shanahan's record

[Sharkinva]

You may be right, but I am confused by statements like this. 2 year setback? Setback to what? They currently are terrible - how much worse could they get?

I am not advocating a switch to a 4-3 or any other defense, but making the argument for maintaining continuity for a bad team is kind of puzzling. Again - if this is a bump in the road and they win most of the remaining games or I am missing something that will result in a good-great defense next season then - my bad - I take it back. Enlighten me (being serious).

I think you are missing something. We have some solid pieces on the defense. Coefield, Riley, Amerson, Merriweather, Hall and even Bowen. We are still a solid FS and ILB from being a good defense. A complete change, especially in scheme from a 3-4 to a 4-3 is out of the question... ask Dallas how thats working out. And they are considered more talented on defense, but the switch has made them horrid. Get us a safety, an ILB who isnt seven games from likely retiring and a DE who can free up Rak (or a OLB better than RAK) and I think this defense gets to where we need it to be.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I think you are missing something. We have some solid pieces on the defense. Coefield, Riley, Amerson, Merriweather, Hall and even Bowen. We are still a solid FS and ILB from being a good defense. A complete change, especially in scheme from a 3-4 to a 4-3 is out of the question... ask Dallas how thats working out. And they are considered more talented on defense, but the switch has made them horrid. Get us a safety, an ILB who isnt seven games from likely retiring and a DE who can free up Rak (or a OLB better than RAK) and I think this defense gets to where we need it to be.

I appreciate the clarification. However - I truly believe that there are very few untouchable players on that defense. I would go with Kerrigan, Amerson, Riley & perhaps Cofield & Bowen. The rest can be replaced. Players like Hall are nice to have at the right price but are replaceable. I would also not include Meriweather in that list - way too unreliable & inconsistent (awesome at times - invisible at others). Orakpo can be great at times but also unreliable & I just question whether he warrants a top dollar contract when the team has so many needs (that being said he will almost certainly be re-signed). Just need someone to unleash this guy if possible.

Again - don't get me wrong - I can see your point & it definitely could work. However - making somewhat dramatic changes could also work. Every team has solid performers on both sides - I just believe that the Redskins don't have that many on the defensive side. I don't believe that you need to resist major changes on defense when the team ranks very low on that side of the ball & the major reason is not due to injuries.

I just want to see this team turn the tide & be set for many years to come, and I am not so sure that the answer lies strictly in obtaining more cap space. Again - I am frustrated & tired of just about every year hearing "We are getting close - next season we will be fine". Just venting I guess.

 

[gkekoa]

I appreciate the clarification. However - I truly believe that there are very few untouchable players on that defense. I would go with Kerrigan, Amerson, Riley & perhaps Cofield & Bowen. The rest can be replaced. Players like Hall are nice to have at the right price but are replaceable. I would also not include Meriweather in that list - way too unreliable & inconsistent (awesome at times - invisible at others). Orakpo can be great at times but also unreliable & I just question whether he warrants a top dollar contract when the team has so many needs (that being said he will almost certainly be re-signed). Just need someone to unleash this guy if possible.

Again - don't get me wrong - I can see your point & it definitely could work. However - making somewhat dramatic changes could also work. Every team has solid performers on both sides - I just believe that the Redskins don't have that many on the defensive side. I don't believe that you need to resist major changes on defense when the team ranks very low on that side of the ball & the major reason is not due to injuries.

I just want to see this team turn the tide & be set for many years to come, and I am not so sure that the answer lies strictly in obtaining more cap space. Again - I am frustrated & tired of just about every year hearing "We are getting close - next season we will be fine". Just venting I guess.

You never need to make total changes, especially on a defense that goes through stretches of playing well. What do we need to do better on defense? We need to apply pressure up the middle so QBs can't step up in the pocket. We need more speed over the middle at the LB position. We need improved play at the S position. We need to scheme better and play to our strengths.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

You never need to make total changes, especially on a defense that goes through stretches of playing well. What do we need to do better on defense? We need to apply pressure up the middle so QBs can't step up in the pocket. We need more speed over the middle at the LB position. We need improved play at the S position. We need to scheme better and play to our strengths.

