Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Do they actually run deeper than Tryon? You bet!

My thoughts on the matter [URL="http://redskinshogheaven.com/2009/08/redskins-might-have-legitimate-concerns-in-the-secondary.html"]here[/URL].

[QUOTE]
Well, at the end of last year (last 5 games or so), the Redskins' pass coverage units collapsed. Certainly, lack of sacks were a factor in the collapse--and two TD passes against the normally reliable Carlos Rogers didn't help--but the Redskins at one point in the season were doing well at pass defense, and the sacks weren't concentrated in one part of the year, particularly. No, the Redskins pass defense failed due to it's coverage units, and the Redskins didn't really fix the problem in the offseason.[/QUOTE]

Your thoughts after the jump.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

No pass rush = no pass defense. But it's not like we don't have question marks. Rogers hasn't put it all together yet. He's played well in stretches but not a whole season. Hall played like shit in Oakland but seemed to play decent when he got here. I think Hall will bounce back and get to his playing level in Atl. Horton should be better but I'm really expecting Landry to start to play at a Pro Bowl level. Smoot is OK. Barring injury and an improved pass rush we should be good in the secondary.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

To me....it seems like your over-analyzing a bit, since the Redskins were a Top 5 defense last year, and should be even better this year. I did enjoy the article though, a very good read.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=roth74va;580574]To me....it seems like your over-analyzing a bit, since the Redskins were a Top 5 defense last year, and should be even better this year. I did enjoy the article though, a very good read.[/quote]I think one of the main points I tried to make is that I didn't think we were a top 5 D, but all the same, I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Barnes looked pretty good to me what do yall think?

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=joethiesmanfan;580576]Barnes looked pretty good to me what do yall think?[/quote]

Which game? First game not so good, second game I thought he was much better. Id say the same thing for Tryon as well, but its still preseason.

If we can stay healthy, I feel like our secondary is fairly solid. But if we have an injury or two, and Tryon/Barnes are forced into duty, things could get ugly quick. I dont like Smoot as a starter, but I feel like he does just fine as the 3rd CB. Hopefully Rogers calf isnt a lingering problem, it sounds way too similar to Springs issues last year. Horton is improving steadily, and Landry is a beast. Like Gtripp said though, Landry is the key and if we were to lose him its gonna be a long season.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Good analysis. I do however think a much improved pass rush will help the secondary simply because opposing QBs will be rushed into throws (often times for shorter yardage), and hopefully the pressure will affect their accuracy as well. It may not make a huge difference, but it can't hurt.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

The offense might not be a dynamic downfield passing attack, and it might never be. But it enters the third preseason game with zero gaping holes.

Good read but you lost me right here.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

One thing that has bothered me about the D since Sean Taylor's death is that Landry hasn't taken ownership of the deep middle of the field. Compared to being at FedEX and seeing the whole field, TV coverage didn't do justice to how #21 took away the middle of the field. For whatever reason, Landry hasn't delivered enough signature hits and plays on the ball that make receivers/QBs think twice about testing his space. I want to see Kareem Moore get some time at FS, freeing Landry to play close to the line of scrimmage in his more natural SS role. I feel that should be the D's standard safety package on 3rd down passing situations.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=firstdown;580589]The offense might not be a dynamic downfield passing attack, and it might never be. But it enters the third preseason game with zero gaping holes.

Good read but you lost me right here.[/quote]

do explain our gaping holes?

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Not sure I agree that we have or will have "woes" in the secondary. A good pass rush cures all, and even then, I like the talent in the secondary to begin with.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=skinsfan69;580571]No pass rush = no pass defense. But it's not like we don't have question marks. Rogers hasn't put it all together yet. He's played well in stretches but not a whole season. Hall played like shit in Oakland but seemed to play decent when he got here. I think Hall will bounce back and get to his playing level in Atl. Horton should be better but I'm really expecting Landry to start to play at a Pro Bowl level. Smoot is OK. Barring injury and an improved pass rush we should be good in the secondary.[/quote]

The secondary is actually going to be a problem, at the nickle spot. Everone underestimated Shawn Springs value to this team, having him here allowed Rogers to play the nickle...Smoot playing the nickle is a liability, it will show up several times this yr and it needs to be addressed.
The Patriots game should give us a good idea of how bad its going to be!

