Post Draft, What Are Our Needs?

Talk about the Washington Football Team here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
SkinsJock
08 Champ
08 Champ
Posts: 18385
youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: New England

the safety 'issue'

Post by SkinsJock »

Haslett has said that he will be more looking to playing a 2 safety scheme than a more traditional SS and FS - he is not saying that if the opportunity to find a better FS came along that he wouldn't take advantage - I feel he is just trying to best utilize the talents of the players he has here and the safeties are going to play closer to the line and if the scheme calls for it then one will drop a bit further back OR have more of a FS responsibility

this is more about best using the talents of the players you have IMO than trying to make players fit the scheme you'd like to run

this is still very early to be actually looking at who is doing what here - players will be added and we are certainly going to lose a lot of players


we were 4-12 - hopefully, we see a lot of changes in both players and how we do things
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
VetSkinsFan
One Step Away
One Step Away
Posts: 7652
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:31 am
Location: NoVA

Re: the safety 'issue'

Post by VetSkinsFan »

SkinsJock wrote:Haslett has said that he will be more looking to playing a 2 safety scheme than a more traditional SS and FS - he is not saying that if the opportunity to find a better FS came along that he wouldn't take advantage - I feel he is just trying to best utilize the talents of the players he has here and the safeties are going to play closer to the line and if the scheme calls for it then one will drop a bit further back OR have more of a FS responsibility

this is more about best using the talents of the players you have IMO than trying to make players fit the scheme you'd like to run

this is still very early to be actually looking at who is doing what here - players will be added and we are certainly going to lose a lot of players


we were 4-12 - hopefully, we see a lot of changes in both players and how we do things


I hope he changes his mind, b/c we don't have the safeties to best utilize the 2 safety secondary as opposed to FS/SS scheme IMO.
...any given Sunday....

RIP #21 Sean Taylor. You will be loved and adored by Redskins fans forever!!!!!

GSPODS:
The National Anthem sucks.
What a useless piece of propagandist rhetoric that is.
SkinsJock
08 Champ
08 Champ
Posts: 18385
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: New England

Post by SkinsJock »

I hear you Vet but this is very early to be too concerned about who is here and what sort of defensive set up is going to be installed

let me put it a little differently - these guys (Shanahan & Haslett) are IMO going to have a more effective defensive scheme and a better defense than we have seen here recently, mainly because they will design the defense around what they feel will give the players they have the best chance to execute the game plan and not like we have seen here recently when very talented players were in many cases being put in situations that did not take advantage of both their talents and the offense the co-ordinators were trying to game plan against

we need to let these guys keep putting together the pieces here - IMO we need to completely change both the attitude and make up of this franchise and that will not happen in one season

some of us seem to be thinking we can be an effective and consistently competitive team again in a very short time - this 4-12 franchise is not becoming a playoff franchise in a year - dream on :lol:
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
FireVinny
piggie
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:23 pm
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL

Post by FireVinny »

Any thoughts on my Kevin Barnes to FS suggestion? Am I imagining having read something about one of the corners moving to FS? If so, I think he should be the guy, based on: the Best hit (and general tackling skill), his wonderlic score (I would call MLB quarterback of the def, but some folks apply the tag to FS as well), and his speed.

As far as the 2 safety scheme, I don't know exactly how that works, but it would seem that you still need at least one of the safeties on the field to be able to help out the corners over the top. I do appreciate trying to fit the scheme to the personnel we have, and maybe that means our safety situation is less of a "mess." Still, it probably means another year of giving up a lot of long passes.
Since Chris Samuels, on the first day of the draft:
O-Line: 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
D-Line: 0
WR: 4
The Hogster
#######
#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Post by The Hogster »

FireVinny wrote:Any thoughts on my Kevin Barnes to FS suggestion? Am I imagining having read something about one of the corners moving to FS? If so, I think he should be the guy, based on: the Best hit (and general tackling skill), his wonderlic score (I would call MLB quarterback of the def, but some folks apply the tag to FS as well), and his speed.

As far as the 2 safety scheme, I don't know exactly how that works, but it would seem that you still need at least one of the safeties on the field to be able to help out the corners over the top. I do appreciate trying to fit the scheme to the personnel we have, and maybe that means our safety situation is less of a "mess." Still, it probably means another year of giving up a lot of long passes.


He might be able to work-in there. But, I'd think that Phillip Buchannon would be better suited for the position. Veteran corners have seen the looks and know the position a bit better than inexperienced corners. Also, it's a proven transition for older, experienced corners to slide over to Free Safety.

It will be interesting though.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
yupchagee
#14
#14
Posts: 4536
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 2:50 pm
Location: Louisville KY

Post by yupchagee »

FireVinny wrote:
yupchagee wrote:I don't see a "mess" at safety. LL probably starts alongside Doughty or Horton.


None of those three can play free safety.

They're all terrible in deep pass coverage, and Doughty and Horton are pretty average at strong safety, too. Landry has stated flat out that he's switching to SS, where Doughty and Horton played last year. Horton has never played FS, and given his past struggles in pass coverage, I doubt he'd succeed. Doughty was a FS in college, but he was terrible at the position in '07, before switching with Landry.

Three guys at SS and none at FS (apologies to Kareem Moore). That's a mess.

But, sorry, you're right: I was probably overstating Hicks' value... what I should have said is that EVERYONE on our OL is weak or unproven. CR used to be an above average center, but that time has passed.



I seem to remember Landry & Doughty playing well together after Taylor's murder. I think they were missused the last 2 years.
Skins fan since '55

"The constitution is not a suicide pact"- Abraham Lincoln
crazyhorse1
ch1
ch1
Posts: 3634
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Re: the safety 'issue'

Post by crazyhorse1 »

VetSkinsFan wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:Haslett has said that he will be more looking to playing a 2 safety scheme than a more traditional SS and FS - he is not saying that if the opportunity to find a better FS came along that he wouldn't take advantage - I feel he is just trying to best utilize the talents of the players he has here and the safeties are going to play closer to the line and if the scheme calls for it then one will drop a bit further back OR have more of a FS responsibility

this is more about best using the talents of the players you have IMO than trying to make players fit the scheme you'd like to run

this is still very early to be actually looking at who is doing what here - players will be added and we are certainly going to lose a lot of players


we were 4-12 - hopefully, we see a lot of changes in both players and how we do things


.

I hope he changes his mind, b/c we don't have the safeties to best utilize the 2 safety secondary as opposed to FS/SS scheme IMO.


Our two safety scheme means that our safties will take turns getting torched.
PulpExposure
Pushing Paper
Pushing Paper
Posts: 4860
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 3:01 pm

Re: the safety 'issue'

Post by PulpExposure »

crazyhorse1 wrote:
VetSkinsFan wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:Haslett has said that he will be more looking to playing a 2 safety scheme than a more traditional SS and FS - he is not saying that if the opportunity to find a better FS came along that he wouldn't take advantage - I feel he is just trying to best utilize the talents of the players he has here and the safeties are going to play closer to the line and if the scheme calls for it then one will drop a bit further back OR have more of a FS responsibility

this is more about best using the talents of the players you have IMO than trying to make players fit the scheme you'd like to run

this is still very early to be actually looking at who is doing what here - players will be added and we are certainly going to lose a lot of players


we were 4-12 - hopefully, we see a lot of changes in both players and how we do things


.

I hope he changes his mind, b/c we don't have the safeties to best utilize the 2 safety secondary as opposed to FS/SS scheme IMO.


Our two safety scheme means that our safties will take turns getting torched.


At least by taking turns it's more fair...
Post Reply