I admit, I was wrong about Joe Barry

[goskins10]

Mike Nolan was fired by Dan Snyder as DC of the Redskins he was fired as the HC by Scot M. and he is the person that replaced Joe Barry at SD as the LBs coach (think he is tired of hearing, "that's not how Joe did it!" and now he is on NFL.com since he can't keep a job! Most of his jobs have been 1 or 2 seasons and gone. Now he can't even get a DC job! He can go **** himself. It's sour grapes as far as I can tell.

 

We got killed for signing FAs and going nowhere. Now we are doing it right and morons like Nolan are saying we aren't doing enough. He is ****ing idiot.

 

We are going to have bad games. Denver won the SB and lost to Oakland at home! Dallas was 12-4 and lost to us on MNF with out 3rd string QB. Last year we repaid the favor losing to them with their what 4tyh QB! The best team does not always win every game. We should be better. Maybe we will not be. But he has no idea, none whatsoever.

[Aireskoi]

Mike Nolan was fired by Dan Snyder as DC of the Redskins he was fired as the HC by Scot M. and he is the person that replaced Joe Barry at SD as the LBs coach (think he is tired of hearing, "that's not how Joe did it!" and now he is on NFL.com since he can't keep a job! Most of his jobs have been 1 or 2 seasons and gone. Now he can't even get a DC job! He can go **** himself. It's sour grapes as far as I can tell.

 

We got killed for signing FAs and going nowhere. Now we are doing it right and morons like Nolan are saying we aren't doing enough. He is ****ing idiot.

 

 

 

Yup, and I just remembered Scot fired him as HC in San Fran, yeah he's mad.

[Wildbunny]

Listening to Sirius Radio, Bob Papa asked Mike Nolan if Washington should be getting more credit this year because of the lack of drama around the team, the good drafts, and the focus on just football.  He listed a few other positives as well.

 

Mike nolan says no,(from memory) they're getting about the right amount of talk.  He said he thinks the "team is average at best" and "the defensive game planning is average at best".  He acknowledged that Norman was added but said they didn't really do anything else to get better,  He says the other 3 teams did much more to get on the path to more wins.

 

Well, GP was average at best with playing guys that may have been 4th, 5th or 6th stringer on many teams.

Not that bad to me.

 

And regarding teams that are average, I know two teams that went to the SB with average offense.

Now, sure we didn't do much to get better except:

- Cut dead wieghts.

- Get some injured players back.

- Get some playing time to youngsters.

- Add Greg Manusky to our Coaching staff...

 

Well, I'll stop here and won't talk of a supposed brilliant HC that never had a better record than 7-9.

[Master Blaster]

If the offense continues what it did last year or improves, all this defense really needs to do is be in the top 15-20 for this team to have a lot of success.  Of course, I wouldn't complain if they were top 1-2, but realistically, a top 5-7 offense with a top 15-20 defense should be in contention.

 

I believe both are realistic goals absent any injuries to major contributors. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

 

Mike nolan says no,(from memory) they're getting about the right amount of talk.  He said he thinks the "team is average at best" and "the defensive game planning is average at best".  He acknowledged that Norman was added but said they didn't really do anything else to get better,  He says the other 3 teams did much more to get on the path to more wins.

 

This is true though.  Our choice of schemes were limited due to personnel.  Terrance Knighton is athletic for being insanely heavy, but there's still a limit to what you can do with that much weight.  So in base packages we couldn't run stunts or other things with him.  Trent Robinson and Keenan Robinson were mucking their assignments up.  Mason Foster and Perry Riley couldn't do much in coverage so we were forced to do a lot more Cover 3.  The only defense I can recall where we really got creative was our Dime unit, and we only used that when DeAngelo Hall got healthy.  That unit had only one ILB, which was Will Compton.  Goldson, Jarrett, and Hall would take turns rotating into the box to act as a 2nd "linebacker".  This unit was basically what won us the 2nd Giants game.

 

There are several indicators that our coaches want to get more creative and do a broader array of things.  We want d-lineman who can play every spot.  We drafted Cravens whose a hybrid LB/S.  All of our Free Safeties have played Corner for years.  We're kicking an Edge player inside to play the 5 tech.

 

Our defensive roster last season, especially after injuries, was not a good one.  We had a whole lot of situational guys that were good at 1 thing.  I don't think any defensive coaches could really adapt between opponents with what we had.

