Jim Haslett : Time For Him To Show Something ?

[darrelgreenie]

Imho, there are very few above average coaches.

Most coaches have a system and will produce a quiality unit once they have talented pieces.

Hence...'its not about the Xs and Os its about the Jimmies and the Joes'

Its the good/great coaches that get more from their talent then others.

I am by no means and Jim Haslett proponent. I have long since wanted a DC that comes directly from the LeBeau or Phillips coaching tree.

 

BUT with that being said Haslett is an average coach, and like most coaches,he  does better with more talent.

And last year the defense lacked to be sure and the missing talent was in the wrong places......right up the middle.

 

Cofield (my favorite DL) is only an average at best run stopping NT.

 

But he's good at creating pressure; in fact he was the only DL that could/did.

 

Fletcher lost his speed, quickness and explosivness consequently the MLB position went from an area of strength to an area of weakness.

 

As a unit the Safety group was terrible. They missed a bunch of tackles.

In most defenses, but especially in our style, the Safeties have to at a minimum make tackles.

Ours didn't.

We had an average at best SS forced to play FS. 

The other 2 FSs were a rookie that looked afraid of contact and an average CB forced to play out of position at FS.

 

Having weaknesses at DL--MLB--SS/FS is gonna be tough for good coaches to mask no add that to historically bad special teams and an inconsistent offense then you get what we had on defense last year.

 

Those aren't Haslett issues those are talent issues.

[skins island connection]

 Since Haslett has been in DC the defense has dropped. He's been here more than long enough to get at the very least a respectable defense together, but it has only gotten worse. Luckily it cannot get much worse than 2013, but there IS the possibility.

 

 And to add one more little nugget, he's not even a 3-4 guy, so he's being asked to do a job he has no skill for. Its a complete failure at the DC spot and the buck stops at Haslett.  If he didn't have the spine to stand up for acquiring better players, what leads anyone to believe he will with Gruden? He'll just sit up in the booth hiding as usual, sucking his thumb, and doing what he does best, which is hide.

[darrelgreenie]

Lol blaming Haslett for personnel decisions.

[Morneblade]

I'll blame him for being a crappy DC then.

[Mahons21]

What has he done in Washington to make you believe he's a crappy DC? What would a good DC have done under the same circumstances?

[darrelgreenie]

I'll blame him for being a crappy DC then.

regardless of your opinion of Haslett; was anything in my post about last year's defense untrue?

[Hunter_R]

What has he done in Washington to make you believe he's a crappy DC?

[Voice_of_Reason]

I sorta get the feeling that Haslett is the new JC. Fans fall into 2 basic camps:

1. The guy is absolute trash. Awful, terrible, no talent ass clown who couldn't start for a girls JV team.

2. The guy is about average. Never going to be great, but with some better folks around him, he could be passable.

But group 1 claims that anything other than absolute hatred of said player or coach actually means you've lost your collective mind, and are completely insane.

I am in group 2 for Haslett. I think he's very "eh" and I would have preferred him replaced. Preferably with Wade Phillips. But that didn't happen.

But I also recognize that there were some things outside of his control. So, I consider him average.

And, btw, if the Skins defense could just be average, in the 16 rank area, team could win 10+ games.

[skins island connection]

 Well, up to this point this 3-4 experiment has been a failure. When a team switched their defense it takes a few years to get the pieces in place, and I can understand that, but this has gone on for how long now, with the results only getting worse?  There has to be that point where change is absolutely needed, and IMO that time was a few years ago.

 

I'd hate to say it because I wouldn't be looking for an excuse for him, but going back to the 4-3 would remove every possible excuse for him, and when the 4-3 was here at least the defense was better; but then again it was with another coach, so go figure.

 

This team cannot rely on the offense to carry the load, and in any other city a coach with his track record would have been given his walking papers.  It has to get better, but I just do not see Haslett being 'the guy' to make it better.

