I need to know something in a poll form.

[UK Skins]

The original question and poll remains in tact for how simple it is. Does any staff in the league not know its system better than any fan anywhere. Here, there's a sickening undercurrent that we do, and only a hint of thought that the systems themselves are flawed.

Almost every single post in this thread is identifying flaws in the system, not questioning that they know the system better. Ignore the "we shouldn't have signed Duckett" posts and "we should have signed a DL" and the rest consistently focus on flaws in the system (not just GW's game-plan either!).

[Art]

Almost every single post in this thread is identifying flaws in the system, not questioning that they know the system better. Ignore the "we shouldn't have signed Duckett" posts and "we should have signed a DL" and the rest consistently focus on flaws in the system (not just GW's game-plan either!).

AJ and Sebowski are the only two who openly suggest the system itself is not a good one. Where are you seeing questions about flaws in the system beyond that? The majority of conversation still revolves around, "Arculeta, so there," in response as if the name has anything to do with anything.

I would be thrilled to get into a serious "system" conversation with a person who thinks the system sucks. That would be a hard position to take, which is why so few are openly attempting to take it.

[Utah]

You know the funny apart about this is that no 2 systems are alike. Because no 2 coaches do things exactly the same.

The only people who know the system are the coaches themselves.

Now, if someone doesn't succeed. I wouldn't say its the system, I would say its the player.

Clearly, both of these systems have worked in the past and now we are getting closer (hopefully) to them working at full strength now. However, lets get on the field and go from there. Only then do we find out if what we have done this off season was good or bad.

[UK Skins]

If you are going to focus on "system" as in the Xs and Os, then very few are in a position to discuss it intelligently. For instance, other than run blitzing, I do not understand how containing the run does not equate to not rushing the passer. And if it does not, then I understand why GW relies on blitzing LBs and DBS (or so we are told). I can then understand why we seem to bad at it, as opposition teams only have to identify and then stop those blitzers, thus leaving someone uncovered by the blitzer!!

But I think most of us, including me, are using the term "system" to mean strategy, big picture, roster, game-plan, etc., which we are discussing.

[skinsfanno9]

No, a clear minority, boosted by at least 80 Cowboy fans posting from guest, think it's plausible the people who install, run and design a system are not capable of grasping the areas that make the system go. That's pretty much it.

Most people understand this simple premise and have the willingness to simply GET that no matter what they thought, the reasons they came up with their thoughts are trumped by people who know more because they can't help but know more. You have seen rather desperate, often pathetic refusal to address the simple premise.

Conversely, I've been kind enough to repetitively admit we may not always get the right player after making the assessment, and it is certainly a reasonable position to take that the system itself, no matter how in touch with it the staff is, may be the flawed element incapable of functioning at a winning level in the NFL.

But, your viewpoint the consensus is that the coaches don't know their systems well enough to know what it takes to make them go is a symptom of the larger problem that a very large percentage of people here are too lost in themselves to know how silly it sounds.

The original question and poll remains in tact for how simple it is. Does any staff in the league not know its system better than any fan anywhere. Here, there's a sickening undercurrent that we do, and only a hint of thought that the systems themselves are flawed.

UK Skins has the right of it. You flat out ignore or gloss over any point which contradicts your postulate and then proclaim those who disagree with you to be cranially challenged. You probably will win out on pure fillibustering, but chances are most have already decided that your position is repleat with a variety of holes. I personally bowed out when you stated as a postulate that the only complexity in sports management deals with player evaluation - that the strategy and assessment was simplistic - that it was impossible for there to be any ambiguity there, even though every other organization everywhere struggles mightily with this. Bottom line, this is not an individual effort - this is a large group oriented effort, and is subject to all the infallibilities that all organizations engaged in complex decision making go through. You simply won't address the issue that 20 experts (all more knowledgeable than us) engaged in making singular evaluations and strategic direction decisions will sometimes (perhaps often) make incongruent ones. But somehow, this kept getting back to "I know more than the coaches know" commentary.

