Jim Haslett : Time For Him To Show Something ?

[roanoker]

I'm good with Gruden's judgement to keep Haslett until proven otherwise. After all, he bears the responsibility. Concerning Shanny meddling with the D, one could argue that if Haslett had his act together no meddling would have been required. Normally, you don't fix it if it aint broke.

 

On the other hand, Shanny did appear to be an autocratic leader.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Question: Does anyone think that we are going to have anything but a bottom 3rd defense this year?

Yes. I think we're minimum 20, and hopefully around 16. Which would be smack average.

And if that's the case, Skins win 10 games.

[skinny21]

Question: Does anyone think that we are going to have anything but a bottom 3rd defense this year?

That's a tough one. Easy to see that we've improved - FA, draft, guys now healthy, coaching changes and guys developing - but it's too early to change my expectations just yet.

IF we see less contain from the OLBs, more one gap play by dlinemen and maybe more press by the dbs, then I expect we fare well on turnovers and sacks, but struggle a bit with consistency, and defending the run game and explosive plays.

They should be, at the least, much more bearable to watch than last year.

Sidenote - if certain guys step up (Amerson, Baker/Jenkins, Robinson and Porter/Crawford/Breeland) then this could turn into a very good defensive group.

[Morneblade]

I'm going to put some numbers out there: 20,11,7,12,10,27,26,14,27,28,28,31,21,21,22,30

This is where a Jim Haslett Defense has finished in points allowed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th years we were he was taking over a Dick Lebeau Defense in Pittsburg that had been a mostly top 5 defense for the decade. After that, it's been pretty bad, if not terrible; 10 of his 11 years since he's been 20th in points or worse. We might have decent talent, but Haslett is not one to get more out of his guys. His years in Pittsburg show he tends to get less out of elite talent. We don't have elite talent, and he is not going to "make them better". I expect another year of giving up a lot of yardage and points.

[skinny21]

I'm going to put some numbers out there: 20,11,7,12,10,27,26,14,27,28,28,31,21,21,22,30

This is where a Jim Haslett Defense has finished in points allowed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th years we were he was taking over a Dick Lebeau Defense in Pittsburg that had been a mostly top 5 defense for the decade. After that, it's been pretty bad, if not terrible; 10 of his 11 years since he's been 20th in points or worse. We might have decent talent, but Haslett is not one to get more out of his guys. His years in Pittsburg show he tends to get less out of elite talent. We don't have elite talent, and he is not going to "make them better". I expect another year of giving up a lot of yardage and points.

I don't really disagree with anything you said. However - and this is kind of an obvious point - elite talent is certainly not necessary for success. Even if Haslett stays exactly the same, our personnel changes, improved offense and ST, along with some better position coaches make for a possibly decent swing in our rankings*.

* keeping in mind that even a 20th ranking would be a significant change for the better

[Destino]

This thread title is infuriating and since it stays on the front page it should be changed to like "how many more chances will this clown Haslett get?" Something less offensive to redskin fans.

[Morneblade]

@skinny21 (my quote feature is broken or I would quote) , this is also an obvious point. When he HAS HAD elite talent, they did not play elite, they played closer to average. My point is that Haslett does not get the most out of what he has, in fact he get significantly less out of what he has than other coaches can. Even with a upgrade on talent, we are not going to see the same upgrade on the field because Haslett doesn't get that much out of his players. I think we have better players over last year, but it's not going to matter much. Only a huge upgrade in talent would get a marginal amount of improvement out of a Haslett coached defense.

[skinny21]

@skinny21 (my quote feature is broken or I would quote) , this is also an obvious point. When he HAS HAD elite talent, they did not play elite, they played closer to average. My point is that Haslett does not get the most out of what he has, in fact he get significantly less out of what he has than other coaches can. Even with a upgrade on talent, we are not going to see the same upgrade on the field because Haslett doesn't get that much out of his players. I think we have better players over last year, but it's not going to matter much. Only a huge upgrade in talent would get a marginal amount of improvement out of a Haslett coached defense.

I think you're overvaluing the role coaching plays (though I do believe it plays a very large role), particularly if we're only talking about the DC. Missed tackles, poor angles, lack of interior pressure, poor personnel fits, lack of depth, inconsistent coverage, etc. (all problems we had last year) - are all heavily dependent on talent as well as coaching.

Put another way - when I think of the poor plays by the defense last, I might have noticed coaching blunders ("0 blitz again?!", "Why is the hell is Kerrigan covering McCoy?!"), but I also often noticed personnel/talent issues ("Another missed tackle by Fletcher/Rambo?!", "Wilson fell down again?!, "How can the QB hold the ball for 6 seconds?!").

