and he's been doing it all year long.

As long as guys are in position to make plays then I can't blame Blache. Rarely have I seen guys out of position this year. When we get beat it's cause the other guy was better. I can accept that. I remember in 06 guys were all over the place, out of position and what not. It seemed Williams was trying to be too cute. Blache seems to keep it more simple.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;512515]As I said in another thread...

Our Defense (and definitely Blache) is NOT TO BLAME!!

The ONLY stat that matters is POINTS ALLOWED... or am I wrong??

* Our defense has not given up more than 24 points in a game all season (Pittsburgh is only other team to say that) - 12 teams are AVERAGING allowing more than 24 per game!! And one is a playoff team (Arizona)

* OUR defense averages giving up 19.0 per game - 7th in the NFL!!

* Our defense is doing this with an offense that is NOT controlling the clock or punters who are pinning teams back.

* Our defense SEEMS to be the problem because they have NO ROOM FOR ERROR... lol... if they give up 2 touchdowns in one game, we all know it's over (i.e. the Ravens game)

* Look at the games where our D gives in late in the 4th and they were games where our Offense went 3 & out for most of the 1st half (Dallas, Baltimore, Cincinnati) and the D was on the field for much of the day... holding the other team at bay...

Really, when you think about it, Blache deserves A LOT of credit.. I think... We have absolutely no pass rush (which puts pressure on our secondary), but Blache's philosophy is "the team that runs more productively will win the majority of games" ...

So his scheme is allowing us to have a top passing defense (opposing pass offenses have terrible numbers against us - 55% completions & 75.1 QB rating) while still being an above average run stopping team (ranked 10th, 3.8 ypc)... this equals not many points allowed.... WHICH IS WHAT REALLY MATTERS...

and although I HATE not getting pressure, the stats above don't lie...[/quote]


I totally agree with this. The defense's job is to stop the other team from scoring. Giving up 19 per game is more than adequate.... they have given us the chance to win pretty much every game (except Pitt and Giants).

If our offense was as good as our D we would be in the playoffs.

Still need a pass rush though...then the D would be sick.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=skinsfan69;512905][B]Also Cinn had most of their yardage on the first few drives. After that Blache adjusted and shut them down. That's what I really like about him and that's a sign of good coaching. He makes adjustments and he's been doing it all year long.[/B][/quote]

What happened on that last drive when the Bengals held the ball for something like 8-9 minutes? The Skins have been burned in the 4th quarter a bunch this year, for whatever reason in crunch time they falter. I'm not saying it's all on Blache, but there's just something there that makes you wonder why they can't close teams out in the 4th.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=MrJL;512772]I would like to point out teams have won that way in the past. Remember the year the Ravens won the Super Bowl?[/quote]


Thats a rare deal though, not many teams win it all with such poor QB play.

They had one of the best D's in NFL history. If they had just a good defense there's no way they win.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Joe Kidd;512982]What happened on that last drive when the Bengals held the ball for something like 8-9 minutes? The Skins have been burned in the 4th quarter a bunch this year, for whatever reason in crunch time they falter. I'm not saying it's all on Blache, but there's just something there that makes you wonder why they can't close teams out in the 4th.[/quote]

From what I've seen our guys are just getting ran over in those situations. The coaches can't go out there and tackle can they? They can't make guys get off blocks can they? Who on our front line is good enough to make a stop or a sack when we have to have it? No one.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=skinsfan69;512987]From what I've seen our guys are just getting ran over in those situations. The coaches can't go out there and tackle can they? They can't make guys get off blocks can they? Who on our front line is good enough to make a stop or a sack when we have to have it? No one.[/quote]

No but he can make adjustments as you say. I'm just not convinced the players are entirely to blame.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=MrJL;512769]Personally, I've thought the O's come together a couple of times late in the game. Such as the fourth down TD against the Ravens and the 80-some yard drive that didn't get anything against the Bengals but still got them to the half yard line. That suggests something was coming together on the O. Then the D gives up another score and the O has to abandon what finally started working because a one score game is now a two score game.[/quote]

The problem is that when the offense finally "comes together" late in these games, the defense has been out in the field a lot and they are running out of steam. I could be wrong, but in the Bengals game, the Redskins did not complete a 1st Down until well into the 2nd Qtr. So you have an entire quarter of the offense going 3 and out, and the defense playing a lot.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Joe Kidd;512982]What happened on that last drive when the Bengals held the ball for something like 8-9 minutes? The Skins have been burned in the 4th quarter a bunch this year, for whatever reason in crunch time they falter. I'm not saying it's all on Blache, but there's just something there that makes you wonder why they can't close teams out in the 4th.[/quote]
I'd say that our D faltered in the first 1/4 thes week and not in the fourth.

