Jim Haslett : Time For Him To Show Something ?

[Leonard Washington]

I think hee's on the cusp of becoming an average coach.

[Bacon]

I don't know why we would bring back a guy who hasn't coached an above average D in a decade, but yes, "not sucking" should be his goal for the season or he needs to go. At this, a legitimately competitive stage in Redskins history, if he's not moving us forward he's moving us back. There are plenty of coaches who would want to be part of this franchise and we could be trying something else that works.

[2cents]

I know Haslett had injuries last year, and that should be taken into account when you factor how the defense played last year.

However, my main beef with him last year was, on top of not being creative, just how passive and safe he became before we went on that seven game winning streak, and even at parts during it. He made everything so basic to try and help the defense, but our defense would get torched. Even with our injuries, when Haslett threw up his hands and said "**** it; we're gonna blitz every down, and if we get burnt, fine" it seemed like the whole defense responded and turned up the heat.

When he was passive there was no emotion and intensity, because I don't think guys bought in. As a player you know your strengths and weaknesses. Coverage was our weakness, and so dropping the defense into coverage with no pass rush...it almost seemed like the players expected to get torched. Instead of just going out and playing and reacting, it's like you could the whole defense with visible question marks over there head.

Haz is at his best, and frankly at his most creative, when he just lets go. First half versus the Giants at home, passive, passive, passive. London and Perry go to him and basically beg him to get aggressive, they fire up the players, Haslett gets aggressive and we effectively shut their offense down in the second half. First three quarters versus Dallas on Thanksgiving Haz blitzed like nuts, Josh got burnt by Dez, then we get passive and the defense gives up points.

I think Haslett will feel a lot more comfortable having Rak and Carriker back, and hopefully our new DBs can help out. Our game plan versus the Saints look unlike anything I'd ever seen Haslett called, and I hope that's a sign of things to come. But if there's injuries, you can't just shrink back into your hole. The players can tell when you're not confident in their ability to make plays.

Well, to play Devil's Advocate to your last sentence, a D coordinator can also tell when his guys blow assignment after assignment and give up big play after big play and make the D coordinator look like an idiot because they can't execute on a high school level. Sometimes you have to shrink back until the guys prove they can play.

[ddub52]

Does anyone else feel that Morris was partially responsible for the defense improving over the second half of the season? I think he had some play calling say so, and he seems to be the kind of guy that the players buy into. Either way, Im cool with leaving things in place if we can improve off of what we did at the end of last season.

[No_Pressure]

How many times in there did he have a QB worth a **** and an offense that gave him a lead to protect?

I mean, you know who his OC was in New Orleans who put up less than stellar numbers with a crap offense? Mike McCarthey...

-Devil's Advocate

Scored 354 points (22.1/g), 10th of 31 in the NFL.

Scored 333 points (20.8/g), 13th of 31 in the NFL.

Scored 432 points (27.0/g), 3rd of 32 in the NFL.

Scored 340 points (21.2/g), 14th of 32 in the NFL.

Scored 348 points (21.8/g), 14th of 32 in the NFL.

Scored 235 points (14.7/g), 31st of 32 in the NFL.

2000-2005 Offensive numbers in New Orleans

[Voice_of_Reason]

I will give Haslett this: It is damn difficult to coach if your start with a ? in the secondary, and then lose your projected starters at both Safety spots for the entire year, your best pass rushing OLB and DE both go down in week 2. You've lost 4 out of 11 projected starters. Couple that with the fact that some of the starters were known to be a little iffy to begin with, and you have, well, the first 9 games of the season.

They had to, pretty much on the fly, figure out how to piece a defense together with guys who weren't projected to play together, and didn't have chemistry or a lot of playing time together as a unit.

There are exactly 2 plays from last year that are completely, totally, and in every way unforgivable. Regardless of the circumstance:

1. The first play against the Bengals. They KNEW that if they went wildcat, we'd go cover 0. THEY KNEW IT. They even said it. Haslett and company didn't know the guy could thrown the ball that well. That's unforgivable.

2. The game losing TD against the Giants. I don't care what the deal is, or who's out there, everybody has to know how NOT to get beat by a bomb like that. Again, completely inexcusable. I don't care if the Langley High Saxons are playing defense on that play, you've got to figure out a way to make sure that doesn't happen.

I'm willing to give a pass to Haslett because it's tough to be creative and do a bunch of different things when you've got Larry, Mo and Curly lining up in the secondary, and your pass-rush is significantly diminished. I think it speaks volumes that the defense improved over time. As they played together more, they were able to do more different things without blowing assignments.

