On Blache

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by MrJL

The Offense has rarely put the Defense in bad positions. They don't turn over the ball much. Maybe the special teams has.

But maybe if the did some of the exotic things Pitt or Baltimore did teams would score less than nineteen. Or the offense would get the ball in better field position.

There have been many many times where the offense goes three and out and doesn't advance field position. Yes you can use the flip side but in the end it really makes no sense to blame to the defense. They're doing a good job. Great? No. We don't have the personel to be great. But good enough to be a playoff defense? Yes.

Personally I'd like to see more exotic blitz packages. But for some reason that's not what Blache is comfortable with. He seems to prefer a straight up style and not hide anything or try and trick the opposing offense. Maybe he's trying not to get caught up in giving up a lot of big plays like we did in 06. Who knows?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

There have been many many times where the offense goes three and out and doesn't advance field position. Yes you can use the flip side but in the end it really makes no sense to blame to the defense. They're doing a good job. Great? No. We don't have the personel to be great. But good enough to be a playoff defense? Yes.

Personally I'd like to see more exotic blitz packages. But for some reason that's not what Blache is comfortable with. He seems to prefer a straight up style and not hide anything or try and trick the opposing offense. Maybe he's trying not to get caught up in giving up a lot of big plays like we did in 06. Who knows?

The first bolded part just isn't true at all and I don't think there's anything you can find to defend it.

But I do think good is a matter of expectation. As a whole, run defense+pass defense, I think we are better than average. I think we SHOULD be a little bit, if not a lot better than we are.

The second bolded part, I know you are just speculating, but we're giving up almost as many big plays as we were in 2006 (defined as 20+ yards, perhaps you are thinking much longer). Mostly, because Blache's blitzes get picked up so easily that we can't defend the deep ins and seams long enough.

We also just don't create any sort of negative plays with his schemes. We're alright at intercepting passes, some better, some worse than us, but we don't get the sacks because he's predictable, and we never strip fumbles (which I don't think is his fault necessarily, but it's true). We rank 30th in forced fumbles per drive, and 29th in adjusted sack rate.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The first bolded part just isn't true at all and I don't think there's anything you can find to defend it.

But I do think good is a matter of expectation. As a whole, run defense+pass defense, I think we are better than average. I think we SHOULD be a little bit, if not a lot better than we are.

The second bolded part, I know you are just speculating, but we're giving up almost as many big plays as we were in 2006 (defined as 20+ yards, perhaps you are thinking much longer). Mostly, because Blache's blitzes get picked up so easily that we can't defend the deep ins and seams long enough.

We also just don't create any sort of negative plays with his schemes. We're alright at intercepting passes, some better, some worse than us, but we don't get the sacks because he's predictable, and we never strip fumbles (which I don't think is his fault necessarily, but it's true). We rank 30th in forced fumbles per drive, and 29th in adjusted sack rate.

Obviously you've got a great handle on things and do a great job breaking down the games. I think in the bolded portion above you identify the central issue quite succinctly. I don't have the numbers (and can't find them) but maybe you can marshal them for me. My sense is that the Redskins actually blitz quite often (I'd bet they are up among the league leaders) but their blitzes are largely vanilla. They don't run many zone dogs, few complex stunts, and when they have DBs coming they often clue. So they are bringing extra people, but not really putting pressure on the opposing OLine and QB (the way other teams do to the Redskins). The people that get pressured are actually the DBs on the back end who get manned up while the QB faces minimal pressure because the defense rarely creates quick pressure despite bringing extra people.

So my question is, how often do the Redskins bring extra pressure (you break this down every week, do you have the cumulative stats?). Do you have any idea how the number of Redskins blitzes stacks up to other teams in the league? Is Blache bringing extra people in order to stop the run or are they actually trying to pressure the passer (i.e. are the bringing people on 1st and 2nd down in running situations or are they mostly in obvious passing downs and distances?)