Re: On Blache
 

I think GT's points from the breakdown of the cincy game are well taken. In a nutshell, the D plays tough enough to keep us in games but at crucial times the blitz calls are so predictable that any qb can spot them. Smoot matched up 1 on 1 v. Housh. on 3rd down is asking for trouble.

I know Blache could be under pressure from Zorn to get more pressure on the qb, so I'll at least give him an out there. And we don't have any good blitzers really (maybe Horton). But the blitzes never surprise anyone, including me!

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=firstdown;513000]I'd say that our D faltered in the first 1/4 thes week and not in the fourth.[/quote]
I have posted this many a times, but for as good as our D is, they have been horrible every 1st quarter. They usually picked up as the game went along, but as our offensive struggles have risen, they have, of late, faltered in the 4th quarter too. 2nd and 3rd quarters, the D has been stellar.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=firstdown;513000]I'd say that our D faltered in the first 1/4 thes week and not in the fourth.[/quote]

He's got a good point, they controlled the clock for over 7 minutes in the 4th quarter on one drive.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Ruhskins;512993]The problem is that when the offense finally "comes together" late in these games, the defense has been out in the field a lot and they are running out of steam. I could be wrong, but in the Bengals game, the Redskins did not complete a 1st Down until well into the 2nd Qtr. So you have an entire quarter of the offense going 3 and out, and the defense playing a lot.[/quote]


well, the Post just did an article on this today. In the first half, in the past five losses we've had the ball just slightly more than half the half. In the 3rd after 15 minutes rest they've held the ball an average of 6:36. That's not bad. Over the first 45 minutes the other team has only held the ball 2 minutes and 13 seconds longer than us.

Re: On Blache
 

Seems to be a lot of discussion over whether or not Blache should be credited for adjustments that help us play better as a game goes along. This is a good discussion, as the Redskins rarely stay with a bad gameplan for an entire game. Is that a credit to our DC? I don't know.

I generally think Blache waits too long to make adjustments, but going through the game film probably distorts reality a little bit as there is not much time between plays to analyze whats going on where he has plenty of time.

[U]I can not say conclusively that the Redskins would be a better defense without Greg Blache calling the shots.[/U] I can say with great confidence that they would not be any worse.

We may miss Blache as a DL coach if/when he retires, but I think (my opinion is) that a change in defensive coaching will -- if not immediately -- generate positive results in the long term.

I hope I'm right, because if the problem with the pass rush is personnel related, we're pretty much screwed for the future one way or another.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;512886]Talk abut a laugher... wow.... you ARE the best analyist on this site...

1st) Bulger IS listed... 136 passing yards vs Skins... over 40 on the last heave... spectacular.. it's called READING... left to right, top to bottom...

2nd) Leftwich did well, but has not played any other significant time at ALL this season to compare...

3rd) Orlovsky' numbers were break even...60% comp/88 QBR - 58.4% comp/80.3 overall .. definitely NOT much worse against others like YOUR ignorant statement was...

YOU failed to mention Romo, who we played just FOUR games ago who had a 72.4 QBR and 2 Ints in the game. Matter of fact... he had his 2nd & 4th worst QBRs against us (out of 11 games)...

I can keep going...

How about McNabb? 196 yds, 58.6% comp, 0 TDs, 79.1 QBR vs Skins - 60.9% comp,86.7 QBR overall...

or Eli Manning?? 54.3% & 61.8% comp, 61.1 & 88.5 QBRs vs Skins - 60.3% comp, 86.4 overall...

So that leaves ONE QB this ENTIRE 14 GAME SEASON who had a remotely BETTER day than usual.. Ryan Fitzpatrick with an amazing 55% comp and one London Fletcher or Mike Green CATCH away from a QBR in the 60's...

I mean... obviously you WANTED me to call you out on being TOTALLY incorrect by carrying this on... right?[/quote]You use '...' so much that I can't really get the flow of what your point is. I see a lot of potentially useful statistics, but they're just thrown at me in a way that I can't hope to understand what your point is.

