Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Ravens)

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

On Hall's tackling, as others have mentioned, this is just an example, if you really watch the games closely or look at a DVR'd game....well let's just say the "eye in the sky don't lie".

Here is my problem with Hall and fans that support his play. Hall gives up far more plays than he makes, but the ones he makes are INTs and are what people remember from the game.
They don't remember:
- the 14 yds easy completion to Evans where hall wasn't within 2 yds of him
- or the 3 & 4 slant where Hall was abused, but fortunately the WR dropped
- or the whip route that Boldin abused Hall on for a first
- or the weak tackle effort from Hall on Boldin on the Otagwe blown coverage
- or the TD where Evans just blew by our #1 "speed" corner who couldn't recover and made no play on the ball
....and that was in 1 half without me really looking a Hall's tackling (I know he missed at least one other tackle)

Yes the INT for TD was a good play, but is it worth 2 first downs (a 3rd was dropped) to keep drives alive, plus a TD....I don't think so. Trust me on this, no OC fears Hall. On the contrary, OCs look to take advantage of Hall and for the most part they are successful.

Wow interesting break down. All the players make mistakes so why are we bashing Hall? Does he take chances? yes and apparently thats why MS and Haslett like him otherwise he would be gone. Did he screw up on the TD pass and not turn around and either intercept or atleast bat the ball away.... yes he screwed up. I'm sure after watching film he will correct the problem. and yes he was giving players a cushion. why? I don't know... maybe it's by design of the scheme in order to take away something the offense was wanting to do and force them to go shorter to an underneith route? I don't know.

But if we are going to bash Hall then you might as well start bashing all the DL who let the Ravens RB's get 1st downs. So now we need not only a better CB but better DL. I'm also sure some LB's could be replaced as well who were out of position or failed to tackle also.

How soon we forget the tackle he made on a RB alot bigger then him in the Steelers game to keep them from getting a 1st down.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Wow interesting break down. All the players make mistakes so why are we bashing Hall? Does he take chances? yes and apparently thats why MS and Haslett like him otherwise he would be gone. Did he screw up on the TD pass and not turn around and either intercept or atleast bat the ball away.... yes he screwed up. I'm sure after watching film he will correct the problem. and yes he was giving players a cushion. why? I don't know... maybe it's by design of the scheme in order to take away something the offense was wanting to do and force them to go shorter to an underneith route? I don't know.

But if we are going to bash Hall then you might as well start bashing all the DL who let the Ravens RB's get 1st downs. So now we need not only a better CB but better DL. I'm also sure some LB's could be replaced as well who were out of position or failed to tackle also.

How soon we forget the tackle he made on a RB alot bigger then him in the Steelers game to keep them from getting a 1st down.

The ultimate goal of the D is to prevent the opponent from scoring touchdowns. The D is going to force more punts and FGs than pick 6s. Hence, the need for Hall to bring more balance into his play. Hall's like a offensive Dman in hockey, always going for the sexy play will result in some embarassing moments where the opponent scores.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The ultimate goal of the D is to prevent the opponent from scoring touchdowns. The D is going to force more punts and FGs than pick 6s. Hence, the need for Hall to bring more balance into his play. Hall's like a offensive Dman in hockey, always going for the sexy play will result in some embarassing moments where the opponent scores.

Ok, I see your point. This whole defense centers around Hall. Forget the whole other side of the field. If there is a TD then it's all Halls fault. Come on man..... in the first game it was the Safeties who were screwing up but not a word. Hall screws up and we need to replace him because he sucks.

I'm sorry he gets a pass from me. It doesn't matter when it came during the game to me yes he gave up a TD but he redeemed himself by getting a TD also. It's a wash for me. Lets get over it and move on.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Ok, I see your point. This whole defense centers around Hall. Forget the whole other side of the field. If there is a TD then it's all Halls fault. Come on man..... in the first game it was the Safeties who were screwing up but not a word. Hall screws up and we need to replace him because he sucks.

I'm sorry he gets a pass from me. It doesn't matter when it came during the game to me yes he gave up a TD but he redeemed himself by getting a TD also. It's a wash for me. Lets get over it and move on.

