Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;555998][B]Well are they good or not? [/B] No pass rush usually means a bad defense. Springs never played and their only all-pro was murdered. Their best corner scratched his ear with his cleats against New England the year before and was covering people on a new knee. Their weak side linebacker was on a new knee and faded down the stretch yet at the end of the year they were able to hold Philly (one of the best offenses in the league in the middle of another NFC Championship game season) to 3 points.

I would say that Blache did an excellent job with fairly little.[/quote]
What I am saying is that our D while good, had some issues. Not quite sure what your problem about that is. The phrase "4th ranked defense" is often used here, and I think it is fair to point out the fact that there were several games where the offense, as lackluster as it was got the lead in the 4th quarter, and the defense lost it. To say that the every loss was on the offense, which is what you seem to be arguing, ignores several very strong 4th quarters from the offense, or the fact that in Dallas and Baltimore games, the offense was trying to get into the game, and our 4th quarter defense gave up 8-10 minute time of possessions.
I think Blache had the players he wanted, he basically set Rodgers on the shelf, a very bad decision to me. He blitzed like a mad man, even when it was shown as ineffective. Hopefully AH/Orakpo will make those blitzes less frequent and more effective.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

Apparently the 4th best defense in the league that was supplemented with mediocre offense needs tweaking. Lets hope we can jump the Ravens and the Steelers next year.

p.s. I'm trying to be cute.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=tryfuhl;556018]Every cornerback in the league has given up a pass like that.[/quote]

And mediocre corners like Torrence give up more than most.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

GB a good coach he now on paper has a DL that will require the opposing OL to keep TE & RB to block, leaving opposing OF with less options. GB did wonders with what he had.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=jsarno;555797]I could be wrong, but I am guessing it was lack of true talent that prevented him from letting the players go. What's the point of sending 8 players if none of them touch the QB, so he kept them in pass coverage. He did what he needed to to get by. The fact that we were 4th in defense shows a lot about what Blache did with less than stellar talent up front.[/quote]Blache played to our defensive strength, which was clearly the range and athletic ability of our DBs. With Haynesworth and Orakpo, we will get to the QB much more. Their presence all but guarantee one-on-one matchups for Andre Carter and Cornelius Griffin. Add in Montgomery, Golston, Daniels, and Alexander, and we have a nice deep rotation on the D-line. I predict that Blache will use much the same scheme at the beginning of next season to see if we can hit the QB consistently while rushing four.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=SouperMeister;556086]Blache played to our defensive strength, which was clearly the range and athletic ability of our DBs. With Haynesworth and Orakpo, we will get to the QB much more. Their presence all but guarantee one-on-one matchups for Andre Carter and Cornelius Griffin. Add in Montgomery, Golston, Daniels, and Alexander, and we have a nice deep rotation on the D-line. I predict that Blache will use much the same scheme at the beginning of next season to see if we can hit the QB consistently while rushing four.[/quote]Please explain how leading the NFL in 6+ man blitzes is playing to the strengths of the secondary.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;556087]Please explain how leading the NFL in 6+ man blitzes is playing to the strengths of the secondary.[/quote]That was exactly my point - Blache had enough trust that our DBs could hold the fort while throwing multiple blitzes due to our weaker front 7. Wouldn't that be the definition of playing to the strength of our DBs? As I mentioned, I would expect to see far fewer blitzes out of the gate this season, and a far more balanced defense, especially if our front 4 applies consistent pressure.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=SouperMeister;556089]That was exactly my point - Blache had enough trust that our DBs could hold the fort while throwing multiple blitzes due to our weaker front 7. Wouldn't that be the definition of playing to the strength of our DBs? As I mentioned, I would expect to see far fewer blitzes out of the gate this season, and a far more balanced defense, especially if our front 4 applies consistent pressure.[/quote]It's a fair point, if you believe that simplifying the game is playing to the strength of the defensive backfield. I see it more as taking the game out of their hands and putting it in the offenses' blitz recognition ability. I always thought playing to the strength of your secondary means rushing four and asking them to make sure all the passing lanes are shut down.

Which is what I hope to see more of this year with Haynesworth, but I'm legitimately worried that Blache will fall into old habits.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

I think the lessons taken from last season include:

1) Never, ever blitz Eli Manning
2) You can blitz McNabb or Romo, but only to exploit a matchup in the trenches. Not just for the abstract concept that is "pressure."