Basically, your argument lacks logical flow. It's coming off somewhat like: [quote]"A bunch of horrible passers look especially horrible when playing the Redskins. Doesn't this prove that we're great!?!?! Also, points!"[/quote] Well, no, but perhaps you are trying to prove something more concrete. I can't tell.

You're also using assumed change in QB Rating to make a point that QB Rating is poorly designed to prove. But I see what you are saying with the completion %....sort of.

My point: we're a below average pass defense --and I could throw a books-worth of stats at you to prove this-- and I don't feel like we should be based on the [U]individual talent[/U] we have in the secondary AND [B]on the pass rush [/B]

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GTripp0012;513164]You use '...' so much that I can't really get the flow of what your point is. I see a lot of potentially useful statistics, but they're just thrown at me in a way that I can't hope to understand what your point is.

Basically, your argument lacks logical flow. It's coming off somewhat like: A bunch of horrible passers look especially horrible when playing the Redskins. Doesn't this prove that we're great!?!?! Also, points! Well, no, but perhaps you are trying to prove something more concrete. I can't tell.

You're also using assumed change in QB Rating to make a point that QB Rating is poorly designed to prove. But I see what you are saying with the completion %....sort of.

My point: we're a below average pass defense --and I could throw a books-worth of stats at you to prove this-- and I don't feel like we should be based on the [U]individual talent[/U] we have in the secondary AND [B]on the pass rush [/B][/quote]



OK this is the last comment I'll make on this subject.

You originally called ME out on not understanding statistics. Then you said that QBs we face have worse days against everyone else in the league.

I then pointed out that we are ranked in the top 10 in pretty much every pass defense category and that you were wrong. I showed, with CLEAR statistics that only one QB in 14 games has a romotely better day that usual. You read, and obviously understand what I was pointing out because of the next ludicrous statement you make in response, then act like YOU can't understand the logic of statement made because you can't make a truly valid argument to facts & numbers I present.

You actually make a mocking statement saying we have faced "A bunch of horrible passers"??

Romo? McNabb? Manning? Roethlisberger? Hasselbeck? Brees? Warner? These are horrible passers?

Whatever. I can't argue with this kind of talk anymore.

Look, I'm not trying to bash you here, but I will defend myself when someone attacks my intelligence.

I can't really make myself much more clear. Anyone who thinks we have a "below average pass defense" should NOT be trying to belittle or trash ANYONE else's statements.

If you are this site's premeir football analyst and feel like you have to belittle facts someone else points out, because you feel threatened (I guess), don't worry, most people don't have the time to put in the hours you do... including me. (Oh, sorry for the ... now you may not be able to understand my whole post)

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GTripp0012;513163]

[U]I can not say conclusively that the Redskins would be a better defense without Greg Blache calling the shots.[/U] I can say with great confidence that they would not be any worse.

We may miss Blache as a DL coach if/when he retires, but I think (my opinion is) that a change in defensive coaching will -- if not immediately -- generate positive results in the long term.
[/quote]

Its hard to knock a top 5 defense.
I think that Blache is a decent DC but has limits.

His defense line appears designed to stop the run and struggles getting pressure.
Our ends rarely just go balls out at the QB is always seems like a controlled rush.
As opposed to the Colts, their defensive line is all about pass rush and they try to stop the run on the way to the QB.

Another problem that i've heard mentioned in this thread is that our blitzes lack disguise.
Blache doesn't really hide the fact that he is blitzing, opposing teams can easily read and adjust to our blitzes. This has put our corners (Smoot, Rogers) in a bad spot when we all out blitz.

Steelers, Ravens, Giants, Eagles, Bears all have a very creative blitz/package with lots of zone-blitz.
They show that 7-10 are blitzing but often only rush 4 but which 4 is difficult to figure out pre-snap.
The brief confusion this disguise creates is often enough to give the pass rusher the advantage, the confusion also distorts the QBs reads.
In the face of an blitz look QBs often check to a hot read, against a zone-blitz they might find a DE or LB sitting in the hot zone forcing him to hold the ball or even an interception.
(e.g. DT -Ngata & DE/LB Suggs both have 2 picks)

The defense has done enough to keep us in most games, but i agree with GT that Blache isn't getting the most out of our current defense in terms of pressure.

My problems with Blache:

1) Where has Chris Wilson been? Where was James playing time? (when we had him)-Where was Rob Jackson early in the season? Why wasn't their a rotation at DE earlier in the year?

2) Why doesn't Rocky blitz/rush more (instead cover where he isn't that great)

3) Why doesn't Blache turn the D-line loose more?

