Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-03-2007, 02:00 PM   #1
Camp Scrub
 
tallestskinsfanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 25
D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Two years ago we had one of the best defenses in the league because we had a solid secondary allowing GW to blitz more times than not. Now for the upcoming season we got Smoot back, Springs(as of now), Rogers, Macklin, ST, Pierson, Stoutmire and the newly drafted Landry.

I'm thinking Greg will start blitzing ST and Landry like crazy......hell blitz whoever's fresh like crazy........and our D-Line is wayyyyyyyyyyyy better with the addition of Carter and the emergence of Golston.


Thoughts?
tallestskinsfanever is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 05-03-2007, 02:09 PM   #2
The Starter
 
GridIron26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,596
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Well, that is exactly what I am thinking.. But don't forget the aging process, our d-line is getting older which means some of them lost a step or so.. But I have pretty good feelings about our defense, I think it will definitely be better than last year..
GridIron26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 02:17 PM   #3
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

I was going to start my own thread on this, but it fits well here. Check out this guest blog analysis on JLC's Redskins Insider blog.

It basically says that if you add up sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, you get a number that the author calls "Defensive Impact Plays." Makes sense, those are the types of plays that end a drive and heavily impact the game. As you'd imagine, our team saw a big decline in Defensive Impact Plays in 2006. But what's funny, DIPs made by the defensive line really didn't decline all that much, the biggest drop occurred amongst the LBs and secondary.

Now I'd argue that the fact that we gave up 4.5 yards per carry last year instead of 4.1 in 2005 and 3.1 in 2004 had a lot to do with that. Our defensive line gave up more yards on the ground, meaning there was less opportunity to blitz and hence the secondary and LB's didn't have the same shots at sacks and INTs. But another argument could be made that GW couldn't attack with his defensive line all that much because the deep coverage was so poor and he needed to compensate with more zones.

It was a great analysis by this kid (UVA student), and it's starting to sway me into thinking that secondary was a bigger need than defensive line. I think we still have things to address with our run defense up front, but here's hoping the additions of Landry, Smoot, and Fletcher lead to greater flexibility in coverage and a more attack-oriented defense.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 02:28 PM   #4
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

In the end, I think this type of analysis really highlights exactly how much of a team sport football really is. Bolstering the defensive line takes pressure off the secondary, and bolstering the secondary can take pressure off the defensive line.

Each unit operates in lockstep with one another. Given that, getting the best overall defensive player on the board probably made a lot of sense.

A DT like Okoye probably would make a big impact for us just as Landry will. But often in our narrow view, we tend to focus on the production of an individual unit (this year, we zeroed in on the defensive line). But the d-line's performance can't be examined in a vacuum very easily, there are too many codependencies in football. The improvement in the secondary could improve the play of the defensive line. In the end, Landry's presence (along with Fletcher, Smoot, and Macklin) should make everyone better.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 02:33 PM   #5
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Admittedly, I've been one that has downplayed the decline in the linebackers last year, attributing most of our run stopping problems to the front four.

But just to show I'm not completely close-minded, I've come to the realization that no matter how bad the defensive line is, (and I still think they need major upgrades) you cannot discount the role linebackers play in rushing defense. While I don't expect our success in that area to skyrocket, I do believe there will be improvement thanks to the additions of Fletcher and maybe even a couple of the rookie draftees judging by all the accolades from Peter King and SI.

I'm also counting on Rocky to prove to the world he was worth this year's second round pick -- and trust me, we REALLY could have used it. He's had a year to ride the bench, mentally prepare himself for the pro game, so now it's time for him grow up, wise up, and be real damn impressive.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 03:04 PM   #6
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

There's no question the improvement of the secondary and LBs will help the overall defense. Hell, if Rogers had just held on to all those dropped picks last year we may have won a few more games. The improvements in the defensive backfield are significant (on paper anyway), and I can't wait to see Fletcher as the QB of the D. He's a huge upgrade from converted safety Lemar Marshall. I'm really concerned about Rocky and Marcus' health. Anyone know how their rehabs are going? Better pass coverage will take less pressure off the D-line and hopefully create some coverage sacks as well. I like that DIP (defensive impact plays) analysis. I do think we could use another solid body or two up front, but even if we stand pat I think we'll improve a lot. Of course, when you're 31st overall you can't get much worse.
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 03:40 PM   #7
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

So are we, as Coach Joe said on draft day, okay at DL or are we still shopping? Gibbs publicly said he's confident we're just fine up front on defense, but in this article John Clayton said we're still actively seeking help....

