I admit, I was wrong about Joe Barry

[TSO]

That's not the case for a 1 gap scheme though, right?  Penetration is the name of the game.  This is why (at least in part) we 1) didn't try too hard to bring Knighton back, 2) didn't draft a behemoth NT, and 3) drafted stack and shed ILBs Spaight and Daniels in successive years.

 

To add to this, listen to Barry right around the 7:00 mark (about right dab in the middle of the sound bar, click the question mark if you want to know what time you're on) here:

 

http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/wtem/media/mpeg/05_04_16_Joe_Barry-1462393169.mp3

 

People might not like what he said there, but it makes sense in a 1 gap scheme. It really does.

 

As for "who is going to play at NT", he also answers that there as well. Some rotation of Reyes, Ziggy, Golston, Ionnadis and Baker is likely, all who've played on the nose at times in their career.    

 

 

Btw, that interview has so many good nuggets in general, be a shame for anyone to miss. Love the stuff about Preston Smith towards the end... very interesting and it's not coachspeak at all. 

[Morneblade]

You're obsession over one position is tired.

 

Then /scroll

We added a run defending safety, which is the position that changes our defense.

 

Which I really liked, of did you miss that?

 

We did add a pick who can play Nose, just not the one you wanted or where you wanted it.

 

I wanted 2, because we didn't have one on the roster. And it's asking a lot to have a 5th rounder be your guy right off the bat.

We added a run stopping ILB.

 

Which I was very happy about, or did you miss that?

We went right up the middle on defense.

Also, we're adding extremely scheme specific players to this team, which obviously means, the coaching isn't changing any time soon, barring an absolutely obvious coaching break down.

 

And I'm looking at that scheme and see a big hole. NT in ANY version of the 3/4 is the most important guy on the defense. Not just my opinion, but the opinion of the coaches that run it. And it Joe Barry, who hasn't been good at all as a DC.

[Koolblue13]

Well, too bad. I guess we'll find out. We've added talent to a defense with hardly any and are allowing a coach to improve and grow.

Our defense is like the old cowboys 34 with Ratliff, not the patriots with wilfork.

[Commander -JB-]

Pretty sure that Wade Phillips was blessed with an amazing group of talent in Denver. Are we to believe he would have had the same success with the Redskins personnel? Cmon now.

[Morneblade]

Pretty sure that Wade Phillips was blessed with an amazing group of talent in Denver. Are we to believe he would have had the same success with the Redskins personnel? Cmon now.

Wade Phillips has been great as a DC for decades. As a HC, not so good but stellar as a DC. He might not have gotten us to #1, but I bet it would have been a much better D overall.

[Koolblue13]

We've got a younger coach, from the Wade tree. We're adding talent. Give it time.

[SkinsGuy]

We didn't look good all season. The first 2 games were good, and then it was all downhill. Weeks 3 and 4 were not bad in run D, but not good in pass D, after that 176, 221, 190 and 161 for rushing yards to the halfway point of the season. By week 4 both pass and run D were terrible. We lack players, and I don't think Barry is very good and won't get us better than the sum of our parts.

 

I'm not sure if you got what I meant (maybe you did), but when I talked about "first half" and "second half", I meant of each game. Not the season.

 

It seemed like the team would start off the game playing run D pretty good in the first half of a game, but by the second half of a game, players would start wearing out due a lot to lack of rotation due to injuries.

 

The inactive list and the injury report when we played better teams like the Patriots, Panthers, and Jets (especially the Jets) was staggering.

 

Not saying that was the only problem, but it did, I feel, contribute mightily to the teams' defense issues.

[bowhunter]

I just saw Sly Williams in Denver won't be returning off of his rookie deal. He could be a good addition at DT to play rotational NT in base sets...

I immediated googled "Sly Williams."  Ex-NBA player turned rapist. I'm not sure he fits Scotty McGems player profile lol.

