Commanders Post at The Warpath

Commanders Post at The Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)

- Locker Room Main Forum (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - On Blache (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=27256)

[quote=MrJL;513793]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[/quote]

Oh they have a say alright. They can pony up the cash and give him a long term extension, even if he gets big offers from other teams. He's playing for a contender and is the key piece of a bad-ass defense. Aside from money, I don't see much of a reason to leave. The Titans know that. I think if Tennessee really wants him long term, they will get him.

[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.

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.[/quote]

There have been many many times where the offense goes three and out and doesn't advance field position. Yes you can use the flip side but in the end it really makes no sense to blame to the defense. They're doing a good job. Great? No. We don't have the personel to be great. But good enough to be a playoff defense? Yes.

Personally I'd like to see more exotic blitz packages. But for some reason that's not what Blache is comfortable with. He seems to prefer a straight up style and not hide anything or try and trick the opposing offense. Maybe he's trying not to get caught up in giving up a lot of big plays like we did in 06. Who knows?

[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...

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)[/quote]First of all, what makes you think I'm not paid?

Though I want to respect the fact that you were able to type so much, clearly care about what your saying, and I want to move away from things that might seem like personal attacks. That doesn't do me any good, as you're clearly more competant than the average fan I come across. I'm sure you didn't need me to tell you this, just know that I am aware of it.

But, measuring performance retroactively can be done quite easily, and I don't see why I should admit or consider I'm wrong when context-neutral statistics, film-study, and majority opinion all say that the defense has some issues. So far, the only reasons to believe I might be wrong is because you, SF69, and a bunch of "experts" cited by you and SF69 believe I'm totally off my rocker. Thus, this debate.

I am surprised that you haven't realized that your argument doesn't get stronger the more you try to simplify things.

I think you believe this:[LIST][*]Points are the only stat that matters[*]Other stats besides points that don't matter can be manipulated, and will be manipulated, by you to try to show that QBs struggle against us.[*]Our offense doesn't score enough points to give our defense a fair chance.[*]Only one QB (Fitzpatrick) was better against us, than his season average.[*]Leftwich's absurd performance doesn't count against our defense because he hasn't played at any other point this season.[*]Bulger's game against us wasn't good before his final drive.[*]Bulger's final drive also doesn't count, because Leigh Torrence was in coverage, and you know, they cut him (and they've been worse since they cut him, but likely not because of him).[*]Romo and Manning both have struggled against us, because Manning's completion percentage is down, and both of their QB ratings are down.[*]Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck are great QBs, and the fact that they've sucked all year has nothing to do with how well we defended them.[*]You've talked to a "real" film watcher, and the tooth fairy, I mean film watcher told you that Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck both credited the Redskins pass defense for everything that has gone wrong with them all year.[*]The Detroit Lions have more points scored than the Redskins. According to the first statement, this means you believe that the Detroit Lions actually have a better offense than the Redskins. Well then.[/LIST]First of all, if you truly believe points scored is the end game, you wouldn't have tried to elaborate on that. Obviously, your smart enough to know you are wrong there. Just in case, though, [URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=909"]this guy[/URL] who writes for a more respected blog than you or anyone you know, puts that to rest quickly.

[quote=Chase Stuart, Pro-football-reference]
So what’s the best way to rank the defenses? Let’s run down the major statistics people use to rank the defenses.

[B]Points Allowed[/B]: People who use this stat like to say things like, “at the end of the day, all I care about is how many points a defense allowed.” While that’s a good statement, points allowed also includes return touchdowns. That’s a big problem — if your QB throws a pick-six or your special teams allowed a score, that shouldn’t hurt the defense. Further, this is heavily influenced by opponent’s field position and opponent’s time of possession, two factors that don’t impact all defenses equally. But many view this as the mother of all defensive stats, so it’s here to stay.
[/quote]

So, points allowed is a good start, but in the Redskins' case, it's misleading for all those factors. The Redskins offense has given up a single TD all year, and the special teams only two TDs. Mostly, the Redskins and their opponents prefer to keep the ball on the ground, which cuts down the amount of attempts a team gets on our defense.

Furthermore, you may have noticed that my point was "The Redskins pass defense is below average." Sadly, this makes stats like PPG largely unhelpful, because you aren't separating run defense from pass defense when you use that.

I suggest you look at these [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats"]drive stats[/URL] before you post anymore. It takes the TOP argument off the table (but not the field position argument). You'll notice the Redskins defense ranks first in punts per drive. Obviously, that's good, and it's a big component of why we give up so few points per game: no team forces more punts than the Redskins. But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. [B]We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh[/B]).

This isn't even including the fact that we are in the top seven in Ave. Starting field position.

Here's the point: when you break the points per game stat down, you realize that we're really not that good at preventing points. NONE of this accounts for the sub-par quality of our competition, which against the pass, is significantly below average, as you already know.

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

So now that you see the fallacy in using points per game as the be-all-end-all (I hope), let's look at some of your other less-ridiculous arguments.

[quote]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.[/quote]

Look. You're correct in saying that QBs struggle to get into a rhythm against the Redskins this year. I think they have all year. Problem is, I contest that (statisically), six times this year, a QB had better than average game against the Redskins. I'm going to make a case for a 7th, Romo (Week 10). Romo was statistically below average in that game, but he beat us in that one at the end, but the guy couldn't even grip the football in that game. He should have been shut out.

And I think you'll agree that the product is often below expectations.

[B]Week 5, Donovan McNabb[/B]
Throws for 6.8 yards per attempt, and no picks. That is his season average in YPA, but he's got ten INTs this year. I feel like we should have forced at least one turnover in this one.

[B]Week 6, Marc Bulger[/B]
Throws for 5.2 yards per attempt, and no picks. Bulger has 12 picks this year. We got none. In this game, one INT wins it. That's on the defense. His season average in yards per attempt is about 6.0. Above average day when you look at the efficiency for the defense, but where is the one big play when you need it? Not to be found.

[B]Week 8, Dan Orlovsky[/B]
Another no turnover performance from our "top ten" passing defense. This time against the Lions, who apparently have a better offense than we do. Orlovsky threw for a league average 6.4 yards per attempt. According to the same measure, Orlovsky is a league average QB. Sensing a trend here? Where is the defense being elite when we really need it?