Agree. A true top notch Safety would have a huge impact on this defense. Also - while the secondary is a concern I would be much more concerned about the pass rush since - while they step up at times - they simply disappear for huge stretches.

Would like to see some tweaks and a definite change in coordinators - don't understand the fascination with Haslett. He might not be the worst, but there are better guys out there.

 

[Sharkinva]

Agree. A true top notch Safety would have a huge impact on this defense. Also - while the secondary is a concern I would be much more concerned about the pass rush since - while they step up at times - they simply disappear for huge stretches.

Would like to see some tweaks and a definite change in coordinators - don't understand the fascination with Haslett. He might not be the worst, but there are better guys out there.

Agreed that there are better guys out there. But I think the main reason you stick with Haslett is because changing half the defense and the DC at the same time generally tends to make you worse, not better. Now granted we cant get much worse. But I tend to think a boost in talent at the safety, ILB and maybe a starting DE would do wonders for this team. Jenkins just hasnt come along as more than a filler. LFB is showing signs of age. And Rambo just isnt there yet. Bottom line, we need four starters on the defense, six if you consider that Hall and Wilson might not be back. Its easier to teach 4-6 guys what they need to be doing if the other guys already have a clue. Teaching 11 a new system is when you drop into the realm of totally abysmal. I think bring in the talent, Let Haslett ride out his contract. And if we dont improve with the talent there, then you make the move.

 

[skinsdad62]

You may be right, but I am confused by statements like this. 2 year setback? Setback to what? They currently are terrible - how much worse could they get?

I am not advocating a switch to a 4-3 or any other defense, but making the argument for maintaining continuity for a bad team is kind of puzzling. Again - if this is a bump in the road and they win most of the remaining games or I am missing something that will result in a good-great defense next season then - my bad - I take it back. Enlighten me (being serious).

the first year would be to acquire the guys needed to run a 4-3 and learn the system we would be short DTs . we would have an over abundance of 3-4 LBS . our de's would be small with rak at 257, kerrigan , 260 jenkins 251. jackson and tapp both go 266 and 270 respectively . we would be small at DE and run defense isnt anyone of those guys strong suit .

at DT cofield and jenkins , and maybe bowen could adjust (all have nfl DT experience ) I think nield could to as could baker

we have riley at MLB but what else ? the secondary doesnt matter

so i give one year to learn the system and another to be proficient at it hence 2 years and fix holes .


now you didnt ask me this but how is Rak (our best defender according to PFF and not even close ) is replaceable but yet kerrigan (a similar guy ) isnt?

to me it is a hole lot easier to plug in a quality ILB and get secondary help then it is to relearn a new system

now the DC is a hole new can of worms

 

[gkekoa]

Agree. A true top notch Safety would have a huge impact on this defense. Also - while the secondary is a concern I would be much more concerned about the pass rush since - while they step up at times - they simply disappear for huge stretches.

Would like to see some tweaks and a definite change in coordinators - don't understand the fascination with Haslett. He might not be the worst, but there are better guys out there.

It doesn't have to be a top notch safety. It needs to be a safety that can understand the scheme, tackle, and play his role.

The problem with the pass rush is our interior line doesn't provide any consistent pressure.

I'm for changing DC if the right guy in the 3-4 is available. Romeo Crennel and Eric Mangini come to mind. Dick Lebeau if he were younger. Wade Phillips in hindsight (even though I wanted him immediately). Rex Ryan would be a dream.

 

[Krusheasy]

Main problem with a new coach right now is....

1. It sets RG3 back more so than bringing him forward. Our offense isnt bad, its just inconsistent. A new system likely will do more harm than good. Especially since odds are a new coach might go away from his strengths.

