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

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Hey Vet - give it a break - we are having fun here

Unfortunately High School level clicks and people taking themselves WAY too seriously are factors on the site. But I'm glad I'm not the only one just having fun...

My bad guys...I was under the impression that critical, intelligent thought in addition to the blind homerisms WAS what this site was for. I'll try to do better with my critical thought in the future.

Do I think D Hall is the boss of the defense, nope.. but do I think he woulda played Andre Johnson better on that TD than Philip Buchanon, yep.

.. regardless though, I love the fact he's saying something about himself stepping up and not starting trash. He has to back it up obviously but I think he will.

LETS GO D. HALL!

*I'M A BLIND HOMER FOR SURE*

VetSkinsFan wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Hey Vet - give it a break - we are having fun here

Unfortunately High School level clicks and people taking themselves WAY too seriously are factors on the site. But I'm glad I'm not the only one just having fun...

My bad guys...I was under the impression that critical, intelligent thought in addition to the blind homerisms WAS what this site was for. I'll try to do better with my critical thought in the future.

My apology Vet. My comment was just one on the general remark and not directed towards you at all. I agree it was reasonable for you to have taken it that way. But it wasn't what I meant.

you and I have a different view on "homer" but ...

I just like what I've seen from these guys SO FAR and think some of the "critical suggestions" are a little early to say the least


I felt a great improvement would see us at 8-8 and if we can get to 9-7 or even 10-6 so much the better

we are at 1-1 and look like being able to do 8-8 - we could even say that 9-7 is possible right now - this means that the coaches and players look like having a really good season - that's not being a homer in my view

CanesSkins26 wrote:

you know what Vet - I think Williams is not here because he's not good enough

Oh I see....Williams is good enough to help a team like the Saints, with historically bad defenses, win the Super Bowl but he's not good enough for DC? Riiiiiiight.

The Williams/Haslett comparison is useless anyway, but to say that Williams isn't good enough of a DC to be with the Skins is idiotic.

you're close to flaming here my friend - I'd like to respond but it serves no purpose

Williams is not here and Haslett is - end of story

IF Williams were here I don't think we'd be seeing the players respond like this and I'm sure that he'd want to run a 4-3 which Haslett (& Shanahan) think is not as effective
being as I'm "a blind homer" - I'm with Shanahan and Haslett on the 3-4

For me, homer supports everything in the DC area.. pros who come from the high schools here, pros who went to our colleges here, and ESPECIALLY pros from the area.. KEVIN DURANT!

that's why I was a huge Shawn Springs fan cause he's from up New Hampshire Avenue!

So when I say "homer".. I really mean it . .LOL

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Hey Vet - give it a break - we are having fun here

Unfortunately High School level clicks and people taking themselves WAY too seriously are factors on the site. But I'm glad I'm not the only one just having fun...

My bad guys...I was under the impression that critical, intelligent thought in addition to the blind homerisms WAS what this site was for. I'll try to do better with my critical thought in the future.

My apology Vet. My comment was just one on the general remark and not directed towards you at all. I agree it was reasonable for you to have taken it that way. But it wasn't what I meant.

All good, Kaz!

VetSkinsFan wrote:All good, Kaz!

I don't understand touching a top 5 defense that is completely suited for a 4-3. We have guys that simply will never be good 3-4 players, the biggest being Carter. He looks awful in the open field defensively.

Shabutie wrote:I don't understand touching a top 5 defense that is completely suited for a 4-3. We have guys that simply will never be good 3-4 players, the biggest being Carter. He looks awful in the open field defensively.

The idea is to cause more turnovers and let our defense be a difference maker in the game. So far I definately see a more aggressive and explosive defense that can change the games tempo and momentum with one play. I like this defense. There's going to be some growing pains but I think that this will end up being a far better defense by the end of the season.

However, I do agree that Carter looks awful making open field tackles. He whiffed on two in the backfield vs. the Texans that ended up going for 6-7 yard gains. I think that he'll get better, but if not Zoe will be right there to take his place, and I know he can make tackles. I also think we'll see much improvement when Kareem Moore comes back and replaces Doughty/Horton because they've been getting blown up for the past 2 weeks.

Shabutie wrote:I don't understand touching a top 5 defense that is completely suited for a 4-3. We have guys that simply will never be good 3-4 players, the biggest being Carter. He looks awful in the open field defensively.

