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

[Mahons21]

I didn't come to that conclusion from those stats alone.

[Phixius]

This right here is exactly why the whole "It's a new system/scheme and the players need time to adjust" excuse is a bunch of horse hockey.

Gregg Willaims did more with less talent his first season here. Haslett pales in comparison.

Wish we had a real DC..........

His defense also gave up big plays and GW let go of key players over the years because he thought they were expendable and the defense suffer. GW defense did not play well every game in 2004 and the defense never really switch to a new formation. They just expanded on the current 4-3. Shawn Springs led the team in sacks that year.

[Skin'Em84]

We are only a few games into it this year (well, 6 now.) This is when there is about enough game tape to start seeing subtle trends and common flaws in our defense. We should get a good measure of how well our defense is and how well our coaches adapt to offenses playing to our weakness over the next 4 or 5 games.

[Oldskool]

The problem that these stats have is that you aren't comparing apples to apples.

If Haslett was running a 4-3, just as Blache had, then the comparisons could be made in this manner.

Haslett (with the permission of Shanahan and Allen) has basically started from scratch and has installed a system that is not only different in the front 7 in scheme and technique from the previous one but the same is true with the DB's as well.

For better or for worse, Blache's system worked to a great extent with the players that were on the team last year. The issue was aggressiveness and that showed in the numbers of turnovers and sacks. Haslett has basically turned the apple cart over and started over. Whether or not this was a wise move is a debate for another thread, but the truth is that you cannot at this point compare the creations of the two coordinators; While Blache's was a fairly established system (having been the DL coach from 2004-07 and DC from 2008-09), whereas Haslett has less than complimentary players at certain positions (NT, ROLB, etc) and his system and style is still in a state of flux in less than year one of the experiment.

[veteranskinsfan]

Hey guys just wanted to say that I enjoyed reading all the comments in this thread and analyzing the statistics. Good arguments by everyone and valid points were made. Much better than some of the threads last year when it got too personal at times with some fans. Can't wait to see the next set of data with the color coding that was mentioned.

[bedlamVR]

The problem that these stats have is that you aren't comparing apples to apples.

If Haslett was running a 4-3, just as Blache had, then the comparisons could be made in this manner.

Haslett (with the permission of Shanahan and Allen) has basically started from scratch and has installed a system that is not only different in the front 7 in scheme and technique from the previous one but the same is true with the DB's as well.

For better or for worse, Blache's system worked to a great extent with the players that were on the team last year. The issue was aggressiveness and that showed in the numbers of turnovers and sacks. Haslett has basically turned the apple cart over and started over. Whether or not this was a wise move is a debate for another thread, but the truth is that you cannot at this point compare the creations of the two coordinators; While Blache's was a fairly established system (having been the DL coach from 2004-07 and DC from 2008-09), whereas Haslett has less than complimentary players at certain positions (NT, ROLB, etc) and his system and style is still in a state of flux in less than year one of the experiment.

I agree with your argument but I totally disagree with the conclusion .

Blanches system only ever looked good on paper and in the stats class . On the field it always looked like an old Jag or MG ... looked good in a clasical sense but fragile and about to break down ...

I totally disagree with the idea that Blaches system better fit the players because in 6 games we have seen a new lease of life in Rogers and Landry, two guys who were high draft picks in 05 and 07 have stand out skills and athleticism but looked all the world like busts and yet in the Haslett system look like pro bowlers .

With Blach We had Orakopo playing out of position - yes he had a lot of sacks - but not where Blanche wanted to start him (SLB) Carter had a lights out season - but I cannot say that is down the Blache because AC has been playing 4-3 end and come no where near to that production all the time he has been here . Haynesworth was already thinking of was to get out of dodge before Haslett came in ..

The one thing I am noticing is ... and this is probably a team thing ... but I can think of only one play all season in which the team has directly lead to a loss . And thats the Texans game . In the Indy game he D had a 3-out you dream of at the end of the game to give us a chance to come back but the Offense messed that party up . Last year on a vital 4th quarter 4 down drive the D would have held for 3 downs and given up the TD on the third ...