[B]Week 9, Byron Leftwich[/B]
Totally not contesting the point that Roethlisberger was terrible against us in the first half of this one. Given. The guy's game is very, very flawed, and I thought Blache exposed it well. Of course, to NOT change our scheme when they change their QB is probably his biggest flaw to date as our coordinator. Leftwich only threw ten times, for a ridiculous 13 yards per throw. If we compare him to Roethlisberger's average (6.9), this is totally inexcusable.

Oh yeah, no INTs.

[B]Week 11, Tony Romo[/B]
Here's the one where I'm going outside what the stats say. The stats say that Romo was bad in this one. He got picked off twice. Thanks DHall, and Rocky. Here's the problem: a guy with a huge cast on his hand who cannot throw downfield accurately should NOT be producing 7.3 YPA against you. Sorry. That's ridiculous. A "top ten" pass defense would never allow that. The argument that we actually played well in this game is "well, but it's Tony Romo, and he's really good!" And the counter-argument is "He's got a giant ****ing cast on his hand and can't throw a football except to his running back".

Whom, of course, was hardly covered all game.

[B]Week 13, Eli Manning[/B]
This was a stupid oversight on your part. This was the real, real poor performance by the pass D. Manning threw for 9 yards an attempt. Nine. 9.0. You aren't in the game when that happens. Only Leftwich was more effective than this. We picked him off once, which is about the expectation for Manning. So we forced the turnover, might have been able to force another if it weren't for Springs, and those combined might have kept us in the game.

But seriously, if you went into this game thinking we might have a top ten passing defense (myself included), you came out thinking we were terrible.

[B]Week 15, Ryan Fitzpatrick[/B]
Flacco had a very average day, so I skipped him. You admitted that Fitzpatrick was better than he should have been. Which is correct, he was. I don't have any idea why the Week 2 and 3 games weigh higher in your mind than this one does, but I'm not really following your logic for a lot of things.

So I'm contesting that we've performed below average expectations on pass defense seven times out of fourteen games. That's 50%. Which was my point all along.

Problem is, in the seven games where I agree with you that we've overachieved average expectations on pass defense, [B]all of the really impressive ones came in September.[/B] Since then, we rattled Derek Anderson, Matt Hasselbeck, and Joe Flacco struggled against us.

To me, that's just not enough to say that we are "top ten" or even average. I think the total product, including September, is pretty close to if not better than average, but we aren't that team any more. Blache is more predictable, IMO. We have Hall instead of Torrence. Mike Green instead of Doughty. Blades instead of Marcus. Lots of injuries on the DL.

We're just not a good pass defense at this point, and this season will not be remembered as one where we shut down opposing QBs. It's something we did a few times. But not with anywhere near the consistency you seem to think we did.

I'm sorry that there's no one metric that you would understand that says I'm right and your wrong. I'd love to have something conclusive to just end the argument. But common sense, combined with statistical analysis says what you believe is way off base. That's what I believe.

[quote=skinsfan69;513807][B]There have been many many times where the offense goes three and out and doesn't advance field position.[/B] Yes you can use the flip side but in the end it really makes no sense to blame to the defense. They're doing a good job. Great? No. We don't have the personel to be great. But good enough to be a playoff defense? Yes.

Personally I'd like to see more exotic blitz packages. But for some reason that's not what Blache is comfortable with. He seems to prefer a straight up style and not hide anything or try and trick the opposing offense. [B]Maybe he's trying not to get caught up in giving up a lot of big plays like we did in 06.[/B] Who knows?[/quote]The first bolded part just isn't true at all and I don't think there's anything you can find to defend it.

But I do think good is a matter of expectation. As a whole, run defense+pass defense, I think we are better than average. I think we SHOULD be a little bit, if not a lot better than we are.

The second bolded part, I know you are just speculating, but we're giving up almost as many big plays as we were in 2006 (defined as 20+ yards, perhaps you are thinking much longer). Mostly, because Blache's blitzes get picked up so easily that we can't defend the deep ins and seams long enough.

We also just don't create any sort of negative plays with his schemes. We're alright at intercepting passes, some better, some worse than us, but we don't get the sacks because he's predictable, and we never strip fumbles (which I don't think is his fault necessarily, but it's true). We rank 30th in forced fumbles per drive, and 29th in adjusted sack rate.

This is one of the most epic, verbose arguments I've ever seen. Rock on.

GTripp is laying the lumber.

[quote=maroonandblack30;513812]I agree here.... I think Gtripp is OVER analysing things a tad.

Any one who watches the games knows the Skins have a good pass defense, you can twist stats to mean anything you want.[/quote]Sorry for going over your head. I hope there was something in there that you learned from my argument, even if you disagree with my conclusion.

[quote=GMScud;513815]This is one of the most epic, verbose arguments I've ever seen. Rock on.

GTripp is laying the lumber.[/quote]Yeah, I wish there was one thing I could point to that would just be like "here, you're wrong". But it's not like that. We're pretty average in most respects, but declining quickly. Haven't been "top ten" since September. That's tough to show in a single number.

So instead, you get 3,000 word thesis papers.

I don't get how you type these things so fast GTripp. I mean that's like a college paper right there (Your last long post). You know a lot for your age. Like you popped out your mom with a TV and game tape in your hand.

Why are you not on TV, giving some of these tool NFL analysts a run for their money?

[quote=DynamiteRave;513818]I don't get how you type these things so fast GTripp. I mean that's like a college paper right there (Your last long post). You know a lot for your age. Like you popped out your mom with a TV and game tape in your hand.

Why are you not on TV, giving some of these tool NFL analysts a run for their money?[/quote]I've got a newspaper voice and a radio face ;)

It's easy for me to write that much when I need to in order to make a point. I put a lot of effort into that one, but not nearly as much as you would think. I'm high on caffeine.

Meanwhile, our real big offensive problems can be summed up by this:

You've heard of the bend but don't break defense? We'll we've got the world's first "Bend but don't score" Offense. We're above average in yards per drive, but 29th in TDs per drive. Obviously, something is amiss here. The rank is a bit misleading, since we've played the two best defenses, and the Giants' defense twice.

