Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

I really think if this team concentrates on the offensive and defensive lines in the off-season, this will help the Redskins a lot more than anything else. What was the common ingredients of all of those great Redskins teams of the 80's? Solid offensive and defensive lines. Several different QBs and RBs in that decade.

I really hope this is what the FO focuses on in the off season!

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;766028]Only temporarily and not enough to justify the cost. We're 28th in points scored, which is what really matters for offense. Shanahan always has had an eye for drafting offensive talent and finding offensive talent in UDFA. A higher draft pick is more important for a rebuild.[/quote]

trent williams - rookie, cost us our 1st round draft pick
banks - free
torain - free
brown - a 3rd or 4th round pick
mcnabb - 2nd and 3/4th rounder
carriker - moved back 15-20 spots in 5th round

the moves were designed to upgrade this team. mcnabb upgraded the qb position for this season plus the next 2 years at a cost of a 2nd and 3 or 4th rounder. j brown could be a steal if he gets back to form/pro bowl and he if he stays he is going to lock down the RT spot for years to come. trent locks down the LT.

getting 2 spots on the O line locked down for years to come, one is hopefully going to be a stud LT, is progress and upgrade.

it sucks we dont have the talent at the DL or linebacker position, makke (sp?) has disappointed and AH is a disgruntled pos.

we need to add atleast 1 more O lineman with our 1 or 2 rounder. it sucks thomas, kelly didnt solidify our receiving corps, to have 3 2nd rounders and pretty much walk away with nothing just flat out sucks. wtf was vinny thinking overloading on that position when samuels, jansen, thomas, kendall all had 1 foot in the grave.

fact is we have upgraded our oline and qb. we just have so many holes and depth problems, they all cant be addressed in one offseason.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

I agree w/the first half of this thread title - there is a lack of talent in many areas on this team. I disagree some w/the second part. The poor tackling has been an issue all year, at some point that falls on the coaches too. GW's & Blache's teams were good tacklers. GW was said to have always stressed that the db's had to tackle well if they wanted to play. The db's tackling has been poor all year. Guys like Hall will tackle well if they're put on the spot, I don't see that happening this year. Yesterday was the worst from the LBs too.

HOw much of it is poor coaching/leadership or just a deflated team morale, I don't know, but I do think the coaching on the defensive side of the ball is not up to par in some areas. I certainly agree though, that Haslett doesn't have the tools to carry out his assignment of a 3-4.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

We also get a 5th or 6th from the Saints in 2011 for Brown

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=freddyg12;766046]I agree w/the first half of this thread title - there is a lack of talent in many areas on this team. I disagree some w/the second part. The poor tackling has been an issue all year, at some point that falls on the coaches too. GW's & Blache's teams were good tacklers. GW was said to have always stressed that the db's had to tackle well if they wanted to play. The db's tackling has been poor all year. Guys like Hall will tackle well if they're put on the spot, I don't see that happening this year. Yesterday was the worst from the LBs too.

HOw much of it is poor coaching/leadership or just a deflated team morale, I don't know, but I do think the coaching on the defensive side of the ball is not up to par in some areas. I certainly agree though, that Haslett doesn't have the tools to carry out his assignment of a 3-4.[/quote]

I think I heard yesterday going into yesterday's game we ranked 17th in the NFL with 30 missed tackles, Titans were #1 with 50

When Rocky whiffed on that first drive trying to tackle Jacobs...I had a bad feeling. It was so frustrating to see that performance yesterday almost exactly a year after a game (against the same Giants) that symbolized years of franchise ineptitude, only to see us put up such a sad effort once again. I'd like to think we can't get lower than that, but I thought the same thing in 2009

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;766022]Well, I'm not buying what you're selling that everyone on the D simply sucks because of the players being oh so horrible, especially since a good deal of the defense sucking last year was because of LaRon Landry, who is our most improved player this year. Not only that, I've cited at three guys who have had at least some success in the 4-3 and now are falling like rocks thanks to the 3-4. The aspect of the D that has stayed mostly the same is the secondary outside of Landry. And anyone with a brain(i.e Spags) would have put LL in the strong safety role.

