Ellis Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I can say with certainty that based on how well the Redskins defense played this year while Arrington was off the field, that the defense will not suffer at all. He had great plays in 2005, but they were not pivotal plays that turned the games around. That only happened once in the playoffs but only because he just happened to be standing where the ball got tipped off to. Granted, Lavar is amazing at boosting team morale, BIG in physical size and hits very hard--all qualities that will be missed. There are other players who hold those same qualities and the Skins will be just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chow184 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 not at all, our D will be better if we get a good MLB or ROLB if we got Ray Lewis we could put Marshall at ROLB again one guy on our radar should be will witherspoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Actually it did the defense without him was good, but when healthy and in the playoffs it was great.Lets be honest our Defense is great but is not close to teams like Pittsburg and Denver or NE, we keep scores down but do not have many big plays, and LA was one of our big play guys. This could turn out to be a good move just depends on who replaces him and who we get for the DL. Losing Champ, AP, and LA over the years is huge. Regardless of the reason why they left, they were all playmakers. how was it great? we allowed 20 to Seattle. That is okay not great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvo14 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Injury prone and freelances. Our defense won't miss a beat because GW defense is all about schemes and playing your role. Thanks for everything Lavar but don't let the door hit you on the way out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashburnskinsfan Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Short term there may be a minor effect. Long term it will be good for the team to get someone who wants to play for the coaches and is healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d56 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It's not our defense that will suffer. i think it will be our offense. Be cause you know some NFC team will sign him and he'll come into Washington an blow things up. Just to prove to the coaches he still had what it takes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 he didnt have a sack all year. his INT vs tampa was the only real significant thing he did all year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It's not our defense that will suffer. i think it will be our offense. Be cause you know some NFC team will sign him and he'll come into Washington an blow things up. Just to prove to the coaches he still had what it takes! He could have done that here. He didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 The bottom line is that LA was a huge factor in our playoff run. He was a force on the field at Tampa and he knocked the league MVP out cold in the first quarter of the Seahawk game. While we will likely remain a top-quality defense do to outstanding scheme and preparation - not to mention Marcus, Springs, Griffin, Taylor...etc. The truth is that LA is still, at this stage in his career, one of the baddest Mofos on the planet and the type of player that can change a game. His presence will be missed by us and much appreciated by whomever he signs with. I, for one, wish him well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 how was it great? we allowed 20 to Seattle. That is okay not great. how much did they put on Carolina :doh: If you hold seatle to 20 you should win. It wasn't our D that lost that game for us it was the O Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannonshogs44 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I would still want him playing for us than against us. Hes going to get back to 100% and when he does, look out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 The bottom line is that LA was a huge factor in our playoff run. He was a force on the field at Tampa and he knocked the league MVP out cold in the first quarter of the Seahawk game. While we will likely remain a top-quality defense do to outstanding scheme and preparation - not to mention Marcus, Springs, Griffin, Taylor...etc. The truth is that LA is still, at this stage in his career, one of the baddest Mofos on the planet and the type of player that can change a game. His presence will be missed by us and much appreciated by whomever he signs with. I, for one, wish him well! Exactly Teams had to prepare and worry about him, the only other guy we have on the field like that now is ST and he is a safety so he does not have the same impact a DL or LB will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac79d Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Zippy....It has become obvious that Williams can develop and place players in positions to achieve success as a unit. While Lavar was a hell of a playmaker when he was younger and healthy, he looked slow and out of position much of the time last season. I think Lavar has some good football left in him, but I truly believe the player Williams puts in his place, will perform as well, if not better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadirtbags Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I could be wrong about this....but I think this coaching staff wants a big play maker at the DE position and will go after a top dollar player to fill this void.