JamesMadisonSkins Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I hate that fans want to follow other teams ways if building a champion. It happens every year after the SB or the Patriots/Steelers/Packers are always mentioned. Build it to what's best for us. Why would you want the "Redskins" to do it the "Patriot" way. I don't see anything wrong with looking toward what other teams do and wanting us to adopt that. Not saying I want to be the Seahawks ... but they've certainly found a formula of building via the draft with physical defenders! Patriots always built through the draft, although they've certainly slacked on defense lately. But the theme of building through the draft and with young FAs rings true. I'm looking forward to a new approach this off-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JdoubleU Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I dont know if that's the formula. Seahawks d was great, but how often does the best D win? Rules benefit the o generally theses days. Hawks were just a better team today . The top 8 scoring offenses in NFL history all failed to win the Super Bowl. Of the best defenses I have ever seen (mid 70's Steelers, 84 Bears, 2000 Ravens, the Dolphins no name D, the LT led Giants, and these Seahawks) have all won. That's often enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 You need a complete team. That will never change. The Seahawks: Offense was 8th in scoring Special teams was 6th Specific to this game: The Bronco's brain trust on offense was unprepared for the fact that the Seahawks could get pressure with 4. Yes, I am saying the Bronco's gameplan and playcalling let them down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Gotta love premature fanjaculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 You need a complete team. That will never change. Quoted again for the truth. Sure the Seahawks defense was dominant yesterday, but let's not act like their offense and special teams was non-existent. Side note, I am highly disappointed in FOX for not showing a replay of Holiday getting hit on that kick return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Defense in the NFL is about 3 things 1) Harassing the passer via the front 4 and pass rush 2) Having physical DB's who can jam at the LOS and inside the 5 yard touch zone and disrupt routes 3) Is able to create turnovers Seattle has all of that, which really disrupts the best of passing attacks. We are light years away from that right now You missed one: TACKLING! How many times did a Bronco receiver catch the ball and was immediately surrounded and tackled by 3-4 players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrecker Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Defense in the NFL is about 3 things 1) Harassing the passer via the front 4 and pass rush 2) Having physical DB's who can jam at the LOS and inside the 5 yard touch zone and disrupt routes 3) Is able to create turnovers Seattle has all of that, which really disrupts the best of passing attacks. We are light years away from that right now I would be happy with a defense that could just tackle the person with the ball. Oops, beat me to it Riggo#44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 What we really need to do is find several 6'3 defensive backs who can run with small receivers and are sure tacklers. Because that is easy. It is entirely possible that Seattle has the best secondary in NFL history right now. This is Haynes/Hayes Raiders level stuff. So...I have no earthly idea how you copy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I would've never guessed we could use a great defense. I guess if the Broncos won, "we could use a great offense". Geniuses on here! While I see what you're saying the Redskins just decided to keep a horrible DC. I'm not getting the "we really need to improve the defense" vibe from this new regime. Are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 This is something else I liked from John Keim on ESPN this morning: I like that players such as Kam Chancellor play special teams. My guess is that he hasn’t lost the drive that turned him from a fifth-round pick in 2010 to a starter and Pro Bowler. Meanwhile, the Redskins had a sixth-round pick (Bacarri Rambo) who was not a good special-teams player. Nor was fifth-rounder Brandon Jenkins. Sean Taylor used to love playing on special teams. When guys have that sort of hunger, it trickles down. When you don’t -- and when you have veterans who would rather not be on there -- it also trickles down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Don't try to copy Seattle. Try to build your own identity. Offenses can win just fine in the NFL. See the Saints in 09 and Packers in '10. I think we're closer to being really good on offense than on defense. Try to build up a dominant offense, and lets see how far we can go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 This is something else I liked from John Keim on ESPN this morning: I think it all starts with leadership from coaching. Seattle's ST coach can motivate his players. Nobody wanted to play for Keith Burns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repo_4 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Enough of this RG3 this or that. Russell Wilson was just kicking back in the super bowl not asked to do much, hell he didn't even win the super bowl mvp ..first time a qb haven't won that since 2005. If we had the seahawks defense we will be going places..but some of us still think our qb has to be lights out for us to win the big one. You know you are damn good if you shut down the top offensive team to only 8 pts Your argument states the D is much more important than the O and that is the way to win SB's. If I knew nothing about football I would then assume that the game MVP would most always be from the D side of the ball. But, as you stated a QB has won the MVP each year since 2005. To me your argument kind of shoots itself in the foot. A dominating D is good to have but not a necessity, to me anyway. It makes it easier on an O but I would much rather have an outstanding O and a mediocre D than the other way around. With all that being said, yes, "RG3 this and that", because he is that important to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Haslett should adopt Seattle's philosophy and just play physical football, without worrying about getting flagged. Seattle's secondary is making contact with WRs on every play, knowing that the refs will not throw flags on every down and slow the game down to a crawl. They are willing to eat an occasional penalty in order to play physical with WRs on every down. It's smart. Instead of tip toeing around the new rules that benefit passing, they ignore it. Playing not to get penalized makes the D look too soft and cautious. The results are the secondary gets shredded, and they STILL get a PI called against them on occasion. Seattle says screw your rules. We're gonna make contact with your WRs knowing that the majority of the time, they will get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 While I see what you're saying the Redskins just decided to keep a horrible DC. I'm not getting the "we really need to improve the defense" vibe from this new regime. Are you? We'll see what they do in the draft and in FA. But for someone to start a thread saying, "we just need a great defense guys!", yeah well not **** Sherlock. I don't know any team that wouldn't want a great defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 [/ URL] http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/60761/redskins-can-learn-from-seahawks Seattle’s starting lineup includes five players selected in the last three drafts – only one in the first round. The Seahawks did a good enough job that you forget about the big miss on linebacker Aaron Curry as the fourth overall pick in 2009. [+] EnlargeAP Photo/G. Newman LowranceSafety Earl Thomas is one of just two first-round picks starting on the Seahawks' defense. 