This does show a bunch of things. The Offense has much further to go than it could, potentially. It is clearly not inept, but rather, end-zone challenged. The Redskins convert a 1st and 10 into another 1st and 10 2/3 of the time. That's pretty solid. The Redskins convert a possession into a touchdown 14.4% of the time. That's pretty horrific.

Lack of the big play on offense is the single biggest issue here.

Meanwhile, our defenses yards per drive is right on par with it's points per drive: slightly above average against a weak schedule.

And finally, QB Rating of the passers the Skins have played.

NFL average = 81.0

Tony Romo 98.3
Kurt Warner 97.5
Drew Brees 93.9
Eli Manning 86.4
Donovan McNabb 85.2
------------
NFL Average 81.0
------------
Dan Orlovsky 80.3
Ben Roethlisberger 80.2
Joe Flacco 76.9
Mark Bulger 69.8
Ryan Fitzpatrick 68.9
Derek Anderson 66.5
Matt Hasselbeck 57.8

We've faced only three passers in the top fourteen, but we've faced the four worst qualified passers.

They are tired!!! Tierd of being on the field!!! Tired of the offense sucking the life out of them!!! Tired of losing!!!!!

[quote=schndr_tdd;513832]They are tired!!! Tierd of being on the field!!! Tired of the offense sucking the life out of them!!! Tired of losing!!!!![/quote]

Have you read any of the posts in this thread? :doh:

[quote=GTripp0012;513814]The first bolded part just isn't true at all and I don't think there's anything you can find to defend it.

But I do think good is a matter of expectation. As a whole, run defense+pass defense, I think we are better than average. I think we SHOULD be a little bit, if not a lot better than we are.

The second bolded part, I know you are just speculating, but we're giving up almost as many big plays as we were in 2006 (defined as 20+ yards, perhaps you are thinking much longer). [b]Mostly, because Blache's blitzes get picked up so easily that we can't defend the deep ins and seams long enough.[/b]

We also just don't create any sort of negative plays with his schemes. We're alright at intercepting passes, some better, some worse than us, but we don't get the sacks because he's predictable, and we never strip fumbles (which I don't think is his fault necessarily, but it's true). We rank 30th in forced fumbles per drive, and 29th in adjusted sack rate.[/quote]

Obviously you've got a great handle on things and do a great job breaking down the games. I think in the bolded portion above you identify the central issue quite succinctly. I don't have the numbers (and can't find them) but maybe you can marshal them for me. My sense is that the Redskins actually blitz quite often (I'd bet they are up among the league leaders) but their blitzes are largely vanilla. They don't run many zone dogs, few complex stunts, and when they have DBs coming they often clue. So they are bringing extra people, but not really putting pressure on the opposing OLine and QB (the way other teams do to the Redskins). The people that get pressured are actually the DBs on the back end who get manned up while the QB faces minimal pressure because the defense rarely creates quick pressure despite bringing extra people.

So my question is, how often do the Redskins bring extra pressure (you break this down every week, do you have the cumulative stats?). Do you have any idea how the number of Redskins blitzes stacks up to other teams in the league? Is Blache bringing extra people in order to stop the run or are they actually trying to pressure the passer (i.e. are the bringing people on 1st and 2nd down in running situations or are they mostly in obvious passing downs and distances?)

We heard during the summer that Blache preferred to run a simplified defense. Few exotic blitzes, focus on fundamentals, stop the run, defend the pass on the back end with DBs. Instead, what we have gotten is a team that blitzes often (albeit with few exotic blitzes), still generates little pressure, and doesn't do a very good job of getting off the field in key third downs. I'm reminded of a passage that Gregg Easterbrook had from earlier in the season after the Skins managed to lose to the Rams:

[B]"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1:[/B] Last week, TMQ praised new Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache for "using conservative, responsibility-oriented schemes with hardly any of the blitzing or exotic fronts that bobbleheads in the booth always extol." With Washington leading St. Louis 17-16, Les Mouflons faced third-and-13 on their 41 with 1:13 remaining. To that point in the game, St. Louis had just 158 yards of total offense. If Washington simply plays straight defense, a stop is likely. Instead, Blache called not just a safety blitz but a double safety blitz. Speedster Dennis Avery was single-covered on a deep go route for a 43-yard completion, and the Rams kicked the winning field goal with two seconds showing."

[quote=GTripp0012;513816]Sorry for going over your head. I hope there was something in there that you learned from my argument, even if you disagree with my conclusion.[/quote]

Do you really get paid to break down film?

Do you break down actual "game film" or just a copy of the TV broadcast?

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;513710]........someone outside for the DC position, possibly [COLOR="Olive"][SIZE="3"]Keith Butler (Steelers LB coach), or Mike Waufle (Giants DL coach)[/SIZE][/COLOR]. We need some fresh blood injected into the defense,...[/quote]

QFT

He said this in another thread and i didn't want to steal his idea, BUT if [B][U]Blache[/U][/B] were to be replaced these are the only types of coaches i would like to see:
coaches that have pedigree from a proven aggresive defensiv system

[quote=GTripp0012;513814][B]The first bolded part just isn't true at all and I don't think there's anything you can find to defend it.[/B]

But I do think good is a matter of expectation. As a whole, run defense+pass defense, I think we are better than average. I think we SHOULD be a little bit, if not a lot better than we are.

The second bolded part, I know you are just speculating, but we're giving up almost as many big plays as we were in 2006 (defined as 20+ yards, perhaps you are thinking much longer). Mostly, because Blache's blitzes get picked up so easily that we can't defend the deep ins and seams long enough.

We also just don't create any sort of negative plays with his schemes. We're alright at intercepting passes, some better, some worse than us, but we don't get the sacks because he's predictable, and we never strip fumbles (which I don't think is his fault necessarily, but it's true). We rank 30th in forced fumbles per drive, and 29th in adjusted sack rate.[/quote]

Oh really?? Sigh... Tripp I just think you can never admit when you're wrong. You try and over analyze everything with stats, and while sometimes you bring up solid points, on this subject you're just flat out wrong. Blache is not the main reason we are where we are. It's the offense that scores 10 points a game. If you can't see that then so be it. But as I said, there are experts that played in the NFL that follow this team who are basically saying the same thing.