[RandyHolt]

Maybe the Tampa DC from the dark years was unavailable 

 

I  assume Haslett can't believe he didn't get fired. Dare I think he will pull out all the stops, do all he can, for this upcoming season, versus do exactly what he did in seasons past since it didn't lead to his removal. He must know this is his last straw and thus be motivated. Let's actually use those exotic blitzes we hear about, but rarely see. Let's unleash our best players doing what they do best. Let 11 aggressive players play aggressively. Get back on the sideline and stop hiding upstairs.

 

Most importantly, I want him to get after QBs, blitzing if needed. I think the key to defense starts with dictating play to the offense, be proactive instead of always reactive. Stop playing afraid.  A competent QB will often easily school a reactive (read passive) defense. Heck, we all saw plain as day rookie QBs kill a passive defense as well. 

 

Last year we were built for the offense to carry the load.They couldn't score in first halves. It was a trainwreck. Now we have added pieces on defense. 

 

#AlwaysOptimistic 

[Morneblade]

DC, Haslett's history has been one of "bad". Took over a top 5 defense and made them average and has been dwelling at the bottom of the heap for basically his entire career outside of that, to the point where he was out of the NFL and coaching in whatever that league was that lasted for 1 year. I will say this, he might be better than the average college coach DC. Might. But on the NFL level is not average, he is below average at best, horrible at worse. if we someone like Wade Phillips (which we could have had this year...) I will tell you this. Our defense, with the same players would be much improved. Maybe not great, but much better than what we have had under Haslett. He will game plan vanilla or maybe aggressive (it wont really matter) but his schemes are not very effective and then will be completely unable to make adjustments. He's had a great defense before, and he made them average.

[skinny21]

I sorta get the feeling that Haslett is the new JC. Fans fall into 2 basic camps:

1. The guy is absolute trash. Awful, terrible, no talent ass clown who couldn't start for a girls JV team.

2. The guy is about average. Never going to be great, but with some better folks around him, he could be passable.

But group 1 claims that anything other than absolute hatred of said player or coach actually means you've lost your collective mind, and are completely insane.

I am in group 2 for Haslett. I think he's very "eh" and I would have preferred him replaced. Preferably with Wade Phillips. But that didn't happen.

But I also recognize that there were some things outside of his control. So, I consider him average.

And, btw, if the Skins defense could just be average, in the 16 rank area, team could win 10+ games.

16th in points/game given up last year would have meant about 6.6 fewer points/game. Not sure how many wins that would have added, but that's a huge difference.

I don't have much faith in Haslett getting this D to that point, but I do see signs of (potential) improvement - better assistant coaches, better (interior) pass rush, better safeties and possible improvement at corner and ILB.

Is that enough for me to believe they'll make that big of a jump? Not really, but coupled with an improved offense and ST I see the potential. Here's hoping it works out that way.

[RandyHolt]

Haslett's history is history.

 

He is the defensive coordinator of your 2014 Washington Redskins. 

 

If that is a problem, the wrath of fans should be directed to who retained him. I said the same last year. Blame Mike. 

[LD0506]

As much as I get the rancor directed at Has, c'mon now, can we be honest? Shanny was forcing Slowik on him, at a couple different positions as I recall. If that's not interfering what is?Is it fair to dump it on on Haslett?

 

Jimbo is definitely on the bubble, and I think if he chokes he may be gone by Halloween (just hope the season isn't).

[skins island connection]

As much as I get the rancor directed at Has, c'mon now, can we be honest? Shanny was forcing Slowik on him, at a couple different positions as I recall. If that's not interfering what is?Is it fair to dump it on on Haslett?

 

Jimbo is definitely on the bubble, and I think if he chokes he may be gone by Halloween (just hope the season isn't).

 

 Uh, yea ! lol.

 Well, honestly we do not know exactly WHY Mike was meddling, but IMO it was probably because he saw that Haslett wasn't/couldn't get the job done.

 There would be no reason for Mike to interfere if the defense was holding its own, so there has to be a logical reason why he did what he did. I doubt it was an ego trip, as some simply look at Mike as a **** control freak, but he actually cleaned up the zoo regime that was in place due to the earlier coaching burps.