[SkinsGuy]

Mike Nolan was fired by Dan Snyder as DC of the Redskins he was fired as the HC by Scot M. and he is the person that replaced Joe Barry at SD as the LBs coach (think he is tired of hearing, "that's not how Joe did it!" and now he is on NFL.com since he can't keep a job! Most of his jobs have been 1 or 2 seasons and gone. Now he can't even get a DC job! He can go **** himself. It's sour grapes as far as I can tell.

 

Yep, Nolan was the DC of the Redskins that Dan Snyder sent a bunch of vanilla ice cream to one day to let him know what he thought of Nolan's defensive schemes.

 

Yeah, I'd say he has a grudge against Snyder, and maybe the team.

[RandyHolt]

Nolan was one of many DCs that promised to be aggressive and get after the QB, and played bend and break instead. Corners off on 3rd and short type situations, with the game on the line. Things even fans could see were not dictated by personnel limitations. He wouldn't try to be aggressive even though playing passive was not working.  Sure we got to the playoffs (thanks to Brad's monster year), but BDB is basically coin flip football. One mistake, say a botched FG snap, and you lose. He was gone after that.

 

Vanilla ice cream was his favorite flavor whether he admitted it or not. His words ring hollow criticizing our team. 

[skins island connection]

I totally agree he needs to continue to improve. But he did not just "improve a spot or two!"

 

Pts/gm - + 12 spots in pts/ gm from 29th to 17th! The highest we have been since 2008 (6th)!!! 

3rd Down Eff - 12 spots from 24th to 12th!

TOs - up 17 spots - from 26th to 9th!!!   

 

These are no small movements! These are incredible accomplishments, especially when you consider the injuries and a **** storm he inherited. I am sorry, but many of you are turning a blind eye to what was a pretty damn good job based on emotion not facts or data.

 

There is still a lot of room to improve. Our goal should be the best at everything. But let's be realistic! It's been 1 season! People act like one bad game this year or if we are not in the top 5 of all Ds, let's get rid of him. Have some patience!

 

And seriously, golfing buddy? Need to get past the supposed nepotism BS. Guys hire guys they have worked with. It's how the NFL works now and has worked forever. But it's not just because they are buddies. Need to get past that lame narrative.

 

 Stats can only tell part of the story; i've never been big on stats, and had a nice back-n-forth with another ESer last year about the very same thing.

 And sure, i get the 'its only been 1 year' argument, and agree, but this is usually where the rubber meets the road; the next year.

 I certainly don't expect them to come out like gangbusters, but steadily improving, as if they were slowly putting together something worthwhile, not a good game here, bad game there. 

 

I said in another post, i don't expect to see cousins picking up from last year, i'd expect to see him struggle a little, and i know the wolves will be howling then. but the defense is a group with a philosophy and a goal; to see them on the field getting lit up left and right will put the burden on the offense to out-score opponents, and when that doesn't happen, mis-guided anger will be directed at the offense.

 

And, its not a lame narrative when its true; if a GM hires a friend over someone who is more experienced and/or fits the teams' needs better, then YES, the GM deserves every bit of criticism he gets.  The main reason why Allen is here is because of his dad; you know it, I know it, and everyone else knows it. There were other more qualified people out there at the time of his hiring, but nostalgia does play a part in his hiring. Its just the truth.

[goskins10]

 Stats can only tell part of the story; i've never been big on stats, and had a nice back-n-forth with another ESer last year about the very same thing.

 And sure, i get the 'its only been 1 year' argument, and agree, but this is usually where the rubber meets the road; the next year.

 I certainly don't expect them to come out like gangbusters, but steadily improving, as if they were slowly putting together something worthwhile, not a good game here, bad game there. 

 

I said in another post, i don't expect to see cousins picking up from last year, i'd expect to see him struggle a little, and i know the wolves will be howling then. but the defense is a group with a philosophy and a goal; to see them on the field getting lit up left and right will put the burden on the offense to out-score opponents, and when that doesn't happen, mis-guided anger will be directed at the offense.

 

And, its not a lame narrative when its true; if a GM hires a friend over someone who is more experienced and/or fits the teams' needs better, then YES, the GM deserves every bit of criticism he gets.  The main reason why Allen is here is because of his dad; you know it, I know it, and everyone else knows it. There were other more qualified people out there at the time of his hiring, but nostalgia does play a part in his hiring. Its just the truth.