So, while I don't expect the defense to be good, if some of those things I mentioned earlier come together, I could see a jump of 5+ in the rankings... which is fairly significant in my book.

[Morneblade]

Going from 30 to 25 isn't going make much of a difference. And when you see coaches come in and turn a defense around or one leaves and it goes to hell, (which has happened several times recently around the NFL)  then realize a coach can make a big difference. Honestly with a GOOD coach we could be 15 spots better, and that would make a BIG difference.

[skinny21]

Going from 30 to 25 isn't going make much of a difference. And when you see coaches come in and turn a defense around or one leaves and it goes to hell, (which has happened several times recently around the NFL) then realize a coach can make a big difference. Honestly with a GOOD coach we could be 15 spots better, and that would make a BIG difference.

Yep, a good DC can make a big difference. Talent can as well. So can good assistant coaches. I'm hoping/thinking we've improved the latter two to some extent, and if we have, I'd expect a better defensive showing.

Moving up several spots in defensive ranking would be a significant change, particularly when coupled with a (hopefully) improved offense and defense. Would I be content with that improvement or with Haslett in that scenario? Nope... but it's certainly better than we were. And that's significant.

[skins island connection]

This thread title is infuriating and since it stays on the front page it should be changed to like "how many more chances will this clown Haslett get?" Something less offensive to redskin fans.

 

 

To be honest, what I WANTED to put on the thread title would have TK hitting the NNT and 'suspension' button like the 'No Whammies" button while chugging a bottle of 50 yr old scotch.

 

 But the Gruden hire has put Haslett on the back pages, not discussed, forgotten, just where he wants to be, where there's no heat on his ass, and he has to be held accountable at some point.

 If this year's defense resembles 2013's in any way, the filter button will be getting a work-out; there's simply no more excuses possible, and a change should/needs to be made before game 4 if the season is to be salvaged in any way. No matter how much offense we get, there will be games where the offense doesn't put up alot of points, and thats where the defense has to be holding their own.

[Morneblade]

I guess I can't get on you for trying to be positive.

I'm just pretty sure that any improvements we make with our roster and new position coaches will be minimized by our DC. I think we are going to see the same defense we have seen, the same bad calls, the same things that have me pulling my hair out. We might tackle better and not be as easy to just move the ball and score at will, but it will be almost as bad.

[skinny21]

Going from 30 to 25 isn't going make much of a difference. And when you see coaches come in and turn a defense around or one leaves and it goes to hell, (which has happened several times recently around the NFL) then realize a coach can make a big difference. Honestly with a GOOD coach we could be 15 spots better, and that would make a BIG difference.

To put it in perspective, moving 5 spots in the points allowed ranking (based on last years numbers) would be a difference of about 3 less points/game allowed. While our D would still be well below average, 3 points is a significant difference IMO - enough to change the outcome of some games - and that's without counting offensive/ST improvement.

To be clear, I'd still want Haslett shipped out though.

[skins island connection]

 Moving up 5 spots doesn't justify any defensive improvement; the difference in a CB actually catching a few balls that were dropped last year.

 The team needs a big impact defensively speaking. Hatcher may help, but overall it falls on the lack of creativity and being predictable in playcalling. All good coaches make constant adjustments, depending on the circumstances;  Haslett doesn't.  Its the same generic mundane approach, as it has always been with him forever.

 

 A radical philosophy change and boost is whats needed. I'm sorry but the pessimistic side of me holds more water when dealing with Haslett; Its almost like making lemons out of lemonade with him.

[RandyHolt]

Haslett deserves to have his feet to the fire. I want to him have full control, and then the plug pulled on him early if he fails. Or, more likely, play calling will be pulled from him. Maybe Morris gets the nod.

 

I am not sure its accurate or not, but it sure seemed like our front 7 calls were not in sync with the DB calls. Maybe it was done deliberately to confuse QB's; be unorthodox. I don't have good examples, but do recall hearing Morris made the calls for the DBs. Maybe all teams do this, I don't know. But when we need a stop and we blitz, I want the corners up tight. It seems so simple to me.

 

And for the love of the game, get your ass back on the field Haslett. Moving up to the booth did nothing more than get him away from Mike. Hmmm now we know why he moved up there last year. Regardless, our defense was teetering as one of the worst of all time for a while there, with him upstairs.

[Mahons21]

You would press your corners when you're blitzing?  Are you sure that's the best idea?