 

It just does not make sense, and i'm sorry but I can't hang my hat on the excuse that 'well Mike interfered and handcuffed Haslett'; I just don't see the logic in that. Haslett has continually under-performed everywhere he's been, and the records speak for themselves, hence the curiousity of why he's still collecting a check.

 

If I or you didn't get our job done at our work, we'd be seasoning curly fries right now, so it becomes a performance/results question in a performance/results type of league. Saying that we don't have quality players only goes so far, because a coach who can teach players and enable them to excel at their positions is what coaching is about. He's just not doing that.

[Mahons21]

Just to clarify a few things that are being misconstrued in here:

 

"Haslett took a great defense and made them average"

 

Haslett had a top 5 defense by DVOA in PIT for two of his 3 years, his final year he was in the low 20's, that is not nearly enough data to show a trend, it can just as easily be argued it was an outlier.  Furthermore, if he was doing such a bad job, why did he go from being a DC to a HC, that's a promotion in the NFL.  Not to mention, his first year as HC he took a what 3-13 team to 10-6 and was coach of the year, following that poor stint in PIT.

 

"A defensive coordinator's #1 job is to coach"

 

No.  No it's not.  It is to design a scheme that utilizes the players in the best way possible in the offseason, and to game plan for the upcoming opponent and call the plays during the season.  That's why he's a coordinator, not a linebacker COACH, dline COACH.  As I've said, it becomes extremely difficult to gameplan when you have one-dimensional players because you become very predictable.

 

Want to blitz?  Well then you need guys who can make the tackle, and no it's not Haslett's fault the Redskins don't have players talented enough to tackle, that is a talent issue period.

 

"Mike wasn't controlling on defense, it was because Haslett was doing a poor job that he stepped in"

 

Then why was it Mike who chose the alignment before Haslett could even do his job?  Mike chose a 34 with personnel suited to a 43, not Haslett.

 

 

If anyone understands enough about football to specifically say what a good coordinator would have done differently, not some vague BS like "he should have made better adjustments" , "he doesn't connect with the players" etc.  If you would have run a more aggressive scheme would, how would you blitz?  would you run overloads and put Kerringan/Rak out in coverage?  Would you have run man blitzes and forced our awful secondary to make the tackle?  What would you have done?  Because Haslett experimented with A LOT last year, and I mean A LOT, there were countless people playing different positions in attempt to actually put an adequate level of talent on the field.  Overload blitzes were used, corner blitzes were used, LB blitzes were used.  None of it was very successful.

[ILikeBilly]

Because Haslett experimented with A LOT last year, and I mean A LOT, there were countless people playing different positions in attempt to actually put an adequate level of talent on the field.  Overload blitzes were used, corner blitzes were used, LB blitzes were used.  None of it was very successful.

So, in your opinion, does Haslett have the talent to be more creative this year?  We have 1 talented rookie, growth from 2nd year players, London is gone (I think this is a good thing at this time) and Hatcher.  Is that enough?

[Mahons21]

So, in your opinion, does Haslett have the talent to be more creative this year?  We have 1 talented rookie, growth from 2nd year players, London is gone (I think this is a good thing at this time) and Hatcher.  Is that enough?

 

Yes, but it is dependent on a few things.  Hatcher's health, Clark's ability to play at a high level despite his age, development of players like K Robinson and D Amerson.

 

If Hatcher is dealing with nagging injuries, if Clark has a drop off in his level of play, Amerson still only shows flashes, and K Robinson is either hurt or not the coverage LB with thought he might be, then he's fairly hampered still.

 

And I agree re: London

[skins island connection]

Just to clarify a few things that are being misconstrued in here:

 

"Haslett took a great defense and made them average"

 

Haslett had a top 5 defense by DVOA in PIT for two of his 3 years, his final year he was in the low 20's, that is not nearly enough data to show a trend, it can just as easily be argued it was an outlier.  Furthermore, if he was doing such a bad job, why did he go from being a DC to a HC, that's a promotion in the NFL.  Not to mention, his first year as HC he took a what 3-13 team to 10-6 and was coach of the year, following that poor stint in PIT.