EDIT: Bottom line, whether you like it, agree with it or not, arrogance, misunderstanding, miscommunication, power struggles politics and all the rest can and do impact the Redskins overall strategy and evaluation of problems in reaching that strategy. Why is this so? Simple - this is true in every other type of organization of every size everywhere on earth.

[skinsn24]

Look its obvious the coaches know more about their system than any fan does. This does NOT in anyway way mean that the coaches are right 100% of the time in knowing what the weaknesses of the system are or in figuring out what went wrong. I am sorry, no chance lance.

The self serving bias, fundamental attribution error, halo effect and many other natural human flaws are involved. Anyone who denies this point or thinks otherwise, needs to go to college and learn something before they type. Yes i know, its amazing college actually teaches management, problem recongition and problem solving skills.

When something is yours, it is actually HARDER and MORE challanging, to find flaws or weaknesses in. This is a fact, proven in hundreds of studies on managment. Think about your kids (if you have any). They might be fat, slow, and stupid to an outsider, but to a mom or dad, the kids is probably just big boned, needs to play outside a little more, or a slower learner. A daughter may be ugly to everyone who sees her, but her mom and dad probably think she looks just fine.

The same is true in the business world and is the reason there is a multi-billion dollar consulting and infrastructure building industry. There is no reason to believe the same doesnt hold true in the football world, no reason at all.

The notion that beacuase someone (GW) created something (his scheme), he can correctly identify the problems and weaknesses 100% of the time with a 0% chance of error, is not simply incorrect, but rather the opposite is true. He is most likely too blind to fairly evaluate what the true problems are. An outsider with knowledge of the sport and scheme is actually a much better person to evaulate what the problem or weakness is. I bet Tony D or Lovie S could easily shed some light on our problems, hell even Buddy Ryan.

This makes perfect sense though, as parents usually cant figure out what is wrong with their kids, they get counsulers and shrinks to do that. Companies hardly ever implement change themselves, instead they contract an outisde consulting firm to figure out what the problems are and what can be done to fix them.

This is a fundamental concept in management and is found in ALL human beings. We ALL possess a fundamental attribution error and a self serving bias.

(The self serving bias is why most of us are homers and believe we are better than the coypukes everyyear)

This notion that only the creator of something can know what is really wrong is totally false and i have proven why above. It is a shame that some "kid" from generation "ipod" has to be the one to shed some real information on this topic. Information that is based on facts, case studies, intricate long term studies, and proven concepts. No question about it, now lets put this baby to rest, because the facts have been said, yes Art, these are facts. Now back to my thesis. Goodnight!

[dfbovey]

AJ and Sebowski are the only two who openly suggest the system itself is not a good one. Where are you seeing questions about flaws in the system beyond that? The majority of conversation still revolves around, "Arculeta, so there," in response as if the name has anything to do with anything.

I would be thrilled to get into a serious "system" conversation with a person who thinks the system sucks. That would be a hard position to take, which is why so few are openly attempting to take it.

I have said repeatedly that the system is flawed in this thread and in others. When you have to rely on pressure from the secondary to generate a pass rush, it's not fundamentally sound. It may have garnered statistically good defenses two years ago, but a system like that gets picked apart by the more savvy QBs in this league. Even when the defense was ranked high, we lived and died by the blitz. I just think it's a backwards way to build the defense.

Williams' defense wasn't always this way either. He used to get alot of production from the defensive lines in Buffalo and in Tennessee. A defensive lineman should always be your team sack leader in a 4-3 defense. Not a corner, safety or even a linebacker.

[JC2MOSS]

By JOSEPH WHITE, AP

The Redskins needed help on defense after setting an NFL record for fewest takeaways (12) in a non-strike season last year and a franchise record for fewest sacks (19). However, it was the defensive line - not the secondary - that appeared to be the weakest spot entering the draft.

Some quotes from the JLC article

I'd Take Okoye, Would You Say Landry?

He can be an every down player and provide help on a defensive line that is crying out for assistance while the front office chases down other positions.

This organization has not really drafted and developed stud D Linemen with the Mann/Manley heyday, and to me, if they are ever going to reach that elite level again they are going to need young difference-makers in the trenches.