You can't have it both ways. There is AMPLE evidence of stud 4-3 players sucking in a 3-4 and vice versa.[/quote]

Right. So all we have to do is get Orakpo, Haynesworth, Golston, and Carter back up at the front four, with McIntosh, Fletcher, and Blades or Wilson at linebacker -- then we can sit back and watch the magical defensive turn-around.

This team just isn't as good as you think it is.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=over the mountain;766044]trent williams - rookie, cost us our 1st round draft pick
banks - free
torain - free
brown - a 3rd or 4th round pick
mcnabb - 2nd and 3/4th rounder
carriker - moved back 15-20 spots in 5th round

the moves were designed to upgrade this team. mcnabb upgraded the qb position for this season plus the next 2 years at a cost of a 2nd and 3 or 4th rounder. j brown could be a steal if he gets back to form/pro bowl and he if he stays he is going to lock down the RT spot for years to come. trent locks down the LT.

getting 2 spots on the O line locked down for years to come, one is hopefully going to be a stud LT, is progress and upgrade.

it sucks we dont have the talent at the DL or linebacker position, makke (sp?) has disappointed and AH is a disgruntled pos.

we need to add atleast 1 more O lineman with our 1 or 2 rounder. it sucks thomas, kelly didnt solidify our receiving corps, to have 3 2nd rounders and pretty much walk away with nothing just flat out sucks. wtf was vinny thinking overloading on that position when samuels, jansen, thomas, kendall all had 1 foot in the grave.

fact is we have upgraded our oline and qb. we just have so many holes and depth problems, they all cant be addressed in one offseason.[/quote]
I was referring to just McNabb and Brown. I'm quite aware they're upgrades for this season, and maybe for the next 3 seasons. However, after they leave or are rendered ineffective down the road, do we still feel the effect of these "phantom" upgrades. Nope. When a player leaves the team, any residual effect is minimal. Brown and McNabb fade away, leaving only those young guys, who I know will be here in the future.

How the hell did you even think I mean the entire aggregate of offensive additions, I cannot fathom. However, it's quite clear you're like an alcoholic. Addicted to the short-term "escape" from the hard reality. If not earlier, 3 years from now, you'll be wondering why the hell is Nate Allen with the Sheagles and is Pro Bowl S while we're still trying to find the next QB of the future. Allen, or anyone else we could have taken with the 2nd rounder year, could be the "cost" of obtaining McNabb and only having a QB upgrade for 3 season.

I still cannot fathom why the hell you brought the rest of them when I was just referring to McNabb and Brown as not worth the cost. Is Jared Veldheer that repugnant to you? Oakland runs a ZBS and he's already seeing action.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SmootSmack;766052]I think I heard yesterday going into yesterday's game we [B]ranked 17th in the NFL with 30 missed tackles[/B], Titans were #1 with 50

When Rocky whiffed on that first drive trying to tackle Jacobs...I had a bad feeling. It was so frustrating to see that performance yesterday almost exactly a year after a game (against the same Giants) that symbolized years of franchise ineptitude, only to see us put up such a sad effort once again. I'd like to think we can't get lower than that, but I thought the same thing in 2009[/quote]

That sounds about right. Some of the missed tackles have been huge, maybe most of them for that matter, leading to big plays. We got used to being such a fundamentally sound defense for the most part under GW & Blache, that to see such poor tackling now makes it seem much worse.

I agree that it just looked like the effort wasn't there in the beginning, even Fletcher didn't seem himself.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Beemnseven;766066]Right. So all we have to do is get Orakpo, Haynesworth, Golston, and Carter back up at the front four, with McIntosh, Fletcher, and Blades or Wilson at linebacker -- then we can sit back and watch the magical defensive turn-around.