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

Blitz Eli! But don't show him what the blitz is before the snap. I agree with you Gtripp about the futility of blitzing to apply pressure, when the quarterback is 95% confident that he's got a hat on every head.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

I think if we would've gotten better results blitzing we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The Steelers blitz effectively, the Redskins don't. At least not up to this point. For the amount of times we blitzed, the results were pathetic. I'm not sure how anyone can argue with that. Our sack totals were pathetic and I don't remember a lot of times where the pass wasn't completed because of pressure from the blitz. Maybe some, but not enough to justify blitzing as much as we did. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember our blitzes creating nearly as much havoc as some of the better defenses in the league. Nothing against Blache but that's just a fact. Simplifying the defense is one thing, but thinking you can beat the opponent all the time without disguising anything is just arrogant.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=53Fan;556107]I think if we would've gotten better results blitzing we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The Steelers blitz effectively, the Redskins don't. At least not up to this point. For the amount of times we blitzed, the results were pathetic. I'm not sure how anyone can argue with that. Our sack totals were pathetic and I don't remember a lot of times where the pass wasn't completed because of pressure from the blitz. Maybe some, but not enough to justify blitzing as much as we did. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember our blitzes creating nearly as much havoc as some of the better defenses in the league. Nothing against Blache but that's just a fact. Simplifying the defense is one thing, but thinking you can beat the opponent all the time without disguising anything is just arrogant.[/quote]

The Steelers run a 3-4. Everything they do is a blitz because their LBs have gap responsibilities and at least one of them is basically a Linemen in atwo point stance on every play. In no way can one compare a 3-4 and a 4-3. The Steelers are successful because they good talent and a few GREAT talents.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=FRPLG;556120]The Steelers run a 3-4. Everything they do is a blitz because their LBs have gap responsibilities and at least one of them is basically a Linemen in atwo point stance on every play. In no way can one compare a 3-4 and a 4-3. The Steelers are successful because they good talent and a few GREAT talents.[/quote]

Compare it any way you want. The point is, they get to the QB and we don't. Whether it's the Steelers or anyone else, the point of blitzing is to sack or disrupt the QB and we don't do much of either when we blitz. That's just the facts and the point I'm trying to make. Why blitz so much if it's ineffective? When a team continually blitzes and is ineffective, I would think that would put a smile on any QB's face. You've just taken some of your D-players out of the way.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=53Fan;556107]I think if we would've gotten better results blitzing we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The Steelers blitz effectively, the Redskins don't. At least not up to this point. For the amount of times we blitzed, the results were pathetic. I'm not sure how anyone can argue with that. Our sack totals were pathetic and I don't remember a lot of times where the pass wasn't completed because of pressure from the blitz. Maybe some, but not enough to justify blitzing as much as we did. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember our blitzes creating nearly as much havoc as some of the better defenses in the league. Nothing against Blache but that's just a fact. Simplifying the defense is one thing, but thinking you can beat the opponent all the time without disguising anything is just arrogant.[/quote]Our relative lack of success with the blitz can partially be blamed on talent. Our best blitzer by far was Marcus Washington, but he battled injuries his last 2+ years. I thought that Landry would have been a GREAT blitzer as a strong safety, but we've had to move him out of his comfort zone after Sean Taylor's death. I would love to see Kareem Moore eventually demonstrate enough discipline to play Free Safety, allowing Landry to play his more natural position at Strong Safety. As for fancy stunts and blitz disguises, I'm optimistic that Big Albert changes everything for our front 7. We will get to the QB with far fewer blitzes this year, which will lead to big plays by the DBs - mark those words.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=SouperMeister;556135]Our relative lack of success with the blitz can partially be blamed on talent. Our best blitzer by far was Marcus Washington, but he battled injuries his last 2+ years. I thought that Landry would have been a GREAT blitzer as a strong safety, but we've had to move him out of his comfort zone after Sean Taylor's death. [B] I would love to see Kareem Moore eventually demonstrate enough discipline to play Free Safety, allowing Landry to play his more natural position at Strong Safety. As for fancy stunts and blitz disguises, I'm optimistic that Big Albert changes everything for our front 7. We will get to the QB with far fewer blitzes this year, which will lead to big plays by the DBs - mark those words[/B].[/quote]

I couldn't agree with you more.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=SouperMeister;556135]Our relative lack of success with the blitz can partially be blamed on talent. Our best blitzer by far was Marcus Washington, but he battled injuries his last 2+ years. I thought that Landry would have been a GREAT blitzer as a strong safety, but we've had to move him out of his comfort zone after Sean Taylor's death. I would love to see Kareem Moore eventually demonstrate enough discipline to play Free Safety, allowing Landry to play his more natural position at Strong Safety. As for fancy stunts and blitz disguises, I'm optimistic that Big Albert changes everything for our front 7. We will get to the QB with far fewer blitzes this year, which will lead to big plays by the DBs - mark those words.[/quote]

I completely agree. Previously it was hard to compare our pass rush with the Steelers because of the talent differential up front. I am hoping that our offseason moves have considerably closed that gap.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=53Fan;556107]I think if we would've gotten better results blitzing we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The Steelers blitz effectively, the Redskins don't. At least not up to this point. For the amount of times we blitzed, the results were pathetic. I'm not sure how anyone can argue with that. Our sack totals were pathetic and I don't remember a lot of times where the pass wasn't completed because of pressure from the blitz. Maybe some, but not enough to justify blitzing as much as we did. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember our blitzes creating nearly as much havoc as some of the better defenses in the league. Nothing against Blache but that's just a fact. Simplifying the defense is one thing, but thinking you can beat the opponent all the time without disguising anything is just arrogant.[/quote]

I agree with you here bro, we blitz far too much for the results we get.
My problem with out blitzing is that we don't do a good job of disguising it.
Disguise is the key to blitzing success.
You have to create confusion as to where the pressure is coming from.
If a QB can see where the blitz is coming from he'll just re-assign the 'Mike' backer and the blitz will be picked up, hat-on-hat.
We need to create situations where there is hesitation and confusion.
This is why i like the idea of playing Orakpo/Washington as DE/OLB it gives the defense some versatility.