[Morneblade]

I'm not sure if you got what I meant (maybe you did), but when I talked about "first half" and "second half", I meant of each game. Not the season.

 

It seemed like the team would start off the game playing run D pretty good in the first half of a game, but by the second half of a game, players would start wearing out due a lot to lack of rotation due to injuries.

 

The inactive list and the injury report when we played better teams like the Patriots, Panthers, and Jets (especially the Jets) was staggering.

 

Not saying that was the only problem, but it did, I feel, contribute mightily to the teams' defense issues.

No, I took this in a completely different way. I thought you were talking about the season as a whole, first 8 games, vs 2nd 8 games, which is why I posed the numbers I did. I can't really comment about 1st half/2nd half of each game, I'd have to go back and watch or go look at splits. I won't get to that tonight, going to bed soon.

 

Agreed about how many injuries we had. I think we had 15 guys on IR at one point, people don't realize just how decimated we were, especially on defense. However, even healthy there were some serious issues on defense. Getting guys back will help, but hopefully we've upgraded enough so last years starters will be depth up the middle.

[skinny21]

Good point, but we were poor there too.

You know, my impression was that the team did a pretty good job of pressuring the quarterback, even if we were exactly middle of the pack in terms of sacks. I've consistently said that we might actually miss Hatcher (and his ability to rush the qb), but that I felt he was a weakness in the run game. I also felt that while Knighton was decent against the run (much more so on short yardage), he didn't lend much as a pass rusher. So, reading your reply, I did the smallest amount of research I could, lol, and came up with this...

Per PFF (their list of top 10 defensive lines):

9. Washington Redskins (7)

Starters: OLB Trent Murphy, DE Chris I. Baker, NT Terrence Knighton, DE Jason Hatcher, OLB Ryan Kerrigan

Rotation: DE Ricky Jean-Francois, DE Stephen Paea, DE Kedric Golston, OLB Preston Smith

Washington’s front is not the stoutest against the run, but they have a number of consistent pass rushers. Ryan Kerrigan and Trent Murphy were not outstanding by any means, but they combined for a +16.7 cumulative pass rush grade. Interior defensive lineman Chris Baker (82.7) and Jason Hatcher (74.6) also pushed the pocket on a consistent basis. The former also played the run well in 2015 (81.7 run defense grade), unlike his teammate, Hatcher (48.4 run defense grade), who’s been a specialist pass rusher for awhile. Jean-Francois and Knighton combined for a +13.8 cumulative run defense grade, giving Washington a pair of stout run defenders. Stephen Paea (75.8) also proved to be a useful free agent addition, despite getting on the field for just 221 snaps. Preston Smith gives Washington some depth on the edge, even if he ultimately ended up with a poor overall grade this season (68.8). He’s flashed serious potential as a pass rusher, finishing the year with eight sacks and 35 combined pressures.

Sure, you have to take it with a grain of salt, but it's interesting.

I think it helps if you look at last year's team in the following way - the DL (including the OLBs) was decent vs the run (very good in short yardage), with some notable weak links, and the same (or a little better) with the pass rush. The secondary struggled vs the pass and rush, though their were some bright spots. The ILBs also struggled against both pass and rush with a slight shift in either depending on who was playing... though maybe lacking the bright spots.

If that's the basic view of the D, then the team would want to get more consistency from the DL, better (and more consist) play in the secondary, and better play from ILB spots.

In terms of consistency from the DL - they cut Hatcher (good vs the pass, poor vs the run), let Knighton walk (decent vs run, not a lot vs the pass) and added guys with perhaps a bit more versatility in Hood, Reyes and Ioannidis - guys that can hold up vs run and pass. They also get Galette back (though I question his ability vs the run), Smith should be further along, they get Paea back (hopefully improved with more experience in the system), and Murphy added into the mix.

Tackling was an issue for the secondary... now we have Norman, Cravens and Fuller added to some guys that did tackle well (on balance) - Breeland, Dunbar, Jarrett and Hall (though Jarrett's a big question mark, Ihenacho returns as well).