This team just isn't as good as you think it is.[/quote]Considering that Orakpo was stuffed into a 4-3 OLB role last year, Landry sucked major balls, and that Blache held them back in 1000 way--one of them being making Landry sucking major balls--, that line and D would actually be performing better than what they did in 2009. Seriously, there has to be someone from a D guru tree that knows how to run a 4-3 better than Blache.

It seems like you're assuming Blache's philosophy is the end-all be-all of 4-3 philosophies.

And Buffalo started magically playing better once they scrapped the 3-4. Instead of coughing up 30+ points every week, they started having games in which they gave up less than 20 points, although they seem to struggle against elite playmakers.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

I do think at this point you have to seriously question the talent on the defense. Rak is the only long term keeper in the front 7. Fletcher can still play so for a short term option he's a keeper as well. Other than that the talent and depth is paper thin.

We've run plenty of 4-3 looks this year and still manage to stink up the joint, so I think the scheme argument has to take a backseat to the talent argument.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;766069]I was referring to just McNabb and Brown. I'm quite aware they're upgrades for this season, and maybe for the next 3 seasons. However, after they leave or are rendered ineffective down the road, do we still feel the effect of these "phantom" upgrades. Nope. When a player leaves the team, any residual effect is minimal. Brown and McNabb fade away, leaving only those young guys, who I know will be here in the future.

How the hell did you even think I mean the entire aggregate of offensive additions, I cannot fathom. However, it's quite clear you're like an alcoholic. Addicted to the short-term "escape" from the hard reality. If not earlier, 3 years from now, you'll be wondering why the hell is Nate Allen with the Sheagles and is Pro Bowl S while we're still trying to find the next QB of the future. Allen, or anyone else we could have taken with the 2nd rounder year, could be the "cost" of obtaining McNabb and only having a QB upgrade for 3 season.

I still cannot fathom why the hell you brought the rest of them when I was just referring to McNabb and Brown as not worth the cost. Is Jared Veldheer that repugnant to you? Oakland runs a ZBS and he's already seeing action.[/quote]

my bad, i didnt know i wasnt allowed to mention the long term young additions our FO did this past offseason in response to your statements that we only added old temporary bandaids.

i dont think one 2nd round pick is going to make or break the 2013 skins. the benefit and upgrade of mcnabb over campbell is worth a 2nd rounder to me, especially if you expect to compete in 2011 and 2012. i expect this team to be very competitive no later than 2012.

to answer your other question; a jason campbell behind this years O line plus veldheer would repugnate me this year and for years to come.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

Campbell hasn't changed any in Oakland. I just think right now he has a better supporting cast at the moment than we do. It was just earlier this year that Campbell was stinking up the place and was benched. And he had plenty of jamarcus russell like days too.

He is just like he was here, passable one day, and horrible the next. The difference is is that Oakland has playmakers, and their defense can keep them in games, even with JC at QB...

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Mattyk;766077]I do think at this point you have to seriously question the talent on the defense. Rak is the only long term keeper in the front 7. Fletcher can still play so for a short term option he's a keeper as well. Other than that the talent and depth is paper thin.

We've run plenty of 4-3 looks this year and still manage to stink up the joint, so I think the scheme argument has to take a backseat to the talent argument.[/quote]

Sure, the talent isn't where we'd want it to be. Again though, the drop-off from last year can't be explained through the talent alone. The point is, that there needs to be a thorough examination of both coaching and players on the defensive level.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=over the mountain;766079]my bad, i didnt know i wasnt allowed to mention the long term young additions our FO did this past offseason in response to your statements that we only added old temporary bandaids.

i dont think one 2nd round pick is going to make or break the 2013 skins. the benefit and upgrade of mcnabb over campbell is worth a 2nd rounder to me, especially if you expect to compete in 2011 and 2012. i expect this team to be very competitive no later than 2012.

to answer your other question; a jason campbell behind this years O line plus veldheer would repugnate me this year and for years to come.[/quote]The young ones didn't have a cost except for the roster spot, did they? So why the hell did you bring them up when I was only talking about McNabb and Brown, aka the TRADES.

