Homer: Redskins defense encourages dinking, dunking

[illone]

I think this game is good as any for Orakpo to go off and get multiple sacks.

Nice article, as always.

How you feeling about that Rodgers bet we made?

I like newcastle, cold and fresh:cheers:

[Enter Apotheosis]

"Other than a desperation throw on 4th-and-10 to Texans receiver Andre Johnson and a Hail Mary on the final play of the game in Philly last weekend, opposing offenses are content to take three step drops and get rid of the ball to someone underneath as quickly as possible."

Dinks and Dunks are very effective if you have an accurate QB. The traditinal WCO used the dink and dunk pass as a substitute for the running play. While the Packers OL is improved over last year I think they may be reluctant to let the long pass develop out of concern for the pass rush ability of Orakpo. So, Skins should expect the short pass and will need to defend against it or the Packers will simply march down the field with ease.

The traditional WCO uses the short game to stretch the field horizontally and set up both the run and deeper passes. It basically made a point of emphasizing a dimension of the field that wasn't particularly well-utilized at the time and wound up being key to defeating some of the prevailing defenses of that era (e.g., the 46). It certainly didn't pass in lieu of the run by any means. Hell, Walsh's 9ers routinely had a top 10 rushing offense.

[70th Week]

I read the title half asleep and I could have sworn it read, " Redskins defense encourages drinking, driving.." I thought to myself, "well, duh.." lol..

[mossomo]

I read the threat title as 'Redskins defense encourages drinking, drunking' and nodded in agreement

Funny thing - me too.

[Pedro]

Carlos should be on their #1 WR, Hall should move around to where we think he'll be near a ball in the air on any given play.

I like the idea of trying to discourage teams throwing to their #1 and Carlos is pretty good at that. If that can be achieved more chances for Hall to intercept, which I also like. Other than that we need to be careful about being too conservative on D. I can see the effectiveness of keeping everything in front of you and hitting hard, but then I've also seen it wear our D down. Different mind set from a different coach now though. If we had at least one huge ILB I'd like it more. Lorenzo hasn't played there yet...

We know Carlos won't catch many that come his way and yet the earth still spins giving the appearance of the sun rising every day. I like his confidence, the guy seams happy and he's playing well. Good article as usual Murf, thanks.

[Frostx08]

Perhaps my eyes are deceiving me...but I remember Sam Bradford and Kolb having PLENTY of time in the pocket

That...and I'm not so sure this will work against Peyton Manning

In the Eagles game I think I remember them saying during the Eagles game that the Skins have allowed more drives of 10 plays or more. That will inevitably lead to scoring....which we haven't stopped. The dinking and dunking have actually been working on us...it's not like it's been particularly effective.

If anything....it gives our offense less opportunities. What you're essentially expecting from the offense is for them to score on every drive and although that's great, it's not idealistic. I'm not so sure I'm fond of this plan. A defense that can get off the field gives the offense more shots to score

[tiger187126]

all these people bashing our defense obviously didn't watch last year. i think JC ended up being a scapegoat for the defense too, and hid some of shortcomings of the defense. oh look a top 10 defense and a bad offense, must be the offense.

in reality we had a defense that constantly gave up the big play or drive with the game on the line. brandon marshall and desean jackson were open deep all day last year. game on the line and need a stop? last year's defense wasn't up to the task.

meanwhile this year we have two wins (already at half of our production last year) and our defense is the reason for both of them.

put aside the rankings, our offense is not miles ahead of what it's been in the past, so our defense must be doing something right.

[flexxskins]

Hey murf, first of all great article.

Secondly, so aren't we basically back to that "bend don't break" type of defence again in your opinion?

[AllBusiness]

Wait a MINUTE!!!!

Rogers guaranteed WHAT?!?!?!?!

[authentic]

Good article again Murf. I think a major adjustment that may have gone unnoticed (btwn the St. Louis to the Philly game) is that Haslet decided to allow the corners to play more 'Man' coverage. IMO, the thing that killed them against the Rams was when Bradford went 'dink and dunk", but we stayed in zone coverage.

[Rexx1240]

Great article Murf.. Really hope 'Los walks like he talks this Sun & for the rest of the season.................AND his career for that matter!!