There have been many instances where the offense goes three and out. It happened last week against the freaking Bengals. No first downs til midway through the 2nd q. Inexcuseable! I remember watching Pitts when Tomlin on side kicks it to start the game off. Why? Cause he knows his defense has his back. We got the ball a few times deep in Pittsburgh territory and could not get first downs. Or the first game of the year.....no first downs til the end of the half. I could go on and on.

Look, I'm not saying our defense is perfect. We need to create turnovers and maybe doing more exotic blitz packages will help. But to be honest, I've seen numerous times where our guys were in positions to get turnovers yet we simply don't make the play. Rogers could've changed the Pitts. game around if he simply catches the ball. How many INTS did we drop last week? Or in first game of the year? To me that's more frustating than not trying to hide blitzes. If our guys could just catch the damn ball.

[quote=skinsfan69;513847]Oh really?? Sigh... Tripp I just think you can never admit when you're wrong. [B]You try and over analyze everything with stats[/B], and while sometimes you bring up solid points, on this subject you're just flat out wrong. Blache is not the main reason we are where we are. It's the offense that scores 10 points a game. If you can't see that then so be it. But as I said, there are experts that played in the NFL that follow this team who are basically saying the same thing.

There have been many instances where the offense goes three and out. It happened last week against the freaking Bengals. No first downs til midway through the 2nd q. Inexcuseable! I remember watching Pitts when Tomlin on side kicks it to start the game off. Why? Cause he knows his defense has his back. We got the ball a few times deep in Pittsburgh territory and could not get first downs. Or the first game of the year.....no first downs til the end of the half. I could go on and on.

Look, I'm not saying our defense is perfect. We need to create turnovers and maybe doing more exotic blitz packages will help. But to be honest, I've seen numerous times where our guys were in positions to get turnovers yet we simply don't make the play. Rogers could've changed the Pitts. game around if he simply catches the ball. How many INTS did we drop last week? Or in first game of the year? To me that's more frustating than not trying to hide blitzes. If our guys could just catch the damn ball.[/quote]

Agree...

Bottom line = our D is in the top 5 in overall defense. To me, there is no need to analyze any further. QB ratings aside I can only think of one game where a QB had a really good game against the Skins (Eli in the 2nd matchup)

I appreciate Gtripps insight but I don't think you have to dig that deep to figure out that the defense is pretty good.

Like mentioned before, I have heard at least two former players say the Skins have "championship quality defense" B-Mitch was one of them.

If guys who actually suited up in the league say their good, thats good enough for me.

"Neutral" stats are fine, but I remember a while ago some math wiz came out with a study that said football teams should go for it on every 4th down because [I]statistics[/I] showed that they would succeed in the long run..... I'm just saying.

I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.

[quote=SmootSmack;513866]I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.[/quote]

I think that is an excellent summation!

Some people just look at things in totally different ways. No harm.

[quote=SC Skins Fan;513835]Obviously you've got a great handle on things and do a great job breaking down the games. I think in the bolded portion above you identify the central issue quite succinctly. I don't have the numbers (and can't find them) but maybe you can marshal them for me. My sense is that the Redskins actually blitz quite often (I'd bet they are up among the league leaders) but their blitzes are largely vanilla. They don't run many zone dogs, few complex stunts, and when they have DBs coming they often clue. So they are bringing extra people, but not really putting pressure on the opposing OLine and QB (the way other teams do to the Redskins). The people that get pressured are actually the DBs on the back end who get manned up while the QB faces minimal pressure because the defense rarely creates quick pressure despite bringing extra people.

So my question is, how often do the Redskins bring extra pressure (you break this down every week, do you have the cumulative stats?). Do you have any idea how the number of Redskins blitzes stacks up to other teams in the league? Is Blache bringing extra people in order to stop the run or are they actually trying to pressure the passer (i.e. are the bringing people on 1st and 2nd down in running situations or are they mostly in obvious passing downs and distances?)

We heard during the summer that Blache preferred to run a simplified defense. Few exotic blitzes, focus on fundamentals, stop the run, defend the pass on the back end with DBs. Instead, what we have gotten is a team that blitzes often (albeit with few exotic blitzes), still generates little pressure, and doesn't do a very good job of getting off the field in key third downs. I'm reminded of a passage that Gregg Easterbrook had from earlier in the season after the Skins managed to lose to the Rams:

[B]"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1:[/B] Last week, TMQ praised new Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache for "using conservative, responsibility-oriented schemes with hardly any of the blitzing or exotic fronts that bobbleheads in the booth always extol." With Washington leading St. Louis 17-16, Les Mouflons faced third-and-13 on their 41 with 1:13 remaining. To that point in the game, St. Louis had just 158 yards of total offense. If Washington simply plays straight defense, a stop is likely. Instead, Blache called not just a safety blitz but a double safety blitz. Speedster Dennis Avery was single-covered on a deep go route for a 43-yard completion, and the Rams kicked the winning field goal with two seconds showing."[/quote]

Problem there is on that blitz one of the safeties blitzed late. I think it was Moore. Rookie mistake.

[quote=schndr_tdd;513832]They are tired!!! Tierd of being on the field!!! Tired of the offense sucking the life out of them!!! Tired of losing!!!!![/quote]

Thats not true. We have won the TOP battle (and in most cases by a significant margin) in nearly every game in the first 45 minutes of play. The problem has been, our defense falls apart in the 4th quarter and gives up long drives... our defense is not tired.

[quote=maroonandblack30;513858]Agree...

Bottom line = our D is in the top 5 in overall defense. To me, there is no need to analyze any further. QB ratings aside I can only think of one game where a QB had a really good game against the Skins (Eli in the 2nd matchup)

I appreciate Gtripps insight but I don't think you have to dig that deep to figure out that the defense is pretty good.

Like mentioned before, I have heard at least two former players say the Skins have "championship quality defense" B-Mitch was one of them.