Problem with Stats is they lie . They tell even the most experienced lies and the only way to judge something like football is actually watching it

[Oldskool]

I totally disagree with the idea that Blaches system better fit the players because in 6 games we have seen a new lease of life in Rogers and Landry, two guys who were high draft picks in 05 and 07 have stand out skills and athleticism but looked all the world like busts and yet in the Haslett system look like pro bowlers .

Landry has played lights out, but Rogers has only been so-so. He's made allot of tackles but that is a result of being beaten by WR's in their routes. As a whole, even with the personnel that have been jettisoned and those being brought in, this defense is still a huge work in progress and many pieces are still better suited or simply more experienced at playing the 4-3.

With Blach We had Orakopo playing out of position - yes he had a lot of sacks - but not where Blanche wanted to start him (SLB) Carter had a lights out season - but I cannot say that is down the Blache because AC has been playing 4-3 end and come no where near to that production all the time he has been here . Haynesworth was already thinking of was to get out of dodge before Haslett came in ..

Orakpo had almost all of his sacks from the SSLB position last year, so I'm not sure where you get that he got them from any other position. As I stated above, players like Carter and Haynesworth are tailor made for the 4-3 and either have shown little in the 3-4 (Haynesworth) or have had previous failures in this system (Carter).

The one thing I am noticing is ... and this is probably a team thing ... but I can think of only one play all season in which the team has directly lead to a loss . And thats the Texans game . In the Indy game he D had a 3-out you dream of at the end of the game to give us a chance to come back but the Offense messed that party up . Last year on a vital 4th quarter 4 down drive the D would have held for 3 downs and given up the TD on the third ...

That is the Haslett method of defense versus Blache's bend-but-don't-break style. Again that is a non factor at this time in determining the difference between the two coaches at this time, since the team is only 6 games into the Haslett regime and we have no way how they will react after 32+ games.

Problem with Stats is they lie . They tell even the most experienced lies and the only way to judge something like football is actually watching it

Problem is, stats don't lie. People lie when they say stats lie, because they don't jive with their preformed conclusions.

[Ryman of the North]

actually someone had posted that the bulk of Orakpos sacks last year came from plays where he had his hand in the dirt. other than that I agree with most of what you just wrote.

[bedlamVR]

Landry has played lights out, but Rogers has only been so-so. He's made allot of tackles but that is a result of being beaten by WR's in their routes. As a whole, even with the personnel that have been jettisoned and those being brought in, this defense is still a huge work in progress and many pieces are still better suited or simply more experienced at playing the 4-3.

Rogers is also tied 2nd in the NFL for passes defensed . He regularly this season has shut his guy down and when allowed to play his physical game can take the opposing WR out of the game complely (see Philly) ... ..he needs to hold onto the ints but some fans have outrageous expectations of players . Rogers is playing well .

Orakpo had almost all of his sacks from the SSLB position last year, so I'm not sure where you get that he got them from any other position. As I stated above, players like Carter and Haynesworth are tailor made for the 4-3 and either have shown little in the 3-4 (Haynesworth) or have had previous failures in this system (Carter).

Rak was far better with his hand in the dirt in as a 4-3 DE in his rookie year but that was mostly because when he stood up Blache didn't send him after the QB very often . Haynseworth showed us nothing in the Greg Blache system either . The only time this guy has turned up is in a contract year and as for Carter, he has shown he had bad down years in the 4-3 as well as in the 3-4 . I mean you can point at other players like Jarmon, and Fletcher but Fletcher has been in the same system most of his careers - he has also being playing almost exclusively in a Gregg Williams derived system for 8+ seasons and Jarmon is essentially a rookie and need to show the coaches something before we know we have lost anything . Other guys like Alexander are flourishing .

That is the Haslett method of defense versus Blache's bend-but-don't-break style. Again that is a non factor at this time in determining the difference between the two coaches at this time, since the team is only 6 games into the Haslett regime and we have no way how they will react after 32+ games.

