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

CanesSkins26 wrote:In 2009 we were 6th in the NFL in sacks and 7th in forced fumbles. This year we are doing well in both categories also. We still suck at interceptions and are ranked near the bottom of the NFL. So we are still good at what we were good at before the change in scheme and still bad at what we struggled with in the 4-3.

More generally, though, none of the items that you mentioned are deficiencies in the 4-3, and all could be corrected with changes to the 4-3 instead of a complete overhaul.

As an example, the Giants (4-3 defense) are leading the NFL in sacks. Of the top three teams in ints, 2 run the 4-3 and one runs the 3-4. Of the top 4 in fumbles, 2 run the 4-3 and two run the

I'm not arguing that we had to go to the 3-4, I'm saying that the best way to get good in the NFL is to build a good D and then a good O. I'm saying that if we are going to go to the 3-4, start with that, not the offense. But our D whether it was 4-3 or 3-4 had issues beyond the yards it was giving up which is what the rankings were based on that were not just tweaks. You can argue whatever stats you want, I was there and no stat's going to change my memory.

I'm glad that we are trying to get a defense that can help the offense - that is what is happening here
the 3-4 or 4-3 or whatever is not going to work unless you have a defense that helps the offense get the points needed

Atlanta went for a 4th down in OT against New Orleans - the reason they chose to use a running play was due to the fact that New Orleans' defense against the rush is the worst in the NFL
While Greg is a decent DC he does not help his offense - his defense here looked good on the stats sheet but always managed to let the other team score more points

this defense is a lot closer to being 'effective' than the offense

NOT saying we have a good defense, we have work to do there but we have a lot of issues on our offensive side of the ball

In todays NFL you need a lot of good big men - no longer can you get by with just good starters - these days with situational packages on both sides of the ball, teams need a lot of linemen - the big men have to be able to be spelled

these guys are putting the pieces together and we have a lot more younger guys that are good AND that 'fit' with the players around them than we used to

THANKFULLY we are building an NFL team & NOT an NFL FANTASY team

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:In 2009 we were 6th in the NFL in sacks and 7th in forced fumbles. This year we are doing well in both categories also. We still suck at interceptions and are ranked near the bottom of the NFL. So we are still good at what we were good at before the change in scheme and still bad at what we struggled with in the 4-3.

More generally, though, none of the items that you mentioned are deficiencies in the 4-3, and all could be corrected with changes to the 4-3 instead of a complete overhaul.

As an example, the Giants (4-3 defense) are leading the NFL in sacks. Of the top three teams in ints, 2 run the 4-3 and one runs the 3-4. Of the top 4 in fumbles, 2 run the 4-3 and two run the

I'm not arguing that we had to go to the 3-4, I'm saying that the best way to get good in the NFL is to build a good D and then a good O. I'm saying that if we are going to go to the 3-4, start with that, not the offense. But our D whether it was 4-3 or 3-4 had issues beyond the yards it was giving up which is what the rankings were based on that were not just tweaks. You can argue whatever stats you want, I was there and no stat's going to change my memory.

I agree with you that the defense had issues, there's really no disputing that. I just think that we could have fixed the defense much faster by making changes to the system that we had, rather than switching to an entirely different system that requires different types of players are certain positions.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:In 2009 we were 6th in the NFL in sacks and 7th in forced fumbles. This year we are doing well in both categories also. We still suck at interceptions and are ranked near the bottom of the NFL. So we are still good at what we were good at before the change in scheme and still bad at what we struggled with in the 4-3.

More generally, though, none of the items that you mentioned are deficiencies in the 4-3, and all could be corrected with changes to the 4-3 instead of a complete overhaul.

As an example, the Giants (4-3 defense) are leading the NFL in sacks. Of the top three teams in ints, 2 run the 4-3 and one runs the 3-4. Of the top 4 in fumbles, 2 run the 4-3 and two run the

I'm not arguing that we had to go to the 3-4, I'm saying that the best way to get good in the NFL is to build a good D and then a good O. I'm saying that if we are going to go to the 3-4, start with that, not the offense. But our D whether it was 4-3 or 3-4 had issues beyond the yards it was giving up which is what the rankings were based on that were not just tweaks. You can argue whatever stats you want, I was there and no stat's going to change my memory.

