Why does the GW D Scheme Kill Takeaways?

[turbodiesel#44]

Since GW has been here, our takeaway numbers have been below average to abysmal. Below is last seasons.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/sortableStatsTeam?div=NFL&stype=offense&stable=turnovers&stat=turnDif&dir=descending&season=regular

I know Carlos dropped a few gifts, and our DL was horrible last year, but it seems to me there is something about the system that reduces our takeaway rate. Even in '05 our TAs were not so hot.

I'm not talking about the total takeaway/giveaway differentials, even though they are not very good either. JGs conservative playcalling and ball protection philosophy keeps our giveaways low. This brings the differential only to average at best.

So, what is it? I can't put my finger on it.

[Jbank31]

Aside from last year where the defense went primarily to a cover two scheme Gregg Williams' defense is a hybrid of the old 46 defense. I can't account for fumbles because there would be no reason for those numbers to be any different but as far as interceptions it is because the goal of the defense is to put pressure on the opposing quarterback and get him to release the ball before he wants. In theory this upsets the timing of the offense and forces a large number of incompletions or sacks. Check out the numbers on qb pressures, three and outs and yards allowed since he has been here and see where they rank. I don't know the answer but I'll bet it is near the top of the league.

[twist]

So, what is it? I can't put my finger on it.

The DL has been constantly below average during GW's tenure, and more recently he has had trouble in the secondary forcing him to play passive defenses. When he goes for pressure, much of the pressure comes from blitzing linebackers and secondary which takes guys out of coverage and opens holes for good offences. When the 4-6 is employed well it creates a ton of turnovers, but to be played well it needs good production out of the front four.

Consistent pressure from the DL will mean many more sacks and turnovers.

[Skins PR]

The DL has been constantly below average during GW's tenure, and more recently he has had trouble in the secondary forcing him to play passive defenses. When he goes for pressure, much of the pressure comes from blitzing linebackers and secondary which takes guys out of coverage and opens holes for good offences. When the 4-6 is employed well it creates a ton of turnovers, but to be played well it needs good production out of the front four.

Consistent pressure from the DL will mean many more sacks and turnovers.

There's no such thing as a 4-6 and we don't run a 46.

[kingofdaroad99]

i think it has alot to do with the lack of explosivness in our own offense, were not making the opposing team feel like they have to take risks to win against us. I hope all that will turn around with JC and everyone else having another year in Al's system

[Walking Deadman]

It seems everytime we strip the ball it bounces ten yards and back into the hands of the opposing team (unless Taylor or Washington is right there).

Rogers has hands of stone.....sorry CR it's true.

Not alot of sacks/hits by the D-line= less QB fumbles and less misguided passes?

outside of that, I have no clue.

[McD5]

Don't flame me for this.....but here is a possibility.

Maybe Gregg Williams is like Jerry Glanville. He comes in....inspires a previously lazy defense with a rally call...and they kick butt for a while. They play above themselves....they fly all over the field....quite simply, they dominate.

And then as time goes on, he does a few things that everyone on the team sees. He insults and benches Lavar. He lets Pierce and Clark go....he benches Arch. He brings in S. Jackson and the entire unit no longer even practices together. Players and agents ask themselves, "Even if I am great and loyal this season, are they even going to sign me again next season?"

He no longer is looked at as a guy you want on your side--but instead becomes the enemy. Production drops off.....locker rooms explode...and he is finally replaced. He eventually goes to the next franchise and does the same thing all over again.

I hope this isn't the case....but it is exactly what happened with Jerry Glanville. It is exactly what happened to Greggs' mentor, Buddy Ryan.

It is exactly what happens with sales organizations in the real world every single day. Bring in a new manager...stir things up...employees kick butt to impress...everyone is at work on time putting their best foot forward, and then they realize that the manager doesn't even care about them, but rather, only cares about himself. They stop putting forth effort...and the manager is replaced.

I pray to God he isn't following in the steps of his mentor. His coaching style, attitude and career so far might suggest that he is doing exactly that.

We will know for sure this season. Either he picks it up big time....or he is coaching somewhere else next year.

[Skins PR]

Don't flame me for this.....but here is a possibility.

Maybe Gregg Williams is like Jerry Glanville. He comes in....inspires a previously lazy defense with a rally call...and they kick butt for a while. They play above themselves....they fly all over the field....quite simply, they dominate.

