PAPDOG67 wrote:Which part of the scheme was terrible? Just curious.
What part of the scheme was terrible??

Well for one how about having Ryan Kerrigan cover Shady McCoy?? Is that one enough to validate this scheme was terrible, Jim Haslett sucks as well as anything else negative you could say???

[/quote]
For one... He said scheme. You didn't answer the question. What is Haz's scheme? What's his philosophy?
So, tell us. Who would you have put on Shady?[/quote]
It was both. Haslet sucks as a coach. You can't prove to me other wise. The whole idea of going to a 3-4 SCHEME was terrible. You took two monster DEs in college, who wreaked havoc by getting up the field every down and had them try to cover running backs. Bringning in Coefield, who was a 4-3 DT and throwing him into a 3-4 NG was a bad move......and Coefield has actually played well for us, but I think he's a more dominant player as a 4-3 DT. The guys also seems to blitz a lot and play a soft zone on 3rd and short (ie under 10 yards) which is rediculous. Call it Scheme, call it philosophy call it whatever you like, whatever Jim Haslet is running, it aint very good.[/quote]
PAPDOG67 while agree 100% anything contrary seems to be unpopular, I voiced my opinion and was told my defense was a Madden Play and only worked on the Nintendo Wii, even though as a defensive coach for South Germantown and my defenses were top ranked, because it's Haslett's my thoughts or opinions mean nothing......

Don't you know having a 257 pound Linebacker cover Shady was a sound scheme, even though we never had a better type blitz to get to Foles?? LMAO!! Sorry the supposed intelligence to many posters here seem to show that both oars aren't in the water, and probably never have been, but please don't take offense when the Defensive Prodigy's here knit pick your opinion..........I for one, AGREE 10000000000000%