The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

SkinsJock wrote:just to be clear - we do not know what the make up of the staff is but we do know that Bruce and the FO have an agreement in place for Jay Gruden to be the HC

Jay will be putting together a staff and those guys will be working for Jay but they will be 'hired' by the FO ...

Jay will get a staff together but they are the guys the FO wants .... as well

so far so good

What makes you think this? ALMOST EVERY (not counting Zorn) HC gets to hire his own staff. You can't really hold a guy responsible for coaching a team if you tell him he can't hire his own staff.

DarthMonk wrote:

AnthonyRRedskin1995 wrote:Has Haslett ever ran a 4-3?

I think before Shanny, that's ALL he ran -

Nope, not true. Before coming to DC Jim had been a DC for 7 years. 3 with the St Louis (4-3), one with New Orleans (4-3) and his best three years of his coaching career (by far) his 3 years as the DC in Pittsburg and he certainly ran a 3-4 there. So now he actually has more experience as a 3-4 DC than a 4-3 DC.

Either way, without Bill Cowher watching over him he has been a terrible DC no matter what scheme he ran.

Yes, I know Shanny was probably as much to blame for the defense struggling as JH, but Jim was a bad DC before he ever came to DC.

If he is kept around, I say make him the responsible for clock/time out management. I know we have lost at least a half a dozen or more games over the past several years due to not having a clue as to how to manage the clock. I think Jim could handle that.

riggofan wrote:http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=39942&p=628633&hilit=jay+gruden#p628633

Tue, Dec 10

riggofan wrote:Anyway, the coach I'd like to see here in January? JAY GRUDEN.

Aww yeah.

Not to brag too much.

I wanted him back in the shanny fired thread. We both got the guy we wanted. I really believe hes the coach who can lead us back to glory.

No, really what he said was to "stay even-keeled"............but you get the point...!!! Let's not get too high or too low.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

AnthonyRRedskin1995 wrote:Has Haslett ever ran a 4-3?

I think before Shanny, that's ALL he ran -

Nope, not true. Before coming to DC Jim had been a DC for 7 years. 3 with the St Louis (4-3), one with New Orleans (4-3) and his best three years of his coaching career (by far) his 3 years as the DC in Pittsburg and he certainly ran a 3-4 there. So now he actually has more experience as a 3-4 DC than a 4-3 DC.

Either way, without Bill Cowher watching over him he has been a terrible DC no matter what scheme he ran.

Yes, I know Shanny was probably as much to blame for the defense struggling as JH, but Jim was a bad DC before he ever came to DC.

If he is kept around, I say make him the responsible for clock/time out management. I know we have lost at least a half a dozen or more games over the past several years due to not having a clue as to how to manage the clock. I think Jim could handle that.

Misleading. You snipped a lot from my quote. What you quoted is not what I wrote. The brick wall emoticon came after other statements, not that one - which was a guess.

Also, though I did not emphasize it, I was careful to use the word "think." He had not run a 3-4 for years before coming here and he certainly had run much more 4-3 than 3-4 before coming here and it was Shanny's choice, not Jim's.

In Pitt he took over a well established 3-4 from Dick LeBeau - with good personnel and experienced assistants too.

So a better answer by me would have been ... yes, he once ran a 3-4 in Pittsburg about 15 years ago. He took over for Dick LeBeau and coached under Cowher - a former DC himself.

Thanks for the info.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:just to be clear - we do not know what the make up of the staff is but we do know that Bruce and the FO have an agreement in place for Jay Gruden to be the HC
Jay will be putting together a staff and those guys will be working for Jay but they will be 'hired' by the FO ...
Jay will get a staff together but they are the guys the FO wants .... as well

What makes you think this? ALMOST EVERY HC gets to hire his own staff.
You can't really hold a guy responsible for coaching a team if you tell him he can't hire his own staff.

I did not say that Jay Gruden "can't hire his own staff" - you did

Jay Gruden will put the coaching staff together .... with 'help'

for the last 4 years Mike has been in charge here - now we have a FO that is making the decisions

Jay Gruden will make a lot of decisions & choices that are critical to the performance of the team but he basically works for the FO who in turn work for the little guy

Jay would not have taken the job if he did not feel that he could be successful here ... even given the circumstances we all know are a part of this franchise

jr_uscg wrote:Been watching Comcast all afternoon and I like Jay. He is on the Larry Michael show right now, great personality. Jay's winning attitude is what the team and fans need. Lets get it done! He is looking forward to working with RGIII. Good job Dan and Bruce!

Obviously it was his first day on the job and there will probably never be a better day than this for him unless he's holding up that Lombardi trophy. I still like your comment that you "like Jay" even if it is a superficial thing. I heard Chad Dukes yesterday comment on the fact that people (both fans and media) just never really LIKED Shanahan here. Maybe its not the most important thing to be liked, but I would argue that in THIS market it won't hurt.

