On Blache

Its hard to knock a top 5 defense.
I think that Blache is a decent DC but has limits.

His defense line appears designed to stop the run and struggles getting pressure.
Our ends rarely just go balls out at the QB is always seems like a controlled rush.
As opposed to the Colts, their defensive line is all about pass rush and they try to stop the run on the way to the QB.

Another problem that i've heard mentioned in this thread is that our blitzes lack disguise.
Blache doesn't really hide the fact that he is blitzing, opposing teams can easily read and adjust to our blitzes. This has put our corners (Smoot, Rogers) in a bad spot when we all out blitz.

Steelers, Ravens, Giants, Eagles, Bears all have a very creative blitz/package with lots of zone-blitz.
They show that 7-10 are blitzing but often only rush 4 but which 4 is difficult to figure out pre-snap.
The brief confusion this disguise creates is often enough to give the pass rusher the advantage, the confusion also distorts the QBs reads.
In the face of an blitz look QBs often check to a hot read, against a zone-blitz they might find a DE or LB sitting in the hot zone forcing him to hold the ball or even an interception.
(e.g. DT -Ngata & DE/LB Suggs both have 2 picks)

The defense has done enough to keep us in most games, but i agree with GT that Blache isn't getting the most out of our current defense in terms of pressure.

My problems with Blache:

1) Where has Chris Wilson been? Where was James playing time? (when we had him)-Where was Rob Jackson early in the season? Why wasn't their a rotation at DE earlier in the year?

2) Why doesn't Rocky blitz/rush more (instead cover where he isn't that great)

3) Why doesn't Blache turn the D-line loose more?

4) Why doesn't Zorn zone-blitz or disguise the blitzes?

Blache doesn't turn the D-Line loose because he believes stopping the run is more important. Zorn doesn't call the blitzes. Wilson has been in occasionally. James was even in once in a blue There is a rotation at DE when everyone is healthy. Taylor, Carter, Evans and Wilson

The Short List:

Bill Cowher - A solid manager and a good judge of talent. Will get the most out of his players, and unlike Jim Zorn, will utilize whatever talent is on the roster.

Gregg Blache - Bring in new offensive and defensive coordinators. I love the way Blache has handled himself, and his players, during these most difficult times. We don't need a genius/guru for a head coach, we need a leader of men. The players respect Gregg Blache, he's an experienced good leader. We already have a lot of talent on the roster. We're 5 players away (2 D-Linemen, 2 O-Lineman, 1 bad-ass pass rushing linebacker) from being a serious contender, and after we get Albert Haynesworth via free agency we'll be that much closer.

That interview Zorn gave earlier in the week he was asked if he would adjust his scheme in order to better utilize the players he has, his response was probably not. I just don't know if he gets it. To say he's developing as a head coach is insanity to me, these are the professional ranks. We don't have time for him to figure it out. Either he's ready to lead or he's not, and it has nothing to do with the fact that this is his rookie year as a head coach. For example; I bet Joe Gibbs can't change a flat tire, and I've heard Tony Stewart say they keep him as far from the garage as possible. Some people are natural leaders and some you can’t put in charge. No matter how smart they are.

The Short List:

Bill Cowher - A solid manager and a good judge of talent. Will get the most out of his players, and unlike Jim Zorn, will utilize whatever talent is on the roster.

Gregg Blache - Bring in new offensive and defensive coordinators. I love the way Blache has handled himself, and his players, during these most difficult times. We don't need a genius/guru for a head coach, we need a leader of men. The players respect Gregg Blache, he's an experienced good leader. We already have a lot of talent on the roster. We're 5 players away (2 D-Linemen, 2 O-Lineman, 1 bad-ass pass rushing linebacker) from being a serious contender, and after we get Albert Haynesworth via free agency we'll be that much closer.

That interview Zorn gave earlier in the week he was asked if he would adjust his scheme in order to better utilize the players he has, his response was probably not. I just don't know if he gets it. To say he's developing as a head coach is insanity to me, these are the professional ranks. We don't have time for him to figure it out. Either he's ready to lead or he's not, and it has nothing to do with the fact that this is his rookie year as a head coach. For example; I bet Joe Gibbs can't change a flat tire, and I've heard Tony Stewart say they keep him as far from the garage as possible. Some people are natural leaders and some you can’t put in charge. No matter how smart they are.