I'm sorry if you can't understand the simple concept that McNabb and Brown will be providing 0 utility to this team in three years while a whole host of players from the second round this year's draft will be to their respective teams long afterwards(5-10 years).

A rebuild means a complete forgoing of the present and imminent future for continued success in the longer term. McNabb will only benefit the team in the near future, but his supporting cast will not be improved sufficiently to get us to the Super Bowl, which is the only reasonable justification of trading away picks for a short-term solution. The FO did not commit to a true rebuild. They tried to win now and reload, and they are now accomplishing neither. McNabb will be 37 by the time you expect the O to "explode", and to expect him to be injury-free by then is dreaming at its finest.

Also, I support the move for trading Campbell. However, do realize that we could have coaxed even more out of Oakland if McNabb did not come here because there would be no "we're going to get rid him anyway" bargaining chip for Al Davis to play.

I want a QB who's either a young one with a really high ceiling or a damn good one in his prime, not a aging player who is likely going to retire in three years.

I'm not sure what made you think I wanted to keep JC. I have repeatedly stated that bombing this season with Rex was the way to go on here. We need to obtain players who are going to last a long time, and for the moment, practically only those types of players. Having a high draft position and a full load of high-round picks is the best way to go about that.
JC is 29 and too old for that. Besides, it's not like he was a lock to re-sign here.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;766109]The young ones didn't have a cost except for the roster spot, did they? So why the hell did you bring them up when I was only talking about McNabb and Brown, aka the TRADES.[/quote]

Not sure you really made that clear from the get go

[quote]I'm sorry if you can't understand the simple concept that McNabb and Brown will be providing 0 utility to this team in three years while a whole host of players from the second round this year's draft will be to their respective teams long afterwards(5-10 years).[/quote]

Debatable

[quote]A rebuild means a complete forgoing of the present and imminent future for continued success in the longer term. McNabb will only benefit the team in the near future, but his supporting cast will not be improved sufficiently to get us to the Super Bowl, which is the only reasonable justification of trading away picks for a short-term solution. The FO did not commit to a true rebuild. They tried to win now and reload, and they are now accomplishing neither. McNabb will be 37 by the time you expect the O to "explode", and to expect him to be injury-free by then is dreaming at its finest.[/quote]

Redskins fans would never ever ever accept a complete dismantling and rebuild.

[quote]Also, I support the move for trading Campbell. However, do realize that we could have coaxed even more out of Oakland if McNabb did not come here because there would be no "we're going to get rid him anyway" bargaining chip for Al Davis to play.[/quote]

Yeah well we actually got more for Campbell than people (including Oakland) were even offering before we got McNabb. No one wanted McNabb. Maybe it's because we were trying to move him for 18 months, but McNabb had little to nothing to do with it.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

scp - i wasnt talking to you in my first post. you're the one who qouted me and said all the upgrades i listed were temporary. i wasnt talking directly to you so i dont understand how you can qoute me then continue to take this lil petty nick pick shots at me, inferring im stupid and analogizing me to an alcoholic.

you started qouting me, not the other way around. if you were talking just about mcnabb and brown, great. my original post was about the offseason additions as a whole without reference to you or any post you made in this thread. get off dez nutz son.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SmootSmack;766123]Redskins fans would never ever ever accept a complete dismantling and rebuild.[/quote]

This is unfortunate, but correct.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

Its not the coaching, the team has no talent and they are old. Orakpo, T. Williams and Landry are the only premier players. The rest of the O-Line is terrible and there is no depth. Same with the D-Line. Till you get good in the trenches it doesnt matter who your coach is. He is a hall of fame coach and his son led the best offense in the league last year, they did not all of a sudden turn into bad coaches. O-Lineman early in the draft, a change of pace tail back in the later rounds and find a tall receiver somewhere so we can have some size. Too many people act like we were Super Bowl favorites this year.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

