Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Questions about the Defensive Game Plan


petedaddy

Recommended Posts

I am very confused about the defensive game plan in this game. It seemed that our idea to defend the Panthers in the second half was to (A) let Cam Newton sit in the pocket as long as he wanted, and (B) leave Steve Smith in 1 on 1 coverage.

It seems to me that the two main thing you would want to do against the Panthers is (A) not let Cam Newton sit in the pocket, and (B) not leave Steve Smith in 1 on 1 coverage.

I don't understand this at all. Did I miss something or what?

We had 4 sacks I believe it was in the 1st half, but we decided to not bring any pressure at all in the second half.

Outside of Steve Smith, the Panthers aren't exactly sporting pro bowlers at wide receiver.

I understand that Cam Newton can run, but I would rather him pick up a few yards running the ball and take some hits, instead of throwing the ball to Steve Smith 1 on 1.

What did you guys think about the defensive game plan today?

Edit - The other point I wanted to make. Cam Newton has thrown 9 interceptions on the year! Why wouldn't we try to pressure for a turnover??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly what happened to zero blitz? The gameplan was changed for the panthers I'm not sure why?

I completely agree with this. I thought there were multiple opportunities to run zero blitz, but they never decided to use it once today. I don't know if they thought they were playing Tom Brady or what, but it's ridiculous to completely change your game plan against the Panthers. The zero blitz even worked effectively against Michael Vick when called at the right times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a few weeks, it's fairly easy to get a read on Haslett. It's not hard to out-coach him. Chudzinski, as I mentioned in a thread a few days ago, knows exactly how to attack a Haslett defense. He called a great game today, especially in the second half. Too bad he's not our offensive coordinator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very confused about the defensive game plan in this game. It seemed that our idea to defend the Panthers in the second half was to (A) let Cam Newton sit in the pocket as long as he wanted, and (B) leave Steve Smith in 1 on 1 coverage.

It seems to me that the two main thing you would want to do against the Panthers is (A) not let Cam Newton sit in the pocket, and (B) not leave Steve Smith in 1 on 1 coverage.

I don't understand this at all. Did I miss something or what?

We had 4 sacks I believe it was in the 1st half, but we decided to not bring any pressure at all in the second half.

Outside of Steve Smith, the Panthers aren't exactly sporting pro bowlers at wide receiver.

I understand that Cam Newton can run, but I would rather him pick up a few yards running the ball and take some hits, instead of throwing the ball to Steve Smith 1 on 1.

What did you guys think about the defensive game plan today?

Edit - The other point I wanted to make. Cam Newton has thrown 9 interceptions on the year! Why wouldn't we try to pressure for a turnover??

You're hired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a few weeks, it's fairly easy to get a read on Haslett. It's not hard to out-coach him. Chudzinski, as I mentioned in a thread a few days ago, knows exactly how to attack a Haslett defense. He called a great game today, especially in the second half. Too bad he's not our offensive coordinator.

It seemed that Haslett wasn't even coaching in the second half. The defensive packages were basically the exact same the entire second half, but I know what you mean about him getting out coached.

---------- Post added October-23rd-2011 at 05:10 PM ----------

You're hired.

haha, I wish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your assuming that we had a game plan and that the coaches had the team prepared at all.

I think the plan was this, "Ok guys,we're gonna attack in the first half to make it look good and give the fans hope,then we'll shatter all their hopes and let the Panthers do whatever they want. Brian, they NEVER run play action so i want you to bite on it all day long and when your not i want you SO wide that your outta the play. Deangelo, just do you. Wilson, I'm putting you on Smith. That'll be some funny ****. Look we have to keep our fans frustrated. Keep em hungry and we'll promise that we will get better, and keep em coming back. So lets go out there and lose! ready, Lose on 3. 1,2,3, LOSE!!! Ok now go out there and get no one."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your assuming that we had a game plan and that the coaches had the team prepared at all.

I think the plan was this, "Ok guys,we're gonna attack in the first half to make it look good and give the fans hope,then we'll shatter all their hopes and let the Panthers do whatever they want. Brian, they NEVER run play action so i want you to bite on it all day long and when your not i want you SO wide that your outta the play. Deangelo, just do you. Wilson, I'm putting you on Smith. That'll be some funny ****. Look we have to keep our fans frustrated. Keep em hungry and we'll promise that we will get better, and keep em coming back. So lets go out there and lose! ready, Lose on 3. 1,2,3, LOSE!!! Ok now go out there and get no one."

That sounds about right. I still don't understand the 1 on 1 coverage with Steve Smith all game. The defense definitely laid an egg in this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A zero blitz against Cam would work once, but not twice.

He's a smart guy, athletic, and he has a guy named Steve Smith on his team.