We heard during the summer that Blache preferred to run a simplified defense. Few exotic blitzes, focus on fundamentals, stop the run, defend the pass on the back end with DBs. Instead, what we have gotten is a team that blitzes often (albeit with few exotic blitzes), still generates little pressure, and doesn't do a very good job of getting off the field in key third downs. I'm reminded of a passage that Gregg Easterbrook had from earlier in the season after the Skins managed to lose to the Rams:

"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1: Last week, TMQ praised new Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache for "using conservative, responsibility-oriented schemes with hardly any of the blitzing or exotic fronts that bobbleheads in the booth always extol." With Washington leading St. Louis 17-16, Les Mouflons faced third-and-13 on their 41 with 1:13 remaining. To that point in the game, St. Louis had just 158 yards of total offense. If Washington simply plays straight defense, a stop is likely. Instead, Blache called not just a safety blitz but a double safety blitz. Speedster Dennis Avery was single-covered on a deep go route for a 43-yard completion, and the Rams kicked the winning field goal with two seconds showing."

[MrJL]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Obviously you've got a great handle on things and do a great job breaking down the games. I think in the bolded portion above you identify the central issue quite succinctly. I don't have the numbers (and can't find them) but maybe you can marshal them for me. My sense is that the Redskins actually blitz quite often (I'd bet they are up among the league leaders) but their blitzes are largely vanilla. They don't run many zone dogs, few complex stunts, and when they have DBs coming they often clue. So they are bringing extra people, but not really putting pressure on the opposing OLine and QB (the way other teams do to the Redskins). The people that get pressured are actually the DBs on the back end who get manned up while the QB faces minimal pressure because the defense rarely creates quick pressure despite bringing extra people.

So my question is, how often do the Redskins bring extra pressure (you break this down every week, do you have the cumulative stats?). Do you have any idea how the number of Redskins blitzes stacks up to other teams in the league? Is Blache bringing extra people in order to stop the run or are they actually trying to pressure the passer (i.e. are the bringing people on 1st and 2nd down in running situations or are they mostly in obvious passing downs and distances?)

We heard during the summer that Blache preferred to run a simplified defense. Few exotic blitzes, focus on fundamentals, stop the run, defend the pass on the back end with DBs. Instead, what we have gotten is a team that blitzes often (albeit with few exotic blitzes), still generates little pressure, and doesn't do a very good job of getting off the field in key third downs. I'm reminded of a passage that Gregg Easterbrook had from earlier in the season after the Skins managed to lose to the Rams:

"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1: Last week, TMQ praised new Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache for "using conservative, responsibility-oriented schemes with hardly any of the blitzing or exotic fronts that bobbleheads in the booth always extol." With Washington leading St. Louis 17-16, Les Mouflons faced third-and-13 on their 41 with 1:13 remaining. To that point in the game, St. Louis had just 158 yards of total offense. If Washington simply plays straight defense, a stop is likely. Instead, Blache called not just a safety blitz but a double safety blitz. Speedster Dennis Avery was single-covered on a deep go route for a 43-yard completion, and the Rams kicked the winning field goal with two seconds showing."

Problem there is on that blitz one of the safeties blitzed late. I think it was Moore. Rookie mistake.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Obviously you've got a great handle on things and do a great job breaking down the games. I think in the bolded portion above you identify the central issue quite succinctly. I don't have the numbers (and can't find them) but maybe you can marshal them for me. My sense is that the Redskins actually blitz quite often (I'd bet they are up among the league leaders) but their blitzes are largely vanilla. They don't run many zone dogs, few complex stunts, and when they have DBs coming they often clue. So they are bringing extra people, but not really putting pressure on the opposing OLine and QB (the way other teams do to the Redskins). The people that get pressured are actually the DBs on the back end who get manned up while the QB faces minimal pressure because the defense rarely creates quick pressure despite bringing extra people.

