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

Red_One43 wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:This is one explanation on what Madieu Williams was thinking on that Cruz play. The film showed that Cruz never runs a go from the slot position. Cruz was lined up in the slot. Madieu saw that and was confident that Cruz would break off the route. The Skins were very conscious of the Giants marching down the field and kicking a FG, so Madieu was positioning himself to jump the route and possibly make the INT.

What was not known to the the person giving this explanation is the extent that Madieu was coached to watch for this tendency of Cruz. Madieu was responsible for Cruz deep, so it was his fault. Blame could also go to Wilson because he not only failed to get his hands on Cruz, as he turned to run with Cruz he seemed to open his hips awkward and quickly lost a step. It was said that Wilson should never have been over the slot guy because he is not physical enough. Williams being a veteran should have known when to turn and run and play the possibility of the deep ball, but the person giving the explanation kept emphasizing that Cruz never ran a go from the slot.

If that's true, it's probably because Cruz hasn't seen such an atrociously played coverage from the slot before.

If he was even thinking about jumping the rout Cruz was running, he ought to get cut, because that is the corner's option when he's got Safety help over the top. The safety is called that for a reason. and cannot allow the guy to get behind him.

If you go back and look at the play, you'll see Hall in man coverage on Nicks ... Williams is positioned about half way between Nicks and Cruz .. Cruz blows by Wilson, and Williams doesn't even break until it's too late. I think he was keeping position to jump Nick's rout, as he was anticipating Eli to throw to single coverage ... Eli may even have froze him by looking at Nicks ... that hesitation is all that was needed for Cruz to blow by him. He even ended up behind both Cruz and Wilson!!

Red_One43 wrote:It seems to me that the person giving this explanation was saying that the coaches were also at fault because, he felt that Madieu was coached to look for Cruz to break off the route and the fact that Wilson being over the slot receiver.

Here's the issue with my source. I hearded this on either ESPN980 or the 106.7 The Fan. I came in after the guest was speaking. This wasn't a random caller, it was a reporter or someone who has inside football knowledge, who was a guest on the one of the shows. I flip back and forth on the stations, so and can't remember which station I was listening to at the time. This was a couple of days ago.

Perhaps someone else heard it as well and can elaborate or heard this from another source.

This the best I can find on the internet. I did find another person in this link from a mesage baord that they have read that Cruz never runs a go form the slot.

http://cpnd.proboards.com/index.cgi?boa ... 377&page=1

The coaches would not be coaching him to stand there like a statue ... and if they are, they need to go.

The more likely scenario is what I suspect ... that Williams was splitting his attention between Cruz and Hall's guy Nicks ... he's watching Eli instead of Cruz, and Eli looks him off of Cruz just enough to freeze him, and Cruz is off to the races since Wilson was already beaten like Salvation Army drum.

Your explanation is quite plausible as to what Williams was doing. Hall says that they just got beat and the coaches say, Williams got caught flat-footed. Explanations that we can see with our own eyes, but what happend in that defensive meeting before the D took the field? The guest on the radio show was trying to give us what he found out. True, I didn't get the guest's name, but I listen to ESPN980 and 106.7 The Fan often enough to know when the hosts are talking to someone who is credible. I also posted that link to the another fan site where members also read that Cruz never runs a go from the slot.

The guest wasn't saying that the coaches coached him to stand like a statute. The guest was saying that the coaches told him that the chances are slim that Cruz goes deep so watch for the short route. They weren't telling him that he has no responsibility for the deep ball, it is understood that the safety always does. No one is absolving Madieu. The question is did the coaches, knowing that they have a back up for a starting safety, who is new to the defense, make sure that Madieu had his prioritites straight.

I posted this in the Haslett thread, because if true, it is a knock on Haz or Coach Morris or both. I think most of us would agree that a DC coordinator should be saying "Just Don't Get Beat Deep! Period!."

People keep saying that these kind of things don't happen to the good teams. Giants blitzed and got burned by Sanatana - that happens to every team, but a fundamental error like Madieu's and the other crazy stuff that has happened this year - penalties and the like - point not only to the players, but the coaches - maybe your ingredient of "benching" is needed. Maybe, we need to simplify the D for its "back up" starting secondary personnel.