And its not only 3-4 teams can do this.
Jim Johnson with the Eagles and Spagnulo w/ the Giants mix in many zone-dogs and fire-zones.
It seems that we just bring an extra man or two into the box and basically annouce their intentions.

[quote=GTripp0012;556011] And for the record, I thought Blache called strong games against the Seahawks and Ravens (and an excellent one against Philly). But the decline was in full swing by that point. This suggests, to me at least, that while Blache was hardly at all responsible for the decline, he simply became part of the problem in the second half of the season.[/quote]

I think Blache got a big assist from Zorn in the Seattle game.
I remember reading that Zorn talked to Blache about how to gameplan for Hasselbeck/passing game.

I thought the playcalling and defensive game management against the 49ers was horrible.

I hate how in the 2nd Cowboys game we couldn't stop a freakin toss/sweep.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;555980]This argument is akin to saying something like, "if meteorologists are undeniably better predictors of weather than sportscasters, then how come it rained yesterday?" It's neither here nor there. Philadelphia was ranked ahead of us by every defensive measure, points, yards, etc, and they had to defend way, way more drives.

Per game yardage totals and points totals don't consider how often you faced an opponents drive, because the style of the offense (slow vs. fast) will affect how many drives a defense has to defend. Also, a defense that struggles to get off the field will have to face fewer drives. We actually weren't very good at getting three and outs, as much as we were at eventually forcing punts.

But it was a few things that put us behind the Tampa's and Chicago's of the world in defense last year, and I think turnovers are a big part of that. I don't have any doubt that they will improve in those phases this year, Blache-permitting. Interesting points, you make.[/quote]


First of all, you can't say that it is not important that our defense outperformed their defense twice, on the field, head-to-head. Your point is completely arbitrary from the perspective you think that fact is meaningless. You're choosing which facts are relevant and which are not. 4th and 6th in yards and points respectively and 2nd in 3 and outs, good TOP, then you're doing things right, and you're just breaking it down into whatever stats you think are important. If you say the Steelers can't have the best defense because they are ranked 26th in penalty yards and 23rd in forced fumbles. I can base my arguments on whatever stats I choose as well. Let's say strength of schedule...what if the Saints played the Lions 16 times a year, their stats on defense would be better, but I wouldn't say they had a better defense than the Redskins last year. We had a tough schedule in the NFC East going up against good offenses, while the AFC North plays bad offenses and it inflates their stats.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;555951]Whenever you take the lead with 1 minute to go, and you lose, it falls on the defense. I don't care what went before, at the 2 minute warning, if you have the lead, a CHAMPIONSHIP DEFENSE stops the opponent (um especially one with a new head coach and no wins at that time!)[/quote]

That happened to Baltimore against Tennessee, but I wouldn't say they didn't have a championship defense, and Tennessee's offense is by no means a powerhouse. Stuff happens.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;556194]First of all, you can't say that it is not important that our defense outperformed their defense twice, on the field, head-to-head. Your point is completely arbitrary from the perspective you think that fact is meaningless. You're choosing which facts are relevant and which are not. 4th and 6th in yards and points respectively and 2nd in 3 and outs, good TOP, then you're doing things right, and you're just breaking it down into whatever stats you think are important. If you say the Steelers can't have the best defense because they are ranked 26th in penalty yards and 23rd in forced fumbles. I can base my arguments on whatever stats I choose as well. Let's say strength of schedule...what if the Saints played the Lions 16 times a year, their stats on defense would be better, but I wouldn't say they had a better defense than the Redskins last year. We had a tough schedule in the NFC East going up against good offenses, while the AFC North plays bad offenses and it inflates their stats.[/quote]Why would our stats be of equal value if mine clearly answer the question at hand more directly?

I don't ask this as to say, "I'm right and your wrong", but while I think you bring some good points, I don't think your stats are backing what you think they are backing.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=53Fan;556107]I think if we would've gotten better results blitzing we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The Steelers blitz effectively, the Redskins don't. At least not up to this point. For the amount of times we blitzed, the results were pathetic. I'm not sure how anyone can argue with that. Our sack totals were pathetic and I don't remember a lot of times where the pass wasn't completed because of pressure from the blitz. Maybe some, but not enough to justify blitzing as much as we did. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember our blitzes creating nearly as much havoc as some of the better defenses in the league. Nothing against Blache but that's just a fact. Simplifying the defense is one thing, but thinking you can beat the opponent all the time without disguising anything is just arrogant.[/quote]

I think the DIII blitz package is what you were noticing. Poor disguising of pressure, no real imagination, very vanilla pressure schemes all around.