Salave'a has been seriously hurt two years and is winding down, and Griffin has been very banged up the last two years and yet to repeat his Pro Bowl form from 2004. Golston looks like he could be real good, but he's not the complete package.

Roster Review: Defensive Ends

By Gary Fitzgerald

Redskins.com

With the Redskins' defense struggling to pressure the quarterback last season, it seems a certainty that the team will address the defensive end position will be addressed this offseason-probably in the draft.

Roster Review: Defensive Tackles

By Gary Fitzgerald

Redskins.com

Given the age of Griffin and Salave'a and the relative inexperience of Golston and Montgomery, defensive tackle could be a position upgraded this offseason.

Mock Draft No. 2: It's Okoye For Redskins

By Dave Goldberg

AP Football Writer

Washington Redskins 2007 NFL Draft

Brian Levy

Defensive End: To help the secondary, the Redskins need to get more of a pass rush. Andre Carter is adequate, totaling 6.5 sacks this year, but an upgrade is needed opposite him. Phillip Daniels is entering his 12th season in the league, will be 34 when training camp opens up, and just does not have the quickness anymore to get to the quarterback. With no evident successor on the current roster, the draft seems to be the likely way to address the issue.

NFL draft needs: NFC East

USA TODAY is identifying the key positions of need for each NFL team in the days leading up to the NFL draft.

WASHINGTON REDSKINS

1. Defensive end: Washington's ends combined for 11 sacks last season (six by newcomer Andre Carter). The entire defense had just 19. Phillip Daniels is 34. Renaldo Wynn will be 33 in September). The Redskins badly need a young end who can get to the quarterback. The last Washington end to record a double-digit sack season was Bruce Smith back when Bill Clinton was still in the White House.

2. Defensive tackle: Cornelius Griffin was a monster in 2004 when he led the NFL in tackles for loss. Griffin, now 30 wasn't nearly as effective the past two seasons and has been bothered by bad hips. Joe Salave'a, supplanted by rookie Kedric Golston last season might be done at 32. Even with free agent signee London Fletcher an upgrade at middle linebacker, the Redskins need another big body up front.

I could post these types of articles all day. But I wont. The point is, ESers are not alone. Outside of the Redskins coaching staff you would be hard pressed to find someone who can say the team is in good shape as far as defensive line is concerned.

You dont need to know every players individual assignment on every single down to know that the Skins front 4 were not getting pressure on the QB at all last year.

But hey, they made up for it by sucking against the run huh?

One thing I do want to mention here is that I LOVE that the Skins selected Landry with the 6th. Just would have prefered to go D-line from there. Or at least get a respectable FA in town before the season starts.

[UK Skins]

Great post skinsn24. Very well summed up. Your parents would be proud of you!

[skinsn24]

Great post skinsn24. Very well summed up. Your parents would be proud of you!

Thank you very much, to everyone else: Please go read my post. It is about 4 posts above this and sums this whole thing up. period.

[Mark The Homer]

(The self serving bias is why most of us are homers and believe we are better than the coypukes everyyear)

That's because We ARE better than the cowpukes every year!

[Burgold]

Mark's right. We are better than the Cowboys every year. If you don't understand that you may just be a spy or saboteur for the enemy.

Get 'im, Men!!!

[VaSkinsNut]

The coaches definitely know more but I would like to see some youth added to the Dline. Wynn and Daniels aren't getting any younger. Salvea may or may not be able to play.

Griffin is a fine player but he seems to miss 3+ games a year.

I think the Skins did fine with the players they added, but I would have liked to have seen a new DT come in. Yes we brought in Gholston and Montgomery last year but IIRC Travis Henry had his best game of the season against us running right up our gut when the 2 rookies were starting. We'll see how they pan out but competition never hurt.

Of course i'm not privy to game film to check if the Linebacker play was god awful or the run supporting safety misread the play on various occasions. But when our run defense was riped to shreads last year by seemingly "most" running backs we faced I've got to believe our tackle play was a large factor.

[fansince62]

By JOSEPH WHITE, AP

The Redskins needed help on defense after setting an NFL record for fewest takeaways (12) in a non-strike season last year and a franchise record for fewest sacks (19). However, it was the defensive line - not the secondary - that appeared to be the weakest spot entering the draft.

