Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

At the time, I hated this decision, and disliked Haslett orchestrating it even more. If you're going to a 3-4, bring in a guru like Wade Phillips, who has done great things with that scheme. Lastly, retooling to a different defensive scheme has put other pressing issues on hold, especially addressing offensive deficiencies at WR and OL.

I would like to see the team mix in some 4-3 after the bye. Can the results possibly be worse than we've seen to date? Opinions welcome.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

I agree

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

There's many factors on why the defense has played bad this year. Injuries to 2 crucial starters is one reason. Replacing Atogwe and Landry with the likes of Madieu Williams and Reed Doughty is another reason. DeAngelo Hall looking very much past his prime is yet another reason. Josh Wilson should only be a nickle back at best, but he's a starter. A little bit has to do with Mike Shanahan as a talent evaluator. There are a lot of factors at work here that are contributing to the low level of play from the defense. The Redskins had a 13th ranked defense last year once the 2011 season was over. They've slipped to 29th or 30th mainly because of the factors I mentioned. The problem is simply not the 3-4.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=SouperMeister;961152]At the time, I hated this decision, and disliked Haslett orchestrating it even more. If you're going to a 3-4, bring in a guru like Wade Phillips, who has done great things with that scheme. Lastly, retooling to a different defensive scheme has put other pressing issues on hold, especially addressing offensive deficiencies at WR and OL.

[I][B]I would like to see the team mix in some 4-3 after the bye. Can the results possibly be worse than we've seen to date? Opinions welcome.[/quote]

[/B][/I]

Many of the Shanahan regime apologists will say that the team DOES incorporate some 43 looks into the 34 base defense. They just mix it up with pre snap looks, but about 20-30% of our defense is actually 43 defense, leaning heavily on nickel packages after 1st down. This is the thing. If you are going to run it like that and disguise it, why not play to the strengths of the squad you inherited, and "tailor it to the strengths of the players", kind of like what he did with RG3 on the O side of the ball. If we had more speed just with our MLB's, I think you would see alot more progress, but our MLB's, Fletcher included, are just flat out not fast enough, so the seams on middle of the field have to have an eye kept on them, so they safeties cannot roam as much as they should be allowed to. Nosetackle is a important part, as everyone knows, but even with the guy we have at the spot, Cofield is just not commanding or even DEmanding enough double teams to ensure success; run game suffers, pass rush suffers. The lack of speed on this team is kind of astounding.

I think at the end of the day, especially with the bye week, we would perform better running a 43 from this point on to the end of the season. The personnel doesn't fit, we are on a collision course with having the worst defense in the history of the NFL, and something has got to give. This issue cannot be ignored, and that is just what Mike Shanahan is doing. He is ignoring that there is a problem. Acknowledgment of the problem at this point is not enough. We have 2 weeks to make something happen. Switch back to the 43, drill the team to death, and I almost guarantee our defense would improve by next game. No way it could get worse, and I have a feeling that alot of people would be pleasently surprised with the outcome of the change. Fletcher would immediately become the focus of the defense, and with what we have right now, might as well lean on him as much as you can to make some plays. The 34 has come, it has failed, lets all please move on.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

I think it was the wrong decision at the time but we cannot switch back because at this point we lack the line backing personnel and have a log jam at defensive line

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

IMO I do no think the switch to 3-4 from 4-3 is as much to blame as the choice to run and lead the entire defense - Haslett.
The switch to 3-4 did set us back YEARS because we did not have the personnel to run it and with limited cap room and draft picks we had at the time was never taken into consideration.
While Haslett might be a good LB and front 7 coach in the class room and on the practice field. Haslett does not have the ability to lead a defense from the sidelines during a game. He can not adjust on the fly and tends to choke. Just my 2cents.
Time for him to go.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

Right decision, wrong coach, don't have all the players needed (or healthy) to execute it effectively.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=SouperMeister;961152]At the time, I hated this decision, and disliked Haslett orchestrating it even more. If you're going to a 3-4, bring in a guru like Wade Phillips, who has done great things with that scheme. Lastly, [U][B]retooling[/B][/U] to a different defensive scheme has put other pressing issues on hold, especially addressing offensive deficiencies at WR and OL.