[quote=FRPLG;556120]The Steelers run a 3-4. Everything they do is a blitz because their LBs have gap responsibilities and at least one of them is basically a Linemen in atwo point stance on every play. In no way can one compare a 3-4 and a 4-3. The Steelers are successful because they good talent and a few GREAT talents.[/quote]

Ok, so compare it to the 4-3 Giants or Eagles. Both have much more complex pressure packages than the 2008 Redskins. You can say it was based on talent, and the Giants have more "talent" in the front seven, but I'd say it was scheme.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;556208]Why would our stats be of equal value if mine clearly answer the question at hand more directly?

I don't ask this as to say, "I'm right and your wrong", but while I think you bring some good points, I don't think your stats are backing what you think they are backing.[/quote]

You don't understand. I'm trying to say your stats are arbitrary. You choose which stats you think are important, but if you're at the top in most stats then there's a reason for that and you've got a good defense no matter what nitpicking you may do. When it comes down to it, we played Philly twice, same number of drives, same opportunity/field/conditions and we beat em twice and our defense outplayed them twice. And if you don't think so then you didn't watch the same games as me.

Also, Tampa's defense isn't what it used to be and neither is Chicago's. By the end of the season Tampa's defense was getting torn apart. Tampa Bay had an easy schedule. I thought the NFC South was overrated and they played the AFC West and NFC North, which is probably as easy as possible. Chicago gave up almost 50 more yards a game than us and more than 3 points/game.

I would rank our defense about 5th. I think Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Tennessee were better over the course of the year, but anybody else I think the Redskins were better than. The only reason others don't is because the Redskins defense doesn't get media attention because they haven't historically been a great defense and their fantasy football stats aren't that good because they don't get TD's and turnovers.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;556226]You don't understand. I'm trying to say your stats are arbitrary. You choose which stats you think are important, but if you're at the top in most stats then there's a reason for that and you've got a good defense no matter what nitpicking you may do. When it comes down to it, we played Philly twice, same number of drives, same opportunity/field/conditions and we beat em twice and our defense outplayed them twice. And if you don't think so then you didn't watch the same games as me.

Also, Tampa's defense isn't what it used to be and neither is Chicago's. By the end of the season Tampa's defense was getting torn apart. Tampa Bay had an easy schedule. I thought the NFC South was overrated and they played the AFC West and NFC North, which is probably as easy as possible. Chicago gave up almost 50 more yards a game than us and more than 3 points/game.

I would rank our defense about 5th. I think Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Tennessee were better over the course of the year, but anybody else I think the Redskins were better than. The only reason others don't is because the Redskins defense doesn't get media attention because they haven't historically been a great defense and their fantasy football stats aren't that good because they don't get TD's and turnovers.[/quote]Alright, I understand. Nothing I'm doing is arbitrary, it's all quite straightforward, but you don't see it the same way. Gotcha.

See the problem with Philly vs. Washington determining who has the better defense is that: 1) if there's only two teams in the entire population, nothing can tell the difference between bad offense and good defense. You saying that our defense clearly outplayed their's might just be their offense getting clearly outplayed by ours, and 2) there's 14 games that you're just totally ignoring. Not arbitrarily, but as I said before, you aren't actually backing what you think you are backing. Because no one agrees with you that the other 14 games shouldn't be counted.

The Redskins were top ten in most stats, and are [B]probably were a top ten defense when you get right down to it[/B]. But what if I say, and defend, them being the 12th best defense? There's nothing arbitrary about that, it's just a ranking based on evidence. Furthermore, there was such a huge, undeniable gap between us and the five "elite" defenses last year, that when you start to establish an NFL average defense from the 2008 season, it comes out somewhere around the 10th or 11th best team. Just because of the obscene quality of the defenses at the top of the list (obviously, the best in years). Again, nothing remotely arbitrary about that, just standard normal distribution.

I think you have no idea how good Minnesota and Philadelphia's defenses were last year, and any argument that suggests we were better than them last year is going to be arbitrary and circumstantial, because there was such a huge chasm between the two. I guess that's just my opinion there, but it just not a strong argument to say that they were in the top five last year defensively. Let's face it, if we had a top five defense, we would have made the playoffs. Every one of my top five defenses did make it, and none of them had any more offense to note than we did.

Again, I think you can debate if they're 6th or 11th or whatever. You can say, "we have a better defense the Giants", and I can respond "even though they create turnovers and we do not?" and you can say "yes" and that's that. I would just question who the one picking the arbitrary numbers is right now.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor;555792] I'm tired of stopping the run first then pass rush. [/quote]

Since when do we actually do the latter? :)

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;555951]Whenever you take the lead with 1 minute to go, and you lose, it falls on the defense. I don't care what went before, at the 2 minute warning, if you have the lead, a CHAMPIONSHIP DEFENSE stops the opponent (um especially one with a new head coach and no wins at that time!)[/quote]

i agree with that 100% CRedskinsrule. You understand the game of football that a Championship defense will find a way to preserve the win in the final minutes with the lead. Last year our defense was good but not a Championship defense.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=Coff;556231]Since when do we actually do the latter? :)[/quote]
Its always been that way. Greg Blache always have stated that sacks don't matter which I think is very stupid considering the fact that sacks could get teams in 3rd and longs and also out of field goal range. Pressure busts pipes and he should realize that.