This team needs a youth movement. The oldest roster in the league has demonstrated it can't win at least eight games. Talent first, coaches second.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

Gentlemen,
Bottom line...talent or coaching..chicken or the egg...or both.
I can not help but feel that if we had brought in a real stud defensive coordinator like a GWilliams or a Rex Ryan in last summer instead of Hasslets we would not be LAST in the NFL in defense ranking. You agree?
As you can tell from the day they announced his hiring, I have never been a Hasslett fan.
We are a premiere franchise in the NFL, we can do better than Hasslett.
Just saying.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Mattyk;766077]I do think at this point you have to seriously question the talent on the defense. Rak is the only long term keeper in the front 7. Fletcher can still play so for a short term option he's a keeper as well. Other than that the talent and depth is paper thin.

We've run plenty of 4-3 looks this year and still manage to stink up the joint, so I think the scheme argument has to take a backseat to the talent argument.[/quote]

I think that's a good point: it's not like the 'skins are running a pure 3-4 every single down.

I also think the increased turnovers should be mentioned. If the defense hadn't played with this aggressive approach, I'm not sure the 'skins are even at 4 wins this year.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Defensewins;766213]Gentlemen,
Bottom line...talent or coaching..chicken or the egg...or both.
[B]I can not help but feel that if we had brought in a real stud defensive coordinator like a GWilliams or a Rex Ryan in last summer instead of Hasslets we would not be LAST in the NFL in defense ranking. You agree?[/B]
As you can tell from the day they announced his hiring, I have never been a Hasslett fan.
We are a premiere franchise in the NFL, we can do better than Hasslett.
Just saying.[/quote]

Maybe... but I'm pretty sure we would still be 5-7.

We have two brilliant offensive minds on the offensive side, but that hasn't helped.

Our problem is talent.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Mattyk;766223]Maybe... but I'm pretty sure we would still be 5-7.

We have two brilliant offensive minds on the offensive side, but that hasn't helped.

Our problem is talent.[/quote]

My problem is not the 5-7 record, after all we were crap last season, especially on offense. My problem is our [B][U]defense [/U][/B]is not improving and is getting worse.
I will gladly concede 100% that the problem on offense is talent, especially on the O-line, RB and Wr. I have no problem with the Shanahan's when it comes to coaching the offense.
On defense, we have enough talent to be .500 team and our defense should play and be ranked in the middle to upper half of the NFL, not the bottom.
Hasslett is not getting everything he can from this defense.
We can agree to disagree.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Defensewins;766231]My problem is not the 5-7 record, after all we were crap last season, especially on offense. My problem is our [B][U]defense [/U][/B]is not improving and is getting worse.
I will gladly concede 100% that the problem on offense is talent, especially on the O-line, RB and Wr. I have no problem with the Shanahan's when it comes to coaching the offense.
On defense, we have enough talent to be .500 team and our defense should play and be ranked in the middle to upper half of the NFL, not the bottom.
Hasslett is not getting everything he can from this defense.
We can agree to disagree.[/quote]

Well when the D is crap from the start and then you loose a few starters then it gets even crapper. They might not have been a great D but they where the starters for a reason.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=firstdown;766233]Well when the D is crap from the start and then you loose a few starters then it gets even crapper. They might not have been a great D but they where the starters for a reason.[/quote]

You are talking about the 10th ranked defense from 2009 that Haslett inherited? Crap? No. Average..yes.
They did not get crappy until Hasslett rode into town.
The coaches selected the starters. See where I am going?
Coaches also decided to sit their best interior defensive lineman to prove a point and they are still pushing AH's head in the shit this late in the season rather than trying to make peace.
Coaches decided to stick with Andre Carter as a starter inot the 3rd or 4th week of the season when they clearly saw in all of preseason he was not going to cut it at OLB in the 3-4.
Moved an OLB (Rocky) inside.
Just once, can I see Rocky moved back to OLB and move Lorenzo Alexander moved inside where Alexander's size and strength might slow down some of those long runs right up the gut of our defense? If not, why not? Because of our coach says so? Hhmmm?
But then again you guys say it is definitely not the coaches.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Defensewins;766213]Gentlemen,
Bottom line...talent or coaching..chicken or the egg...or both.
I can not help but feel that if we had brought in a real stud defensive coordinator like a GWilliams or a Rex Ryan in last summer instead of Hasslets we would not be LAST in the NFL in defense ranking. You agree?
As you can tell from the day they announced his hiring, I have never been a Hasslett fan.
[B]We are a premiere franchise in the NFL[/B], we can do better than Hasslett.
Just saying.[/quote]