 

For the most part you blitz on 3rd downs, usually 3rd and long, the point is to pressure the QB and force them into a quick throw and stop the offense short. Thus you want to give up the slant etc., you just have to make sure you can tackle.

 

Press coverage is used more when you're using a 4-man rush.  You press your corners to take away the short routes, and give the d-line a chance to get to the QB.

 

If you choose to blitz with press coverage and you're going against any half decent QB/WR combo, they'll sense your blitz see the press and beat you like a drum for a deep TD majority of the time. 

 

You could make an argument for pressing corners while bringing a run-stuffing blitz, but in that case you'd be overly susceptible to big PA plays.

 

It's hard to move the ball as an offense in the NFL, and it gets exponentially more difficult when the field shrinks, the last thing you want to do is run a defense that gives up big plays.

[RandyHolt]

You would press your corners when you're blitzing?  Are you sure that's the best idea?

 

...

I don't doubt you are correct.

 

My point was when we NEED a stop; you would have them back in soft zone / off? Down and distance were not even discussed of course. 

 

I may well be wrong, i have never coached.  I was just trying to find an example.

 

You seem more in the know than I. Were you happy with the coordination between our front 7 and DBs last season, and is it normal that 2 different coaches one upstairs call in plays?  I believe that is what I heard was done last year.  

[skins island connection]

 Not to jump in your discussion, but it drives me to drink [ even more ] to see a blitz with DBs playing 8 yds away, waiting to react to a receiver.

 Maybe its just me, but if you're gonna blitz, you need safeties who can cover and have good field vision, but the DBs on the LOS need to stop giving the WRs a light touch and give them a good disruptive block off the LOS so it not only disrupts timing but slows the entire offense down.

 We all see good defenses with DBs/safeties who are shifty and physical at the LOS and for the most part get the job done. If the WR thinks he will be hit at the snap, the DB has already gotten in his head for the duration. Its not always a physical aspect, the mental part is a big one as well. ITs all in how the players are being taught, or coached, or not coached.

[martytheman]

I appreciate the optimism about haztard turning things around this year, and I really hope he does, but his recent history says otherwise.

Remember the packers game last year when rak and kerrigan started off by sacking Rodgers 3 times, then the pack moved to the quick pass, dink and dunk game to combat that, and what was haztards response? "Lets just keep doing the same thing we did in the first quarter.. it'll work eventually!!"

The fans in the stands knew what the pack were doing, the announcers knew it, we knew it but somehow haztard didn't?

And what was the net result of that wise decision? a blowout loss, in a game we started out looking competitive in.

Now I Realize alot of the issues stemmed from the offense and RG3, but the lack of defensive adjustments stood out big time... I think that is what we are in store for again this year.

[MustangSteve]

 In ways, I miss Williams; I can only imagine him here with the current players, he'd prob have them in full beast mode from whistle to whistle.

Its sad he's involved in the circumstances of last year, because he had the ability to get every drop of aggressiveness out of every player. Yea, he took alot of chances, but that was his style.

 

I can't help but agree, this Redskins team would be a true Super Bowl contender with a top 10 defense.

[RandyHolt]

 

Remember the packers game last year...

I think I do. We were back in our 'aggressive early getting after the QB' mode (like after the bye week in 2012) and we were getting bodies on Rodgers. Green Bay wisely saw the OL was getting eaten alive, and dialed up short passes / shorter drops.

 

The logical move to me, would have been to move our corners up.  Which please someone correct me if I am wrong, was up to Morris to do. Now again I am not sure moving up the corners was the right move, but is it correct to pin the blame on Haslett if so, and he didn't?

 

It's so unclear who decided what, but I believe Morris called all the plays for his corners. Maybe a directive from Mike to Jim to let Raheem do that, we have no idea. What a mess it was!

 

It was the Green Bay game when it was apparent to me our DBs were not in sync with our front 7. Nelson ate us alive. 

 

IMO when the front gets consistent pressure, it is safer and maybe needed to move the corners up. It appears we never did.  #CommenceBlowout.

[Mahons21]

I recall hearing that Morris called the depth of the secondary but not the actual play.  So if Haz called cover-3 (which he or mike did A LOT), corners would be responsible for their 1/3, but Morris would call their depth, ie whether they were pressing or playing off.

 

As far as the coordination went between dbs and front 7 last year, I was honestly too caught up and frustrated during games to notice.  There was nothing so out of whack that it stood out to me.

 

What really seemed to bug funs was our consistent use of cover-3, which for the most part is going to be off coverage because the corner is responsible for deep 1/3, and has to protect the deep routes.  However as Seattle showed us last year, with a good d-line and a safety that can cover sideline to sideline, you can press up your corners while running cover-3.  Unfortunately the Redskins had neither of those.