I'm going to give him the benefit of doubt and say that he did not let the d-line rush the passer first since he did not have the talent to do so. This year there will be no benefit of doubt. He should be fired if we can not get to the quarterback with Haynesworth collasping pockets everywhere.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;556058]And mediocre corners like Torrence give up more than most.[/quote]
He was not bad in nickel and dime packages

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;556229]Alright, I understand. Nothing I'm doing is arbitrary, it's all quite straightforward, but you don't see it the same way. Gotcha.

See the problem with Philly vs. Washington determining who has the better defense is that: 1) if there's only two teams in the entire population, nothing can tell the difference between bad offense and good defense. You saying that our defense clearly outplayed their's might just be their offense getting clearly outplayed by ours, and 2) there's 14 games that you're just totally ignoring. Not arbitrarily, but as I said before, you aren't actually backing what you think you are backing. Because no one agrees with you that the other 14 games shouldn't be counted.

The Redskins were top ten in most stats, and are [B]probably were a top ten defense when you get right down to it[/B]. But what if I say, and defend, them being the 12th best defense? There's nothing arbitrary about that, it's just a ranking based on evidence. Furthermore, there was such a huge, undeniable gap between us and the five "elite" defenses last year, that when you start to establish an NFL average defense from the 2008 season, it comes out somewhere around the 10th or 11th best team. Just because of the obscene quality of the defenses at the top of the list (obviously, the best in years). Again, nothing remotely arbitrary about that, just standard normal distribution.

I think you have no idea how good Minnesota and Philadelphia's defenses were last year, and any argument that suggests we were better than them last year is going to be arbitrary and circumstantial, because there was such a huge chasm between the two. I guess that's just my opinion there, but it just not a strong argument to say that they were in the top five last year defensively. Let's face it, if we had a top five defense, we would have made the playoffs. Every one of my top five defenses did make it, and none of them had any more offense to note than we did.

Again, I think you can debate if they're 6th or 11th or whatever. You can say, "we have a better defense the Giants", and I can respond "even though they create turnovers and we do not?" and you can say "yes" and that's that. I would just question who the one picking the arbitrary numbers is right now.[/quote]

You originally said the Eagles have an undeniably better defense than us. I don't understand how you can say that. Maybe you really are sure in your mind of that, but I'm not sold on that at all. I think it would be much easier to say the Eagles offense is better than the Redskins offense and our special teams was nothing special. And if that's the case then how did we beat them twice? From the games that I watched I remember our defense outplaying them.

And in terms of turnovers you're only looking at the one side of it. The Redskins were the ONLY team in the NFL last year to never give up more than 27 points in a game. That's consistency and that may not be flashy and get media attention about the defense on NFL Live or Sportscenter or have guys like Dawkins acting like an animal or the fat Williams guys getting in trouble with water pills and Jared Allen doing vitamin water commercials or any Pro Bowlers, but I think if people actually watched the games and paid attention to the defense they would see it differently. Also people don't look at the turnovers in terms of we were always in close games last year so teams didn't have to take any risks against us. When your offense can get you a lead (28th in points) other teams have to take more chances in order to catch up, which causes more turnovers.

I think our offense was really bad and we got unlucky losing some close games. Also, just because you're a top 5 defense it doesn't mean you automatically make the playoffs. I could argue we were the 4th best defense so I just don't see how you can be so sure those other 5 were better than us.

But all I was really saying is there's a lot more of what goes into how good a defense is than just the stats you're using. You gotta think about what offenses they play, what their offense does (if they keep putting the defense in bad positions), and a whole lot of other stuff that you can't just average with stats. Just because a team is 10th in interceptions, 10th in yards, 10th in yards allowed per drive, etc, it doesn't mean they're the 10th best defense. There are a lot of important factors not related to the team defensive statistics. I think it's more of an opinion than a statistical analysis.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

The additions of Orakpo and Haynesworth will definitely help our pass rush which ultimately will improve our defense. We're deep at D-line so we should have a solid rotation so the guy stay fresh. The trick will be can we actually time the blitzes. That's where I thought we didn't execute. We tipped our hand too early or were unable to secure the sack if we did get to the QB.
It's hard to call for the coordinator's head when players don't execute but ultimately it's his responsibility to make sure they do so.
I think we'll be an elite defense this year, especially since we have cap room left. We can get a vet. OLB plus sign some other players (OT, WR, OG and maybe even a MLB). You know damn well Snyder is going to use every bit of cap room to improve the team (a couple 1-yr deals would be ideal).

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

Every fan wont like the teams scheme from time to time either on offense or defense. I didnt like how ex-DC Gregg Williams use to play our CBs and I dont like how Blache doesnt seem to put pressure on offenses that leads to turnovers.