Does anyone really think Tennessee will let Haynesworth get away??

OK this is the last comment I'll make on this subject.

You originally called ME out on not understanding statistics. Then you said that QBs we face have worse days against everyone else in the league.

I then pointed out that we are ranked in the top 10 in pretty much every pass defense category and that you were wrong. I showed, with CLEAR statistics that only one QB in 14 games has a romotely better day that usual. You read, and obviously understand what I was pointing out because of the next ludicrous statement you make in response, then act like YOU can't understand the logic of statement made because you can't make a truly valid argument to facts & numbers I present.

You actually make a mocking statement saying we have faced "A bunch of horrible passers"??

Romo? McNabb? Manning? Roethlisberger? Hasselbeck? Brees? Warner? These are horrible passers?

Whatever. I can't argue with this kind of talk anymore.

Look, I'm not trying to bash you here, but I will defend myself when someone attacks my intelligence.

I can't really make myself much more clear. Anyone who thinks we have a "below average pass defense" should NOT be trying to belittle or trash ANYONE else's statements.

If you are this site's premeir football analyst and feel like you have to belittle facts someone else points out, because you feel threatened (I guess), don't worry, most people don't have the time to put in the hours you do... including me. (Oh, sorry for the ... now you may not be able to understand my whole post)I don't think this should be about you vs. me: who knows more? Why would I stoop down to that level? It's not an argument that anyone on this board, besides you, should or would give a crap about.

I never once accused you of not knowing what you are talking about. I thought your argument was built the wrong way (kinda like the Redskins). You decided, presumably based on the games you've seen, that the Redskins defense is great, offense is terrible, and that you might be able to prove this statistically. Statistics were never designed to be used like that. The context-neutral statistics I cite in ALL of my game reviews suggest that the defense and offense are close to equally responsible for the downfall of the team. Not coincidentally, this is also what I see on film. Imagine that.

What you did bring to light is that, the Redskins have faced a bunch of passers that are having awful years. When you cite Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck, you're only helping to defend my point. When you cite Brees, and Warner, you're actually bringing solid evidence to the contrary. Which makes this a good discussion. Those guys are MVP candidates. We shut them down. Why haven't we done that all season long?! Why did Ryan Fitzpatrick and Mark Bulger succeed where Brees and Warner failed? Why are we totally helpless against Eli Manning and Tony Romo (and possibly McNabb, depending on the outcome of Sunday's game). Should we be?

But the problem here is that you are lumping the good passers with the bad passers with the disappointingly bad, with the surprisingly bad, and then you use a series of double standards. ("Don't you think Roethlisberger is great?! What about Hasselbeck?")

I enjoyed your game by game breakdown of how passers did against us. You also changed the metric you were using to suit your argument, because the primary metrics you used, completion percentage and QB Rating, did not fit your argument in all the cases. Which means, that by definition, your argument was weak. I didn't have to respond, because you already knew from the research that you weren't as right as you thought you were. That was MY point.

The main thing, is I can't respond to your point, until you make a point. I think you are trying to say that we have an above average pass defense. But your defense for it is weak. Since you can't come to terms with me on proper opponent adjustments for the Leftwich half, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Hasselbeck, Dan Orlovsky, Mark Bulger, or against one of the other passers we should have shut down, but didn't, I suggest we shrink the sample and talk about a case by case study.

Brees and Warner struggled against this pass defense, like you said. Romo and Manning, in those must win games, have had no trouble whatsoever, broken pinky, wet ball, whatever the conditions. Why exactly, are you contesting, that the performance of two home games in September should outweigh two more important home games in November in your argument? Why are you giving the defense a pass in those games?

Very simple. The two best performances vs. our two worst. All else equal, why should September games be weighed more heavily in your mind than November games within the division. Are injuries a factor in your mind? Or are you simply refusing to admit the defense f'ed up at any point this season.

---------------------------------

PS -- If you bother to respond to this, you first must consider the fact that you might be wrong, and I might be right here. If you can't do that, don't bother responding to this. You will be wasting your time.

You aren't necessarily wrong, that's not what I'm trying to say. But if your whole purpose of reading this is to try to prove, against strong evidence to the contrary, that you are right, it's just not worth what you are going to put into it. I mean, you obviously haven't put as much thought into it as I have.