[addicted]

Attitude adjustment. Great article. The defense is starting to come together and is just taking time to gel as expected. Won't be surprised if the defense takes a punch in the mouth this game but as long as we keep playing more physical and Hanyesworth plays like he's capable this will continue to improve. Can't believe hands of stone made that guarantee, that shows some swagger which is needed. Rogers playing big will be key how far up the rankings we can go as a team. I hope he's right

[pjfootballer]

Perhaps my eyes are deceiving me...but I remember Sam Bradford and Kolb having PLENTY of time in the pocket

That...and I'm not so sure this will work against Peyton Manning

In the Eagles game I think I remember them saying during the Eagles game that the Skins have allowed more drives of 10 plays or more. That will inevitably lead to scoring....which we haven't stopped. The dinking and dunking have actually been working on us...it's not like it's been particularly effective.

If anything....it gives our offense less opportunities. What you're essentially expecting from the offense is for them to score on every drive and although that's great, it's not idealistic. I'm not so sure I'm fond of this plan. A defense that can get off the field gives the offense more shots to score

I want to say 1) good article Murf

and 2) I agree with you Frostx.

I really think we need to blitz more. Against the Cowboys and Texans, we blitzed too much without alot of sacks and I think Haslett got gunshy. Against the Rams and Eagles, we didn't blitz enought. Somehow Haslett needs to find a middle ground.

I think the plan to pressure Romo sits to pee was the right plan. He gets flustered.

The plan against Shaub should have been less blitzing and use more multiple coverages to confuse Shaub and the WRs. Wrong plan used.

The plan againts Bradford should have been blitzes from all angles and keep the rookie guessing. Wrong plan used.

Against Vick and the Eagles it was fine to limit them to the dink and dunk because blitzing against Vick could mean a long scramble or long pass. But when Kolb came in the game, we should have been in his face.

[NewCliche21]

Murf,

Took a codeine for a massive headache. I think that your article did a better job of relieving it than the pill.

Thank you.

[TheismannQuote]

I can deal with the strategy but it all falls to pieces if our secondary fails to tackle. We've seen DHall making some good wrap-ups so far this year and Carlos is a descent tackling corner. My biggest concern is Kareem Moore's tackling ability. With Doughty...well, we all know his limitations, but Moore either gets caught flat-footed and whiffs on a tackle or does the flying-superman across the field. Hopefully these past couple of games are more indicative of him coming off of an injury...but this style of defense needs a sure tackling safety net.

[Ryman of the North]

The problem is that we are letting teams nickel and dime us to death and then still taking shots at key times (houston). Depending on the other guy to screw up is foolish.

We blitzed too often early on and when we got caught we paid big, so haslett got gunshy, we NEED middle ground. we need to be aggressive but we need to stay sound doing it.

Last season we didnt take chances very often because lets be honest our offence put us in a hole. we had a passive scheme that was very good at limiting yardage but broke down after being on the field too much. How is allowing teams to move the ball any better?

Playerwise we have comparable players to most of the best 4-3 defences, we just need an upgrade at one or two spots, however when you look at 3-4 teams we need need players across the board to even be close.

[Oldfan]

Stop the run, prevent the big play, give up the dink and dunk. Let the opponent play ball control. We haven't seen that strategy in burgundy and gold since Greg Blache.

[Est.1974]

Stop the run, prevent the big play, give up the dink and dunk. Let the opponent play ball control. We haven't seen that strategy in burgundy and gold since Greg Blache.

That makes me think of the Patriots sticking 50 on us about 3 years back. Good teams will screw you.

[Oldfan]

That makes me think of the Patriots sticking 50 on us about 3 years back. Good teams will screw you.

Yep.

Actually that strategy works fine against an offense like ours or the Eagles, not against Green Bay's. The Pack will dink and dunk you for 40 minutes of ball control if you let them.

Chicago has been playing that syle of defense for years. That's where Blache learned it.

[pjfootballer]

I want to say 1) good article Murf

and 2) I agree with you Frostx.

I really think we need to blitz more. Against the Cowboys and Texans, we blitzed too much without alot of sacks and I think Haslett got gunshy. Against the Rams and Eagles, we didn't blitz enought. Somehow Haslett needs to find a middle ground.