If guys who actually suited up in the league say their good, thats good enough for me.

"Neutral" stats are fine, but I remember a while ago some math wiz came out with a study that said football teams should go for it on every 4th down because [I]statistics[/I] showed that they would succeed in the long run..... I'm just saying.[/quote]

There are some key questions here.

1. Will the offense improve having to once again start from scratch if Zorn is fired?

2. Will the defense improve with a new coach who places more emphasis on pass rush?

3. If Blache is retained will his sacks don't matter philosophy allow him to push the front office to attempt to improve the D's main weakness the defensive line?

[quote=GTripp0012;513813]First of all, what makes you think I'm not paid?

Though I want to respect the fact that you were able to type so much, clearly care about what your saying, and I want to move away from things that might seem like personal attacks. That doesn't do me any good, as you're clearly more competant than the average fan I come across. I'm sure you didn't need me to tell you this, just know that I am aware of it.

But, measuring performance retroactively can be done quite easily, and I don't see why I should admit or consider I'm wrong when context-neutral statistics, film-study, and majority opinion all say that the defense has some issues. So far, the only reasons to believe I might be wrong is because you, SF69, and a bunch of "experts" cited by you and SF69 believe I'm totally off my rocker. Thus, this debate.

I am surprised that you haven't realized that your argument doesn't get stronger the more you try to simplify things.

I think you believe this:[LIST][*]Points are the only stat that matters[*]Other stats besides points that don't matter can be manipulated, and will be manipulated, by you to try to show that QBs struggle against us.[*]Our offense doesn't score enough points to give our defense a fair chance.[*]Only one QB (Fitzpatrick) was better against us, than his season average.[*]Leftwich's absurd performance doesn't count against our defense because he hasn't played at any other point this season.[*]Bulger's game against us wasn't good before his final drive.[*]Bulger's final drive also doesn't count, because Leigh Torrence was in coverage, and you know, they cut him (and they've been worse since they cut him, but likely not because of him).[*]Romo and Manning both have struggled against us, because Manning's completion percentage is down, and both of their QB ratings are down.[*]Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck are great QBs, and the fact that they've sucked all year has nothing to do with how well we defended them.[*]You've talked to a "real" film watcher, and the tooth fairy, I mean film watcher told you that Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck both credited the Redskins pass defense for everything that has gone wrong with them all year.[*]The Detroit Lions have more points scored than the Redskins. According to the first statement, this means you believe that the Detroit Lions actually have a better offense than the Redskins. Well then.[/LIST]First of all, if you truly believe points scored is the end game, you wouldn't have tried to elaborate on that. Obviously, your smart enough to know you are wrong there. Just in case, though, [URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=909"]this guy[/URL] who writes for a more respected blog than you or anyone you know, puts that to rest quickly.

So, points allowed is a good start, but in the Redskins' case, it's misleading for all those factors. The Redskins offense has given up a single TD all year, and the special teams only two TDs. Mostly, the Redskins and their opponents prefer to keep the ball on the ground, which cuts down the amount of attempts a team gets on our defense.

Furthermore, you may have noticed that my point was "The Redskins pass defense is below average." Sadly, this makes stats like PPG largely unhelpful, because you aren't separating run defense from pass defense when you use that.

I suggest you look at these [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats"]drive stats[/URL] before you post anymore. It takes the TOP argument off the table (but not the field position argument). You'll notice the Redskins defense ranks first in punts per drive. Obviously, that's good, and it's a big component of why we give up so few points per game: no team forces more punts than the Redskins. But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. [B]We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh[/B]).

This isn't even including the fact that we are in the top seven in Ave. Starting field position.

Here's the point: when you break the points per game stat down, you realize that we're really not that good at preventing points. NONE of this accounts for the sub-par quality of our competition, which against the pass, is significantly below average, as you already know.

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

So now that you see the fallacy in using points per game as the be-all-end-all (I hope), let's look at some of your other less-ridiculous arguments.

Look. You're correct in saying that QBs struggle to get into a rhythm against the Redskins this year. I think they have all year. Problem is, I contest that (statisically), six times this year, a QB had better than average game against the Redskins. I'm going to make a case for a 7th, Romo (Week 10). Romo was statistically below average in that game, but he beat us in that one at the end, but the guy couldn't even grip the football in that game. He should have been shut out.

And I think you'll agree that the product is often below expectations.

[B]Week 5, Donovan McNabb[/B]
Throws for 6.8 yards per attempt, and no picks. That is his season average in YPA, but he's got ten INTs this year. I feel like we should have forced at least one turnover in this one.

[B]Week 6, Marc Bulger[/B]
Throws for 5.2 yards per attempt, and no picks. Bulger has 12 picks this year. We got none. In this game, one INT wins it. That's on the defense. His season average in yards per attempt is about 6.0. Above average day when you look at the efficiency for the defense, but where is the one big play when you need it? Not to be found.

[B]Week 8, Dan Orlovsky[/B]
Another no turnover performance from our "top ten" passing defense. This time against the Lions, who apparently have a better offense than we do. Orlovsky threw for a league average 6.4 yards per attempt. According to the same measure, Orlovsky is a league average QB. Sensing a trend here? Where is the defense being elite when we really need it?

[B]Week 9, Byron Leftwich[/B]
Totally not contesting the point that Roethlisberger was terrible against us in the first half of this one. Given. The guy's game is very, very flawed, and I thought Blache exposed it well. Of course, to NOT change our scheme when they change their QB is probably his biggest flaw to date as our coordinator. Leftwich only threw ten times, for a ridiculous 13 yards per throw. If we compare him to Roethlisberger's average (6.9), this is totally inexcusable.

Oh yeah, no INTs.

[B]Week 11, Tony Romo[/B]
Here's the one where I'm going outside what the stats say. The stats say that Romo was bad in this one. He got picked off twice. Thanks DHall, and Rocky. Here's the problem: a guy with a huge cast on his hand who cannot throw downfield accurately should NOT be producing 7.3 YPA against you. Sorry. That's ridiculous. A "top ten" pass defense would never allow that. The argument that we actually played well in this game is "well, but it's Tony Romo, and he's really good!" And the counter-argument is "He's got a giant ****ing cast on his hand and can't throw a football except to his running back".