And then as time goes on, he does a few things that everyone on the team sees. He insults and benches Lavar. He lets Pierce and Clark go....he benches Arch. He brings in S. Jackson and the entire unit no longer even practices together. Players and agents ask themselves, "Even if I am great and loyal this season, are they even going to sign me again next season?"

He no longer is looked at as a guy you want on your side--but instead becomes the enemy. Production drops off.....locker rooms explode...and he is finally replaced. He eventually goes to the next franchise and does the same thing all over again.

I hope this isn't the case....but it is exactly what happened with Jerry Glanville. It is exactly what happened to Greggs' mentor, Buddy Ryan.

It is exactly what happens with sales organizations in the real world every single day. Bring in a new manager...stir things up...employees kick butt to impress...everyone is at work on time putting their best foot forward, and then they realize that the manager doesn't even care about them, but rather, only cares about himself. They stop putting forth effort...and the manager is replaced.

I pray to God he isn't following in the steps of his mentor. His coaching style, attitude and career so far might suggest that he is doing exactly that.

We will know for sure this season. Either he picks it up big time....or he is coaching somewhere else next year.

I have read some stupid posts on this forum and I have to tell you... I don't think this is one of them. Honestly, I think this is a valid theory. Like you, I hope it isn't true but I can not argue with the logic.

[Ford]

There's no such thing as a 4-6 and we don't run a 46.

There's absolutely such a thing and the poster was saying that we would occasionally employ a 4-6 type set-up .. not that we used it as our primary set.

[turbodiesel#44]

Generally you get a takeaway with decent field position. Even if you are deep in your own territory, you have averted an opposing score. We had 12 takeaways. The Ravens had 40. As bad as we were last year, we were in most of our games.

If we merely had 1 additional takeaway per game, we might have gone to the playoffs. The Skins need to solve this problem. I am leaning towards the DL being the culprit, but these other ideas are interesting.

[WSHRedskins3ATLBraves3]

I think that the best way to force turnovers is apply pressure. That's pretty obvious. However, last year, when we couldn't apply any pressure with 4 down linemen and had to send extra blitzers we didn't have the balance you need. I'm talking about the balance between players that are blitzing and players that are covering. If you have Champ Bailey and Nate Clements opposite each other, then you can usually count on those two receivers being locked down and you can send extra blitzers. However, when you have CR and SS, when you send blitzers (Lamar, Warrick, and Marcus, AA, or ST) you are going to have problems in coverage. When we get a good balance of blitzers and pass defenders and have the ability to mix the defense up more, then turnovers will come.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

Don't flame me for this.....but here is a possibility.

Excellent post. There are many statements in there that make you wonder if that is exactly what happened last year with the washingtonpost story that surfaced mid season. Very interesting theory. Do you think that maybe Gibbs realized this and started to try and 'right the ship' with all of the non-moves made this offseason with an emphasis placed on stability?

I sure hope so.

[redskins55]

Don't flame me for this.....but here is a possibility.

Maybe Gregg Williams is like Jerry Glanville. He comes in....inspires a previously lazy defense with a rally call...and they kick butt for a while. They play above themselves....they fly all over the field....quite simply, they dominate.

And then as time goes on, he does a few things that everyone on the team sees. He insults and benches Lavar. He lets Pierce and Clark go....he benches Arch. He brings in S. Jackson and the entire unit no longer even practices together. Players and agents ask themselves, "Even if I am great and loyal this season, are they even going to sign me again next season?"

He no longer is looked at as a guy you want on your side--but instead becomes the enemy. Production drops off.....locker rooms explode...and he is finally replaced. He eventually goes to the next franchise and does the same thing all over again.

I hope this isn't the case....but it is exactly what happened with Jerry Glanville. It is exactly what happened to Greggs' mentor, Buddy Ryan.

It is exactly what happens with sales organizations in the real world every single day. Bring in a new manager...stir things up...employees kick butt to impress...everyone is at work on time putting their best foot forward, and then they realize that the manager doesn't even care about them, but rather, only cares about himself. They stop putting forth effort...and the manager is replaced.

I pray to God he isn't following in the steps of his mentor. His coaching style, attitude and career so far might suggest that he is doing exactly that.

We will know for sure this season. Either he picks it up big time....or he is coaching somewhere else next year.