I would like to see the team mix in some 4-3 after the bye. Can the results possibly be worse than we've seen to date? Opinions welcome.[/quote]

Oh they done some retooling alrighty, Hassletusdown is the biggest tool in the tool shed.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

If Shanny stays I would like for him to make a run at Mike Nolan as DC. I wasn't a big football fan back when he was the DC for us in 97-99. But what he did in SF, DEN, BAL, ATL even MIA was good. He has done a great job adjusting scheme with the personnel he has. That is something Haslett has not done IMO.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=Redskin Warrior;961357]If Shanny stays I would like for him to make a run at Mike Nolan as DC. I wasn't a big football fan back when he was the DC for us in 97-99. But what he did in SF, DEN, BAL, ATL even MIA was good. He has done a great job adjusting scheme with the personnel he has. That is something Haslett has not done IMO.[/quote]

Oh sweet Mother of Pearl no!!!!!! I was a big football fan in 97-98 and i thought his D was terrible. Never forget being up 35-14 on the Boys and getting beat. Ill never forgive that one.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

After watching my alma mater SDSU take down Boise State this weekend I really think we should switch to the 3-3-5 defense and use our awesome secondary depth to shut teams down. On a more serious note I wouldn't mind the Redskins drafting Leon McFadden.

The team made the switch to the 3-4, the defense is a good defense with the right players/coach we just need to keep working on it, and hope that Rak Daddy can go through 2013 with no injuries. Safe to say a majority of us including myself underestimated how good/important he was to our D.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

Shanahans never been know for having good defenses.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

I don't care what type of front we run, until we upgrade the secondary & pass rushing depth, this D isn't going anywhere.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=CrustyRedskin;961366]Oh sweet Mother of Pearl no!!!!!! I was a big football fan in 97-98 and i thought his D was terrible. Never forget being up 35-14 on the Boys and getting beat. Ill never forgive that one.[/quote]


that was in 99 I believe

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

i'm not sure the switch would fix our issues right now. but the switch to the 3-4 did hurt our D personnel wise. now i think we'd be equally bad under either, but i've always been a fan of matching scheme to personnel on hand and not the other way around (since it really seems to set you back by getting rid of good players like andre carter).

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

I've always hated the three four. I always felt more confident with more bodies on the line.
And to echo what Matty said, without a secondary either will not be effective.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;961436]that was in 99 I believe[/quote]

Yeah it was i meant 97-99. Cowboys swept the SKins that year but that was the last time we won the Division!

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=CrustyRedskin;961366]Oh sweet Mother of Pearl no!!!!!! I was a big football fan in 97-98 and i thought his D was terrible. Never forget being up 35-14 on the Boys and getting beat. Ill never forgive that one.[/quote]

It would be better than whats here now. But its a moot point because there is no way Nolan would ever work for Snyder again. And also he wont have any talent to work with on top of his bad experience here.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

Regardless of the defensive scheme, this team needs to desperately to fix its secondary starting with both safeties. That said, I think we have the makings of an excellent 4-3 D-line with Orakpo and Kerrigan as DEs and a combination of Cofield, Carriker, Bowen, and Jenkins as DTs. I think the challenge with our current personnel would be the LBs. We would need a SLB, WLB, and a MLB (to replace Fletcher). I don't know how well our current crop of LBs would fit in that scheme. Still, I think it may be easier to find 4-3 LBs than to find a true 3-4 NT that this team has never found.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

Yes, I agree that the 3-4 switch was a colossal mistake from the beginning. Too many resources were wasted trying to convert when defense wasn't the primary problem.

Switching back to a 4-3 shouldn't be too complicated, but the team now has to think about replacing the entire secondary and getting another linebacker or 2 to make it work.
The secondary is just a mess, so that has to be priority number 1 this offseason. They would also need to release Carriker to free up salary space as he would be the odd man out.

At this point, I would be fine with going to a 4-3 after the bye and letting Robinson and Riley play on the outside with Fletch in the middle. Alexander can also play, but he isn't really starting caliber for the long term. Fletch will need to be replaced next year in my opinion as he is rapidly slowing down due to age and wear-n-tear.

I do not however believe Shanahan will make the switch back because it will be an open admission of failure. I also don't believe he will replace Haslett until the season ends because I think he blames injuries and lack of quality personnel more than coaching.

Snyder will probably have to bring a hammer down to force a change, and Haslett and D.Smith will then take the fall. It's just too hard to reasonably fathom how bad this defense is after all the resources spent on it. Mind numbing really.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=Bishop Hammer;961486]It would be better than whats here now. But its a moot point because there is no way Nolan would ever work for Snyder again. And also he wont have any talent to work with on top of his bad experience here.[/quote]I thought everybody loved ice cream? :confused:

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

I'm amazed that some think changing to a 4-3 right now will improve things. Amazed.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=Mattyk;961545]I'm amazed that some think changing to a 4-3 right now will improve things. Amazed.[/quote]
There is no limit to the wisdom found...in these humble pages.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=Ruhskins;961488]Regardless of the defensive scheme, this team needs to desperately to fix its secondary starting with both safeties. That said, I think we have the makings of an excellent 4-3 D-line with Orakpo and Kerrigan as DEs and a combination of Cofield, Carriker, Bowen, and Jenkins as DTs. I think the challenge with our current personnel would be the LBs. We would need a SLB, WLB, and a MLB (to replace Fletcher). I don't know how well our current crop of LBs would fit in that scheme. Still, I think it may be easier to find 4-3 LBs than to find a true 3-4 NT that this team has never found.[/quote]Orakpo was a great SAM his first season. Though I'd rather see Rak with a hand on the ground now. I'd go with Rak and Bowen as DEs, Cofield and Jenkins at DTs, Jackson and Fletch and Kerrigan as LBs.

