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

SkinsJock wrote:Some here know how I feel about statistics


all I'm really looking for here is a 3-4 defense - I think that's the base defense that has shown to be better suited in today's NFL

the offense has got to score more points - duh - I think having a defense that can give the offense better field position and create more turnovers will give the offense a better chance to do that - I don't think I'm the only NFL fan that thinks the 3-4 base defense has proven to be more effective


hopefully this franchise improves the scoring on offense and the defense finds players that can help the 3-4 work as it should here soon

i agree that the 3-4 has generally been a more effective defense-- particularly in the sense of being more "disruptive".

however, if my understanding is correct, the 3-4 has up until the past 2-3 years been employed by a stark minority of NFL teams-- which means that the entire talent pool for players best suited toward a 3-4 defense was divided up by very few teams, making it easier to find superior players than the vast majority of other teams who were dividing up the diluted talent pool of players best suited for a 4-3 defense.

so i don't think it's necessarily clear whether the scheme itself is superior, or if they've simply had a higher concentration of superior players.

and now that so many teams are switching to the 3-4, the talent pool is being heavily diluted, which may prove to neutralize what has been the real main advantage of employing the 3-4.

and it wouldn't surprise me at all if as more and more teams switch to the 3-4, the teams still running the 4-3 eventually suddenly magically start getting better and better as the talent pool they are drawing their players from becomes more concentrated. and then suddenly everyone will think the 4-3 is hot new thing, a schematically superior defense that everyone will start switching back to... and on and on the cycle will continue.

die cowboys die wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Some here know how I feel about statistics


all I'm really looking for here is a 3-4 defense - I think that's the base defense that has shown to be better suited in today's NFL

the offense has got to score more points - duh - I think having a defense that can give the offense better field position and create more turnovers will give the offense a better chance to do that - I don't think I'm the only NFL fan that thinks the 3-4 base defense has proven to be more effective


hopefully this franchise improves the scoring on offense and the defense finds players that can help the 3-4 work as it should here soon

i agree that the 3-4 has generally been a more effective defense-- particularly in the sense of being more "disruptive".

however, if my understanding is correct, the 3-4 has up until the past 2-3 years been employed by a stark minority of NFL teams-- which means that the entire talent pool for players best suited toward a 3-4 defense was divided up by very few teams, making it easier to find superior players than the vast majority of other teams who were dividing up the diluted talent pool of players best suited for a 4-3 defense.

so i don't think it's necessarily clear whether the scheme itself is superior, or if they've simply had a higher concentration of superior players.

and now that so many teams are switching to the 3-4, the talent pool is being heavily diluted, which may prove to neutralize what has been the real main advantage of employing the 3-4.

and it wouldn't surprise me at all if as more and more teams switch to the 3-4, the teams still running the 4-3 eventually suddenly magically start getting better and better as the talent pool they are drawing their players from becomes more concentrated. and then suddenly everyone will think the 4-3 is hot new thing, a schematically superior defense that everyone will start switching back to... and on and on the cycle will continue.

You realize though that on the flip side fewer athletes have trained for the 3-4 and fewer who would fit the scheme better made the NFL, so you could also argue that as more teams switch they will actually improve based on increased availability and experience of 3-4 players and not decrease in skill. Reality's actually a balance of the two.

interesting stuff dcd

I'm hoping that Haslett learned from what happened here and makes the adjustment to having a defense that better utilizes the abilities of the players he has this season - I look for a 3-4 base defense but playing a scheme that takes advantage of the players he has and not hoping that the players can play in a scheme that they are not suited for like it seemed we did here last season

Haslett was brought in because of his experience and hopefully he'll show better judgement in running this defense here this year


I could care less if we run a 4-3 as long as Haslett best utilizes the players we have AND finds a way to scheme/use the 3-4 packages that cause the opposing teams offenses to have little success - I am hoping for a defensive scheme along the lines of a Dick LeBeau or a Dom Capers and not a Greg Williams or Greg Blache style

I think we'll see a lot of improvement from both the players and the game planning on the defensive side of the ball here

not that it would take much

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Some here know how I feel about statistics


all I'm really looking for here is a 3-4 defense - I think that's the base defense that has shown to be better suited in today's NFL

the offense has got to score more points - duh - I think having a defense that can give the offense better field position and create more turnovers will give the offense a better chance to do that - I don't think I'm the only NFL fan that thinks the 3-4 base defense has proven to be more effective


hopefully this franchise improves the scoring on offense and the defense finds players that can help the 3-4 work as it should here soon

i agree that the 3-4 has generally been a more effective defense-- particularly in the sense of being more "disruptive".

however, if my understanding is correct, the 3-4 has up until the past 2-3 years been employed by a stark minority of NFL teams-- which means that the entire talent pool for players best suited toward a 3-4 defense was divided up by very few teams, making it easier to find superior players than the vast majority of other teams who were dividing up the diluted talent pool of players best suited for a 4-3 defense.

so i don't think it's necessarily clear whether the scheme itself is superior, or if they've simply had a higher concentration of superior players.

and now that so many teams are switching to the 3-4, the talent pool is being heavily diluted, which may prove to neutralize what has been the real main advantage of employing the 3-4.

and it wouldn't surprise me at all if as more and more teams switch to the 3-4, the teams still running the 4-3 eventually suddenly magically start getting better and better as the talent pool they are drawing their players from becomes more concentrated. and then suddenly everyone will think the 4-3 is hot new thing, a schematically superior defense that everyone will start switching back to... and on and on the cycle will continue.