So my question is, how often do the Redskins bring extra pressure (you break this down every week, do you have the cumulative stats?). Do you have any idea how the number of Redskins blitzes stacks up to other teams in the league? Is Blache bringing extra people in order to stop the run or are they actually trying to pressure the passer (i.e. are the bringing people on 1st and 2nd down in running situations or are they mostly in obvious passing downs and distances?)

We heard during the summer that Blache preferred to run a simplified defense. Few exotic blitzes, focus on fundamentals, stop the run, defend the pass on the back end with DBs. Instead, what we have gotten is a team that blitzes often (albeit with few exotic blitzes), still generates little pressure, and doesn't do a very good job of getting off the field in key third downs. I'm reminded of a passage that Gregg Easterbrook had from earlier in the season after the Skins managed to lose to the Rams:

"Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! No. 1: Last week, TMQ praised new Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache for "using conservative, responsibility-oriented schemes with hardly any of the blitzing or exotic fronts that bobbleheads in the booth always extol." With Washington leading St. Louis 17-16, Les Mouflons faced third-and-13 on their 41 with 1:13 remaining. To that point in the game, St. Louis had just 158 yards of total offense. If Washington simply plays straight defense, a stop is likely. Instead, Blache called not just a safety blitz but a double safety blitz. Speedster Dennis Avery was single-covered on a deep go route for a 43-yard completion, and the Rams kicked the winning field goal with two seconds showing."

ESPN/Football Outsiders has an article up right now that says that the Redskins and Eagles are the two highest blitzing teams in the league. 16% and 17% respectively. They are near the top of the league an adjusted sack rate. We're near the bottom. There is no doubt their blitz schemes are inherently more effective than ours. Good post.

And to answer your question, he blitzes mostly in third and long. Exactly when Easterbrook says you shouldn't.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The first bolded part just isn't true at all and I don't think there's anything you can find to defend it.

But I do think good is a matter of expectation. As a whole, run defense+pass defense, I think we are better than average. I think we SHOULD be a little bit, if not a lot better than we are.

The second bolded part, I know you are just speculating, but we're giving up almost as many big plays as we were in 2006 (defined as 20+ yards, perhaps you are thinking much longer). Mostly, because Blache's blitzes get picked up so easily that we can't defend the deep ins and seams long enough.

We also just don't create any sort of negative plays with his schemes. We're alright at intercepting passes, some better, some worse than us, but we don't get the sacks because he's predictable, and we never strip fumbles (which I don't think is his fault necessarily, but it's true). We rank 30th in forced fumbles per drive, and 29th in adjusted sack rate.

Oh really?? Sigh... Tripp I just think you can never admit when you're wrong. You try and over analyze everything with stats, and while sometimes you bring up solid points, on this subject you're just flat out wrong. Blache is not the main reason we are where we are. It's the offense that scores 10 points a game. If you can't see that then so be it. But as I said, there are experts that played in the NFL that follow this team who are basically saying the same thing.

There have been many instances where the offense goes three and out. It happened last week against the freaking Bengals. No first downs til midway through the 2nd q. Inexcuseable! I remember watching Pitts when Tomlin on side kicks it to start the game off. Why? Cause he knows his defense has his back. We got the ball a few times deep in Pittsburgh territory and could not get first downs. Or the first game of the year.....no first downs til the end of the half. I could go on and on.

Look, I'm not saying our defense is perfect. We need to create turnovers and maybe doing more exotic blitz packages will help. But to be honest, I've seen numerous times where our guys were in positions to get turnovers yet we simply don't make the play. Rogers could've changed the Pitts. game around if he simply catches the ball. How many INTS did we drop last week? Or in first game of the year? To me that's more frustating than not trying to hide blitzes. If our guys could just catch the damn ball.

