The Haslett Files (Greg Blache vs. Jim Haslett, Historically bad defensive pace, etc.)

[Morneblade]

I think Blache's 4-3 was fundamentally sound(other than the mistake of having Landry play FS).

Blache's problem was the lack of will to be aggressive.

Think about this on passing downs:

Rak and Carter at the ends

Fat Al and whoever out of Kemo, Bryant. or Daniels at DT

Landry in this year's position as SS/rover

Fletcher Rocky and let's say Alexander or Wilson at SLB

You couple that with Haslett's aggression and are you going to tell me that group can't pressure the QB?

That is the jist here. That formation with the people we have is far superior than what we can field right now in a 3-4. And it would stop the run.

[SJValleySkinz]

Our front 7 (other then Orakpo and Carriker) is filled with players that are either not talented enough, or talented but miscast in the system. comparing Hazelett to Blache is moot and completely unreasonable because you cannot, no matter how you want to spin it, run a 3-4 without a talented front 7. It's like running a dinner without hamburgers. All those stats the OP presented are completely meaningless because no coach could get by in the 34 without certain pieces. 100 times out 100, nobody can succeed in the 3-4 without at the very minimum two above average outside linebackers and a dominant nose tackle.

[TD Riggo]

I have the only stats that I need. Until we have more data, this thread is pointless.

4-12

3-3

We have been "in it" in every game so far. Even against Peyton Manning.

Get back to me in 9 weeks.

[Skins Wingman]

I have the only stats that I need. Until we have more data, this thread is pointless.

4-12

3-3

We have been "in it" in every game so far. Even against Peyton Manning.

Get back to me in 9 weeks.

thats the only thing that matters my friends.. wins and losses

[VRIEL1]

Going back and readin it myself, no, it does not come off like you are agreeing with him. Due to the fact that you brought up the Saints defense (creating turnover but giving up yards) it looks like you are defending that Haslett is fielding a good defense as opposed to one that maybe isnt so good, which was his premise. So its actually very easy to see whey Kdawg would take it as what he did, Because that is exactly what it looks like to me. You calling him a whiner for saying that myabe Haslett hasnt been doing a great job, but cause you can win a SB with the same kind of defence (give up tons of yards, creat tunrovers).

And his sentence is correct, yours is actually incorrect as you are not supposed to use a "," before "and". Unless you misunderstood where for we're (we are) then your sentence structure makes more sence.

Ok, when I read KDawgs original post I took it that he was trying to defend Haslett by posting stats between Blache and Haslett. Some areas were similar some way off.

I think we all know Haslett's defense is giving up yardage like it's halloween candy. Thats a given. The media and fans are talking about all the yardage opponants are putting up on the Skins due to Hasletts defense. So going back and reading my statement telling KDawg to simply forget about posting stats and just throw up that the Saints went to the SB doing the same exact thing the Skins are doing now.... letting opposing teams gain a lot of yardage on them is not a bad thing after all.

You basically confirmed exactly what I was talking about. I mentioned the Saints cause they had the same issue's were having. Which is what I though KDawg was trying to prove that Haslett's defense is really not as bad as every one thinks and not too far off from Blache's in many catagories.

I guess I could have said "KDawg, all you have to do is tell the whinners to look at last yrs Saints." Does that make everyone feel better that I reworded it even though I thought it was kinda obvious since we all are talking about the same issue's..... Haslett and the yardage?

[VRIEL1]

This statement is why I thought he was defending Haslett....

Total Analysis

One thing that this defense is MUCH better at this year than it was the last two years is our physicality and turnover production. It's ridiculous how much better the Haslett defense is in comparison when speaking about these things. This defense also seems to have heart, the Blache defenses seemed to lack that killer instinct. I can honestly say that Haslett has done a great job in bringing Captial Punishment to DC.

Going back and reading it again at one point it looks like KDawg is saying Blache's defense didn't give up as much yrds which is a true statement. But then in his analysis he sounds like he's saying "hey guys although the stats don't show it the team is actually playing better and with more heart. Thats how I took it. Pardon me if he was trying to slam Haslett. I guess then I am pointing out KDawg if he did that. But keep in mind all I said was stop complaining and enjoy the game I didn't call him a moron.

[TD Riggo]

thats the only thing that matters my friends.. wins and losses

Not only that, but at this point we are 6 weeks into a brand new offense and defense. And we only have to get 1 more win in the next 10 weeks to equal the "success" we had in the second year of a system as we had last year! I'd say that we are already successful, barring a complete implosion and 9 game losing streak!

[illone]

Great research, thanks for posting it.

The Skins had a decent defense the past few years, but not a great defense despite the top 10 ranking that many fans fell back on.

I agree that the aggressive style is great, but when the coach is playing mind games with the best player and doesn't have the correct ingredients to bake a 34 defense, it makes for a frustrating season to say the least.