Here's a request for you - When you watch the All -22 count the number of times that Cruz lines in the slot and key on Madieu to see if he is in that same coverage and watch what he does and Cruz does. This will give you more insight as to why Williams didn't do what he was supposed to do.

RayNAustin wrote:What he should have have done once Cruz got near him in a full sprint and he was flat footed is to cut off the rout and grab him ... tackle him, whatever... take the flag, but don't try to run parallel to him like he did ... so he made two errors.

RayNAustin wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:This is one explanation on what Madieu Williams was thinking on that Cruz play. The film showed that Cruz never runs a go from the slot position. Cruz was lined up in the slot. Madieu saw that and was confident that Cruz would break off the route. The Skins were very conscious of the Giants marching down the field and kicking a FG, so Madieu was positioning himself to jump the route and possibly make the INT.

What was not known to the the person giving this explanation is the extent that Madieu was coached to watch for this tendency of Cruz. Madieu was responsible for Cruz deep, so it was his fault. Blame could also go to Wilson because he not only failed to get his hands on Cruz, as he turned to run with Cruz he seemed to open his hips awkward and quickly lost a step. It was said that Wilson should never have been over the slot guy because he is not physical enough. Williams being a veteran should have known when to turn and run and play the possibility of the deep ball, but the person giving the explanation kept emphasizing that Cruz never ran a go from the slot.

If that's true, it's probably because Cruz hasn't seen such an atrociously played coverage from the slot before.

If he was even thinking about jumping the rout Cruz was running, he ought to get cut, because that is the corner's option when he's got Safety help over the top. The safety is called that for a reason. and cannot allow the guy to get behind him.

If you go back and look at the play, you'll see Hall in man coverage on Nicks ... Williams is positioned about half way between Nicks and Cruz .. Cruz blows by Wilson, and Williams doesn't even break until it's too late. I think he was keeping position to jump Nick's rout, as he was anticipating Eli to throw to single coverage ... Eli may even have froze him by looking at Nicks ... that hesitation is all that was needed for Cruz to blow by him. He even ended up behind both Cruz and Wilson!!

Red_One43 wrote:It seems to me that the person giving this explanation was saying that the coaches were also at fault because, he felt that Madieu was coached to look for Cruz to break off the route and the fact that Wilson being over the slot receiver.

Here's the issue with my source. I hearded this on either ESPN980 or the 106.7 The Fan. I came in after the guest was speaking. This wasn't a random caller, it was a reporter or someone who has inside football knowledge, who was a guest on the one of the shows. I flip back and forth on the stations, so and can't remember which station I was listening to at the time. This was a couple of days ago.

Perhaps someone else heard it as well and can elaborate or heard this from another source.

This the best I can find on the internet. I did find another person in this link from a mesage baord that they have read that Cruz never runs a go form the slot.

http://cpnd.proboards.com/index.cgi?boa ... 377&page=1

The coaches would not be coaching him to stand there like a statue ... and if they are, they need to go.

The more likely scenario is what I suspect ... that Williams was splitting his attention between Cruz and Hall's guy Nicks ... he's watching Eli instead of Cruz, and Eli looks him off of Cruz just enough to freeze him, and Cruz is off to the races since Wilson was already beaten like Salvation Army drum.

Your explanation is quite plausible as to what Williams was doing. Hall says that they just got beat and the coaches say, Williams got caught flat-footed. Explanations that we can see with our own eyes, but what happend in that defensive meeting before the D took the field? The guest on the radio show was trying to give us what he found out. True, I didn't get the guest's name, but I listen to ESPN980 and 106.7 The Fan often enough to know when the hosts are talking to someone who is credible. I also posted that link to the another fan site where members also read that Cruz never runs a go from the slot.

The guest wasn't saying that the coaches coached him to stand like a statute. The guest was saying that the coaches told him that the chances are slim that Cruz goes deep so watch for the short route. They weren't telling him that he has no responsibility for the deep ball, it is understood that the safety always does. No one is absolving Madieu. The question is did the coaches, knowing that they have a back up for a starting safety, who is new to the defense, make sure that Madieu had his prioritites straight.

