Mahons21 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 This is another thread about Albert Haynesworth, but I believe it deserves its own thread. I apologize if I was incorrect and this thread should be merged. -Now the disclaimer is over I can get to the heart of the thread. So we got big Al possibly the best defensive player in the league, but will we use him properly? -Recently I read an article posted by JLC I believe, it was one of the WP reporters, that quoted the Titans d-line coach discussing AH's insane ability, so much so that, he had to let AH just due what he wanted. Essentially he followed no scheme, he just did what he felt was necessary, and exceeded beyond any hope. -The skins however, seem to really want their players to act according to scheme, rather than letting the player use their own abilities to their advantage. -We bring in Portis, but we make him run in between the tackles rather than putting him in space where he accelled. -We bring in Lloyd he doesnt show enough heart, and we bench him...I still am not over that decision(after seeing him play in CHI) -We draft Arrington a LB who more or less plays on instinct, though does so very well. We get angry with his inability to play in a system bench/cut him(another dumb move I believe) -We bring in on of the lightest DE's in the league, and put him at a run stopping position? That just isn't smart, and word on the street it we thought about moving him to SAM, whewthank goodness that didn't happen. -So here is my worry, are we get just unleash this beast that is AH, or are we going to try and tame him and inhibit his abilities, my hope is the former but juding my recent history the latter may be our future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdiamond Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I think what you're getting at is players coming in to our "system" might not be the best fit and then don't really excel... I think it's a valid point. Kind of like the opposite of the Denver teams in the past just plugging in running backs. Personally I've always kinda thought AH was a bit over rated and was kinda hoping we didn't sign him (especially after I saw the contract we gave him). But I hope he succeeds here for obvious reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel25 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 i think i got a different interpretation. i don't think he meant he allowed haynesworth to freelance. i think he meant he stopped trying to get him to use traditional technique. i think he followed the scheme, but just forgot about hand placement and all that stuff. i could be wrong, but that's what i thought he meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGREENHULK Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 i think i got a different interpretation. i don't think he meant he allowed haynesworth to freelance. i think he meant he stopped trying to get him to use traditional technique. i think he followed the scheme, but just forgot about hand placement and all that stuff. i could be wrong, but that's what i thought he meant. I agree Tennessee is a very scheme driven defense..I also doubt Albet was allowed to freelance. Why try to teach a caged animal how to sip tea...just let the beast out on game days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGhost Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I agree Tennessee is a very scheme driven defense..I also doubt Albet was allowed to freelance. Why try to teach a caged animal how to sip tea...just let the beast out on game days... didn't exactly work out with lavar.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel25 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 didn't exactly work out with lavar.... the difference with lavar is he wasn't where he was supposed to be. it would have been different if lavar were in the right place, but the coaches always wanted the proper technique for a tackle or to be in a proper stance before the play, or run a certain way. not sayin that coaches shouldn't teach that, but i can understand lettin it go when you have a player with that much talent. but talent doesn't do too much for you if you're out of position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllBusiness Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Lavar was a victim. A victim of political agenda. The man truly was a beast. A beast that was never allowed to roam as beasts roam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I disagree completely, Blache runs a very simple system where he puts all the work on the players. He's been quoted as saying he likes his players to not think while they play. He wants the players to just react. I think Haynesworth if healthy will be a great addition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideshow24 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 If you believe Blache, and I do, he says he will adapt the defense TO the players. Even mentions that his defense won't be fully crafted until after the draft so he will know what players he has. Q: Will you adjust the defense around Albert? A: “We always try and build our defenses around our players. I’ve always said we don’t try and do Wal-Mart suits. We try and tailor-make our suits. So what we do is when you add a talent to this degree, you adjust the [defense] to fit him. So our schemes will fit him, but also the rest of our guys. It will fit all of our players. “Right now, I have an idea and a concept of what it will be, but when the draft is done, we will have all the pieces in place. You will know exactly where you want to go with it. At this time, we realize that we have something that we haven’t had before. “[Haynesworth] is a special player--the likeness that he has to Reggie White. I was in Green Bay when we brought Reggie over in free agency. The same thing [happened]. Everybody made a bunch of noise about how it was too much money for a defensive lineman. [White] came in and he fit in well. He transformed our defense to a very, very good defense and in a couple of years he took them to the Super Bowl. “Hopefully it won’t take us a couple of years. I just think that he is a very good piece. He is a very good fit to a group that is already pretty darn good. I think that he may be the piece that can help take us over the top.” http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Blache__Defense_Will__Adjust__To_Fit_Haynesworth_32611.jsp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel25 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Lavar was a victim. A victim of political agenda. The man truly was a beast. A beast that was never allowed to roam as beasts roam. i actually agree wit that. i really think we shoulda went to a 3 - 4 just because of him. the man had 11 sacks one year by playin DE on 3rd downs. imagine if all he had to do was get after the QB every play. we messed up when we let him do what he wanted. we shoulda only told him to do one thing at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan44 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I think what you're getting at is players coming in to our "system" might not be the best fit and then don't really excel... . many times it has been the system itself that didn't fit...more than the players.. bad Qbs make more than just themselves look bad I could care less about guys like Arrington who could play.. was talented ..but far more worried about hearing his own name than buying-in to any system in the end LaVarr was dinged and he didn't last a 5 1/2 games in the Meadowlands after missing 15 games over his last 2 yrs w/ the Skins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePreciating Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 -The skins however, seem to really want their players to act according to scheme, rather than letting the player use their own abilities to their advantage. -We bring in Portis, but we make him run in between the tackles rather than putting him in space where he accelled. -We bring in Lloyd he doesnt show enough heart, and we bench him...I still am not over that decision(after seeing him play in CHI) 1. Interior defensive tackle in a 4-3 scheme doesn't have a whole lot of scheme in it. I'm sure AH executed the occasional gap stunt in Tennessee. 2. What? Portis broke the single season rushing record between the tackles. We brought in Saunders to give us more sweeps and swings, and Portis dropped off dramatically. 3. Lloyd is still a bum. Two good games in Chi-town does not a good receiver make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePreciating Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 i actually agree wit that. i really think we shoulda went to a 3 - 4 just because of him. the man had 11 sacks one year by playin DE on 3rd downs. imagine if all he had to do was get after the QB every play. we messed up when we let him do what he wanted. we shoulda only told him to do one thing at a time. Why go to the Giants then? I'm pretty sure Lavar had no interest in a 3-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdiamond Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Lloyd has never been a good receiver. What he's good at is making one spectacular catch per game. B/c of this he would usually get a spot on SportsCenter, thus making people think he were actually any good. I mean he never topped 50 receptions in a season. Good riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkFan8 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Your second biggest worry should be the NNT you're about to get Probably should fix your title up and make it more descriptive Regarding your OP, I have faith that Blatche will let him do his thing. I'll be most interested to see if we blitz any more than we did last year with a real presence in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel25 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Why go to the Giants then? I'm pretty sure Lavar had no interest in a 3-4. well i never said he wanted to, i was just sayin that's my oppinion of him. but i think he did say he wanted to stay in the nfc east to play us twice, and couldn't see himself wit the cowboys. so that just leaves two 4-3 teams. now that you mention it, i think he said somethin in a recent article about how part of him wishes he coulda played in his home town of pittsburgh, and how he think he woulda excelled as a 3 - 4 linebacker. but that was after he retired. i'll try to find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahons21 Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 If you believe Blache, and I do, he says he will adapt the defense TO the players. Even mentions that his defense won't be fully crafted until after the draft so he will know what players he has.Q: Will you adjust the defense around Albert? A: “We always try and build our defenses around our players. I’ve always said we don’t try and do Wal-Mart suits. We try and tailor-make our suits. So what we do is when you add a talent to this degree, you adjust the [defense] to fit him. So our schemes will fit him, but also the rest of our guys. It will fit all of our players. “Right now, I have an idea and a concept of what it will be, but when the draft is done, we will have all the pieces in place. You will know exactly where you want to go with it. At this time, we realize that we have something that we haven’t had before. “[Haynesworth] is a special player--the likeness that he has to Reggie White. I was in Green Bay when we brought Reggie over in free agency. The same thing [happened]. Everybody made a bunch of noise about how it was too much money for a defensive lineman. [White] came in and he fit in well. He transformed our defense