Some quotes from the JLC article

I'd Take Okoye, Would You Say Landry?

He can be an every down player and provide help on a defensive line that is crying out for assistance while the front office chases down other positions.

This organization has not really drafted and developed stud D Linemen with the Mann/Manley heyday, and to me, if they are ever going to reach that elite level again they are going to need young difference-makers in the trenches.

Salave'a has been seriously hurt two years and is winding down, and Griffin has been very banged up the last two years and yet to repeat his Pro Bowl form from 2004. Golston looks like he could be real good, but he's not the complete package.

Roster Review: Defensive Ends

By Gary Fitzgerald

Redskins.com

With the Redskins' defense struggling to pressure the quarterback last season, it seems a certainty that the team will address the defensive end position will be addressed this offseason-probably in the draft.

Roster Review: Defensive Tackles

By Gary Fitzgerald

Redskins.com

Given the age of Griffin and Salave'a and the relative inexperience of Golston and Montgomery, defensive tackle could be a position upgraded this offseason.

Mock Draft No. 2: It's Okoye For Redskins

By Dave Goldberg

AP Football Writer

Washington Redskins 2007 NFL Draft

Brian Levy

Defensive End: To help the secondary, the Redskins need to get more of a pass rush. Andre Carter is adequate, totaling 6.5 sacks this year, but an upgrade is needed opposite him. Phillip Daniels is entering his 12th season in the league, will be 34 when training camp opens up, and just does not have the quickness anymore to get to the quarterback. With no evident successor on the current roster, the draft seems to be the likely way to address the issue.

NFL draft needs: NFC East

USA TODAY is identifying the key positions of need for each NFL team in the days leading up to the NFL draft.

WASHINGTON REDSKINS

1. Defensive end: Washington's ends combined for 11 sacks last season (six by newcomer Andre Carter). The entire defense had just 19. Phillip Daniels is 34. Renaldo Wynn will be 33 in September). The Redskins badly need a young end who can get to the quarterback. The last Washington end to record a double-digit sack season was Bruce Smith back when Bill Clinton was still in the White House.

2. Defensive tackle: Cornelius Griffin was a monster in 2004 when he led the NFL in tackles for loss. Griffin, now 30 wasn't nearly as effective the past two seasons and has been bothered by bad hips. Joe Salave'a, supplanted by rookie Kedric Golston last season might be done at 32. Even with free agent signee London Fletcher an upgrade at middle linebacker, the Redskins need another big body up front.

I could post these types of articles all day. But I wont. The point is, ESers are not alone. Outside of the Redskins coaching staff you would be hard pressed to find someone who can say the team is in good shape as far as defensive line is concerned.

You dont need to know every players individual assignment on every single down to know that the Skins front 4 were not getting pressure on the QB at all last year.

But hey, they made up for it by sucking against the run huh?

One thing I do want to mention here is that I LOVE that the Skins selected Landry with the 6th. Just would have prefered to go D-line from there. Or at least get a respectable FA in town before the season starts.

it all makes sense if you accept....perish the thought.....that the Skins know in their heart of hearts that they aint goin to the SB this season. If you accept the rebuild project on defense now underway to be a two year project (with some tweaking of the O line as well)...then Landry is a nice pick-up. we will be drafting 10 to 18 next draft if all goes well. but, let's see what happens in June first.

[Dan T.]

Art tells us that Gregg Williams and the coaching staff are satisfied with current personnel on the defensive line, and that defensive upgrades were instead needed and addressed in the back seven.

We are told that the seemingly alarming lack of sacks by the D-line is NOT a big concern, that the primary focus of the D-line is containment and run-stopping. Pressure can come from blitz schemes.

If this is true, then in my mind Gregg Williams' system undervalues quarterback pressure and sacks from defensive linemen.

A quarterback sack can be momemtum changer in a game, and can provide a huge psychological lift, especially on a home field. Conventional wisdom says that front four pressure helps out the secondary. Further, a defensive coordinator who gets reliable pressure from his front four alone has a lot more coverage flexibility with 7 guys available.

So why do we undervalue straight front-four pressure?

