Page 2 of 2
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:32 pm
by Countertrey
UK Skins Fan wrote:Countertrey wrote:UK Skins Fan wrote:A classic of English cuisine
Should the words "classic", "English", and "cuisine" ever be seen in the same sentence?
Absolutely. Over here, we invented some foods that don't involve relish.
Is that the same as saying "You don't have to like our food in order to eat it"?
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:59 pm
by UK Skins Fan
Countertrey wrote:Is that the same as saying "You don't have to like our food in order to eat it"?
To be honest, I've completely forgotten what we were talking about
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:26 pm
by Countertrey
UK Skins Fan wrote:Countertrey wrote:Is that the same as saying "You don't have to like our food in order to eat it"?
To be honest, I've completely forgotten what we were talking about
The topic was photography...
film or electronic medium? Do you prefer rare?
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:37 pm
by UK Skins Fan
Countertrey wrote:UK Skins Fan wrote:Countertrey wrote:Is that the same as saying "You don't have to like our food in order to eat it"?
To be honest, I've completely forgotten what we were talking about
The topic was photography...
film or electronic medium? Do you prefer rare?
Black and white, and medium rare.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:54 pm
by Kilmer72
Countertrey wrote:UK Skins Fan wrote:A classic of English cuisine
Should the words "classic", "English", and "cuisine" ever be seen in the same sentence?
LMAO!!! In defense of English Cuisine most top notch chefs compete to see who can make the best Beaf Wellington. English foods are generally bland in most cases. Then again so is American cuisine. It may not be very good for you, but imo nothing is better than a classic English breakfast.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 7:13 pm
by Deadskins
That means something totally different to a Frenchman like UK.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:55 am
by UK Skins Fan
Deadskins wrote:That means something totally different to a Frenchman like UK.
Who woke you up?
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:29 pm
by jr_uscg
Personally I think Jim Haslett is staying because he has ties with our next Head Coach. Snyder and Allen already know but have to wait because of the playoffs. Jay Gruden worked with Haslett at onetime. Next Head Coach might not be Jon Gruden, but maybe his little brother Jay?
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 5:53 pm
by rskin72
I think Haz is just the caretaker until the next coach is named.....just like Phillips was not initially fired in Houston until the new coach was hired. I think Morris may very well end up as DC here if Gruden is the HC apparent.
While some of the statments in this thread relieve Haz of some of the responsibilty for the D here, I still do not think it absolves him of all blame. And...I never have liked the bend but do not break philosophy for D. With all other main coordinators gone, think Haz will be shown the door very soon.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:23 pm
by Bishop Hammer
]
Countertrey wrote:This has taken an unfortunate turn...
That's what she said?
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:38 pm
by DarthMonk
Jim Haslett believes he was held back by Mike Shanahan’s meddling in recent seasons.
Now, months later, DeAngelo Hall is willing to put his name to that same sort of claim.
“Defensively man, I just feel like we played so bad last year, we’ve got some unfinished business to definitely take care of,” Hall told ESPN 980′s “Inside the Locker Room” on Wednesday. “I’m excited after talking to Haslett about the possibility of him being able to just run his defense without anybody in his ear telling him what to call or what not to call. So I’m really excited to see Haz unleash his full arsenal of play calls.”
That’s interesting. Brian Mitchell then mentioned that he thinks Haslett could be better without interference.
“I mean, he’s been in this league for so long for a reason,” Hall said. “It’s not because he’s the best-looking guy; it’s because he can call plays and have a great defense. No disrespect to Mike Shanahan, he’s a great coach, but he liked to micromanage things. He kind of liked his hands on everything. Jay [Gruden's] kind of like look, I’m gonna let Haz kind of do his thing. Obviously if I see something that I feel like as an offense we can stop or we can’t stop, I’ll definitely let him know, give him a heads-up on some things to help us get better as team. But Haz is going to get to do what he does.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc- ... y-calling/
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Mon Feb 24, 2014 7:12 pm
by HEROHAMO
I really did not know Shanny was meddling with the defense too? It cant get any worse then last year I know that much.
Anyhow Hall really shined last year. I thought he played a heck of a game against Megatron. Which proves he can play with the best of them.
So yeah I actually think our defense will look alot better. But we still need some draft picks or free agents to come in. A MLB is a must. Riley just isnt cutting it. Our DL could use a stout NT who can demand double teams or DE. OLBs we should be locked and loaded. We seriously need a FS/SS a good starter would help a ton.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:35 am
by Deadskins
HEROHAMO wrote:A MLB is a must. Riley just isnt cutting it.
I know we need to replace London, but why do you say Riley isn't cutting it? I feel like he's been a really good player for us.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:01 pm
by DarthMonk
Deadskins wrote:HEROHAMO wrote:A MLB is a must. Riley just isnt cutting it.
I know we need to replace London, but why do you say Riley isn't cutting it? I feel like he's been a really good player for us.
Plus, in our 3-4, we really have 2 ILBs as opposed to a MLB. Let's just not overpay Rak. I'm not even sure I want to franchise him.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 9:19 am
by HEROHAMO
Deadskins wrote:HEROHAMO wrote:A MLB is a must. Riley just isnt cutting it.
I know we need to replace London, but why do you say Riley isn't cutting it? I feel like he's been a really good player for us.
Just thought he blew alot of his assignments last year. I mean he had a terrible year. Not once do I recall a big play coming from Riley. Not blaming it all on Riley but he had a bad year.
However I can remember Kerrigan, Hall, Amerson and Rak coming up with at least a big play every now and then. All I can remember of Riley this year is getting burned numerous times and missing tackles.
Riley played well the year before this season.
Not trying to grill him too hard. He did play well his first couple years. Maybe he will bounce back and have a good season. Still we need another ILB.
Re: In defence of Haslett's defence
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:05 am
by Deadskins
HEROHAMO wrote:Deadskins wrote:HEROHAMO wrote:A MLB is a must. Riley just isnt cutting it.
I know we need to replace London, but why do you say Riley isn't cutting it? I feel like he's been a really good player for us.
Just thought he blew alot of his assignments last year. I mean he had a terrible year. Not once do I recall a big play coming from Riley. Not blaming it all on Riley but he had a bad year.
However I can remember Kerrigan, Hall, Amerson and Rak coming up with at least a big play every now and then. All I can remember of Riley this year is getting burned numerous times and missing tackles.
Riley played well the year before this season.
Not trying to grill him too hard. He did play well his first couple years. Maybe he will bounce back and have a good season. Still we need another ILB.
I don't remember him having a particularly bad season, especially in light of how much London's game fell off. Riley had 115 tackles (72 solo 43 assists), 3 sacks, 1 int, 1 fum rec, and 9 passes defensed. Those aren't spectacular numbers, but they aren't terrible either. I also remember London saying how well he was playing, and that Perry's ascension was his legacy.
Re: Haslett's defense - from Cofield
Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:19 pm
by SkinsJock
4/7 - it's the beginning of OTAs and Barry Cofield feels the defense (that's the US spelling Trevor) will be more aggressive under Haslett
http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsbl ... ocid=yahoo