The bottom line is though as long as the scheme ranks near the top I really dont care what we run. Hopefully Haynesworth and Orakpo create more pressure which will lead to more options for Blache on defense.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;556736]...
But all I was really saying is there's a lot more of what goes into how good a defense is than just the stats you're using. [B]You gotta think about what offenses they play, [/B]what their offense does (if they keep putting the defense in bad positions), and a whole lot of other stuff that you can't just average with stats. Just because a team is 10th in interceptions, 10th in yards, 10th in yards allowed per drive, etc, it doesn't mean they're the 10th best defense. There are a lot of important factors not related to the team defensive statistics. I think it's more of an opinion than a statistical analysis.[/quote]

Just pointing out, that last year our Defense faced the awesomeness of Cleveland, Cincinatti, St Louis, Detroit.

The D was definitely able to step up at times(against Philly, AZ, etc), but they were not consistent. Also, and I showed this in another thread, but you can get it from Pro Football reference, our D struggled on the opening drive more often than not. I know our offense did too, but most games the D gave up either a FG or TD on the opening drive.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;556736]
I think our offense was really bad and we got unlucky losing some close games. Also, just because you're a top 5 defense it doesn't mean you automatically make the playoffs. I could argue we were the 4th best defense so I just don't see how you can be so sure those other 5 were better than us.

But all I was really saying is there's a lot more of what goes into how good a defense is than just the stats you're using. You gotta think about what offenses they play, what their offense does (if they keep putting the defense in bad positions), and a whole lot of other stuff that you can't just average with stats. Just because a team is 10th in interceptions, 10th in yards, 10th in yards allowed per drive, etc, it doesn't mean they're the 10th best defense. There are a lot of important factors not related to the team defensive statistics. I think it's more of an opinion than a statistical analysis.[/quote]

Yeah, I agree to an extent. I mean I wouldn't argue we had a top 5 D, but I agree that our offense's poor play had an impact on our D's stats. Someone mentioned they didn't hold on in the last couple min of games and a "championship team" would have, and that's true. Our D obviously wasn't good enough last year to win it all, but it is hard to scrutinize them too much because in those games they were on the field WAY too long. I don't think you can hold that against GB either.

As far as the pass rush. If I remember correctly the D wasn't generating much pressure in the last couple years of GW. The fact is we have had a serious talent deficiency on the DL and LB's (only as far as pass rush is concerned) for many years. Let's see what they can do with some real talent up front.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;556736]You originally said the Eagles have an undeniably better defense than us. I don't understand how you can say that. Maybe you really are sure in your mind of that, but I'm not sold on that at all. I think it would be much easier to say the Eagles offense is better than the Redskins offense and our special teams was nothing special. And if that's the case then how did we beat them twice? From the games that I watched I remember our defense outplaying them.

And in terms of turnovers you're only looking at the one side of it. The Redskins were the ONLY team in the NFL last year to never give up more than 27 points in a game. That's consistency and that may not be flashy and get media attention about the defense on NFL Live or Sportscenter or have guys like Dawkins acting like an animal or the fat Williams guys getting in trouble with water pills and Jared Allen doing vitamin water commercials or any Pro Bowlers, but I think if people actually watched the games and paid attention to the defense they would see it differently. Also people don't look at the turnovers in terms of we were always in close games last year so teams didn't have to take any risks against us. When your offense can get you a lead (28th in points) other teams have to take more chances in order to catch up, which causes more turnovers.

I think our offense was really bad and we got unlucky losing some close games. Also, just because you're a top 5 defense it doesn't mean you automatically make the playoffs. I could argue we were the 4th best defense so I just don't see how you can be so sure those other 5 were better than us.

But all I was really saying is there's a lot more of what goes into how good a defense is than just the stats you're using. You gotta think about what offenses they play, what their offense does (if they keep putting the defense in bad positions), and a whole lot of other stuff that you can't just average with stats. Just because a team is 10th in interceptions, 10th in yards, 10th in yards allowed per drive, etc, it doesn't mean they're the 10th best defense. There are a lot of important factors not related to the team defensive statistics. I think it's more of an opinion than a statistical analysis.[/quote]Calling the offense "really bad" as opposed to something more rooted in what they actually were (slow-moving, turnover-averse, and lacking big play scoring ability) is a necessary justification to explaining how we could only be 8-8 with an elite defense. Of course, once you come to the realization that the defense was less-than-elite, in pretty much every possible way, then it becomes easier to accept the offense for what it was, and not have this justification dilemma with our record.

Philadelphia played 12 games against the same teams in the same locations as we did. They basically played the same schedule as us. Despite the slow moving, drive-limiting nature of our playing style, they STILL managed to give up fewer total yards, and points than us, while forcing more turnovers. They were undeniably better. Continuing to deny it is pretty crazy, considering the 4th ranking in pts against and yards against you hold so dearly is one behind the Eagles, and their scores in that category are far more legitimate, thanks to having faced more opponent drives than we did.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;556882]Philadelphia played 12 games against the same teams in the same locations as we did. They basically played the same schedule as us. Despite the slow moving, drive-limiting nature of our playing style, they STILL managed to give up fewer total yards, and points than us, while forcing more turnovers. They were undeniably better. Continuing to deny it is pretty crazy, considering the 4th ranking in pts against and yards against you hold so dearly is one behind the Eagles, and their scores in that category are far more legitimate, thanks to having faced more opponent drives than we did.[/quote]

[quote=GTripp0012;556882]Just pointing out, that last year our Defense faced the awesomeness of Cleveland, Cincinatti, St Louis, Detroit.[/quote]

Your argument is akin to saying if meteorologists play the Pittsburgh Steelers 4 times in a 16 game season they have the toughest schedule in the NFL. It is neither here nor there. Four games isn't an entire season, how about the Saints, Cardinals, Giants, Cowboys, Eagles. If your argument is that Philadelphia had a harder schedule, you're wrong. Look up whatever stats you want on that for the 16 games and you can see that. Philly also played Cleveland, Cincinnati, and St. Louis. The only different teams we played were New Orleans (#1 in points and yards) and Detroit (actually ranked better than the Redskins in points), but yeah they were bad.