I posted this in the Haslett thread, because if true, it is a knock on Haz or Coach Morris or both. I think most of us would agree that a DC coordinator should be saying "Just Don't Get Beat Deep! Period!."

People keep saying that these kind of things don't happen to the good teams. Giants blitzed and got burned by Sanatana - that happens to every team, but a fundamental error like Madieu's and the other crazy stuff that has happened this year - penalties and the like - point not only to the players, but the coaches - maybe your ingredient of "benching" is needed. Maybe, we need to simplify the D for its "back up" starting secondary personnel.

Here's a request for you - When you watch the All -22 count the number of times that Cruz lines in the slot and key on Madieu to see if he is in that same coverage and watch what he does and Cruz does. This will give you more insight as to why Williams didn't do what he was supposed to do.

The problem with simplifying is that in this particular case, they were running a very common under-over double, and there really is no way to simplify that. This demands that the safety keep the play in front of him, but Williams didn't even keep Wilson, the under guy in front of him .. and ended up behind Cruz and Wilson ... and he's our free safety? We're in trouble.

What I see is that he didn't even turn his hips to start running until Cruz was about 3 yards from him with Wilson chasing, and at that point he's toast ... D. Green would be toast, and Williams doesn't have great speed. Whatever was going through his head, it was terrible play ... he did the one thing you can't do, let the play get behind you.

What he should have have done once Cruz got near him in a full sprint and he was flat footed is to cut off the rout and grab him ... tackle him, whatever... take the flag, but don't try to run parallel to him like he did ... so he made two errors.

I cannot find any legit reason why he'd let Cruz get on top of him like that other than him being a complete knuckle-head that might be better off on the sidelines than on the field.

Burgundy&Wha? wrote:If Dallas dumps their coaching staff at the end of the season, Rob Ryan would be a good pick-up for DC.

Burgundy&Wha? wrote:If Dallas dumps their coaching staff at the end of the season, Rob Ryan would be a good pick-up for DC.

Red_One43 wrote:Giants almost made Williams look routine on that Dez TD that was overturned. Why does a corner bite on an out and up in that situation.

This is probably why Haz doesn't bench Willliams - who do you replace him with when other teams to do the knuckle-head as well?

2.Talked to a very knowledgeable NFL guy after the game and his point summed up some differences between the teams. The Redskins and Steelers run the same defense, right? Well, this person said that’s true only to a point. The Steelers are much more basic on early downs and it shows in their execution. While they will change things up and they will blitz a lot, most of their so-called exotic looks come on third down. They rarely learn anything new. It’s a major key to why they execute so well. That, and having a top nose tackle in Casey Hampton – who had major penetration early in the game to cause a loss. This person didn’t think either secondary was anything special and actually thought the Redskins front three was better. But they have Hampton. The Steelers also have a big front and did a good job diagnosing plays and causing problems. The Redskins hit them a couple times but could not stick with the run because of the score. I did like how physical the Steelers played them; probably more than any other D this year. I will say, Alfred Morris matched their physical style. I have a feeling he likes that sort of game.

1.The Redskins’ defensive failures are an organizational failure. They wanted to build a 3-4 defense that was ultra-aggressive, modeling them after Pittsburgh. But if you want to blame talent as the problem, then you can only do one thing after that: blame the guys bringing in that talent. But all I heard from scouts and other evaluators before the season was how much they liked their front seven. A good front seven should be enough to cover up certain sins. The Steelers did not have their best player in the secondary (safety Troy Polamalu) yet they still shut down the Redskins. Heck, Ryan Clark is very good vs. the run, but not as strong against the pass. So you can make the case that the only other strong starter in this group is corner Ike Taylor. Yet the Steelers still flourish. The Redskins do not. They don’t hang their hats lately on shutting teams down; rather, they hang it on not giving up a ton of points to good offenses – New Orleans, New York. Everyone wants to blame the cap penalties. OK, that hurt. But how many times were they hurt by their signings in the past? So there’s no guarantee anything in free agency would have worked. Maybe it would have, but to only blame that is just wrong. I think if we’ve learned anything in the Dan Snyder era it’s that free agency is not the cure all.

