KDawg Posted November 15, 2013 Author Share Posted November 15, 2013 Great post - thanks! Wondering if you would expand on this part, especially re: what you think is the issue (the lack of a dominate NT or something else). Well, I'm the OP. So my thoughts have been summed up there and in the above posts, specifically the one you quoted Too Long Didn't Read Version: I think our primary issue is the lack of a NT. I think we have a couple secondary/tertiary issues that wouldn't be as glaring if we had that monster in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brokenstriker Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 I was just wondering if there was anything significant in addition to the lack of a dominate NT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 16, 2013 Author Share Posted November 16, 2013 I was just wondering if there was anything significant in addition to the lack of a dominate NT A dominant DL in general masks a ton of issues. If we get a push up front, Kerrigan and Rak WILL collapse the pocket outside in. QBs would have to make quick decisions in the face of pressure or take the sack. We'd look a lot different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 A dominant DL in general masks a ton of issues. If we get a push up front, Kerrigan and Rak WILL collapse the pocket outside in. QBs would have to make quick decisions in the face of pressure or take the sack. We'd look a lot different. Goodness, I'd love to see that in conjunction with press man coverage (and someone added to the roster that could cover backs/TEs). Here's hoping Robinson gets healthy 'cause he could be that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Best guess at 43 U (against base I-form) w/ our personnel LDE-Bowen DT--Jarvis Jenkins 3-Tech-Cofield RDE-Kerrigan/Rak SAM-Rob Jackson MLB-Riley WLB-Fletcher (Will Compton) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 17, 2013 Author Share Posted November 17, 2013 You did it again. Bahahahah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Kdawg sometimes you post/act like quite the child. You know the common way to refer the DL playing at the LDE spot, even in a 43 under? http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/depth/_/name/sea/formation/4-3-defense ^^Bingo. You guessed it, or probably didn't guess it, LDE. -Cheers all the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martytheman Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Well, I'm the OP. So my thoughts have been summed up there and in the above posts, specifically the one you quoted Too Long Didn't Read Version: I think our primary issue is the lack of a NT. I think we have a couple secondary/tertiary issues that wouldn't be as glaring if we had that monster in the middle. But how many of those guys are in the league at any given time? 4 or 5 top tier guys? awfully hard to get a "monster" nt these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 17, 2013 Author Share Posted November 17, 2013 Kdawg sometimes you post/act like quite the child. You know the common way to refer the DL playing at the LDE spot, even in a 43 under? http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/depth/_/name/sea/formation/4-3-defense ^^Bingo. You guessed it, or probably didn't guess it, LDE. -Cheers all the same Same could be said for you, brother. My last post was intended as a playful jab. Hence the " Bahaha". But take it how you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rskin72 Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Kdawg....enjoyed reading your OP, though did not read every post after that. I just finished reading kirwan's book, and in there the ideal 3-4 defense personnel is NOT what we have. You identified the NT issue, and although Kirwan himself lauded Cofield, he just is not the space eater that the NT needs to be. And, yes, I agree that Haynesworthless could have been that, but did not work out. Also, London was not the atypical LB in a 3-4 scheme.....to short. Not sure that Carriker was as big of a loss as you imply. D was still not stout prior to his injury. In the 3-4, from the limited knowledge that I have, the 3 linemen occupy O linemen, and the LB's are key to making plays. I just do not see a lot of variety from our DC in how he uses our LB corps. I certainly think that there are 3-4 DC's that could come into Washington and make a difference with the players currently on this defense. So are you in favor of a new DC? Think you alluded to that..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 This is a good post, but there are heavy implications that every team who switches from 4-3 to 3-4 have to go through years of transition. This is not only not the case, but it also doesn't address that the skins are getting worse. Moreso, teams have transitioned in the past and maybe stayed middle of pack for a couple years before thriving, our defense is nowhere near middle of pack and reflects on coaching and play acquisition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 17, 2013 Author Share Posted November 17, 2013 There are no heavy implications from a general standpoint. I think there are from our standpoint. Least amount of new pieces needed is sticking with our current 3-4. A monster nose solves a lot. A one gap 3-4 is the next easiest, which is the same as a 4-3 under, in essence. And a true 4-3 is the hardest transition... For us. Having said that, getting a nose could be more difficult than any of those other transitions. Our defense is the way it is simply due to a lack of a true nose, a bi-polar scheme, and an aging ILB. That's my thought. Not all teams would struggle with the transition. A key cog is a one technique/nose type player either way. Haynesworth would have fit well. Too bad he didn't