In any case teams are different over the course of the year, even if its in the same location. We were a completely different team in in the beginning of the season versus the end, and you can say that about a bunch of teams. But for 2 of those 12 games, one near the beginning and one near the end that were on the same day at the same location I saw one defense outperform the other both times, but apparently that was undeniably oppositely viewed by you, irrelevant to you, or maybe you just missed the games.

If you're arguing that the Redskins offense (28th in points) is better than the Eagles offense (6th in points) you're wrong. That's like arguing the St. Louis Rams defense (28th) is better than the Vikings defense (6th).

The differences in most of the stats between the Redskins and Eagles are small (0.4 points) and 10 yards so I'm saying small differences in stats like that don't matter when there are so many other variables involved from week to week and you don't even really know how important those stats are to a good defense. Slowing teams down not taking risks and making them make the small play slows them down and makes less drives for the other team. Is that a stat? No, but does it make a good defense, maybe. I think that it is wrong to be so sure based on a selection of stats that you choose that doesn't take other variables into consideration. You can have your opinion, but I think that you're opinion the Eagles are undeniably better is crazy and I feel my opinion that it's not UNDENIABLE is more reasonable. And evidence is the fact that many other people will agree with me that the Redskins defense could have been better than the Vikings or Eagles last year. And if you think all those people are crazy, then I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and maintaining your original opinion.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;556968]Your argument is akin to saying if meteorologists play the Pittsburgh Steelers 4 times in a 16 game season they have the toughest schedule in the NFL. It is neither here nor there. Four games isn't an entire season, how about the Saints, Cardinals, Giants, Cowboys, Eagles. If your argument is that Philadelphia had a harder schedule, you're wrong. Look up whatever stats you want on that for the 16 games and you can see that. Philly also played Cleveland, Cincinnati, and St. Louis. The only different teams we played were New Orleans (#1 in points and yards) and Detroit (actually ranked better than the Redskins in points), but yeah they were bad.

In any case teams are different over the course of the year, even if its in the same location. We were a completely different team in in the beginning of the season versus the end, and you can say that about a bunch of teams. But for 2 of those 12 games, one near the beginning and one near the end that were on the same day at the same location I saw one defense outperform the other both times, but apparently that was undeniably oppositely viewed by you, irrelevant to you, or maybe you just missed the games.

If you're arguing that the Redskins offense (28th in points) is better than the Eagles offense (6th in points) you're wrong. That's like arguing the St. Louis Rams defense (28th) is better than the Vikings defense (6th).

The differences in most of the stats between the Redskins and Eagles are small (0.4 points) and 10 yards so I'm saying small differences in stats like that don't matter when there are so many other variables involved from week to week and you don't even really know how important those stats are to a good defense. Slowing teams down not taking risks and making them make the small play slows them down and makes less drives for the other team. Is that a stat? No, but does it make a good defense, maybe. I think that it is wrong to be so sure based on a selection of stats that you choose that doesn't take other variables into consideration. You can have your opinion, but I think that you're opinion the Eagles are undeniably better is crazy and I feel my opinion that it's not UNDENIABLE is more reasonable. And evidence is the fact that many other people will agree with me that the Redskins defense could have been better than the Vikings or Eagles last year. And if you think all those people are crazy, then I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and maintaining your original opinion.[/quote]We played New Orleans and Detroit, they played Atlanta and Chicago. Please cut the shit. Their schedule was harder. Not that it matters over 16 games when 14 are basically the same, and they still beat us in every single defensive metric, most by a long shot. It's pretty much undeniable that their defense was better, at least among objectivity. If you [B]aren't[/B] concerned about being objective, then it's just an entirely different viewpoint: fan.

Would you, in the future, not quote me with saying what CRedskinsRule says. I mean, he's right, but we're also two different people. Thanks.

But I do thank you for claiming argument consistency from TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. That's one of the more entertaining things that has ever happened from around these parts. Now I pretty much can't take you seriously anymore. I think you'll understand.

The rest of your post just seems to be a never-ending series of strawmans that varies between arguments that he made, neither of us made, and no one has ever made.

