Per JLC on Twitter, Gruden getting rid of ENTIRE defensive staff

[Morneblade]

31 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Him or Dontari Poe

 

32 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

Im willing to bet if the Panthers let him hit free agency, the Redskins take a very serious look at Kawaan Short.  A dominant NT has to be priority #1 in this team.

 

If we stay with the 3-4. It's kinda funny how everyone is clamoring for a real NT now. SMDH.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, SkinsTillIDie said:

 

Skinsinparadise, thanks for all the little nuggets you've been dropping. It's understandable why, at the time, Scot wasn't inclined to pay $10 million a year to Damon Harrison following a season in which he only played 53% of the Jets' snaps. But did he talk about why he resisting signing any of the number of starting-caliber safeties that were available last offseason?

 

Of the three positions I mentioned, the safety position is the one I didn't really talk much about.  My dalliance with Scot on safeties had to do with the draft -- and it was a question about a specific free safety in the draft.  Reading a little into his answer, clear to me its on his radar.   But he didn't flat out say so.  I take much more on that subject by recalling Jay in the off season going out of his way in an interview to rave about D. Hall is going to be a top flight free safety.  Scot told me that Jay is heavily involved in personnel and has a good eye.  I don't know if it were Jay, Barry or Scot or all three on this front but it appears to me the reason why he didn't chase FA safeties is they thought they have a great one in house.  Obviously, they were wrong.  Jay recently admitted that they underestimated how hard it was to convert players from corner to safety.  I don't know how the sausage was made on that front -- but in retrospect that was arguably perhaps the biggest off season miscalculation.    

 

As for MLB.   He said a guy like Patrick Willis (who he drafted) can transform a defense and it was clear to me he didn't think that guy was on the roster.  He liked Spaight's potential, though.  As for the D line, I'll just say there was no miscalculation about the off season.  He knew that it wasn't fixed and they'd have to go at it this off season  I'd presume he'd be ok with me telling this but he told me he had his eye on a DT in the early rounds who was snatched before our pick.  So it was a BPA thing but he had his eyes on DTs in the draft.   And considering it didn't quite work out in the draft last time -- it makes logical sense to me that he's not going to leave it to chance this time and will go after top needs in FA so he can keep the flexibility of going BPA in the draft.

 

I could also tell that he thought we can use another edge rusher.  He told me very little of this by him giving me an overall summary.  He didn't tell me I am going to do this and that. Instead, it would be a give and take question which I'd extrapolate from.  For example, I got to his thoughts on MLB by talking overall about my opinion that a big time MLB can change a defense, though some disagree that its a pivotal position -- then I said what do you think Scot.  He'd answer, expound, and nuggets would come out of it in the process.    I'd say with the three pass rushers we got on the team, we probably don't need another -- and I'll just say he didn't agree.  And then I'd recall what he said about pass rush on another front.   And then I'd add the two points together and it brought a conclusion that I am confident in. 

 

All of that was a moment in time.  Things obviously could have shifted since.  But I hear some of the same stuff spit back by reporters.  I think Scot is going after DT, safety, MLB -- maybe edge rusher.  Nothing shocking there.  But it might be reassuring to those who wonder if Scot disagrees with the conventional wisdom cooking on the board.   He's all over the conventional wisdom, he agrees with it.  It was clear though he doesn't see all of those teams weaknesses as equal problems, there is one in particular that bothers him the most.  

[Conn]

1 minute ago, SkinsTillIDie said:

 

But you are qualified to say that there's a literal 0% chance that Greg Manusky is fit to be our next defensive coordinator? Because you talk a lot about the "best candidate," but then are unprepared to explain what that actually means, outside of vague conceptual buzzwords.

 

Think you might have missed the overall point of what I was saying. I don't know hardly anything about Manusky aside from the stats I've seen and my own biased thoughts on his work, positive or negative, with our LB's. I had a greater, broader point. In an entire league full of potential candidates, Manusky is only your #1 option if you're over-weighting familiarity. That's just a rational conclusion, because he's got a 9 year DC resume that shows he's not a slam dunk, followed by multiple years relegated to being a position coach. Not sure how that could be argued.