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:

Deadskins wrote:I'd still like them to bring in Wade Phillips to be DC.

I posted that when he was released!

I haven't seen any hope of that, but yeah I would be completely on board with bringing Wade Phillips in. He may have failed as a HC, but that guy has had a successful defense pretty much everywhere he has gone. With an offensive minded guy as our head coach, why not hire the best, strongest possible coach to run the defense?

riggofan wrote:

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:

Deadskins wrote:I'd still like them to bring in Wade Phillips to be DC.

I posted that when he was released!

I haven't seen any hope of that, but yeah I would be completely on board with bringing Wade Phillips in. He may have failed as a HC, but that guy has had a successful defense pretty much everywhere he has gone. With an offensive minded guy as our head coach, why not hire the best, strongest possible coach to run the defense?

I wanted Phillips when he was fired from Dallas and I feel it will be an enormous mistake not to consider him now, but there are way more qualified DCs out there than Jim Haslett.

Keeping him, if Gruden does, will be Jay's first mistake. I think it is a 99% certainty that Haz' contract will not be extended and next year (if he stays - yes, i'm still hoping he gets the axe) we will be getting a new DC. This can only be prevented if they go out and hit runs in free agency and the draft and just fill the D with so much talent Haz can't screw it up.

So if we are going to be getting a new DC next year, why not get one now?

When it comes to the media around here and what the NFL Network is reporting which is totally different than what Coach Gruden is saying I have to look for the most logical reason. With the amount of Shanahan bashing that has been going on, I have to think that the only reason why Haslett is still here is because Shanacrap forced Haslett into doing things on defense he was against. Either that or Haslett has some video of Snyder and a secretary or something. Because as bad as this defense has been since the moment they switched to a 3-4 I can find no other reason that Haslett wasn't shown the door along with Mike and Kyle. I understand that Jim worked with Bruce Allen and they are friends, but still a sorry pathetic defense is what has been fielded for 4 years. Seems to me if Gruden wants to stick with the 3-4 go get Wade Phillips and do this correctly. Jim Haslett is not the answer and needs to be out of here ASAP.....

PAPDOG67 wrote:CLL I would have played zone. In fact I would have played zone a lot, almost all the time considering we don't have the best personel to play man coverage.

Every big play we gave up seems to have come when we were in a zone defense.

Deadskins wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:CLL I would have played zone. In fact I would have played zone a lot, almost all the time considering we don't have the best personel to play man coverage.

Every big play we gave up seems to have come when we were in a zone defense.

With this horrid defense I can't even argue because it seems that a big play was given up just about every 6 snaps. I would also think that we don't have personnel to run man or zone Now maybe with a better LB coach this will help the front 7 since we seem to be staying with the 3-4....

PAPDOG67 wrote:Bottom line is this:

2007 - 19.4 PPG 11th
2008 - 18.5 PPG 6th
2009 - 21.0 PPG 18th

Haslet comes in with Shanny:

2010 - 23.6 PPG 21st
2011 - 22.9 PPG 21st
2012 - 24.3 PPG 22nd
2013 - 29.9 PPG tied for 30th

Hmm, 18th the previous year (not the 4th we hear so often from some). And, after the switch to the 3-4, without the proper players for the scheme, dropping just three places and giving up 2.6 more points a game seems pretty reasonable to me. Throw in Shanny's meddling, and I simply can't agree with your "epic fail" assessment.

SkinsJock wrote:

Deadskins wrote:I'd still like them to bring in Wade Phillips to be DC.

I really don't see that happening - Jay would have to convince the FO that he really cannot work with Haslett or Raheem and that's a long shot

Don't think so. He is going to be able to select his own staff without interference from BA.

Deadskins wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:Bottom line is this:

2007 - 19.4 PPG 11th
2008 - 18.5 PPG 6th
2009 - 21.0 PPG 18th

Haslet comes in with Shanny:

2010 - 23.6 PPG 21st
2011 - 22.9 PPG 21st
2012 - 24.3 PPG 22nd
2013 - 29.9 PPG tied for 30th

Hmm, 18th the previous year (not the 4th we hear so often from some). And, after the switch to the 3-4, without the proper players for the scheme, dropping just three places and giving up 2.6 more points a game seems pretty reasonable to me. Throw in Shanny's meddling, and I simply can't agree with your "epic fail" assessment.

+1. Damn that was pithy.

Gruden confirmed there will be no competition for QB next year. Bye Cousins.

Deadskins, if you can't see the problem with that chart, I can't help you out. Take a good look at 2013 and get back to me. 29+ PPG is not acceptable in arena football.