Problem is, stats don't lie. People lie when they say stats lie, because they don't jive with their preformed conclusions.

No stats lie when people try and crow bar them into situations where they should not be applied . I mean what we are talking about is not even stats ...we are comparing numbers that come from a series of unrelated events . We were not playing the same Rams teams as last year, the same series of events didn't happen the same environment was not encountered there are so many variables then you cannot realistically compare even the Rams game in 2009 to 2010 when week to week things can change dramatically . The populations of data for both Blache and Hasslett are too small for real stats to be carried out and even then there is no control to compare against so all you can make is subjective qualitative analysis of the defense and the numbers tell us little but what happened in individual games .

The bottom line is that this D has put us in position to win games . The last minute Int, the 3- and out against the Colts, the forced holding call against the Cowboys ... that is something you cannot say about the Blache D . Good D finds a way to change the game . Regardless of the statistical ranking our D has not influenced the game in a positive way for a long long time .

People want to make excuses for other teams like -

We were lucky that Alex Barron held and got called for the hold or the Packers were depleted by injuries (like we were not, missing both tackles, NT, RB etc or anything) but if those teams are so great and our D sucks so bad then it should never have been so close . Ever .

[Oldfan]

Oldschool Post #179 ~~The problem that these stats have is that you aren't comparing apples to apples.

If Haslett was running a 4-3, just as Blache had, then the comparisons could be made in this manner.

..Haslett (with the permission of Shanahan and Allen) has basically started from scratch and has installed a system that is not only different in the front 7 in scheme and technique from the previous one but the same is true with the DB's as well.

If KDawg was trying to prove that the Blache scheme was superior to Haslett's long term, you would be right. But the following was his purpose:

KDawg Post #1 -- Let me start off by saying I'm not a Greg Blache fan, either. But there seems to be a lot of people saying that our team would be allowing a lot more scores under Blache. For starters, let's look at both of their Redskin tenures.

[Oldfan]

I miss leading the league in 3 and outs. In 2008, the Skins had the best defense in the NFL. I don't care what anybody says. When a woeful offense like Zorn's leaves you out to dry that many times, and still getting the 3 and out, time and time again, speaks volumes. Haslett is showing us why he was in the UFL. Shanahan also hasn't done jack since winning the Superbowl with Dan Reeves' team. Color me unimpressed.

The point you made has been shown to be false twice before in this thread.

2010... Us 366 plays, opponents 430 ...TOP: Us 29.26, opponents 33.38

2009... Us 970 plays, opponents 1000 ..TOP: Us 29:00, opponents 31:23

2008... US 1026 plays, opponents 933 ..TOP: Us 31:30, opponents 28.29

[KDawg]

I totally disagree with the idea that Blaches system better fit the players because in 6 games we have seen a new lease of life in Rogers and Landry, two guys who were high draft picks in 05 and 07 have stand out skills and athleticism but looked all the world like busts and yet in the Haslett system look like pro bowlers

Landry, yes. Rogers? On what planet is he a Pro Bowler?

Haynesworth was already thinking of was to get out of dodge before Haslett came in ..

The player you speak of is a dirtbag, but nowhere did I see this with factual evidence. The whole mess started with the switch to the 3-4.

Last year on a vital 4th quarter 4 down drive the D would have held for 3 downs and given up the TD on the third ...

This is conjecture. Back this statement up.

Problem with Stats is they lie . They tell even the most experienced lies and the only way to judge something like football is actually watching it

And having watched football, and being a football coach, our defense isn't good. I'd like to know on what planet a middle of the road points allowed statistic and a dead last yardage ranking makes a good defense. This defense has room to grow, but I don't like Haslett as the coordinator for that job.

Haynseworth showed us nothing in the Greg Blache system either

As much as I dislike the guy, this is incorrect. He managed to get a great push inside and helped to free up Carter and Orakpo. A defensive tackles primary job is rarely to get tackles and sacks. It's to help the linebackers and ends by drawing double teams and create pressure.