Improving the coverage by the secondary as they did also stands to turn more of those pressures by the into sacks.

The truly questionable spot is ILB. Yes, they have Spaight (more suitable to take on blockers than guys like Compton and Riley) and added another of that ilk in Daniels, but the position is far from set. That, I think, is where we may really struggle to stop the run. I think Compton and Foster would work better behind a line that could keep them clean, though it's entirely possible they show improvement by virtue of added experience and better play around them. I don't expect the young guys to start anytime soon (barring injury), but I think they could be the future - the ability to take on blockers is a key element for ILBs playing behind a 1 gapping DL.

Anyway, IMO, the rankings (PFF's and Cooley's) and stats (missed tackles/pressure, etc) seem to support the above viewpoint, and thus our Free Agency and Draft make a bit more sense (of course, you have to take into account going BPA the first 4 rounds or so).

[Morneblade]

You know, my impression was that the team did a pretty good job of pressuring the quarterback, even if we were exactly middle of the pack in terms of sacks. 

I agree, I think we were better there. In fact I really didn't have a issue with how our front 7 was against the pass, missing Galette. Was never a fan of Murphy though.

I think it helps if you look at last year's team in the following way - the DL (including the OLBs) was decent vs the run (very good in short yardage), with some notable weak links, and the same (or a little better) with the pass rush. The secondary struggled vs the pass and rush, though their were some bright spots. The ILBs also struggled against both pass and rush with a slight shift in either depending on who was playing... though maybe lacking the bright spots.

 

I'm going to disagree here. In very obvious short yardage rush situations we were good, but we were not good in just about ever other situation. And we were really weak up the middle

If that's the basic view of the D, then the team would want to get more consistency from the DL, better (and more consist) play in the secondary, and better play from ILB spots.

In terms of consistency from the DL - they cut Hatcher (good vs the pass, poor vs the run), let Knighton walk (decent vs run, not a lot vs the pass) and added guys with perhaps a bit more versatility in Hood, Reyes and Ioannidis - guys that can hold up vs run and pass. They also get Galette back (though I question his ability vs the run), Smith should be further along, they get Paea back (hopefully improved with more experience in the system), and Murphy added into the mix.

Tackling was an issue for the secondary... now we have Norman, Cravens and Fuller added to some guys that did tackle well (on balance) - Breeland, Dunbar, Jarrett and Hall (though Jarrett's a big question mark, Ihenacho returns as well).

Improving the coverage by the secondary as they did also stands to turn more of those pressures by the into sacks.

The truly questionable spot is ILB. Yes, they have Spaight (more suitable to take on blockers than guys like Compton and Riley) and added another of that ilk in Daniels, but the position is far from set. That, I think, is where we may really struggle to stop the run. I think Compton and Foster would work better behind a line that could keep them clean, though it's entirely possible they show improvement by virtue of added experience and better play around them. I don't expect the young guys to start anytime soon (barring injury), but I think they could be the future - the ability to take on blockers is a key element for ILBs playing behind a 1 gapping DL.

 

I  agree with all of this.

Anyway, IMO, the rankings (PFF's and Cooley's) and stats (missed tackles/pressure, etc) seem to support the above viewpoint, and thus our Free Agency and Draft make a bit more sense (of course, you have to take into account going BPA the first 4 rounds or so).

 

My overall issue is this, we need 2 NT's (you need a guy for depth) and we only have one that I think can play it, and will actually be playing it. That guy, if he puts on 15 pounds is Matt Ioannidis and is a 5th round rook. I like the pick, and think he could do well there, I'm just not sold on him being a starter, day one. I think Baker could be a productive starter, but he won't be there most of the time, if at all from what I have heard. That's why I was so up on Billings in the 4th round (or any other DT/NT in any of the other rounds that was a good fit, it wasn't just about Billings) because IMO, we had zero guys that would/could play there. I've seen Kedric Golston listed as the starting NT. That really isn't good. In fact, it's really bad.

