Couple of things from the Gibbs wrap-up presser.

[Art]

I understand that you're just pointing out that he didn't find that out through special investigation of his own, but honestly I'm gunna have to say that it was a legitimate question regardless of whether it was "simply on NFL.com" or not. He saw it, wondered if there was any validity to it, went to the source of the team, and asked the question. That's just good journalism.

Actually, it's fradulent journalism. "There's been talk," is a sign you've spoken to a living soul who told you something. "I just read," would be the way an honest person would lead that question. There's nothing wrong with the question. I just found it amusing how he phrased it. The guy clicked on NFL.com, then tried to pretend he's been on the horn getting the scoop on the new tight end.

[Mackdaddydean]

Actually, it's fradulent journalism. "There's been talk," is a sign you've spoken to a living soul who told you something. "I just read," would be the way an honest person would lead that question. There's nothing wrong with the question. I just found it amusing how he phrased it. The guy clicked on NFL.com, then tried to pretend he's been on the horn getting the scoop on the new tight end.

It is definately not fradulent journalism. I don't think "There's been talk" indicates personal interaction at all. This is a common phrase used to mean "there's been rumors". This is not only understood by journalists but also by also by those who are being asked the questions. Furthermore, if something like that made it online, trust me there has been actual talk going on somewhere. Note he did not say "I have heard talk" or "People have been telling me". How he phrased it was actually smart.

[Forever21]

Toward the end of the presser, Gibbs outlined as clearly as you've ever heard just how bad our coverage was last year and just how negative it was to the rest of the defense. I do think we have some reason to hope we'll be better in the secondary, which will, in turn, make us better everywhere else. The same thing is true in reverse. If you have a great front four, it makes your coverage better.

I think we were a lot closer to having a great secondary than we were to having a great front four though .

So Art are you saying maybe the coaches watched some film or something and maybe they saw that our secondary was perhaps a bigger issue than our DL?

I don't understand this.

All anyone on ES talks about is how bad our DL is and obviously the folks here know more than GW or JG possibly could about football.

How is it that the coaches could be missing what is so obvious to everyone on ES?

[SkinsGuy]

I think there is some merit to what you are saying here (and hopefully it's true), but this is not what I remember about the 2006 defensive line......really at all. I made it a point to consistently watch the DL pressure on most defensive snaps. I saw Andre Carter getting swallowed up by OTs 80lbs heavier than him, when he should have been blowing past them. Griffin was a big no-factor last year, hopefully due to his shoulders. Salave'a provides no real pocket push and should be replaced by Golston. Daniels just had three surgeries and Wynn has seen better days. What I consistently remember seeing last year was a defensive line that just could not get to the QB - and the QB having all day to throw. I remember yelling at the screen many times last year - C"MON THE QB HAD ALL DAY THERE........they have big problems on the DL and failed to address it in FA and mostly in the draft. I am quite shocked we did not draft a DL in this draft. Landry is going to be a great safety, especially with Taylor, but need at safety was a luxury pick, and the need at DE is desperate. I would have rather seen Jamaal Anderson picked, although Landry had the higher grade. I have no idea how we are going to get to the QB again next year. Hopefully what you are saying is true, but I just don't remember it that way last year.

I disagree. That's not what I saw.

I saw a DL barely have time to form a pocket around the QB before they were looking over their shoulders watching the ball fly into a receiver's hands.

I'm not saying there weren't instances where the QB had more time to throw.

There were.

But that happens to even what is considered the best pass-rushing D-lines in the NFL.

Fixing our problems in the secondary and LB core will go a long way to helping the Redskins' problem of getting pressure on QBs.

[HoyaSkins28]

the TE Ecker was a cannon fodder pick. he is worth basically nothing. ben patrick was a big miss for us. i thought we should have gotten him in the 6th when he was available. he was worth a 3rd rounder, big steal for the cards

[SkinsGuy]

Um, you and I seem to have differing memories.

Or one of us has selective memories.

As I said to the other poster, there were times where the QB stood back there a while and had time to throw.

However, that was the exception rather than the rule.

