Page 2 of 4
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:16 pm
by skinsfan#33
ATX_Skins wrote:
I do think he is a good coach. And yes, that is a gut feeling.
Fair enough; i can't argue with with your gut. Mine says he is awfull and that is why hi Defenses have always been sub par!
But like i said I can't argue with a gut feeling.
ATX_Skins wrote:What makes me think he is good is the fact that he is still employed in this organization. If he were no good, I don't think he'd still be here.
The President and Congress are still employed...
Never mind I don't want to open that can of worms!
Norv Turner had three head coaching jobs and two of them he lasted for the better part of a decade.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:34 pm
by ATX_Skins
ATX_Skins wrote:What makes me think he is good is the fact that he is still employed in this organization. If he were no good, I don't think he'd still be here.
The President and Congress are still employed...
Never mind I don't want to open that can of worms!
Norv Turner had three head coaching jobs and two of them he lasted for the better part of a decade.[/quote]
That is a very good point, and maybe I should have elaborated. I have seen a very positive shift from the top down since Bruce and Shanny have been here. I am very satisfied with most of the decisions being made.
Political analogies to football hold almost no weight. I would only agree with you there if there were as many diverse candidates as there were coaches. Luckily, in most sports there is no need to choose between the lesser evil.
On a different note; who would you rather see take over next year, or after the bye week? Who is out there right now that could do a better job?
I again feel as though this team's defense has been hampered by an offense which has struggled every week in the first half. Playing from behind can absolutely ruin any game plan. I think out coaches do a very good job adjusting at the half.
The additions this week may not seem like a big deal because of who they are, but look at what they offer... Rob Jackson is back, and although he himself is not a superstar he offers the same production as some of our other LB's. This results in more rest, different packages to be run, and potentially more energy up front. Jarvis Jenkins, same thing. Getting even a couple plays rest can have a snowball effect on the front line. I feel (again gut feeling) as though this will have a big impact in the second half as we won't see our guys as gassed. Should there be more pressure on the QB in the second half, I think it will have a positive impact on the secondary.
Of course, we will see. I could be completely wrong...
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:44 pm
by ATX_Skins
riggofan wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:ATX_Skins wrote:Fire Haslett?
Before the season started I knew the secondary would be a cause for concern. It is playing out just about how I thought it would. Terrible
Haslett is a good Def coach.
First, what makes you say Haz is s good DC? Is that a gut feeling? It certainly isn't of his past body of work which clearly demonstrates he is average at best and that is really stretching it!
So what makes you believe he is good?
Second, this secondary has all of the same staffers from last year except for Madoodoo Williams who add bad as Rambo has been was worse. So I'm assuming you thought last year's secondary was terrible too! I can't really say it wasn't but I just wanted to see if you agree.
Uh yeah, last year's secondary was terrible too for the same reason. Personnel and lack of cap space to do anything about it.
I actually agree with both of you guys. I agree with ATX_Skins that the big issue is personnel on defense. But I also agree that I don't really know if Jim Haslett is a "good" DC or not.
I think if Haslett is really "good", we should expect to see SOME kind of improvement over the next few games. Make some adjustments, motivate guys more, whatever it takes. If we find by week 8 that we're really just going to be giving up 400-500 yards a game, I would hope to see him gone at the end of the season.
With Bob Jackson and Jenkins coming back we do not see an impact in the next few weeks, I will have to agree with you guys. I feel though as if we will be seeing an immediate impact, this week even.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:59 pm
by Deadskins
Those guys won't be back until after the bye. Four game suspensions, not three.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:21 pm
by skinsfan#33
ATX_Skins wrote:On a different note; who would you rather see take over next year, or after the bye week? Who is out there right now that could do a better job?
Look i'm not one of those fools that thinks any good comes out of firing a DC, OC or HC during the season. It helps some times, but those situations are few and far between.
I never wanted us to hire Haz in the first place and when Wade Phillips bacme available during Jim's first season I went on record saying we should go get him. I have no idea who will be availablein the offseason but we can revisit it then.