So, is it time for Haslett to show something? I actually think he kindof already did. The expectation is that the defense will be better this year. That's my expectation. It's at least as good as it was at the end of last season, and then gets better from there.

If that's not the result, he could be on the outside looking in at the end of the year. I hope he succeeds. Because keeping the same HC, OC and DC for 5 years hasn't happened in DC since Gibbs I. And you only keep guys around if you're winning.

But we can't have any more of those Bengal type plays. Can't happen. Inexcusable.

[Pedro]

My problem with Haslett is we start off too many games where teams score on us quite easy, before we start stopping them. If that hangs around he needs not to.

[DC9]

Scored 354 points (22.1/g), 10th of 31 in the NFL.

Scored 333 points (20.8/g), 13th of 31 in the NFL.

Scored 432 points (27.0/g), 3rd of 32 in the NFL.

Scored 340 points (21.2/g), 14th of 32 in the NFL.

Scored 348 points (21.8/g), 14th of 32 in the NFL.

Scored 235 points (14.7/g), 31st of 32 in the NFL.

2000-2005 Offensive numbers in New Orleans

The correct answer is zero:

Aaron Brooks

Jeff Blake

Jake Delhomme

Todd Bouman

I'm not apologizing for Haz. Believe me. But in fairness to Haz, he took over a team that traded all of it's picks to us for two years for Rickey Williams... and then he had Mickey Loomis picking out defensive players... which outside of Vilma, he hasn't done well at all.

The evidence is against Haz, but he is here. He has a full box of toys to play with this season. If he doesn't deliver, then we are likely looking at Rah or maybe bringing in Spanos (who I loved).

But lets see what he can do with depth (which was tested this past year, but we had it at least) and a QB and offense who know how to manage games and score points. Heck, even guys like Orakpo and Carriker really haven't had a chance to pin their ears back with a huge lead since they've been here. That's so awesome to think about.

[No_Pressure]

The correct answer is zero:

Aaron Brooks

Jeff Blake

Jake Delhomme

Todd Bouman

I'm not apologizing for Haz. Believe me. But in fairness to Haz, he took over a team that traded all of it's picks to us for two years for Rickey Williams... and then he had Mickey Loomis picking out defensive players... which outside of Vilma, he hasn't done well at all.

The evidence is against Haz, but he is here. He has a full box of toys to play with this season. If he doesn't deliver, then we are likely looking at Rah or maybe bringing in Spanos (who I loved).

But lets see what he can do with depth (which was tested this past year, but we had it at least) and a QB and offense who know how to manage games and score points. Heck, even guys like Orakpo and Carriker really haven't had a chance to pin their ears back with a huge lead since they've been here. That's so awesome to think about.

You said less than stellar numbers with a crap offense. They were in the top half of the league every year with crap quarterbacks which is more than can be said for their defense. I don't understand the dig at Mike McCarthy either. In Green Bay he took over a 4-12 team with the 22nd rated offense in the NFL and took them to 8-8, 22nd ranked next season and since 2006 they haven't been outside the top 10 in offense, with one 1st overall finish, and 5/6 years being in the top 5 in the league. The only finish at 10th was the year the won the superbowl. You could say that he inherited Aaron Rodgers, but let's flash back to 2005 where he fell to 20 something and everyone thought he was going to be a flop because he stared down receivers. McCarthy's first two seasons were using Brett Favre and he cut him loose (or Favre "retired" for the first of 50,000,000 times) after going 13-3 because Brett Favre is unstable, and he felt he had coached Rodgers up well enough to step in, 3 years later they won the superbowl.

I get what you're saying about not apologizing for Haslett, and there were specific circumstances at each of his coaching stops which likely hampered his ability as a coach. The Saints didn't have amazing personnel, I don't think a LeBeau/Kiffin hybrid could have coaxed that Rams defense past 20th in the league, and we haven't been stocked up on top flight defensive talent here either. I don't think that a bad offense is a good enough excuse for his lack of defensive numbers in New Orleans- for one I wasn't going solely on games won and lost, but points let up by the defense which, aside from turnovers from the offense in bad field position, generally show who the culprit is. I don't think my assessment of Haslett was unfair either. He's an average coach who can do good things when he has good pieces to work with, and doesn't really do much when he has average or bad pieces to work with.