You realize though that on the flip side fewer athletes have trained for the 3-4 and fewer who would fit the scheme better made the NFL, so you could also argue that as more teams switch they will actually improve based on increased availability and experience of 3-4 players and not decrease in skill. Reality's actually a balance of the two.

that's a good point. i wonder how much of it has to do with training for it vs. just having a certain kind of natural build. i won't pretend to have any idea.

Here are my grades..

1. Ryan Kerrigan - B+ He was the best OLB left on the board and I think he will be a solid player for the skins, not a star but very very solid

2. Jarvis Jenkins - B- I think we may have reached a little bit, and I would have rathered Marvel Austin at the time, but I think he will come in and play a good DE in the 3-4. He was not the best 3-4 DE prospect on the board when taken though IMO

3. Leonard Hankerson - A+ I think this guy was a steal and could be our future #1 WR

4. Roy Helu - B+ I think this guy will give the backfield the speed we have been missing, I think this guy will be our starting RB by midseason.

5. Dejon Gomes - D I think we could have gone in a different direction then S. I think it was a reach and he plays a position where we have depth. Although he will be a ST guy, and is a true SS, something we dont have behind LL.

5. Niles Paul - C I dont mind the WR pick, and Paul could be a steal, noone knows bc he played in a rushing offense. But I from things I read, most had this as a reach too.

6. Evan Royster - C Has good college numbers, but does not do 1 thing exceptionally, but overall could be solid. Only reason pick is a C is bc I dont think we needed 2 RBs, but hey Im being nitpicky.

6. Aldrick Robinson - B+ This guy could end up being a pretty darn good slot reveiver. He's quick with good hands, not a 1 or 2, but potentially a solid slot guy.

7. Brandyn Thompson - B Good depth pick here. We needed depth at the position but dont see this guy making the squad, hope I am wrong though.

7. Maurice Hurt - B See above, good value pick in a position of weakness, but not sure he makes the team. Hopefully will develop on PS

7. Markus White - A I LOVE this pick, and this this guy could be a valuable depth guy at OLB. Im thinking he spells Orakpo as our pass rushing OLB when needed.

7. Chris Neild - A+ This guy is going to be good IMO and was a steal. This may be one of my favorite picks of the draft, I think he will be starting by midseason.

I LOVE the infusion of youth we brought to the team with this draft. Im hoping we continue the trend by being WISE on free agents

5. Dejon Gomes - D I think we could have gone in a different direction then S. I think it was a reach and he plays a position where we have depth. Although he will be a ST guy, and is a true SS, something we dont have behind LL.

Horton, Doughty, and Landry are all SS... it's FS we were weak at last year. Now we haev Otagwe and maybe Moore can continue to learn behind him. I didn't think Barnes did that bad at FS considering he is a CB and little NFL experience.

You might be able to make an argument for Reed, but it seems to me that these guys you mentioned ALL played FS and SS. IMO, we have a bunch of FS who we try to move to SS too. Reed is the only guy you could argue that plays SS similarly to LL (in the box)

skins2357 wrote:You might be able to make an argument for Reed, but it seems to me that these guys you mentioned ALL played FS and SS. IMO, we have a bunch of FS who we try to move to SS too. Reed is the only guy you could argue that plays SS similarly to LL (in the box)

I already said Otagwe and Moore were FS. Horton was drafted as a strong safety from UCLA. We had a failed experiment with Landry at FS when ST passed. Barnes I said did alright at FS.

I don't quite know who you were saying I said was a SS but you argue is a FS...

The way I see it, we went into the draft with our biggest neess being QB, NT & interior OL. We cam out of the draft with our biggest needs being QB, NT & interior OL.

Based on the boards I've seen, we reached for Jenkins, Helu, Gomes & Royster.

I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

We are looking at free agency to feel that need. Davin Joseph, Tampa Bay, a Bruse Allen draftee, might be a target. Of course, all of this is contingent on a new CBA - I understand that Davin is not eligible under the old rules.

Maybe they see it as some of us did and want to give the Oline that improved as the year went on a chance and focus on other needs.

VetSkinsFan wrote:Maybe they see it as some of us did and want to give the Oline that improved as the year went on a chance and focus on other needs.

Yes, it's all an iterative process

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

How do you figure its harder to fill than guard? Especially for us, when we probly have three or four guys that can play there already, and no guards that are worth a crap.

brad7686 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

How do you figure its harder to fill than guard? Especially for us, when we probly have three or four guys that can play there already, and no guards that are worth a crap.