ESPN.com - NFL - Clayton: NFC big questions
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 03:41 PM   #8
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
I was going to start my own thread on this, but it fits well here. Check out this guest blog analysis on JLC's Redskins Insider blog.

It basically says that if you add up sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, you get a number that the author calls "Defensive Impact Plays." Makes sense, those are the types of plays that end a drive and heavily impact the game. As you'd imagine, our team saw a big decline in Defensive Impact Plays in 2006. But what's funny, DIPs made by the defensive line really didn't decline all that much, the biggest drop occurred amongst the LBs and secondary.

Now I'd argue that the fact that we gave up 4.5 yards per carry last year instead of 4.1 in 2005 and 3.1 in 2004 had a lot to do with that. Our defensive line gave up more yards on the ground, meaning there was less opportunity to blitz and hence the secondary and LB's didn't have the same shots at sacks and INTs. But another argument could be made that GW couldn't attack with his defensive line all that much because the deep coverage was so poor and he needed to compensate with more zones.

It was a great analysis by this kid (UVA student), and it's starting to sway me into thinking that secondary was a bigger need than defensive line. I think we still have things to address with our run defense up front, but here's hoping the additions of Landry, Smoot, and Fletcher lead to greater flexibility in coverage and a more attack-oriented defense.
With Barber gone from the Gmen we can almost knock 3/4 of a yard average off.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 06:10 PM   #9
Playmaker
 
over the mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: baltimore
Posts: 3,262
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

will our D be better next year? i really hope so with the additions of fletcher, smoot, landry, pierson back and getting holdman out and marshall to a more suited role . . . . but will we be able to produce a decent pass rush when we dont blitz? probaly not looking at last year

the nfc east looks ripe for the picking this year (i think that every year thoo)
over the mountain is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 06:22 PM   #10
The Starter
 
wolfeskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: chesapeake,va.
Posts: 2,160
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMScud View Post
So are we, as Coach Joe said on draft day, okay at DL or are we still shopping? Gibbs publicly said he's confident we're just fine up front on defense, but in this article John Clayton said we're still actively seeking help....

ESPN.com - NFL - Clayton: NFC big questions

gibbs has always said that even if he is comfortable with a particular part of the team , he, along with his other coaches, are always looking for players to improve the team.
__________________
Hail to Allen/Shanahan .... bring in some baby hogs and load up on diesel fuel !!! (budw38)
wolfeskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 06:42 PM   #11
The Starter
 
GoSkins!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 45
Posts: 1,587
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

I'm sure we are seeking help om the D-line. That is still a place that we can upgrade and we have a little cash.

The question I have is this (and I've asked before):

If we had Pierce at MLB last year do you guys think we would have been better?

I think that just about everyone here would say "yes". For that reason alone I think the defense will make great strides with Fletcher at MLB and Marshall/Mcintosh at OLB.

I watched all the games from last year multiple times (I know, I'm a geek), and the d-line was within a couple of 10ths of a second getting to the QB all the time. Even a slight improvement in coverage will increase the sack count and turnovers.

So the point is (again) slightly better DB play, DLs holding up thier guys, and wrap up tackling by the LB's can make a huge improvement (just like the lack of those 3 thing led to its demise).
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien
GoSkins! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 07:20 PM   #12
Playmaker
 
skinsfan_nn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Newport News,Virginia
Age: 49
Posts: 4,495
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoSkins! View Post
I'm sure we are seeking help om the D-line. That is still a place that we can upgrade and we have a little cash.

The question I have is this (and I've asked before):

If we had Pierce at MLB last year do you guys think we would have been better?

I think that just about everyone here would say "yes". For that reason alone I think the defense will make great strides with Fletcher at MLB and Marshall/Mcintosh at OLB.

I watched all the games from last year multiple times (I know, I'm a geek), and the d-line was within a couple of 10ths of a second getting to the QB all the time. Even a slight improvement in coverage will increase the sack count and turnovers.

