Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=Hog1;1102759]Will you please explain the importance of draft position and results on the field?
I think you will find our secondary was voted most popular with the league QB's who can chuck the rock over 50 yards. No doubt their guy would not be covered by our guy. Perhaps the coaches forgot to tell them "HEY! when that Cheetah looking dude blows by you like 80 mph.....don't forget to follow him!!! Sadly we all to often....forgot
BTW....did you see any Skins games this year? You may have noticed Hall was not in there or is that coaching as well?
Clark is at least a year or two to late....and slow. Did I ask you if you watched any Skins games this year? Jury is still out on Amerson...but I have high hopes four him.
Breeland looks like the real deal.. very happy about that. Thomas is....totally a wait and see guy as he has not been healthy long enough to evaluate.
I noticed you failed to point out the instances where I suggested the unit was well coached. Why is that?
Did we discuss the part about relationship of draft position and results on the field? Let me help:
RYAN LEAF?
AKILI SMITH?
JEMARCUS RUSSEL.....to name a few[/quote]Look up "talent" and get back to me, ok? Are you denying the last ppl you name weren't talented? My point is so far over your head at this point, it's having to register its flight path with the FAA.

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1102724]Dallas' defense was abysmal but they brought in a new coordinator and a bunch of no-name parts and did a lot better[/quote]

Only part that worries me is that San Francisco defense has had anything but no name parts with guys like Willis and the Smith brothers among others.

With that said there is still a decent amount of raw talent for us on the defensive side of the ball and Fangio was able to send a pair of relative no name safeties to the pro bowl including Donte Whitner who as a former top 10 pick in Buffalo was thought to be a bust. Also FWIW he got Carlos Rodgers to the pro bowl :D

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1102762]Look up "talent" and get back to me, ok? Are you denying the last ppl you name weren't talented? My point is so far over your head at this point, it's having to register its flight path with the FAA.[/quote]

Here again, you cleverly avoided addressing anything I posted....better that way I am sure for you.
BUT..alas...NO I do think as I have "already stated" Breeland and Amerson I think can play....but NO as I have "already Stated" Clark is way done unless we need him to hold open the revolving door to our pass coverage. Hall...who knows how he will return...but did you know...as I "already stated" he did not play this year....like in games....this year.

Is this information on your flight path?

I took your advice...according to Miriam Webster, Talent is "the special ability to do something well". I would certainly not describe our unit as a whole in those terms...with the exception of Am and Bree.
More importantly, I have become bored with this nonsensical exercise in avoidance.....soo
httr

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=Hog1;1102770]Here again, you cleverly avoided addressing anything I posted....better that way I am sure for you.
BUT..alas...NO I do think as I have "already stated" Breeland and Amerson I think can play....but NO as I have "already Stated" Clark is way done unless we need him to hold open the revolving door to our pass coverage. Hall...who knows how he will return...but did you know...as I "already stated" he did not play this year....like in games....this year.

Is this information on your flight path?

I took your advice...according to Miriam Webster, Talent is "the special ability to do something well". I would certainly not describe our unit as a whole in those terms...with the exception of Am and Bree.
More importantly, I have become bored with this nonsensical exercise in avoidance.....soo
httr[/quote]You defended Morris with our secondary's (your words) "...."talent""

Amerson, Bree, Thomas, wouldn't have been drafted as high as they were without talent. Clark and Hall wouldn't have done as well as they have done without talent.

Even if you want to point out Clark and Hall are over the hill, the rest are not.

There is no defense of Morris, or any of our defensive coaches, on the basis of getting scraps or JAGs.

Maybe if you re-read the last couple pages, and my response to Lotus for example, my point might be clearer. FAA, hell. My point may have to register with NASA now. lol. HTTR

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=Mattyk;1102746]Our safeties have been bad for years. Clark? Dude was washed up before he got here. Amerson hasn't lived up to his billing as a ballhawk. Breeland was our lone bright spot this year.[/quote]

The thing with Amerson, he seems to have gotten worse from his rookie season when all you heard in the off season is how he put on the muscle to help with press coverage. He really had 1 good game this season

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

We have a lot of unproven dudes and washed up guys here. Minus Breeland and Hall (who I think can still hack it).

Amerson and Thomas still have yet to impress. Are they talented? Potentially.

Clark has been anything but impressive during his 2nd stint here. WAS he talented? Yes, in his prime. Is he still talented? Doesn't seem like it anymore.

Talent can and does go away.

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

Careful....you'll get the dreaded...NASA treatment

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1102778]You defended Morris with our secondary's (your words) "...."talent""

Amerson, Bree, Thomas, wouldn't have been drafted as high as they were without talent. Clark and Hall wouldn't have done as well as they have done without talent.

Even if you want to point out Clark and Hall are over the hill, the rest are not.

There is no defense of Morris, or any of our defensive coaches, on the basis of getting scraps or JAGs.

Maybe if you re-read the last couple pages, and my response to Lotus for example, my point might be clearer. FAA, hell. My point may have to register with NASA now. lol. HTTR[/quote]

No one here is arguing against the idea that Morris has coached poorly. But it is ALSO true that he has not been given the tools to work with.

To understand this, please answer the question I asked before: what capable, long-term starter help has Morris been given specifically at safety?

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

All I know is that teams love Wade Phillips as a DC so I like that option and Ken Norton Jr.

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

Id rather have Vic Mackey.

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

Who has close ties to Tampa, Allen or Gruden? That's the guy to bank on.

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=Chico23231;1102755]I just like to know we haven't been able to develop folks in the secondary...???

Folks this is a good example of our dysfunction. Like the arguement of talent and coaching issues on the defense...we also have problems developing a plan and scouting for corners and safeties from a personel perspective.

I'd just like to know for once what was the plan to replace Sean Taylor at free safety? This issue has been going on since 2007. Wtf!!! Why can't we solve this position?[/quote]

To be fair, we drafted Laron Landry in the first round to be a replacement. Obviously that did not work out, but he was was the stud we all thought could do the job...

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[quote=Lotus;1102790]No one here is arguing against the idea that Morris has coached poorly. But it is ALSO true that he has not been given the tools to work with.

To understand this, please answer the question I asked before: what capable, long-term starter help has Morris been given specifically at safety?[/quote]Your question doesn't apply to why the redskins secondary has sucked the past few seasons. Vet players were added, like Merriweather and Clark.

But just to humor you: The redskins drafted Philip Thomas with a 4th rd and Rambo with a 6th rd in 2013. Remember this quote from Rambo: (Bills vs Skins) [URL="https://mobile.twitter.com/domo_lxxxvi/status/544535799837233152"] "The coaches require you to watch film." [/URL]
2012 they drafted Bernstine in the 7th. 2011 they drafted Gomes in the 5th.

So why dont we have capable long term starter help for safety, despite 4 picks the last 4 years? Shouldn't we have at least one starter from that?

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

ST was supposed to be our FS for the 10+ years and Laron was supposed to be our SS. When Sean died it forced them to put Laron in the FS position.

Laron got injured and didn't want to get the surgery that the team wanted him to get. That burned some bridges and produced his exit. They should let Philip Thomas to continue to develop as a starting SS and draft the next FS.

Re: Vic Fangio and other to be interviewed for Defense.
 

[QUOTE=EARTHQUAKE2689;1102786]The thing with Amerson, he seems to have gotten worse from his rookie season when all you heard in the off season is how he put on the muscle to help with press coverage. He really had 1 good game this season[/QUOTE]


But hey he's got talent!