The rule was usually the QB getting rid of the ball quickly due to poor pass coverage before pressure could really be applied.

The Redskins needed to fix the problems in pass coverage, which was the primary problem.

However, even if our secondary and LB core go back to '04/'05 form, it doesn't mean our D-Line will suddenly become a sack machine.

That's not Williams' defense and it's not their primary job.

For the DTs, their job is to eat up blockers, which keeps them off the LBs and safties and allows them to make the plays.

It's also thier job to get a good push forward to shrink the pocket and keep the QB from being able to step up and deliver a throw.

For the DEs, their job is containment. They form the outside of the pocket to keep RBs from going to the outside, and close off escape lanes for the QB.

That doesn't mean Williams doesn't want them to sack the QB. If they can get to the QB, fine, get him. But don't abandon your assignment or leave your lanes to do it.

A good example of that is Andre Carter. Folks complain about him being swallowed up by left tackles.

I'm sure that did happen sometimes. However, one thing he was doing was holding his lane. Keepng the containment going.

He could've easily used his speed and went around the slower tackle and got behind the QB. However, that would've left an escape lane open for the QB to take off or get a quick throw to a RB or TE along the sideline, while more than likely Carter wouldn't have got to the QB having to go around like that.

The D-Line's main job in Williams' defense is to provide pressure and containment. To close off running routes, escape lanes, and to eat up blockers so the LBs and safties can make the plays.

Getting sacks is a secondary goal, and usually left more to the blitzing players.

I feel the D-Line did what they could last year (considering how banged up they were). However, b/c of injuries, poor play in the secondary and LB core, and a failed experiment with Archuletta, the 2nd part of the equation (the LBs and safties making plays at the line) couldn't be accomplished.

And the line suffered b/c of it.

I feel that with injuries healed up, and better players brought in the secondary and LB core, you'll see a dramatic difference in the way this defense plays, and much more pressure from the D-Line.

Not to mention our rush defense will get back on track.

[SkinsGuy]

He might have to change his name. Or at the very least we would have come up with a good nickname for him.

Either that, or they are just going to have to refer to him as 'Sartz".

[SkinsGuy]

It wasn't just the sceondary....our LBs were not so hot at covering backs out of the backfield. but that has been a problem for several years now.

I agree.

When I say 'secondary', I mainly mean the coverage unit.

Which, last season included the LBs b/c Williams had no choice but to put them into coverage too.

Which REALLY messed up his defense.

[Taylor 36]

I am goin to re-post something I put in another thread:

Last season, it wasn't the case of opposing QBs hiking the ball and having 8, 9, 10 seconds to throw.

If that were the case, then that means that we had a pretty good secondary to be able to cover that long.

However, we know that we did NOT have a good secondary last year.

No, last year what I saw was from the opposing QB was:

3 steps.. throw

3 steps.. throw

3 steps.. throw

This means that opposing offensive players were getting open in the secondary practically IMMEADIATELY.

The D-Line barely got 2-3 steps into their push before the QB was throwing the ball.

They rarely had time to put on any pressure.

Our secondary was that bad. They made most QBs facing the Redskins look Marino-like quick.

So Williams couldn't blitz much b/c he had to put everyone out in coverage to compensate.

That also left running lanes open, which hurt our rushing defense.

THIS is what I believe the coaches saw in studying the film, and made the moves they did (focusing on the secondary and LBs in FA and the draft. This will help us put more pressure on opposing QBs and stop the run the way we usually do.

I'm not saying we don't need to look at another DL in UDFA or June 1st cuts, but I don't think it was our biggest need.

:applause: great Analysis. thanks for sharing it, and I believe you are right, though I don't have many games to look at film from last year.

[SkinsGuy]

this is the best argument ive heard yet as to why it was our secondary and not the dline. and this makes even more sense as to why we werent blitzing at all. but i gotta wonder, why did our secondary just plummet then? rogers/taylor/springs were all very good in 05, why did they just turn into garbage in 06?

The primary reason was injuries.

The Redskins lost Pierson right off the back.

Springs was in and out (mostly out) all season. Other players dealt with injuries as well.

