Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[URL="http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/20645/high-turnover-rate-fueling-redskins-d"]High turnover rate fueling Redskins' D - NFC East Blog - ESPN[/URL]

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)

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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!

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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

Re: Redskins
 

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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. ... [B]Washington has allowed 15 drives of at least 10 plays, the most in NFL, but only three ended in TDs.[/B] ... 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 [url=http://www.freep.com/article/20101028/SPORTS01/101028046/1049/SPORTS01/Lions-vs.-Redskins-preview-capsule#ixzz13jy3dSm6]Lions vs. Redskins preview capsule | freep.com | Detroit Free Press[/url]

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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

[B]In the 4-3[/B]...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.

[B]In the 3-4[/B]...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...

[B]Summary[/B],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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=Mattyk;753368]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: 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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=Mattyk;753377]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.[/quote]

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

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk;753377]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.[/QUOTE]


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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;753378]Then why do you think we're giving up so much yardage?[/quote]

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

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=irish;753370]I agree, when they were giving up too many points people were focused on how few yards they gave up. Now that they are [SIZE=4]actually keep teams from scoring and creating turnovers[/SIZE] people want to focus on how many yards they give up. [SIZE=4]Who cares how many yards they give up, its an almost meaningless stat[/SIZE].[/quote]

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

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;753378]Then why do you think we're giving up so much yardage?[/quote]

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

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.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=Mattyk;753387]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.[/quote]

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

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

If we didn't have the turnovers the 3/4 would be a disaster right now.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=skinsnut;753407]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[/quote]

I don't think that's how statistics are suppose to work.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

We've been in the --- as least the last 10 years in turnovers..
I don't remember the last time the redskins finished the season in the + in turnovers. (long way to go still..I know)

Is it really a coincidence,that we are in the + the season we switch to the 3-4? I don't think so...

IMO...This team isn't 4-3 at this moment running the 4-3 as of old.

We don't get D-Halls strip and fumble return for a TD at the end of the 1/2 against Dallas.
and NO way Hall gets 4 INT's against the Bears and the 92 yarder for a TD....

That's 2 games alone that we won, just by the turnover itself.

So if we are running the 4-3 defense..this team is sitting at 2-5 right now imo...instead of 4-3
[B]AT BEST![/B]

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

The offense has to help more as well. The Skins are fotunate that their Defense is keeping the other team from scoring, because the offense is not doing much at this point to really help. We really need a solid game out of McNabb and company this weekend.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=irish;753370]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.[/quote]People like yards against because defenses that give up a lot of yards tend to keep giving up a lot of yards where points are incredibly dependent on field position and turnover rates.

So you can point to the Redskins struggles with yards and field position and think that this is going to continue to be a meaningful problem. And it is. But as long as turnover rates stay high, the yards against this defense are going to remain academic. Right now, offenses are struggling to pay off their drives with points, and it's because the more plays we force them to make the more mistakes they are going to make in the process.

We're not the best defense at turning offensive mistakes into turnovers, and as long as we keep dropping INTs, I don't see how we are going to improve.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=firstdown;753416]If we didn't have the turnovers the 3/4 would be a disaster right now.[/quote]This is probably accurate. The red zone defense has been very good, but not good enough to overcome the amount of times we allow teams to get there on us without the benefit of hilarious gaffes by our opponents.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=Mattyk;753377]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.[/quote]The base defense in the NFL these days is five defensive backs. So 3-4/4-3 is really a dumb academic argument. It's really about your formation when the other team has 3 receivers on the field. For Blache, that was "screw it, we're going to stay in the 4-3 and give you mismatches in both slots. You probably suck anyway, Matt Cassel."

For Haslett, it's a Clancy Pendergast 2-4 front, which isn't really much different from any other "even" front, such as a 4-2. We do not do very much 3-3-5 defense.

I also think we saw against the Colts that the "ninja" formation with no real shape is a base 4-man front where three of the four are linebackers.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

It's nice to know we're as good as Pittsburgh, or hell the overrated Green Bay Packers, even though we don't do what they do and are much worse than them.
:spank:

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

Actually we're better than the overrated Packers, we beat them

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

[quote=Mattyk;753484]Actually we're better than the overrated Packers, we beat them[/quote]

I meant in the context of whose defense is better.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

The article that started the thread is about turnovers, so in that regard we are better

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

its nice to see us getting actual results from coaching.

In TC and PS the talk was about how haslett and the skins worked hard on creating more turnovers thru strip drills to talking with players about gang tackling, etc.

its just nice to see fruits of labor once in awhile, a long while.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

No question about that Matty. I do not think it is happen stance or coincedence either. We shall see as we move toward the end of the season, but to be honest I think the numbers will still be there. It was drubbed into our players head all offseason to get after the football on defense and special teams and to this point that is what this defense has done.

I really don't care about the woulda coulda shoulda statements about the team winning by the fualt of the other teams mistakes. If things or plays had played out differently it would have changed the game for sure but it still doesn't mean we nessecessarily lose either.

We are 4-3 with one of the best TO differentials in the game and #2 in TOs on defense. These are facts. This is a indication of a playoff team not the other way around. When teams win in spite of having a bad day or because they don't quit, this the sign of a team learning how to win. Playoffs or even a NFC East title this year would not surprise me.

Re: Redskins move to 34 has paid off.
 

To the point of the thread, 3-4 takes time to adjust and so does our new d scheme and coach to what we are doing well and the personell we have. It is a work in progress and i think all sides are doing well in thier adjustments.