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=SouperMeister;580592]One thing that has bothered me about the D since Sean Taylor's death is that Landry hasn't taken ownership of the deep middle of the field. Compared to being at FedEX and seeing the whole field, TV coverage didn't do justice to how #21 took away the middle of the field. For whatever reason, Landry hasn't delivered enough signature hits and plays on the ball that make receivers/QBs think twice about testing his space. I want to see Kareem Moore get some time at FS, freeing Landry to play close to the line of scrimmage in his more natural SS role. I feel that should be the D's standard safety package on 3rd down passing situations.[/quote]

Landry is good. What Sean did was special. It's not like there are any other safeties in the league who commanded that much of the field. Landry won't ever be able to do that.

I think we're slowly forgetting that ST was on the easy way to being the best or quite nearly the best safety in league history. He was probably going to do things for an extended period of time that were simply extraordinary.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Good read! Although I'm not sure if it's all about secondary though.. Every team's secondary have let big plays to happen once in a while.. I guess I would have to pick Hall as an weakness, he is good but he also gambles.. Hall did let some big plays to happen but he got lucky (Eagles game comes to the mind, DeSean dropped the ball two times.) Rogers doesn't do that often, at all? I think the nickel back is our main problem, Smoot lost more than a step as he always give this a huge lofty space between him and WR.. I'm hoping Barnes or maybe Tryon will manage to crack as nickel starter later in the season.. I'm pretty sure Horton will improve with his coverage areas, since he seems to be still a leveled head.. As for Landry, I truly hope he will break out this season or otherwise I would be very disappointed..

Sean Taylor, nobody could commanded the field the way he did.. My heart stops when his name is brought up.. It is one of very disappointing tragic events, he could have been the best one we ever watched in our life time (and he still is to this day).. There will not be someone who we could find to replicate like him.. If he is still here with us, then we would be basically guaranteed to be #1 defense, along with Orakpo and Haynesworth.. Taylor and Landry would have freedom to roam all over the field, which will put fear into every opponents..

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=ChickenMonkey;580600]The secondary is actually going to be a problem, at the nickle spot. Everone underestimated Shawn Springs value to this team, having him here allowed Rogers to play the nickle...Smoot playing the nickle is a liability, it will show up several times this yr and it needs to be addressed.
[B]The Patriots game should give us a good idea of how bad its going to be![/quote][/B]

[B]I agree. New England's offense doesn't play around like our mickey mouse offense does. It will be a very good test. [/B]

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

The thing that bothers me is this calf injury of Rogers. Rogers barely put any time in during camp and has yet to play in the preseason. Yet he is penciled in opposite of Hall. I would think after those two your go to guys are Smoot and Barnes.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=ChickenMonkey;580600]The secondary is actually going to be a problem, at the nickle spot. Everone underestimated Shawn Springs value to this team, having him here allowed Rogers to play the nickle...Smoot playing the nickle is a liability, it will show up several times this yr and it needs to be addressed.
The Patriots game should give us a good idea of how bad its going to be![/quote]

I agree that Smoot has problems playing the nickel corner. But he's not a terrible nickel back, either. There are much worse problems that a secondary can have than a middle-of-the-road nickel back. Many teams would kill to have their biggest secondary problem be at nickel corner.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=GridIron26;580616]Good read! Although I'm not sure if it's all about secondary though.. Every team's secondary have let big plays to happen once in a while.. I guess I would have to pick Hall as an weakness, he is good but he also gambles.. Hall did let some big plays to happen but he got lucky (Eagles game comes to the mind, DeSean dropped the ball two times.) Rogers doesn't do that often, at all? I think the nickel back is our main problem, Smoot lost more than a step as he always give this a huge lofty space between him and WR.. I'm hoping Barnes or maybe Tryon will manage to crack as nickel starter later in the season.. I'm pretty sure Horton will improve with his coverage areas, since he seems to be still a leveled head.. As for Landry, I truly hope he will break out this season or otherwise I would be very disappointed..