Another primary reason was preformance. Players didn't live up to expectations.

Especially Carlos Rogers, who I believed just suffered from the dreaded 'sophmore slump'.

It happens to players who have success in their rookie season.

They have that success, they feel they've "made it", and they just figure they can put it on cruise control for the rest of their carrers.

However, they come to find out that they have to keep that hard work up to keep that success up.

Rogers found that out, and his play improved at the end of the year.

Injuries have now healed. Springs will be 100%, and Pierson will be back.

The Redskins have jettisoned players the didn't preform well (Rumph, Wright, Vincent, who had that block and probably worked his butt off, but seems to be showing his age).

They have brought in better players like Smoot, Stoutmire, and Macklin.

The Archuletta idea was a disaster and stopped.

On the LB core, they got rid of Holdman and shook things up. They've moved Marshall out of the Mike spot and brought in one of the best middle LBs in the game in Fletcher.

M. Washington will (hopefully) be healed from that hip injury that bothered him last year.

For me, a LB core consisting of M. Washington, Fletcher, and McIntosh sounds pretty good.

Not to mention that the Redskins drafted two LBs yesterday that seem like good prospects.

I think with healthy players, and better preformers, we will see a much better defense next season. One more like our 04/05 defenses.

[ThomasRoane]

The primary reason was injuries.

The Redskins lost Pierson right off the back.

Springs was in and out (mostly out) all season...

You make some great points SkinsGuy but can you go back to single line for your paragraphs? Double space works great on paper but it kills my eyes on the PC!!

[SkinsGuy]

You make some great points SkinsGuy but can you go back to single line for your paragraphs? Double space works great on paper but it kills my eyes on the PC!!

Sorry Thomas.

I try to keep my words seperated like that b/c the only thing worse on the eyes is a buch of words clustered together with no spacing.

I will

try

to do

my best.

[Philip Pease]

I had another thought and that is the team needs to create turnovers (they are game changers) Get the hard hitting Landry who can make the ball carrier cough-up the ball.

Secondly, stopping the run is dependent on the LBs making the tackle. Fletcher should really help.

Third get back to the aggressive blitzing scheme that was so successful in previous years to bring pressure on the QB. To do that we needed to improve our secondary and then we can be successful by blitzing from LB, corner, or safety.

Fourth, from reading posts regarding Sartz, he looks like he could be a special teams player who may excel at blocking punts and kicks (another game changing play). Also, if he can bulk up he could become a DE.

So, while it would be nice if we could get some outstanding player at DL and DE that could stuff the run in the backfield and pressure the QB without blitzing; that was not what GW had in mind from the players available in the draft. LBs and secondary are the ones who are expected to make the plays.

I like our draft and think I understand what the coaches are thinking by the picks they made.

[The Dude]

Actually, it's fradulent journalism. "There's been talk," is a sign you've spoken to a living soul who told you something. "I just read," would be the way an honest person would lead that question. There's nothing wrong with the question. I just found it amusing how he phrased it. The guy clicked on NFL.com, then tried to pretend he's been on the horn getting the scoop on the new tight end.

So he admitted to getting his info solely from NFL.com? Or are you inferring that he did?

[kramdizzle]

obviously a healthy line is teh key to the season. IF, which is a big if, they can stay healthy i see a top 15 defense, which combined with maybe a top 10 offense should be more than serviceable

[Cdowwe]

Washington should help the rush if he doesnt have to worry about coverage.

[Morneblade]

Point is, it's been a rare event for a team to dominate us on the ground. It's happened a few times, MOSTLY last year, where teams pushed us around. That's out of character for what we try to do and think it is probably the most naturally easy thing to fix, given the personnel we have.

Unless the personnel is the problem, which alot of us think it is.

[Aston]

this is the best argument ive heard yet as to why it was our secondary and not the dline. and this makes even more sense as to why we werent blitzing at all. but i gotta wonder, why did our secondary just plummet then? rogers/taylor/springs were all very good in 05, why did they just turn into garbage in 06?