4) Why doesn't Zorn zone-blitz or disguise the blitzes?

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=30gut;513631]Its hard to knock a top 5 defense.
I think that Blache is a decent DC but has limits.

His defense line appears designed to stop the run and struggles getting pressure.
Our ends rarely just go balls out at the QB is always seems like a controlled rush.
As opposed to the Colts, their defensive line is all about pass rush and they try to stop the run on the way to the QB.

Another problem that i've heard mentioned in this thread is that our blitzes lack disguise.
Blache doesn't really hide the fact that he is blitzing, opposing teams can easily read and adjust to our blitzes. This has put our corners (Smoot, Rogers) in a bad spot when we all out blitz.

Steelers, Ravens, Giants, Eagles, Bears all have a very creative blitz/package with lots of zone-blitz.
They show that 7-10 are blitzing but often only rush 4 but which 4 is difficult to figure out pre-snap.
The brief confusion this disguise creates is often enough to give the pass rusher the advantage, the confusion also distorts the QBs reads.
In the face of an blitz look QBs often check to a hot read, against a zone-blitz they might find a DE or LB sitting in the hot zone forcing him to hold the ball or even an interception.
(e.g. DT -Ngata & DE/LB Suggs both have 2 picks)

The defense has done enough to keep us in most games, but i agree with GT that Blache isn't getting the most out of our current defense in terms of pressure.

My problems with Blache:

1) Where has Chris Wilson been? Where was James playing time? (when we had him)-Where was Rob Jackson early in the season? Why wasn't their a rotation at DE earlier in the year?

2) Why doesn't Rocky blitz/rush more (instead cover where he isn't that great)

3) Why doesn't Blache turn the D-line loose more?

4) Why doesn't Zorn zone-blitz or disguise the blitzes?[/quote]

Blache doesn't turn the D-Line loose because he believes stopping the run is more important. Zorn doesn't call the blitzes. Wilson has been in occasionally. James was even in once in a blue There is a rotation at DE when everyone is healthy. Taylor, Carter, Evans and Wilson

Re: On Blache
 

The Short List:

Bill Cowher - A solid manager and a good judge of talent. Will get the most out of his players, and unlike Jim Zorn, will utilize whatever talent is on the roster.

Gregg Blache - Bring in new offensive and defensive coordinators. I love the way Blache has handled himself, and his players, during these most difficult times. We don't need a genius/guru for a head coach, we need a leader of men. The players respect Gregg Blache, he's an experienced good leader. We already have a lot of talent on the roster. We're 5 players away (2 D-Linemen, 2 O-Lineman, 1 bad-ass pass rushing linebacker) from being a serious contender, and after we get Albert Haynesworth via free agency we'll be that much closer.

That interview Zorn gave earlier in the week he was asked if he would adjust his scheme in order to better utilize the players he has, his response was probably not. I just don't know if he gets it. To say he's developing as a head coach is insanity to me, these are the professional ranks. We don't have time for him to figure it out. Either he's ready to lead or he's not, and it has nothing to do with the fact that this is his rookie year as a head coach. For example; I bet Joe Gibbs can't change a flat tire, and I've heard Tony Stewart say they keep him as far from the garage as possible. Some people are natural leaders and some you can’t put in charge. No matter how smart they are.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=shack;513770]The Short List:

Bill Cowher - A solid manager and a good judge of talent. Will get the most out of his players, and unlike Jim Zorn, will utilize whatever talent is on the roster.

Gregg Blache - Bring in new offensive and defensive coordinators. I love the way Blache has handled himself, and his players, during these most difficult times. We don't need a genius/guru for a head coach, we need a leader of men. The players respect Gregg Blache, he's an experienced good leader. We already have a lot of talent on the roster. We're 5 players away (2 D-Linemen, 2 O-Lineman, 1 bad-ass pass rushing linebacker) from being a serious contender, and [B]after we get Albert Haynesworth via free agency we'll be that much closer.[/B]

That interview Zorn gave earlier in the week he was asked if he would adjust his scheme in order to better utilize the players he has, his response was probably not. I just don't know if he gets it. To say he's developing as a head coach is insanity to me, these are the professional ranks. We don't have time for him to figure it out. Either he's ready to lead or he's not, and it has nothing to do with the fact that this is his rookie year as a head coach. For example; I bet Joe Gibbs can't change a flat tire, and I've heard Tony Stewart say they keep him as far from the garage as possible. Some people are natural leaders and some you can’t put in charge. No matter how smart they are.[/quote]

Does anyone really think Tennessee will let Haynesworth get away??