I agree with you that the defense had issues, there's really no disputing that. I just think that we could have fixed the defense much faster by making changes to the system that we had, rather than switching to an entirely different system that requires different types of players are certain positions.

And I agree with you that our D could have been better faster if we'd stayed with the 4-3. But if the 3-4 is the goal, better to do it first. It just seems like such a compromise strategy which leads to mediocrity and not greatness to say we have to just improve the D in the current scheme to be good rather then what we want as an ideal. Shannahan wants a 3-4. That's his ideal. Go for it, don't just get to mediocre faster. I endorse the method. We sucked for 20 years, I'm not interested in just not sucking as fast as we can. I'm interested in going for it.

The reason why he switched to the 3/4 was that the best teams in the NFL were running the 3/4. The other thing is that players coming out of the draft for the forseeable future are more suited to run the 3/4 vs the 4/3. Look at all the hybrid players who enter the draft. At some point we were going to have to do it. Also, the players we had running the 3/2 were older players who were on the downside of their career.

Also pointed out was that the 3/4 creates more turnovers than then 4/3 and that was the point. Have a defense that will put your offense in a position to put points on the board. Problem is, is that our defense has done a good job on their end but the offense just isn't staying on the field or putting up ANY points. I expect that correction to come next year after the overhaul happens there.

Can't build Rome in a day folks. Losing sucks - we all know that but to be a great team, you need to be structured and that's what they are doing. They are building the foundation right now and then can add the specialty pieces once everything is in place.

our offense needs more than a qb ....... oline ........... playmakers NOT just a wr we lack playmakers , someone who can turn a 5 yard catch into a TD.
this team is not even close to being a playoff team. we are at least 2 more years away from being a .500 team.
my question is why ???
other teams turnaround takes 2 years why are we a 5 year plan .....49ers ..... ravens .... falcons the list is a mile long on teams that make it happen ,why not us ?
not saying fire anyone
just this routine is old ..... losing is not acceptable nor should it be.

redskinz4ever wrote:this team is not even close to being a playoff team. we are at least 2 more years away from being a .500 team.
my question is why ???

No need to answer because you're committing a logical fallacy referred to as "begging the question."

redskinz4ever wrote:my question is why ???
other teams turnaround takes 2 years why are we a 5 year plan .....49ers ..... ravens .... falcons the list is a mile long on teams that make it happen ,why not us ?

Answer: 10 years of Vinny Cerrato and Danny boy running things. 2 years can't erase the mess they made.

I posted this in another thread, but here are our recent drafting stats:

Since 2000, the skins have had a total of 29 draft picks in rounds 1-4 (they should have had nearly 50 sans trades). From 2005-2010, they only had a total of 13 between rounds 1-4 (they should have had 24). Out of those 13, only 6 are currently on the roster. Rounds 1-4 are crucial in building a franchise -- yet our idiot owner has consistently disregarded this generally accepted football principle for over a decade.

Between 2010-2005 the skins had a total of 39 draft picks -- of which 33% were selected in rounds 1-4. Comparatively:
- GB: 58 picks; 50% selected in rounds 1-4.
- Pitt - 51 picks; 49% selected in rounds 1-4.
- NE - 57 picks; 51% selected in rounds 1-4.
- BAL - 47 picks; 60% selected in rounds 1-4.
- SF: 50 picks; 50% selected in rounds 1-4.

It is going to take more than 2 years to rebound from losing 15-20 draft picks to competitors over the past 5 years. It will take 5 years because that is how long it takes to work from scratch. SF, ATL, etc. all had pieces. They didn't give away their draft picks like candy. This is a clean slate deal.

Vinny and Danny were even more incompetent than people give them credit for.

Strengthen the OL, and a lot changes. For the better.

Yes, it might get worse this year, but so what? This is not Steve Spurrier / Vinny Cerrato / Bruce Smith / Neon Deion / Haynesworth etc etc. Shanahan is a professional.

No, he is not Joe Gibbs, and yes, I remember the loud persistent insistence that "Gibbs has tarnished his record" by taking the Redskins to the playoffs only twice in four years. Honestly? We see why Gibbs is in the Hall of Fame.

So, to repeat: Shanahan is not Gibbs. Shanahan is still pretty good.

Get the OL and get some receivers. Then see how good these QBs are when the team can run and protect the passer.

welch wrote:Strengthen the OL, and a lot changes. For the better.

