HTTR24-7:Coordinated Chaos- Mike Shanahans History With Defensive Coordinators

[Lavarleap56]

I'd be willing to bet my last dollar that every defense isn't coached that way because Bill Bellichik and Jim Schwartz understand statistics. They both majored in Economics. Schwartz has been quoted on Football Outsiders about the deceptive nature of the NFL's yardage stats.

Your best strategy for leading the NFL in the lowest PPG and your best strategy for leading the league in lowest YPG would be in direct conflict.

Your best strategy for leading the league in takeaways would cause you to be over-agressive. Good offenses burn over-aggressive defenses. You would be giving your opponent a better opportunity to come from behind and beat you.

If our defense is being coached that way, we have discovered part of the problem.

The philosophy is not a problem for Pittsburgh and and not a problem for us.

[SkinsFTW]

Like most teams, defenses are usually composed of guys; not guys who are going to make the Pro Bowl, not guys who dominate, not All Pro's. Just guys. Losing Rak and Carriker hurts, and we could all said here all day and talk about what might've been if we had taken J.J Watt instead of Ryan Kerrigan. The fact is, this is the hand that we've been dealt; we're dealing with some crappy injuries, but ever football team deals with crappy injuries. The good teams and good coaches overcome. They find a way to make it work.

Exactly and you'd think that by the 3rd year Haslett would have enough of his own "guys" that 2-3 injuries don't blow the whole thing up and turn what should have been a top 15 defense at worst into the 30-32th best in the league. We didn't lose any All Pro's, we lost a good LB and a decent replaceable level DE. Besides that we lost some depth safeties that other teams didn't even want.

[Oldfan]

The philosophy is not a problem for Pittsburgh and and not a problem for us.

Don't know about that.

With a late lead, our boys were over-aggressive against the Giants and Victor Cruz. We got burned. That didn't hurt?

Last season, with a late lead, Haslett was over-aggressive with an all-out blitz against the Cowboys. Romo sits to pee and Dez Bryant burned us. How did that feel?

Of course, if those gambles had been successful, there's a good chance the defense would have added to their takeaway stat.

[SkinsGuy]

On last weeks’ game against the Pittsburgh Steelers:

Haslett- “Well, obviously we weren’t pleased with the way we played and the outcome. That’s something we’ll deal with every week.”

Good to know that they wont be pleased with how they play and the outcome of every game for the rest of the year.... Hate that quote

That quote is so funny. :ols:

Haslett obviously didn't mean it the way it came out, but it is hilarious none the less.

[Lavarleap56]

Don't know about that. With a late lead, our boys were over-aggressive against the Giants and Victor Cruz. That didn't hurt?

Last season, with a late lead, Haslett was over-aggressive with an all-out blitz against the Cowboys. Romo sits to pee and Dez Bryant burned us. How did that feel?

Of course, if those gambles had been successful, there's a good chance the defense would added to their takeaway stat.

Well weren't over aggressive against the Giants. The Cruz TD is one of the few calls I don't even blame Haslett for. Predictable yes but having a double on their most dangerous WR in crunch time is not a bad call. Think the world knows Williams just played it wrong. Haslett's over aggressiveness has caused us to give up leads in the past. That over aggressiveness is his play calling issue which is personal preference not necessarily scheme base.

You are assuming that over aggressiveness would add to the takeaway stat.. Cover 0 blitz has maybe brought us 1-3 turnovers 40 games.

[Oldfan]

...Haslett's over aggressiveness has caused us to give up leads in the past. That over aggressiveness is his play calling issue which is personal preference not necessarily scheme base...

His personal preference? You mean Mike leaves it up to him?

You are assuming that over aggressiveness would add to the takeaway stat.. Cover 0 blitz has maybe brought us 1-3 turnovers 40 games.

If the yield is that low, we shouldn't be doing it at all. Each takeaway is worth an average of four points. Each touchdown is worth seven. The Bengals TD on the first play of their game against zero blitz was minus 7. If we had only three takeaways that's +12. Just two TDs (-14) scored against us in 40 games would give us a negative return on zero blitz.

[Skinsinparadise]

I guess finding another OC would be the best way to find a new DL coach and LBs coach.