[Warpath11]

I dont claim to know more about our defensive scheme then G. Williams, but the one thing I notice about his scheme is the fact that he CAN adapt it (I've noticed a few posts in this thread claiming to the contrary).

For example while a coordinator for the Titans he was not an overly-aggresive blitzer becuase he could count on pressure from his front 4 (Jevon Kearse, Kenny Holmes etc...don't get me wrong he did blitz but it was not what the defense was predicated on).

When he got to Buffalo he adapted his scheme to fit the two space eating/blocker occupying/double team demanding/2-gap monsters he had at DT (Sam Adams and Pat Williams). This allowed him to be more creative and fee up his LBs to blitz a lot more then when he was with the Titans (also led to many DB blitzes)

Finally, he comes here and once again changes his scheme to fit what he had and got his first season here. Created a super-aggressive LB heavy scheme that we saw in 2004. In-essence (only my opinion) the Redskins front 4 was playing the Sam Adams and Pat Williams role (main concern was stopping the run) thus allowing the LBs and DBs to create pressure on the QB (6 sacks for Springs in 04).

Now I can't diagonse what went wrong last year but, I believe people have hit on it throughout this post (age, injuries and chemistry...). With the Andre Carter signing I think GW was going to try and tone down the amount of blitzing he did as teams were starting to figure out his exotic blitz packages (more like what he ran with the Titans and Kearse). I believe GW will have this thing tweaked and sorted out by the start of next season (I hope).

[SonnyJ]

Art, after wading through the mind-numbing arrogance of the armchair coaches/GMs on ES, I think you should have worded the poll question like this:

Choice 1: The Redskins are willfully ignoring the DL in order to thumb their collective noses at the fans and media.

Choice 2: The Redskin coaching staff, after laboriously reviewing the debacle that was the 2006 season, are incompetent buffoons clearly incapable of determining the root causes of the failure.

JC2Moss - you're actually helping Art prove his point. What you provide is what OUTSIDERS thought, yet the Redskins, after a thorough review, went out and shored up other areas of the defense. Consequently, what does that tell you about what the coaching staff thought the problems were?

This all revolves around the game film, people. In very few situations in life do we have access to such a comprehensive analytical tool, one in which what was designed can be precisely compared to what actually happened. There is no he said, she said. This is what was called, this is what each person was supposed to do, here is what actually happened. And they don't just do a fleeting analysis of a few plays here and there - as Art said, they look at every play of every game and at what every player is doing, multiple times. Come on, people - there just isn't much of a chance of elite professionals mis-diagnosing the problem areas given that wealth of information. Hell, us laymen could figure it out if we watched the film and knew the assignments.

I also think many of you all are thinking Art's claim is that the coaching staff feels that DL is a strength, which he isn't saying. He's just pointing out that, judging by the moves made, it was deemed, at the very least, as less of a weakness than the back 7. It is possible for something to be neither a strength nor a weakness, but merely functional.

[sucking up]

Lastly, I think anyone who thinks Art is a trigger-happy Mod on a power trip should read this thread. His patience and level-headedness with people who refuse to concede this simple, undeniable, point should be all anyone needs in the way of proof to the contrary. Me, I would have whacked a bunch of you all for being such pigheads .

[/sucking up]

[Aghar]

Art tells us that Gregg Williams and the coaching staff are satisfied with current personnel on the defensive line, and that defensive upgrades were instead needed and addressed in the back seven.

We are told that the seemingly alarming lack of sacks by the D-line is NOT a big concern, that the primary focus of the D-line is containment and run-stopping. Pressure can come from blitz schemes.

If this is true, then in my mind Gregg Williams' system undervalues quarterback pressure and sacks from defensive linemen.

A quarterback sack can be momemtum changer in a game, and can provide a huge psychological lift, especially on a home field. Conventional wisdom says that front four pressure helps out the secondary. Further, a defensive coordinator who gets reliable pressure from his front four alone has a lot more coverage flexibility with 7 guys available.

So why do we undervalue straight front-four pressure?