BUT just because I don't think it makes sense to fire him now that doesn't mean I don't want to see him gone as soon as a qualified replacement can be found. I thought (and still do) that firng Danny Smith was the right thing to do (heck I was hoping he would have been the first shown the door when MS was hired), but replacing him with a coach that isn't quite ready wasn't the way to go. If they are going to fire Haz and bring in someone like that then keep him.
ATX_Skins wrote:I again feel as though this team's defense has been hampered by an offense which has struggled every week in the first half. Playing from behind can absolutely ruin any game plan. I think out coaches do a very good job adjusting at the half.
I agree tha the O and D feed off themselves but the D has been terrible at the start of most games and then it gets worse. The only adjustment I see is by the opposing teams to what our D is doing.
Rob Jackson and Jarvis Jenkins will deffinately help. Haz will need to figure a way out to t have RJ, BO, and RK on the field at the same time. And if it a situation that could result in the OLB dropping into coverage that guy has to be Jackson. I don't think BO could cover me and I run something like a 6.0 forthy. Asking BO to cover is proof that Haslett either doesn't know what he is doing or gambled and lost.
If someone asks me who I want back next off season RJ or BO I could answer that in a nano second. You have to re-sign the better player and the better player is clearly RJ!
BO = better pass rusher
RJ = better at EVERYTHING else!
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:10 pm
by frankcal20
oneman56 wrote:frankcal20 wrote:We didn't have any money to get anyone in the FA market. We drafted a CB and two Safeties. Unfortunately one of them got hurt (Thomas). There was hope that Merriweather would've come back in better shape and playing ability. Unfortunately that didn't happen and he's on the PS. I would imaging that we will be quite active in the FA market in regards to dbacks in the offseason.
Who are you referring to? Meriweather has played the past 2 weeks.
Minnifield. My mistake.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:17 pm
by Bishop Hammer
riggofan wrote:Great call. I'm sure if we fire Jim Haslett tomorrow, Bacarri Rambo will immediately go from inexperienced rookie to pro bowl caliber tackling machine. London Fletcher will experience an unexplained and miraculous bout of reverse aging. And Darrelle Revis will demand a trade from the Bucs to the Redskins for the league minimum. Problems solved.
What the hell are we waiting for???
That's the best answer yet for firing Haslett.
Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 6:29 pm
by BigRedskinDaddy
Here's some more grim numbers: since Haz was the DC in St. Louis up to the present day, his units have finished 23rs, 21st, 28th, 31st, 13th and 28th in yards allowed. The Skins are currently 32nd.
For a guy who likes to attack, not read-and-react, that's abysmal. Teams run his Defenses from one goalpost to the other and back again, and the dominoes of fatigue plus severe ToP imbalance leave little margin for error, victory-wise,
He's gotta go IMHO.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 8:42 am
by StorminMormon86
BigRedskinDaddy wrote:He's gotta go IMHO.
Yesterday's game has proven this wrong.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 10:23 am
by skinsfan#33
How so?
Just because the players played well against a team with zero offensive ability (but stilll gave up 300 yards to a talentless team). I know the D gave up as many points as they scored but Haz didn't become a good DC overnight.
"Twice a day even a broken clock is right" or if you like "every once in a while even a blind squirel gets a nut"
Now if they go out and do that against the Cowgirls and Bears then you may have a point
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:02 am
by oneman56
skinsfan#33 wrote:How so?
Just because the players played well against a team with zero offensive ability (but stilll gave up 300 yards to a talentless team). I know the D gave up as many points as they scored but Haz didn't become a good DC overnight.
"Twice a day even a broken clock is right" or if you like "every once in a while even a blind squirel gets a nut"
Now if they go out and do that against the Cowgirls and Bears then you may have a point
100% agreed. Regardless of which side of the fence you're on regarding Haslet,t this game against the Raiders doesn't prove or dis-prove either side. We played a pretty good defensive game against pretty bad offense made worse by missing players.