According to who???? Market Value doesnt = Wins. We have sucked for so long that other teams in the NFL look at us like we look at cleveland (and really....who are WE to look down on ANYONE). Do we have Superbowls....yes. What have they done for us lately....or matter of fact...in the last 15 years!!!

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Texanskin;766248]According to who???? Market Value doesnt = Wins. We have sucked for so long that other teams in the NFL look at us like we look at cleveland (and really....who are WE to look down on ANYONE). Do we have Superbowls....yes. What have they done for us lately....or matter of fact...in the last 15 years!!![/quote]

We have the money to hire top coaches. We fired Gregg Williams and he went on to win a Superbowl last year. we hired Jim Zorn! Wow! Thanks Vinny.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Texanskin;766248]According to who???? Market Value doesnt = Wins. We have sucked for so long that other teams in the NFL look at us like we look at cleveland (and really....who are WE to look down on ANYONE). Do we have Superbowls....yes. What have they done for us lately....or matter of fact...in the last 15 years!!![/quote]

Yeah, but wins alone doesn't make a team a premiere team necessarily. It's a very subjective matter, but I think the point that Defensewins was trying to make is that we are historic and relevant franchise, regardless of whether or not we win or lose. There's a reason that this franchise is one of the most valuable sports franchises on the planet; and that's what makes it premiere.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Defensewins;766242]You are talking about the 10th ranked defense from 2009 that Haslett inherited? Crap? No. Average..yes.
They did not get crappy until Hasslett rode into town.
The coaches selected the starters. See where I am going?
Coaches also decided to sit their best interior defensive lineman to prove a point and they are still pushing AH's head in the shit this late in the season rather than trying to make peace.
Coaches decided to stick with Andre Carter as a starter inot the 3rd or 4th week of the season when they clearly saw in all of preseason he was not going to cut it at OLB in the 3-4.
Moved an OLB (Rocky) inside.
Just once, can I see Rocky moved back to OLB and move Lorenzo Alexander moved inside where Alexander's size and strength might slow down some of those long runs right up the gut of our defense? If not, why not? Because of our coach says so? Hhmmm?
But then again you guys say it is definitely not the coaches.[/quote]

Even with the moves you propose, do you think the D would be radically different?

Obviously the coaches aren't absolved from all blame, but bottom line is we don't have the talent necessary to compete. The best coaching in the world isn't going to change that.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Mattyk;766274]Even with the moves you propose, do you think the D would be radically different?

Obviously the coaches aren't absolved from all blame, but bottom line is we don't have the talent necessary to compete. The best coaching in the world isn't going to change that.[/quote]

Even Football Outsiders more "advanced" stats has us in a freefall from last year as of 11/30/10.
[url=http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2010 DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY RATINGS[/url]
[url=http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2009]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2009 DEFENSE EFFICIENCY RATINGS[/url]

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Mattyk;766077]I do think at this point you have to seriously question the talent on the defense. Rak is the only long term keeper in the front 7. Fletcher can still play so for a short term option he's a keeper as well. Other than that the talent and depth is paper thin.

We've run plenty of 4-3 looks this year and still manage to stink up the joint, so I think the scheme argument has to take a backseat to the talent argument.[/quote]

I think Carter is good.. He's a bit older and not really long term... But he's being seriously misused right now.. Didn't he struggle with playing LB in the 3-4 on his previous teams as well?