And don't bother with any personal attacks either. You haven't been around here long enough to offend me.

game set and match to gtripp

I don't think this should be about you vs. me: who knows more? Why would I stoop down to that level? It's not an argument that anyone on this board, besides you, should or would give a crap about.

I never once accused you of not knowing what you are talking about. I thought your argument was built the wrong way (kinda like the Redskins). You decided, presumably based on the games you've seen, that the Redskins defense is great, offense is terrible, and that you might be able to prove this statistically. Statistics were never designed to be used like that. The context-neutral statistics I cite in ALL of my game reviews suggest that the defense and offense are close to equally responsible for the downfall of the team. Not coincidentally, this is also what I see on film. Imagine that.

What you did bring to light is that, the Redskins have faced a bunch of passers that are having awful years. When you cite Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck, you're only helping to defend my point. When you cite Brees, and Warner, you're actually bringing solid evidence to the contrary. Which makes this a good discussion. Those guys are MVP candidates. We shut them down. Why haven't we done that all season long?! Why did Ryan Fitzpatrick and Mark Bulger succeed where Brees and Warner failed? Why are we totally helpless against Eli Manning and Tony Romo (and possibly McNabb, depending on the outcome of Sunday's game). Should we be?

But the problem here is that you are lumping the good passers with the bad passers with the disappointingly bad, with the surprisingly bad, and then you use a series of double standards. ("Don't you think Roethlisberger is great?! What about Hasselbeck?")

I enjoyed your game by game breakdown of how passers did against us. You also changed the metric you were using to suit your argument, because the primary metrics you used, completion percentage and QB Rating, did not fit your argument in all the cases. Which means, that by definition, your argument was weak. I didn't have to respond, because you already knew from the research that you weren't as right as you thought you were. That was MY point.

The main thing, is I can't respond to your point, until you make a point. I think you are trying to say that we have an above average pass defense. But your defense for it is weak. Since you can't come to terms with me on proper opponent adjustments for the Leftwich half, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Hasselbeck, Dan Orlovsky, Mark Bulger, or against one of the other passers we should have shut down, but didn't, I suggest we shrink the sample and talk about a case by case study.

Brees and Warner struggled against this pass defense, like you said. Romo and Manning, in those must win games, have had no trouble whatsoever, broken pinky, wet ball, whatever the conditions. Why exactly, are you contesting, that the performance of two home games in September should outweigh two more important home games in November in your argument? Why are you giving the defense a pass in those games?

Very simple. The two best performances vs. our two worst. All else equal, why should September games be weighed more heavily in your mind than November games within the division. Are injuries a factor in your mind? Or are you simply refusing to admit the defense f'ed up at any point this season.

---------------------------------

PS -- If you bother to respond to this, you first must consider the fact that you might be wrong, and I might be right here. If you can't do that, don't bother responding to this. You will be wasting your time.

You aren't necessarily wrong, that's not what I'm trying to say. But if your whole purpose of reading this is to try to prove, against strong evidence to the contrary, that you are right, it's just not worth what you are going to put into it. I mean, you obviously haven't put as much thought into it as I have.

And don't bother with any personal attacks either. You haven't been around here long enough to offend me.


OK, first of all, I have been on this website since February 2004. Again, I am REALLY having issue here with your READING ABILITY. (It IS right under my name) In case you are not sure how to interpret THIS stat, I have been here 2 years longer than you. I am here all the time reading, but I don't always post due to ignorance and attacks most people feel like they have to respond with, rather than just talk about the Skins (you started this back and forth when you said that I was "100% wrong" and smugly pronounced that I "don't know how to use statistics")

Again and again you TOTALLY disregard things I say to try and twist things to support your argument and can't FATHOM that YOU ARE WRONG.

And Matty, I am suprised by your two cents. I have been here for 4 years and pretty much respected what you contribute. But, if you have read this whole back and forth discussion and you think that I have been "proven" wrong somewhow, well...

1) Our offense - 16.5 points per game - 29th in the NFL
2) Our defense - 19.0 points per game - 7th in the NFL

OK, first things first. If talk about making a clear enough point for YOU to understand... the ONLY STAT THAT MATTERS IS POINTS. If you don't agree with this, you are clueless.