We have a similar player in Moss, but he's not being used right; could be due to the qb issue, i'm not sure.

But the defense played 1/2 of a great game; holding them to 3 fg's in the 1st half was pretty good, but adjustments made by the Panthers OC clearly outshined the ones by our DC, IF there was any.

They ran the ball in chunks and we couldn't stop it; the right def side all but got lost, and changes have to be made in the form of personnel on the field or playcalling, but the 2nd half looked worn out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A zero blitz against Cam would work once, but not twice.

He's a smart guy, athletic, and he has a guy named Steve Smith on his team.

We have a similar player in Moss, but he's not being used right; could be due to the qb issue, i'm not sure.

But the defense played 1/2 of a great game; holding them to 3 fg's in the 1st half was pretty good, but adjustments made by the Panthers OC clearly outshined the ones by our DC, IF there was any.

They ran the ball in chunks and we couldn't stop it; the right def side all but got lost, and changes have to be made in the form of personnel on the field or playcalling, but the 2nd half looked worn out...

If zero blitz would work once, then we should have ran it once.

Also, we ran zero blitz a few times with success against Vick last week who is just as athletic as Cam, and the Eagles have better all around receivers than the Panthers. I'm not always in favor of the zero blitz, but I thought there were times we could have used it to give a rookie QB a little something to think about. Yes, Cam has been doing some impressive things, but he did also have 9 interceptions coming into the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If zero blitz would work once, then we should have ran it once.

Also, we ran zero blitz a few times with success against Vick last week who is just as athletic as Cam, and the Eagles have better all around receivers than the Panthers. I'm not always in favor of the zero blitz, but I thought there were times we could have used it to give a rookie QB a little something to think about. Yes, Cam has been doing some impressive things, but he did also have 9 interceptions coming into the game.

Yea, at least doing it once would cause them to change their gameplan some, but Haslett wouldn't know when to stop, thus making Cam look that much better. I'm sure they knew Smith was a deep threat, and couldn't stop him in the 2nd half without the zero blitz; my guess is if he did, the score would be much worse...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everytime we blitzed, we didn't get there. Or we got there a second too late.

It was the right call playing coverage. Unfortunately we had a couple of scrubs in Barnes and Doughty out there that just got abused left and right.

I personally didn't see much regular blitzing in the second half, but I could be wrong. I haven't rewatched game yet. I know what you mean about Barnes and Doughty. They frustrated me so much, I even made a thread about how glad I will be when Kareem Moore and Phillip Buchanon are back.

The blitzing that I did see in the second half was similar to what they were running against the Eagles last week, where they send the normal 4 and then send a guy 15 seconds later, because they are worried about Cam running. Obviously when it is such a delay against a guy like Cam or Vick, they are going to have time to do something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the defense gives up a TD nearly EVERY TIME our offense scores on the possession before. It's gotten to the point where it's almost a guarantee that we'll give a score right back after we just got one.

I was at the game today and told my wife the exact same thing.. Pretty sad!!! I'm done drinking the kool-aide for real this time until we find us a QB, posession/deep threat WR and oline...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A zero blitz against Cam would work once, but not twice.

He's a smart guy, athletic, and he has a guy named Steve Smith on his team.

We have a similar player in Moss, but he's not being used right; could be due to the qb issue, i'm not sure.

But the defense played 1/2 of a great game; holding them to 3 fg's in the 1st half was pretty good, but adjustments made by the Panthers OC clearly outshined the ones by our DC, IF there was any.

They ran the ball in chunks and we couldn't stop it; the right def side all but got lost, and changes have to be made in the form of personnel on the field or playcalling, but the 2nd half looked worn out...

That's right they made the adjustments at half and we did not account for it. We should have been able to adjust mid 3rd quarter but for some reason did not. Even the players were quoted after the game commenting on not being able to handle Carolina offense and even praised Cam. "Kevin Barnes said the Redskins tried to disguise coverages—as every team does in every game—but Newton was good enough." LB London Fletcher said. “Guys were open. He made plays for them. He’s a good player, a lot better than you would expect a guy to be at such a young age and with no offseason workouts.”

- http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/redskins-watch/2011/oct/23/initial-thoughts-panthers-33-redskins-20/

I was a big fan of Haslett, and haven't lost complete faith yet, but they have to get back to where they were in the first 3 games or this team is going to get left in the dust by the other mediocre teams in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't strictly 1-on-1 coverage. It was zone coverage and more often than not there was a safety over the top in the vicinity of the play in addition to the CB (usually Josh Wilson). They got big plays primarily because the safety help was poor, Steve Smith is very good, Cam Newton made some throws that were very hard to defend (even when Wilson was in good position), and we didn't get much pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...