Yes, it might get worse this year, but so what? This is not Steve Spurrier / Vinny Cerrato / Bruce Smith / Neon Deion / Haynesworth etc etc. Shanahan is a professional.

No, he is not Joe Gibbs, and yes, I remember the loud persistent insistence that "Gibbs has tarnished his record" by taking the Redskins to the playoffs only twice in four years. Honestly? We see why Gibbs is in the Hall of Fame.

So, to repeat: Shanahan is not Gibbs. Shanahan is still pretty good.

Get the OL and get some receivers. Then see how good these QBs are when the team can run and protect the passer.

Well put. Some of the younger fans on here just don't get it. Gibbs leaped all kinds of bounds to do what he did in his second time around. He gave us respect when no one else could. Now that he is gone we have once again lost it. Maybe the Shan can get something going next year. This year is done but it doesn't mean we can't improve.

frankcal20 wrote:The reason why he switched to the 3/4 was that the best teams in the NFL were running the 3/4. The other thing is that players coming out of the draft for the forseeable future are more suited to run the 3/4 vs the 4/3. Look at all the hybrid players who enter the draft. At some point we were going to have to do it. Also, the players we had running the 3/2 were older players who were on the downside of their career.

Also pointed out was that the 3/4 creates more turnovers than then 4/3 and that was the point. Have a defense that will put your offense in a position to put points on the board. Problem is, is that our defense has done a good job on their end but the offense just isn't staying on the field or putting up ANY points. I expect that correction to come next year after the overhaul happens there.

Can't build Rome in a day folks. Losing sucks - we all know that but to be a great team, you need to be structured and that's what they are doing. They are building the foundation right now and then can add the specialty pieces once everything is in place.

Frank, being one of the few on here that consistently listens to Sirius NFL, I've got to ask you... Did you hear me today with Ross Tucker and Bob Papa?

We need an O-Line before a QB. A QB should NOT be our #1 priority.

StorminMormon86 wrote:We need an O-Line before a QB. A QB should NOT be our #1 priority.

true the oline needs ALOT of help and no matter who we have at qb they will be running for their lives.

With the current line I would think this next draft should be all about the offensive line, Kory won't be at full stregnth next year, I think Williams should be on the right side, Jamal Brown has to go, Chester hasn't impressed me and I think the center position will be better with one more year playing. So it seams at the very least 4 draft picks for the line and maybe get a veteran QB that can manage and get a franchise QB the year after. Hightower won't have his speed back until the year after next either, and Torrain is NOT the answer.

Yep. I wouldn't be surprised if Shanny didn't take a QB this year but waited until 2013 to nab one.

StorminMormon86 wrote:Yep. I wouldn't be surprised if Shanny didn't take a QB this year but waited until 2013 to nab one.

I hope you're wrong because this franchise needs a QB to groom asap. One usually doesn't draft OL (ex LOT) in the first round. So we should have plenty of picks in later rounds for OL.

So as of today the Redskins have 1 pick in rounds 1, 2 and 3. 2 picks in round 4 the additional 1 from tading Campbell one in round 5, 6 and 7 totalling 8 I wonder what they do. Any thoughts?

Russ Penman wrote:So as of today the Redskins have 1 pick in rounds 1, 2 and 3. 2 picks in round 4 the additional 1 from tading Campbell one in round 5, 6 and 7 totalling 8 I wonder what they do. Any thoughts?

What kind of compensation might we get from Carlos Rogers, Andre Carter, and our others that walked in free agency?

Russ Penman wrote:So as of today the Redskins have 1 pick in rounds 1, 2 and 3. 2 picks in round 4 the additional 1 from tading Campbell one in round 5, 6 and 7 totalling 8 I wonder what they do. Any thoughts?

Round 1 - QB
Round 2 - CB
Round 3 - OG
Round 4 - RB
Round 4 - OL
Round 5 - OL

The best thing about this year was before they hit the field, we made some great additions .... for next year

In today's NFL, you need a talented QB to win. The modern NFL requires it. It is a passing league now more than ever, and it takes talent on offense to get that done.

Shanahan is an old school coach who seems to think that his "system" is more important than the talent on the field. That would be fine, if he actually fielded a team that could win in the old school way (running the ball and playing solid defense).

Instead, Shanahan is trying to do everything too soon. He's working with poor talent, and trying to install a modern way of playing the game.