PAPDOG67 wrote:Deadskins, if you can't see the problem with that chart, I can't help you out. Take a good look at 2013 and get back to me. 29+ PPG is not acceptable in arena football.

PAPDOG67 I think you have come to the conclusion that trying to prove a point to some people is virtually impossible on this site. I have learned that some people are just "stuck"

The tittle of the thread is Redskins hire J. Gruden as HC. Since I'm tired of +20 yrs of rebuilding, I'm going to be cautious with my opinion about this hiring. My first impression will be about how he handles the usual offseason hoopla we have come to know since Danny bought the team.
About Haz, Since he wasn't fired with the shannys, a lot of questions have been surronding this desicion. One possibility I'm thinking of, is that the Gruden hiring was worked out even before the end of the season (by week 13 even Shanny's landlord had the house in the market) and maybe Haz staying came as a request of Gruden. Option 2 is the one mentioned before, about a video of Danny at the Christmas party....
So, complete the staff fast and get to work, without much hoopla about RGIII, Kirk, RGII, big name over the hill free agents, and the usual stuff that have the Skins in NFL network for not football related news.

HaiL,

PAPDOG67 wrote:Deadskins, if you can't see the problem with that chart, I can't help you out. Take a good look at 2013 and get back to me. 29+ PPG is not acceptable in arena football.

I do see a problem. But what I don't see is this "epic fail" you were claiming it showed.

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:Deadskins, if you can't see the problem with that chart, I can't help you out. Take a good look at 2013 and get back to me. 29+ PPG is not acceptable in arena football.

PAPDOG67 I think you have come to the conclusion that trying to prove a point to some people is virtually impossible on this site. I have learned that some people are just "stuck"

And you just proved it again with that post.

Deadskins wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:CLL I would have played zone. In fact I would have played zone a lot, almost all the time considering we don't have the best personel to play man coverage.

Every big play we gave up seems to have come when we were in a zone defense.

This is true. And has been confirmed by Chris ey. Playing a zone would force Kerrigan into coverage, isn't that the main thing they're against? They hate Kerrigan in coverage, but he recommends zone. They also refuse to acknowledge the fact that Philly's intent is to key in on Kerrigan and forcing the look they want. It's not as simple as putting a corner on McCoy... Like Philly wouldn't have audibled to a run and put a TE/OL on that corner and run him over. Their logic is...flawed to say the least.

Deadskins wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:Deadskins, if you can't see the problem with that chart, I can't help you out. Take a good look at 2013 and get back to me. 29+ PPG is not acceptable in arena football.

I do see a problem. But what I don't see is this "epic fail" you were claiming it showed.

There's no logic to it. They're just arguing a point they've heard with no true understanding of what they're talking about. As evident in their desire to play zone in that situation. And play zone when our defense was at its worst in zone. It's comical.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:CLL I would have played zone. In fact I would have played zone a lot, almost all the time considering we don't have the best personel to play man coverage.

Every big play we gave up seems to have come when we were in a zone defense.

This is true. And has been confirmed by Chris ey. Playing a zone would force Kerrigan into coverage, isn't that the main thing they're against? They hate Kerrigan in coverage, but he recommends zone. They also refuse to acknowledge the fact that Philly's intent is to key in on Kerrigan and forcing the look they want. It's not as simple as putting a corner on McCoy... Like Philly wouldn't have audibled to a run and put a TE/OL on that corner and run him over. Their logic is...flawed to say the least.

Deadskins wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:Deadskins, if you can't see the problem with that chart, I can't help you out. Take a good look at 2013 and get back to me. 29+ PPG is not acceptable in arena football.

I do see a problem. But what I don't see is this "epic fail" you were claiming it showed.

There's no logic to it. They're just arguing a point they've heard with no true understanding of what they're talking about. As evident in their desire to play zone in that situation. And play zone when our defense was at its worst in zone. It's comical.

Yes, playing zone might have put Kerrigan into coverage, but he would have been only responsible for the flat area, or underneath curl area, I don't expect you to know that. By putting him in man, and asking him to cover one of the best RB in the game Man to Man on a wheel route is suicide, and we got exactly what we asked for. I'm pretty sure that play went for a TD. To ask a LB the size of Kerrigan to cover McCoy is ridiculous. Its like telling Shaq to go cover Jordan out on the perimiter.

Don't forget our best corner Hall sucks at playing zone and always has. We did much better in man to man.

Wasn't that excited but was not disapointed either to hear the news. Dont really know too much about Gruden. From what I have heard Gruden has coached in the arena league winning the championship twice. He also was the offensive coordinator for the Bengals the past three years. I hear many good things from other experts so It sounds good to me. Lets hope that Gruden is given the full authority to run things his way. lets draft a stud in the second round.