I don't understand the Redskins, it seems like we've been running in place for years. Never moving forward. We did a little upgrading on the line, got a little depth and now the D is screwing it up. (The o-line is still screwing it up but... At least we know what we really need... a C and a RT) But seriously. What is the missing piece already?

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

And it [B]just isn't possible [/B]that many of the guys who performed well last year are aging, having a down year, maybe lost a step or two and were bound to begin a decline at some point anyway. Impossible, right?

Matty said it earlier -- outside of Brian Orakpo and perhaps Lorenzo Alexander, who else among the front seven gives us much hope long term? Who?

Andre Carter? -- he's had an up and down career
Philip Daniels? -- seriously, how the guy has lasted this long is miraculous
Kedric Golston? -- showed promise early, had been going downhill (even in the 4-3)
Adam Carriker? -- ho-hum
Ma'ake Kemoeatu? -- total bust, but what did we expect?
London Fletcher? -- complete stud, but only a year or two left
Chris Wilson? -- situational pass rusher, basically non-existent
H.B. Blades? -- special teamer, nothing more
Rocky McIntosh? -- Our top pick in '06; traded down to grab him, giving away a 2nd the following year, and what do we really have with this guy?

Then there's Vonnie Holliday and Anthony Bryant. Yikes.

And among these guys, there are still those who say that all we have to do is line them up differently and all will be right with the world? Please.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;766290]I think Carter is good.. He's a bit older and not really long term... But he's being seriously misused right now.. Didn't he struggle with playing LB in the 3-4 on his previous teams as well?

I don't understand the Redskins, it seems like we've been running in place for years. Never moving forward. We did a little upgrading on the line, got a little depth and now the D is screwing it up. (The o-line is still screwing it up but... At least we know what we really need... a C and a RT) But seriously. What is the missing piece already?[/quote]

He left San Fran precisely because he couldn't get it down there. He was reportedly more comfortable learning the scheme here, but even so, his instincts/skillset, such as playing in space, showed themselves to be terrible, which is death for a LB.

I believe that C is fine with Lich and Monty. What we need are two true guards. I'm sick of having converted centers playing guard.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;766292]He left San Fran precisely because he couldn't get it down there. He was reportedly more comfortable learning the scheme here, but even so, his instincts/skillset, such as playing in space, showed themselves to be terrible, which is death for a LB.

I believe that C is fine with Lich and Monty. What we need are two true guards. I'm sick of having converted centers playing guard.[/quote]

As long as it isn't Rabach under Center. Ugh God, don't even get me started. :Smoker:

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Beemnseven;766291]And it [B]just isn't possible [/B]that many of the guys who performed well last year are aging, having a down year, maybe lost a step or two and were bound to begin a decline at some point anyway. Impossible, right?

Matty said it earlier -- outside of Brian Orakpo and perhaps Lorenzo Alexander, who else among the front seven gives us much hope long term? Who?

Andre Carter? -- he's had an up and down career
Philip Daniels? -- seriously, how the guy has lasted this long is miraculous
Kedric Golston? -- showed promise early, had been going downhill (even in the 4-3)
Adam Carriker? -- ho-hum
Ma'ake Kemoeatu? -- total bust, but what did we expect?
London Fletcher? -- complete stud, but only a year or two left
Chris Wilson? -- situational pass rusher, basically non-existent
H.B. Blades? -- special teamer, nothing more
Rocky McIntosh? -- Our top pick in '06; traded down to grab him, giving away a 2nd the following year, and what do we really have with this guy?

Then there's Vonnie Holliday and Anthony Bryant. Yikes.

And among these guys, there are still those who say that all we have to do is line them up differently and all will be right with the world? Please.[/quote]
Conveniently ignoring the already-cited fact that Buffalo is performing far better now that they've ditched the 3-4. BTW, that supposedly horrid Bills D only coughed up 20.4 per game(slightly better than us) despite being prone to absolute dud games.