Good question. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Here's my stab. Someone mentioned in another post about how GW's scheme worked for a year or two but eventually offenses simply figured it out. They even quoted GW in an interview where he mentions about how they're definately planning on addressing the issues of teams figuring out his cover 2 D, so it could be just a case of a old dog needing to learn some new tricks.

I think the secondary and linebacker play were definately bad last year. Without a doubt, these shortcomings will have effects outside the pass game and so the defensive line certainly does not deserve all the blame for the run D.

But it's hard for me to be completely sold on "the secondary was the main issue of our run defense" when thinking about 4 games from last year.

Tennessee - Travis Henry's career day. Rosie Odonnell could have run through those holes.

Tampa Bay - Cadillac runs for his season high 122. Alstot looks like his 2002 version. Campbell's debut is ruined.

Atlanta - 256 yards yielded on the ground. Including the 70 yard game winner right up the gut.

New York - Do I really need to give you all details about the season finale? Tiki, you're welcome. And good riddance.

That said, there were some games where we did great against the run, but terrible against the pass, like Jax and both Dallas games. Difference is, we tend to win the games in which we're better on the ground. In our 5 wins last year, we yielded only 75.4 yards per game on the ground.

And what about the lack of sacks? How do you generate more sacks playing 7 yards off the receivers and rushing 3 and 4 guys? SkinsGuy was right about the timing routes. Last year, we consistently played 7 yards off the ball, especially on 3rd down, but in 2005, I recall we played a lot more bump and run with these same guys. Anyone have an idea why?

[Redskin Rush]

I'm not saying we don't need to look at another DL in UDFA or June 1st cuts, but I don't think it was our biggest need.

I completely agree, people act like they've never heard of such things as coverage sacks. If the QB has to hold the ball for longer than 3-4 seconds I think our DL can get a good push. :2cents:

[SkinzFoLife]

I think we may be grooming the kid from USC (Dallas) to be a pass rushing linebacker. He has good height and long arms (6'4") but he's only 240lbs. If he can add 15-20lbs he could be a JAson taylor type DE/LB.

[terpfan]

I think we may be grooming the kid from USC (Dallas) to be a pass rushing linebacker. He has good height and long arms (6'4") but he's only 240lbs. If he can add 15-20lbs he could be a JAson taylor type DE/LB.

Yeah, I could see him filling that role. He had 7 sacks or so his senior season at USC. Let's jsut hoping we arent counting on that though...

[bcl05]

He might have to change his name. Or at the very least we would have come up with a good nickname for him.

Dallas "Sucks" Sartz. Couldn't be more obvious. I really hope he turns into a prominent player for us - not least because we'll have so much fun with his name.

[thewagen]

The primary reason was injuries.

The Redskins lost Pierson right off the back.

Springs was in and out (mostly out) all season. Other players dealt with injuries as well.

Another primary reason was preformance. Players didn't live up to expectations.

Especially Carlos Rogers, who I believed just suffered from the dreaded 'sophmore slump'.

It happens to players who have success in their rookie season.

They have that success, they feel they've "made it", and they just figure they can put it on cruise control for the rest of their carrers.

However, they come to find out that they have to keep that hard work up to keep that success up.

Rogers found that out, and his play improved at the end of the year.

Injuries have now healed. Springs will be 100%, and Pierson will be back.

The Redskins have jettisoned players the didn't preform well (Rumph, Wright, Vincent, who had that block and probably worked his butt off, but seems to be showing his age).

They have brought in better players like Smoot, Stoutmire, and Macklin.

The Archuletta idea was a disaster and stopped.

On the LB core, they got rid of Holdman and shook things up. They've moved Marshall out of the Mike spot and brought in one of the best middle LBs in the game in Fletcher.

M. Washington will (hopefully) be healed from that hip injury that bothered him last year.

For me, a LB core consisting of M. Washington, Fletcher, and McIntosh sounds pretty good.

Not to mention that the Redskins drafted two LBs yesterday that seem like good prospects.

I think with healthy players, and better preformers, we will see a much better defense next season. One more like our 04/05 defenses.

======================================================

Rogers found that out, and his play improved at the end of the year.

======================================================

Too bad his hands didn't improve..stonehands!!!