[maroonandblack30]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Oh really?? Sigh... Tripp I just think you can never admit when you're wrong. You try and over analyze everything with stats, and while sometimes you bring up solid points, on this subject you're just flat out wrong. Blache is not the main reason we are where we are. It's the offense that scores 10 points a game. If you can't see that then so be it. But as I said, there are experts that played in the NFL that follow this team who are basically saying the same thing.

There have been many instances where the offense goes three and out. It happened last week against the freaking Bengals. No first downs til midway through the 2nd q. Inexcuseable! I remember watching Pitts when Tomlin on side kicks it to start the game off. Why? Cause he knows his defense has his back. We got the ball a few times deep in Pittsburgh territory and could not get first downs. Or the first game of the year.....no first downs til the end of the half. I could go on and on.

Look, I'm not saying our defense is perfect. We need to create turnovers and maybe doing more exotic blitz packages will help. But to be honest, I've seen numerous times where our guys were in positions to get turnovers yet we simply don't make the play. Rogers could've changed the Pitts. game around if he simply catches the ball. How many INTS did we drop last week? Or in first game of the year? To me that's more frustating than not trying to hide blitzes. If our guys could just catch the damn ball.

Agree...

Bottom line = our D is in the top 5 in overall defense. To me, there is no need to analyze any further. QB ratings aside I can only think of one game where a QB had a really good game against the Skins (Eli in the 2nd matchup)

I appreciate Gtripps insight but I don't think you have to dig that deep to figure out that the defense is pretty good.

Like mentioned before, I have heard at least two former players say the Skins have "championship quality defense" B-Mitch was one of them.

If guys who actually suited up in the league say their good, thats good enough for me.

"Neutral" stats are fine, but I remember a while ago some math wiz came out with a study that said football teams should go for it on every 4th down because statistics showed that they would succeed in the long run..... I'm just saying.

[MrJL]

Originally Posted by maroonandblack30

Agree...

Bottom line = our D is in the top 5 in overall defense. To me, there is no need to analyze any further. QB ratings aside I can only think of one game where a QB had a really good game against the Skins (Eli in the 2nd matchup)

I appreciate Gtripps insight but I don't think you have to dig that deep to figure out that the defense is pretty good.

Like mentioned before, I have heard at least two former players say the Skins have "championship quality defense" B-Mitch was one of them.

If guys who actually suited up in the league say their good, thats good enough for me.

"Neutral" stats are fine, but I remember a while ago some math wiz came out with a study that said football teams should go for it on every 4th down because statistics showed that they would succeed in the long run..... I'm just saying.

There are some key questions here.

1. Will the offense improve having to once again start from scratch if Zorn is fired?

2. Will the defense improve with a new coach who places more emphasis on pass rush?

3. If Blache is retained will his sacks don't matter philosophy allow him to push the front office to attempt to improve the D's main weakness the defensive line?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Oh really?? Sigh... Tripp I just think you can never admit when you're wrong. You try and over analyze everything with stats, and while sometimes you bring up solid points, on this subject you're just flat out wrong. Blache is not the main reason we are where we are. It's the offense that scores 10 points a game. If you can't see that then so be it. But as I said, there are experts that played in the NFL that follow this team who are basically saying the same thing.

There have been many instances where the offense goes three and out. It happened last week against the freaking Bengals. No first downs til midway through the 2nd q. Inexcuseable! I remember watching Pitts when Tomlin on side kicks it to start the game off. Why? Cause he knows his defense has his back. We got the ball a few times deep in Pittsburgh territory and could not get first downs. Or the first game of the year.....no first downs til the end of the half. I could go on and on.

Look, I'm not saying our defense is perfect. We need to create turnovers and maybe doing more exotic blitz packages will help. But to be honest, I've seen numerous times where our guys were in positions to get turnovers yet we simply don't make the play. Rogers could've changed the Pitts. game around if he simply catches the ball. How many INTS did we drop last week? Or in first game of the year? To me that's more frustating than not trying to hide blitzes. If our guys could just catch the damn ball.