want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 I have seen enough of this pathetic 3-4 abortion of Haslett! Fire his dumb ass and get the damn 4-3 back in Washington. Whats the difference? Historically bad with the 3-4, historically bad!!! One thing is a fact, this 3-4 defense is not better, has never been better and will never be better than any 4-3 defense we have ever placed on the field in the history of this team, ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinSkinsWin83 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 There are no heavy implications from a general standpoint. I think there are from our standpoint. Least amount of new pieces needed is sticking with our current 3-4. A monster nose solves a lot. A one gap 3-4 is the next easiest, which is the same as a 4-3 under, in essence. And a true 4-3 is the hardest transition... For us. Having said that, getting a nose could be more difficult than any of those other transitions. Our defense is the way it is simply due to a lack of a true nose, a bi-polar scheme, and an aging ILB. That's my thought. Not all teams would struggle with the transition. A key cog is a one technique/nose type player either way. Haynesworth would have fit well. Too bad he didn't want to. Colts don't have a true tackle. Coming from a tampa 2. Transition is not at all hard if you have the right coaches to teach their system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 18, 2013 Author Share Posted November 18, 2013 Colts don't have a true tackle. Coming from a tampa 2. Transition is not at all hard if you have the right coaches to teach their system. They have a different system and a different type of personnel. Again, I'm speaking about our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 18, 2013 Author Share Posted November 18, 2013 One thing that stuck out to me, granted it was vs. a pass attempt, but it still stood out, was Kerrigan's ability to take on a double, clamp the tackles arm and free a rush lane for Orakpo. That gave me a tremendous jolt in faith in his ability to immediately transition to a 4-3 end, if a new DC came in and wanted to go that route. I'm still open for whatever a new DC does, but I think Kerrigan could absolutely play as an end for us on the weak side. DGs 4-3 under set is looking better and better. I still would like a bigger 1-technique/shade technique player, and we'd need some more pieces, but if we're going to transition to a 4-3 then starting with the 4-3 under is a good first step. Having said that, this also sheds some light on the defense. I won't say Haslett, in particular, seeing how no one really has any kind of clue as to who is running the defense right now. I'll just say the defense. We were poor as a whole, but given the slight glimpses of positive we've seen this season from this unit, it really makes me wonder why we're not more creative with the D. Kerrigan at end took on two blockers, clamped the tackle to keep him engaged and opened the rush lane for an explosive Rak sack. That's how you have to scheme a defense. Complicate it. Move guys around a little bit. London Fletcher's sack was an excellent call with excellent execution. We have moments of brilliance on defense. We need to stay creative with our packages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 So let's assume we drop Haslett and bring in an actual 3-4 DC ... I've kind of been making this NT claim for quite some time. A stud NT is not easy to come by ... but we could certainly at least try to snag someone capable of holding down that spot. If there is a difference-making NT available at the top of the 2nd round I think that's where we have to go. What is Cofield's flexibility? Can be be put at one of the end spots in the 3-4? I would think he would at least be a valuable rotation piece. I do agree with the idea that our LBs can collapse the ends, but that is what has killed us all year. We have gotten zero pressure up the middle. QBs simply step UP as our ends rush around them. Kind of the opposite of what teams do to our OL on offense haha. So hypothetically. Stick with the 3-4 ... use a 2nd on a NT. Release Bowen (saves lots of cap space). Bring back Orakpo at a reduced price (buying into the collapsed middle) or just let him go and sign Jackson long-term. I think this team will have tons of cap space so why not utilize it where you need to? 1. Draft or sign NT (2nd/3rd) 2. Draft or sign ILB (2nd/3rd) 3. Draft or sign a DE (4th/5th or middle-range FA) 4. Sign a CB (Talib?) 5. Re-sign Riley 6. Re-sign Jackson or Orakpo DE: Carriker, Cofield, Jenkins, 5th rounder NT: 2nd Rounder, Baker ILB: Riley, Robinson, young FA, Kehl, 6th round pick OLB: Kerrigan, Orakpo, Jenkins, Tapp, FA backup CB: Talib, Hall, Amerson, Crawford, 4th Rounder S: Rambo, P. Thomas, Doughty, 3rd rounder/FA (stud?) I can't imagine those 6 options cost us a ton of cap space ... at least in the big picture, considering we should start out with around $40 million ... or more if we let someone like Bowen go. I think those would go a long way for our defense in '14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayAction Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 As I watch opposing defenses playing the Redskins there seems to be a recurring theme - - their LBs seem faster, more aggressive and better tacklers than the Skins. Philly's 2 DEs 1NT and 1 OLB were able to put pressure on RG3 while the second OLB was free to defend against the stretch plays and short passes. Skins generally rush both OLB and the 2 interior LBs are the only heavies left to blow up the running plays. It's not working for the Skins. Fletcher is a ghost of his former self and Riley can't do it all himself. I think the defense needs a major retooling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.