|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-17-2009, 11:15 AM | #1 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 54
Posts: 5,006
|
Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
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:
__________________
Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman |
Advertisements |
09-17-2009, 12:14 PM | #2 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
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.
|
09-17-2009, 12:40 PM | #3 |
MVP
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 46
Posts: 10,164
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
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.
|
09-17-2009, 12:43 PM | #4 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,347
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
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.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' — Jack Kent Cooke, 1996. |
09-17-2009, 12:47 PM | #5 | |
MVP
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 46
Posts: 10,164
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Quote:
|
|
09-17-2009, 12:51 PM | #6 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,347
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Quote:
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' — Jack Kent Cooke, 1996. |
|
09-17-2009, 12:59 PM | #7 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Three Chopt Virginia
Age: 47
Posts: 2,906
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Yes Sir!
__________________
A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood. |
09-17-2009, 01:17 PM | #8 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Quote:
|
|
09-17-2009, 01:22 PM | #9 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
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?
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
09-17-2009, 01:25 PM | #10 |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
The scheme works, but as the article points out they just need better execution of it.
|
09-17-2009, 01:27 PM | #11 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 21,429
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
At least I won't blame this on Hixon
|
09-17-2009, 01:29 PM | #12 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Well we do practice against our own receivers.
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
09-17-2009, 02:02 PM | #13 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
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.
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
09-17-2009, 03:05 PM | #14 | |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Quote:
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. |
|
09-17-2009, 03:26 PM | #15 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 55
Posts: 1,587
|
Re: Interesting read on our secondary philosophy
Quote:
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.
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien |
|
|
|