No stats lie when people try and crow bar them into situations where they should not be applied . I mean what we are talking about is not even stats ...we are comparing numbers that come from a series of unrelated events . We were not playing the same Rams teams as last year, the same series of events didn't happen the same environment was not encountered there are so many variables then you cannot realistically compare even the Rams game in 2009 to 2010 when week to week things can change dramatically .

Okay, I'll bite. Then how do you compare Blache's defense to Haslett's? You make one argument then go completely against it with this statement. By your standards, you can NEVER compare one team to another, one unit to another from year to year.

The populations of data for both Blache and Hasslett are too small for real stats to be carried out and even then there is no control to compare against so all you can make is subjective qualitative analysis of the defense and the numbers tell us little but what happened in individual games .

This is a case of a fan not liking the way the stats leaned and making an argument against statistics. Statistics never tell the entire story, but they tell a good portion of it. If the stats had been in favor of Haslett, you wouldn't have said this.

The bottom line is that this D has put us in position to win games

Twice. Against Green Bay and against Indy. Green Bay the D failed in regulation and we were a missed field goal away from losing. They did a great job in the overtime. Against Indy, the D played it's best 4th quarter yet.

rgardless of the statistical ranking our D has not influenced the game in a positive way for a long long time .

Non sense. This is tunnel vision. I'd say our offense hasn't influenced the game in a positive way in a long time.

We were lucky that Alex Barron held and got called for the hold

Orakpo made a great play there, but he's done it several times this season with no call. We got it that time, but if he didn't we'd be talking about how bad our D is on the last drive of games. Revisionist history. We were in position to lose and we let the refs decide if we won or lost. That's not good defense.

Packers were depleted by injuries (like we were not, missing both tackles

Yes. We were. Our offense hasn't been great with the tackles, either.

NT

Who are you referring to? Our 2nd string NT or the NT who has done nothing but get destroyed so far this season coming off an achilles injury, who we banked on being the key cog to switching to the 3-4?

but if those teams are so great and our D sucks so bad then it should never have been so close . Ever .

Our D doesn't suck, but it's certainly not good. With the turnovers, points allowed and yards allowed I'd say we're a slightly below average defensive team that needs a high octane offense to succeed. IE: New Orleans. Gregg Williams' D last year, without a great offense, would have been massacred by the media. But with that offense all they need to do is be aggressive and create turnovers and the offense can take care of the rest. They filled their niche. That defense fits the Saints in a great way. A+ fit for what they need.

For what we need, our defense is a C- fit. Shoddy offense + aggressive and careless defense isn't a great match.

[Hubbs]

Hmmm. We gave up nearly 300 yards to Jay Culter. Yet we won.

Keep saying it's just because DeAngelo Hall can perform miracles, everyone....

[ddub52]

What about opponents? The Redskins have faced 4 out of 5 of the leagues top offenses. Our 2009 schedule was a cake walk (Rams, Lions, Chiefs) and we still blew it against weak offensive teams.

[Atlass]

Originally Posted by Beans

I miss leading the league in 3 and outs. In 2008, the Skins had the best defense in the NFL. I don't care what anybody says. When a woeful offense like Zorn's leaves you out to dry that many times, and still getting the 3 and out, time and time again, speaks volumes. Haslett is showing us why he was in the UFL. Shanahan also hasn't done jack since winning the Superbowl with Dan Reeves' team. Color me unimpressed.

So let me get this straight. The Skins who only won 4 games all of last year and now are 4-3 and in first place in the NFC East aren't winning pretty enough for you....You are an idiot.

[Hubbs]

What about opponents? The Redskins have faced 4 out of 5 of the leagues top offenses. Our 2009 schedule was a cake walk (Rams, Lions, Chiefs) and we still blew it against weak offensive teams.

...according to yards.

So let me get this straight. The Skins who only won 4 games all of last year and now are 4-3 and in first place in the NFC East aren't winning pretty enough for you....You are an idiot.