Whom, of course, was hardly covered all game.

[B]Week 13, Eli Manning[/B]
This was a stupid oversight on your part. This was the real, real poor performance by the pass D. Manning threw for 9 yards an attempt. Nine. 9.0. You aren't in the game when that happens. Only Leftwich was more effective than this. We picked him off once, which is about the expectation for Manning. So we forced the turnover, might have been able to force another if it weren't for Springs, and those combined might have kept us in the game.

But seriously, if you went into this game thinking we might have a top ten passing defense (myself included), you came out thinking we were terrible.

[B]Week 15, Ryan Fitzpatrick[/B]
Flacco had a very average day, so I skipped him. You admitted that Fitzpatrick was better than he should have been. Which is correct, he was. I don't have any idea why the Week 2 and 3 games weigh higher in your mind than this one does, but I'm not really following your logic for a lot of things.

So I'm contesting that we've performed below average expectations on pass defense seven times out of fourteen games. That's 50%. Which was my point all along.

Problem is, in the seven games where I agree with you that we've overachieved average expectations on pass defense, [B]all of the really impressive ones came in September.[/B] Since then, we rattled Derek Anderson, Matt Hasselbeck, and Joe Flacco struggled against us.

To me, that's just not enough to say that we are "top ten" or even average. I think the total product, including September, is pretty close to if not better than average, but we aren't that team any more. Blache is more predictable, IMO. We have Hall instead of Torrence. Mike Green instead of Doughty. Blades instead of Marcus. Lots of injuries on the DL.

We're just not a good pass defense at this point, and this season will not be remembered as one where we shut down opposing QBs. It's something we did a few times. But not with anywhere near the consistency you seem to think we did.

I'm sorry that there's no one metric that you would understand that says I'm right and your wrong. I'd love to have something conclusive to just end the argument. But common sense, combined with statistical analysis says what you believe is way off base. That's what I believe.[/quote]

OK my turn to respond to your comments...

“[B]First of all, what makes you think I'm not paid?[/B]”
* You are? By whom?

You say that I “[B]Other stats besides points that don't matter can be manipulated, and will be manipulated, by you to try to show that QBs struggle against us.[/B]”
* Talk about manipulation, all of the sudden you start using yards per attempt (?) and a lack of INTs to use as your main source of ammo. Doesn't QB Rating account for both of these and more to give you an idea of the OVERALL performance? Also, in one breath you say McNabb had a good day because he didn't throw an INT, then in the next breath you discredit the 2 INTs we had against Romo and he had a good day because of yards per attempt??

You go on to say that Roethlisberger has “[B]sucked all year[/B]”
* He has? He had a 3 game stretch where he struggled. You take those away and he has completed over 60% of his passes and has a 14 TDs to only 4 INTs in the other 11 games. Yes, I realize you'll discredit this because I am excusing 3 games. But in your argument, you throw out the Saints/Cardinal games because we were playing well then, right? So he played bad for 3 games out of 14. Not only that, but let's not talk like morons, especially if we are trying to have an intellectual conversation by acting like he sucks, when EVERYONE knows he doesn't.

OK. Now you talk about points allowed not being important and mention someone I've never heard of making a point that actually SUPPORTS the fact that our defense IS above average and NOT the reason for our misery this year.

He says that ”[B]if your QB throws a pick-six or your special teams allowed a score, that shouldn’t hurt the defense.[/B]” Thanks. That helps. So our defense is giving up only 17.5 points per game!!

You then say to look at points per drive and state "[B]But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh).[/B]"
* How exactly is 10th in the league closer to 25th than 1st? How is being in the top 10 bad? ... sheesh, this is an example of the stttrreeettcchhhiinnggg you have been doing.

Your next quote "[B]Problem is, I contest that (statisically), six times this year, a QB had better than average game against the Redskins[/B]." and we get brought back to the Bulger game.
* Mark Bulger had 93 yards passing and your all important 3.7 yards per attempt (that is AWFUL by the way, right?) through 59 minutes of the game and with 1:06 left in the game he underthrows a desperation chuck, the receiver adjusts to the ball, Torrance falls down, and now Bulger had a great day and picked us apart?? ... sttttrrrreettchhhhh

* I already mentioned how YOU manipulated the McNabb/Romo games... but to elaborate on this HUGE excuse you give Romo for his "can't grip the ball" routine... you do realize the very next week he threw for 341yds and 3TDs right? yeah, that thumb was barely hanging on.

* Manning. Another time where after going on and on in other games saying "no INTs" like that was the sole reason we sucked, you discredit that we DID pick him off. Also, he had the average day in regards to completion % and QB Rating, but threw the ball 34 times to get the 300yds because [U]we were playing the run all day[/U], which was obvious to even us pions who don't get paid to watch film.

And finally you say "[B]But common sense, combined with statistical analysis says what you believe is way off base.[/B]"

* Common sense & statistical analysis is way off base? Let me remind you that the two points we have been debating are that A) Our defense is at least equally to blame for lack of success this year and B) our pass defense is below average (these are things YOU have said) You have supported this with:

* This point is big. You just rambled on and on asserting that the most imprtant gauges of a pass defense is the opposing QB's yards per attempt & our INTs. Doesn't the QB Rating, which I have used all along ACCOUNT FOR THESE??

* Points per game allowed do not matter. MY common sense is way off base?

* Mark Bulger had a good game against us. MY statistical analysis is way off base?

Look, we obviously just have different opinions and will never convince the other that our way of thinking is better. But, EVERY argument you make is not over-analyzed, it's taking parts of this and that and peicing it together to support your argument... not a solid foundation and everytime you respond, I am pretty sure it gets toppled back down (just for you to find more junk to pile up again.

[quote=skinsfan69;513847]Oh really?? Sigh... Tripp I just think you can never admit when you're wrong. You try and over analyze everything with stats, and while sometimes you bring up solid points, on this subject you're just flat out wrong. Blache is not the main reason we are where we are. It's the offense that scores 10 points a game. If you can't see that then so be it. But as I said, there are experts that played in the NFL that follow this team who are basically saying the same thing.