Oh, I'm sorry, but there's a better corner who has donned the Redskins uniform and has some rings to boot as well. Forgive me for having high standards. Any rudimentary cost-benefit analysis would show that Hall is a complete idiot for trying so hard to get that one extra pick precisely because picks are extremely low probability events. You let the picks "come to you" and catch those picks(Stonehands could not, nor was his coverage that good). You don't chase them at the expense of coverage because there's going to be MANY, MANY more "no attempts" or incompletions if you cover well.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Oh, I'm sorry, but there's a better corner who has donned the Redskins uniform and has some rings to boot as well. Forgive me for having high standards. Any rudimentary cost-benefit analysis would show that Hall is a complete idiot for trying so hard to get that one extra pick precisely because picks are extremely low probability events. You let the picks "come to you" and catch those picks(Stonehands could not, nor was his coverage that good). You don't chase them at the expense of coverage because there's going to be MANY, MANY more "no attempts" or incompletions if you cover well.

Wait, what? Cornerbacks shouldn't take gambles on picks because of cost-benefit analysis and the low probability of yielding results? Seriously?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Wait, what? Cornerbacks shouldn't take gambles on picks because of cost-benefit analysis and the low probability of yielding results? Seriously?

Yeah I don't get this.

[Meks]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Wait, what? Cornerbacks shouldn't take gambles on picks because of cost-benefit analysis and the low probability of yielding results? Seriously?

Yea, love that playing corner turned into playing poker

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Wow interesting break down. All the players make mistakes so why are we bashing Hall? Does he take chances? yes and apparently thats why MS and Haslett like him otherwise he would be gone. Did he screw up on the TD pass and not turn around and either intercept or atleast bat the ball away.... yes he screwed up. I'm sure after watching film he will correct the problem. and yes he was giving players a cushion. why? I don't know... maybe it's by design of the scheme in order to take away something the offense was wanting to do and force them to go shorter to an underneith route? I don't know.

Not bashing Hall, he's a Skin, I want him to do well. I've also complimented him on his play (when its deserved). I'm just pointing out the reality of who he is. He's a playmaker when opportunities present themselves, but he gives up an inordinant amount of plays that don't show up in the stat line, but do show up upon a good look at the game.

Ask yourself this, take away the 4 INT performace against Cutler & the Bears, are you willing to have 2 INT & 2 FF over 15 games vs. giving up the number of plays Hall does game-in game-out? To me it's not worth it, but we don't have a better option right now.

I'll take less spectacular plays in favor of solid coverage and sure tackling. In a nutshell, when $$$, cap, contract are no consideration, I take Carlos Rogers over Hall (I wish we could've taken the best of both and combine them into one very good CB). We are thin at CB, unfortunately Hall is the best we have. Hopefully Barnes and Wilson develop and we can get some help next off-season.

[SFREDSKIN]

DeAngelo Hall’s Contract Might Prove To Be The End Of Carlos Rogers’ Time In Washington

Furthermore, the presence of another hefty contract is hurting Rogers’ chances at landing a big payday in Washington. DeAngelo Hall is currently entering the third year of a six-year deal worth up to $55 million.

After signing an eight-year, $72 million contract in Oakland, Hall was released by the Raiders just eight games into the 2008 campaign. The Redskins inked him to a one-year deal and he managed to turn that near tryout-like stint into a big contract.

The former Virginia Tech standout has been an enigmatic player whose merits often fail to outweigh his lapses in coverage. Hall has 12 interceptions and a pair of forced fumbles in 36 games, but misses too many tackles and tends to get caught gambling. You can debate as to whether or not he is a good corner, but one thing is unquestionable in my mind: Hall was never worth the money Washington paid him after half a season of work in 2008.

Hall is a high risk, high reward player and his impact can swing the outcome of a game in either direction. He’s certainly worth having on the roster, but not at such a high price. His contract is a classic case of the Redskins overpaying for a player with a reputation for being a headcase.

Secondly, Hall’s deal gives Rogers leverage in the negotiation process. If Hall can make $55 million and struggle in coverage, then why can’t Rogers drop a few picks yet demand similar money?