Sean Taylor, nobody could commanded the field the way he did.. My heart stops when his name is brought up.. It is one of very disappointing tragic events, he could have been the best one we ever watched in our life time (and he still is to this day).. There will not be someone who we could find to replicate like him.. If he is still here with us, then we would be basically guaranteed to be #1 defense, along with Orakpo and Haynesworth.. Taylor and Landry would have freedom to roam all over the field, which will put fear into every opponents..[/quote]

I sometimes think how freakin silly this defense would be w/ #21 too. But I think it's time for Landry to step up and take control and I think he will this year.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=PennSkinsFan;580618]The thing that bothers me is this calf injury of Rogers. Rogers barely put any time in during camp and has yet to play in the preseason. Yet he is penciled in opposite of Hall. I would think after those two your go to guys are Smoot and Barnes.[/quote]

The Rogers' injury bothers me too, I'm sure it does to many fans.. However I think Redskins are being smart and let Rogers to rest as much as he could, so that way the injury would have small chance to linger throughout the season, just like with Springs..

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Good article, I see how secondary can be an issue but still think the d line will really help. Injuries are the biggest fear at this point. I still worry bout the health of the oline more and the overall offensive to me is still the point of most concern with this team.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

The pass rush last year was pitiful. If we see a dramatic improvement in that category everything changes. Blache must adjust his secondary philosophy to match.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Well I think a big issue here is our scheme. It does seem there's always a gap somewhere between the backers and secondary for offensive targets to sneak in and get open for a completion. Translation: teams move the chains on us in chunks here and there, which leaves the d on the field too long and sets up FG opportunities etc, etc. I think Blache/Gray/Landry must find a way to break up those attempts. Maybe Laron plays a bit closer. Maybe Horton roams somewhere in that gap. What I doubt though is our improved pass rush fixes this completely. We need our DB duo to get more INTs and Laron to put fear in the heart of WRs, but we also need to see some kind of adjustment.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

First, I appreciate your analysis. I actually feel better that the big plays we gave up were spread around rather than concentrated in one area. For some reason, I had the impression that our LB's were getting beaten a lot in coverage.

Nevertheless, I'm one of those who feels that we should have a more effective pass rush this season that should mitigate any problems we may have in the secondary. So, I'm not very worried about it.

Also, we didn't score many points last season so I think that every 20-yard pass play by the opposition may have been magnified more than it would have been if we had had a more potent offense. If the offense can score more this season, then most defensive lapses pobably won't seem quite as significant.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Yeah there was a marked improvement from the Ravens to the Steeler game. My god, the yardage we gave up in game #1 had me almost morphing into chicken little. Shit we made both Flacco and Smith look like Pro Bowlers.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=PennSkinsFan;580618]The thing that bothers me is this calf injury of Rogers. Rogers barely put any time in during camp and has yet to play in the preseason. Yet he is penciled in opposite of Hall. I would think after those two your go to guys are Smoot and Barnes.[/quote]

Could have sworn he was out there last week. Didn't he make the tackle on that ball that Holmes caught off the bounce that got reversed?

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=Mattyk72;580672]Could have sworn he was out there last week. [B]Didn't he make the tackle on that ball that Holmes caught off the bounce that got reversed?[/B][/quote]

Yes.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=The Goat;580658]Well I think a big issue here is our scheme. It does seem there's always a gap somewhere between the backers and secondary for offensive targets to sneak in and get open for a completion. Translation: teams move the chains on us in chunks here and there, which leaves the d on the field too long and sets up FG opportunities etc, etc. I think Blache/Gray/Landry must find a way to break up those attempts. Maybe Laron plays a bit closer. Maybe Horton roams somewhere in that gap. What I doubt though is our improved pass rush fixes this completely. We need our DB duo to get more INTs and Laron to put fear in the heart of WRs, but we also need to see some kind of adjustment.[/quote]
I agree with Goat here . Very good points . I think our problems are bigger at LB than with our DB's , as I doubt Orakpo or Fletcher could cover me one on one . I would rather see O-Sak-Po at end , and hope we do not ask Fletch to cover guys like Westbrook , and we should be ok .