[Morneblade]

I'd prefer to move away from the 3-4, but if we stick with it:

Philips is a great pick, if we can get him

Manusky is not as good, but pretty solid. San Fran had some pretty anemic offenses. I'd be ok, but not super excited with him as a DC.

 

I'd really like to move on to the 4-3 though. I think it's easier to draft for.

[Skinsinparadise]

59 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

I will bet .00125% of the Redskins total cap expenditures we make two fairly significant Day 1 signings--depending on who gets tagged and who doesn't two of the three problem areas at DL, ILB and S are addressed.

 

I'd bet on it, too. And let me couch this by saying I didn't ask Scot squat about FA aside from our own players.   He didn't tell me what he's going to do.  But when I piece together what happened in last years draft with some insight from him coupled with what he wants to address in the off season, coupled with he doesn't like to box himself in where he drafts according to need -- it all adds up to an aggressive FA year.  Not that I think they sign a ton of players but I am guessing like you are -- they sign a couple of big players.

[NoCalMike]

A lot of time the elite players show their potential from day one on the field.  They aren't going to play mistake free football or make every single play, but you can see relatively early.

 

Sean Taylor from the first time he stepped on the field it was obvious he was destined to be great.

 

Hell, even Lavar Arrington showed he had the potential, he just never materialized ultimately due to his stubbornness and unwillingness to be coached. 

 

Another factor is that sometimes the beasts are one-man shows on the field until they get more talent around them, however they still make an immediate impact.

[Skinsinparadise]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-coaching-carousel-here-are-three-defensive-coordinator-options-for-redskins/

 

With Washington letting go of its defensive staff Thursday, I can't help but wonder if Jay Gruden turns back to an old friend for help. If I were Gruden, who served as the Bengals offensive coordinator before taking the Redskins job in 2014, I'd at least place a call to Cincinnati to see about bringing Paul Guenther in to run his defense. With Guenther still under contract, however, it may be a moot point considering Bengals owner Mike Brown is a stickler for this stuff.

There would clearly be a strong familiarity there, though Brown may also be keen to keep Guenther on staff as the possible replacement for Marvin Lewis if he gets moved to the front office after the 2017 season. Regardless, it is likely a moot point.

While it may seem crazy to some, I'd actually reach back to the past and pursue Rams defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, who had a tremendous run as the Redskins defensive coordinator from 2004-2007 under Joe Gibbs. Williams was beloved by players in Washington, who actually pushed him hard to be their head coach when Gibbs retired for the second time in 2007. Jim Zorn got hired instead.

While things were hardly rosy between Williams and owner Dan Snyder at the end -- Williams interviewed for the job but did not get it -- I've heard that relationship has been sound in recent years and Williams would bring a certain swagger back to a defense that has been suspect since he left. Numerous league sources said they expect Williams to have multiple opportunities for defensive coordinator jobs, so time may be of the essence here, but it's certainly worth Gruden exploring.

Wade Phillips is also far from being ready to retire and he is in limbo right now in Denver with an expiring contract and an uncertain future. His son, Wes, coaches tight ends under Gruden. Of course, the Redskins passed on an opportunity to hire him before -- and Phillips extended his distinguished coaching resume by winning a Super Bowl in Denver coordinating an elite defense -- but this league works in funny ways sometimes.

That would be the case if any of these three situations came to pass.

 

[SkinsTillIDie]

2 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Think you might have missed the overall point of what I was saying. I don't know hardly anything about Manusky aside from the stats I've seen and my own biased thoughts on his work, positive or negative, with our LB's. I had a greater, broader point. In an entire league full of potential candidates, Manusky is only your #1 option if you're over-weighting familiarity. That's just a rational conclusion, because he's got a 9 year DC resume that shows he's not a slam dunk, followed by multiple years relegated to being a position coach. Not sure how that could be argued.