I think it's obvious that both sides of the ball have their own issues to correct. And both have declined in the past nine games. I think the offense has declined further, because the offense had further to decline than the defense did.

I'm sorry for not admiting when I'm wrong after clearly proving myself right. You're probably looking at me as some arrogant prick right now. I'm okay with that.

But your claim that I'm wrong is that I'm OVERanalyzing stuff. You aren't even reading what I have to write. And that's why you aren't learning anything here.

We are simply not great at preventing points. That's not overanalyzing things at all. You cannot have read my post and still deny this. Eleven teams are better at keeping teams out of the end zone than we are. That is the very most basic measure of defense. Our offense isn't scoring enough touchdowns, given. But that's not the whole story, and if you think it is, then I probably had more respect for you as a poster than I should have.

If PPG is enough for you to feel like you know that we don't have an issue at preventing points, then whatever. Bottom line is that we are a 7-7 defense, and we need to get better to be a force in the playoffs next year. I think you know this.

Realize that:

• You said that the offense goes three and out way too much (I assume compared to an average team).
• You were wrong when you said this.
• I told you that you were wrong.
• I am not to blame for you being wrong, like you seem to believe I am. It is not my fault you did not know that our offense converts a 1st and 10 into another 1st and 10 two thirds of the time.
• The fact that you refuse to read anything I write doesn't make your statement any less wrong.
• I will not be apologizing for correcting you, simply because you don't want to admit that you were wrong.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think it's obvious that both sides of the ball have their own issues to correct. And both have declined in the past nine games. I think the offense has declined further, because the offense had further to decline than the defense did.

I'm sorry for not admiting when I'm wrong after clearly proving myself right. You're probably looking at me as some arrogant prick right now. I'm okay with that.

But your claim that I'm wrong is that I'm OVERanalyzing stuff. You aren't even reading what I have to write. And that's why you aren't learning anything here.

We are simply not great at preventing points. That's not overanalyzing things at all. You cannot have read my post and still deny this. Eleven teams are better at keeping teams out of the end zone than we are. That is the very most basic measure of defense. Our offense isn't scoring enough touchdowns, given. But that's not the whole story, and if you think it is, then I probably had more respect for you as a poster than I should have.

If PPG is enough for you to feel like you know that we don't have an issue at preventing points, then whatever. Bottom line is that we are a 7-7 defense, and we need to get better to be a force in the playoffs next year. I think you know this.

Realize that:

• You said that the offense goes three and out way too much (I assume compared to an average team).
• You were wrong when you said this.
• I told you that you were wrong.
• I am not to blame for you being wrong, like you seem to believe I am. It is not my fault you did not know that our offense converts a 1st and 10 into another 1st and 10 two thirds of the time.
• The fact that you refuse to read anything I write doesn't make your statement any less wrong.
• I will not be apologizing for correcting you, simply because you don't want to admit that you were wrong.

I don't think you're a prick. I just thing you act like you a Mr. Know It All just cause you spend countless hours breaking down film and studying stats. Just cause you take the time to do this, you think your opinion is what matters. Then you get defensive when someone challenges you on it. You get defensive if I say other people who have played in the NFL and know more about football than you (or I) say the defense is not the main problem.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I don't think you're a prick. I just thing you act like you a Mr. Know It All just cause you spend countless hours breaking down film and studying stats. Just cause you take the time to do this, you think your opinion is what matters. Then you get defensive when someone challenges you on it. You get defensive if I say other people who have played in the NFL and know more about football than you (or I) say the defense is not the main problem.

Well, either way, no hard feelings.

If I put multiple hours into an argument that I'm pretty darn sure/am sure I'm right on, you can't really expect me to give it up when a few people who don't necessarily understand where I'm coming from try to shoot me down. That's what this big thing boils down do. It probably won't be the last time I get defensive on this board when someone tries to (poorly) shoot me down.