Washington Redskins vs Detroit Lions Pregame Thread

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I know you love to to pile on Shanahan at any chance, but as defensive coordinator the performance of the D ultimately falls on Haslett. That just comes with the territory. He needs to get things figured out.

I agree that Shanahan can't be held responsible for the effectiveness of the week to week defensive gameplan, but rewind half a decade to the Gibbs era, and we were just in a different category in terms of defensive ability. You didn't have to worry about the week to week defensive gameplan six years ago. Strong defense was the expectation.

The organization is different now. Defense is a struggle. It's a struggle when Haslett is on point and it's a struggle when he's doing things that don't make sense. He's going to have to accept responsibility when the unit performance is unacceptable, but I don't know if Haslett is the reason the defense has gone backwards in the last five years.

I just don't think there has been a high priority on acquiring and keeping great defensive players.

I think we have some really good defensive players, and some really good defensive prospects, and it's on Haslett to turn those guys into a strong unit, but we're also forced to rely on no-upside guys like Baccari Rambo and EJ Biggers in major roles, and that's a tough thing to scheme around.

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Nobody forced Haslett to take the job.

We have the 3-4 personnel now. Haslett has to make it work.

Nobody forced Haslett to take the job? That has got to be the lamest excuse for Shanahan I've ever heard

[donofriose]

Shanahan in my opinion deserves some of the blame for how bad the D has looked.

It is similar to Rex Ryan, the New York Jets defense is incredible, but their offense is terrible.

Both coaches deserve some of the blame because they are head coaches, not coordinators.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

Nobody forced Haslett to take the job? That has got to be the lamest excuse for Shanahan I've ever heard

I don’t think Matty's statement was as much an excuse for Shanahan as it was an indictment on Haslett. He has to figure out how to get this D rolling - four quarters per game. It's his D. Of course Shanahan bears some responsibility for it - that is part of the deal if you are the HC.

Haslett figured it out last year, right? People were praising him for the “mid-season adjustments he made” which played a major role in the team running off seven in a row to win the division. It is still early, maybe he can do the same this year…

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

Well yes and no.Haslett is responsible for the defense Now,but it was Shanahans hare brained ideal to hire Haslett and blow up our 4-3 defense that was never suited to run the 3-4 and weve pretty much sucked since then,so you could kinda say its all Shanahans fault

Well, for one thing Haslett wasn't Shanahan's 1st or even 2nd choice. In fact, and this is going to open up a whole other can of worms, I think a "higher power" may have strongly suggested Haslett. Do I know this for a fact? No, but I do know about some other things which would lead me to think that's quite possible.

As for switching from a 4-3. No problem with that at all. We were in a 4-3 with guys like Carter, Wynn, Daniels. You look at where the league was headed offensively, what players on D were becoming available via the draft and FA, and you make a decision based on that as far as where you want the D to be in 5 years (from Mike's 5 year plan). I don't think the "we were a 4-3 in 2009 defense, so we should stay that way" argument holds much weight

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well, for one thing Haslett wasn't Shanahan's 1st or even 2nd choice. In fact, and this is going to open up a whole other can of worms, I think a "higher power" may have strongly suggested Haslett. Do I know this for a fact? No, but I do know about some other things which would lead me to think that's quite possible.

As for switching from a 4-3. No problem with that at all. We were in a 4-3 with guys like Carter, Wynn, Daniels. You look at where the league was headed offensively, what players on D were becoming available via the draft and FA, and you make a decision based on that as far as where you want the D to be in 5 years (from Mike's 5 year plan). I don't think the "we were a 4-3 in 2009 defense, so we should stay that way" argument holds much weight

Well the facts are Shanny hired Haslett,as for the rest that is just conjecture.

How you dont have a problem with the switch to the 3-4 is beyond me,weve sucked big time since we've done it.Add that to the fact that we MILLIONS of dollars invested in haynesworth to anchor the 4-3.
Would Haynesworth still have acted the same way if we hadnt made the switch,who knows,we'll never know the answer to that

[SmootSmack]

So you think we wouldn't have sucked if we stuck with the 4-3? Even though we were likely changing a lot of the players along the front 7 anyway?

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

Well the facts are Shanny hired Haslett,as for the rest that is just conjecture.

How you dont have a problem with the switch to the 3-4 is beyond me,weve sucked big time since we've done it.Add that to the fact that we MILLIONS of dollars invested in haynesworth to anchor the 4-3.
Would Haynesworth still have acted the same way if we hadnt made the switch,who knows,we'll never know the answer to that

Doesn't matter, because chances are he would have played the same way regardless...piss poor...

Besides, it's not Shanny's fault MILLIONS of dollars were invested (wasted) in Haynesworth before he took over...similar to the fact that it's not Lombardi's fault the Browns drafted Richardson #3 overall. He still has to make decisions based on what he thinks is best for the team - in his vision.

[scowan]

Anyone else notice how much press-man coverage the Chiefs played last night? Why don't the Redskins do more of that? At least hit the guy before he gets into his route. With Orakpo and Kerrigan coming from the edges, that's all they need, is a little more time to get to the QB.

[skinsfaninok]

^ because our corners cant be left alone like Smith and Flowers were

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by scowan

Anyone else notice how much press-man coverage the Chiefs played last night? Why don't the Redskins do more of that? At least hit the guy before he gets into his route. With Orakpo and Kerrigan coming from the edges, that's all they need, is a little more time to get to the QB.

I don't know if any of our CB's are fast enough to play right off the line. Wilson can get beat regularly and D. Hall just doesn't seem good enough.

I'm not sure how Amerson or Biggers are one on one, but if Biggers had the coverage skills, I think he has the speed.

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So you think we wouldn't have sucked if we stuck with the 4-3? Even though we were likely changing a lot of the players along the front 7 anyway?

I dont think we would have but we could go back and forth on it all day
Lets just move on and agree to disagree since this is supposed to be Lions pregame talk

[Chico23231]

Redskins WR Leonard Hankerson injures hamstring in Friday practice - Richmond Times-Dispatch

Hank is injuried. Questionable for the game. And Kai still not kicking.

[scowan]

Well, I feel like if the Redskins don't press Calvin Johnson some this weekend, they are going to be in for a long day.

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Redskins WR Leonard Hankerson injures hamstring in Friday practice - Richmond Times-Dispatch

Hank is injuried. Questionable for the game. And Kai still not kicking.

Mother focker what next