(if we can afford it)....Williams had the freak in tenn......and his defense was outstanding....I'd imagine this coaching staff feels confident sticking a role player at the LB position to replace Lavar if we could improve our defensive line with a sack specialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodie987 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Well, in reality, our defence was pretty good without LaVar. The truth is, we dont need LaVar to win, We can win without him...Yes we would like to see him on the field everygame watching his crazy hits...but we have sean taylor who can do that even better now... i dont think it matters who we put on the field at the LB position b/c i think that dale lindsey (LB coach) and Greg Williams (Head coach-Defence) will do a great job whom ever they fill in the slot with.... Marcus Washington wasnt UNREAL..he is now... and Lemar Marshal FORSURE wasnt UNREAL...and now hes respected all around the league so... we shoudl trust the defencesive staff in filling in the job...but hopefully it doesnt get re-filled in my warrick holdman...b/c im just not a fan of his work. ~lmk ~jake :dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Maybe Taylor Jacobs can play LB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Maybe Taylor Jacobs can play LB? maybe...because he sure can't play WR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoeRedskins Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It really depends on who they bring in for him. If Warrick Holdman is the starting OLB, then we could very much be in trouble. I don't think Clemons can be an every down LB, so we will have to wait and see who fills in til that prediction can be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLEED-B&G Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 does anybody remember how susceptible to outside runs we were when LA was not in the lineup, the first couple games of the season we were giving up a big plays every game, and letting teams run all over us to the outside, As soon as LA was put back in he stopped the outside runs, if you think his departure will have no effect then you are in denial. there is no one on our roster currently that can fill in for LA at the same capacity, if we don't find an answer for him in FA or the draft we are going to have holes in our defense again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 a lot. other than Griffin and ST this defense doesn't have the physical presence that keeps offensive coordinators up at night. everyone keeps pointing to what a fantastic job our defense did - statistically - two seasons ago on our way to a wonderful 5-11 record. i recall a defense that played well but couldn't stop the better teams when it counted (yes...the O stunk) ...and it was good....but as GW himself said...not good enough...and last season.......the lack of physical LB play off one of the edges cost us.... but the main thing? now...instead of a wideout, a de, possibly a safety, cb depth, o-line depth...we have added to the list of needs...not subtracted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadirtbags Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I think we will go after a scrappy LB to replace Lavar....just doubt he will be a big name player like Ray Lewis. :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 but the main thing? now...instead of a wideout, a de, possibly a safety, cb depth, o-line depth...we have added to the list of needs...not subtracted Not necessarily. What if, suddenly, Robert McCune is up-to-snuff at MLB and Lemar is moved back to the weak-side? We haven't heard anything on his progress. Edit: must be more careful... "e" and "t" are only separated by one letter on the keyboard... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It is not about how much it suffered when he was out. That is a pretty narrowed minded way to look at it and I doubt the coaching staff would be dumb enough to look at it that way. What matters is how good they could have been with a healthy Lavar. Unfortunately we will never know. There is no doubt this defense will be stout. Will it be dominant is hard to determine until some outside factors get worked out. Our defence was dominate without LA last season. This past season, we slipped a little with LA in (part time). I'm sorry, but I think he turned into a distraction with the team this year. Joe Gibbs is famous for keeping distractions behind closed doors. Hindsight tells us that LA was airing his dirty laundry over the airwaves, purposely to undermine Joe Gibbs. So we really have no idea of how this affected the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 "What if, suddenly, Robert McCune is up-to-snuff at MLB and Lemar is moved back to the weak-side? We haven't heard anything on his progress." ntoro...well that's sure betting on the come! willing to risk season tickets (if you had them) on that one?! kingfish...the defense wasn't dominant last season. it was very good..all things considered. but it wasn't dominant. it was waxed in the first gints game...lost the first TB game....and basically gave aawy 2-3 games (yes the O was part culprit also) with long scoring runs......the bears defense was dominant...our D was very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlhjr34 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Most of us are bummed out about losing Lavar, but in all reality, how much do you think our defense will suffer? Will it be tougher to stop the run? Will our pass defense suffer? Will it be harder to create as many turnovers?I'm reluctant to say it's a good thing that losing Lavar will free up more space for scrappy-type players. But I think it actually is. Your thoughts? Don't have to look too far to see how we'll be with out him. Pretty much have been the last two seasons. I mean 2004 we were the Second ranked defense in the NFL and he played in how many of those games? I think Lavar can be a hell of a player in the league, but it just has to be in a defensive scheme that doesn't require the discipline that GW's d does. I mean if he can find a team that want a freelance type of LB then he's definitely the guy for you. That's why I'm not a 100% sold on him playing for the Eagles or Dallas. Sure he's going to be enticed by the "revenge" factor of playing there but I mean he's going to be back in the same boat again. I mean even Marvin Lewis has said he was difficult player to "coach" so he's just got to be somewhere where Lavar can be allowed to coach himself and do what he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.