I think that outstanding coaches find ways to overcome these problems: Gregg Williams in 2004 had us in the top 5. We had been 21st and 24th under Spurrier the two year prior. We were starting a rookie at FS, Oft-Injured Shawn Springs, unheralded Marcus Washington, our middle linebacker was a former UDFA who hadn't started a game the year before named Antonio Pierce, 4 game starter and virtual unknown Giants castoff Ryan Clark, Wynn, Demetric Evans, Joe Salavea, these are not guys who you would think could ever make up a top 5 defense, and yet they were absolutely dominant that season. Sure Gregg Williams has looked a bit sordid ever since his time here, but he was a good defensive coach, he did a lot with a little. Haslett has done little with a little. I cannot say that I express the same amount of surprise that other fans do at this, but I stand by my conclusion:

We have gotten much better as a team on defense, even if we're starting rookies. Assuming that we stay more or less healthy in 2013, if Jim Haslett cannot get this group of players into the top half of the league in points given up, I would consider that the point at which the prospect of an unknown would exceed the value of the known- in other words if Haslett fails this year I will have seen everything I need to see from him. We do not have the personnel to warrant staying in the bottom half of the league on defense anymore. I'm not expecting top 5 or even top 10. Somewhere between 10-15 would be alright with me, and we've seen that Haslett has taken defenses there before- albeit a long time ago.

[skins2323]

Im kinda "meh" on Haz. For one, i hate his 3-4 scheme. The whole point of a 3-4 is to confuse the offense, so that they dont know who is rushing the passer. You watch teams like the Steelers or Ravens, they have everyone on the line, then when the ball is hiked then have ppl scrambling all over the place. Some are dropping into coverage, some are rushing the passer, but it confuses the offensive line bc they have no idea who is coming. I have even seen occasions in Baltimore where they drop all 3 lineman into coverage and rush all 4 LBs. I have seen them drop 1 Lineman into coverage and rush an ILB and OLB. I have seen them rush 3, 4, 5....my point is that they vary up their rushes to confuse the offense. My main problem with Haz, is that there is rarely any deception on our defense. 99% of the time its the same guys rushing the passer. Our 3 down lineman rush the middle, Orakpo will rush from one end and Kerrigan from the other.Rarely do you see any "exotic" looks where lineman drop into zone and an ILB comes or something different. My point is that we switched to 3-4 to deceive defenses, but we are running a glorified 4-3/5-2 where Orakpo and Kerrigan plus our D Line rushes the entire time. There is no deception up front, which makes it pretty obvious to know whose coming.

With that being said, with all of our starters returning and some upgrades in the draft, if we are not in the top 12 on defense next year then i think you will see Morris as our next DC in 2014. JMO...

[Mad Mike]

I think it's a waste of time to think about it. If he sucks he will get fired. If he the defense improves with the new additions he wont.

In the end, all I care about are wins and losses. If the defense helps us win by stopping people, I'm happy.

[Arsenic]

I'm still convinced that Raheem Morris was brought in to replace Haslett. I'm not so sure that this bothers Coach Haslett. Perhaps he's just one of those dudes, never showing frustration. His strength is keeping his cool, patiently building and constructing while the high-energy, defensive mouthpiece, Raheem Morris, becomes familiar with the current terminology, players and scheme. Building a defense and running one might require opposite strengths.

Of course, we all know that anything can happen in the musical-chairs game that is NFL coaching. The obvious assumption is:

Today: Mike & Has

Tomorrow: Kyle & Morris

which is cool with me.. :cool:

we shall see

Regardless, HTTR! :logo:

[DC9]

I don't understand the dig at Mike McCarthy either. In Green Bay he took over a 4-12 team with the 22nd rated offense in the NFL and took them to 8-8, 22nd ranked next season and since 2006 they haven't been outside the top 10 in offense, with one 1st overall finish, and 5/6 years being in the top 5 in the league.

I have a bad way of typing like I am talking. I love McCarthy, it's a coin toss between he and Sean Payton as to who is the best offensive playcaller in the world. It was a dig on the situation. McCarthy is GREAT. But he can only do so much with crap players on offense. Haz was the head coach, Loomis was/still is the GM. I don't remember who the DC was, but they all had crap players. Loomis sucks. If McCarthy can't put up fantastic numbers and he's the best play caller in football, how do you expect an average DC or average coach like Haz to do anything with crap players on defense? Outside of Brees and Sharper (FAs, and Brees was a grasp that he gambled his whole career on) and Vilma and a few linemen (drafts) he has really stunk as a GM.

I think you are judging Haz the HC in the same group you are with Haz the DC. Don't. Two totally different ball games. And he was on two historically bad franchises as a DC who have only blips of success on their radar throughout the life of their franchises (save for his first stint in Pittsburgh where yes, he did well with a stacked roster). He's got some cool toys here, and he's not going anywhere this year. Might as well root for the guy.

But you can't fault him for last year. I think he did well with what he had once he figured out what he needed to do. Did it take him too long to figure that out? I guess, but we were at the bottom end of the depth chart at a lot of those positions.