You can't be a pass first team when you suck at QB and receiver. I don't care how good you think your system is. Shanahan the GM is actually killing Shanahan the coach. He's shooting himself in the foot, and that's what sucks about Mike TAN-ahan.

I asked Ross Tucker on Sirius NFL radio yesterday about the differences of opinion within the fan base... Basically, half the fan base seems like they want to can everyone right now and start over, or, bare minimum, they're looking for major statistical improvement by now (18 months into this rebuild). The other half staying calm, being patient and letting him finish what he started. I suggested that some think that Shannahan2 and/or Haslet are poor coaches or their playcalling is off and right away, they scoffed at that. Keep in mind Ross Tucker is a guy that actually knows and played football, and analyses coaches tape for a living.

The big picture answer is what I've been preaching, but I wanted to confirm that I wasn't going crazy hearing all this talk on this site. They answered me like it would be totally foolish to start over...it's why this franchise has been spinning it's wheels for ten years. Constant turnover, constant philosophy changes has led to horrible results. They think Shannahan will improve his offense in next years draft to include his QB. All of this is pretty obvious to those in sinc with this rebuild. What was interesting is that he said, that he shouldn't be given just 3 years as I suggested on the phone, but at least 4 or ideally 5. Theory would be, he'll pick up a QB in the draft and common sense would be to give him at least another year to see the full puzzle put together. Then if no improvement after year 4 (minimum), reevaluate. Basically, give him time to try and fix this.

After hearing someone talk straight about where we are in the process, I am totally behind this. I know I'll catch grief, but I think it's the right thing for the franchise. We need stability and shouldn't be looking to replace coaches or a front office after a few years. I have now extended my time given to Shannahan from 3 to 5 years. That is when I will evaluate his progress and all the while, continue enjoying watching these young players grow. Blog that

The Hogster wrote:In today's NFL, you need a talented QB to win. The modern NFL requires it. It is a passing league now more than ever, and it takes talent on offense to get that done.

Shanahan is an old school coach who seems to think that his "system" is more important than the talent on the field. That would be fine, if he actually fielded a team that could win in the old school way (running the ball and playing solid defense).

Instead, Shanahan is trying to do everything too soon. He's working with poor talent, and trying to install a modern way of playing the game.

You can't be a pass first team when you suck at QB and receiver. I don't care how good you think your system is. Shanahan the GM is actually killing Shanahan the coach. He's shooting himself in the foot, and that's what sucks about Mike TAN-ahan.

Very well said. I know mike got handed a no talent team but it's going to be year three and we need a real QB and WR talent and it is a passing league now so QB is more important than ever .

skinpride1 wrote:

The Hogster wrote:In today's NFL, you need a talented QB to win. The modern NFL requires it. It is a passing league now more than ever, and it takes talent on offense to get that done.

Shanahan is an old school coach who seems to think that his "system" is more important than the talent on the field. That would be fine, if he actually fielded a team that could win in the old school way (running the ball and playing solid defense).

Instead, Shanahan is trying to do everything too soon. He's working with poor talent, and trying to install a modern way of playing the game.

You can't be a pass first team when you suck at QB and receiver. I don't care how good you think your system is. Shanahan the GM is actually killing Shanahan the coach. He's shooting himself in the foot, and that's what sucks about Mike TAN-ahan.

Very well said. I know mike got handed a no talent team but it's going to be year three and we need a real QB and WR talent and it is a passing league now so QB is more important than ever .

Personally, I prefer the old smash mouth style of football. You eat the clock up and keep your defense fresh. It is also humiliating for the opposing defense when they can't stop the run. Of course you have to be able to pass. Sometimes the passing game has to be able to open up the running game. Like Hogster said above ^ he needs to field a team to win the old school way. Pick a QB in next years draft if we keep losing like this. Then year after year keep picking O Linemen until its done. It's going to be a long time before we can field a team like the 49ers. I am actually jealous of their style of ball.

Or we can be a pass happy team that can put up lots of points but struggle to keep the D fresh.

The Hogster wrote:In today's NFL, you need a talented QB to win. The modern NFL requires it. It is a passing league now more than ever, and it takes talent on offense to get that done.

I tend to disagree with this. The Broncos and especially the 49ers are winning games playing old school smash mouth football. People tend to generalize the "modern" NFL as a pass heavy one because of what the Packers and Saints are doing.