I think the plan to pressure Romo sits to pee was the right plan. He gets flustered.

The plan against Shaub should have been less blitzing and use more multiple coverages to confuse Shaub and the WRs. Wrong plan used.

The plan againts Bradford should have been blitzes from all angles and keep the rookie guessing. Wrong plan used.

Against Vick and the Eagles it was fine to limit them to the dink and dunk because blitzing against Vick could mean a long scramble or long pass. But when Kolb came in the game, we should have been in his face.

The problem is that we are letting teams nickel and dime us to death and then still taking shots at key times (houston). Depending on the other guy to screw up is foolish.

We blitzed too often early on and when we got caught we paid big, so haslett got gunshy, we NEED middle ground. we need to be aggressive but we need to stay sound doing it.

Last season we didnt take chances very often because lets be honest our offence put us in a hole. we had a passive scheme that was very good at limiting yardage but broke down after being on the field too much. How is allowing teams to move the ball any better?

Playerwise we have comparable players to most of the best 4-3 defences, we just need an upgrade at one or two spots, however when you look at 3-4 teams we need need players across the board to even be close.

Copycat.:pfft:

[NewCliche21]

I want to say 1) good article Murf

and 2) I agree with you Frostx.

I really think we need to blitz more. Against the Cowboys and Texans, we blitzed too much without alot of sacks and I think Haslett got gunshy. Against the Rams and Eagles, we didn't blitz enought. Somehow Haslett needs to find a middle ground.

I think the plan to pressure Romo sits to pee was the right plan. He gets flustered.

The plan against Shaub should have been less blitzing and use more multiple coverages to confuse Shaub and the WRs. Wrong plan used.

The plan againts Bradford should have been blitzes from all angles and keep the rookie guessing. Wrong plan used.

Against Vick and the Eagles it was fine to limit them to the dink and dunk because blitzing against Vick could mean a long scramble or long pass. But when Kolb came in the game, we should have been in his face.

Again, on codeine, but this is brilliantly put. Just the wrong plans, not the wrong ability.

[Ryman of the North]

Yep.

Actually that strategy works fine against an offense like ours or the Eagles, not Green Bay's. Chicago has been playing that syle of defense for years. That's where Blache learned it.

exactly, not every team in the league is dependant ONLY on big plays. it worked on dalass because genuis boy garret wanted to hang 50 on us and not just win so he abandoned the run. It wont work on well coached and solid offencive teams, lets be honest Philly at the moment has qb issues and depends on big plays and even with Kolb they started just throwing short stuff .

[pjfootballer]

II really think we need to blitz more. Against the Cowboys and Texans, we blitzed too much without alot of sacks and I think Haslett got gunshy. Against the Rams and Eagles, we didn't blitz enought. Somehow Haslett needs to find a middle ground.

I think the plan to pressure Romo sits to pee was the right plan. He gets flustered.

The plan against Shaub should have been less blitzing and use more multiple coverages to confuse Shaub and the WRs. Wrong plan used.

The plan againts Bradford should have been blitzes from all angles and keep the rookie guessing. Wrong plan used.

Against Vick and the Eagles it was fine to limit them to the dink and dunk because blitzing against Vick could mean a long scramble or long pass. But when Kolb came in the game, we should have been in his face.

The problem is that we are letting teams nickel and dime us to death and then still taking shots at key times (houston). Depending on the other guy to screw up is foolish.

We blitzed too often early on and when we got caught we paid big, so haslett got gunshy, we NEED middle ground. we need to be aggressive but we need to stay sound doing it.

Last season we didnt take chances very often because lets be honest our offence put us in a hole. we had a passive scheme that was very good at limiting yardage but broke down after being on the field too much. How is allowing teams to move the ball any better?

Playerwise we have comparable players to most of the best 4-3 defences, we just need an upgrade at one or two spots, however when you look at 3-4 teams we need need players across the board to even be close.

Copycat! :pfft:

[Ryman of the North]

thats because you are completely correct. lol

he was blitz happy early on, got burned, got gunshy and stopped blitzing. part of the blitzing was against Mike Vick you are better off staying completely sound but there is no excuse for not blitzing Kolb, none.

[jasjhughes]

Every time I see this thread title, I misread it "Redskins defense encourages drinking." It sure does.