Well, that's just mean. I don't think I'd go that far, even if I happen to be a sarcastic ass. :pfft:

[ddub52]

...according to yards.

Indy, Philly, and Houston are in top 5 in the league in scoring points per game.

[KDawg]

Hmmm. We gave up nearly 300 yards to Jay Culter. Yet we won.

Keep saying it's just because DeAngelo Hall can perform miracles, everyone....

And I will.

That game wouldn't have fallen on the defense regardless. They did their part. But no, they weren't "good". There's a ton of things that they need to clean up. DeAngelo Hall won that game. Had those throws gone to Rogers side we may not have seen a single pick. But, still, despite the Hall "miracles", that game fell on the offense's shoulders, even though the D wasn't good as a whole. But when you force THAT many turnovers it doesn't matter.

[Mahons21]

And I will.

That game wouldn't have fallen on the defense regardless. They did their part. But no, they weren't "good". There's a ton of things that they need to clean up. DeAngelo Hall won that game. Had those throws gone to Rogers side we may not have seen a single pick. But, still, despite the Hall "miracles", that game fell on the offense's shoulders, even though the D wasn't good as a whole. But when you force THAT many turnovers it doesn't matter.

How about giving some credit where credit is due?

Isn't it possible that Cutler didn't throw to Rogers side, because our best cover corner had his man covered?

Isn't it possible that Haslett's heavy blitzes with soft zones, both a.) forced cutler to make a quick decision (something he's not great at), and b.) allowed hall to play his game?

Isn't it possible that having one of our best players on defense not only back in the lineup but also playing a large % of plays, had a significant impact?

We strayed from our bend don't break style defense this week, and used a lot more blitzing and the gameplan against Cutler seemed to work quite well. Such a style of play, is going to create big plays for both our defense and the oppositions offense. That's the way it goes.

BTW anytime a defense creates 5 turnovers in 5 possessions, they played better than good.

[Skinzfever2010]

Does Greg Blache have a job?

[pjfootballer]

I believe Blatch retired. He was contemplating it the last 2 years after Williams left.

[Skinsfan4life83]

How about giving some credit where credit is due?

Isn't it possible that Cutler didn't throw to Rogers side, because our best cover corner had his man covered?

Isn't it possible that Haslett's heavy blitzes with soft zones, both a.) forced cutler to make a quick decision (something he's not great at), and b.) allowed hall to play his game?

Isn't it possible that having one of our best players on defense not only back in the lineup but also playing a large % of plays, had a significant impact?

We strayed from our bend don't break style defense this week, and used a lot more blitzing and the gameplan against Cutler seemed to work quite well. Such a style of play, is going to create big plays for both our defense and the oppositions offense. That's the way it goes.

BTW anytime a defense creates 5 turnovers in 5 possessions, they played better than good.

Smartest post in the whole damn thread, shut it down, nothing to see here folks.

[KDawg]

How about giving some credit where credit is due?

I thought I did?

I

sn't it possible that Cutler didn't throw to Rogers side, because our best cover corner had his man covered?

So did Hall, but that didn't stop Cutler from throwing to him.

Isn't it possible that having one of our best players on defense not only back in the lineup but also playing a large % of plays, had a significant impact?

Never said this wasn't the case.

BTW anytime a defense creates 5 turnovers in 5 possessions, they played better than good.

Not necessarily. But again, I did say above the D did its job.

[HailGreen28]

BTW anytime a defense creates 5 turnovers in 5 possessions, they played better than good.

Not necessarily. But again, I did say above the D did its job.

Jeez, KDawg. Maybe our standards are too low around here?

You're right, they should have scored 14 or 21 points on their own, or gotten another couple turnovers, before we give them credit for playing well.....

[KDawg]

Jeez, KDawg. Maybe our standards are too low around here?

You're right, they should have scored 14 or 21 points on their own, or gotten another couple turnovers, before we give them credit for playing well.....

I did say they played well... But the unit as a whole has issues, anyone denying that is burying their head in the sand.

For the third time in my last three posts, the D did its job.