[No_Pressure]

No offense, but I think you also have a bad way of telling me things I've already stated as my own opinion as if I didn't take them into consideration already :pfft:

how do you expect an average DC or average coach like Haz to do anything with crap players on defense?...I think you are judging Haz the HC in the same group you are with Haz the DC. Don't. Two totally different ball games.

He was the head coach there so his influence cannot be known, but for a defensive minded coach it was a bit erratic. It should also be taken into account that they were playing 2 games per year against the greatest show on turf.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

And he was on two historically bad franchises as a DC who have only blips of success on their radar throughout the life of their franchises (save for his first stint in Pittsburgh where yes, he did well with a stacked roster). He's got some cool toys here, and he's not going anywhere this year. Might as well root for the guy.

I get what you're saying about not apologizing for Haslett, and there were specific circumstances at each of his coaching stops which likely hampered his ability as a coach. The Saints didn't have amazing personnel, I don't think a LeBeau/Kiffin hybrid could have coaxed that Rams defense past 20th in the league, and we haven't been stocked up on top flight defensive talent here either.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

But you can't fault him for last year. I think he did well with what he had once he figured out what he needed to do. Did it take him too long to figure that out? I guess, but we were at the bottom end of the depth chart at a lot of those positions.

Of course I'll root for the guy, I don't have any alternative. I hope that he does succeed and get this defense into the top half of the league, because we're ready to win for the next few years and I hope we're set up with the coaches and personnel to do that already. Last season he did better down the stretch, and he certainly did have injuries hampering what he could do.

My other argument was simply that in many cases, great coaches overcome problems of injuries and personnel. Haslett is not a great coach. Not every coach necessarily needs to be a great one in order to win in the NFL. If he could do an adequate job with the people we have this year, I don't think many people will want him gone. If he stays more or less the same, in that 20-25 range where we let up way too many points, I think eventually the team has to say "hey, we gave you time, injuries happen but we just didn't get the defense turned around and we're going to take it in another direction."

Oh and as a side note, the Saints in 2000 when Haslett took over had 17.5 sack in his prime La'Roi Glover, interception machine Sammy Knight at SS, Keith Mitchell in his pro bowl year, Darren Howard, Norman Hand, Joe Johnson...they had an absolutely stacked defensive line. They brought back almost the exact same roster for 2001 and dropped 17 points in defensive ranking to 27th. This could have been for a number of reasons, but the fact that they remained highly inconsistent is alarming. It isn't a direct indication that Haslett is a bad defensive coach, since he was the HC, but he did have influence on the defense, the DC, and personnel, all of which went downhill on that side of the football. This makes the argument for me that he's an average coach, I'm not trying to make him out to be horrible.

[DC9]

My other argument was simply that in many cases, great coaches overcome problems of injuries and personnel. Haslett is not a great coach. Not every coach necessarily needs to be a great one in order to win in the NFL. If he could do an adequate job with the people we have this year, I don't think many people will want him gone. If he stays more or less the same, in that 20-25 range where we let up way too many points, I think eventually the team has to say "hey, we gave you time, injuries happen but we just didn't get the defense turned around and we're going to take it in another direction."

Agreed. I think one way or the other this is his last year. Either he gets a HC job or he's not retained UNLESS we are just that close to winning a SB in 2014-2015 and he is allowed back or is re-signed for another sesaon or two. But I think it's better than 80% that he's gone.

Oh and as a side note, the Saints in 2000 when Haslett took over had 17.5 sack in his prime La'Roi Glover, interception machine Sammy Knight at SS, Keith Mitchell in his pro bowl year, Darren Howard, Norman Hand, Joe Johnson...they had an absolutely stacked defensive line. They brought back almost the exact same roster for 2001 and dropped 17 points in defensive ranking to 27th. This could have been for a number of reasons, but the fact that they remained highly inconsistent is alarming. It isn't a direct indication that Haslett is a bad defensive coach, since he was the HC, but he did have influence on the defense, the DC, and personnel, all of which went downhill on that side of the football. This makes the argument for me that he's an average coach, I'm not trying to make him out to be horrible.

No doubt, he's average at best. I do like that he's an aggressive coach, though and I think he could be better than average if we can stay healthy and at least one of the two safeties pans out to be as advertised. That's all I'm saying. We know the offense works, if we get him a two score lead and we aren't gettins sacks or forcing turnovers on defense... like you said... it's been real Jim.

[Koolblue13]

If the Defense improves and the guys stay healthy, while the entire team continues to win, why change anything?