There have been many instances where the offense goes three and out. It happened last week against the freaking Bengals. No first downs til midway through the 2nd q. Inexcuseable! I remember watching Pitts when Tomlin on side kicks it to start the game off. Why? Cause he knows his defense has his back. We got the ball a few times deep in Pittsburgh territory and could not get first downs. Or the first game of the year.....no first downs til the end of the half. I could go on and on.

Look, I'm not saying our defense is perfect. We need to create turnovers and maybe doing more exotic blitz packages will help. But to be honest, I've seen numerous times where our guys were in positions to get turnovers yet we simply don't make the play. Rogers could've changed the Pitts. game around if he simply catches the ball. How many INTS did we drop last week? Or in first game of the year? To me that's more frustating than not trying to hide blitzes. If our guys could just catch the damn ball.[/quote]I think it's obvious that both sides of the ball have their own issues to correct. And both have declined in the past nine games. I think the offense has declined further, because the offense had further to decline than the defense did.

I'm sorry for not admiting when I'm wrong after clearly proving myself right. You're probably looking at me as some arrogant prick right now. I'm okay with that.

But your claim that I'm wrong is that I'm OVERanalyzing stuff. You aren't even reading what I have to write. And that's why you aren't learning anything here.

We are simply not great at preventing points. That's not overanalyzing things at all. [B]You cannot have read my post and still deny this.[/B] [U]Eleven[/U] teams are better at keeping teams out of the end zone than we are. That is the very most basic measure of defense. Our offense isn't scoring enough touchdowns, given. But that's not the whole story, and if you think it is, then I probably had more respect for you as a poster than I should have.

If PPG is enough for you to feel like you know that we don't have an issue at preventing points, then whatever. Bottom line is that we are a 7-7 defense, and we need to get better to be a force in the playoffs next year. I think you know this.

Realize that:

[LIST][*]You said that the offense goes three and out way too much (I assume compared to an average team).[*]You were wrong when you said this.[*]I told you that you were wrong.[*]I am not to blame for you being wrong, like you seem to believe I am. It is not my fault you did not know that our offense converts a 1st and 10 into another 1st and 10 two thirds of the time.[*]The fact that you refuse to read anything I write doesn't make your statement any less wrong.[*]I will not be apologizing for correcting you, simply because you don't want to admit that you were wrong.[/LIST]

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;513895]Look, we obviously just have different opinions and will never convince the other that our way of thinking is better. But, EVERY argument you make is not over-analyzed, it's taking parts of this and that and peicing it together to support your argument... not a solid foundation and everytime you respond, I am pretty sure it gets toppled back down (just for you to find more junk to pile up again.[/quote]I'm sorry my last post went totally to waste for you.

I agree with you that we'll just have to agree to disagree. As I mentioned before, I don't know why you look at the Pittsburgh, Dallas, New York, and Cincinnati games and see a great pass defense. I don't.

I apologize for saying you don't understand stats. You clearly do. I don't apologize for letting you know that your 100% wrong when you say PPG is the only stat that matters. You clearly are.

At the end of the day, as long as you are enjoying the product on the field more than I am, you'll always be somewhat right. I'm moderately disappointed by our 7-7 pass defense. I hope that doesn't offend you. Good day.

[quote=SC Skins Fan;513835]Obviously you've got a great handle on things and do a great job breaking down the games. I think in the bolded portion above you identify the central issue quite succinctly. I don't have the numbers (and can't find them) but maybe you can marshal them for me. My sense is that the Redskins actually blitz quite often (I'd bet they are up among the league leaders) but their blitzes are largely vanilla. They don't run many zone dogs, few complex stunts, and when they have DBs coming they often clue. So they are bringing extra people, but not really putting pressure on the opposing OLine and QB (the way other teams do to the Redskins). The people that get pressured are actually the DBs on the back end who get manned up while the QB faces minimal pressure because the defense rarely creates quick pressure despite bringing extra people.

So my question is, how often do the Redskins bring extra pressure (you break this down every week, do you have the cumulative stats?). Do you have any idea how the number of Redskins blitzes stacks up to other teams in the league? Is Blache bringing extra people in order to stop the run or are they actually trying to pressure the passer (i.e. are the bringing people on 1st and 2nd down in running situations or are they mostly in obvious passing downs and distances?)

We heard during the summer that Blache preferred to run a simplified defense. Few exotic blitzes, focus on fundamentals, stop the run, defend the pass on the back end with DBs. Instead, what we have gotten is a team that blitzes often (albeit with few exotic blitzes), still generates little pressure, and doesn't do a very good job of getting off the field in key third downs. I'm reminded of a passage that Gregg Easterbrook had from earlier in the season after the Skins managed to lose to the Rams:

[B]"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1:[/B] Last week, TMQ praised new Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache for "using conservative, responsibility-oriented schemes with hardly any of the blitzing or exotic fronts that bobbleheads in the booth always extol." With Washington leading St. Louis 17-16, Les Mouflons faced third-and-13 on their 41 with 1:13 remaining. To that point in the game, St. Louis had just 158 yards of total offense. If Washington simply plays straight defense, a stop is likely. Instead, Blache called not just a safety blitz but a double safety blitz. Speedster Dennis Avery was single-covered on a deep go route for a 43-yard completion, and the Rams kicked the winning field goal with two seconds showing."[/quote]ESPN/Football Outsiders has an article up right now that says that the Redskins and Eagles are the two highest blitzing teams in the league. 16% and 17% respectively. They are near the top of the league an adjusted sack rate. We're near the bottom. There is no doubt their blitz schemes are inherently more effective than ours. Good post.

And to answer your question, he blitzes mostly in third and long. Exactly when Easterbrook says you shouldn't.

[quote=SmootSmack;513866]I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.[/quote]I don't get what you are saying here.

Of course 6 yards is 6 yards. But that's also a three and out, which happens too infrequently with this team to say we are a top five defense. We do force a lot of punts, which is good, but not until the ball has gone too far down the field, which is bad.