 

I'm personally of the belief that Haslett was hampered by the lack of talent.   You become limited when you're forced to a guy like BM at FS for extended periods when he's better suited to SS, or playing a bum like Rambo, or EJ Biggers.  Not to mention there was zero pass rush without a blitz.  Haz isn't the best DC in the league, far from it, but even the best guys become limited when they lack talent. 

[skins island connection]

 

 

I'm personally of the belief that Haslett was hampered by the lack of talent.   You become limited when you're forced to a guy like BM at FS for extended periods when he's better suited to SS, or playing a bum like Rambo, or EJ Biggers.  Not to mention there was zero pass rush without a blitz.  Haz isn't the best DC in the league, far from it, but even the best guys become limited when they lack talent. 

 

 That holds water up to a point.

The difference of opinions revolve around the actual definition of 'talent'. 

 

Is talent only available outside of Redskins Park? IMO no.

A player, at some point in their career, develops this talent, and uses/expands upon it as he goes through his career. But exactly where does it come from? There are things like natural speed a.k.a. Darrell Green, grain-fed strength [ insert accordingly ], but if they are not used properly, they're no good.  Talent comes from the abilities of a player combined with a goal of a direction from a coach.

 

This is where the terminology of the word 'coach' comes in. A coach recognizes attributes of players, and uses them to their advantage, but that also requires the coach to correctly place this player to achieve this goal.

 

 Pettibon, Buddy Ryan, Gregg Williams, all had their own abilities. Pets was great in 2nd half adjustments, Ryan got his players playing physical, Williams was sort of a cross between them; they had no problems getting in a player's grill when they messed up, and they all demanded their players leave it on the field, and they did. Players would walk on molten lava for those coaches.

 

Haslett doesn't have that demeanor, and the players know it. The talent is there, and they may not be a top rated defense with all-star players, but Haslett isn't the aggressive type of coach that the players need.

I'd bet the farm that if a Harbaugh/Carrol came in here, this defense would be poppin' big time; it may not be a top 5 defense, but every single team that we played would know we brought it to them all day.

[Mahons21]

When I reference talent, I'm talking about ability to play your roll to the highest level.

 

As a DB how are you in man coverage, zone, run support, play recognition, playing the ball in the air etc.

 

As a LB, how are you when blitzing, playing man, zone, filling the gap and so forth..

 

This has nothing to do with the coach.  

 

Coaches can put players in bad positions, but when you have so many one dimensional players like Haz did last year, you can't put everyone in an optimal position, it's not possible.  If you believe he did a poor job of putting players in a position to succeed, what are some examples?  I didn't like how many times Rak was put in coverage, but if he's an OLB in this type of scheme he simply has to be put out there, you can't rush 5 every time from okie.  I didn't like that OLBs were put in contain, but that sounded like that was coming from up above.

 

As far as Rah Rah coaches go, I disagree that one of them would have gotten much more out of this defense.  For every Rah Rah coach there's a calm guy who stays even keel and has just as much success, and this has been the case throughout the history of the NFL.  I don't believe Bum Phillips was a in your face type of DC, nor is Dom Capers.  Jim Haslett didn't seem to need a loud personality when he was the DC of PIT and they had two top 5 DVOA defenses.  And you mention guys like Harbough/Carrol who have arguably the two most talented defenses in the NFL right now, and it's by a fairly wide margin.  

[skins island connection]

 A coach's number 1 job is to coach. To teach. To find the best qualities of a player and use them in the best way of the coach's scheme.

 

 Coaches that succeed for the most part are able to reach their players, to have or develop a chemistry between them. That is what I was referring to with Carroll and Harbaugh; their players don't have to like their coaches, but respect is a must, but it also happens that in most cases the player likes his coach as well.

 

 One thing that irks me is seeing our best cover guys blitzing; if the offense has any QB/WR communication, they can bank on it being 6 points. Luckily this hasn't been exposed, much.  But the actual fundamentals of coverage, i.e. popping a WR off the LOS is an attitude maker and gets in the head of the WR; if done right it can be a game-long mental block for the WR, but a miss and its hello TD. Thats where the coach has to teach technique and discipline.

 

 Haslett's time at Pittsburgh didn't fair well; he took over a top defense and made it worse, hence his N.O. stint, then St.Louis, then the Arena league or wherever he was when he was brought here. That part there should have been a clue; he couldn't get it done so he had to settle for something outside the NFL.