I think those 2 coaches aren't holding up their end. Then again I don't know how much autonomy Haslett gives them. But to my eye Slowick's LBs aren't good in zone coverage drops or recognition, they don't mix it up shuffle positions and rarely overload. Jacobs's DL is very static but lacks the individual talent to make an impact without the help of scheme: stunting, slanting, shooting gaps

I am not a Haslett guy. But I put an equal amount of this on Allen/Shanny -- you got a D line that can stop the run but can't penetrate. Last season, Carriker (gone now) 6 sacks and Bowen if I recall had 5.5 so we got some interior penetration. Jenkins obviously right now is purely a run stuffer. R. Jackson obviously in his career hasn't been a sack guy. So you got pressure just coming at times from Kerrigan and that seems to be it. Then you got a QB who has time to wait for Wrs to get open playing against a LB crew who is poor at coverage, a bad free safety, and 2 mediocre corners. When you break it all down, we should get torched. Unless, we get Bowen who i think has played decently to put more pressure and maybe Jenkins can rediscover what he had going in his rookie preseason -- though coaches swear he's been a stud against the run. Ditto Rob Jackson, there are people on this board who swear he's as good or close enough to Orkapo so far he's been good against the run but not much of a pass rushing threat. Should a good D coordinator mask some of these weakness, yeah, look at the Steelers play without their stud safety and pass rusher and they are still a top 5 defense.

[Oldfan]

...Should a good D coordinator mask some of these weakness, yeah, look at the Steelers play without their stud safety and pass rusher and they are still a top 5 defense.

Good coaches are considered good because they get more from the hand they're dealt. Mike is doing well masking the weakness of his O-line, but Haz just doesn't have the same skill on his side of the ball, as far as I can tell. On the other hand, Mike has the final say on the defensive strategy. So, it's hard for me to fix the blame.

[Lavarleap56]

His personal preference? You mean Mike leaves it up to him?

If the yield is that low, we shouldn't be doing it at all. Each takeaway is worth an average of four points. Each touchdown is worth seven. The Bengals TD on the first play of their game against zero blitz was minus 7. If we had only three takeaways that's +12. Just two TDs (-14) scored against us in 40 games would give us a negative return on zero blitz.

Of course Mike has input and overseas everything. That being said Mike let's his coaches do their jobs and that includes Haslett. He just doesn't have figure heads in positions doing nothing. The defensive Coordinator and staff came up with the game plan & dc calls the game. Does Mike have authority to tell Haslett what to do on the sidelines, yes of course. Does he routinely assert that authority, no he doesn't.

Cover 0 blitz was very effective for us back in the early 2010 season with a healthy Laron Landry. Since then the Cover 0 pressure scheme has not been a effective package for us. Allows a lot more big plays and TDs than it does get people off the field or create turnovers.

I charted a few of our Cover 0 pressure scheme earlier in the season. I can find time to review everything cover 0 package we have run since 2010 if you like. You will see a overwhelming negative return.

[Oldfan]

...I charted a few of our Cover 0 pressure scheme earlier in the season. I can find time to review everything cover 0 package we have run since 2010 if you like. You will see a overwhelming negative return.

I appreciate the offer, but I'll take your word on that. That would be my guess anyway.

As the head coach, I would rein in Haslett a bit.

[SWFLSkins]

Don't know about that.

With a late lead, our boys were over-aggressive against the Giants and Victor Cruz. We got burned. That didn't hurt?

Last season, with a late lead, Haslett was over-aggressive with an all-out blitz against the Cowboys. Romo sits to pee and Dez Bryant burned us. How did that feel?

Of course, if those gambles had been successful, there's a good chance the defense would have added to their takeaway stat.

How were they over aggressive on the Cruz TD? It's not as if there was only one backer back there covering him, Williams simply played to shallow and took a bad angle as the over the top safety, leaving both chasing Cruz. I did not see an over blitzing package on that play, just a blown coverage.

[Oldfan]

How were they over aggressive on the Cruz TD? It's not as if there was only one backer back there covering him, Williams simply played to shallow and took a bad angle as the over the top safety, leaving both chasing Cruz. I did not see an over blitzing package on that play, just a blown coverage.

Williams was over-aggressive. The only reason for him to be playing up that close was to be in position to jump the route for a pick. If coaches over-emphasize takeaways, players play over-agressively and often get burned.

[SWFLSkins]

Williams was over-aggressive. The only reason for him to be playing up that close was to be in position for a pick. If coaches over-emphasize takeaways, players play over-agressively.

If this is true OF then Haslett with less than two minutes to go with the lead is going for a pic?> should be fired on the sideline at that moment. I find that hard to believe. More like a blown coverage by a player that is not good enough to start but has too. Even in HS we didn't let any player get behind the coverage with a lead in a two minute drill. In fact we made sure we had the speedsters back there and no necessarily the hitters just in case.

[Lavarleap56]

I appreciate the offer, but I'll take your word on that. That would be my guess anyway.

If I had to put a blame chain together it would start with Mike Shanahan. Should never have hired a DC who did not want to run a 3-4 in the first place.