 

Listen, I'm old skool, and I believe you build great teams from the trenches out. You build great lines (which is a reason I prefer the 4-3 over the 3-4) and that is what wins championships. Which is why I'm concerned with both our OL (C, LG and to be harsh, RT and RG in the run game) and DL. Neither are close to dominate. Both have IMO, big holes in them. And I believe that having great lines masks holes elsewhere, while the opposite is not nearly as true. So, I'm concerned. I realize  maybe most people today are more concerned with flashy pieces, but when the weather gets bad and you can't run the ball or stop the run, you run into big problems at the end of the season and playoffs.

 

That is why everyone is so sick and tired of me on this. I see holes in what are IMO our most important areas.

[Wildbunny]

Wade Phillips has been great as a DC for decades. As a HC, not so good but stellar as a DC. He might not have gotten us to #1, but I bet it would have been a much better D overall.

 

Not sure Wade Philips would have had better results here than Denver with Joe Barry as DC. Pretty sure it would have been all alike.

 

My overall issue is this, we need 2 NT's (you need a guy for depth) and we only have one that I think can play it, and will actually be playing it. That guy, if he puts on 15 pounds is Matt Ioannidis and is a 5th round rook. I like the pick, and think he could do well there, I'm just not sold on him being a starter, day one. I think Baker could be a productive starter, but he won't be there most of the time, if at all from what I have heard. That's why I was so up on Billings in the 4th round (or any other DT/NT in any of the other rounds that was a good fit, it wasn't just about Billings) because IMO, we had zero guys that would/could play there. I've seen Kedric Golston listed as the starting NT. That really isn't good. In fact, it's really bad.

 

Listen, I'm old skool, and I believe you build great teams from the trenches out. You build great lines (which is a reason I prefer the 4-3 over the 3-4) and that is what wins championships. Which is why I'm concerned with both our OL (C, LG and to be harsh, RT and RG in the run game) and DL. Neither are close to dominate. Both have IMO, big holes in them. And I believe that having great lines masks holes elsewhere, while the opposite is not nearly as true. So, I'm concerned. I realize  maybe most people today are more concerned with flashy pieces, but when the weather gets bad and you can't run the ball or stop the run, you run into big problems at the end of the season and playoffs.

 

That is why everyone is so sick and tired of me on this. I see holes in what are IMO our most important areas.

I thought you were above this now... Looks like you're still grevious on it, and it won't change before next season. That's getting old. That's what, the third thread where you complain about the 'supposed' lack of NT?

 

This guy is our DC:

 

He's even checking grass' height, so he have everything under control.

 

but perhaps you preferred this one:

[Morneblade]

 

Not sure Wade Philips would have had better results here than Denver with Joe Barry as DC. Pretty sure it would have been all alike.

 

Then you don't know Wade Phillips. He's been one of the top, if not the top DC for decades. DECADES. Joe Barry has had the worst defense, ever and marginally better one last year as a DC. If this is your assumption, then I don't even know what to say about that.

 

I thought you were above this now... Looks like you're still grevious on it, and it won't change before next season. That's getting old. That's what, the third thread where you complain about the 'supposed' lack of NT?

 

Then move on. It's not that hard, trust me. I do it every day. I decided it was best to get out of the other threads with this, as it was derailing to some point from the OP in them. Instead of starting another thread, I decided to reinvigorate this one with NT, and the fact that I STILL think Barry sucks. So, I'm sure you'll be happy to hear that.

 

This guy is our DC:

 

*pic of Joe Barry

 

He's even checking grass' height, so he have everything under control.

 

Yep, did a great job last year. Gave up over 6000 yards last year. And was obvious out-coached in several games. Including the playoffs. If you want to call a freefall "under control", ok. Just don't expect me to agree with it.