This is a great post. While I don't pretend to know more than our coaching staff I can't help but question a coach that doesn't believe in pressure from his front-four, and actually finds ways to work around it as a rule, not a secondary option. Even when our defense was getting to the QB via the blitz and had statisitically great seasons, many still said, "Could you imagine this team if they were getting pressure to the QB via their front four on a consistent basis?" Don't we all believe we wouldn't have had ONE of the best defenses in 04 and 05 but THE BEST defense in 04 and 05, and far better in 06 if we could get pressure on the QB from our front four?

It's all well and good to get pressure via corner blitz and safety blitz and LB blitz, but that's only to confuse the QB knowing that it can come from anywhere at anytime, INCLUDING the front four. And when you blitz too often you increase your chances of getting beat. Blizting is not a defense, it's a RISK(not always a bad idea, but a risk nonetheless) within a defensive scheme, or at least that's what I was always tought. By saying our front four is there to run stop and contain, aren't we telling opposing QBs to read our blitzes properly and burn us everytime. Which is exactly what they have been doing. :2cents:

[fansince62]

Art, after wading through the mind-numbing arrogance of the armchair coaches/GMs on ES, I think you should have worded the poll question like this:

Choice 1: The Redskins are willfully ignoring the DL in order to thumb their collective noses at the fans and media.

Choice 2: The Redskin coaching staff, after laboriously reviewing the debacle that was the 2006 season, are incompetent buffoons clearly incapable of determining the root causes of the failure.

JC2Moss - you're actually helping Art prove his point. What you provide is what OUTSIDERS thought, yet the Redskins, after a thorough review, went out and shored up other areas of the defense. Consequently, what does that tell you about what the coaching staff thought the problems were?

This all revolves around the game film, people. In very few situations in life do we have access to such a comprehensive analytical tool, one in which what was designed can be precisely compared to what actually happened. There is no he said, she said. This is what was called, this is what each person was supposed to do, here is what actually happened. And they don't just do a fleeting analysis of a few plays here and there - as Art said, they look at every play of every game and at what every player is doing, multiple times. Come on, people - there just isn't much of a chance of elite professionals mis-diagnosing the problem areas given that wealth of information. Hell, us laymen could figure it out if we watched the film and knew the assignments.

I also think many of you all are thinking Art's claim is that the coaching staff feels that DL is a strength, which he isn't saying. He's just pointing out that, judging by the moves made, it was deemed, at the very least, as less of a weakness than the back 7. It is possible for something to be neither a strength nor a weakness, but merely functional.

[sucking up]

Lastly, I think anyone who thinks Art is a trigger-happy Mod on a power trip should read this thread. His patience and level-headedness with people who refuse to concede this simple, undeniable, point should be all anyone needs in the way of proof to the contrary. Me, I would have whacked a bunch of you all for being such pigheads .

[/sucking up]

why thank you! I have now had my pedantic lecture for the day. there are armchair coaches...and there are armchair analysts!!!!!!!!!!!!!...... :laugh:

btw...just what does semen taste like? that is territory I am unfamiliar with. Have a nice day!

[SonnyJ]

So why do we undervalue straight front-four pressure?

I don't think anyone seriously undervalues it. Bill Walsh said that the key to success in the NFL is late-game pass rush.

Williams just doesn't want to sacrifice run containment at the expense of pass rush (except, of course, in obvious passing situations). And those are often mutually exclusive. Getting up the field quickly on a pass rush can open HUGE running lanes - stopping the run on the way to the QB sounds good in theory, but it'll kill you in practice.

Players who can stuff the run AND be a pass-rushing freak are few and far between. What's the strategy for attacking a pass-rusher? Right, run at him - that'll slow him down more effectively than any double-team.

Williams seems to like situational pass rushers - speed/motor guys like Clemons or Ron Warner that he can stick in there in spot duty to get after the QB. They get mauled as everydown players, though.

[SonnyJ]

why thank you! I have now had my pedantic lecture for the day. there are armchair coaches...and there are armchair analysts!!!!!!!!!!!!!...... :laugh:

btw...just what does semen taste like? that is territory I am unfamiliar with. Have a nice day!