[Oldfan]

If this is true OF then Haslett with less than two minutes to go with the lead is going for a pic?> should be fired on the sideline at that moment. I find that hard to believe. More like a blown coverage by a player that is not good enough to start but has too. Even in HS we didn't let any player get behind the coverage with a lead in a two minute drill. In fact we made sure we had the speedsters back there and no necessarily the hitters just in case.

Please read more carefully. I didn't speculate that Haslett called for the pick on that play.

---------- Post added November-3rd-2012 at 09:56 AM ----------

If I had to put a blame chain together it would start with Mike Shanahan. Should never have hired a DC who did not want to run a 3-4 in the first place.

I wonder how much choice he had. If you were an up-and-coming DC would you put your future in the hands of Mike Shanahan given his Denver management of DCs?

[SWFLSkins]

Please read more carefully. I didn't speculate that Haslett called for the pick on that play.?

But OF what you are saying is that his MO is teaching more TO's (great) but not situation coverages? They don't practice the two minute drill on D? There is so much fail here to consider it is giving me a headache.

---------- Post added November-3rd-2012 at 10:12 AM ----------

If I had to put a blame chain together it would start with Mike Shanahan. Should never have hired a DC who did not want to run a 3-4 in the first place.

My Uncle was a very successful businessman, and I worked for a time with him when I was young. Usually when the upper managers start blaming the subordinates, He would just look at them and say, are you trying to make my decision to hire you a poor one? The guy would just look at him weird. And he would say well, You hired him and now you are wrong, I hired you so,,,,what are we saying here? I am wrong? lol Someone needs to sit down with Mike after the season and let him know that in the area of Defense he has failed, and needs to make a change ....or.......maybe Mike is not the guy for the job.

[Lavarleap56]

Please read more carefully. I didn't speculate that Haslett called for the pick on that play.

---------- Post added November-3rd-2012 at 09:56 AM ----------

I wonder how much choice he had. If you were an up-and-coming DC would you put your future in the hands of Mike Shanahan given his Denver management of DCs?

They didn't target any up and coming DCs to be fair. Mike wanted Zimmer but he didn't leave the Bengals. Romeo Crennel called to express interest but Mike didn't want him. Haslett was the fall back since they worked together so much in 2009 when Mike wasn't coaching. I think Mikes DC record is 50/50 and when they are good they stay. Think he might of had a quick hook at times.

[Oldfan]

But OF what you are saying is that his MO is teaching more TO's (great) but not situation coverages? They don't practice the two minute drill on D? There is so much fail here to consider it is giving me a headache.

Call it a blown coverage if you like, but why did he blow the coverage in that situation? Isn't an over-emphasis on takeaways a reasonable explanation for such over-aggressiveness?

[Skinsinparadise]

Williams was over-aggressive. The only reason for him to be playing up that close was to be in position to jump the route for a pick. If coaches over-emphasize takeaways, players play over-agressively and often get burned.

Recall in the past under zorn you were pushing for a defense which is more about creating turnovers. Is it Haslett is too far to the extreme on it? If you don't support a bend but don't break more conservative defense then I gather you prefer a more aggressive one.

On the other hand, Mike has the final say on the defensive strategy. So, it's hard for me to fix the blame.

I fix the blame on Mike for hiring Haslett and the personnel. But he's not calling the plays. Ditto i didn't give Gibbs credit or blame for Gregg Williams X's and O's on defense.

[SWFLSkins]

Call it a blown coverage if you like, but why did he blow the coverage in that situation? Isn't an over-emphasis on takeaways a reasonable explanation for such over-aggressiveness?

The guy was completely out of position, so yeah blown coverage is what I call it. No an over-emphasis on takeaways is great but not without an emphasis on down and distance, time remaining, what team is leading, spot on the field, game characteristics, personnel and on and on. IF Williams is a one trick pony and only plays with aggression on every play how in the world did he make it to the NFL? You know this as a DE, you just can't head up field every play and get undercut by the run. You can't just stay home every play waiting for the run. Yes you do a little of both, but Williams failed to adjust or did Haslett fail to adjust Williams? That is the question?

Based on evidence thus far this season, something even with the talent level, is horribly askew in the secondary. As bad as they are they are being coached down. Five to ten yards off in a two minute drill and a safety over the top should not result in a long TD, unless someone misses a tackle, the ball is perfectly placed between defenders or a blown coverage. I saw blown coverage by Williams, now who's fault is that I don't know.

[Oldfan]

Recall in the past under zorn you were pushing for a defense which is more about creating turnovers. Is it Haslett is too far to the extreme on it?