So the point is (again) slightly better DB play, DLs holding up thier guys, and wrap up tackling by the LB's can make a huge improvement (just like the lack of those 3 thing led to its demise).
Yes you are a wanna be GEEK! That can't golf worth a shit......

IF Antinio was in the Middle we would have been better only to a degree. He's only one player, our defense looked like swiss cheese due to injuries and NO depth....HOLES EVERYWHERE.

With that said I think with a healtly LBer core MW/ Fleetch/ and Rocky getting some play time, and the improvements at corner, safety situation and DEPTH in all. We should be GREATLY improved.

I still believe we would be fooling ourselves to think the team is not looking to pickup a DE/DT, I would find it hard to believe they aren't seeing what's available, and ready to strike if the right player comes along.
__________________
"There's no greater feeling than moving a man from Point A to Point B, against his will." #68

THANKS COACH GIBBS FOR EVERYTHING! YOUR THE MAN AND ALWAYS WILL BE!
skinsfan_nn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 07:25 PM   #13
The Starter
 
budw38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern,Va.
Posts: 2,386
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoSkins! View Post
I'm sure we are seeking help om the D-line. That is still a place that we can upgrade and we have a little cash.

The question I have is this (and I've asked before):

If we had Pierce at MLB last year do you guys think we would have been better?

I think that just about everyone here would say "yes". For that reason alone I think the defense will make great strides with Fletcher at MLB and Marshall/Mcintosh at OLB.

I watched all the games from last year multiple times (I know, I'm a geek), and the d-line was within a couple of 10ths of a second getting to the QB all the time. Even a slight improvement in coverage will increase the sack count and turnovers.

So the point is (again) slightly better DB play, DLs holding up thier guys, and wrap up tackling by the LB's can make a huge improvement (just like the lack of those 3 thing led to its demise).
Pierce would have made a diff. Fletcher should make a difference . But , I still believe that one more pass rusher would make a big difference . If we had two guys up front teams would have to double one of them , which would give Lb's and Safeties a clear path to the QBs when we blitzed ! I can't wait to see Taylor and Landry belting TO / Glenn // Plexiglass when they travel into the teeth of our D ! Lets hope Landry can do for our D what Polomoa Steelers / and Sanders , Colts , did for their teams .
budw38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 07:40 PM   #14
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,486
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan_nn View Post
Yes you are a wanna be GEEK! That can't golf worth a shit......

IF Antinio was in the Middle we would have been better only to a degree. He's only one player, our defense looked like swiss cheese due to injuries and NO depth....HOLES EVERYWHERE.

With that said I think with a healtly LBer core MW/ Fleetch/ and Rocky getting some play time, and the improvements at corner, safety situation and DEPTH in all. We should be GREATLY improved.

I still believe we would be fooling ourselves to think the team is not looking to pickup a DE/DT, I would find it hard to believe they aren't seeing what's available, and ready to strike if the right player comes along.
Right. Because as much as we like to blame the run defense, here is are the images going through my head when I think of the plight of the 2006 season:

"Kenny Wright torched again!"
"Wow, Adam Archuleta was just run RIGHT by, by _________________!"
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 07:48 PM   #15
The Starter
 
GoSkins!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 45
Posts: 1,587
Re: D-Lineman??? We Dont Need No Stinkin D-Lineman

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan_nn View Post
Yes you are a wanna be GEEK! That can't golf worth a shit......

IF Antinio was in the Middle we would have been better only to a degree. He's only one player, our defense looked like swiss cheese due to injuries and NO depth....HOLES EVERYWHERE.

With that said I think with a healtly LBer core MW/ Fleetch/ and Rocky getting some play time, and the improvements at corner, safety situation and DEPTH in all. We should be GREATLY improved.

I still believe we would be fooling ourselves to think the team is not looking to pickup a DE/DT, I would find it hard to believe they aren't seeing what's available, and ready to strike if the right player comes along.
Caddy,
That is my point exactly, if guys think that a single change at LB would have helped a bit, having 3 better safeties, 3 better corners (can't count Springs from last year), and a MLB/QB of the defense could change everything.

That said, yeah, I'm sure the Skins are looking for a DE right now. The fact is that there were really none available worthy of the 6th pick.
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien
GoSkins! is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.35326 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25