Redskins move to 34 has paid off.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

There it is..........

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

Look at some of the offenses we've faced so far and where they rank.

Colts #2 in yards, #3 in points
Texans #4 in yards, #6 in points
Cowboys #5 in yards, #14 in points
Eagles #6 in yards, #10 in points
Packers #11 in yards, #13 in points

5 legit offenses that rack up yards and points against pretty much everyone they face.

I know this whole thread is about the 3-4, but to me the Skins only play that defense on 1st down. If on 1st down the opposing offense throws an incompletion or otherwise ends up ina 2nd and long and therefore goes to a 3 WR set, the Skins go to the Nickel and 3-4, 4-3 whatever is gone. It seems like at that point they have gone with more 4 down line men 5 Dbs and 2 LBs. I've notice many times on 3rd and long the Skins playing only 2 DT/DE and everyone else standing around at the line. The opposing team doesn't know whose coming (Times Square defense I've heard it called). That's not a 3-4 D either.

I agree that we are doing a ton of different schemes...I don't recall which game it was but I was irate about the lock down commitment to the 3-4 which clearly was not working...At that point, Haslett finally relaxed a bit and started playing more 4 man fronts....a LOT more....since then the 4 man fronts have been far more effective than the 3 man fronts he was overly committed to the first 3 games or so.

I think most here agree that we have missing pieces for the 3-4...I am glad Haslett recognized that and adjusted...to be frank....I was worried he wouldn't adjust...and if that was the case....we would have probably be 2-5 right now.

I am certainly still not sold on Haslett...and yes we have gotten lucky....how can you be ranked 31st out of 32 in yardage and expect to win more games that you lose?....eventually that will catch up to you...I don't care what anyone says about turnovers, pts....losing the yardage and time of possession battle is never good....I don't care how you spin it.

If we had lost...which we easily could have, many here would be completely dogging the 3-4 and bringing up yardage as one of the reasons we suck.

What I want to see is a consistant climb out of the bottom ranking for yards...eventually turnovers will even out...a good team cannot depend on turnovers to win....especially not a team wanting to compete for a playoff spot.

Hopefully by the end of the season we will be a 20th ranked defense in yards...seems to be where Haslett teams live.

Look at some of the offenses we've faced so far and where they rank.

Colts #2 in yards, #3 in points
Texans #4 in yards, #6 in points
Cowboys #5 in yards, #14 in points
Eagles #6 in yards, #10 in points
Packers #11 in yards, #13 in points

5 legit offenses that rack up yards and points against pretty much everyone they face.

Keep in mind that the 500 yards we gave to these teams contributed to their yardage stats...note their yardage rankings exceed their points...partially due to playing us....but I do see your point