Couple things that still stuck out to me about the defense and I don't know if was blown coverage or design, was this. On the Raiders only TD scoring drive they had a 3rd down play with stacked WR's which we didn't even cover allowing an easy completion for first down. Then the TD to Rivera, we allowed him to run uncovered right into the endzone. And, we still didn't tackle very well. This continues to happen every week and when we play the Broncos in a few weeks, the Chargers (Rivers is playing surprisingly well), etc these issues will be magnified. Nothing changed on defense all that much, the Raiders offense just couldn't take advantage of it.
I'm still undecided where I stand on Haslett, seems to me we have better talent on D then the way we perform and therefore I tend to think the issue is moreso coaching and scheme. Yes, we could use some more secondary talent and yes we could use some more speed on D but I like our LB's (wish we had more speed though), I like our D line and we have a decent pass rush so we shouldn't be as bad as we are. I do however, give a lot of kudos to Haslett for last years 7 game winning streak where our D played pretty darn good with all the injuries we had and that's why I'm undecided.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:04 pm
by StorminMormon86
skinsfan#33 wrote:How so?
Just because the players played well against a team with zero offensive ability (but stilll gave up 300 yards to a talentless team). I know the D gave up as many points as they scored but Haz didn't become a good DC overnight.
"Twice a day even a broken clock is right" or if you like "every once in a while even a blind squirel gets a nut"
Now if they go out and do that against the Cowgirls and Bears then you may have a point
We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:20 pm
by gushogs
If I was Hasslet I would have designe every play to let Rivera catch all the TDs he wanted, just to be able to watch her sister jumping up and down with a cutoff T-Shirt!!!!!
HaiL,
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:38 pm
by StorminMormon86
gushogs wrote:If I was Hasslet I would have designe every play to let Rivera catch all the TDs he wanted, just to be able to watch her sister jumping up and down with a cutoff T-Shirt!!!!!
HaiL,
I would definitely be on board with that.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:12 pm
by BigRedskinDaddy
StorminMormon86 wrote:We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
One game is a pretty small sample size for whether you keep him or not. What happens when, not if, we lose another one? Do we line up all the assistant coaches and do them firing-squad style? My point, and I believe the others in this thread who would like to replace Haslett, is that in looking at the BIGGER picture it's clear our D's are not anywhere near the top.
Or even the middle for that matter.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:18 pm
by riggofan
BigRedskinDaddy wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
One game is a pretty small sample size for whether you keep him or not. What happens when, not if, we lose another one? Do we line up all the assistant coaches and do them firing-squad style? My point, and I believe the others in this thread who would like to replace Haslett, is that in looking at the BIGGER picture it's clear our D's are not anywhere near the top.
Or even the middle for that matter.
One game is a pretty small sample size. So is three.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:44 pm
by DaSkinz Baby
StorminMormon86 wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:How so?
Just because the players played well against a team with zero offensive ability (but stilll gave up 300 yards to a talentless team). I know the D gave up as many points as they scored but Haz didn't become a good DC overnight.
"Twice a day even a broken clock is right" or if you like "every once in a while even a blind squirel gets a nut"
Now if they go out and do that against the Cowgirls and Bears then you may have a point
We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
You have got to be kidding right? Cause we beat a team playing their #2 QB and both the starting RB and FB were hurt early. I think the least this defense could do is beat a obviously weak team with second and third stringers starting. I bet had Terrell Pryor played there would not have been 7 sacks and I think we would have lost. So big deal Jim Haslett finally earns a paycheck by his defense beating the team it should have. Maybe this week off will allow them to learn to tackle, us leading the league in missed tackles isn't a good stat to have going into the bye.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:46 pm
by DaSkinz Baby
riggofan wrote:BigRedskinDaddy wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
One game is a pretty small sample size for whether you keep him or not. What happens when, not if, we lose another one? Do we line up all the assistant coaches and do them firing-squad style? My point, and I believe the others in this thread who would like to replace Haslett, is that in looking at the BIGGER picture it's clear our D's are not anywhere near the top.
Or even the middle for that matter.
One game is a pretty small sample size. So is three.
Care to comment on the FACT that since Haslett has been here our defense has ranked between 28th and 31st how about you try to validate that fact.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:01 pm
by SkinsJock
DaSkinz Baby wrote: ... Maybe this week off will allow them to learn to tackle, us leading the league in missed tackles isn't a good stat to have going into the bye.
