A good off-season review for the Redskins

[MTK]

Of course the coaches can be wrong... but they are still far more trustworthy and knowledgeable about the personnel than we can ever dream of being. I never said they shouldn't be questioned, I don't see why one small sign of support is seen as some sort of homeristic blind allegiance.

We don't have the benefit of working with these guys and seeing them up close on a daily basis.

It seems to be clear that the coaches felt last year's defensive problems stemmed from injuries and coverage issues in the secondary. They've addressed the secondary and they claim the defensive line is now healthy and will be in attack mode more often this year.

The beauty of it is we'll see if they are right soon enough.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Well, who was right? This armchair fan has said for several seasons we needed more help along the D-line!

I think the 2006 season backs up the armchair fan, not the coaches.

Well 05 you would have been wrong and 06 correct but if asked after 05 would our D be our weak link in 06 most people if not all would have said no way.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

I give our off-season is a B.

[JDALY27]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Of course the coaches can be wrong... but they are still far more trustworthy and knowledgeable about the personnel than we can ever dream of being. I never said they shouldn't be questioned, I don't see why one small sign of support is seen as some sort of homeristic blind allegiance.

We don't have the benefit of working with these guys and seeing them up close on a daily basis.

It seems to be clear that the coaches felt last year's defensive problems stemmed from injuries and coverage issues in the secondary. They've addressed the secondary and they claim the defensive line is now healthy and will be in attack mode more often this year.

The beauty of it is we'll see if they are right soon enough.

I agree with you here but don't forget about the terrible LB play!

[JoeRedskin]

Points we all agree on:

1: Last Years D sucked and, as part of that: a) The line put on no pressure; b) Our LB's were pushed around and pretty much non-factors in both run and pass defense; and our secondary was often out of position and, even when in position, didn't have the horses to run with the big dogs (ahhh mixed metaphors, gotta love'em - this year we're gonnna ring their clocks).

2: We have taken significant steps to improve our secondary.

3. With the addition of Fletcher and the good reports on Rocky, there is reason to hope that our LB play will be greatly improved.

4. JC's play at QB is likely the key to the offense.

Points upon which there is a divergence of opinion:

1. The DL will be fine this year. Essentially, as has been pointed out by others, the coaches clearly made the choice to upgrade the back 7 as opposed to the front 4. The point of contention, it seems to me, is whether or not this was a mistake b/c I think it unreasonable to try and entirely revamp/replace all three elements of the D. I think the DL will be fine but unspectacular. Not sure I trust GW as much as I used to, mainly b/c of his relieance on older players to start on the line. But you never know - three years ago we went into the season and GW said "trust me - AP can do the job". He was right. Maybe it went to his head and he was sure he could make anyone into a star. Maybe last year knocked him down a notch. Maybe, maybe maybe...

I think, when it comes to the DL, we are all crossing our fingers and hoping GW isn't talking out his butt when he says it will be fine. I hope he is right and, I choose to believe (at this point anyway), that last year was an anomaly in his coaching career and that, this year, he will return to the ranks of respected D-Cood's.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Right. It's like everyone thinks that we overachieved in 2004 and 2005. Sure, that might be true to some extent, but there's more to it than just overachieving.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Right. It's like everyone thinks that we overachieved in 2004 and 2005. Sure, that might be true to some extent, but there's more to it than just overachieving.

just wondering how did we overachieve in 2004.

[Hog1]

Nice post Joe.
I think part of the choice to rebuild in the D-secondary, rather than the line has to be price and availability of top shelf linemen. Plus we have to possible replacements/stars in the wings. Just like Joe said, gotta' trust GW

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

just wondering how did we overachieve in 2004.

I'm assuming he meant the defense specifically, not the team as a whole.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

I'm assuming he meant the defense specifically, not the team as a whole.

I got it. It was kind of misleading at first.

[dmek25]

hahaha. read up on your favorite football team. might have been the best offensive team, of all time

[hail_2_da_skins]

I think the off-season moves rank a C for me. The team did a great job of upgrading the secondary and the linebackers, but I am really worried about the defensive line. It's my personal belief, that excellent defensive line play can make a mediocre secondary and linebackers look good. Pressure on the quarterback and line stuffing protects the back seven. It's especially bad for the Redskins because the defensive line has been neglected for years. Daniels and Griffin are very good linemen, but they are often injured and the drop off from starters to backups is tremendous. Golston and Montgomery will have to really step it up this year and I think coach Williams believes they will. I will believe it when I see it. I'm hoping it will work out but I have my doubts.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by hail_2_da_skins

I think the off-season moves rank a C for me. The team did a great job of upgrading the secondary and the linebackers, but I am really worried about the defensive line. It's my personal belief, that excellent defensive line play can make a mediocre secondary and linebackers look good. Pressure on the quarterback and line stuffing protects the back seven. It's especially bad for the Redskins because the defensive line has been neglected for years. Daniels and Griffin are very good linemen, but they are often injured and the drop off from starters to backups is tremendous. Golston and Montgomery will have to really step it up this year and I think coach Williams believes they will. I will believe it when I see it. I'm hoping it will work out but I have my doubts.

Well, that's kinda the crux of the disagreement. Someone posted (and it got reprinted in JLC's Washington Post blog) that the significant difference between the 2005 and 2006 D's was the drop off in game changing plays made by the secondary. Undoubtedly, the drop off of impact plays was the result of poor play by both the line and the secondary but which was more to blame for the drop off?

The coaches seem to think it was the back 7 that failed and that the line, as constituted, will create enough pressure to make things work. As I said, given their track record, I will go with the coaches at this point. (Disclaimer: Given the obvious apparent need at DL, I reserve the right to w/draw my endorsement after four games if the D is performing poorly AND the DL is arguably the main culprit).

I think its fair to say that everyone here would feel better if a playmaker or two had been signed for the line and that we all have our doubts concerning the DL. It's just the level of concern that seems to be in debate.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

just wondering how did we overachieve in 2004.

I think that some people feel that because we weren't highly ranked the year before that we brought in a bunch of retreads and undrafted players, only to ascend to number three in the league that year...

Still though, there's more to it than that in my opinion.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I think that some people feel that because we weren't highly ranked the year before that we brought in a bunch of retreads and undrafted players, only to ascend to number three in the league that year...

Still though, there's more to it than that in my opinion.

I honestly see us going back to the top 10 in defense this year.