How bad is our secondary?
 

Seriously, I'm asking those of you who look at film and analyze such things to clue in the rest of us: just how bad is our secondary?

I mean, we just made somebody named Danny Amendola look like Jerry Rice. For goodness sakes, he tied the all-time NFL record for receptions in one half against us! Danny Amendola!

What and/or who are the problems? Is it fixable with the current group of players? What do [U]you[/U] think the Skins should do to make it better and save my sanity?

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Well you took a Center/Guard with your 3rd round pick who has been inactive the first 2 games of the season when we desperately needed a Right Tackle, Cornerback or Safety.

Should we just expect a complete zero from McRib, an early third round pick, this year? I cant get over the logic of that poor move.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=Chico23231;941606]Well you took a Center/Guard with your 3rd round pick who has been inactive the first 2 games of the season when we desperately needed a Right Tackle, Cornerback or Safety.

Should we just expect a complete zero from McRib, an early third round pick, this year? I cant get over the logic of that poor move.[/quote]

Third round picks are not usually penciled in as day one starters.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Like I posted on another thread, I would like too see more Crawford, less Griffin.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=44 goes 50 gut;941609]Third round picks are not usually penciled in as day one starters.[/quote]

yeah, but the are usually contributors in some sort of capacity. Their usually not in street cloths on the sidelines.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

This came up in the post game thread just now. IMO the team has had to address SO MANY facets of the talent pool on the roster that Secondary was the lowest priority when Shanahan took over. On paper this made sense in 2009.

I think the facts clearly display this. I would expect secondary to be the primary area of concern next off season.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

To answer the thread. Very bad. Like I pointed out before everyone was suggesting that they switch to man coverage. Then the first play they go man they get burned deep for a TD. The quick 3 step drops were perfect to stop our pass rush.

Maybe theres something they can do with the scheme but at the very least we have to keep in mind the personnel they're working with is average at best. Then again the Steelers have made a living as a top 10 defense with an average secondary. In the end this league is all about getting a pass rush going, especially when it comes to defending the pass.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=Chico23231;941606]Well you took a Center/Guard with your 3rd round pick who has been inactive the first 2 games of the season when we desperately needed a Right Tackle, Cornerback or Safety.

Should we just expect a complete zero from McRib, an early third round pick, this year? I cant get over the logic of that poor move.[/quote]

So you're certain a RT, CB, or Safety taken there would be contributing now?

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;941603]Seriously, I'm asking those of you who look at film and analyze such things to clue in the rest of us: just how bad is our secondary?

I mean, we just made somebody named Danny Amendola look like Jerry Rice. For goodness sakes, he tied the all-time NFL record for receptions in one half against us! Danny Amendola!

What and/or who are the problems? Is it fixable with the current group of players? What do [U]you[/U] think the Skins should do to make it better and save my sanity?[/quote]

We all knew that this was an issue and it can't be fixed until the off season. Josh Wilson is really the only guy we have that can cover. If anyone can remember Amendola got over on us the last time we play them.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

it's one of the worst in the league, Hall is really the only decent player we have. Wilson always gets beat

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;941610]Like I posted on another thread, I would like too see more Crawford, less Griffin.[/quote]

I agree. Was Crawford even active yesterday?

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

yeah Crawford played

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

How bad is the secondary?

Not as good as we thought after week 1, and probably not as bad as we are thinking right now.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;941618]So you're certain a RT, CB, or Safety taken there would be contributing now?[/quote]

I some capacity, yes. Even if on teams. Polumbus hasnt been good, CB has been a struggle (Crawford got snaps yesterday) and at safety M. Williams and Gomes are starters, nuff said there. Could I guarentee it, course not cause of injury but i expect a contributor with a relatively high 3rd round pick. We could use the help

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;941621]it's one of the worst in the league, Hall is really the only decent player we have. Wilson always gets beat[/quote]

ohhhfff.... wheeew... Um... OH you're being sarcastic ... almost got me.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;941610]Like I posted on another thread, I would like too see more Crawford, less Griffin.[/quote]

Agreed. Also, more cowbell.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Outside of Russell Wilson, who wouldn't play here, who is that magical third round pick who is contributing right now.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Any word on Josh Wilson's injury? He got a concussion, no?