Please clarify .... when is it ever good to lead the league in missed tackles?
and
why would 'going into the bye' be a particular worry?
I would think it means we'll have time to improve on this - maybe you feel differently?
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:06 pm
by skinsfan#33
riggofan wrote:BigRedskinDaddy wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
One game is a pretty small sample size for whether you keep him or not. What happens when, not if, we lose another one? Do we line up all the assistant coaches and do them firing-squad style? My point, and I believe the others in this thread who would like to replace Haslett, is that in looking at the BIGGER picture it's clear our D's are not anywhere near the top.
Or even the middle for that matter.
One game is a pretty small sample size. So is three.
How about three years and three games? Is that a big enough sample size? How about all of those years of bad DC work prior to him getting this gig?
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:09 pm
by skinsfan#33
SkinsJock wrote:DaSkinz Baby wrote: ... Maybe this week off will allow them to learn to tackle, us leading the league in missed tackles isn't a good stat to have going into the bye.
Please clarify .... when is it ever good to lead the league in missed tackles?
and
why would 'going into the bye' be a particular worry?
I would think it means we'll have time to improve on this - maybe you feel differently?
The can take the time to improve, but they certainly won't practice tackling.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:48 pm
by StorminMormon86
DaSkinz Baby wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:How so?
Just because the players played well against a team with zero offensive ability (but stilll gave up 300 yards to a talentless team). I know the D gave up as many points as they scored but Haz didn't become a good DC overnight.
"Twice a day even a broken clock is right" or if you like "every once in a while even a blind squirel gets a nut"
Now if they go out and do that against the Cowgirls and Bears then you may have a point
We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
You have got to be kidding right? Cause we beat a team playing their #2 QB and both the starting RB and FB were hurt early. I think the least this defense could do is beat a obviously weak team with second and third stringers starting. I bet had Terrell Pryor played there would not have been 7 sacks and I think we would have lost. So big deal Jim Haslett finally earns a paycheck by his defense beating the team it should have. Maybe this week off will allow them to learn to tackle, us leading the league in missed tackles isn't a good stat to have going into the bye.
You advocate firing him. Our defense stepped up yesterday, caused a fumble which resulted in a TD, and had the pick six. Explain how firing Haslett is a good idea, 4 weeks into a season where we just won our first game and are headed into a bye week one game out of the division lead? Firing Haslett is NOT going to magically make our defense any better. If he's gone at the end of the year so be it, but it makes absolutely no sense to fire the guy 4 weeks in.
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 8:22 pm
by masterkwon
What a year for Denver to have the NFC East on their schedule. It's like a gift of four byes. They may hang 200 points on the division. They are already at 93 and Dallas is up next week.
Remember in 2007 when Brady hung 52 on Washington? With this defense it may be deja vu all over again, compliments of Peyton. The secondary may call in sick that week.
Posted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 12:18 am
by HEROHAMO
masterkwon wrote:What a year for Denver to have the NFC East on their schedule. It's like a gift of four byes. They may hang 200 points on the division. They are already at 93 and Dallas is up next week.
Remember in 2007 when Brady hung 52 on Washington? With this defense it may be deja vu all over again, compliments of Peyton. The secondary may call in sick that week.
Remember in 07 the Gints ended up 9-7 winning this division. Then guess who won the Superbowl that year? Same thing happened in 11.
So dont count the NFC East out yet.
Posted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:37 am
by DaSkinz Baby
skinsfan#33 wrote:riggofan wrote:BigRedskinDaddy wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:We won the game. Our defense had a pick six. Therefore, you do not fire your defensive coordinator.
One game is a pretty small sample size for whether you keep him or not. What happens when, not if, we lose another one? Do we line up all the assistant coaches and do them firing-squad style? My point, and I believe the others in this thread who would like to replace Haslett, is that in looking at the BIGGER picture it's clear our D's are not anywhere near the top.
Or even the middle for that matter.
One game is a pretty small sample size. So is three.
DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER!!!
How about three years and three games? Is that a big enough sample size? How about all of those years of bad DC work prior to him getting this gig?