Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Now that I think about it, Williams' defensive scheme might be flawed.


Guest sith lord

Recommended Posts

Guest sith lord

Living in the Buffalo market, I remember Greg Williams as the coach of the Bills. And if memory serves me correctly, they had the same problem as the Skins currently do. They had a good defense that generated very few turnovers.

So in other words, it might not be the players, it might be the scheme where everybody has to be in a certain spot and aren't givin the opportunities to make plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:doh: :doh: :doh:

Turnovers will come...right now its just a matter of us forcing fumbles too hard! The ball always skips out of bounds or hits someone in the chest (a la Sean Taylor on Priest Holmes with the assist to Gonzales). We held a very good offense to a couple of field goals early and no more than 21 points in the end. You have to think we're doing something right still but, "now that i think about it" you dont? So before no one was thinking about it enough? Please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sith lord
:doh: :doh: :doh:

Turnovers will come...right now its just a matter of us forcing fumbles too hard! The ball always skips out of bounds or hits someone in the chest (a la Sean Taylor on Priest Holmes with the assist to Gonzales). We held a very good offense to a couple of field goals early and no more than 21 points in the end. You have to think we're doing something right still but, "now that i think about it" you dont? So before no one was thinking about it enough? Please.

You don't have to get mad, I'm just telling you what I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to get mad, I'm just telling you what I know.

OK. I'm not mad. I'm just saying that I think Williams will adjust the scheme if need be. So far, we haven't been that bad if you take away those 2 big plays in DEN and one in KC. When Williams was in Buffallo did they give up a lot of big plays like that? If not, maybe we can bank on that not happening very often the rest of the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to get mad, I'm just telling you what I know.

Do you have the statistics on defensive turnovers from GW's stint in Buffalo?

Not overall turnover ratio / differential, but defensive turnovers.

They would add a lot of value to this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Living in the Buffalo market, I remember Greg Williams as the coach of the Bills. And if memory serves me correctly, they had the same problem as the Skins currently do. They had a good defense that generated very few turnovers.

So in other words, it might not be the players, it might be the scheme where everybody has to be in a certain spot and aren't givin the opportunities to make plays.

It makes sense.. If you watch the fumbles we do cause we rarely swarm to the ball quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're absolutely right.

According to NFL.com, in 2003, Buffalo had the #2 Defense in the League...

But they also had the FEWEST TAKEAWAYS (Fumbles recovered or INTs) in the league... only 18!

Washington, by comparison, had 30.

And in 2002, the Bills Defense (again, a top ranked unit) had to take the ball away 3 times in the last game of the season to avoid the least amount of takeaways in club history.

BD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're absolutely right.

According to NFL.com, in 2003, Buffalo had the #2 Defense in the League...

But they also had the FEWEST TAKEAWAYS (Fumbles recovered or INTs) in the league... only 18!

Washington, by comparison, had 30.

BD

Good work BD... Greg Williams has our guys glued to gaps. Which isn't a bad thing,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're absolutely right.

According to NFL.com, in 2003, Buffalo had the #2 Defense in the League...

But they also had the FEWEST TAKEAWAYS (Fumbles recovered or INTs) in the league... only 18!

Washington, by comparison, had 30.

And in 2002, the Bills Defense (again, a top ranked unit) had to take the ball away 3 times in the last game of the season to avoid the least amount of takeaways in club history.

BD

Wow thats pretty interesting. What about sacks? How did his defenses rank in terms of sacks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have serious beef with how LA is being treated. But my biggest gripe is how our players are used I even made a post about how GW needs to adjust his scheme last week. Honestly I think GW is to ****y and arrogant to change his scheme ala JG on offense.

My biggest gripe is with the use of Sean Taylor he is used wrong. This guy is a ballhawk capable of 8+ints every year but where not putting him in postion to roam back deep like he did at UM. This guy has superstar ability and honestly in this scheme thier will be no superstars. He is in the box way to much and I agree he is good in run support but they need to tone it down or put Bowen in the box more. He is asked to cover WR's 1 on 1 way way to much covering for blitzers and sometimes without a blitzer taking away from his ability to read the QB and play the whole field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take it a step further:

Gregg Williams' 1998 Tennessee Oiler Defense forced 19 takeways with 30 sacks.

