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

I agree with SkinsJock that Haslett isn't the biggest problem with the defense. Having said that, if we can upgrade the d-coordinator then do it. There are definitely guys out there who have proven they can consistently put together good defenses on different teams. (We had one when Marvin Lewis was here and also Gregg Williams.)

The criticism of Haslett that he has never proven that seems fair.

I'm not sure that Haslett is a good DC and he has not exactly proven to be one

I just think it's not so much Haslett or the 3-4 as it is a combination of depth and players not executing

that's just my feeling - I do think that even if that is close to being true, Haslett has a season to make an impression ... regardless

I still can't believe Haslett has people in his corner. Unreal. Please tell me one good defense he has put togehter. Find me one seaon where you can point out that his defense was top 10. Please.....you can't do it. The guys track record is a proven failure. GET HIM OUT OF HERE !

I also think that the refs, while not biased are not exactly fair with our team ...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... fferently/

in a nutshell - Haslett is right in suggesting that the refs need to do a better job ... and this was back in August

When are we as a fan base going to stop making excuses for our coaches and players and start demanding some better play from them. I am someone who was a huge ORakpo fan when he was drafted, but if we can get a 3rd rounder for him at the deadline, good riddance. Eventually you need produce on the field. I still like Orakpo, but for the money he is commanding, see you later. We lost with you, we can lose without you. Its amazing how so much of our fan base has just accepted sub par football. Its like its expected. Its sickening.

This is thorough:

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/32 ... im-haslett

He really had little 3-4 experienced before us. It is what he started with at Pittsburgh but he was taking over for someone. Kind of like the way Switzer took over for Jimmy Johnson. Plus he had good personnel and good assistants. The personnel he has had here has largely sucked.

The essential conclusion of the article linked above is "average." It is a good bleacher report article.

I have seen many a player in perfect position after Haslett made a certain call and then watched that player fail to make the play for which he was placed perfectly. I have also seen 13 yard cushions on third and 10. Is this Hazlet or the player or both?

DarthMonk wrote:This is thorough:

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/32 ... im-haslett

He really had little 3-4 experienced before us. It is what he started with at Pittsburgh but he was taking over for someone. Kind of like the way Switzer took over for Jimmy Johnson. Plus he had good personnel and good assistants. The personnel he has had here has largely sucked.

The essential conclusion of the article linked above is "average." It is a good bleacher report article.

I have seen many a player in perfect position after Haslett made a certain call and then watched that player fail to make the play for which he was placed perfectly. I have also seen 13 yard cushions on third and 10. Is this Hazlet or the player or both?

thanks for the article DM

Haslett's not a bad DC & he's not a really good DC - I just don't think all the problems are changed for the better by firing him

Just as some of us were throwing on the last shovelful of dirt ...

DarthMonk wrote:Just as some of us were throwing on the last shovelful of dirt ...

Night of the Living Haslett

Called a great game. Loved how aggressive they were. Anybody else have that feeling though that it was a little bit of "what do we have to lose? Let's throw caution to the wind." Either way, lots of credit to Haz.

One other point about that though is that the players came through for him. You can't all out blitz like that down after down if Amerson and Breeland and Merriweather aren't playing lights out. Its a good reminder that its not all about Jim Haslett. You HAVE to have the players.

Awesome game plan last night. Finally got some pressure on the QB.

The play of our corners last night changes EVERTHING! Expect to see a much more physical D when playing teams that live by the pass.

I have to go back rewatch, but frankly the way the corners played when I was watching is what I've been hoping for. Could be that Hall's injury this year ends up being a blessing in disguise.

Now, does anyone know what in the world is going on with Philip Thomas?

emoses14 wrote:I have to go back rewatch, but frankly the way the corners played when I was watching is what I've been hoping for. Could be that Hall's injury this year ends up being a blessing in disguise.

Now, does anyone know what in the world is going on with Philip Thomas?

Good question, man. Clark was struggling last night - injured?

If we played someone like P. Manning last night, our corners would have been exposed and we would have been annihilated. Gruden said it best when he said Romo didn't pick up a single blitz. Its sad when you are forced to blitz on nearly every down in order to get sacks.

Onlyskins4ever wrote:If we played someone like P. Manning last night, our corners would have been exposed and we would have been annihilated. Gruden said it best when he said Romo didn't pick up a single blitz. Its sad when you are forced to blitz on nearly every down in order to get sacks.

"IF" sure can apply to a lot like if it's not broke don't fix it. I give credit where it's due and they called something Romo and the Cowboys couldn't handle and they kept calling it so I say good on the coaching staff and on the players. Conversely, the Cowpies inexplicably rush for 8 yards on 1st down in OT and then decide to throw the ball playing right into our hands. You call it sad, I call it doing the best with what you have and doing what you need to do in order to win.