 

but perhaps you preferred this one:

 

*Pic if Jim Haslett

 

Maybe you should check my posting history on Hazmat. In short, I was one of his most vocal opponents to being hired, and never stopped. However, IMO, Joe Berry is a lateral move. We did not improve at all. But guess who was available when we hired Joe Barry? Wade Phillips. And his son was coaching for us at the time. Bet we could have had him. And we would have been better last year defensively. Significantly better. Would have won a few more games, and I bet we get at least one win in the playoffs, if not more.

[Koolblue13]

Maybe you should start a thread asking why you're the only one not ignoring the NT position and how important it is to the type of defense you think we run, so everyone can correct you in one place and you won't have to keep typing the same things in every thread.

[Wildbunny]

Then you don't know Wade Phillips. He's been one of the top, if not the top DC for decades. DECADES. Joe Barry has had the worst defense, ever and marginally better one last year as a DC. If this is your assumption, then I don't even know what to say about that.

That's still a player's game. Check our roster and what Denver had last year, then check injuries... You're dreaming kid if Philips would have made way better than what Barry did here last year.

And don't bring back the Matt Millen team please...

 

Then move on. It's not that hard, trust me. I do it every day. I decided it was best to get out of the other threads with this, as it was derailing to some point from the OP in them. Instead of starting another thread, I decided to reinvigorate this one with NT, and the fact that I STILL think Barry sucks. So, I'm sure you'll be happy to hear that.

 

No, you're definately not moving from it. You just said you were "over it".

 

Maybe you should start a thread asking why you're the only one not ignoring the NT position and how important it is to the type of defense you think we run, so everyone can correct you in one place and you won't have to keep typing the same things in every thread.

I know 3 guys that aren't that chilling about the fact that we don't have a real NT, Barry, Gruden and McCloughan.

 

Now, I'll stash Morneblade in the Rule #12 section...

[TSO]

To add to this, listen to Barry right around the 7:00 mark (about right dab in the middle of the sound bar, click the question mark if you want to know what time you're on) here:

http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/wtem/media/mpeg/05_04_16_Joe_Barry-1462393169.mp3

People might not like what he said there, but it makes sense in a 1 gap scheme. It really does.

As for "who is going to play at NT", he also answers that there as well. Some rotation of Reyes, Ziggy, Golston, Ionnadis and Baker is likely, all who've played on the nose at times in their career.

Btw, that interview has so many good nuggets in general, be a shame for anyone to miss. Love the stuff about Preston Smith towards the end... very interesting and it's not coachspeak at all.

I just noticed this post doesn't show the sound bar on my iPhone, lol. It looks like I'm losing it if you read it there.

Well, quoting it here somehow made it appear, but just as a link. It was all cool and embedded on the desktop. Weird.

[kingarthur65]

<STAFF EDIT, RULE 11>

That is why everyone is so sick and tired of me on this. I see holes in what are IMO our most important areas.

Can you give us an idea of some of the attributes you are looking for in a starting NT for this team?

[TSO]

Can you give us an idea of some of the attributes you are looking for in a starting NT for this team?

Rule 11. Please do not use the “Quote” feature to quote pics, gifs, vids, or any large sections of text.

It unnecessarily extends and clutters threads and is annoying. Edit them out.

If you would like to respond to the contents of a particular post, simply quote the sentence or idea that you're commenting upon, not the entire post if it's lengthy.

Morneblade, have you listened to that Barry interview I linked to? Particularly around the 7:00 mark.

If not, you should.

If so, what is it that you disagree with him on, and why? I thought he made some good sense considering the scheme, but I'm open to being wrong.

[skinny21]

 

You know, my impression was that the team did a pretty good job of pressuring the quarterback, even if we were exactly middle of the pack in terms of sacks. 

I agree, I think we were better there. In fact I really didn't have a issue with how our front 7 was against the pass, missing Galette. Was never a fan of Murphy though.