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;513544]OK this is the last comment I'll make on this subject.

You originally called ME out on not understanding statistics. Then you said that QBs we face have worse days against everyone else in the league.

I then pointed out that we are ranked in the top 10 in pretty much every pass defense category and that you were wrong. I showed, with CLEAR statistics that only one QB in 14 games has a romotely better day that usual. You read, and obviously understand what I was pointing out because of the next ludicrous statement you make in response, then act like YOU can't understand the logic of statement made because you can't make a truly valid argument to facts & numbers I present.

You actually make a mocking statement saying we have faced "A bunch of horrible passers"??

Romo? McNabb? Manning? Roethlisberger? Hasselbeck? Brees? Warner? These are horrible passers?

Whatever. I can't argue with this kind of talk anymore.

Look, I'm not trying to bash you here, but I will defend myself when someone attacks my intelligence.

I can't really make myself much more clear. Anyone who thinks we have a "below average pass defense" should NOT be trying to belittle or trash ANYONE else's statements.

If you are this site's premeir football analyst and feel like you have to belittle facts someone else points out, because you feel threatened (I guess), don't worry, most people don't have the time to put in the hours you do... including me. (Oh, sorry for the ... now you may not be able to understand my whole post)[/quote]I don't think this should be about you vs. me: who knows more? Why would I stoop down to that level? It's not an argument that anyone on this board, besides you, should or would give a crap about.

I never once accused you of not knowing what you are talking about. I thought your argument was built the wrong way (kinda like the Redskins). You decided, presumably based on the games you've seen, that the Redskins defense is great, offense is terrible, and that you might be able to prove this statistically. Statistics were never designed to be used like that. The context-neutral statistics I cite in ALL of my game reviews suggest that the defense and offense are close to equally responsible for the downfall of the team. Not coincidentally, this is also what I see on film. Imagine that.

What you did bring to light is that, the Redskins have faced a bunch of passers that are having awful years. When you cite Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck, you're only helping to defend my point. When you cite Brees, and Warner, you're actually bringing solid evidence to the contrary. Which makes this a good discussion. Those guys are MVP candidates. We shut them down. Why haven't we done that all season long?! [B]Why did Ryan Fitzpatrick and Mark Bulger succeed where Brees and Warner failed? [/B]Why are we totally helpless against Eli Manning and Tony Romo (and possibly McNabb, depending on the outcome of Sunday's game). Should we be?

But the problem here is that you are lumping the good passers with the bad passers with the disappointingly bad, with the surprisingly bad, and then you use a series of double standards. ("Don't you think Roethlisberger is great?! What about Hasselbeck?")

I enjoyed your game by game breakdown of how passers did against us. You also changed the metric you were using to suit your argument, because the primary metrics you used, completion percentage and QB Rating, did not fit your argument in all the cases. Which means, that by definition, your argument was weak. I didn't have to respond, because you already knew from the research that you weren't as right as you thought you were. That was MY point.

The main thing, is I can't respond to your point, until you make a point. I think you are trying to say that we have an above average pass defense. But your defense for it is weak. Since you can't come to terms with me on proper opponent adjustments for the Leftwich half, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Hasselbeck, Dan Orlovsky, Mark Bulger, or against one of the other passers we should have shut down, but didn't, I suggest we shrink the sample and talk about a case by case study.

Brees and Warner struggled against this pass defense, like you said. Romo and Manning, in those must win games, have had no trouble whatsoever, broken pinky, wet ball, whatever the conditions. Why exactly, are you contesting, that the performance of two home games in September should outweigh two more important home games in November in your argument? Why are you giving the defense a pass in those games?

Very simple. The two best performances vs. our two worst. All else equal, why should September games be weighed more heavily in your mind than November games within the division. Are injuries a factor in your mind? Or are you simply refusing to admit the defense f'ed up at any point this season.

---------------------------------

PS -- If you bother to respond to this, you first must consider the fact that you might be wrong, and I might be right here. If you can't do that, don't bother responding to this. You will be wasting your time.

You aren't necessarily wrong, that's not what I'm trying to say. But if your whole purpose of reading this is to try to prove, against strong evidence to the contrary, that you are right, it's just not worth what you are going to put into it. I mean, you obviously haven't put as much thought into it as I have.

