Interesting read on our secondary philosophy

[Paintrain]

There's been a lot of criticism about our secondary play, particularly Hall, from Sunday. This is a decent article about our identity as a secondary (off coverage vs. press coverage) and how it plays to each players strengths and weaknesses. Chalk talk: Why the Redskins play off-man coverage | Washington Examiner

It's interesting to see the difference between Hall, Smoot, Tryon and Rogers.

In Atlanta, Hall made the Pro Bowl playing off-man; in Oakland he got cut playing a lot of press. Not everyone prefers playing off-man. Fred Smoot is better in press coverage, as is Justin Tryon. Rogers is probably the most adaptable. Against New York, though, it didn’t matter.

I hope this gives more context and insight rather than saying "XXXX sucks!!" although it didn't give any as to why Rogers can't catch. Just sayin. :confused:

[Longtimefan]

It might be wise for Gray and Zorn to compromise. Not good for the HC and SC to disagree on how the defense should/or is going to be played. I did however, hear Zorn in one of his PC's say he did think it was neccessary for our DB's to get a little closer to the receivers. Will be interesting to see what follows.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

It might be wise for Gray and Zorn to compromise.....

Zorn needs to tell Blache he wants more aggression from his defense. Blache needs to adjust his scheme and tell Gray what to coach in the secondary.

That being said, this isn't Gray's fault. He's only a postion coach and I'm sure is doing what Blache has told him to do. It really doesn't matter what type of coverage is played in the secondary, if the offense knows pre-read what the coverage is 80% of the time, the secondary is going to look bad.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Zorn needs to tell Blache he wants more aggression from his defense. Blache needs to adjust his scheme and tell Gray what to coach in the secondary.

That being said, this isn't Gray's fault. He's only a postion coach and I'm sure is doing what Blache has told him to do. It really doesn't matter what type of coverage is played in the secondary, if the offense knows pre-read what the coverage is 80% of the time, the secondary is going to look bad.

It seems like scheme-wise Grey gets to dictate a lot of what the secondary does and how they do it. I am sure Palermo gets to dictate rotation and technique for the Dline and likewise Olivadotti gets to do the same for the LBs. Blache's job is coordinate the whole thing. Make the base calls and make sure everyone is putting together the pieces in a way that can work. The only place where I see continued questionable technique is the secondary (more accurately...the only place where it is apparent to my less than professional eyes).

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

It seems like scheme-wise Grey gets to dictate a lot of what the secondary does and how they do it. I am sure Palermo gets to dictate rotation and technique for the Dline and likewise Olivadotti gets to do the same for the LBs. Blache's job is coordinate the whole thing. Make the base calls and make sure everyone is putting together the pieces in a way that can work. The only place where I see continued questionable technique is the secondary (more accurately...the only place where it is apparent to my less than professional eyes).

There-in IM(LTP)O is the problem. The NFL is a copycat league.....Blache needs to get some Giants/Eagles game film and start copying.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

There-in IM(LTP)O is the problem. The NFL is a copycat league.....Blache needs to get some Giants/Eagles game film and start copying.

Yes Sir!

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Zorn needs to tell Blache he wants more aggression from his defense. Blache needs to adjust his scheme and tell Gray what to coach in the secondary.

That being said, this isn't Gray's fault. He's only a postion coach and I'm sure is doing what Blache has told him to do. It really doesn't matter what type of coverage is played in the secondary, if the offense knows pre-read what the coverage is 80% of the time, the secondary is going to look bad.

Agreed, all the assistants need to be in-sink with the HC. There needs to be an agreement as to how it's going to be played with everyone on the same page. There cannot be contrasting philosophies, the minds have to be in agreement. Idon't know whose fault it is, or even if it could be considered a fault, it's just a situation that needs to be worked out to the satisfaction of the HC. who should have the final say.

[FRPLG]

Here's the damn deal. We've been watching the off-man coverage going back to Grilliams' days here. It gets toasted more often than the coaches would lead you to believe based on what I have seen, regardless of how well it is played. I don't like it. They need to get their asses on the WRs. If we're going to pressure the QB doesn't it make sense our CBs should closer to the WRs sooner? What the hell is the point of getting pressure if we're just letting the QB diagnose off-coverage and throw out of the pressure before the CBs can make a play. Those two don't seem to mesh. How about this...play some off-coverage and some press. Mix it up. This is my main issue with Blache...he sees defense in absolutes. Do it his way, because it is the best, and ignore individual ability and skill. That was the BEST thing and Grills...he dramatically altered schemes week to week based on the opponent. We had a different identity every week.

[53Fan]

I've got a question for you Sammy since you apparently know what you're talking about, great posts by the way, The article says Pittsburgh only uses play off-man coverage, why such a big difference in their results and ours? Is it because they disguise better and mix things up a lttle more?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

....since you apparently know what you're talking about, great posts by the way

Thanks. Too bad I can't get my wife and kid to believe this.

The article says Pittsburgh only uses play off-man coverage, why such a big difference in their results and ours? Is it because they disguise better and mix things up a lttle more?