Yes. We went from one extreme to the other.

I use the traffic light analogy to explain how I look at it:

Red = Take few risks -- we have a lead to protect.

Amber = Take prudent risks -- it's a tight game

Green = Take more risks -- we need to come from behind.

Blache was mostly stuck on red; Haslett is mostly stuck on green.

If the goal is to achieve a higher ranking on the points against stat, Blache's method was smart and Haslett's approach is dumb. If the goal is to win football games, they are both poor risk management strategies.

[Lavarleap56]

Yes. We went from one extreme to the other.

I use the traffic light analogy to explain how I look at it:

Red = Take few risks -- we have a lead to protect.

Amber = Take prudent risks -- it's a tight game

Green = Take more risks -- we need to come from behind.

Blache was mostly stuck on red; Haslett is mostly stuck on green.

If the goal is to achieve a higher ranking on the points against stat, Blache's method was smart and Haslett's approach is dumb. If the goal is to win football games, they are both poor risk management strategies.

I'm not following the logic oldfan.. How is Haslett or any other DC in the NFL dumb for trying to limit points and yardage?

The "philosophy of defense" pic I posted is straight from Dick LeBeau. It's the same philosophy and scheme Lou Spanos brought with him from Pittsburgh and implemented here in Washington. If you are. Hard to call that philosophy stupid when it has resulted in numerous top 5 rankings in yards,& points. Steelers have rode that defensive philosophy to multiple 10,11,12,13 win seasons in the last 7-8 years while winning super bowls.

Now if we want to talk about how the scheme is called, player choices, or any other issue that's fair game. I can't get behind a debate criticizing a defensive philosophy that has had more success than any other in the NFL for 10 years plus probably.

[Oldfan]

I'm not following the logic oldfan.. How is Haslett or any other DC in the NFL dumb for trying to limit points and yardage?

The "philosophy of defense" pic I posted is straight from Dick LeBeau. It's the same philosophy and scheme Lou Spanos brought with him from Pittsburgh and implemented here in Washington. If you are. Hard to call that philosophy stupid when it has resulted in numerous top 5 rankings in yards,& points. Steelers have rode that defensive philosophy to multiple 10,11,12,13 win seasons in the last 7-8 years while winning super bowls.

Now if we want to talk about how the scheme is called, player choices, or any other issue that's fair game. I can't get behind a debate criticizing a defensive philosophy that has had more success than any other in the NFL for 10 years plus probably.

You are claiming that Pittsburgh is successful because of their defensive philosophy to coach for a high ranking on a stat. While I have a high regard for your football knowledge, the reasons Pittsburgh has been successful are far too complex an issue for anyone, no matter how expert, to sum up so neatly.

Do you understand that a defense can adopt a strategy that results in a lower scoring game for BOTH teams? Do you understand how that would help the defense achieve a better ranking on the points against stat but not help his team win the game?

If you understand that, then it is just a logical deduction that coaching defense to a higher ranking on the points against stat and coaching the defense to win football games are two different goals requiring different strategies. Coaching to win is all that matters.

So, do you understand how a defensive strategy to keep the opponent's score down might only result in lowering the score for both teams?

BTW, an over-aggressive defensive strategy to create more takeaways and short-field advantages for the offense might only result in higher scoring games if your defense is often burned by the opponents' offense.

[Voice_of_Reason]

There will be several 3-4 type defensive coordinators out on the market after the season. The DC from Notre Dame is an iteresting choice, Rex Ryan and when the Chiefs fire Romeo or Romeo, he's there also.

I don't think that Raheem Morris is the DC in waiting. His background is the 4-3. We don't run a 4-3, and I don't think that we'll flip back.

There are some others that might be available. I think it's a certainty that Haz is gone. I don't think it happens during the season. But I have to imagine that the comments after the Bengal's game, with the Bengal's players saying they KNEW what the defense was going to be probably sealed Haz's fate. Shanahan is nothing if not prepared, and I imagine it hurt him to the core to think that his team was out-coached.

[SkinsFTW]

IF Williams is a one trick pony and only plays with aggression on every play how in the world did he make it to the NFL? You know this as a DE, you just can't head up field every play and get undercut by the run. You can't just stay home every play waiting for the run. Yes you do a little of both, but Williams failed to adjust or did Haslett fail to adjust Williams? That is the question?

I think the Giants had ran that play several times and the receiver went short, Williams was being too aggressive obviously but that's likely how the Giants come back on teams every week. They fool the defense at the end of the game on plays like that. Williams should know that his job is to stay on top at all times but obviously he thought he had it figured out and was going to jump the route, which makes him look like a complete idiot.