And four stiffs off the street for our secondary. :soapbox:

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

People make too much out of the 3-4 vs. 4-3. IN terms of run fits, we were fine before, we're fine now. We can't pressure or cover anyone, which would be the case regardless of the system we're running. Obviously we attempted this by drafting Kerrigan, but we need more pass rushers than just the pair we have. We have to beable to come from all angles.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

People don't realize 3-4 or 4-3, it doesn't matter what formation you line up in, its the coaching and the players and frankly we don't have either really.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;961577]People don't realize 3-4 or 4-3, it doesn't matter what formation you line up in, its the coaching and the players and frankly we don't have either really.[/quote]

I agree. San Fran runs a great 3-4 because of fantastic coaching and they have the best players for each role. The giants run a great 4-3 (when they want to) but also have an amazing defensive line. The bears have a great defensive scheme as well. Both schemes can work if you have the right players. Right now we do not have the best players or good coaching. You need one to be good, you need both to be great.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=Mattyk;961418]I don't care what type of front we run, until we upgrade the secondary & pass rushing depth, this D isn't going anywhere.[/quote]

I totally concur. Chris Wilson was able to get to the QB in preseason, but not the regular season only because he was going up against 3rd stringers. We need guys who are reserves that can step in and be just as effective as Carriker and Orakpo if they get injured. The secondary is simply a laughing stock. Watching our secondary play this season is equivilant to watching stand up comedy. If Bruce Allen had any sense, he would overrule the bad choices that Mike Shanahan has made with personnel. DeAngelo Hall needs to be moved to safety or released or perhaps traded. Move Josh Wilson to nickle back. He's not starting material. Draft a young corner who can cover like a blanket. Or trade for someone who can.

There are many ways to make the defense better. It doesn't matter if the Redskins are running the 34, 43, or the 46. The players that are put in place simply have to be better than what we have right now in order for the system to work.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=Mattyk;961545]I'm amazed that some think changing to a 4-3 right now will improve things. Amazed.[/quote]it's simple, when i switch kerrigan to de on madden he goes to 99 ovr. you can't argue w numbers like that...

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

In my opinion, the 3-4 is fine if you have either a superior DE or NT to go along with a very strong linebacking corps. Every team rushes 4 men as a basic package, and the goal is to apply consistant pressure with a 4 man rush. It makes the blitz so much more effective.

The problem is logistical. It is increasingly difficult to find a 6-4, 300 lb 3-4 DE who can take on double teams and still get penetration. Teams like SF, Hou, Ari, and SD have those superior players. Other teams like Pit and GB have 330 lb 3-4 NT's who can consistantly take on double teams and push the pocket. Those teams can get constant pressure with a 4 man rush, and their blitzes work.

The Redskins don't have those guys in the front 3, all can be handled with a single blocker. When the Skins rush their 4th guy, it is an easy pickup for the O-line. They have to rush 5 guys to apply any pressure, and only then will the blitz be effective with 6-7 rushers whereas other strong defenses get it with 5.

It is much easier to find a 6-1, 300 pounder who can play 4-3 DT and get penetration beating a single blocker than a 6-2, 330 lb 3-4 NT who can consistantly occupy 2 blockers. And it is easier to get a 6-3, 260 lb 4-3 DE who can speed rush past 1 blocker than a 6-5, 300 lb 3-4 DE who can consistantly take doubles.

4-3 teams are just easier to build, and compounding the problem is most college teams want lighter, speedier defenders to attack the wide open college game. Alabama is a rare exception that runs a base 3-4, but Saban can have his choice of any kid in the country to fit his scheme. Most college teams want their kids on the track getting quicker and faster as opposed to the dining room getting bigger.

It is still about getting consistant pressure with a 4 man rush, and if you can find those guys, the 3-4 works fine. The Skins don't have them, and they need to find them. Otherwise a 4 man front with Kerrigan, Orakpo, Cofield, and Bowen/Jenkins would appear to be their best course going forward. All are 4-3 players ideally as better penetrators rather than occupiers. My opinion only.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

The defensive coaches are scratching their heads after 9 straight weeks of mediocrity. The problem, I keep saying, is not the base defense that's being run. It's the personnel on the field. The same thing would still be happening if the Redskins were running a 43 defense just like back in 2006 when the Redskins finished 27th in defense.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=jdc65;961535]I do not however believe Shanahan will make the switch back because it will be an open admission of failure.[/quote]

You hit the nail on the head. While 4-3 vs. 3-4 may be a worthy debate, I think it's moot in this case.