P.S. The fact that drive total has become a non-quantifiable statistic in this debate means it's pretty much over.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;556991]...
Would you, in the future, not quote me with saying what CRedskinsRule says. ...[/quote]

Turnabout from the other day, right GTripp ;)

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;557045]Turnabout from the other day, right GTripp ;)[/quote]Irony, I believe. Though some may call it coincidence.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=GTripp0012;556991]We played New Orleans and Detroit, they played Atlanta and Chicago. Please cut the shit. Their schedule was harder. Not that it matters over 16 games when 14 are basically the same, and they still beat us in every single defensive metric, most by a long shot. It's pretty much undeniable that their defense was better, at least among objectivity. If you [B]aren't[/B] concerned about being objective, then it's just an entirely different viewpoint: fan.

Would you, in the future, not quote me with saying what CRedskinsRule says. I mean, he's right, but we're also two different people. Thanks.

But I do thank you for claiming argument consistency from TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. That's one of the more entertaining things that has ever happened from around these parts. Now I pretty much can't take you seriously anymore. I think you'll understand.

The rest of your post just seems to be a never-ending series of strawmans that varies between arguments that he made, neither of us made, and no one has ever made.

P.S. The fact that drive total has become a non-quantifiable statistic in this debate means it's pretty much over.[/quote]

Get over yourself please, stop with all the hand waving saying they're undeniably better because you say so based on the criteria you choose. And if you did watch the games, can you at least agree with me that on those 2 days the Redskins defense was better? Throughout the year I never felt our defense was getting handled except maybe the first game versus the Giants. The Eagles gave up 41 to Dallas, 36 to the Giants, and 36 to Baltimore. That's not what I call consistent and that may not be a stat that you choose, but it does matter if you want to call yourself a good defense.

If there were a stat that was for the offensive strength that you face I guarantee it would be higher for the Redskins than the Eagles. I know it's the case for points and yards by a large margin. I wasn't claiming their schedule was harder, I was saying we faced better offenses. New Orleans had the best offense in the NFL and we had to face the Eagles offense twice (which was one of the best offenses in the NFL, again 6th in points) while they had to face our offense twice (which is much worse statistically, since you seem to care about the statistical analysis so much). And yeah Atlanta and Chicago were offensive powerhouses last year, I think I missed that.

P.S. You defined the meaning of drive total and how it is relevant statistically, but you don't know. Having a lower number of drives could mean that the defense is better, that they force offenses to work during every possession, bend but not break (i.e. Blache's scheme), as opposed to one that is more attacking and takes more chances (i.e. Jim Johnson's scheme).

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

[quote=an23dy;557186]Get over yourself please, stop with all the hand waving saying they're undeniably better because you say so based on the criteria you choose. And if you did watch the games, can you at least agree with me that on those 2 days the Redskins defense was better? Throughout the year I never felt our defense was getting handled except maybe the first game versus the Giants. The Eagles gave up 41 to Dallas, 36 to the Giants, and 36 to Baltimore. That's not what I call consistent and that may not be a stat that you choose, but it does matter if you want to call yourself a good defense.

If there were a stat that was for the offensive strength that you face I guarantee it would be higher for the Redskins than the Eagles. I know it's the case for points and yards by a large margin. I wasn't claiming their schedule was harder, I was saying we faced better offenses. New Orleans had the best offense in the NFL and we had to face the Eagles offense twice (which was one of the best offenses in the NFL, again 6th in points) while they had to face our offense twice (which is much worse statistically, since you seem to care about the statistical analysis so much). And yeah Atlanta and Chicago were offensive powerhouses last year, I think I missed that.
[B]
P.S. You defined the meaning of drive total and how it is relevant statistically, but you don't know. Having a lower number of drives could mean that the defense is better, that they force offenses to work during every possession, bend but not break (i.e. Blache's scheme), as opposed to one that is more attacking and takes more chances (i.e. Jim Johnson's scheme).[/B][/quote]Number one, there are definately stats kept on who faces the hardest competition. Again, these all suggest that it was pretty much a negligible difference, since [B]you know 12 of our opponents were exactly the same as Philly[/B]. Here, is [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef"]football outsiders rankings[/URL], and to get the opponent adjustment, you can just subtract the Non-adjusted from the adjusted total. Simple enough. Philly faced better offenses, by their rankings, but again, it's a really, really small difference, enough to not matter, which is what I've told you from the start. Other rankings I've seen say the same.

Number two, you cherry pick your numbers like only one other person I've ever talked to on this fourm, which given your propensity to deem other's numbers to be arbitrary, delights me very much. You point out that Philadelphia had three games with a high point total. Except that, we already know there's no way to skew it to say the Skins don't allow points at a faster rate. So I don't know what you are trying to say. Philly has a higher variance? That's true, I suppose.

Number three, I definately do know everything in bold is an irrelivant point. Last year, we gave up points at a faster rate than the Eagles, and we gave up more total points, and we faced fewer drives. To an extent, we did have a small bend-but-don't-break effect in our defense. It's true. We also [SIZE=3][U]broke[/U][/SIZE] undeniably faster than Philadelphia, Tennessee, or Minnesota. Like, gave up more points. That's what you mean by bend but don't break, is it not?

Number four, you apparently are okay quoting other people under my username. That's not cool, dude. I'm not just going to ignore that you did that.

Re: Greg Blache Defensive Scheme!!
 

LOL... now kids pay attention, this is what a pissing match looks like.