You're confusing long term potential with short-term performance. Just because guys like Fletch isn't going to be giving much years down the road doesn't mean that they can't play now. Also, some of the moves would have never even be considered if the 3-4 switch did not happen. Kemo, Bryant, Carriker, and Holliday would not even be here. We would have been debating which 4-3 SOLB candidates to grab in the draft or FA this past offseason.

Carriker is the only one who fits the 3-4 to a T and is proven to have failed in a 4-3.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

The Bills didn't ditch the 3-4. They just have some more 4-3 sets because of injuries. But they're still basically a 3-4

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;766298][B]Conveniently ignoring the already-cited fact that Buffalo is performing far better now that they've ditched the 3-4.[/B] BTW, that supposedly horrid Bills D only coughed up 20.4 per game(slightly better than us) despite being prone to absolute dud games.

You're confusing long term potential with short-term performance. Just because guys like Fletch isn't going to be giving much years down the road doesn't mean that they can't play now. Also, some of the moves would have never even be considered if the 3-4 switch did not happen. Kemo, Bryant, Carriker, and Holliday would not even be here. We would have been debating which 4-3 SOLB candidates to grab in the draft or FA this past offseason.

Carriker is the only one who fits the 3-4 to a T and is proven to have failed in a 4-3.[/quote]

I must have forgotten the rule which states that whatever works for the Buffalo Bills will naturally work for the Redskins.

What on earth are you watching that leads you to believe these guys can play effectively now after what we've seen all year? What were you doing this Sunday at 1pm? Did you actually [I]watch[/I] the game?

[quote]Also, some of the moves would have never even be considered if the 3-4 switch did not happen. Kemo, Bryant, Carriker, and Holliday would not even be here. We would have been debating which 4-3 SOLB candidates to grab in the draft or FA this past offseason.[/quote]

And which players from last year would be giving us All-Pro performances if only they had stayed in a 4-3? Golston and Haynesworth? Andre Carter, Rocky McIntosh, -- oh yeah, we'd be a "top ten defense" at this very moment if Shanny hadn't come along and screwed everything up, right?

It's also a fact that they are still using the 4-3. Which is why it's a fact that if Haslett had never been hired, and if the same scheme had been carried over from last year, we'd be in exactly the same horrific situation.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

Can't totally let Shanny off the hook. The lunacy surrounding the McNabb incident is enough to have doubts about this guy. Not saying he isn't a good coach, but he isn't infallible. Remember, this guy hasn't won squat since Elway retired, and he had loads of talent in Denver since then, in the weakest division in the NFL no doubt.

Re: It's Talent, Not Coaching.
 

[quote=Beemnseven;766327]I must have forgotten the rule which states that whatever works for the Buffalo Bills will naturally work for the Redskins.

What on earth are you watching that leads you to believe these guys can play effectively now after what we've seen all year? What were you doing this Sunday at 1pm? Did you actually [I]watch[/I] the game?



And which players from last year would be giving us All-Pro performances if only they had stayed in a 4-3? Golston and Haynesworth? Andre Carter, Rocky McIntosh, -- oh yeah, we'd be a "top ten defense" at this very moment if Shanny hadn't come along and screwed everything up, right?

It's also a fact that they are still using the 4-3. Which is why it's a fact that if Haslett had never been hired, and if the same scheme had been carried over from last year, we'd be in exactly the same horrific situation.[/quote]Yeah, because Football Outsider's stats are just as bad as regular ones. :rolleyes:

They're still using a 4-3? They may be using fronts with 4 men with the nickel package, but they never ever have use 4 down linemen. And you think someone else is going to be exactly the same as Blache scheme-wise?

It's common knowledge that the 3-4 needs a NT to work. The NT has a very specific role that 4-3 DTs do not perform. Our NTs sucking makes EVERYONE ELSE look worse because the 3-4 is that dependent on having NT. You seem to suffer from perceiving everyone is sucking worse than they actually are precisely because of this.