3.Back to the differences. An NFL source said it’s the difference between having a philosophy and just installing a system. The Steelers, the source said, have a philosophy. Is that fair? When you’re not going well anything is fair. You want to blame coordinator Jim Haslett? Go ahead. This isn’t about one game or one play. It’s now about a body of work. This defense does not come close to comparing to the Gregg Williams’ units. In my time covering the Redskins, that group was as prepared as any. Yes, they got burned at times but could you imagine that D with this quarterback?
4.Let’s look at the last 16 games. It’s not pretty. And I’ll just go by the most important stat: points allowed. In that time the Redskins have allowed 17 or more points 15 times. Defenses that want to flirt with being a top-10 unit don’t do anything like that – you can’t just blame injuries to Brian Orakpo and Adam Carriker, either, because the defense was healthy in the front seven all of last season. There’s more: they’ve allowed 25 or more points 11 times. Eleven! Maybe the offense contributed to that last season by not sustaining drives or scoring enough or putting them in bad spots with turnovers. Well, the Redskins are scoring more, not turning the ball over … and the defense is still giving up points. The fewest points they’ve allowed this year is 22. There’s just no proof that they’re improving. They’ve played better games than others and they’ll look good for stretches, but rarely for an entire game. Something isn’t working, though I think you’re smart enough to know that already.

oneman56 wrote:http://washingtonexaminer.com/rick-snider-time-for-redskins-to-make-a-change/article/2511941#.UI331m-HKSo

riggofan wrote:I heard Sean Salisbury on LaVar's show on Friday night. He said he had it on good authority that Haz is on the way out and the Redskins already have their "d coordinator in waiting".

Obviously, Lavar/Salisbury. Take it with the usual grain of salt.

Deadskins wrote:Then why give him an extension? Not saying it isn't true, just trying to understand.

People want someone to blame and Jim Haslett often is the target, but I’m still not convinced coaching is the problem. Personnel seems to be more like it. The Redskins don’t seem to be very good. And Shanahan and Bruce Allen are getting what they paid for. They went bargain shopping on defense in the offseason and addressed the offense (yes, the $18 million cap penalty hurt). What happens when you buy cheap products? Things don’t work as well.

Red_One43 wrote:Keep an eye on Philly's DC change after the bye, doubt if that helps much.

Red_One43 wrote:

Deadskins wrote:Then why give him an extension? Not saying it isn't true, just trying to understand.

Trying to understand Shanny and the Danny are next to impossible, because they way they think in some ways is out of this world.

Think back to the McNabb contract extension.

McNabb is under fire and they extend his contract with one that they can easily get out from underneath. Why renew it in the first place? Did a phony vote of confidence really help anyone?

Without the details of Haz's and Smith's contracts, we have no idea what it means.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:Keep an eye on Philly's DC change after the bye, doubt if that helps much.

Again?!

Deadskins wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

Deadskins wrote:Then why give him an extension? Not saying it isn't true, just trying to understand.

Trying to understand Shanny and the Danny are next to impossible, because they way they think in some ways is out of this world.

Think back to the McNabb contract extension.

McNabb is under fire and they extend his contract with one that they can easily get out from underneath. Why renew it in the first place? Did a phony vote of confidence really help anyone?

Without the details of Haz's and Smith's contracts, we have no idea what it means.

Coaches contracts don't count under the salary cap, so McNabb's extension and Hazlet's wouldn't be for the same reasons.

Deadskins wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:Keep an eye on Philly's DC change after the bye, doubt if that helps much.

Again?!

Maybe he meant our bye.

5.Quick note: Seven of the 11 starters from Sunday’s game also were starters for most of last season and an eighth, Reed Doughty, was a part-time starter. A ninth, end Jarvis Jenkins, was a second-round pick, albeit one who is still learning after missing all of last season with a knee injury.

Shanahan said that free agent free safety Madieu Williams has been “solid” as he expected. Shanahan said he felt good about what cornerback Cedric Griffin has given the team when healthy and that receiver Josh Morgan “has major upside.” Shanahan said he expects more from Morgan and other free agents in the second half of the season.