To be honest, I don't understand most of what you write because it's so fragmented and rambling as to be basically gibberish - the senile rantings of an old, unhappy person. From what I have been able to discern, though, shows you to be quite the lecturer. Odd that you would call me out on that.

As to your last comment, it's so juvenile that my only thought is contempt. I'll just say, act your age.

[Drex]

So why do we undervalue straight front-four pressure?

Two words: Greg Blache.

Here are some quotes from and regarding Blache, ranging from his days as D-coordinator of the Bears to his current position with the skins. They are quite revealing:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128972

“Dwight Freeney, and no disrespect to him, but he’s in a system where they don’t play the run. They just go up field. And he also plays on turf. If you ever looked at Indianapolis football, they play a totally different system than we do.”

“I think the one thing you have to understand, I don’t think you can take a Corvette motor and put it in an SUV. People see all this flash and glitter and they think that’s the ultimate answer. And its not. If that were the answer the Colts would’ve won the Super Bowl already.”

“That’s the one thing that happens with some guys that get drafted real high. You get this vision that you can’t get your hands dirty.”

http://www.bearshistory.com/lore/passrushrevival.aspx

“In 2003, Dick Jauron disciple Greg Blache told the media that "sacks don't matter" in the scheme of his defense, and his players backed up his words, finishing with a franchise-low 18.

Contrary to Blache's feelings, new coach Lovie Smith has gone on the record stating that his defense will live or die by the presence or absence of a pass rush from his front four linemen.”

http://www.bearshistory.com/seasons/2004chicagobears.aspx

“Along with playing much cover-2 and reintroducing the blitz to Chicago, Smith’s defense also required a different type of defensive lineman. Smith’s predecessor, Greg Blache, made a profound statement when he said “sacks don’t matter,” and his line was built to reflect that. Instead of sleek, fast linemen, the line the new coach inherited was designed to stop the run first and contain the quarterback at the expense of pressuring him. The new scheme would require slimmer, faster linemen that would play a “one gap” scheme, instead of one that tied up linemen to allow linebackers to make plays."

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=12131

“Asked to describe his crew of defensive linemen, Blache replied: "We have big strong guys, we play square-shoulder defense, we don't run around blocks, we don't free-lance and we don't take chances. We play sound fundamental football.”

http://www.phinatics.com/larrychester.htm

“Blache used the following analogy to explain why Larry was able to finally make it. “It doesn’t matter where you start the race. It’s how you run it and how you finish it. He (Chester) didn’t start the race in the pole position, but he ran it hard, he persevered. Now, he’s a starter in the NFL when all of those “beauty babies”, all those first round picks are gone. They didn’t pay attention to detail, and they didn’t win the trust of the people around him and he did.”

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3206384/Rookies-may-have-to-carry.html

"I don't really like rookies," Blache said. "You tolerate them for a year until they become veterans. They really do have to grow on you. I never like to get real high on rookies.”

As others have mentioned, Williams has had successful defenses in the past with Buffalo and Tennessee that relied upon front four pressure. IMHO, Williams' defenses in Washington have been heavily influenced by the philosophies of Greg Blache, whose attitude towards the role of the front four is demonstrated in the aforementioned quotes.

Also telling are the quotes by Blache regarding his viewpoints towards rookies, which possibly could have been a factor in the team's decision to not draft a defensive lineman so highly.

[TheDane]

Coaches Know More != Correct Personnel Decisions

For example,

A coach certainly knows more about the team than I do. But he might be making the wrong assumption when he says "You know, with a guy like Landry, I can change the scheme from Y to X and we might just be able to compensate for our pass rush..."

[NavyDave]

btw...just what does semen taste like? that is territory I am unfamiliar with. Have a nice day!

Don't you have a broke back mountain, 49er or cowpoke fan who can answer that for you??

Just don't say "No it doesn't" when they give you an answer

[Dan T.]

Sorry, I reject the notion that front-four QB pressure and a defense's run stopping ability are mutually exclusive. Other teams have struck a balance. Drex's posts regarding Blache's philosophy, to me, reflect an adamant contrarian view that so flies in the face of conventional wisdom that its almost pathological. He seems to have a personal disdain for elite, athletic d-lineman.