You need two DE's to start, one is Carriker. Who is the other out of your three or four guys you say we already have? Having back ups in starting positions does not work. Golston? - Back up. Jarmon? Couldn't beat out Golston. Daniels? Holliday? Those two are not the future of this team. Guard not worth a crap? The O line improved a lot during the season and also let's keep in mind free agency hasn't played out yet, so picking A guard is not the answer. Picking THE right guard is the answer.

brad7686 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

How do you figure its harder to fill than guard? Especially for us, when we probly have three or four guys that can play there already, and no guards that are worth a crap.

By easier to fill I meant on the market, not already on the team. Signing good DL's is hard and expensive, signing guards isn't. At least not comparatively. Interior linemen don't have to be as good as Tackles or DLs in a 3-4.

Red_One43 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

How do you figure its harder to fill than guard? Especially for us, when we probly have three or four guys that can play there already, and no guards that are worth a crap.

You need two DE's to start, one is Carriker. Who is the other out of your three or four guys you say we already have? Having back ups in starting positions does not work. Golston? - Back up. Jarmon? Couldn't beat out Golston. Daniels? Holliday? Those two are not the future of this team. Guard not worth a crap? The O line improved a lot during the season and also let's keep in mind free agency hasn't played out yet, so picking A guard is not the answer. Picking THE right guard is the answer.

Remember Jarmon was 1st moved to LB so he lost a lot of weight, then back to DE so he gained a lot of weight. Also he was comong off a majot injury & it frequently takes more than a yr to get back to 100%. He will be a very good player.

yupchagee wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

How do you figure its harder to fill than guard? Especially for us, when we probly have three or four guys that can play there already, and no guards that are worth a crap.

You need two DE's to start, one is Carriker. Who is the other out of your three or four guys you say we already have? Having back ups in starting positions does not work. Golston? - Back up. Jarmon? Couldn't beat out Golston. Daniels? Holliday? Those two are not the future of this team. Guard not worth a crap? The O line improved a lot during the season and also let's keep in mind free agency hasn't played out yet, so picking A guard is not the answer. Picking THE right guard is the answer.

Remember Jarmon was 1st moved to LB so he lost a lot of weight, then back to DE so he gained a lot of weight. Also he was comong off a majot injury & it frequently takes more than a yr to get back to 100%. He will be a very good player.

Good points. Settling into one position and being at 100%. This could be Jarmon's breakout year. I still like the Jenkins pick because the coaches say he is a fit for what they want to do. I trust that they didn't pick a guard because they saw a priority in getting the right players to fix the 31st ranked defense. No knock intended for Golsotn either. He is a high motor guy who is a good special teamer.

Red_One43 wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

brad7686 wrote:I have no idea why we didn't take a guard in the second.

I agree. Either Orlando Franklin or Ben Ijalana.

If Jenkins ends up being a good pick then a 3-4 D lineman fills a big hole, and one that's a lot harder to fill then a guard

How do you figure its harder to fill than guard? Especially for us, when we probly have three or four guys that can play there already, and no guards that are worth a crap.

You need two DE's to start, one is Carriker. Who is the other out of your three or four guys you say we already have? Having back ups in starting positions does not work. Golston? - Back up. Jarmon? Couldn't beat out Golston. Daniels? Holliday? Those two are not the future of this team. Guard not worth a crap? The O line improved a lot during the season and also let's keep in mind free agency hasn't played out yet, so picking A guard is not the answer. Picking THE right guard is the answer.

Remember Jarmon was 1st moved to LB so he lost a lot of weight, then back to DE so he gained a lot of weight. Also he was comong off a majot injury & it frequently takes more than a yr to get back to 100%. He will be a very good player.

Good points. Settling into one position and being at 100%. This could be Jarmon's breakout year. I still like the Jenkins pick because the coaches say he is a fit for what they want to do. I trust that they didn't pick a guard because they saw a priority in getting the right players to fix the 31st ranked defense. No knock intended for Golsotn either. He is a high motor guy who is a good special teamer.

Jarmon should be a producer in 2011 and hopefully, so will Jenkins. Both will be needed as will Golston, remember this is just year two of the defensive overall. They'll need a rotation of defensive lineman and simply finding one to play opposite Carriker would prove to be costly come mid-season.

Finding 3-4 defensive ends maybe harder than finding guard, but finding guards that fit Shanny's ZBS narrows any gap.

If a team needs both, it is much easier to draft a 3-4 DE to fit into a rotation and find a ZBS guard on the FA market.

With the draft coming first this year I have to believe that this is the route that they are taking.

Here's why

As mentioned (and always overlooked by the doomsayers) the offensive line progressed as the year went on. Then again starter Jammal Brown and his backup Stephon Heyer may both be on the market once a new CBA is signed, that means there is no starting RT on the roster, Hicks is no more than a backup and is a better guard than tackle anyway. Casey Rabach is like the doors at your local supermarket and is due $3 million for 2011. Yes we are still discussing why they waited until the end of the draft to select someone named Hurt

The Redskins don't need help at guard, they have a bunch of tackles that NEED to be moved inside, or off the roster. The Redskins drafted Trent Williams last year and he may still be a little raw but he is all we have. The selection of Maurice Hurt means the players they have targeted aren't coming out of school they are coming off their first contracts.

I just hope they target the right guys.