to a very, very good defense and in a couple of years he took them to the Super Bowl. “Hopefully it won’t take us a couple of years. I just think that he is a very good piece. He is a very good fit to a group that is already pretty darn good. I think that he may be the piece that can help take us over the top.” http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Blache__Defense_Will__Adjust__To_Fit_Haynesworth_32611.jsp -Why didn't we do this with Jason Taylor then who was 2 seasons removed from dpoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Every player has to play within a system. Nobody truly roams free any more. The game is too fast now, teams are filled with super athletic guys who can run a 40 yard dash in four and a half seconds. Discipline is an important part of the game, and our defensive system and running game is working because we have consistently fielded top defenses and running games. I don't understand what your basis is. Also, Brandon Lloyd wasn't good in Chicago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justsomeguy Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Brandon Lloyd wasn't good anywhere period. Including him as a rapper. With a talent like Haynesworth I am less interested in how we scheme with him. I am more interested in what everyone else will be forced to do as far as scheming against him. I can't wait for the season to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Lavar was a victim. A victim of political agenda. The man truly was a beast. A beast that was never allowed to roam as beasts roam. :violin: I'd like another order of revisionist history with fries please..... You know why the Skins always got burned when the bootleg was run against us in the redzone?? Cause your boy Lavar wasn't taking care of his responsibilities on his side of the field. Lavar had all the talent in the world but either didn't have the brain to realize that potential or his ego was too big to let that talent be coached. Cry me a river........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahons21 Posted March 11, 2009 Author Share Posted March 11, 2009 Every player has to play within a system. Nobody truly roams free any more. The game is too fast now, teams are filled with super athletic guys who can run a 40 yard dash in four and a half seconds. Discipline is an important part of the game, and our defensive system and running game is working because we have consistently fielded top defenses and running games. I don't understand what your basis is.Also, Brandon Lloyd wasn't good in Chicago... -My basis is we put Jason Taylor a pass rusher in run stopping position, even thought about him at SAM. We consistently bring in players that perform well in other systems and rather than allow them to use their abilities we tend to try and make them form to our system. Taylor is an example and so is Portis, I know he broke the single season rushing record but the guy is meant to make plays in space, he had 3 straight 1500+ yds in denver doing so. We sign Adam Archuleta a big guy and move him to FS rather then putting Sean at FS? That is just dumb, we get players and don't put them where they accell. -Only time will tell, how AH will do in our system, but it was just a question I was posing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahons21 Posted March 11, 2009 Author Share Posted March 11, 2009 :violin:I'd like another order of revisionist history with fries please..... You know why the Skins always got burned when the bootleg was run against us in the redzone?? Cause your boy Lavar wasn't taking care of his responsibilities on his side of the field. Lavar had all the talent in the world but either didn't have the brain to realize that potential or his ego was too big to let that talent be coached. Cry me a river........ -Yet you forget the play in the redzone where Lavar leaps the LOS on the on 1 and stop the RB for what like a 2 yard loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 -Yet you forget the play in the redzone where Lavar leaps the LOS on the on 1 and stop the RB for what like a 2 yard loss. How many times did he do that and miss and the rb still scored?? Plenty. Million dollar talent,nickel head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinLifer Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Lavar was a victim. A victim of political agenda. The man truly was a beast. A beast that was never allowed to roam as beasts roam. Man, I hope that I just totally missed the boat on your sarcasm here. LaVar never realized that clapping near a man that someone else just tackled doesn't make you LT. He never realized that he had to play in concert with 10 other guys. He never realized that, for all his world of ability, not every play was destined to be a Steve Sabol classic. He realizes now, though, that 31 other NFL teams know this stuff. He realizes it as a sub-par analyst for the Comcast Redskins show, not on an NFL roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x96bryan10 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 1st just wanna say that I Love this Site!!! :point2sky After consistently checking out this website (almost daily) for the past 3 years (no joke) That finally i've been able to have my account activated....had wireless so no home email address....Thank you to all the members who i sent emails to asking for help on signing up... i recieved 0 replies :doh: 2nd I am also one of the people who believe that albert hayneworth while being a dominant force on defense isnt the "elite" player that the medcia brought him up to be. (Well before we signed him anyways funny how everyones opinion did a quick 180 ) As far as Arrington goes it still blows my mind as to how fast he went from awesome on the field ...to being cut...to being out of the league completely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.