A great insight to a problem I predicted when he first arrived in 04. After I noticed his style of defense I told everyone around me that the scheme wouldn't last here in Washington. Each year it has decreased in production, and last year was the last straw. You will see a different scheme employed by Williams this year, or you will see him ousted as the D coordinator.. He can't afford to play that stubborn blitz happy crap he's done over the last 3 years. We don't have the personnel to create the turnovers needed for it to succeed. ie:( pass rushing end, shut down corners) Sean Taylor has saved Williams butt these past few years, hence the man crush he has on ST. But that ended last year as well..

[CRobi21]

Nor can I my friend. Nor can I.

[McD5]

Excellent post. There are many statements in there that make you wonder if that is exactly what happened last year with the washingtonpost story that surfaced mid season. Very interesting theory. Do you think that maybe Gibbs realized this and started to try and 'right the ship' with all of the non-moves made this offseason with an emphasis placed on stability?

I sure hope so.

Boy I hope so. In the real world, outside of this website, I have been a regional manager for a fortune 100 company for the last nine years. It is a financial services/sales company. It is the oldest and largest financial services company in the country. Although the nfl is certainly unique, I believe that certain management techniques are used with every organization.

In my job, if one of my offices is greatly underperforming, it is usually a managerial problem. And after trying to work with the office, if results are still not apparent, the final move is usually to replace the manager.

The new manager I look for is usually young....a great motivator, and a workhorse. In laymens' terms....a fired up ball buster.

This move ALWAYS results in immediate improvement. Sales guys that were lazy or comfortable change their tune quickly. Guys that used to show up for work at 9 am now are in the office at 8 am. Guys that used to take 90 minute lunch breaks now take 60 minute lunch breaks--and sometimes don't even take lunch.

Everyone picks up their performance when the new guy comes in. Even the most cynical, and oldest of employees will have a good attitude, and usually buy into the program, and at least give the guy a chance. Sales and morale pick up, and the office rebounds quickly.

It isn't until about midway through the second year that I really know what I have in the new manager. It is really easy to see. If the manager is having a problem with a guy in the office that has always been a top performer, ie. Lavar, red flags go up immediately.

If the new manager is now taking more vacations....or isn't working the same hours he did during his first year....this is also a clue as to where his mind is. I can easily find this out by calling down to the office at 8 am on a Wednesday morning, and see who answers the phone. I also listen to what my employees that work under him say. If there is smoke...there is usually a fire.

What I have found...is that either one of two scenarios repeat themselves over and over:

Either the personality of your highly motivated, energetic ball buster has rubbed off wrong on your employees, and he is no longer leading by example as he did when he first began..usually followed by a dropoff in production again....or you have an exceptional manager that is an asset to the organization. If he is the former....a meathead for lack of a better term....I then have to drive down and cut him loose, and begin the hiring process again.

Glanville was the former. He was great getting teams like the Falcons to play for a year. Then he disrespected his players, lost total control, and was replaced. Buddy Ryan the exact same thing. I also think the Giants coach may be the exact same type of person. There are a lot of examples all over the league.

You really can't blame teams for hiring these guys. They always show up when a team has been drastically underperforming. You need them to light a fire under someones' butt. You need someone to go in there and raise hell....someone to knock a few heads around, and to wake up the organization. The problem however, is that often times they take it too far. They don't know how to RELATE to their employees....and all hell breaks loose after a honeymoon period.

I just pray Gregg isn't this guy. I am encouraged by a recent article I read that showed me he might be flexible and willing to adapt. Maybe he won't repeat the mistakes of his mentor, and the mistakes of so many others.

And if this is a real problem....I hope that Joe has already recognized it, and that he is stepping in. It was reported that after the snitch article last season, that Joe finally attended one of his first defensive meetings of the season. That is encouraging to say the least.

:logo:

[Spartacus87]

Don't flame me for this.....but here is a possibility.

You lost me once you mentioned LaVar as a possible reason Williams will fail. Other guys on the team have even hinted at their dislike at LaVar and their appreciation for him being gone.

And benching Archuleta? If anything, that says- I don't care how much we paid you to come here, I regret that, and you're not playing until you stop sucking in coverage. Granted, I still feel like Adam wasn't used correctly, largely due to injuries elsewhere on the defense that changed us into our weak Cover-2 attempt that we don't have the personnel for, but still, Arch couldn't even cover tight ends, something most safeties in the NFL should be able to somewhat do, so it's not like it was all on Williams.