 

 

With all due respect, not being "big on stats" is code for they don't tell the story I want so I will ignore them. No one is saying he should have won DC of the year or that we even had a "good" Def. I totally agree it's all in meaningless unless he continues to improve. How is that different than any other DC, OC HC or any job? If you don't keep getting better it means you are getting worse and eventually there will need to be a change. But that's not the discussion here. It's about how JB did last year and is it reasonable to assume he will continue to improve the D. In the end is it really that hard to admit that the guy did a pretty good job last year?

 

I see you are already positioning yourself to blame the D if Cousins or/and the Off stumbles. Nice hedging :-) but really, what does that have to do with how Joe Barry did last year? We can have a conversation about Cousins but there is another thread for that.

 

95% or more of all NFL coaching hires are done based a previous relationship or/and experience with someone on the team or in the FO. Just because this one's fairly well known, it's a problem? Sorry it is extremely lame. It has no relevance outside just something to complain about. People need to let it go.

[skins island connection]

With all due respect, not being "big on stats" is code for they don't tell the story I want so I will ignore them. No one is saying he should have won DC of the year or that we even had a "good" Def. I totally agree it's all in meaningless unless he continues to improve. How is that different than any other DC, OC HC or any job? If you don't keep getting better it means you are getting worse and eventually there will need to be a change. But that's not the discussion here. It's about how JB did last year and is it reasonable to assume he will continue to improve the D. In the end is it really that hard to admit that the guy did a pretty good job last year?

Now, don't start putting words in my mouth; stats don't tell the whole truth, and we won't get into a back-n-forth on that, ok bud?

You're right; most every coaching job[ a few exceptions ] demands a little change to keep on top, or else opponents figure out ways to beat you. I'm not being down on Barry, I hope he does a great job and continues to improve the defense, I just don't want to see it turn into Haslett 2.0 where it takes an act of god to remove him if needed.  I'm keeping an open mind and hope he does put together something special here, but you have to admit, he's bounced around quite a bit in the NFL over the last 10 years, so something doesn't look quite right in that picture.

 

I see you are already positioning yourself to blame the D if Cousins or/and the Off stumbles. Nice hedging :-) but really, what does that have to do with how Joe Barry did last year? We can have a conversation about Cousins but there is another thread for that.

Absolutely false;  i'll lay blame where it goes. I was merely trying to say that I have a feeling Cousins will struggle some, but he deserves the chance to work out of it.  But if the defense is giving up 30+ points during the first 4-6 weeks, then yes, he should take blame.

95% or more of all NFL coaching hires are done based a previous relationship or/and experience with someone on the team or in the FO. Just because this one's fairly well known, it's a problem? Sorry it is extremely lame. It has no relevance outside just something to complain about. People need to let it go.

Vinny Baby had his time here, then Allen shows up, but his success record wasn't exactly stellar; and yes, I may have a chip on my shoulders with him, because personally I just cannot stand the 70's looking uniforms.  The only uniforms in my mind that really display the Washington Redskins and winners are the ones of the 80's; I'm just partial that way.  There, the cat's outta the bag, I don't like Allen because of the uni change. Its my party and i'll **** if I want to.  lol

[goskins10]

 

Edit -

 

 

Now, don't start putting words in my mouth; stats don't tell the whole truth, and we won't get into a back-n-forth on that, ok bud?

You're right; most every coaching job[ a few exceptions ] demands a little change to keep on top, or else opponents figure out ways to beat you. I'm not being down on Barry, I hope he does a great job and continues to improve the defense, I just don't want to see it turn into Haslett 2.0 where it takes an act of god to remove him if needed.  I'm keeping an open mind and hope he does put together something special here, but you have to admit, he's bounced around quite a bit in the NFL over the last 10 years, so something doesn't look quite right in that picture.

 

Edit -

Absolutely false;  i'll lay blame where it goes. I was merely trying to say that I have a feeling Cousins will struggle some, but he deserves the chance to work out of it.  But if the defense is giving up 30+ points during the first 4-6 weeks, then yes, he should take blame.

