Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

So far I have no problem with the defesnse. GB has been in this league a long time and he knows what he's doing. I trust him. We don't need to dial up all these complex blitzes and coverages to be a good defense. But I'll also say this. This defense really misses Daniels and I hope we see more of Evans on run downs.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

[URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/24997-play-calling-a-huge-concern.html#post473325[/URL]
(Last paragraph)

I hope this isn't a trend and it gets fixed quickly. I had a concern when Blache was originally hired that his defensive rankings in Chicago were not good or trending upwards during his time there. A few folks blew my concern off as injuries and personnel, if things don't straighten out we may be in for a run of poor defensive rankings while Blache is DC.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

I agree with Doughtydoubter we need to shore up the DT posistion. Griffin is not what he was 3 or 4 years ago and Montgomery and Golston show flashes at times. Look at the impact guys like Marcus Stroud and Kris Jenkins are making for thier teams. That and if we could get someone to replace Doughty we would have the personnel for this "beat your man" D. Hopefully Horton will develop soon.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

I like what I saw...bend but don't break. Once Springs is on the field we'll get even better.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

[quote=DirtyLandry;475374]I agree with Doughtydoubter we need to shore up the DT posistion. Griffin is not what he was 3 or 4 years ago and Montgomery and Golston show flashes at times. Look at the impact guys like Marcus Stroud and Kris Jenkins are making for thier teams. That and if we could get someone to replace Doughty we would have the personnel for this "beat your man" D. Hopefully Horton will develop soon.[/quote]

I think ur on point regarding the DTs. I mean they are the ones that need to push the o-line and disrupt the running game. I think last season there were complaints that the DTs were not doing much of a pass rush either, so they need to step it up.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

[quote=DirtyLandry;475374]I agree with Doughtydoubter we need to shore up the DT posistion. Griffin is not what he was 3 or 4 years ago and Montgomery and Golston show flashes at times. Look at the impact guys like Marcus Stroud and Kris Jenkins are making for thier teams. That and if we could get someone to replace Doughty we would have the personnel for this "beat your man" D. Hopefully Horton will develop soon.[/quote]

Stroud and Jenkins were basically thrown out the door from Jack. and Car. Our problem is our ends holding it down against the run.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

questions i have about our D that I havent found answers too:

1 - are our corners playing man, zone or a mix depending on the play call?

From the replays i saw from the giants game it looks like alot of man coverage, and poor man coverage at that as smoot was getting turned around or lead to far down field off his player. smoots days as being a good man cover cb might be fading.

2 - are the linebackers blitzing?

I saw the occassional linebacker blitz in passing downs but nothing aggressive. On clear passing plays it looked like the giants had no prob stopping our 4 man rush as we dropped back into max coverage.

3 - are the safeties playing a true cover 2?

looks this way to me except for the one time landry came up to the line of scrimmage and got his .5 sack with andre. I like the cover 2 and think it fits well with our safeties.

can someone please explain to me what we are running on D? straight up man with an occasional extra man blitz, go soft cover rush 4 on passing plays? after double G i am not used to seeing such base scemes.

go skins!!

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

[quote=saden1;475379]I like what I saw...bend but don't break. Once Springs is on the field we'll get even better.[/quote]

I don't care for most "bend but don't break" defenses. It's okay to give up yards on 1st and 2nd down, but it's not okay to allow opponents to convert over 50% of their 3rd downs, get large chunks of yards between the 20s, and chew up the clock.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

[quote=Mattyk72;475332]If they keep building on what they showed in the 2nd half of last week I've got no major complaints.[/quote]

i couldnt agree more. In the second half the defense looked great. I am hoping the defense continues to play with the motivation they had in the second half.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

[quote=over the mountain;475387]questions i have about our D that I havent found answers too:

1 - are our corners playing man, zone or a mix depending on the play call?

From the replays i saw from the giants game it looks like alot of man coverage, and poor man coverage at that as smoot was getting turned around or lead to far down field off his player. smoots days as being a good man cover cb might be fading. [/quote]

Mostly man unless it's 2nd or 3rd & long, then Cover 2 Zone

[quote]2 - are the linebackers blitzing?

I saw the occassional linebacker blitz in passing downs but nothing aggressive. On clear passing plays it looked like the giants had no prob stopping our 4 man rush as we dropped back into max coverage. [/quote]
Not much, we're playing a real vanilla 4-3 D

[quote]3 - are the safeties playing a true cover 2? looks this way to me except for the one time landry came up to the line of scrimmage and got his .5 sack with andre. I like the cover 2 and think it fits well with our safeties.[/quote]
We're playing a lot of Cover 1 with Landry deep. If both safeties are back on mid-short yardage it's Cover 2 Man, if 2nd or 3rd & Long, Cover 2 Zone

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

From the second half of last weeks game and this whole game. Seems good so far.

Re: Blache's Defensive Scheme
 

thanks slinging sammy baugh . . . it does look like a cover 1 with landry deep using his speed to go side to side. hopefully the cover 1 holds up, so far the real long ball has not hurt us.

go skins!