I am resigned to the fact that the Skins will be in most of the games they play and it will take effort from all three phases in order to get wins. no longer will the team be able to lean on the defnse like they did in the past.

:2cents:

[Mania]

Why don't you look at the level of competition the two teams played in 2009 and 2010. Last years doesn't compare to this years @ all.

[KDawg]

I have the only stats that I need. Until we have more data, this thread is pointless.

4-12

3-3

We have been "in it" in every game so far. Even against Peyton Manning.

Get back to me in 9 weeks.

How about reading the thread and understanding my point. It's not that Blache is better than Haslett, or Haslett is better than Blache. It's to combat the notion that Blache's defenses would have given up points where Haslett's hasn't. It wouldn't have. The rest is a talking point, which again, I clearly said can change. Come on, people. You don't have to agree with me on the topic, but at least come into the thread willing to talk football, not give me a lecture about how its too early when I've already mentioned it was early in the year.

[Hubbs]

We're better in points now, worse in yards, worse in pass yards, worse in pass TD, better in picks, worse in rush yards, worse in rush TD, better in turnovers.

Yes, by all means, let's stop listening to the guy who gives up yards instead of points. Yards win games, baby! Points don't! That's why the Steelers beat the Texans a few years back when the Steelers gained over 400 yards and the Texans gained, and I'm not making this up, less than 100. The Steelers won. Except, um... wait... somehow the Texans won... that's weird.

[KDawg]

Yes, by all means, let's stop listening to the guy who gives up yards instead of points. Yards win games, baby! Points don't! That's why the Steelers beat the Texans a few years back when the Steelers gained over 400 yards and the Texans gained, and I'm not making this up, less than 100. The Steelers won. Except, um... wait... somehow the Texans won... that's weird.

Part of my problem with the way you argue is the air of superiority you're throwing around with your sarcasm. If you want to talk football, I'm game. But leave that out.

[netkrazed]

I just have to say one thing...

With Blache, we were in the top 10 defense for 2 years. With Haslett, even we're only into 6 games, we're near the pit among 32 teams.

[Hubbs]

Part of my problem with the way you argue is the air of superiority you're throwing around with your sarcasm. If you want to talk football, I'm game. But leave that out.

Yes, I have a sarcasm problem. I understand this. It's something I would call one of my flaws. But once you get past the sarcasm, exactly what part of what I'm saying do you disagree with? That we should strive to give up points instead of yards?

[Hubbs]

I just have to say one thing...

With Blache, we were in the top 10 defense for 2 years. With Haslett, even we're only into 6 games, we're near the pit among 32 teams.

Yes, that damn pit with its ranking by yards. If only we could find another ranking.

[netkrazed]

Yes, that damn pit with its ranking by yards. If only we could find another ranking.

Yardage is the main component of how D is measured. More yards the opponent have, more times they are on OUR side of the real estate. Less they have, less they have chance to score. Simple as that.

[KDawg]

Yes, I have a sarcasm problem. I understand this. It's something I would call one of my flaws. But once you get past the sarcasm, exactly what part of what I'm saying do you disagree with? That we should strive to give up points instead of yards?

Bend but don't break defenses have a tendency to break. Ours has. Three times this year. We've also succeeded in stopping the other team three times. I'm not comfortable with a 50% rate on a bend but don't break defense. It feels more like a bend but sometimes break defense. That's the problem with giving up a lot of yards. It eventually breaks.

[Darth Tater]

Blache's 2008 defense was pretty much as good as it was going to get. The 2009 drop was predictable once he went away from what he did best and started using his defensive line to make the big play in the passing game. Further, his defense could not create turnovers. Given that turnover opportunities this year and last year are about the same, it is obvious that putting our guys into position to take advantage of them is often done by putting us in position to give up the big play. This defense does, however, have many things that it can do better without surrendering the ability to take advantage of turnover opportunities while Blache's defense proved it could not do a better job at taking advantage of TO opportunities without surrendering the big play.

[netkrazed]

Bend but don't break defenses have a tendency to break. Ours has. Three times this year. We've also succeeded in stopping the other team three times. I'm not comfortable with a 50% rate on a bend but don't break defense. It feels more like a bend but sometimes break defense. That's the problem with giving up a lot of yards. It eventually breaks.

I agree with ya totally.

Started with Nolan Ryan and still exists.

[netkrazed]

I have the only stats that I need. Until we have more data, this thread is pointless.

4-12

3-3

We have been "in it" in every game so far. Even against Peyton Manning.

Get back to me in 9 weeks.

We're in it every game this season because the other teams constantly beat themselves. We're not going to get this lucky from here and out. I feel very fortunate that our team is 3-3 right now. There's plenty room for improvement and hopefully it starts this week at Chicago.

[Hubbs]

Yardage is the main component of how D is measured. More yards the opponent have, more times they are on OUR side of the real estate. Less they have, less they have chance to score. Simple as that.

So they'll be able to attempt 52-yard field goals more often. Somehow, I'm okay with that.