And don't bother with any personal attacks either. You haven't been around here long enough to offend me.

Re: On Blache
 

game set and match to gtripp

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GTripp0012;513779]I don't think this should be about you vs. me: who knows more? Why would I stoop down to that level? It's not an argument that anyone on this board, besides you, should or would give a crap about.

I never once accused you of not knowing what you are talking about. I thought your argument was built the wrong way (kinda like the Redskins). You decided, presumably based on the games you've seen, that the Redskins defense is great, offense is terrible, and that you might be able to prove this statistically. Statistics were never designed to be used like that. The context-neutral statistics I cite in ALL of my game reviews suggest that the defense and offense are close to equally responsible for the downfall of the team. Not coincidentally, this is also what I see on film. Imagine that.

What you did bring to light is that, the Redskins have faced a bunch of passers that are having awful years. When you cite Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck, you're only helping to defend my point. When you cite Brees, and Warner, you're actually bringing solid evidence to the contrary. Which makes this a good discussion. Those guys are MVP candidates. We shut them down. Why haven't we done that all season long?! [B][U]Why did [/U][/B]Ryan Fitzpatrick and [B][U]Mark Bulger succeed [/U][/B]where Brees and Warner failed? [B][U]Why are we totally helpless against Eli Manning and Tony Romo[/U][/B] (and possibly McNabb, depending on the outcome of Sunday's game). Should we be?

But the problem here is that you are lumping the good passers with the bad passers with the disappointingly bad, with the surprisingly bad, and then you use a series of double standards. ("Don't you think Roethlisberger is great?! What about Hasselbeck?")

I enjoyed your game by game breakdown of how passers did against us. You also changed the metric you were using to suit your argument, because the primary metrics you used, completion percentage and QB Rating, did not fit your argument in all the cases. Which means, that by definition, your argument was weak. I didn't have to respond, because you already knew from the research that you weren't as right as you thought you were. That was MY point.

The main thing, is I can't respond to your point, until you make a point. I think you are trying to say that we have an above average pass defense. But your defense for it is weak. Since you can't come to terms with me on proper opponent adjustments for the Leftwich half, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Hasselbeck, Dan Orlovsky, Mark Bulger, or against one of the other passers we should have shut down, but didn't, I suggest we shrink the sample and talk about a case by case study.

Brees and Warner struggled against this pass defense, like you said. [B][U]Romo[/U][/B] and Manning, in those must win games, have [B][U]had no trouble whatsoever, broken pinky, wet ball, whatever the conditions[/U][/B]. [U]Why exactly, are you contesting, that the performance of two home games in September should outweigh two more important home games in November in your argument? [/U] Why are you giving the defense a pass in those games?

Very simple. The two best performances vs. our two worst. All else equal, why should September games be weighed more heavily in your mind than November games within the division. Are injuries a factor in your mind? Or are you simply refusing to admit the defense f'ed up at any point this season.

---------------------------------

PS -- If you bother to respond to this, you first must consider the fact that you might be wrong, and I might be right here. If you can't do that, don't bother responding to this. You will be wasting your time.

You aren't necessarily wrong, that's not what I'm trying to say. But if your whole purpose of reading this is to try to prove, against strong evidence to the contrary, that you are right, it's just not worth what you are going to put into it. I mean, you obviously haven't put as much thought into it as I have.

And don't bother with any personal attacks either. You haven't been around here long enough to offend me.[/quote]


OK, first of all, I have been on this website since February 2004. Again, I am REALLY having issue here with your READING ABILITY. (It IS right under my name) In case you are not sure how to interpret THIS stat, I have been here 2 years longer than you. I am here all the time reading, but I don't always post due to ignorance and attacks most people feel like they have to respond with, rather than just talk about the Skins (you started this back and forth when you said that I was "100% wrong" and smugly pronounced that I "don't know how to use statistics")

Again and again you TOTALLY disregard things I say to try and twist things to support your argument and can't FATHOM that YOU ARE WRONG.

And Matty, I am suprised by your two cents. I have been here for 4 years and pretty much respected what you contribute. But, if you have read this whole back and forth discussion and you think that I have been "proven" wrong somewhow, well...

1) Our offense - 16.5 points per game - 29th in the NFL
2) Our defense - 19.0 points per game - 7th in the NFL

OK, first things first. If talk about making a clear enough point for YOU to understand... the ONLY STAT THAT MATTERS IS POINTS. If you don't agree with this, you are clueless.