It should also be of note that Jackson has coached the safeties since 2004. Do I like him? Not really. But that article last year also came at a time when we were decimated by injuries and we were on a slippery slope downhill into a cursed season. When things aren't going well, everyone likes to point fingers and come up with explanations, even if they aren't entirely accurate. Especially if the source in question was Archuleta or Shawn Springs, both of whom are on (or were, in Adam's case since he's gone now) rocky grounds with the coaching staff and franchise. I think the accuracy of that article will be validated by the defense this year, but until then, I don't consider that any more truthful than a Peter King or Lenny piece.

Besides, Williams is now opening up his scheme to the talent we have, basing it more around Taylor, Washington, McIntosh, Griffin, etc. Plus whether we like it or not, he's insisting the defensive line is fine for this year, which only sends a good message to his players that he trusts them, as they themselves have said. If they stink again this year, then they can't complain when we draft d-line and get some FA's to replace them next year. But for now, I don't think bringing back the Prodigal Son in Smoot, getting a quiet, strong vet like London Fletcher, and not changing the d-line is hurting Williams in the locker room one bit.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

we had 26 takeaways in 04, 22 in 05, and 12 in 06. 04/5 dont seem that far off, we were ranked 3rd and 9th in yards per game, and our turnovers were pretty similar. 06 was an abomination of a season, forcing 12 turnovers (which i cant believe ISNT a record for least amount of turnovers in a season) is just horrendous. williams last 2 years in buffalo he forced very low turnover numbers as well, but 12 is just downright sad. whatever scheme he was running in 04 and 05 obviously were capable of producing a decent amount of turnovers, hopefully this year we produce more.

i know i get flamed for saying shawn springs isnt that great, but he has forced 2 turnovers in the past 2 seasons. i know INTs isnt a great stat to judge corners by, but those are awful numbers for a #1 corner. he should be producing more picks than that and he doesnt. turnovers are the most important stat for a defense because they completely negate any offensive drive.

[Spartacus87]

we had 26 takeaways in 04, 22 in 05, and 12 in 06. 04/5 dont seem that far off, we were ranked 3rd and 9th in yards per game, and our turnovers were pretty similar. 06 was an abomination of a season, forcing 12 turnovers (which i cant believe ISNT a record for least amount of turnovers in a season) is just horrendous. williams last 2 years in buffalo he forced very low turnover numbers as well, but 12 is just downright sad. whatever scheme he was running in 04 and 05 obviously were capable of producing a decent amount of turnovers, hopefully this year we produce more.

The problem with our scheming in 06 was the horrendous version of the Cover 2 we tried to run out of desperation due to all the injuries we sustained early on. As anyone who watches football these days knows, the Cover 2 is quickly becoming the very trendy base defense for many teams, capable of taking away the big play and containing the run, but it requires good corners who can play the run as well as the pass, a speedy middle linebacker, disciplined safeties with plenty of range, and a fast pressure-creating defensive line.

Our only real starting corner all year was Rogers, everyone else were inadequate guys like Mike Rumph, Kenny Wright, and Ade Jimoh (and I love Jimoh, but he isn't gonna cut it when he's anything higher than a dime back in most cases). Our safeties were Taylor, then Archuleta who can't cover to save his life; Troy Vincent who did an admirable job but is just a step too slow and a bit too fragile anymore; and Vernon Fox who generally isn't starter quality, just a scrappy overachiever. Lemar Marshall lost a step due to his injuries and didn't have the range of previous years or the strength to shed blocks, Marcus Washington had a hip injury, and Holdman was taking a nap on the weakside. Our defensive line was never built for speedy attacking with the exception of the hope for Carter, but he didn't catch on until the end of the year, and by then he was playing alongside green rookies in Golston and Montgomery who couldn't do anything serious enough to draw away the double teams Carter was facing, and the aging Daniels/Wynn on the other side who were injured and just seemed to lack gas in the tank.

Basically, not only did we not have the people required to play a proper Cover 2, but many of our people seeing playing time were battling through injuries at that. Just a total recipe for disaster. It'll be interesting to see who can stay healthy this year (I'm looking at you, Springs/Daniels/Griffin) and how Williams' new looser scheme centered around certain talents will impact our overall defense compared to the previous 3 years.

[McD5]

You lost me once you mentioned LaVar as a possible reason Williams will fail. Other guys on the team have even hinted at their dislike at LaVar and their appreciation for him being gone.