 

Edit -

Vinny Baby had his time here, then Allen shows up, but his success record wasn't exactly stellar; and yes, I may have a chip on my shoulders with him, because personally I just cannot stand the 70's looking uniforms.  The only uniforms in my mind that really display the Washington Redskins and winners are the ones of the 80's; I'm just partial that way.  There, the cat's outta the bag, I don't like Allen because of the uni change. Its my party and i'll **** if I want to.  lol

 

 

Not putting words in your mouth. Did you or did you not say "I am not a big stats guy"? You did. I was responding to that. But OK, I do actually agree stats are not the entire picture, especially if you focus on one stat over others. My point is and will continue to be, there is reason to have some faith in Joe as not just one, but several very key metrics showed significant improvement. As for him bouncing around, that's not entirely true. He was with Tampa for 5 yrs, then he had his 2 yrs with Detroit when the entire staff was fired. Then he went back to Tampa for a yr, then USC for a yr, before spending 4 yrs with San Diego where he left on his own. The Detroit job is the only one he did not leave on his own. Compare him to say Mike Nolan (just one example) who has very rarely been at a team for more than 2 yrs and has been fired from at 4 of those jobs. Now that's bouncing around.

 

If you weren't hedging about the potential off struggles then why bring them up here? Never mind. I half kidding. Of course, I agreed before, I the D does not improve or especially it gets worse then they need to be held accountable. I have no problem with that. But saying, "I don't want this to turn  into Haslett 2.0", is making a comparison that's not fair. Hasless came in and we got worse in most every way imaginable including yds/pts/3rd down/TO, just about everything. Again, Joe Barry improved in almost every category, and that's with the most injuries to a D in the NFL!

 

Fair enough on Bruce. As a fan you are allowed unreasonable positions and are allowed to hold to them forever. Thanks for owning it. Not being sarcastic.

[SkinsGuy]

Vinny Baby had his time here, then Allen shows up, but his success record wasn't exactly stellar; and yes, I may have a chip on my shoulders with him, because personally I just cannot stand the 70's looking uniforms.  The only uniforms in my mind that really display the Washington Redskins and winners are the ones of the 80's; I'm just partial that way.  There, the cat's outta the bag, I don't like Allen because of the uni change. Its my party and i'll **** if I want to.  lol

 

I agree.

 

I despise that Allen is constantly trying to bring attention to his dad's successful time here with the uniforms, while at the same time trying to bury the memories of the 80s.

 

It is almost like he resents Gibbs' Super Bowl dynasty (4 appearances in 10 years), because it greatly overshadows George Allen's tenure here.

 

I'd like to see the 80s uniforms again myself.

[skins island connection]

goskins,

 i think we're both on the same page, maybe i didn't type it the right way.

 

 I have no issues giving Joe a chance, but what i meant to say was, i didn't want to see the FO wait years until they did something about it IF Joe's defenses went downhill and stayed there, like Haslett's did.

 

 We all have our opinions of players and coaches, and this forum allows us to discuss them. 

[goskins10]

I agree.

 

I despise that Allen is constantly trying to bring attention to his dad's successful time here with the uniforms, while at the same time trying to bury the memories of the 80s.

 

It is almost like he resents Gibbs' Super Bowl dynasty (4 appearances in 10 years), because it greatly overshadows George Allen's tenure here.

 

I'd like to see the 80s uniforms again myself.

 

goskins,

 i think we're both on the same page, maybe i didn't type it the right way.

 

 I have no issues giving Joe a chance, but what i meant to say was, i didn't want to see the FO wait years until they did something about it IF Joe's defenses went downhill and stayed there, like Haslett's did.

 

 We all have our opinions of players and coaches, and this forum allows us to discuss them. 

 

 

@ Skins Island - I agree, we are not very close. I also do not want to wait 4 yrs to make a change if it's obvious there needs to be one. I just se at least a few signs that this is not anything like hasless.

 

 

 

Skins and Skins -- :-)  I mean no disrespect when I ask this question - When did you start following the Redskins? For me, is was right after we signed Vince Lombardi. If you remember Ted Williams also came to town as HC of the Senators. Then Vince died and we had that ****up Bill Austin. What a disaster. The next year the Senators moved to Texas and we got another new HC - George Allen. story), He took the Redskins places they had never been. Without baseball which had been my life. that was a critical era of Redskins football and I remember those years with great fondness.

 

Additionally, I really do not think Bruce means any disrespect to Joe Gibbs. But he is proud of his fathers accomplishments here. I just posted a video from the 1972 Redskins that if you have not watched and were not fans of the team yet, may give you a different perspective of that era.  - http://es.redskins.com/topic/401758-youtube-washington-redskins-1972-vintage-season-highlights/

 

Some additional context is that this was also right after the race riots in downtown and the start of Nixon's demise due to his crazy ego and the worst of the Vietnam War. The Redskins meant a lot more to the city than a football team. There was no Hockey, no BBall, and no Baseball. Regardless of the side of the aisle you on, what side of the riots, how you felt about the war or most anything else, the one thing all people could agree was the Washington Redskins - and George Allen made them a real team, something you could follow and believe in.