As I understand it - these guys (Haslett & Shanahan) looked at the defense differently and felt that a 3-4 would work better - they were not as interested in a statisically good defense as they were in having a defense that could help by creating more turnovers and being more effective in reality - our defenses recently were "top 5" but did not help much at all - we never seemed to be able to get the ball back when we needed to

I wish that Haslett would work in more 4-3 formations as the players get more familiar with the 3-4 - I think that this 3-4 defense looks a lot more effective BUT I think that IF we could better utilize the players we have by throwing in more 4-3 we would both confuse the opposing OC a little bit and make better use of the players we have


I CERTAINLY do NOT think that we should go back to a 4-3 OR play the scheme we had here for any of the past 5 years - those defenses were ONLY good on the stats sheet - they NEVER seemed to get the ball back when we needed it

the players on defense seem to be playing with a great deal of attitude and I hope to see more 4-3 these next 2 weeks or whatever as we transition to the 3-4

hopefully the fat slob gets his ass on the playing field more AND he makes a bit more of an effort than we have seen so far - that will also help a lot

TeeterSalad wrote:

Shabutie wrote:I don't understand touching a top 5 defense that is completely suited for a 4-3. We have guys that simply will never be good 3-4 players, the biggest being Carter. He looks awful in the open field defensively.

The idea is to cause more turnovers and let our defense be a difference maker in the game. So far I definately see a more aggressive and explosive defense that can change the games tempo and momentum with one play. I like this defense. There's going to be some growing pains but I think that this will end up being a far better defense by the end of the season.

However, I do agree that Carter looks awful making open field tackles. He whiffed on two in the backfield vs. the Texans that ended up going for 6-7 yard gains. I think that he'll get better, but if not Zoe will be right there to take his place, and I know he can make tackles. I also think we'll see much improvement when Kareem Moore comes back and replaces Doughty/Horton because they've been getting blown up for the past 2 weeks.

You need players to be able to do it, though. The scheme itself isn't going to create turnovers.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:

Shabutie wrote:I don't understand touching a top 5 defense that is completely suited for a 4-3. We have guys that simply will never be good 3-4 players, the biggest being Carter. He looks awful in the open field defensively.

The idea is to cause more turnovers and let our defense be a difference maker in the game. So far I definately see a more aggressive and explosive defense that can change the games tempo and momentum with one play. I like this defense. There's going to be some growing pains but I think that this will end up being a far better defense by the end of the season.

However, I do agree that Carter looks awful making open field tackles. He whiffed on two in the backfield vs. the Texans that ended up going for 6-7 yard gains. I think that he'll get better, but if not Zoe will be right there to take his place, and I know he can make tackles. I also think we'll see much improvement when Kareem Moore comes back and replaces Doughty/Horton because they've been getting blown up for the past 2 weeks.

You need players to be able to do it, though. The scheme itself isn't going to create turnovers.

No, but this scheme allows the players more freedom to make plays and create turnovers. This scheme allows Landry to be an animal, and that will result in turnovers. It allows Orakpo to rush the passer and be a presence on any given play which should result in turnovers. I see more opportunities to create game changing defensive plays then I have in years past. The ability to create those opportunites and then take advantage of them will come in time (I hope).

We've gone against two good veteran QB's so far. Lets wait and see what happens when we put as much pressure on Bradford this weekend.

TeeterSalad wrote:

Shabutie wrote:I don't understand touching a top 5 defense that is completely suited for a 4-3. We have guys that simply will never be good 3-4 players, the biggest being Carter. He looks awful in the open field defensively.

The idea is to cause more turnovers and let our defense be a difference maker in the game. So far I definately see a more aggressive and explosive defense that can change the games tempo and momentum with one play. I like this defense. There's going to be some growing pains but I think that this will end up being a far better defense by the end of the season.

However, I do agree that Carter looks awful making open field tackles. He whiffed on two in the backfield vs. the Texans that ended up going for 6-7 yard gains. I think that he'll get better, but if not Zoe will be right there to take his place, and I know he can make tackles. I also think we'll see much improvement when Kareem Moore comes back and replaces Doughty/Horton because they've been getting blown up for the past 2 weeks.

You are not going to see a dramatic improvement out of Carter. He has terrible hips and very poor lateral agility. Even if he does everything right mentally, he will not be able to play at a high level. Moore should definitely help a lot. Doughty has been very stout against the run and he is solid in coverage, but struggles to make plays on the ball. If he catches that pick against the Texans, the game is over (I know Landry hit him) Teams can be agressive and not give up huge plays at the same time. The Ravens do it, the Jets do it, the Redskins did it under Williams. Most of what appears to be overly agressive blizing, is bringing the same players from different positions. Then we run into problems like, Alexander being responsible for backside, but does not have the speed to do it. The problem is right now, we are bringing guys off the edge that are not pure pass rushers and dropping guys back that cannot cover (Carter, Orakpo) If we do not trick the offensive line and get a free rusher, we are exposing ourselves every play and that is without blizing a lot of guys. Since we bring people from such odd positions, a lot of players have to overlap responbilities. We have guys that have been DTs there whole careers, now responsible for backside and boots. Getting good at each of these techniques takes tons and tons of repititions. Now we have a bunch of guys doing a lot of techniques, but not very well.