Yes. But they use some press at times also. The key is disguise and mixing thiings up. Here is some info from wiki on Dick LeBeau, Jim Johnson and Spags:



“It was a thought process kind of born out of necessity. It was basically an outcropping of the run-and-shoot [offense] that was becoming pretty prevalent in the league back then. We were in the same division as Houston, and they were tremendous at it with Moon and Co. Then the West Coast offense was spreading throughout the league. Those were all quick-rhythm, get-the-ball-out-of-your-hands-and-cut-up-the-defense types of passing games. We were just looking for ways to get pressure without exposing our defensive backs to have to cover the whole field all of the time.”

—Dick LeBeau, on the origin of the ‘zone blitz’.[1]

As an assistant coach he is credited with inventing the "Fire Zone" or "zone blitz" defense, which employs unpredictable pass rushes and pass coverage from various players.[7] His defenses typically employ 3-4 sets, with any of the 4 linebackers and frequently a defensive back among the pass rushers, while defensive linemen may drop back into short pass coverage zones to compensate for the pass rush coming from other positions. The design is intended to confuse the opposition's quarterback and frustrate its blocking schemes, as the offense may be unsure on each play of which defenders will rush the passer and which will drop into coverage. While often described as a "blitzing" scheme (implying more than the typical number of four pass rushers used by most defenses), the call on any particular "zone blitz" play may involve only three or four pass rushers but from unpredictable positions and angles. Although widely considered a defensive innovator, his stint as the head coach of the Cincinnati Bengals was unsuccessful[8].

Jim Johnson.....Widely regarded as one of the best defensive coordinators in the National Football League (NFL), he was especially known for being a master architect of blitzes, disguising them skillfully and keeping offenses constantly off-balance.[1]

Spagnuolo learned under Philadelphia coach Jim Johnson, and shares the same aggressive, blitz-heavy approach as his mentor. Spagnuolo uses a 4-3 base defense with a heavy emphasis on multiple blitz packages, including corner and safety blitzes. While defensive coordinator of the New York Giants, he often used a smaller defensive line, with three or even four defensive ends to further pressure the quarterback.
This philosophy proved successful, with the Giants leading the NFL in sacks in 2007. During Super Bowl XLII, Spagnuolo's defense sacked Tom Brady five times, the most times he had been sacked in any game that season.

The Steelers run a 3-4, the Giants, Eagles run a 4-3. The technical aspects of what coverage to run or what base D is better 3-4 or 4-3 isn't as important as the philosophy of confusion and keeping the O off-balance. All three teams do this very well and have been historically successful on defense due to that type of philosophy. It isn't just that they have better players than anyone else.

I'm not throwing the season out the window or throwing Blache completely under the bus for the season. But from the Giants game the defensive philosophy is the same as last season. In the Giants game we had similar problems; can't get off the field on 3rd down, opponent picking apart the defense. We did manage (2) turnovers, the fumble came from exactly the type of blitz I'm talking about, and the pick was a great play by Landry while Manning was hurried (can't recall if it was a blitz play or great effort by the DL on the hurry).

My point is we have imporved our talent level on the D, to receive the maximum benefit from the over $ 70M invested in the D this off-season, the coaching staff must make the philosophical adjustment to be more aggressive, create confusion, and keep the O off-balance. If Blache does this we will see the same kind of defensive success as the Steelers, Giants and Eagles. If not, we'll still fare statistically well in yds & points but 3rd down %, turnovers, and most importantly coming up with stops in key situations, we will still struggle.

[MTK]

The scheme works, but as the article points out they just need better execution of it.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The scheme works, but as the article points out they just need better execution of it.

But what makes Pittsburgh so much better at it then us? Going by the article I'm assuming we have the same schemes. I'm really not trying to be smartass in any way I'm just curious. If it's purely execution then I'm fine with the scheme because it works very well for Pitt. If they do something differently than us I'd like to know what it is. I may be wrong but I think our personell should put us on the same level as them. I definitely believe our execution is lacking at this point and expect it to get better, it's only been one game and maybe that is the answer.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

But what makes Pittsburgh so much better at it then us? Going by the article I'm assuming we have the same schemes. I'm really not trying to be smartass in any way I'm just curious. If it's purely execution then I'm fine with the scheme because it works very well for Pitt. If they do something differently than us I'd like to know what it is. I may be wrong but I think our personell should put us on the same level as them. I definitely believe our execution is lacking at this point and expect it to get better, it's only been one game and maybe that is the answer.

I would go with that too.

Everyone (not pointing you out) seems to want all these answers after just one game, and really it's just not that cut and dry. We still have 15 games left, alot can and will happen over the course of the season. I think too many people are taking the results of one game, putting it under the microscope, and assuming that's how the rest of the year will go.

[GoSkins!]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I would go with that too.

Everyone (not pointing you out) seems to want all these answers after just one game, and really it's just not that cut and dry. We still have 15 games left, alot can and will happen over the course of the season. I think too many people are taking the results of one game, putting it under the microscope, and assuming that's how the rest of the year will go.

Got to agree with you here.

Unless I'm missing something, the Giants, who won 12 games last year, scored 16 offensive points and our defense caused 1 interception and 1 fumble.

I'm not sure I'm ready to throw the defense under the bus yet.

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by GoSkins!

Got to agree with you here.

Unless I'm missing something, the Giants, who won 12 games last year, scored 16 offensive points and our defense caused 1 interception and 1 fumble.

I'm not sure I'm ready to throw the defense under the bus yet.

And wasn't our Defense on the field for like 80% of the first half? I would say we did an impressive job against the Giants on Defense for being fucked on the field so long because our offense didn't substain drives.