 

Joe Gibbs was easily the best coach the Redskins have ever had. IMO he is the greatest HC of all time for any team in any sport with the lone exception of maybe, and I say maybe, Phil Jackson (Joe never had to cheat like BB). That's just me. But an argument could be made that George Allen was the most important given the timing, the lack of other sports and the state of the city.

 

If you were already fans at by then and still feel that way, it's obviously your right and I would never say you are wrong to feel that way. But I would suggest that maybe you are reading more into Bruce's actions that is actually meant. Again, that's just me.

[SkinsGuy]

goskins,

 

I have been following the Redskins since I was old enough to understand football, which is about the mid-70s. This isn't about George Allen's success here as a coach. It is well known.

 

This is about his son's seemingly trying to make the team's history all about that. Or at least, it's focus. At the expense of more glorious times. Times his father were not involved in.

 

To me, I think it is intentional and petty.

[skins island connection]

 Well, can't say I go back that far; at least not knowing football back then. My time really kicked into gear around 75-76; that's when the actual gaming aspect began becoming clear for me.

Regardless, chronology has no bearing on who may be right or wrong.

 

Bruce didn't exactly have a stellar career as GM, and its well documented. I'm not trying to knock the guy, but nostalgia and pride are strange bedfellows. When Scotty was hired, he made his presence felt, and how well he did will be revealed in future times.

 

 Barry on the other hand, wasn't blazing the league with his defenses, but he is IMO an upgrade over Haslett. My angle on the whole discussion was basing how long it took to get rid of Haslett, which we all know MS kept him as a whipping boy, and the FO hopefully not waiting 5-6 years on replacing Barry IF he didn't get the defense moving up, showing steady progress.

 

Thus far, he's done ok; not great, not bad, but ok; but if he fails over the next few years, specifically the defense either not improving or even dropping, then Allen would need to step in, if it is his duty, something he didn't do while Haslett was here.

 

And to be a little greedy, I've always and will forever be partial to the 80's look, because that decade represented the biggest winning impact with this team, and it just doesn't look right for the Redskins to be in a 70's look while every other team is modernized.

[goskins10]

 Well, can't say I go back that far; at least not knowing football back then. My time really kicked into gear around 75-76; that's when the actual gaming aspect began becoming clear for me.

Regardless, chronology has no bearing on who may be right or wrong.

 

Bruce didn't exactly have a stellar career as GM, and its well documented. I'm not trying to knock the guy, but nostalgia and pride are strange bedfellows. When Scotty was hired, he made his presence felt, and how well he did will be revealed in future times.

 

 Barry on the other hand, wasn't blazing the league with his defenses, but he is IMO an upgrade over Haslett. My angle on the whole discussion was basing how long it took to get rid of Haslett, which we all know MS kept him as a whipping boy, and the FO hopefully not waiting 5-6 years on replacing Barry IF he didn't get the defense moving up, showing steady progress.

 

Thus far, he's done ok; not great, not bad, but ok; but if he fails over the next few years, specifically the defense either not improving or even dropping, then Allen would need to step in, if it is his duty, something he didn't do while Haslett was here.

 

And to be a little greedy, I've always and will forever be partial to the 80's look, because that decade represented the biggest winning impact with this team, and it just doesn't look right for the Redskins to be in a 70's look while every other team is modernized.

 

Did you miss the entire first part of the comment where I agreed we were not that far apart? That I mostly agreed with you? I just see more positives signs and believe Barry is already way ahead of hasless.

 

The rest of my comment had to do about not liking Allen and believing he is trying to elevate George Allen's accomplishments over Joe Gibbs and the 1980's Redskins. Now, you said you are partial to Gibbs era. And that makes sense, that's when you have the best memories of the Redskins.

 

However, as much as I like the 1980's teams, I also very much relate to the late 1960's and early 1970's Redskins. There was a socio-political importance to the teams during that era. It was more than just football. The Redskins truly united the city during some really bad times.

 

There is nothing wrong with recognizing that era. Many of us have our very first and probably strongest memories of the Redskins are.