This defense can work and will progess, but it does take time. We do not have the ideal personnel to run this right now.

Our defense has been very good the past several years. We had a sound defense and had plenty of oppurtunities to force TOs. No team and I mean NO team in the NFL has dropped more ints (Rogers) and failed to recover fumbles like the Redskins have. Remmember the Cowboys game last year where Macintosh and Fletcher both dropped picks they could have fair caught? Those are the plays people have to make.

Shabutie wrote:Our defense has been very good the past several years. We had a sound defense and had plenty of oppurtunities to force TOs. No team and I mean NO team in the NFL has dropped more ints (Rogers) and failed to recover fumbles like the Redskins have. Remmember the Cowboys game last year where Macintosh and Fletcher both dropped picks they could have fair caught? Those are the plays people have to make.

sorry mate - woulda, coulda, shoulda - same thing could be said for any number of things about this franchise over the past 10 years

the facts are we should have been a lot better ... what we have seen here for 10 years has been a failure and major disapointing - we are not a franchise that many have respected offensively or defensively

we needed a big time shake up or rebuilding or whatever - THAT has started with bringing in Shanahan and Allen and NOT having Cerrato or Snyder interfering AT ALL - then they brought in Haslett and Kyle

I like the defense I just hope that Haslett utilizes and takes more advantage of ALL the players he has in combination with the changeover to the 3-4 not just a couple of "star" players

But you are in full support of a defense that does not suit our talent and just gave up more passing yards than I can remember? Change is not always good. This was a very good defense that was built for a 4-3. We are now going to be a worst defense that maybe causes more TOs. Rogers will still drop plenty of INTs. With Blache, we do not lose to Houston. Just wait and look at the defensive numbers at the end of the year.

Shabutie wrote:But you are in full support of a defense that does not suit our talent and just gave up more passing yards than I can remember? Change is not always good. This was a very good defense that was built for a 4-3. We are now going to be a worst defense that maybe causes more TOs. Rogers will still drop plenty of INTs. With Blache, we do not lose to Houston. Just wait and look at the defensive numbers at the end of the year.

I don't think you can say that with Blache we would win that game. Blache would've had Horton or Doughty 40 yards from the line of scrimmage. Corners giving 10 yard cushion all the time. He would've had Landry in coverage all the time. A lot more things went wrong than just Haslett's calling of the game. What happens Williams doesn't get hurt, if Heyer wasn't called for holding, if the field goal wasn't blocked, if McNabb could've gotten the ball to Galloway on that deep pass, if Gano makes the 2nd field goal in OT, if Buchanon helps Doughty on the TD pass to Johnson...WAY TOO MANY IF's.
I still think if we had a running game we would've won, simply because it was clear our D was outmatched by their O, and if you can run the ball and hold onto the ball for minutes at a time in the 4th quarter the other team can't touch it so they can't score. While I don't think we have the right personnel for the 3-4, I don't think you can say with 100% certainty that Blache would've allowed less than 27 points in regulation. I think we, the fans, are tending to forget this is a rebuilding process. We knew coming into this year that we don't have the personnel and that it would take at least a couple of years to build a solid 3-4 defense through the draft and/or FA pickups. I'm a little disappointed in the D but I'm going to be patient and not demand a change in scheme 2 games into a new regime.

MDSKINSFAN wrote:

Shabutie wrote:But you are in full support of a defense that does not suit our talent and just gave up more passing yards than I can remember? Change is not always good. This was a very good defense that was built for a 4-3. We are now going to be a worst defense that maybe causes more TOs. Rogers will still drop plenty of INTs. With Blache, we do not lose to Houston. Just wait and look at the defensive numbers at the end of the year.

