It's Talent, Not Coaching.

[Bushead]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

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.

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.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

My problem is not the 5-7 record, after all we were crap last season, especially on offense. My problem is our defense 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.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

My problem is not the 5-7 record, after all we were crap last season, especially on offense. My problem is our defense 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.

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.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

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.

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.

[Texanskin]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

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.

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!!!

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Texanskin

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!!!

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.

[Coff]

Originally Posted by Texanskin

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!!!

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

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.

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.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

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

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

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?

[Beemnseven]

And it just isn't possible 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.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

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?

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.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

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.

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

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

And it just isn't possible 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.

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.