[goskins10]

goskins,

 

I have been following the Redskins since I was old enough to understand football, which is about the mid-70s. This isn't about George Allen's success here as a coach. It is well known.

 

This is about his son's seemingly trying to make the team's history all about that. Or at least, it's focus. At the expense of more glorious times. Times his father were not involved in.

 

To me, I think it is intentional and petty.

 

I just don't see why it's a problem celebrating another great time in Redskins history. I get why you like the Joe Gibbs teams so much. I already said, quite emphatically that he was a better coach and had more success. But just because you do not relate to the late 60's and early 70's teams, that does not mean others do not.

 

I truly relate to the George Allen Redskins. Again, it was as much about the socio-political importance of their success and how it brought the city together as it was about the football.

 

I enjoy reliving those moments and am glad the Redskins are not forgetting those times.

[SkinsGuy]

I just don't see why it's a problem celebrating another great time in Redskins history. I get why you like the Joe Gibbs teams so much. I already said, quite emphatically that he was a better coach and had more success. But just because you do not relate to the late 60's and early 70's teams, that does not mean others do not.

 

I truly relate to the George Allen Redskins. Again, it was as much about the socio-political importance of their success and how it brought the city together as it was about the football.

 

I enjoy reliving those moments and am glad the Redskins are not forgetting those times.

 

It isn't about me relating to a bygone era. It is about the president of the team not relating to our most successful era.

 

With Allen as president, we've seen uniforms from pretty much every era and decade on the field. Even uniforms from the Redskins real early days when the made the helmets look like those old leather helmets.

 

However, as far as I can remember, one we really haven't seen is the most famous one. The one from the Joe Gibbs Super Bowl era.

 

Why? What does Allen have against them that we never see them?

 

It is strange that we have seen the Redskins under his tenure pretty much wear every type of uniform they've had. From the '30s to the '70s, but not the most famous ones. The ones from the '80s.

 

And yes, I think there is something behind it.

[SkinsGuy]

Here is an article about an interview Allen did recently and was asked about the uniforms, and the players and fans grumbling about them, and all he does is give a rhetorical and evasive answer:

 

http://was.247sports.com/Bolt/Trio-of-Redskins-named-to-CBS-Sports-Top-100-45716749

[goskins10]

It isn't about me relating to a bygone era. It is about the president of the team not relating to our most successful era.

 

With Allen as president, we've seen uniforms from pretty much every era and decade on the field. Even uniforms from the Redskins real early days when the made the helmets look like those old leather helmets.

 

However, as far as I can remember, one we really haven't seen is the most famous one. The one from the Joe Gibbs Super Bowl era.

 

Why? What does Allen have against them that we never see them?

 

It is strange that we have seen the Redskins under his tenure pretty much wear every type of uniform they've had. From the '30s to the '70s, but not the most famous ones. The ones from the '80s.

 

And yes, I think there is something behind it.

 

 

We will have to agree to disagree. I respect your opinion, I just don't agree. But fair enough. We are grow-ups. It's OK to disagree. If everyone agreed about everything it would be pretty boring...  :-)

[skins island connection]

Did you miss the entire first part of the comment where I agreed we were not that far apart? That I mostly agreed with you? I just see more positives signs and believe Barry is already way ahead of hasless.

 

The rest of my comment had to do about not liking Allen and believing he is trying to elevate George Allen's accomplishments over Joe Gibbs and the 1980's Redskins. Now, you said you are partial to Gibbs era. And that makes sense, that's when you have the best memories of the Redskins.

 

However, as much as I like the 1980's teams, I also very much relate to the late 1960's and early 1970's Redskins. There was a socio-political importance to the teams during that era. It was more than just football. The Redskins truly united the city during some really bad times.

 

There is nothing wrong with recognizing that era. Many of us have our very first and probably strongest memories of the Redskins are.

 

 My apologies if I made it sound like Barry is no better than Haslett, that was not my intentions. 

 Anyone in the place of Haslett is an improvement to me, and i'm sure to many others. 

 

 Regarding the 70's, you obviously have much more knowledge and memories than I, and there's nothing wrong with that; i'll agree, at the time, with the civil unrest, Allen WAS a great uniter and a very important figure in the NFL and politics.  His name is synonymous with football. 

 

Bruce's accomplishments fall far short of his dad's, but he's trying, i'll give him that. I still wish he'd switch back to the 80's look though, but thats just me talking. 