3. The Seahawks’ starting defense includes two former first-round picks (safety Earl Thomas, 2010; linebackerBruce Irvin, 2011). That’s it. The Redskins last season had five former first-round picks. But three of them were drafted by other teams. Way of life here. So the Seahawks have more picks in Rounds 4-7 (six) among their defensive starters than players selected in Rounds 1-3 (four). They also had a former undrafted free agent in Chris Clemons. Not every coach -- including good ones -- are strong at developing talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dont Taze Me Bro Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 We keep pretending like the NFL is a passing league now. In a way, yes, teams pass more. Which has made a good defense ALL the more neccessary. 3 of the last 4 NFL winners have been great defensive teams, even IN this "passing" age. And yet we are stuck with Jim Haslett. Way to go Bruce... This is a little misleading and not all entirely true. 2010 - Packers won but in addition to having the 5th ranked defense, they had the 9th ranked offense (loaded on both sides of the ball, including a top 5 QB). 2011 - Giants had the 27th ranked defense, 8th ranked offense (so spot on with this one). 2012 - Ravens had the 16th ranked offense but their defense that year was 17th overall (average at both ends of the ball, statistically speaking). This year, Seattle ranked 17th on offense, first on defense. You can count Green Bay in your argument, but they had a top offense and were playing against Pitt which had the #2 defense that year. Pitt's offense was mediocre (14th). Pitt was built more like Seattle was this year. Green Bay was just stacked. Giants/Pats both had horrible defenses and top 10 offenses. And the Ravens were just average. So 2 out of 4 won with defense or 1 out of 4 if you give the majority of credit to the Green Bay offense that year and in the playoffs. Edit - I should toss in that I want a top defense back, least hovering around the top 10 or better. But we need to fix the o-line first, give our QB time to throw the ball. I've been adamant in my belief that we need the following positions fixed: RT, RG, LG, C, WR (stud), NT (big boy) or DT (stud - if we switch back to 43), MLB (fletchs replacement), ILB, CB, SS, FS, P That's a lot of holes to fill and I didn't even include replacing Moss in the slot, should he not be back next year. We don't have a 1st round pick. The only thing going for us is the cap space in FA this year. Too many holes to fix in one draft/FA period, it's going to take a minimum of 2 years to fix everything if we get the right stop gaps in FA that can perform at a high level for 1-2 years so going into year 3, we can start drafting youth and their replacements. I hope I'm wrong. Im not saying we couldn't make a push for the playoffs next season or be a playoff team year 2 under Gruden, simply because the NFC East is that bad right now. But it will take a while to build a legitimate contender that can contest for a SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 What we really need to do is find several 6'3 defensive backs who can run with small receivers and are sure tacklers. Because that is easy. It is entirely possible that Seattle has the best secondary in NFL history right now. This is Haynes/Hayes Raiders level stuff. So...I have no earthly idea how you copy it. Amerson has the size. I'd like to see us make him a more physical CB. I like the 6-3 dude from Nebraska, Jean-Baptiste? Get him in the later rounds, maybe we have something there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planter Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Great to see defense prove it's still relevant in "the Big Game". Hope RGIII was watching Mr. Wilson closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planter Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I enjoy the annual "This just happened in the Super Bowl so I have a great idea: Let's do what just happened in the Super Bowl" thread. It's always fun. Yeah, what could anybody learn from studying the best in the world at their craft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celticsalmon Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 With Haslett as DC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yeah, what could anybody learn from studying the best in the world at their craft. Sure you can learn something, but we don't need a thread about it. It's not like the OP had some crazy idea to make us better. You don't think the other 31 teams wished their defense was great? "Guys, listen up, just had the best idea ever. We can win the Super Bowl if we have a great defense." Thanks Captain Obvious. What's next? "Guys, we can win more games next year if we just outscore our opponents." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The top 8 scoring offenses in NFL history all failed to win the Super Bowl. Of the best defenses I have ever seen (mid 70's Steelers, 84 Bears, 2000 Ravens, the Dolphins no name D, the LT led Giants, and these Seahawks) have all won. That's often enough for me. i think several others said it far better than me. the seahawks were a better team yesterday, and you dont look at one of the most dominant defensive performances ever in a super bowl and say 'if we can just do that'.......... to your point, you named 6-9 teams with great all time defenses out of the nearly 50 super bowls played and seem to think thats the formula. nobodys saying they wouldnt love a dominant defense. if only it were that easy..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatankgough Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Are the players tested after a win like this? I thought cheaters never win. Looked like they did a pretty good job of that yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 One thing the Seahawks had plenty of that the Redskins of late had none of.....confidence. The Coaches never went for the juggler when holding the lead, they simply went into run and get out alive mode. Other then, dare I say his name, Spurrier, the Redskins have lacked a confident guy. Be it ****y or cool, calm and confident, they haven't had it. Mike tried to be, but not in games, not they way he called them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.