I didn't miss the point. What I'm saying is, the traits that determine what makes a candidate "the best" isn't quantifiable. This isn't judging speed by measuring a 40 time. All these coaches know x's and o's. Joe Berry's x's and o's were lauded by players after the season ended.

It is rational to assume that the "best" coordinators are head coaches. Or, are coordinating other teams, and won't jump ship without being promoted to head coach. So you're either getting a "retread," someone who's been a coordinator elsewhere and for one reason or another, is in a position to be hired by us. Or, you're getting someone with no experience, who's never had any degree of success as a coordinator before. Both require taking chances.

There are the obvious X factors. Can a coach communicate what he wants to players? Can he get the best out of them? Most importantly, if you're in the hiring position, how do you measure this? How can you possibly know that this coach maxed the potential of his players?

Well, if you've been working with him every day for the past year, and you've seen how he relates to players, to what degree he's been responsible for player improvement (e.g. Trent Murphy, Ryan Kerrigan), then you have that information available to you. You can know he's someone you can work with successfully. You can know he's someone for whom players will have respect and play hard.

With a coach from elsewhere? You're guessing. You're taking a greater leap of faith, which is by definition a greater risk. You could end up being Sean Payton clashing with Rob Ryan.

The thing is: there is no certainty. There is no: "here are 7 coaches, and here they are ranked #1-7." And if you want to go simply by a coach's history of defensive rankings, well, a lot of people here were desperate for Vic Fangio because of his high-ranking defenses in SF with 4 All-pros. But we all saw two weeks ago what a Vic Fangio defense looks like when he has players comparable to the ones we're employing.

 

[Conn]

That's a good post. You have a point there, there are some pros to being familiar with a candidate. I think where we disagree (in this hypothetical) is how heavily that should be weighted. 

[SkinsTillIDie]

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Of the three positions I mentioned, the safety position is the one I didn't really talk much about.  My dalliance with Scot on safeties had to do with the draft -- and it was a question about a specific free safety in the draft.  Reading a little into his answer, clear to me its on his radar.   But he didn't flat out say so. ...

 

As for MLB.   He said a guy like Patrick Willis (who he drafted) can transform a defense and it was clear to me he didn't think that guy was on the roster.  He liked Spaight's potential, though.  .......

 

As for the D line, I'll just say there was no miscalculation about the off season.  He knew that it wasn't fixed and they'd have to go at it this off season  I'd presume he'd be ok with me telling this but he told me he had his eye on a DT in the early rounds who was snatched before our pick.  So it was a BPA thing but he had his eyes on DTs.   ....

 

I could also tell that he thought we can use another edge rusher.  He told me very little of this in him giving me an overall summary....   I'd say with the three pass rushers we got, we probably don't need another -- and I'll just say he didn't agree. ....

 

He's all over the conventional wisdom, he agrees with it.  It was clear though he doesn't see all of those teams weaknesses as equal problems, there is one in particular that bothers him the most.  ....

 

 

Thanks for the insight!

 

I imagine once the draft got into the 40s, he was hoping either Jarran Reed (4 before us), A'Shawn Robinson (7) or Austin Johnson (10) would fall. Wonder who specifically he wanted most.

 

I did suspect Noah Spence would've been drafted if he had fallen to us.

[NoCalMike]

One thing I've always been told about defense is that effort is a big part of it.  With defense you are mostly reacting rather than acting (on most plays).  It's easier to mess up and blow an assignment.   Whoever we do sign as a D-coordinator, I hope they aren't afraid to get on the players and even bench guys if they feel they aren't giving max effort, especially in 2017 when the unit likely isn't going to be Top 10.  Get on them early and often while they are still growing, learning, and gelling.  Root out any bad habits or work ethic you see.

[Burgold]

22 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

One thing I've always been told about defense is that effort is a big part of it.  With defense you are mostly reacting rather than acting (on most plays).  It's easier to mess up and blow an assignment.   Whoever we do sign as a D-coordinator, I hope they aren't afraid to get on the players and even bench guys if they feel they aren't giving max effort, especially in 2017 when the unit likely isn't going to be Top 10.  Get on them early and often while they are still growing, learning, and gelling.  Root out any bad habits or work ethic you see.