No way Shanny goes back now, not after 3 years. The only way I could see it would be with a new DC. Then Shanny could say "I still prefer the 3-4 but for the good of the team I have decided to defer to our new DC."

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

In my humble opinion, TEs challenge the 3-4 and giant TEs are the future. Also more spread offense every year. The future of pro d is being played in places like TCU, Nebraska and Boise State. A base nickel package, 5dbs, but with a larger, taller, more safety type player in the nickel corner spot.
Also, though we wouldnt have enough linebackers, Kerrigan and Orakpo are obviously great pass rushers that used to be ends. Our smallish tackles have also produced in 4-3.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=CrazyCanuck;961899]You hit the nail on the head. While 4-3 vs. 3-4 may be a worthy debate, I think it's moot in this case.

No way Shanny goes back now, not after 3 years. The only way I could see it would be with a new DC. Then Shanny could say "I still prefer the 3-4 but for the good of the team I have decided to defer to our new DC."[/quote]

Shanny won't do that because he won't admit he made a mistake. Mikey also won't get a strong DC. Even if Haslett is gone his replacement won't fare much better. MS doesn't have an eye for defensive talent and no inkling how to construct a defense. Very rarely has he had a dominant D. Its a shame because when he's had one his teams have done well. I don't see that happening with our beloved Skins.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

people are fickle. 1st year is was fire haslett, 3/4 has to go.
2nd year moved up to 13th(?), got the right personel and 3/4 is "working" (good call!)
3rd year, have injuries to 4/5 starters, and now haslett has to go, 3/4 isn't working

People its more than just wins and losses. We had the right personel to play a very effective 3/4 defense. And they got hurt. This issue is our backup personel aren't that good. WE can't just change something after one year when it does't work. We need to stay the course, build on the players we have. 3/4 defenses in this league are what work, they dominate. Orakpo, Kerrigan being hurt is HUGE. Carrigan is not getting the pressure because those two aren't there.

We need another year of drafting, healthy key players, and we will be dominate again. we need to stop all the knee jerk reactions and just build instead of tear down and rebuild every two years.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=#56fanatic;962938]people are fickle. 1st year is was fire haslett, 3/4 has to go.
2nd year moved up to 13th(?), got the right personel and 3/4 is "working" (good call!)
3rd year, have injuries to 4/5 starters, and now haslett has to go, 3/4 isn't working

People its more than just wins and losses. We had the right personel to play a very effective 3/4 defense. And they got hurt. This issue is our backup personel aren't that good. WE can't just change something after one year when it does't work. We need to stay the course, build on the players we have. 3/4 defenses in this league are what work, they dominate. Orakpo, Kerrigan being hurt is HUGE. Carrigan is not getting the pressure because those two aren't there.

[B]We need another year of drafting, healthy key players, and we will be dominate again. [/B]we need to stop all the knee jerk reactions and just build instead of tear down and rebuild every two years.[/quote]

Can you tell me when did we ever "dominate?" ...cause those days were early 90's and 80's. Since then the best defenses we've had were under Greg Williams.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=skinsfan69;962959]Can you tell me when did we ever "dominate?" ...cause those days were early 90's and 80's. Since then the best defenses we've had were under Greg Williams.[/quote]

I don't know about that. If you remember in 2000 and 2001, the Redskins had a top 5 defense under Ray Rhodes and then Kurt Schottenheimer. Greg Williams ran the 3rd ranked defense in 2004 and we were in the top 10 under Greg a couple of seasons but let's not forget the earlier part of that decade.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;962961]I don't know about that. If you remember in 2000 and 2001, the Redskins had a top 5 defense under Ray Rhodes and then Kurt Schottenheimer. Greg Williams ran the 3rd ranked defense in 2004 and we were in the top 10 under Greg a couple of seasons but let's not forget the earlier part of that decade.[/quote]

I just think with the defense most of the improvement is going to have to come from the draft and perhaps a free agent or two. We really need to get 3-4 solid starters from next years draft in the worst way.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

[quote=HailGreen28;961554]Orakpo was a great SAM his first season. Though I'd rather see Rak with a hand on the ground now. I'd go with Rak and Bowen as DEs, Cofield and Jenkins at DTs, Jackson and Fletch and Kerrigan as LBs.

And four stiffs off the street for our secondary. :soapbox:[/quote]

It couldn't be worse. It just couldn't. We have some needs.

Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
 

The scheme isn't the problem. It's the lack of talented players. Shanahan has always sucked at acquiring defensive talent. As long as he's in Washington, our defenses will never be good, no matter what scheme we run.