On Blache

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Hail to the Redskins

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)

That's all that needs to be said. We don't do the exotic things that Pittsburgh or Balt does but the bottom line is if we scored more points we'd be going to the playoffs. I'd even point out that the 19 points should be lower cause of some of the bad situations the offense has put the defense in. If the defense didn't keep us in games we'd be STL. Cinn or Det. bad.

[MrJL]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

That's all that needs to be said. We don't do the exotic things that Pittsburgh or Balt does but the bottom line is if we scored more points we'd be going to the playoffs. I'd even point out that the 19 points should be lower cause of some of the bad situations the offense has put the defense in. If the defense didn't keep us in games we'd be STL. Cinn or Det. bad.

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.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by MrJL

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.

IMO if we used more disguise and more zone-blitz looks we would get more pressure, more sacks, more turnovers.



All war is based on deception.

Hence that general is skilful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skilful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by MrJL

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.

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?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

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?

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.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

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.

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:

"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1: 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."

[MrJL]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

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:

"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1: 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."

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

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

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:

"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1: 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."

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.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

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.

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.

[maroonandblack30]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

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.

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 statistics showed that they would succeed in the long run..... I'm just saying.

[MrJL]

Originally Posted by maroonandblack30

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 statistics showed that they would succeed in the long run..... I'm just saying.

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?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

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.

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. You cannot have read my post and still deny this. Eleven 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:

• 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.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

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. You cannot have read my post and still deny this. Eleven 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:

• 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.

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.