Besides, Williams is now opening up his scheme to the talent we have, basing it more around Taylor, Washington, McIntosh, Griffin, etc. Plus whether we like it or not, he's insisting the defensive line is fine for this year, which only sends a good message to his players that he trusts them, as they themselves have said. If they stink again this year, then they can't complain when we draft d-line and get some FA's to replace them next year. But for now, I don't think bringing back the Prodigal Son in Smoot, getting a quiet, strong vet like London Fletcher, and not changing the d-line is hurting Williams in the locker room one bit.

I don't disagree with a thing you said. And I do think bringing in a Smoot and a Fletcher can only help. I also think Gregg is a little more open minded this season--he has to be. The "my way or the highway" attitude may have been wearing thin.

And like you, I do think Lavar was a little bit of a loose cannon. But I think when you add up how Lavar was benched, treated and then insulted by Dale later, plus the way we let Pierce, Clark and Harris go, added to the way we treated Arch last season--that combined it sends a pretty bad message to the remaining players.

So if you are a multi pro bowl player like Lavar...but you might not do everything 100% like Gregg believes is best--you get benched, and later insulted. If you are solid like Pierce, Clark or Harris....you get traded. Regardless of how good you played. If you are Arch, a player that other d coordinators have had great success with--it doesn't matter. If Gregg doesn't like something--you get benched and traded.

What is really the goal here? I would hope it is to get the best out of our players. To put them in an environment that lets them succeed. Not to bench, insult or trade them. Gregg Williams is not bigger or more important that the success of our team. And if the players believe Gregg thinks he is the most important thing on earth.....it will be reflected in their desire and in their play on the field.

[turbodiesel#44]

we had 26 takeaways in 04, 22 in 05, and 12 in 06. 04/5 dont seem that far off, we were ranked 3rd and 9th in yards per game, and our turnovers were pretty similar. 06 was an abomination of a season, forcing 12 turnovers (which i cant believe ISNT a record for least amount of turnovers in a season) is just horrendous. williams last 2 years in buffalo he forced very low turnover numbers as well, but 12 is just downright sad. whatever scheme he was running in 04 and 05 obviously were capable of producing a decent amount of turnovers, hopefully this year we produce more.

Those '05 numbers illustrate what I am curious about. Even when GWs D is top 5 rated, we only had 22 TAs. That is below average. The Bears had 44 this year. Even the Raiders had 23. That seems to point to more than an underachieving DL, Carlos' hands, bad luck and some bad calls from this season.

I think there may be some aspect of our Defensive philosophy that is not conducive to TAs. But I can't identify it.

[dent19]

Why does his Scheme Kill wins for us......

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Those '05 numbers illustrate what I am curious about. Even when GWs D is top 5 rated, we only had 22 TAs. That is below average. The Bears had 44 this year. Even the Raiders had 23. That seems to point to more than an underachieving DL, Carlos' hands, bad luck and some bad calls from this season.

I think there may be some aspect of our Defensive philosophy that is not conducive to TAs. But I can't identify it.

well we do a lot more blitzing with our LBs/DBs than other teams, which takes them out of plays to make interceptions. if we relied more on our Dline to generate pressure, we might be able to have DBs/LBs intercept the ball more, but pressure from the dline is unheard of around here.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

Now I'll be the first to admit that I'm not anywhere near an expert on this. So I phrase this in more of a question. I know blitzing the house creates pressure and pressure forces erratic decisions and thus makes turnovers. BUT, if you get pressure with your front 4, you have 7 players back to make the interception on that bad throw. If you blitz the house like we do, you get nice pressure and force bad passes and incompletions (see 04 and 05) but if you send 7 on a blitz then theres only 4 waiting back to try and make the play on that erratic throw.

Like I said, I could be totaly wrong. But it seems to me that pressure only leads to interceptions if there is someone there to catch them, otherwise it leads to incompletions.

Front 4 pressure = 7 players LOOKING to capitolize.

7 man blitz pressure = 4 players back TRYING to capitolize.

If I'm wrong, please humbly correct me.

Edit" BLC beat me to it. Ah well:doh:

[Flycoach]

So, what is it? I can't put my finger on it.

I'd say that it has to do with the dline not being any more than average. If we had, say a "good" dline - not even dominating, but just "good" - I bet that that would lead to more pressure on opposing QB's and more TO's.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

06 was an abomination of a season, forcing 12 turnovers (which i cant believe ISNT a record for least amount of turnovers in a season) is just horrendous.

It IS a record, in a 16-game season.

As for why so few turnovers? Here's one clue:

"Please.... take picture... can't... hold on...any....longer...."