 

Well, there was this guy named Mueller who was friends with Haslett, and being Haslett had already coached at N.O. they thought it would be a good fit.  But then again, pre-Sean Peyton Saints were perennial losers. Oh, while you're at it, ask Willie Roaf about the bus Haslett threw him under. Despite what some say, Roaf was hot about that.

 

"A defensive coordinator's #1 job is to coach"

 

Did I say that?  Must have been a typo, because I always say coaches coach players play.

 

No.  No it's not.  It is to design a scheme that utilizes the players in the best way possible in the offseason, and to game plan for the upcoming opponent and call the plays during the season.  That's why he's a coordinator, not a linebacker COACH, dline COACH.  As I've said, it becomes extremely difficult to gameplan when you have one-dimensional players because you become very predictable.

 

Want to blitz?  Well then you need guys who can make the tackle, and no it's not Haslett's fault the Redskins don't have players talented enough to tackle, that is a talent issue period.

 

"Mike wasn't controlling on defense, it was because Haslett was doing a poor job that he stepped in"

 

Then why was it Mike who chose because  the alignment before Haslett could even do his job?  Mike chose a 34 with personnel suited to a 43, not Haslett.

 Thats a good head scratcher because i'm not sure; Mike did want the 3-4 but why he thought Haslett could run it is beyond me. Its been proven that he can't.

 

If anyone understands enough about football to specifically say what a good coordinator would have done differently, not some vague BS like "he should have made better adjustments" , "he doesn't connect with the players" etc.  If you would have run a more aggressive scheme would, how would you blitz?  would you run overloads and put Kerringan/Rak out in coverage?  Would you have run man blitzes and forced our awful secondary to make the tackle?  What would you have done?  Because Haslett experimented with A LOT last year, and I mean A LOT, there were countless people playing different positions in attempt to actually put an adequate level of talent on the field.  Overload blitzes were used, corner blitzes were used, LB blitzes were used.  None of it was very successful.

 

Bu...bu... I thought Mike was calling the plays?  And to answer one statement,  if your players believe in you, they will execute better, communicate better, because the results were achieved because their DC/coach told them exactly what would happen and it did. Its not totally about x's and o's, its also about knowing your players, the players having trust in their DC/coach, because if he steers them the right way and they are successful, the relationship between them grows, as does the trust.

[Voice_of_Reason]

16th in points/game given up last year would have meant about 6.6 fewer points/game. Not sure how many wins that would have added, but that's a huge difference.

I don't have much faith in Haslett getting this D to that point, but I do see signs of (potential) improvement - better assistant coaches, better (interior) pass rush, better safeties and possible improvement at corner and ILB.

Is that enough for me to believe they'll make that big of a jump? Not really, but coupled with an improved offense and ST I see the potential. Here's hoping it works out that way.

 

Keep something in mind: The Colts last year were 11-5, won their division, and went to the playoffs.

 

The 'Skins offense moved the ball better than the colts.  Both rushing and passing offenses were better than the Colts. In terms of yards, the 'Skins were the 9th ranked offense, Colts were the 15th.  In terms of points, 'Skins scored 20.9 ppg, and Colts scored 24.4. 

 

The difference between 3-13 and 11-5? 

1. Turnovers.  Colts were significantly better than the 'Skins.  

2. Defense. 'Skins gave up 29.9 ppg.  That's statistically tied for last. Minn was technically last with 30ppg. .1 point over an entire season is statistically insignificant.   Colts were 9th, with 21 ppg. 

3. ST.  it's hard to quantify how much ST hurt the team, but they had the worst starting field position since FDR was President, so that's got to account for something.  

 

So, in order for the 'Skins to be much improved record wise, a few simple things have to happen:

 

1. They have to stop giving the ball away like candy at Halloween.  I think they will cut down on turnovers significantly.