I think it helps if you look at last year's team in the following way - the DL (including the OLBs) was decent vs the run (very good in short yardage), with some notable weak links, and the same (or a little better) with the pass rush. The secondary struggled vs the pass and rush, though their were some bright spots. The ILBs also struggled against both pass and rush with a slight shift in either depending on who was playing... though maybe lacking the bright spots.

 

I'm going to disagree here. In very obvious short yardage rush situations we were good, but we were not good in just about ever other situation. And we were really weak up the middle

 

That is why everyone is so sick and tired of me on this. I see holes in what are IMO our most important areas.

 

I'm a bit confused by your first response above... I thought you said the DL was poor at generating pressure?  

 

I'm enjoying our discussion (and I certainly understand your questioning of the strength of our lines), but you seem set on blaming the DL for our porous run defense when 1) they're not playing a traditional, 2 gap, run-stuffing scheme and 2) the rest of the defense (with few exceptions) was atrocious vs the run.  The funny part, is that as a (predominately) 1 gapping line, the focus of the DL will be penetration... which you (seemingly) agreed they did a good job with.

 

I'm going to go ahead and provide some interesting links that will further discuss just how bad the linebackers and safeties were vs the run, just in case it'll help:  

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

 

This one's interesting, shows us 30th for second level (5-10) and open field (10+) yards vs running backs, but 1st in power rank.  I don't know if that could more clearly illustrate my point/opinion that the DL was good and the ILBs/safeties were terrible.  Sure, you could blame the line for not keeping them clean, but then your problem's with the scheme, not the DL.

 

Had trouble finding anything from the end of the season on the topic - I think these next two were late Oct./early Nov. timeframe... still relevant though.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/11/11/five-redskins-on-pffs-midseason-worst-at-every-position-list/

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2015/11/09/a-closer-look-at-how-the-redskins-run-defense-went-awry-against-the-patriots/

[RedBeast]

Still arguing about a NT? Enough already. The draft was a week ago.

[Morneblade]

Maybe you should start a thread asking why you're the only one not ignoring the NT position and how important it is to the type of defense you think we run, so everyone can correct you in one place and you won't have to keep typing the same things in every thread.

 

I'll be keeping everything here from now on. Still waiting for actual corrections though.

 

That's still a player's game. Check our roster and what Denver had last year, then check injuries... You're dreaming kid if Philips would have made way better than what Barry did here last year.

And don't bring back the Matt Millen team please...

 

 

No, you're definately not moving from it. You just said you were "over it".

 

I know 3 guys that aren't that chilling about the fact that we don't have a real NT, Barry, Gruden and McCloughan.

 

Now, I'll stash Morneblade in the Rule #12 section...

1. Why don't you go and look at Wades' resume. it's a player's league, but a crap coordinator vs. a great coordinator makes a huge difference. And this "kid' is probably older than you.

2. I'm "moving on" from drafting Billings. Still need someone.

3. I dunno about that. McCloughan said himself that if someone asked him if he wouldn't take a NT in the first couple round, he'd laugh at them. Maybe he is looking for a June first cut?

 

Morneblade, have you listened to that Barry interview I linked to? Particularly around the 7:00 mark.

If not, you should.

If so, what is it that you disagree with him on, and why? I thought he made some good sense considering the scheme, but I'm open to being wrong.

I did. He actually goes and contradicts himself right off the bat. First thing they talk about is that the NT is the most important player in the 3-4 and that you can't just "put guys in there, they have to be NT's" And then he talks about just putting guys in there, like Reyes and Hood ((3-4 DE's) so at that point, I'm just like yeah, whatever dude. Keep your story straight for 30 seconds. I disagree that either of those 2 can play nose, and I don't think Golston can play nose either. I think Baker can.........be he wont be. He will be at DE.