SF69, I hope I'm not making it seem like I'm just being disagreeable. You've been right on a very many number of things throughout the years. I just wanted to point out that while we might be seeing this issue differently, my position probably makes a lot more sense when you let go of those factual inaccuracies I've pointed out. At no point do I expect you to agree with me that Blache is the problem.

But the offensive performance looks a lot less offensive when you know what I do about the defense. Still not good enough to contend for a super bowl, but far less horrific then you currently believe.

This is what I really don't understand. Maybe someone can help me. I've read that Blache doesn't care about sacks that much. He wants his lineman to play run first. If this is true, why in the hell does he blitz so much? Isn't the point of blitzing mainly to sack the QB? Another thing. I understand that if you play the run first your sacks suffer. But on obvious passing downs, should'nt our d-line be getting more sacks. Obviously you don't play the run first in that situation. It's nice that our D is ranked #5, but to be near, or at, the top in the league in blitzes and near the bottom in sacks would tell me we better keep our safties and corners back because the chances of the QB getting the pass off are pretty good. I love defense and think I understand it pretty well but this puzzles me.

the defense has played well this season. look at the stats.

The real question is whether Blache will stay past this season. He worked this year for the players. The REAL QUESTION is whether Blache will retire when this season is over.

My thought is that Blache will retire on his own.

Zorn will bring in another OC to replace himself. Danny Smith will be replaced. Danny Snyder will offer another shotgun to Blache but Vinny will need to find another DC.

Blache will leave on his own.

Blache sometimes seems confused or stubborn in his schemes

[quote=A10sROCK;513959]the defense has played well this season. look at the stats.

The real question is whether Blache will stay past this season. He worked this year for the players. The REAL QUESTION is whether Blache will retire when this season is over.

My thought is that Blache will retire on his own.

[B]Zorn will bring in another OC to replace himself.[/B] Danny Smith will be replaced. Danny Snyder will offer another shotgun to Blache but Vinny will need to find another DC.

Blache will leave on his own.[/quote]

Why wouldn't Zorn just hand it over to Sherman?

[quote=GTripp0012;513922]I don't get what you are saying here.

Of course 6 yards is 6 yards. But that's also a three and out, which happens too infrequently with this team to say we are a top five defense. We do force a lot of punts, which is good, but not until the ball has gone too far down the field, which is bad.[/quote]

You said there is absolutely no evidence that the offense has gone three and out on multiple occassions and failed to advance field position. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say that. Or maybe now the debate is over what you mean by "too infrequently"

[quote=SmootSmack;514040]You said there is absolutely no evidence that the offense has gone three and out on multiple occassions and failed to advance field position. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say that. Or maybe now the debate is over what you mean by "too infrequently"[/quote]

I may be totally off here but I thought he meant to say frequently. cause it happens all the time. 3 and out. Infrequently would mean it does not happen all that often ...right?

[quote=GTripp0012;513918]I think it's obvious that both sides of the ball have their own issues to correct. And both have declined in the past nine games. I think the offense has declined further, because the offense had further to decline than the defense did.

I'm sorry for not admiting when I'm wrong after clearly proving myself right. You're probably looking at me as some arrogant prick right now. I'm okay with that.

But your claim that I'm wrong is that I'm OVERanalyzing stuff. You aren't even reading what I have to write. And that's why you aren't learning anything here.

We are simply not great at preventing points. That's not overanalyzing things at all. [B]You cannot have read my post and still deny this.[/B] [U]Eleven[/U] teams are better at keeping teams out of the end zone than we are. That is the very most basic measure of defense. Our offense isn't scoring enough touchdowns, given. But that's not the whole story, and if you think it is, then I probably had more respect for you as a poster than I should have.

If PPG is enough for you to feel like you know that we don't have an issue at preventing points, then whatever. Bottom line is that we are a 7-7 defense, and we need to get better to be a force in the playoffs next year. I think you know this.

Realize that:

[LIST][*]You said that the offense goes three and out way too much (I assume compared to an average team).[*]You were wrong when you said this.[*]I told you that you were wrong.[*]I am not to blame for you being wrong, like you seem to believe I am. It is not my fault you did not know that our offense converts a 1st and 10 into another 1st and 10 two thirds of the time.[*]The fact that you refuse to read anything I write doesn't make your statement any less wrong.[*]I will not be apologizing for correcting you, simply because you don't want to admit that you were wrong.[/LIST][/quote]

I don't think you're a prick. I just thing you act like you a Mr. Know It All just cause you spend countless hours breaking down film and studying stats. Just cause you take the time to do this, you think your opinion is what matters. Then you get defensive when someone challenges you on it. You get defensive if I say other people who have played in the NFL and know more about football than you (or I) say the defense is not the main problem.

I think people on this board probably feel that our defense should be like the Ravens D, a defense that carries a team and wins games for them. I don't think our defense is like that and people expect too much out of it. Because of our offense, our defense right now keep us in a game for 3 quarters, but fizzles out in the 4th. For the umpteenth time I will say this: a lot of the problems in defense would be solved if the offense was able to: cut down in 3 and outs, score more points, and win the TOP battle.

Now, does our defense has its problems? Yes. Could they fix a lot of things? Yes. But they are not the only reason or the main reason why this team is failing. When the offense starts to keep the ball, score points, capitalize on good plays by the defense (key stops, INTs, fumble recoveries), and actually doing their fair share of the work, then you can criticize the defense if the team keeps losing.

[quote=Ruhskins;514066]I think people on this board probably feel that our defense should be like the Ravens D, a defense that carries a team and wins games for them. I don't think our defense is like that and people expect too much out of it. Because of our offense, our defense right now keep us in a game for 3 quarters, but fizzles out in the 4th. For the umpteenth time I will say this: a lot of the problems in defense would be solved if the offense was able to: cut down in 3 and outs, score more points, and win the TOP battle.

Now, does our defense has its problems? Yes. Could they fix a lot of things? Yes. But they are not the only reason or the main reason why this team is failing. When the offense starts to keep the ball, score points, capitalize on good plays by the defense (key stops, INTs, fumble recoveries), and actually doing their fair share of the work, then you can criticize the defense if the team keeps losing.[/quote]

I happen to think it'd be easier to improve the defense though.