2. The defense has to improve to middle-of-the-pack.  If they can get to 24 ppg given up, they'd be about a 16th ranked defense. Smack middle of the road average. And 24 ppg is not exactly a lofty goal.  We're not talking about the 85 bears here. (For the record, Seattle led the league with 14.4 ppg, and SF was second at 15.1. So I'm asking our defense to get to 10+ points from the top teams in the league.  Egads. Our expectations have dropped pretty low...) Heck, I'd say if the defense can't improve to 24 ppg, then everybody on the defensive side of the ball, from the coaches, players and player evaluators  needs to be fired, and they need to start all over again.  

3. ST needs to not be a complete and total catastrophe.  It shouldn't be.  They brought in a lot of ST type guys, it should swing around pretty quickly and not be a liability.

 

If they do those three things, they win 8 games.  If they do those 3 things AND the offense really takes off (like I think it will) they can win 10-11 games.

 

If they do not do those three things, it's going to be a LONG year. 

[darrelgreenie]

Uh, yea ! lol.

 Well, honestly we do not know exactly WHY Mike was meddling, but IMO it was probably because he saw that Haslett wasn't/couldn't get the job done.

 There would be no reason for Mike to interfere if the defense was holding its own, so there has to be a logical reason why he did what he did. I doubt it was an ego trip...

Lol, blamess Mike Shanahan.

Here's what you've said above: Mike Shanahan only meddled because the defense wasn't holding its own. But guess what? The defense WITH his still wasn't getting it done.

 

And that is all we know. Mike or Haslett it doesn't matter; we don't know who did what to who so to speak.

We don't know who made what call or choose the gameplan.

 

The only thing we know is that last year's defense wasn't good enough.

We know the DL couldn't pass rush.

We Fletch's play declined.

We know the SS/FS couldn't tackle.

We know the special teams was historically bad and crippling in terms of field position.

We know the offense turned the ball over and couldn't sustain offense early in games.

 

Most of the above are personnel issues not scheme or coaching issues.

 

Saying that we don't have quality players only goes so far...

If a team doesn't have quality players what else is there to say?

That is a far as anything needs to go.

 

Personnel.

At its core the NFL is about personnel.

That is why the draft is a big deal.

That is why the FA is a big deal.

 

That is why signing Jason Hatcher was huge.

That is why they signed 3 special teams beasts in FA.

That is why we drafted Trent Murphy.

[Morneblade]

@Mahons21: DVOA may or may not mean anything at all. When you get down to it, POINTS are what constitutes wins and losses, and he drug down yards given up as well. DVOA is about as meaningful as ESPN's QB ranking IMO.

 

@DG: I can't believe you're actually defending Haslett.

[Mahons21]

PPG is a team stat not a defensive stat.

 

A team good at ball control will slow the game down and create less points in a game, making a defense appear better by a PPG metric.  A team that turns the ball over consistently and regularly on their own half of the field combined with a horrendous special teams unit will make a defense look significantly worse than it actually is.

 

YPG is the same.  An offense that is up tempo will create a faster game with more possessions that will equal more opportunities for the opponent to score, but if the defense can keep them out of scoring position every time despite giving up 50+ yards then they're still doing their job.  Hypothetically a defense allows 400 yards in a game and 7 pts, would you say the defense played poorly?  Of course not.

 

DVOA measures what a defense does in a given situation v what other defenses were able to do in that situation.  In my opinion it is the most accurate depiction of a defense, if you disagree that's fine, you can continue to use team metrics to judge a defense.

[mitchellvii]

The fact that we kept Haslett continues to mystify me.  I have already gone through multiple TV sets as victims to flying shoes whenever Haslett put in a 10 yard cushion on a game-changing 4th and 3.  The cushions, the soft zones, the endless blitzes that never reach the QB, the gaping holes across the middle, the complete lack of halftime adjustments.

 

Literally the worst Defensive Coach in the NFL and we KEPT him.

 

So Redskins.

[darrelgreenie]

..... @DG: I can't believe you're actually defending Haslett.

I can't believe anyone would think I'm defending Haslett.