Redskins move to 34 has paid off.

[skinsfaninok]

High turnover rate fueling Redskins' D - NFC East Blog - ESPN

Skins are 2nd in the league with 17 forced turnovers and are only giving up 19 points per game which is 10th in the league. I said after the Philly game that I wouldn't trash Haslett anymore and I haven't since.

7 Points vs Dallas
12 Points vs Philly
13 points vs Green Bay
14 points vs Chicago (7 points actually)

[skinsfan_nn]

Little early to make that blanket statement. We have a lot of room for improvement on the defensive side of the football, and yes we looked good against the bears for once.

We don't have the personnel to run a 3-4 in a dominant fashion by any means. We are missing a few key ingredients. First and foremost a true Nose. As well as we have a aged D-line/ other key parts/players of the prior regime base D that have not made a good transition or just don't have the talent IMO to be starting on a top tier D in the 3-4.

I hope to see much improvement as we continue on with this Defense, as we have one heck of a stout second half of the season we are getting ready to be facing and apparently we are gonna need all the help we can get if this offense doesn't get moving quickly.

I will hold judgment and see how we finish the second half of this season before jumping to this conclusion of the 3-4 is any great success. Hopefully as we are heading into a post season run.

But this is way to pre-mature based on what I've been watching outta this inconsistent team in all phases the first 7 weeks, I just can't wait to see this team play a complete 60 minutes of football on any given Sunday. The GREAT news we have improved in some areas like forced turnovers and first and foremost the WIN COLUMN!

[skinsfaninok]

I agree and I think in another year or 2 we could have a great 34 defense in Washington. I am impressed though so far this season, 17 to s is pretty damn good

[LavaRnChad]

I'm still not totally sold on the 3-4, despite the turnovers because it's too early and we've been extremly fortunate because we are still playing people out of place. Good offenses make our D look weak. Happy with the turnovers though.

[gibbsisgod]

I found this in the Detroit Free Press. The bold portion is an amazing stat IMO.

STREAKS, STATS AND NOTES — Detroit’s win over Washington in 2009 snapped a 19-game losing streak. ... Lions QB Matthew Stafford is expected to play for the first time since the season opener, when he hurt his throwing shoulder against Chicago. ... Detroit RB Jahvid Best leads all rookies with 534 yards from scrimmage. ... Lions have gone three-and-out on 31.1% of their offensive series, the worst mark in the league. ... Although the Lions are 1-5, they have scored more points (146) than they have allowed (140). ... The Lions lost 18 straight to the Redskins in 1968-97 but have won three of seven since then. ... Detroit is averaging a league-worst 3.44 yards on first down. ... Washington has allowed 15 drives of at least 10 plays, the most in NFL, but only three ended in TDs. ... Washington CB DeAngelo Hall tied the NFL record with four interceptions last week. ... The Redskins have allowed a league-high 106 plays of 10-plus yards. ... Washington’s Ryan Torain ran for a career-high 125 yards against the Bears. ... Washington QB Donovan McNabb has thrown at least a touchdown and an interception in each of the last five games. ... Detroit’s Stefan Logan is fourth in the league at 30.2 yards per kickoff return, but the Redskins lead the NFL in kickoff coverage. ... Washington’s Santana Moss is nine yards receiving short of 8,000.



Read more: Lions vs. Redskins preview capsule | freep.com | Detroit Free Press Lions vs. Redskins preview capsule | freep.com | Detroit Free Press

[irish]

It was obvious the D the Skins were using wasnt really going to take them anywhere so a change was needed. I think its been so far so good with the 34. Sure there's room for improvement but this is a much more dynamic D than in years gone by.

[skinsfaninok]

I agree Irish, we were always top 10 but never forced any turnovers.

[aceinthehouse]

This is the difference in what I've seen in the transition from the 4-3 to the 3-4.

In the 4-3...we were very tough to drive on...more 3 & outs.and very tough between the 20's...but then we allowed that homerun ball...that 60 yard bomb..or that 55 yard run for a TD....we also struggled to stop teams in the redzone. So even though we didn't do too bad in yards allowed,we still gave up the back-breaker play late in the game..or the defense was so tired from an inept offense,they couldn't hold up any longer....Never-the-less...our defense had many chances or opportunities to stop teams late in the game or 4th qtr drive..and failed to do so on many occasions. We also didn't cause the turnovers needed at certain points in the games nor at crititical points in the games to give our offense another shot to win it.