I don't think you can say that with Blache we would win that game. Blache would've had Horton or Doughty 40 yards from the line of scrimmage. Corners giving 10 yard cushion all the time. He would've had Landry in coverage all the time. A lot more things went wrong than just Haslett's calling of the game. What happens Williams doesn't get hurt, if Heyer wasn't called for holding, if the field goal wasn't blocked, if McNabb could've gotten the ball to Galloway on that deep pass, if Gano makes the 2nd field goal in OT, if Buchanon helps Doughty on the TD pass to Johnson...WAY TOO MANY IF's.
I still think if we had a running game we would've won, simply because it was clear our D was outmatched by their O, and if you can run the ball and hold onto the ball for minutes at a time in the 4th quarter the other team can't touch it so they can't score. While I don't think we have the right personnel for the 3-4, I don't think you can say with 100% certainty that Blache would've allowed less than 27 points in regulation. I think we, the fans, are tending to forget this is a rebuilding process. We knew coming into this year that we don't have the personnel and that it would take at least a couple of years to build a solid 3-4 defense through the draft and/or FA pickups. I'm a little disappointed in the D but I'm going to be patient and not demand a change in scheme 2 games into a new regime.

I am not demanding a change. I am just wondering why the first change ever took place. We had a very good pass defense last year with a very average pass rush. It takes a good defensive coordinator and secondary personnel to pull that off. I think the defense can be very succesful in the next few years. Right now, we are not suited as well for it. We were anticipating a rebuilding year, but it appears we have an offense that could contend for a playoff spot if we had a solid defense. The defense was very, very good last year. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

Shabutie wrote:But you are in full support of a defense that does not suit our talent and just gave up more passing yards than I can remember? Change is not always good. This was a very good defense that was built for a 4-3. We are now going to be a worst defense that maybe causes more TOs. Rogers will still drop plenty of INTs. With Blache, we do not lose to Houston. Just wait and look at the defensive numbers at the end of the year.

They gave up a lot of yards to the top passing team in the league last year. At the same time they did what the scheme is designed to do, they stopped the run (58 net yds... Foster put up over 200 yds the week before and he didn't get a third of that last week) and they put pressure on the QB (5 sacks). They did this with Haynesworth inactive and a backup SS starting at FS

Shabutie wrote: The defense was very, very good last year. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

The defense was very good on paper, on the field they had CB lining up 12 yards off the ball on 3rd and 8 situations. That's broke...

The defense couldn't pressure the QB on the regular bases. That's broke...

Giving up 500 passing yards to a team that averaged less than 300 is considered a decent job? Are you serious right now?

Shabutie wrote:Giving up 500 passing yards to a team that averaged less than 300 is considered a decent job? Are you serious right now?

Where did I say it was a decent job? I said they did what it was designed to do. I said that it was against the top passing team in the NFL last year.

We had Reed covering Andre and you go into panic mode when the obvious happens. Are you serious is a better question.

This isn't madden guys.. you can't change your defense with the click of a button and it'll work.. not going to happen overnight. I see shabutie saying we should of keep it a 4-3.. well, why keep it a 4-3 when your working for a 3-4? Your saying we should keep it a 4-3 till we get the right personel? That could take 3-4 years and then the vets will be needing replacements as well. So keep a 4-3 while adding more 3-4 personel? Isn't that the same as making a defense into a 3-4 wih 4-3 peeps?

You change the defense now and then build around the people who can't adjust. We can sit around and wait for 3 offseasons while others get older..

These guys are professional athletes. Changing a system shouldn't be a huge deal to these guys...

I like the direction we are going and I didn't come into the season screaming super bowl!!! Let's see howvthe defense fairs with a real cover safety in the secondary this week instead of a strong safety hybrid. We played the best pass offense in the nfl this week with a defense that has been in place for 4 months tops.

2nd game of the season fellas

Bucket wrote:This isn't madden guys.. you can't change your defense with the click of a button and it'll work.. not going to happen overnight. I see shabutie saying we should of keep it a 4-3.. well, why keep it a 4-3 when your working for a 3-4? Your saying we should keep it a 4-3 till we get the right personel? That could take 3-4 years and then the vets will be needing replacements as well. So keep a 4-3 while adding more 3-4 personel? Isn't that the same as making a defense into a 3-4 wih 4-3 peeps?

You change the defense now and then build around the people who can't adjust. We can sit around and wait for 3 offseasons while others get older..

These guys are professional athletes. Changing a system shouldn't be a huge deal to these guys...

I like the direction we are going and I didn't come into the season screaming super bowl!!! Let's see howvthe defense fairs with a real cover safety in the secondary this week instead of a strong safety hybrid. We played the best pass offense in the nfl this week with a defense that has been in place for 4 months tops.

2nd game of the season fellas

Bucket, I am not saying to change to a 4-3 now. I am questioning ever getting rid of Blache. We are only "moving torwards the 3-4" because we have a 3-4 DC now. You really missed the boat on that one. Changing a system is not a huge deal for several positions, but for the DTs moving to DE and the DEs moving to OLB, it is a huge undertaking.