Bend but don't break defenses have a tendency to break. Ours has. Three times this year.

And it also hasn't three times. Perhaps we should examine why it broke, which oddly enough has tended to happen when we haven't stopped opposing quarterbacks. "A-ha," one might say. Well what's the best way to stop opposing quarterbacks? The best way might not work every time, but unless you think Greg Blache's defenses were the best we could hope for, we'd better figure out what the best actually is. Maybe the best only works 50% of the time. The other guys get paid, too. Maybe 50% of the time is better than 40% of the time.

We've also succeeded in stopping the other team three times. I'm not comfortable with a 50% rate on a bend but don't break defense. It feels more like a bend but sometimes break defense. That's the problem with giving up a lot of yards. It eventually breaks.

So let's figure out if anything will work more than 50% of the time. And let's make sure we figure out whether or not most of the times that the defense breaks, the offense will also work big-time. Sure seem to be a lot of coincidences in that regard, no?

[KDawg]

So they'll be able to attempt 52-yard field goals more often. Somehow, I'm okay with that.

Keep in mind that this is the NFL, not college football. It's also the year 2010, kickers have gotten better each and every year that this league has existed. Statistically speaking, Shaun Suisham was better than Mark Moseley. 52 yarders are routinely made in this league. Kickers this season have made 60% of 50+ yard field goals. Crosby was 2/2 before he missed that one. I'd prefer they didn't even get the chance to kick it, to be honest. Had that been the first time they broke down at the end of a game I'd be more willing to give the benefit of the doubt. However, we were a bad call (if they didn't call that hold on Rak, like they haven't several times this year) from losing the Dallas game and we couldn't stop Houston from driving... Or Philly. But we held against Indy and gave our offense a shot, and Landry stopped Green Bay on the second play of their final drive in OT. That's a 40% hit rate on stopping opponents on their final drive to win the game, and that's not counting the drive that set up the Crosby missed field goal. (That's holding a team to a 3 and out, or even less than 8 plays.) You're really okay with that?

And it also hasn't three times.

I said as much. But it came pretty close in all three of those

Perhaps we should examine why it broke, which oddly enough has tended to happen when we haven't stopped opposing quarterbacks. "A-ha," one might say. Well what's the best way to stop opposing quarterbacks?

This is proving my point. We can't stop opposing quarterbacks, remember that yard stat that you deem unimportant? Yeah, they're gashing us in that department. 32nd in the league.

The best way might not work every time, but unless you think Greg Blache's defenses were the best we could hope for, we'd better figure out what the best actually is. Maybe the best only works 50% of the time. The other guys get paid, too. Maybe 50% of the time is better than 40% of the time.

Ironic because we've stopped opponents on their final drive 40% of the time. But I'd imagine your reply is going to be "better 40% of the time than 30% of the time" which my rebuttal will be, "Yes, and 30 is better than 20, that doesn't make it a good rate".

So let's figure out if anything will work more than 50% of the time. And let's make sure we figure out whether or not most of the times that the defense breaks, the offense will also work big-time. Sure seem to be a lot of coincidences in that regard, no?

That would be ideal. I don't think you've been following this thread closely, the offense is an issue. I've posted numbers that prove that in this very thread. But this offense is better than the offense we've had the last two seasons, but not necessarily in the 4th quarter. We're allowing 4.5 points per game in the fourth quarter and scoring just 2.1 points. Neither is the sign of a juggernaut in the fourth.

[Oldfan]

I think the points per game is probably a direct correlation to the ineptitude of the previous offenses. Blache's defenses got next no help when it came to points scored for them or field position. Shanny's offense moves the ball which helps field position (and consequently allows more yards to be gained) and scores more points.

If you were to check the stats, I'll bet you will find that Zorn's offense did a much better job of ball control and TOP than our current offense. That's what his offense was designed to do. This year's offense is getting its yardage with big passing plays, but has not done well in third-down conversions and moving the chains.

[Oldfan]

Yardage is the main component of how D is measured. More yards the opponent have, more times they are on OUR side of the real estate. Less they have, less they have chance to score. Simple as that.

The yardage ranking is a poor way to grade a defense. The points ranking is also deceptive. The problem is that offense and defense interact. The offense can help or hurt the defense and the reverse is also true. So, you can't grade either offense or defense by these simplistic stats.

[KDawg]

If you were to check the stats, I'll bet you will find that Zorn's offense did a much better job of ball control and TOP than our current offense. That's what his offense was designed to do. This year's offense is getting its yardage with big passing plays, but has not done well in third-down conversions and moving the chains.

The yardage ranking is a poor way to grade a defense. The points ranking is also deceptive. The problem is that offense and defense interact. The offense can help or hurt the defense and the reverse is also true. So, you can't grade either offense or defense by these simplistic stats.

Agree with both of the above points. However, trends seem to hold true throughout a coordinators career. I think that's where you see a better indicator of who that coordinator is independent of "stats" in a season or two.