How anyone can say that our defense is EQUALLY responsible for our record is just trying to in some way prove how insightful they are by using some complex game film, existential blathering argument. I mean, you have used no argument other than your words and your "I have watched the game film" argument over and over while spewing wrong fact after wrong fact with no stats to back it up (see Bulger & Romo below). What "Overwhelming evidence"?? What your incredible game film analysis?? I am soooo lost as to why exactly I am wrong here.

I mean, 24 of the 32 teams in the NFL AVERAGE MORE THAN 19.0 points per game. (I'm sure ALL of those teams would be happy with our D)

Regardless, if you ask a person who actually gets PAID to "break down film," (meaning they DO know what they are talking about & have a job in the NFL) if 16.5 points per game is something they wish for their offense, I HOPE you can grasp what their answer would be.

If you ask the same person if they would take a defense which allows on 19.0 points per game, THEY WOULDN'T COMPLAIN.

Now about the COMPLETE OMISSIONS and overlooks of clear points I debunk of yours...

You keep bringing up Bulger's game against the Redskins for some reason like he tortched us. I literally am laughing about it right now. The guy had a whopping 93 YARDS PASSING with 1:06 seconds left in the game (!) when LEIGH TORRANCE misplayed his coverage and gave up the 43 yard hail mary heave. For the game, he had a 57% completion and 72 QB Rating. Come on man, really, this is rediculous.

Also, why are we helpless against Manning & Romo?? I JUST posted this but let me try one more time.

Manning's combined stats vs Skins this year was 57.9% comp (his overall for the year is 60.3%) and his QB Rating was 74.8 (86.4 overall). Those ARE worse right??

Romo's stats vs Skins - 63.5% completion (63.1% overall) and his QB Rating was 81.7 (his overall rating is 98.3). Here again you provide more stupidity wth your words. In that week 11 game (you know, the "September game" 8 weeks after the Arizona game), Romo was 19-for-27 for a whopping 198 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs, and a robust QBR of 72.8. This is a perfect example of the ignorance that is getting absurd. You call me out for discrediting this performance when it clearly only SUPPORTS my statements.

Also, you are saying that Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck are terrible QBs? or are you trying to use the "bad year" excuse like playing either is easy pickings for a defense? Again, ask a REAL, paid film watcher and ask them if these two guys are bums and that their defense SHOULD shut them down.

Regardless, Roethlisberger completed 29% of his passes and had a 15.1 QB Rating. You are saying these are his average output numbers??

Also, and finally, I point out that only 1 QB in 14 has had a BETTER DAY THAN HIS averages ALL SEASON LONG. That is a clear statement/argument for our pass defense CLEARLY not being below average. And by the way, way to COMPLETELY ignore my stats on our pass defense being in the top 10 in every major category.

Anyway, I wouldn't have responded, because I was to the point where I was realizing you just REFUSE to admit you MIGHT be wrong, just once, with you being the "expert and all". But to see other people buy it, Matty, I had to make sure I cleared the air.

Oh, and let me point out as a final word; The Detroit Lions average more points per game than the Washington Redskins. (17.1 to 16.5)

Does anyone really think Tennessee will let Haynesworth get away??


They had to franchise him to keep him last year, and they're not allowed to this year. So they might not have a say

OK, first of all, I have been on this website since February 2004. Again, I am REALLY having issue here with your READING ABILITY. (It IS right under my name) In case you are not sure how to interpret THIS stat, I have been here 2 years longer than you. I am here all the time reading, but I don't always post due to ignorance and attacks most people feel like they have to respond with, rather than just talk about the Skins (you started this back and forth when you said that I was "100% wrong" and smugly pronounced that I "don't know how to use statistics")

Again and again you TOTALLY disregard things I say to try and twist things to support your argument and can't FATHOM that YOU ARE WRONG.

And Matty, I am suprised by your two cents. I have been here for 4 years and pretty much respected what you contribute. But, if you have read this whole back and forth discussion and you think that I have been "proven" wrong somewhow, well...

1) Our offense - 16.5 points per game - 29th in the NFL
2) Our defense - 19.0 points per game - 7th in the NFL

OK, first things first. If talk about making a clear enough point for YOU to understand... the ONLY STAT THAT MATTERS IS POINTS. If you don't agree with this, you are clueless.