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Great study. I believe the only way for guys to get better is to get in the game. Rodgers sitting tomorrow will surely give way for the younger guys to step in and likely step up.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=FRPLG;580601]Landry is good. What Sean did was special. It's not like there are any other safeties in the league who commanded that much of the field. Landry won't ever be able to do that.
[B]
I think we're slowly forgetting that ST was on the easy way to being the best or quite nearly the best safety in league history. He was probably going to do things for an extended period of time that were simply extraordinary.[/B][/quote]

I totally agree. I'm certainly not forgetting. Not a day goes by where I don't think about Sean. He was going to revolutionize the safety position. I think he had about 10 pro-bowls and a few defensive player of the year awards in front of him. Just imagine this defense if he was still around. Downright scary.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Not only does pass rush aid the secondary, but a stout defensive line against the run leads to longer subsequent passing downs.

The return of Phillip Daniels will go largely unnoticed because of Haynesworth, but he's one of the best run stuffing ends in the league. The two of them will make a huge impact against the run. We'll see longer passing downs, the pass rush will make an impact, and the corners will hold up better.

We'll miss Springs, he was still our best CB last year IMO. But it all starts with the run defense, and we'll be fierce in that department.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=The Goat;580658]Well I think a big issue here is our scheme. It does seem there's always a gap somewhere between the backers and secondary for offensive targets to sneak in and get open for a completion. Translation: teams move the chains on us in chunks here and there, which leaves the d on the field too long and sets up FG opportunities etc, etc. I think Blache/Gray/Landry must find a way to break up those attempts. Maybe Laron plays a bit closer. Maybe Horton roams somewhere in that gap. What I doubt though is our improved pass rush fixes this completely. We need our DB duo to get more INTs and Laron to put fear in the heart of WRs, but we also need to see some kind of adjustment.[/quote]

I think your analysis is quite good.

Here's my optimistic take on the problem: greater pressure up front should cause qb's to throw more quickly, taking away some downfield routes. Knowing this, our db's can play tighter, thereby closing that gap that you mentioned between the linebackers and defensive backs. The 85 Bears defense thrived on this way of doing things. I'm not saying that we are the 85 Bears. I'm just saying that, strategy-wise, things may work out similarly, at least on occasion.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

One question this thread raises for me is how our defensive schemes put a certain player in position to cover say the flat. From what I've seen Rocky is our best cover LB but I don't see him get "stuck" in coverage that often. Sometimes it looks like Rocky is hovering there around the LOS while London sort of roams 7-10 yards off the LOS, which inevitably gets him "stuck" in coverage. London covering is a bit of a sh*t show IMO...i mean come on how much reach can a 5-10 bowling ball w/ short arms really have to defend a pass? Why doesn't Blache have London hover around the LOS and Rocky sit back further?

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Good thread, GT.

I agree with many of the comments about the affect of an improved pass rush. The conventional wisdom is that almost any WR will beat coverage with enough time. Our rush was weak, especially late in the games, late in the year. So, lots of time for long routes to come open. Plus, we had to send more blitzes to compensate, and our blitzes were particularly lame last year down the stretch. With an improved rush, both of these things should change.

Still, I agree that the loss of Springs has not be fully dealt with. But recall that the issue with Springs was never his play--it was his health (combined with his cap hit).

I would like to see better play out of the safeties in the passing game, as would we all. I do think we've got the talent there, it just needs to show.

As for the CBs, let's hope Carlos gets better, and that some of the youngins' step up.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

G Tripp you have really been beating this "we were not a top five defense" drum this offseason. I am not sure I understand your analysis help me understand after watching this offense last year and so far this preseason why I should be worried about our "downgraded secondary and questionable defensive strategies" and not an offense that simply doesn't score that much, has a tendency to leave the defense in precarious positions and kill momentum. Not to mention a specialty team unit that missed a lot of field goals. Personalities aside the defense has been the only thing to really applaud the last few seasons and whether you agree with the statistics that the league uses to rank defenses (or offenses for that matter) they are what they are and we WERE a top five defense. If our offense was top 15 we would probably have been in the postseason. There was no balance. But you really have to work the numbers to blame the teams collapse last year on the play of the defense.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=RedBar;580716]G Tripp you have really been beating this "we were not a top five defense" drum this offseason. I am not sure I understand your analysis help me understand after watching this offense last year and so far this preseason why I should be worried about our "downgraded secondary and questionable defensive strategies" and not an offense that simply doesn't score that much, has a tendency to leave the defense in precarious positions and kill momentum. Not to mention a specialty team unit that missed a lot of field goals. Personalities aside the defense has been the only thing to really applaud the last few seasons and whether you agree with the statistics that the league uses to rank defenses (or offenses for that matter) they are what they are and we WERE a top five defense. If our offense was top 15 we would probably have been in the postseason. There was no balance. But you really have to work the numbers to blame the teams collapse last year on the play of the defense.[/quote]