I wonder about this. I mean it has to be true to some extent, but it seems that many defenses these days attack and try to force the offense to react to what they are doing. The best defenses are not passive ones that react, but very aggressive.

[Rattlesnake88]

24 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

One thing I've always been told about defense is that effort is a big part of it.  With defense you are mostly reacting rather than acting (on most plays).  It's easier to mess up and blow an assignment.   Whoever we do sign as a D-coordinator, I hope they aren't afraid to get on the players and even bench guys if they feel they aren't giving max effort, especially in 2017 when the unit likely isn't going to be Top 10.  Get on them early and often while they are still growing, learning, and gelling.  Root out any bad habits or work ethic you see.

Whispers* Gregg Williamssssss

[BraveWarrior]

8 hours ago, SAli457180 said:

I think everyone here and probably at Redskins Park saw this coming.  32nd ranked defense with no pressure.  Guy probably wasn't well liked by any of the players anyway.  Hope they draft DL in the draft and get someone who light a fire under the guys on defense.

 

I know the players were frustrated with things, but I've never heard any rumblings abut players not liking Barry. I've heard they found him to be upbeat and likeable. He always seemed like a good guy in interviews and such. Let's not **** on the guy because we wanted the team to go in a different direction. 

[BraveWarrior]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

John Keim ‏@john_keim  17s17 seconds ago

Will write this later, but will say it now: Redskins need more talent on D, regardless of who's coaching. Bad D was organizational failure

 

This. They've mismanaged the defense for several years now. Hw do you switch to a 3-4 and never draft a true NT? As for FAs, they only brought in Knighton, and he never ran on all 8 cylinders here. Also, they've neglected the safety position. And why did they draft Cravens and put him in as a LB? Anyone looking at him could tell he's too small to be an NFL LB, and looks perfect for a SS.

[Riggo#44]

6 minutes ago, BraveWarrior said:

 

And why did they draft Cravens and put him in as a LB? Anyone looking at him could tell he's too small to be an NFL LB, and looks perfect for a SS.

 

This is one of the reasons Barry was let go.

[Hail2theSkins24]

If we get Wade we HAVE to get some talented bigs either from FA or draft if his scheme is going to succeed. Resign Hood and Baker and sign one of the premier DL on the market. We have the talent at DB that he'll maximize with Norman, Bree, Fuller. He has a stud SS in Cravens who will have a similar game to TJ Ward. Kerrigan, Murphy, Galette, Preston Smith rushing the passer. I think Preston can breakout in Wade's scheme. 

 

 Go defense in first two rounds of the draft and it'll be interesting to see how much improvement this D will have next season. I think Wade can have some fun with Lanier as well, he's so raw but an absolute freak of nature at his size

[drowland]

14 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

This is one of the reasons Barry was let go.

 

I thought they drafted Cravens to play that "money linebacker" role like Duane Buchanon plays in AZ.  They're the same size.  With as many needs as the Skins had on D at the time I thought it was too much of a luxury pick.  

[clskinsfan]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

I wonder about this. I mean it has to be true to some extent, but it seems that many defenses these days attack and try to force the offense to react to what they are doing. The best defenses are not passive ones that react, but very aggressive.

It really depends on the call and the situation for that call and your players. There are obviously aggressive man schemes and passive zone schemes. I always coached (High School)  a passive scheme simply because it gives your players more time to react and players tend to stay in position better to make a play on the ball. That is kind of what Barry was attempting to do. One of the major problems was the only person in our secondary and linebackers that has any decent read and react ball skills is Norman. The rest of the secondary hardly ever looked for the ball. 

 

The flip side is an aggressive attacking scheme which can lead to your players being put into bad positions in exchange for big plays (turnovers hopefully). There is no right or wrong way to play. It really matters what your players excel at. An example would be Breeland. I think he is a very good man to man player, which is why they decided to move him to the slot later in the year. He is not the best in zone however. You can of course play both forms at the same time (Half and Half or combinations of combo man/zone to remove your opponents biggest threat). 