How anyone can say that our defense is EQUALLY responsible for our record is just trying to in some way prove how insightful they are by using some complex game film, existential blathering argument. I mean, you have used no argument other than your words and your "I have watched the game film" argument over and over while spewing wrong fact after wrong fact with no stats to back it up (see Bulger & Romo below). What "Overwhelming evidence"?? What your incredible game film analysis?? I am soooo lost as to why exactly I am wrong here.

I mean, 24 of the 32 teams in the NFL AVERAGE MORE THAN 19.0 points per game. (I'm sure ALL of those teams would be happy with our D)

Regardless, if you ask a person who actually gets PAID to "break down film," (meaning they DO know what they are talking about & have a job in the NFL) if 16.5 points per game is something they wish for their offense, I HOPE you can grasp what their answer would be.

If you ask the same person if they would take a defense which allows on 19.0 points per game, THEY WOULDN'T COMPLAIN.

Now about the COMPLETE OMISSIONS and overlooks of clear points I debunk of yours...

You keep bringing up Bulger's game against the Redskins for some reason like he tortched us. I literally am laughing about it right now. The guy had a whopping 93 YARDS PASSING with 1:06 seconds left in the game (!) when LEIGH TORRANCE misplayed his coverage and gave up the 43 yard hail mary heave. For the game, he had a 57% completion and 72 QB Rating. Come on man, really, this is rediculous.

Also, why are we helpless against Manning & Romo?? I JUST posted this but let me try one more time.

Manning's combined stats vs Skins this year was 57.9% comp (his overall for the year is 60.3%) and his QB Rating was 74.8 (86.4 overall). Those ARE worse right??

Romo's stats vs Skins - 63.5% completion (63.1% overall) and his QB Rating was 81.7 (his overall rating is 98.3). Here again you provide more stupidity wth your words. In that week 11 game (you know, the "September game" 8 weeks after the Arizona game), Romo was 19-for-27 for a whopping 198 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs, and a robust QBR of 72.8. This is a perfect example of the ignorance that is getting absurd. You call me out for discrediting this performance when it clearly only SUPPORTS my statements.

Also, you are saying that Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck are terrible QBs? or are you trying to use the "bad year" excuse like playing either is easy pickings for a defense? Again, ask a REAL, paid film watcher and ask them if these two guys are bums and that their defense SHOULD shut them down.

Regardless, Roethlisberger completed 29% of his passes and had a 15.1 QB Rating. You are saying these are his average output numbers??

Also, and finally, I point out that only 1 QB in 14 has had a BETTER DAY THAN HIS averages ALL SEASON LONG. That is a clear statement/argument for our pass defense CLEARLY not being below average. And by the way, way to COMPLETELY ignore my stats on our pass defense being in the top 10 in every major category.

Anyway, I wouldn't have responded, because I was to the point where I was realizing you just REFUSE to admit you MIGHT be wrong, just once, with you being the "expert and all". But to see other people buy it, Matty, I had to make sure I cleared the air.

Oh, and let me point out as a final word; The Detroit Lions average more points per game than the Washington Redskins. (17.1 to 16.5)

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GMScud;513771]Does anyone really think Tennessee will let Haynesworth get away??[/quote]


They had to franchise him to keep him last year, and they're not allowed to this year. So they might not have a say

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;513790]OK, first of all, I have been on this website since February 2004. Again, I am REALLY having issue here with your READING ABILITY. (It IS right under my name) In case you are not sure how to interpret THIS stat, I have been here 2 years longer than you. I am here all the time reading, but I don't always post due to ignorance and attacks most people feel like they have to respond with, rather than just talk about the Skins (you started this back and forth when you said that I was "100% wrong" and smugly pronounced that I "don't know how to use statistics")

Again and again you TOTALLY disregard things I say to try and twist things to support your argument and can't FATHOM that YOU ARE WRONG.

And Matty, I am suprised by your two cents. I have been here for 4 years and pretty much respected what you contribute. But, if you have read this whole back and forth discussion and you think that I have been "proven" wrong somewhow, well...

[B]1) Our offense - 16.5 points per game - 29th in the NFL[/B]
[B]2) Our defense - 19.0 points per game - 7th in the NFL[/B]

OK, first things first. If talk about making a clear enough point for YOU to understand... the ONLY STAT THAT MATTERS IS POINTS. If you don't agree with this, you are clueless.