Great post. Tripp you bitched and moaned about Blache last year but in the end we were one of the top scoring defenses in the NFL w/out a pass rush. Say what you want with the stats but if the offense could score 20 points a game we're a playoff team. That's the bottom line.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=roth74va;580574]To me....it seems like your over-analyzing a bit, since the Redskins were a Top 5 defense last year, and should be even better this year. I did enjoy the article though, a very good read.[/quote]

Yeah...we could potentially have one of the better safety combos in the NFL if Landry and Horton continue on their path, plus Doughty and Moore are exceptional backups. Hall will be huge for us this season, Carlos improved a lot last season also except for catching the ball. Smoot is a sufficient nickel back and the fact we don't have to start him means we have quality depth finally. Barnes could contribute in the future if he makes the team.

I'm not worried about our secondary, or honestly ANY position on our defense at all. We were ranked #4 last season, we made huge improvements that should force plenty of TOs and get sacks, the only two weak points of the D last season...so I expect us to be one of the TOP 2 defenses in 2009. YES, I said TOP 2. Pittsburgh/Houston/Baltimore/Minnesota and the Skins should end up the top 5 at the end of the year (in no order).

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=skinsfan69;580794]Great post. Tripp you bitched and moaned about Blache last year but in the end we were one of the top scoring defenses in the NFL w/out a pass rush. Say what you want with the stats but if the offense could score 20 points a game we're a playoff team. That's the bottom line.[/quote]Sounds like your problem is less with the analysis and more with the fact that I was the one bringing it.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

[quote=RedBar;580716]G Tripp you have really been beating this "we were not a top five defense" drum this offseason. I am not sure I understand your analysis help me understand after watching this offense last year and so far this preseason why I should be worried about our "downgraded secondary and questionable defensive strategies" and not an offense that simply doesn't score that much, has a tendency to leave the defense in precarious positions and kill momentum. Not to mention a specialty team unit that missed a lot of field goals. Personalities aside the defense has been the only thing to really applaud the last few seasons and whether you agree with the statistics that the league uses to rank defenses (or offenses for that matter) they are what they are and we WERE a top five defense. If our offense was top 15 we would probably have been in the postseason. There was no balance. But you really have to work the numbers to blame the teams collapse last year on the play of the defense.[/quote]We were not a top five defense. Point blank. Pittsburgh. Baltimore. Tennessee. Philadelphia. Minnesota. Oops, no more room in the top five.

If you read all my analysis, all of them, I don't think there's a stone I've left unturned.

If you haven't read all of it: let me summarize quickly:

At no point would anyone have argued that our defense was great. Not in the first part of the season, not in the middle of the season, and not in the last part of the season. Never. If anything, it's value was in it's consistency. We could count on a solid effort from our defense week after week, and perform well against the NFL's best teams as long as the offense was up to par.

Well after week five, the offense didn't perform at a great level the rest of the season. The defense endured some cracks against the Rams and the Lions (one game we held on, the other we didn't), but it was generally up to par. But I don't think it stayed at that level. Too often during the 2-6 collapse, the pass defense was torn apart by a bad quarterback. Rookie Joe Flacco, Ryan Fitzpatrick, and Shaun Hill all got their dibs in.

No one can sit there with a straight face and act like what we were seeing at the end of the year was a top defense. Teams were picking on Horton, Smoot, even Springs like we were the Lions. We have some pieces, but we never really put it altogether.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Blache makes me very nervous against a team like the Patriots, but I think he is fine for the NFC East.

Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
 

Yeah I'm less trusting of Blache's scheme and strategy the more I see. He just doesn't seem to find ways to consistently get pressure on the QB. He also can't seem to pin down the opposing OCs passing attack. Something is amiss.