 

My problem is this. Baker is our best NT, and he wont be playing there. Iaonnidis isn't ready yet, but might be pretty good. I want 2 guys I know are going to be good NT's for depth and rotation. Right now, I see Golston in some paper's depth chart as the starter. He's a well below average NT, especially in our system. Because he does not penetrate well, which is what we want our DL to do, right?

 

We have a lot of ends. We have Murphy, Hood, Reyes, Paea, Francois and (IMO) Golston and Baker. What I would like to see is Baker with Iaonnidis behind him at NT. Then, I would shut up, because we'd have a couple NT's. Easy.   

[Koolblue13]

Those are nose for our type of defense.

It's been explained to you multiple times, by everyone, even the coach.

[Morneblade]

I'm a bit confused by your first response above... I thought you said the DL was poor at generating pressure?  

 

I'm enjoying our discussion (and I certainly understand your questioning of the strength of our lines), but you seem set on blaming the DL for our porous run defense when 1) they're not playing a traditional, 2 gap, run-stuffing scheme and 2) the rest of the defense (with few exceptions) was atrocious vs the run.  The funny part, is that as a (predominately) 1 gapping line, the focus of the DL will be penetration... which you (seemingly) agreed they did a good job with.

 

I'm going to go ahead and provide some interesting links that will further discuss just how bad the linebackers and safeties were vs the run, just in case it'll help:  

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

 

Trimmed for space

Ok, took a look at the FO link, and correct me if I make a mistake in what it's saying, how I'm interpreting it. Some stats here I'm not 100% sure what they are saying.

 

Stuffed ranking was very low, only 19% (25th). From what I saw last year, that was from us not getting penetration and getting moved off the ball.

 

2nd level yards were very low as well, as you said (30). I'm not sure how that is measured. If it's from the LoS and your DL is getting moved, or if it judged in yardage from where the DL is compared to where the tackle is made?

 

We gave up 4.17 YPC up the middle. This was not as bad as out LE (4.62) but nearly 42% of the runs were up the middle. Keep in mind, we don't have a 360 pound Terrence Knighton (which I was not a fan off, too heavy) there anymore, nor the 330 pound version of him (which I wish we kept) that is in New England. Expect that change.

 

To your last point, I thought they were decent in helping collapse the pocket, but not good at getting penetration on running downs. does that help clear what I was saying up?

[TSO]

I did. He actually goes and contradicts himself right off the bat. First thing they talk about is that the NT is the most important player in the 3-4 and that you can't just "put guys in there, they have to be NT's" And then he talks about just putting guys in there, like Reyes and Hood ((3-4 DE's) so at that point, I'm just like yeah, whatever dude. Keep your story straight for 30 seconds. I disagree that either of those 2 can play nose, and I don't think Golston can play nose either. I think Baker can.........be he wont be. He will be at DE.

 

My problem is this. Baker is our best NT, and he wont be playing there. Iaonnidis isn't ready yet, but might be pretty good. I want 2 guys I know are going to be good NT's for depth and rotation. Right now, I see Golston in some paper's depth chart as the starter. He's a well below average NT, especially in our system. Because he does not penetrate well, which is what we want our DL to do, right?

 

We have a lot of ends. We have Murphy, Hood, Reyes, Paea, Francois and (IMO) Golston and Baker. What I would like to see is Baker with Iaonnidis behind him at NT. Then, I would shut up, because we'd have a couple NT's. Easy. 

 

Gotta be honest, I don't see the contradiction you're seeing here. Doc Walker is the one, first of all, who was saying what you're initially referring to, not Joe Barry. So Joe didn't contradict himself, unless you're claiming he's 100% in agreement with Doc.

 

This is how Doc framed the question (paraphrasing, emphasis mine):

 

"We talk a lot in here about when you go the 34 base. And, to me, 34... you gotta have a Nose Tackle. And you just can't pick a guy to line up that can play Nose. He either is or he isn't. To me. Do you have someone - and it's hard now in the shells when you're not even hitting anyone - but are you confident that you have a guy right now that can play Nose for you to the point where you're satisfied..."