How anyone can say that our defense is EQUALLY responsible for our record is just trying to in some way prove how insightful they are by using some complex game film, existential blathering argument. I mean, you have used no argument other than your words and your "I have watched the game film" argument over and over while spewing wrong fact after wrong fact with no stats to back it up (see Bulger & Romo below). What "Overwhelming evidence"?? What your incredible game film analysis?? I am soooo lost as to why exactly I am wrong here.

I mean, 24 of the 32 teams in the NFL AVERAGE MORE THAN 19.0 points per game. (I'm sure ALL of those teams would be happy with our D)

Regardless, if you ask a person who actually gets PAID to "break down film," (meaning they DO know what they are talking about & have a job in the NFL) if 16.5 points per game is something they wish for their offense, I HOPE you can grasp what their answer would be.

If you ask the same person if they would take a defense which allows on 19.0 points per game, THEY WOULDN'T COMPLAIN.

Now about the COMPLETE OMISSIONS and overlooks of clear points I debunk of yours...

You keep bringing up Bulger's game against the Redskins for some reason like he tortched us. I literally am laughing about it right now. The guy had a whopping 93 YARDS PASSING with 1:06 seconds left in the game (!) when LEIGH TORRANCE misplayed his coverage and gave up the 43 yard hail mary heave. For the game, he had a 57% completion and 72 QB Rating. Come on man, really, this is rediculous.

Also, why are we helpless against Manning & Romo?? I JUST posted this but let me try one more time.

Manning's combined stats vs Skins this year was 57.9% comp (his overall for the year is 60.3%) and his QB Rating was 74.8 (86.4 overall). Those ARE worse right??

Romo's stats vs Skins - 63.5% completion (63.1% overall) and his QB Rating was 81.7 (his overall rating is 98.3). Here again you provide more stupidity wth your words. In that week 11 game (you know, the "September game" 8 weeks after the Arizona game), Romo was 19-for-27 for a whopping 198 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs, and a robust QBR of 72.8. This is a perfect example of the ignorance that is getting absurd. You call me out for discrediting this performance when it clearly only SUPPORTS my statements.

Also, you are saying that Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck are terrible QBs? or are you trying to use the "bad year" excuse like playing either is easy pickings for a defense? Again, ask a REAL, paid film watcher and ask them if these two guys are bums and that their defense SHOULD shut them down.

Regardless, Roethlisberger completed 29% of his passes and had a 15.1 QB Rating. You are saying these are his average output numbers??

Also, and finally, I point out that only 1 QB in 14 has had a BETTER DAY THAN HIS averages ALL SEASON LONG. That is a clear statement/argument for our pass defense CLEARLY not being below average. And by the way, way to COMPLETELY ignore my stats on our pass defense being in the top 10 in every major category.

Anyway, I wouldn't have responded, because I was to the point where I was realizing you just REFUSE to admit you MIGHT be wrong, just once, with you being the "expert and all". But to see other people buy it, Matty, I had to make sure I cleared the air.

Oh, and let me point out as a final word; The Detroit Lions average more points per game than the Washington Redskins. (17.1 to 16.5)

That's all that needs to be said. We don't do the exotic things that Pittsburgh or Balt does but the bottom line is if we scored more points we'd be going to the playoffs. I'd even point out that the 19 points should be lower cause of some of the bad situations the offense has put the defense in. If the defense didn't keep us in games we'd be STL. Cinn or Det. bad.

That's all that needs to be said. We don't do the exotic things that Pittsburgh or Balt does but the bottom line is if we scored more points we'd be going to the playoffs. I'd even point out that the 19 points should be lower cause of some of the bad situations the offense has put the defense in. If the defense didn't keep us in games we'd be STL. Cinn or Det. bad.


The Offense has rarely put the Defense in bad positions. They don't turn over the ball much. Maybe the special teams has.

But maybe if the did some of the exotic things Pitt or Baltimore did teams would score less than nineteen. Or the offense would get the ball in better field position.

The Offense has rarely put the Defense in bad positions. They don't turn over the ball much. Maybe the special teams has.

But maybe if the did some of the exotic things Pitt or Baltimore did teams would score less than nineteen. Or the offense would get the ball in better field position.

IMO if we used more disguise and more zone-blitz looks we would get more pressure, more sacks, more turnovers.



All war is based on deception.

Hence that general is skilful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skilful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.