 

Joe Barry deserves his shot, period. The conversation about him kinda got lost a little, but I was trying to say that IF, IF his defenses do not improve, or if they get worse, to the point where pressure is on the offense to win the games, then he should be replaced. Not 4 weeks into the season, but an overall picture through the year, to see how they improve/decline, and go from there. 

 

His work in Detroit wasn't anything to brag about, but it wasn't pitiful either, but he is an improvement over Haslett; down the road, if things don't improve, then the option of replacing him should be on the table, but as I said, he deserves his shot.

[TSO]

Thought this article deserved a spot here. Like many of us have said, the injuries likely caused Barry to get more conservative with zone coverages, and if Russel isn't making it up he's essentially verified that.

(On a side note, notice his little Haslett-defense he threw in there, lol, can't help himself)

Great read, though, so I'd advise to read it in its entirety.

https://www.dchotread.com/2016/06/17/redskins-attacking-more

Compton: "We're Going to Kill it!"

The Redskins defense was nowhere near good enough last year. I don’t think that statement would offend anybody.

It was better than previous years in several key categories but still well short of where they want to be and need to be.

First the sobering truth. The Redskins defense allowed an average of 380.6 yards per game, which was 27.9 yards per game higher than the NFL average.

They also allowed 13.8 more rushing yards per game on average than the league average.

Their passing yards per game allowed was 258.0 compared to the NFL team average of 243.8 or a 14.2 yard per game difference.

Not good, right?

Yet to win a division – they did have to count on their defense to bail them out at times and the unit was pretty good on third down, red zone, goal-to-go situations and overall points per game allowed.

Still – Scot McCloughan and the coaching staff knew that in order to win a Super Bowl – they were going to have to step up their talent base and they did that with the acquisition of Josh Norman and by bringing back Junior Galette.

If Galette is healthy, the Redskins acquired or brought back two top-shelf talents for roughly $12 million dollars of cap space at arguably the two most important individual positions for a 3-4 defense, edge pass rusher and shutdown corner.

The Redskins defense will be a lot better. That is not a question for me, and it really shouldn’t be for you. Of course – if half of the projected starting unit suffers major injury – we could have a different discussion.

Even then, they have significantly better depth and experience than they had last year at this time or certainly when the defensive unit & talent base was largely dismissed while Jim Haslett took the blame.

Besides a talent infusion, the Redskins defense will be better in 2016 because they are now in the year-two with Joe Barry and his staff and players can react more than think. The more comfortable you are mentally, the better you will be physically.

The talent, depth and comfortability allows you to be more versatile and less predictable. It also allows Barry to be more aggressive.

“We’re going to take a big jump,” Redskins inside linebacker Will Compton told me on Wednesday. He’s right. Of course they will.

However, he was talking specifically about an element that hasn’t received much attention. The Redskins will be able to blitz a lot more and in more creative ways because they know their secondary can hold up a lot better in coverage.

The Redskins didn’t want to blitz a whole lot in 2015. They were a much more conservative defense than previously, because they had to be and because Perry Fewell and Barry decided to play more zone defensive coverage.

This year, it appears they’ll play more man coverage looks (than last year) based on what I’ve seen at minicamp practices and organized team activities and they’ll be able to attack more when they want to. They’ll be able to dictate tempo and the attack, more than trying to just get by and put a Band-Aid on their business.

(Much more at the link)

[Koolblue13]

Yeah I read that yesterday. Fantastic article. Really got me pumped.

The Kirk and JG comparison to Compton and JB change is what stands out to me. Got the QB coach, got the ILB coach this year. Kirk starts season as starter, Compton is doing that for the first time too.

I think our D is going to be very good, especially if the offense can keep hanging 28+ on people.

The style is going to be fun to watch too.

[TSO]

Yeah I read that yesterday. Fantastic article. Really got me pumped.

The Kirk and JG comparison to Compton and JB change is what stands out to me. Got the QB coach, got the ILB coach this year. Kirk starts season as starter, Compton is doing that for the first time too.

I think our D is going to be very good, especially if the offense can keep hanging 28+ on people.

The style is going to be fun to watch too.

Yeah, it was a bit of a puff piece and we've seen these before, but I think this is objectively the closest we've been in a long time to actually seeing what's said here pan out.

And, dude, chill with the offense scoring 28+ stuff, that's the second time I've read something along those lines from you... you're going to curse this thing!