Onlyskins4ever wrote:If we played someone like P. Manning last night, our corners would have been exposed and we would have been annihilated. Gruden said it best when he said Romo didn't pick up a single blitz. Its sad when you are forced to blitz on nearly every down in order to get sacks.

Manning might've been sacked even faster if all other things had been equal to last night. All Romo had was the super quick hot read and we were jumping those. Without his escapability we'd have had another 4-5 sacks.

DarthMonk wrote:

Onlyskins4ever wrote:If we played someone like P. Manning last night, our corners would have been exposed and we would have been annihilated. Gruden said it best when he said Romo didn't pick up a single blitz. Its sad when you are forced to blitz on nearly every down in order to get sacks.

Manning might've been sacked even faster if all other things had been equal to last night. All Romo had was the super quick hot read and we were jumping those. Without his escapability we'd have had another 4-5 sacks.

I agree there, too. Romo can get loose and stay loose. I think he performs better sometimes when he's being chased! I don't think Peyton Manning has that same instinct.

DarthMonk wrote:Without his escapability we'd have had another 4-5 sacks.

Yeah, I begrudgingly have to give Blowmo props for that. He's one of the best at escaping what would surely be a sack on any other QB. I attribute it to his being slimy.

hanburgerheel wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

Onlyskins4ever wrote:If we played someone like P. Manning last night, our corners would have been exposed and we would have been annihilated. Gruden said it best when he said Romo didn't pick up a single blitz. Its sad when you are forced to blitz on nearly every down in order to get sacks.

Manning might've been sacked even faster if all other things had been equal to last night. All Romo had was the super quick hot read and we were jumping those. Without his escapability we'd have had another 4-5 sacks.

I agree there, too. Romo can get loose and stay loose. I think he performs better sometimes when he's being chased! I don't think Peyton Manning has that same instinct.

Peyton Manning is a great QB. Nothing I am about to say takes away from that.

It is really easy to rattle Peyton Manning. When the game doesn't go according to the script in his head, be it on one play, a series or the game, he reverts back to good ole' happy feet Manning. It is the sole reason I knock him way down the list of all time greats. If you punch manning the mouth, literally, he folds. Why in the world do you think all of these protect the QB rules have been invented in the years since he's been in the league? Not a conspiracy point, but just an observation. Brady will always unquestionably be better than Manning, not because he has more rings, but because he isn't a [female dog] and can take a punch and get up and kill you. Rattle Manning, and he starts to panic. This is why he (among many other QBs mind you) has historically had so much more trouble with Steelers, Pats (recently) SeaHawks. This is the main reason he left the NFC South when he did (do you think he wanted to deal with that defense Houston has all the time?) and went to at the time cream puff AFC west (defensively). He's had this problem ever since he was at Tennessee, probably before that. Brett Farve, Joe Montana, Brady, Rothle. . . Big Ben, (much as I hate to admit it) Elway, Marino and guys of that ilk were tough SOB's who played QB.

Now, you try to knock Peyton on his butt and it doesn't work, good luck.

Manning wouldn't have had to escape like Romo because he would have used an audible to counter the blitz he saw coming from a mile away and then take advantage of the inexperienced corners.

Onlyskins4ever wrote:Manning wouldn't have had to escape like Romo because he would have used an audible to counter the blitz he saw coming from a mile away and then take advantage of the inexperienced corners.

Well, the upside is we didn't play Manning. We played Romo and the current darlings of the sports media- the Dallas Cowboys. I'll worry about Manning when we play Manning.

hanburgerheel wrote:

Onlyskins4ever wrote:Manning wouldn't have had to escape like Romo because he would have used an audible to counter the blitz he saw coming from a mile away and then take advantage of the inexperienced corners.

Well, the upside is we didn't play Manning. We played Romo and the current darlings of the sports media- the Dallas Cowboys. I'll worry about Manning when we play Manning.

Yeahhhhhh really...how many Manning like qb's and offenses are in the NFL? Two or three maybe

Onlyskins4ever wrote:Manning wouldn't have had to escape like Romo because he would have used an audible to counter the blitz he saw coming from a mile away and then take advantage of the inexperienced corners.

Possibly but Romo called audibles too ... his young line just couldn't handle the numbers and unpredictable angles. Manning probably could have done what you say with the Denver offense but I'm not so sure about the offense Romo was playing with last night. That's also why I said "all the things being equal."

By the way how did those audibles work last year against Seattle??

DarthMonk wrote:

Onlyskins4ever wrote:Manning wouldn't have had to escape like Romo because he would have used an audible to counter the blitz he saw coming from a mile away and then take advantage of the inexperienced corners.

Possibly but Romo called audibles too ... his young line just couldn't handle the numbers and unpredictable angles. Manning probably could have done what you say with the Denver offense but I'm not so sure about the offense Romo was playing with last night. That's also why I said "all the things being equal."

By the way how did those audibles work last year against Seattle??

Good point, I didn't take into consideration the inexperience of their line. I just wish we could bring about consistent pressure without the blitz.