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;941640]Outside of Russell Wilson, who wouldn't play here, who is that magical third round pick who is contributing right now.[/quote]

No one here for sure and then you name a prime example and dismiss him lol. Most are getting playing time, ours is stretching out street cloths walking around looking like a hybrid Grimace and ChumLee. Glad your happy with our CB, Safety, and Tackle talent.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Okay lets look at this at a fundamental level. Since Shanny was hired he has addressed every aspect of the team in 3 years, yes, but secondary is easily the least "worked on" or improved area. When he came in he very obviously felt that Secondary and TE were the only areas that were RELATIVELY set at starter. He even talked publicly about this, placing the other areas of the team at a higher priority in the long term planning (to stop the bleeding so to speak at areas that were far worse off at the time).

So in three years:
QB: multiple moves, multiple top draft picks, trades: Much improved but at a huge price
WR: 3rd round and later picks, top free agent signings: Much improved but still a question mark and at a big Cap hit.
OL: Multiple top picks, trade, might have been hampered by Cap: Work in Progress but improved
DL/LBackers: Multiple top picks, good signings: Much improved but need a top inside LB very soon.
DB: very few picks none high. a lot of "patchwork" temporary fill ins, one good signing, one solid late round draft pick, a LOT of losses: most neglected area of the team.

Drilling down: a few late round picks made. They simply haven't HAD the picks to draft a high prospect DB without sacrificing other areas. Who do you sacrifice and who do you pick in their place? Price Amukamura (injury prone) instead of? Subtract one of Kerrigan, RGIII, J. Jenkins, Trent Williams, or subtract a lesser lower round pick and we don't necessarily get a starter?

Gomes seems like a keeper late draft picks, but they've lost talent at a higher rate than they can replace it. They lost Landry due to chronic injury (and self entitled character). Signed Atogwi, but he didn't work out due to injuries. Lost Carlos Rodgers, primarily because the guy couldn't catch a cold, until he suddenly decided to stop memorizing the eye chart OR he got caught doing it by San Fran, suddenly with improved eye sight, he's got fly paper hands. Still a low character guy, who felt entitled to be paid big by the Redskins despite probably dropping more game finishing interceptions than anyone in Skins history. So of course he talked down on his former team just like Landry, proving that we didn't want him anyway... Not interested in punks who blame everyone but themselves... especially when said punk clearly faked his eye exams or at the VERY LEAST didn't take his poor eye sight into account AFTER HE FOUND OUT ABOUT IT, and STILL talked crap about the Skins. Seriously I know there's still some people who liked Rodgers but when you say "there's still guys who want out of there" AFTER you found out your eye sight was bad when you played on that team? That's a b*tch move...

As far as moves they could have made, their were some, they could have resigned Rodgers, except he made it very obvious he didn't want to be here (after the fact see above). Nnamdi was available, not sure why he would have wanted to sign here as opposed to "the dream team"... Otherwise not a lot of Young free agents with upside, except Josh Wilson, who happily DID sign here, in what was undoubtedly an upgrade, as he's now our CB1, he should be a good CB2 though. Not your primary cover corner.

Conclusion: Three years isn't enough time or draft picks to address every area of the team. I conclude this because it's right there in black in white. Point out the starters they should have drafted and then pick who you subtract from the team to draft him.

They have had literally NO chance to use a high pick on a top DB without sacrificing an IMPACT player in other areas that were even less stocked with talent than the secondary was.



The previous administration left them with a big contract (Hall), two low character guys coming into their first free agency with talent but also with clear undeniable issues and zero depth.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Not as bad as the front 7 was yesterday....

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=Mattyk;941626]How bad is the secondary?

Not as good as we thought after week 1, and probably not as bad as we are thinking right now.[/quote]

Agreed. If the scheme isn't right, can't always blame the players. I think Haslett stayed with the zone way too long. Plus, sometimes, a team just doesn't match up well with another team. I've seen that happen quite a few times, no matter how good or bad the team is usually.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;941621]it's one of the worst in the league, Hall is really the only decent player we have. Wilson always gets beat[/quote]

OMG :doh:

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=Ruhskins;941647]Any word on Josh Wilson's injury? He got a concussion, no?[/quote]

Concussion, not yet cleared medically for Week 3.

Griffin would start in his place. :doh:

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Let's go through this again for those who are a little slow on the uptake.

D. Hall is among the worst CBs in the league. It can be proven both quantitatively and subjectively. He just is. He's good for a few TOs a year and maybe a pick-six...that's it. Otherwise he spends the game getting beat constantly and has for seasons now.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Great another D. Hall pissing match. As if having to deal with losing a game is not enough.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=Ruhskins;941681]Great another D. Hall pissing match. As if having to deal with losing a game is not enough.[/quote]

lol...i like the comments here that "Gano woulda made that" referring to the 62 yarder....

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Bring back Ade Jimoh!