2. While the defense needs a change, I really think its more talent than system. Haslett hasnt done a great job, but if you hand an average cook premium ingredients he will likely make a palatable meal. Hand that same cook a pack of oodles of noodles and some ground beef, and you really cant expect much more than what you gave him. Haslett has had some good moments and bad, but we have been forced to start some guys that should be backups more often than not on the defense.

I say see where this season goes, give Shanahan and company a full offseason with a full budget and see where we get next year. Give him a three year eztention with the last two years being buy in options which would be fair to both sides. Sure we might pay him a little heavy for 2014 and 2015, but it would be the best case scenario as the other option is likely throwing $8 million a year at a college coach.

^^^this^^^


if you read anything thing today, read these two articles

 

[SoCalWizFan]

It doesn't have to be a top notch safety. It needs to be a safety that can understand the scheme, tackle, and play his role.

The problem with the pass rush is our interior line doesn't provide any consistent pressure.

I'm for changing DC if the right guy in the 3-4 is available. Romeo Crennel and Eric Mangini come to mind. Dick Lebeau if he were younger. Wade Phillips in hindsight (even though I wanted him immediately). Rex Ryan would be a dream.

Like it. Good idea about possibly maintaining scheme while getting a better coach. Oh well - I will support whoever they get (or retain).

 

[gkekoa]

I think that one tweet right there says it all.

4 out of 6 years, a young guy is running a top five offense.

It speaks volumes that people would want to get rid of him.

 

[skinsdad62]

Baylor could be bracing for a Redskins rush on Art Briles | ProFootballTalk

could this happen ?

 

[Krusheasy]

Baylor could be bracing for a Redskins rush on Art Briles | ProFootballTalk

could this happen ?

the twitter "insiders" have been throwing this around for a few weeks ... sure, anything is possible. But considering we don't currently have an opening for HC, I dont think it will happen.

 

[skinz2winz]

You never need to make total changes, especially on a defense that goes through stretches of playing well. What do we need to do better on defense? We need to apply pressure up the middle so QBs can't step up in the pocket. We need more speed over the middle at the LB position. We need improved play at the S position. We need to scheme better and play to our strengths.

So your saying we need a new defensive coordinator GK? That's how I read this...

 

[skinsdad62]

So your saying we need a new defensive coordinator GK? That's how I read this...

better players at those positions would help

 

[skinz2winz]

the first year would be to acquire the guys needed to run a 4-3 and learn the system we would be short DTs . we would have an over abundance of 3-4 LBS . our de's would be small with rak at 257, kerrigan , 260 jenkins 251. jackson and tapp both go 266 and 270 respectively . we would be small at DE and run defense isnt anyone of those guys strong suit .

at DT cofield and jenkins , and maybe bowen could adjust (all have nfl DT experience ) I think nield could to as could baker

we have riley at MLB but what else ? the secondary doesnt matter

so i give one year to learn the system and another to be proficient at it hence 2 years and fix holes .


now you didnt ask me this but how is Rak (our best defender according to PFF and not even close ) is replaceable but yet kerrigan (a similar guy ) isnt?

to me it is a hole lot easier to plug in a quality ILB and get secondary help then it is to relearn a new system

now the DC is a hole new can of worms

I'm not certain switching to a 4-3 would require having to go out and "get" guys. We have the personnel to play a 4-3, we just need to add to that. Rak & Kerrigan are your proto-typical DE guys. Coefield (previously played 4-3), Carriker, Baker, Jenkins, Nield & Bowen can play DT. Our LB core would need an upgrade but we already know this. Jenkins and Riley could play outside and we can bring in an experienced ILB to play the 4-3. Add Robinson to the mix at OLB with his speed and your on to something. I just believe we can create more pressure with a 4 man front with Rak & Kerrigan coming off the edges than what we currently are doing. If these two can flush or make the QB step up into both our DT's, let alone a blitzer, then we have created the needed pressure which in turn helps our secondary.

