Meet Lou Spanos

[GridIron26]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Looking at the linebacker position in our defense, we've got alot of reason to be concerned. We're switching to a brand new defense that is schematically and philosophically completely different than the one we've run for the past 6 years. Orkapo aside, there's not a single holdover LB from last year who is ideal for the 3-4 defense. No starting LB on the roster has ever started a 3-4 defense before. our LB coach has never been a position coach before. Our Defensive coordinator is average at best. Our head coach has a history of impatience with defensive coordinators and systems.

Now, as a fan, we can hope for 2010 to be all roses and sunshine, but being realisticy we have no reason to expect our linebacking unit to be anything special at all this year. More reasonable expectations would be a unit ranking in the bottom 10, perhaps even the bottom 5, of the league.

This is exactly my concern for 2010 season, I am confident our offense will improve alot.. But I'm not with defense, I really don't understand why we decided to change the defense, especially at this time when we need some improvements on offense? Our original defense always have been stout, but imagine with the additional aggressive attitude? Our defense would be awesome, especially when the whole D-line men had a year experience together.. Orakpo probably would be moved to DE full time, and not to mention Haynesworth and Carter would be more effective, as well.. But we decided to change the defense and then now, we have unhappy Haynesworth, Carter who already proved that he can't play 3-4 in SF and definitely is not going to rack up another two digits number of sacks next season.. And not to mention, we have some questions on LB positions..

I have to say, I would be surprise if the defense is still good..

[MTK]

The need for change on defense was evident. While they've been stout and what most would call a bend but don't break kind of D, when was the last time this unit produced turnovers with any regularity?? That's why we're seeing a change.

[SirClintonPortis]

Can't go wrong with him. Knows the 3-4 system, developed the LBs up there, 15 years experience. I can't fathom how different being a Linebackers coach is so different from being an assistant LB coach. You're working with the same core of players, just that you're doing to the delegating of tasks to the assistants, etc.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

This is exactly my concern for 2010 season, I am confident our offense will improve alot.. But I'm not with defense, I really don't understand why we decided to change the defense, especially at this time when we need some improvements on offense? Our original defense always have been stout, but imagine with the additional aggressive attitude? Our defense would be awesome, especially when the whole D-line men had a year experience together.. Orakpo probably would be moved to DE full time, and not to mention Haynesworth and Carter would be more effective, as well.. But we decided to change the defense and then now, we have unhappy Haynesworth, Carter who already proved that he can't play 3-4 in SF and definitely is not going to rack up another two digits number of sacks next season.. And not to mention, we have some questions on LB positions..

I have to say, I would be surprise if the defense is still good..

Passing game driven league. Increasing the probability that the QB-involved play is more important than ever nowadays. You can't win the Super Bowl unless you stop the good QBs in the league, and the only way to do that is with a lot of pressure on the quarterback.
Blache also had absolutely ridiculously (in a bad way) predictable blitzes that were bound to be picked up. What's the point of blitzing if it's going to fail?
Also, the run D was starting to suck it up in the latter half of 2008 and the D was supposed to be focused on stopping the run. Haynesworth kind of remedied the problem of a bad short yardage defense and lack of pressure, but he's only one guy and he was contributing mainly because of his talent, not because of any help from a hyper-conservative scheme.

You could question why did they simply get a more aggressive 4-3 coordinator, but whatever the case, Blache's D was only good for stat-padding against bad teams, not for getting to and winning the Super Bowl.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Passing game driven league. Increasing the probability that the QB-involved play is more important than ever nowadays. You can't win the Super Bowl unless you stop the good QBs in the league, and the only way to do that is with a lot of pressure on the quarterback.
Blache also had absolutely ridiculously (in a bad way) predictable blitzes that were bound to be picked up. What's the point of blitzing if it's going to fail?
Also, the run D was starting to suck it up in the latter half of 2008 and the D was supposed to be focused on stopping the run. Haynesworth kind of remedied the problem of a bad short yardage defense and lack of pressure, but he's only one guy and he was contributing mainly because of his talent, not because of any help from a hyper-conservative scheme.

You could question why did they simply get a more aggressive 4-3 coordinator, but whatever the case, Blache's D was only good for stat-padding against bad teams, not for getting to and winning the Super Bowl.

Nice post. Good points.

[GridIron26]

My main point is that we have shown that we can compete with our old style of defense; while coaching is different point from what I'm trying to argue.. We have players that are better fit for 4-3 instead of 3-4.. We have needs on offense that needs to be taken care of; for an example, we drafted Riley with our 2nd pick, while we could have drafted someone else on O-line side.. I would not oppose the idea of changing to 3-4 style, only after we take care of our offense first..

While I agree with you guys that Blache sucks, I never said that he was good in first place.. Which was why I added " with the additional aggressive attitude" in my first post, the defense would be awesome..

But again, this is just my opinion..

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

My main point is that we have shown that we can compete with our old style of defense; while coaching is different point from what I'm trying to argue.. We have players that are better fit for 4-3 instead of 3-4.. We have needs on offense that needs to be taken care of; for an example, we drafted Riley with our 2nd pick, while we could have drafted someone else on O-line side.. I would not oppose the idea of changing to 3-4 style, only after we take care of our offense first..

While I agree with you guys that Blache sucks, I never said that he was good in first place.. Which was why I added " with the additional aggressive attitude" in my first post, the defense would be awesome..

But again, this is just my opinion..

Capers is going to turn out to be a steal for the 3rd of our 7th rd picks he will have RT on lock for years to come.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

While I agree with you guys that Blache sucks, I never said that he was good in first place.. Which was why I added " with the additional aggressive attitude" in my first post, the defense would be awesome..

But again, this is just my opinion..

I never said it wasn't a fair point that they could have went with a more aggressive 4-3. However, to me, conservative and aggressive are polar opposite "styles" or approaches, and the Redskins' old style was primarily conservative approach.

[GridIron26]

Yea... We will see, I hope the transition won't be that bad also I hope the defense wouldn't lose us some games..

[LandrySlice]

Everyone on this board flies off the handle about stuff, lets just wait and see. I have a feeling the D is gonna be just fine, thats one of the staples of Redskin football!