 

 

Notice Doc is even putting the question in the context of his own understanding by saying "to me" a couple of times. 

 

Now, you're assuming Joe agrees with Doc there completely, number one. I get that, since Joe is saying "yeah" or "uh huh" while Doc is asking the question, but that's still an assumption. Anyone who's been interviewed knows that, while someone is asking a question, you sometimes nod while they're doing so or say things like "yeah", "mmhmm", "sure" while they're asking their question, but not because you agree with what they're saying or how they're framing it, just showing that you acknowledge you understand their question.

 

It's the answer that matters here. And Joe says, right away, that yes he does feel like he has guys that can play Nose and he talks about each player who has had a background playing that spot (Baker, Reyes, Ziggy, Golston and Ioannidis). Just because you don't agree with him about those guys doesn't mean he's contradicting himself. Sorry, Morneblade, just think you're way off base. 

 

When you say Baker is our best NT, but he won't be playing there... how do you know? When you say that Ioannidis isn't ready yet, again, how do you know for sure?

 

But let's say you're right about the above two... I can definitely say you're totally wrong about Golston, though. You see, he is actually pretty damn good as a short yardage/goalline 1 technique, so I have to assume you're just basing your idea about him on his name and not his actual play. I dare you to pull up some tape of him playing in that role and show me anything other than him doing well the majority of time. He actually made a bunch of plays there last season for us, arguably more than Knighton did until the last month of the season. 

 

So when you say, "He's a well below average NT, especially in our system. Because he does not penetrate well, which is what we want our DL to do, right?" I've got to assume you have no idea what you're talking about, lol.

 

Hey, maybe I'm wrong. But I won't believe you unless you show me, play-by-play, what you're talking about regarding Golston. Because I know what I saw. Maybe I'm just blind... again, I'm open to being proven wrong here, but there needs to be some substance. It's real easy to criticize Golston around here. 

 

Finally, we have no idea how good Reyes or Ziggy Hood could be in that role, either. And maybe it does end up like you are hoping for, with Baker manning that spot and Ioannidis behind him. 

 

But that gets us to the main point I wanted to get across by posting that link... when answering the above question Doc posed and Joe Barry said:

 

 

... And the thing you gotta understand, guys, not to get all technical football with ya... but you guys understand, and our fans. If you're shaded on the Center, we call that a 1 technique. If you're shaded on the Guard, we call that a 3 technique. If you're shaded on the Tackle, we call that a 5 technique. Well there's no difference between a 1, a 3, and a 5. It's all the same - You're shaded on the outside of an Offensive Lineman.    

 

A Nose Guard has got to take on a double team from a Center and Guard. A 3 technique has got to take on a double team from a Guard and Tackle. A 5 Technique has got to take a double team on from a Tackle and a TE! So what's the difference if you play 1, 3 or 5!? So, you always say "oh my God you gotta have this BIG....", I want guys that are football players that are strong, that can run; that can play the run when it's run, and rush the passer when it's pass. Whether you're a 1, a 3 or a 5, I don't care. So, to answer your question, Doc, we got guys and I feel good about it, I'm not worried.      

  

Now, you can oppose his philosophy. Question it. Whatever. But trying to make him out to be a bumbling fool who contradicts himself and can't stay coherent for "30 seconds"... I think you're losing your objectivity here because of how you view Barry, brother.

 

To me, this goes back to your lack of trust in him, and that's fine. I get it. I just wish you'd look a bit more deeper than just yardage (seems like you bring that up mostly when criticizing him), because outside of that there was a lot of good with how he ran the Defense like with situational D (i.e. 3rd downs, short yardage, goal line, end of game, surprise blitzes, etc...) as well as the way they handled a ridiculous amount of injuries everywhere except the Dline.     

[Koolblue13]

I read all of that subs and you're right on.