You mention run support not being the strong suit of Rak or Kerrigan. Well, they don't cover very well as 3-4 backer's so what are their strong suits Dad? There are pro's & con's to switching however, I feel both Rak & Kerrigan are being miss-used in this system that regularly requires they cover downfield or in space. Not a strong suite of either player imo.

 

[skinsdad62]

I'm not certain switching to a 4-3 would require having to go out and "get" guys. We have the personnel to play a 4-3, we just need to add to that. Rak & Kerrigan are your proto-typical DE guys. Coefield (previously played 4-3), Carriker, Baker, Jenkins, Nield & Bowen can play DT. Our LB core would need an upgrade but we already know this. Jenkins and Riley could play outside and we can bring in an experienced ILB to play the 4-3. Add Robinson to the mix at OLB with his speed and your on to something. I just believe we can create more pressure with a 4 man front with Rak & Kerrigan coming off the edges than what we currently are doing. If these two can flush or make the QB step up into both our DT's, let alone a blitzer, then we have created the needed pressure which in turn helps our secondary.

You mention run support not being the strong suit of Rak or Kerrigan. Well, they don't cover very well as 3-4 backer's so what are their strong suits Dad? There are pro's & con's to switching however, I feel both Rak & Kerrigan are being miss-used in this system that regularly requires they cover downfield or in space. Not a strong suite of either player imo.

Rak and kerrigan have been pro bowl OLBs . I hardly call that miss used both are light for DEs so the run defense can be more vulnerable . carriker is through we dont have 2 olbs robinson is injury prone.

i have seen how long it took to change over to the 3-4 and i expect the same changing back

D ware didnt get any better rushing the passer with his hand down and i doubt Rak or kerrigan will either

 

[Sharkinva]

Rak and kerrigan have been pro bowl OLBs . I hardly call that miss used both are light for DEs so the run defense can be more vulnerable . carriker is through we dont have 2 olbs robinson is injury prone.

i have seen how long it took to change over to the 3-4 and i expect the same changing back

D ware didnt get any better rushing the passer with his hand down and i doubt Rak or kerrigan will either

Switching back to a 4-3 is a bad idea at this point. Ware has actually gotten worse and more beat up going to the DE position. Agree we would need alot at the LB position in order to make the switch. Carriker... I think they will at least see what he has come training camp next year. But either way 3-4 or 4-3 we need to start getting younger on the D-line as Bowen and Coefield are both tipping 30 next year. But we might have to live with an older line in order to finally fix the secondary. Not even taking into account we also need ILB and O-line help.

 

[skinsdad62]

What's Responsible for the Defensive Woes? | Fanspeak Washington Redskins Blog

this article here points out to how Rak and kerrigan are used in our 3-4

Rak is 16th and and kerrigan 19th (or vice versa) in rush % out of 24 rush OLBS .

adjusting that % will aid in the pass rush .

why wouldnt you have your 2 best pass rushers , rush more ? could it be that LBF and Riley cant cover and are safeties are weak ?

 

[Krusheasy]

What's Responsible for the Defensive Woes? | Fanspeak Washington Redskins Blog

this article here points out to how Rak and kerrigan are used in our 3-4

Rak is 16th and and kerrigan 19th (or vice versa) in rush % out of 24 rush OLBS .

adjusting that % will aid in the pass rush .

why wouldnt you have your 2 best pass rushers , rush more ? could it be that LBF and Riley cant cover and are safeties are weak ?

the article says ...

"Kerrigan (80%) in terms of percentage of pass rush plays they are rushing the quarterback

.. so he rushes the QB 80% ?

 

[Caliskinsfan]

I'm understanding it as 80% dropping in coverage, which is not Raks and Kerrigans strengths. This is directly Related to my question on another thread about Kerrigan saying that he was responsible for contain about 85% in the Vikes game. Without strong MLB and secondary play, we get gashed... A lot, particularly over the middle. At least, that's how Im understanding it. Not as good as most of y'all when it comes down to the x's and o's.