Final record: 8-8

1999 Titan Defense with the addition of Jevon Kearse- 40 takeways and 54 sacks.

Kearse himself had 14.5 sacks and 10 forced fumbles. Tennessee also lost to the Rams in the Superbowl that season.

As good as Williams schemes are, his best defenses in TN came with the addition of a difference maker on the defensive line.

Schemes put you in a position to make the play, playmakers make the plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turnovers aer kinda streaky; both for and against. One of the more overlooked contibuting factors to the dearth of turnovers is the lack of an offense which gets big leads. Once a we force teams to alter their game plans and play catch-up, the turnovers will mount. Right now though, I'd settle for some sure tackling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about we lay off the defense. The offense is giving the ball away too much. Take away the turnovers in KC, and the Skins win the game.

The defense gave up 1 big play all game. When's the last time Priest was held to 18 yards rushing????

It sure doesn't help the defense when the offense turns the ball over and gives KC a short field to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Living in the Buffalo market, I remember Greg Williams as the coach of the Bills. And if memory serves me correctly, they had the same problem as the Skins currently do. They had a good defense that generated very few turnovers.

So in other words, it might not be the players, it might be the scheme where everybody has to be in a certain spot and aren't givin the opportunities to make plays.

You know, now that you mention it, I do remember Buffalo having a really good defense but not a lot of turnovers back then. I think we played them and lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest sith lord
You know, now that you mention it, I do remember Buffalo having a really good defense but not a lot of turnovers back then. I think we played them and lost.

I remember that game all too well. Cold and drizzle all game. And we got spanked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are well within our rights as fans to raise issues about the defense, offense, or even the quality of the water. I don't know enough about the personell to make a call on the Lavar thing, but the overall defense has some question marks.

1. Why can we not produce a turnover?

Is it the schemes, the packages, the personell or the style of defense?

I tend to believe that the overall defensive philosophy is what keeps this team from generating turnovers. Williams is obsessed with a containment type of scheme. He wants everyone in their place at all times in order to avoid big plays. This seems to work well for the most part, but has a drawback. This type of scheme does not induce ball-hawkin. We do not have a million bodies around the ball carrier because people are maintaining their positions on the opposite side of the field in case someone should run back that way. The drawback to this is that when a ball is on the ground, we don't have enough people around to get to it. Simple mathematics would normally come into play. The more red shirts around, the better chance of picking it up. When you don't flow to the ball, you have less people there for grabbing a fumble. Plain and simple.

Another reason we dont' generate turnovers is that turnovers are of two types, forced and unforced. unforced are turnovers where the ball carrier just flat out fumbles. Forced turnovers occur because of defensive pressure: A heavy rush on the QB forces him to use bad judgement and throw the ball into coverage, or a blitz blindsides the QB and he fumbles. A solid hit on a receiver causes a drop or fumble.

Very rarely is there a turnover generated because of good DB coverage. This means the QB, without being pressured, has no receivers and dumps the ball out of bounds.

We a not getting turnovers because we don't ball-hawk and we don't have a solid 4 man pass rush. The only time we get pressure is through a blitz. The drawback to this is that a defender has now left a man uncovered somewhere.

Turnovers are an inevitable part of the game. That's why Coach Gibbs and every other head coach is so concerned about turnovers. The flip side is that because turnovers are so important to not make, they are equally important to generate. No team will go through a season without a turnover. The good teams average about .7 per game. That still means the cough up the ball at least once. But, the make up for it by getting more back! It Williams, et al think they can win just because they don't turn the ball over, the math does not support it. The top teams have positive turnover ratios. Even if we never committed a turnover, we would still have to get at least one to be on the positive side!

I think the coaches know this, and that is why they are so snippy about the LaVar questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Living in the Buffalo market, I remember Greg Williams as the coach of the Bills. And if memory serves me correctly, they had the same problem as the Skins currently do. They had a good defense that generated very few turnovers.

So in other words, it might not be the players, it might be the scheme where everybody has to be in a certain spot and aren't givin the opportunities to make plays.

Shut The :censored: Up, :sucks: . People dont know what there talking about these days

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...