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Didnt the skins have Ryan Clark once upon a time??

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Yes. I wished at the time we had not cut him.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=Lotus;941638]Agreed. Also, more cowbell.[/quote]

:lol:

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=CrustyRedskin;941691]Didnt the skins have Ryan Clark once upon a time??[/quote]

Yet another move by the past "brain trust" that is currently effecting the team... Imagine if Clark and Bailey were still here, add Wilson as a great CB2 and subtract Hall...

Yes they would need to draft Champs replacement here soon but that is a much better secondary simply by not being such a crappy short sighted organization.

Talent and draft decisions have long term repercussions, an moderately talented player probably plays well over 6 years barring injury or suddenly sucking. why do you all think they've sucked for the last 20 years, and especially since Dan "Fantasy Football" Snyder took over?

It's crazy to think Vinny and Snyder aren't having an ongoing negative impact, especially when you can immediately point to the two low character (but talented) high draft pick starters who most recently left and the holes they left behind them. and even old moves that a top notch organization wouldn't have made (or needed to make in the case of Champ).

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Per the thread topic. The secondary is really, really bad when the front seven don't pressure the QB, as we observed yesterday. The secondary is average i.e. just good enough, when the front seven does its job.

We knew what secondary would be be going into the season, and we thought we knew what the front seven was, but yesterday puts that group back in the questionable column. Haslett's gameplan was a bad one no doubt, really quite awful. But had the front seven played like it did in week one Haslett's approach could have passed as "too conservative" instead of "effing retarded."

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=The Goat;941705]Per the thread topic. The secondary is really, really bad when the front seven don't pressure the QB, as we observed yesterday. The secondary is average i.e. just good enough, when the front seven does its job.

We knew what secondary would be be going into the season, and we thought we knew what the front seven was, but yesterday puts that group back in the questionable column. Haslett's gameplan was a bad one no doubt, really quite awful. But had the front seven played like it did in week one Haslett's approach could have passed as "too conservative" instead of "effing retarded."[/quote]

To be honest, I think the secondary is just not good period. We pressured Brees last week, and he still threw for 340 (granted, he's one of the very best). But this week Bradford lit us up for 310 yards. That's 325 yards passing per game folks -- we will not win a lot of games with that kind of production by our opponents. And while these were two good QBs, we still have to face Romo (twice), Manning (twice), Vick (twice), Ryan, Roethlisburger, and Newton -- all of whom are guys capable of hanging those kinds of numbers on us. If we cannot cover better (no matter what we do with the pass rush, which I agree has to improve from yesterday), we're in for a lot of 35-27 losses this season.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=calia;941711]To be honest, I think the secondary is just not good period. We pressured Brees last week, and he still threw for 340 (granted, he's one of the very best). But this week Bradford lit us up for 310 yards. That's 325 yards passing per game folks -- we will not win a lot of games with that kind of production by our opponents. And while these were two good QBs, we still have to face Romo (twice), Manning (twice), Vick (twice), Ryan, Roethlisburger, and Newton -- all of whom are guys capable of hanging those kinds of numbers on us. If we cannot cover better (no matter what we do with the pass rush, which I agree has to improve from yesterday), we're in for a lot of 35-27 losses this season.[/quote]

we're in for a lot of 35-27 losses this season :(

There's no magic fix to losing your starting CB1 and SS1 in two years, when you're trying to find a franchise QB, build an OL, give RGIII some weapons, and deal with an unexpected Cap penalty.

Fortunately most of us had realistic expectations going into this season amiright?

right? :yeahright

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

Here's something though: were the DBs just losing personal battles? It really didn't look like it to me.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

How bad is our secondary?

Bad enough to make a thread for it apparently..

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;941738]Here's something though: were the DBs just losing personal battles? It really didn't look like it to me.[/quote]

No. The WRs were finding the open spots in the zones and catching the balls. When a QB has the time that Bradford did yesterday, they'll eat up a zone defense ALL day long. Zone defenses are dependent on the DL getting pressure on the QB.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;941738]Here's something though: were the DBs just losing personal battles? It really didn't look like it to me.[/quote]

The poor defensive showing is all on Haslett.

Re: How bad is our secondary?
 

[quote=warriorzpath;941850]The poor defensive showing is all on Haslett.[/quote]

That's what I was thinking. I don't think we're BAD, you saw how we played last week. DBs (and the safetys) did a really good job.

But when you call soft zones and you're playing the DBs 8 yards off of Amendola, a guy who can make nothing into something if he has a little space, it's going to make the DBs look bad.