[Darkstarr]

In the last 9 games the defense held the opponents to 21 or under 7 of those nine times. That is all I care about. I do not care about yards given up, or any other "stat". The only ONE i care about is points. In today's NFL if our defense can keep O's to 21 and under 80% of the time, I will take my chances. Not to mention Under Haslett they are creating more chances for the the skins O with all the turnovers they got last year. Overall I am happy with Haz.

[quettefan]

I used to be one of those people that wanted him out of here... but even with all the injuries, the defense wasn't that bad during that seven game run. Shoot, even in the 8th game, they pretty much held the Seahawks defense in check. And that was with an offense who couldn't move the ball. I think Haslett is safe right now. Unless something catastrophic happens or he gets a head coaching gig, he should be here for awhile.

my sentiments exactly!

[Hail26]

I personally am not a Haslett fan. I think Morris gets that DC job soon. HTTR

[Mahons21]

pointless discussion

[WilberMarshall]

Dude has nothing to offer. I hope he proves a lot of the fan base wrong, but I doubt it. I have serious issues with the scheme he runs on defense.

[maskedsuperstar]

To answer the question first and foremost, despite his late showing last year, I thought it was best that we move in another direction at DC this season. I feel this will be his last chance and anything beyond top 10 status will seal his fate.

I've never had a problem with him getting a pass because of injuries and such. The reason I've wanted him gone is, I just don't think he calls a good game. I mean, whether it was true or not, when there were rumors that his play calling duties would be are were taken away, that sends up a major red flag in my mind. Joe Gibbs would never have even let a rumor like that start with Richie Petitbone. Ok, I don't want to live in the past as that was not my intent, but here are my reasons for wanting him gone:

1) I think he doesn't call a good game. Too many times have I seen the wrong defense called for a particular formation.

2) I think he doesn't allow his field general (London) enough leeway to change the call.

3) We get dominated right off the bat and I fail to see any adjustments. I think he's stubborn to adjustments.

4) Things like cover zero on 4th and 21 or knowing the WR could throw, yet playing the wrong coverage just reeks in my opinion.

Again, nothing personal against him and I don't hold him accountable for injuries. It's the body of work for me.

Well, after the bye, he adjusted. The defense was much more aggressive.

---------- Post added May-8th-2013 at 06:07 PM ----------

Im kinda "meh" on Haz. For one, i hate his 3-4 scheme. The whole point of a 3-4 is to confuse the offense, so that they dont know who is rushing the passer. You watch teams like the Steelers or Ravens, they have everyone on the line, then when the ball is hiked then have ppl scrambling all over the place. Some are dropping into coverage, some are rushing the passer, but it confuses the offensive line bc they have no idea who is coming. I have even seen occasions in Baltimore where they drop all 3 lineman into coverage and rush all 4 LBs. I have seen them drop 1 Lineman into coverage and rush an ILB and OLB. I have seen them rush 3, 4, 5....my point is that they vary up their rushes to confuse the offense. My main problem with Haz, is that there is rarely any deception on our defense. 99% of the time its the same guys rushing the passer. Our 3 down lineman rush the middle, Orakpo will rush from one end and Kerrigan from the other.Rarely do you see any "exotic" looks where lineman drop into zone and an ILB comes or something different. My point is that we switched to 3-4 to deceive defenses, but we are running a glorified 4-3/5-2 where Orakpo and Kerrigan plus our D Line rushes the entire time. There is no deception up front, which makes it pretty obvious to know whose coming.

With that being said, with all of our starters returning and some upgrades in the draft, if we are not in the top 12 on defense next year then i think you will see Morris as our next DC in 2014. JMO...

Haz knew the secondary was weak. He couldn't be aggressive. Totally understand what you are saying. In any aggressive style defense, you had better have a good secondary. But to his credit, he did start having the defense moving around the LOS, blitzing more etc. after the bye.

[MumboSauce]

If not for turning the ball over a lot, and the offense not turning it over, the defense would be pretty turbl lol terrible...Not a Has fan, but the D was limited with injuries, no pass rush and an atrocious secondary. You have to get pressure without blitzing, not Has' fault.

[rd421]

You can't forget that Shanahan is really loyal to defensive coordinators. In Denver he was to a fault. Hard to think Haz is on any type of a hot seat after taking the east especially considering how big the defense came up down the stretch.

[skins island connection]

pointless discussion

Very thought provoking comment there, bud!

Is it pointless because;

A. Haslett is going nowhere,

or

B. Its a dumb topic that should have not been brought up, yet you commented to build up your posts.

Actually, the overall feeling is if Haslett has a healthy defense and they struggle, there's nowhere to point the finger but Haslett.