In the 3-4...Yes,we are giving up way more yards than before,more 10+ play drives that truly can wear down a defense. But we are also getting those huge INT returns...those forced fumbles or even sacks. We are very tough in the redzone and even better in Goal line situations. Once our Defense has their backs to the wall,we are very stubborn to deal with. We also use exotic blitzes and zone coverage schemes that confused, even the best QB out there in Peyton Manning. Sure we have given up a play or 2 that goes for 20 or 30 yards...but we have a knack at getting it right back,or creating turnovers or sacks to back them right back up. We are also pretty good at creating offensive penalties like Holding and false starts from all the confusion we cause with our schemes. Just ask Brian Orakpo about that. Shoot,that alone has given us 1 win already...

Summary,Our Defense may not be a solid brick wall as before in the 4-3,but they are very opportunistic in creating havoc and problems to make Offenses uncomfortable. I also see guys flying to the ball a lot more than before..a lot more aggressive. All in all,we are keeping teams out of the end zone when it truly matters and taking advantage of Offensive mistakes. Our offense although not great,is a whole lot better than before and are at least having a few drives a game to give our Defense a little rest,than the usual 3 & outs break before our D-comes back on the field routine. Which probably has a lot more to do with the turnovers we create on Defense and the Field position we give the offense and the opportunities to score as well.

[MTK]

Points allowed and turnovers are better indicators of a successful defense than yards allowed. So in that regard, you've got to say so far so good. And things should only get better.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Points allowed and turnovers are better indicators of a successful defense than yards allowed. So in that regard, you've got to say so far so good. And things should only get better.

I agree, when they were giving up too many points people were focused on how few yards they gave up. Now that they are actually keep teams from scoring and creating turnovers people want to focus on how many yards they give up. Who cares how many yards they give up, its an almost meaningless stat.

[KI Skins Fan]

One of the key reasons Mike Shanahan gave for switching to the 3-4 was to create more turnovers. So far, that part of the plan has worked very well. Also, the defense has had some outstanding individual plays at key times during games to stop opponents. The defensive players play hard and they never quit. That is admirable.

They have also been lucky. If there hadn't been a holding penalty called, a dropped pass in the end zone, and a poor coaching decision not to challenge a play that would have been a touchdown instead of a turnover, then we might have lost three more games. What would we be saying about the defense then?

That said, this defense gives up way too many easy yards. For example, opponents can complete short passes over the middle all day long. That is going to bite them in the butt in future games.

I recognize that Haslett is playing a soft pass defense in part to cover for deficiencies in 3-4 personnel. That problem can be covered up to some extent but it can only be fixed through a combination of the draft, trades, and free agency. It's ironic to me that Coach Shanahan, the Elder claims that the Redskins have the personnel to play a 3-4 while Haslett covers up for the lack of 3-4 personnel.

My point is that I think the decision to go to a 3-4 had little to do with the personnel at hand. It is a force fit. I don't think they're very good at it but the players have given a great effort, the DC has covered up some weaknesses as best he can, and they've been lucky at times. I think it's going to take two or three more years for the Redskins to build a solid 3-4 defense.

[MTK]

People seem to get caught up on this notion that we don't have the personnel for the 3-4, but in reality we're not running a straight 3-4. Haslett said they've lined up in the 3-4 about 35% of the snaps so far. This is more of a hybrid D than a true 3-4. Just thought that's worth pointing out again. Also, 3 of the 4 picks Hall had last week came in man coverage, so I also think that we're not playing as much 'soft zones' as we think.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

People seem to get caught up on this notion that we don't have the personnel for the 3-4, but in reality we're not running a straight 3-4. Haslett said they've lined up in the 3-4 about 35% of the snaps so far. This is more of a hybrid D than a true 3-4. Just thought that's worth pointing out again. Also, 3 of the 4 picks Hall had last week came in man coverage, so I also think that we're not playing as much 'soft zones' as we think.

Then why do you think we're giving up so much yardage?

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

People seem to get caught up on this notion that we don't have the personnel for the 3-4, but in reality we're not running a straight 3-4. Haslett said they've lined up in the 3-4 about 35% of the snaps so far. This is more of a hybrid D than a true 3-4. Just thought that's worth pointing out again. Also, 3 of the 4 picks Hall had last week came in man coverage, so I also think that we're not playing as much 'soft zones' as we think.

We have more defensive looks than any team I've ever seen. 3-4, 4-3, Nickel, 1-5-4, 0-7-4...endless.



I 'd like to name our defensive scheme the "Mutant scheme".

Fits in well with the theme of the site right now too.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

Then why do you think we're giving up so much yardage?

Look at the teams on our schedule so far. Been a brutal stretch and we made it through nicely.