How anyone can say that our defense is EQUALLY responsible for our record is just trying to in some way prove how insightful they are by using some complex game film, existential blathering argument. I mean, you have used no argument other than your words and your "I have watched the game film" argument over and over while spewing wrong fact after wrong fact with no stats to back it up (see Bulger & Romo below). What "Overwhelming evidence"?? What your incredible game film analysis?? I am soooo lost as to why exactly I am wrong here.

I mean, 24 of the 32 teams in the NFL AVERAGE MORE THAN 19.0 points per game. (I'm sure ALL of those teams would be happy with our D)

Regardless, if you ask a person who actually gets PAID to "break down film," (meaning they DO know what they are talking about & have a job in the NFL) if 16.5 points per game is something they wish for their offense, I HOPE you can grasp what their answer would be.

If you ask the same person if they would take a defense which allows on 19.0 points per game, THEY WOULDN'T COMPLAIN.

Now about the COMPLETE OMISSIONS and overlooks of clear points I debunk of yours...

You keep bringing up Bulger's game against the Redskins for some reason like he tortched us. I literally am laughing about it right now. The guy had a whopping 93 YARDS PASSING with 1:06 seconds left in the game (!) when LEIGH TORRANCE misplayed his coverage and gave up the 43 yard hail mary heave. For the game, he had a 57% completion and 72 QB Rating. Come on man, really, this is rediculous.

Also, why are we helpless against Manning & Romo?? I JUST posted this but let me try one more time.

Manning's combined stats vs Skins this year was 57.9% comp (his overall for the year is 60.3%) and his QB Rating was 74.8 (86.4 overall). Those ARE worse right??

Romo's stats vs Skins - 63.5% completion (63.1% overall) and his QB Rating was 81.7 (his overall rating is 98.3). Here again you provide more stupidity wth your words. In that week 11 game (you know, the "September game" 8 weeks after the Arizona game), Romo was 19-for-27 for a whopping 198 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs, and a robust QBR of 72.8. This is a perfect example of the ignorance that is getting absurd. You call me out for discrediting this performance when it clearly only SUPPORTS my statements.

Also, you are saying that Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck are terrible QBs? or are you trying to use the "bad year" excuse like playing either is easy pickings for a defense? Again, ask a REAL, paid film watcher and ask them if these two guys are bums and that their defense SHOULD shut them down.

Regardless, Roethlisberger completed 29% of his passes and had a 15.1 QB Rating. You are saying these are his average output numbers??

Also, and finally, I point out that only 1 QB in 14 has had a BETTER DAY THAN HIS averages ALL SEASON LONG. That is a clear statement/argument for our pass defense CLEARLY not being below average. And by the way, way to COMPLETELY ignore my stats on our pass defense being in the top 10 in every major category.

Anyway, I wouldn't have responded, because I was to the point where I was realizing you just REFUSE to admit you MIGHT be wrong, just once, with you being the "expert and all". But to see other people buy it, Matty, I had to make sure I cleared the air.

Oh, and let me point out as a final word; The Detroit Lions average more points per game than the Washington Redskins. (17.1 to 16.5)[/quote]

That's all that needs to be said. We don't do the exotic things that Pittsburgh or Balt does but the bottom line is if we scored more points we'd be going to the playoffs. I'd even point out that the 19 points should be lower cause of some of the bad situations the offense has put the defense in. If the defense didn't keep us in games we'd be STL. Cinn or Det. bad.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=skinsfan69;513796]That's all that needs to be said. We don't do the exotic things that Pittsburgh or Balt does but the bottom line is if we scored more points we'd be going to the playoffs. I'd even point out that the 19 points should be lower cause of some of the bad situations the offense has put the defense in. If the defense didn't keep us in games we'd be STL. Cinn or Det. bad.[/quote]


The Offense has rarely put the Defense in bad positions. They don't turn over the ball much. Maybe the special teams has.

But maybe if the did some of the exotic things Pitt or Baltimore did teams would score less than nineteen. Or the offense would get the ball in better field position.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=MrJL;513800]The Offense has rarely put the Defense in bad positions. They don't turn over the ball much. Maybe the special teams has.

[SIZE="3"][COLOR="Red"]But maybe if the did some of the exotic things Pitt or Baltimore did teams would score less than nineteen.[/COLOR][/SIZE] Or the offense would get the ball in better field position.[/quote]

IMO if we used more disguise and more zone-blitz looks we would get more pressure, more sacks, more turnovers.



All war is based on deception.

Hence that general is skilful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skilful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.