 

I guess what I am trying to say is the  players you have tend to dictate what base scheme you will run. Or you will get the correct players to run YOUR scheme.  I think Barry tried to play a passive scheme to make up for the lack of talent in the middle of the defense. The problem was he was too passive and he paid for it on third and fourth down more often then not. He failed at getting his players into the correct positions A LOT of the time. And when he did get them there they failed to make the play A LOT of the time.  I am glad he is gone. It is going to be very fun to watch a true defensive master put the talent we do have into the right positions to make plays.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I just want a DC who's aggressive, smart, and high energy.  Somebody who will hold players and coaches accountable, motivate them, and push them.  

 

 

[Taylor703]

Please for the love of all things holy, no more Buccaneers or buddy buddy hires. If ****ing Wade Phillips is available than you hire him. You messed it up last time. Make it right. Fix this damn defense. Manusky is lipstick on a pig. 

[tmandoug1]

Bye.

[TSO]

5 hours ago, bobandweave said:

 

<edited out initial qualifier that justified the ridiculous rant that followed, but only in bobandweave's mind>

 

Barry did absolutely nothing in the two years he was here. All he did to steal your phrase was turn this chicken **** into even more chicken **** even after getting the best football player in the entire league last season according to those guys that the MNF crew always quote. Even with the best CB in the game Barry couldn't turn **** into salad. And absolutely no one should be surprised by this. Barry is awful and will always will be awful, he can't coach or find players who can play or do anything right. He is gone, never should have been here in the first damn place, and it's not like this wasn't said to everyone before.

 

Check my history, the minute Barry was hired I said what a mistake it was. Lots of people did. Yet here we are today witnessing the dismissal of this awful stain on this team and what is going on here? The same apologist who were loud and rude to the people like me who supported Barry two years ago are still apologizing for the crappy job Barry did blaming it on the players. 

 

That is complete and total BS.

 

Some of the same loud argumentative posters did not understand when he was hired what a **** show Joe Barry was and still don't comprehend what a **** show Joe Barry is now. It's time that we all understand what coaching and coaches are supposed to do.

 

GREAT head coaches don't need GREAT players in order to be GREAT

GREAT head coaches don't need GOOD players in order to be GREAT

GREAT head coaches need average guys working together as a single unit together to be GREAT

 

Stop blaming the players, if I see that one more time I swear. Do you guys blaming all of the players understand it's the coaches that bring those players here? If the players all suck then you blame the idiots who brought them here for expecting sucky players to be good.

....…................<more ranting>

 

And last thing, to all of the lets blame the players and excuse the coaches in this equation, if the players ran the show why do we even need coaches? Why not just save money and let them coach themselves? 

........... <more ranting>

 

 

I'm really getting sick and tired of asking you to tone it down. This isn't the first time now where you've really brought a crazy antagonistic style of posting to the board that rubs the vast majority the wrong way. 

 

I thought we ironed this out last time via PM after yet another one of your spats with some others, but I guess not. And, no, putting that qualifier initially about not taking it personally with that smilie doesn't make this okay. 

 

Everything I bolded above was either a straw man, utter nonsense, trolling/baiting, extremely self-gratifying or a direct lie. I mean, you just really think your **** doesn't stink. Well, it does and it needs a powerful vent for the household to survive.  

 

This is your final warning about this posting style. Don't reply to this here and turn this thread into one about you, you should know exactly what I'm taking about at this point because we've went over it enough. 

[TSO]

10 hours ago, NewCliche21 said:

Jerry Brewer has been to DC media as GMSM has been to our team.  I absolutely love that guy.

 

10 hours ago, SWFLSkins said:

Ashburning ‏@johnnylocal  2m2 minutes ago

Jerry Brewer has been to DC media as GMSM has been to our team. I absolutely love that guy. @JerryBrewer

 

I've been meaning to tell you this for some time now, brother, and I hope this doesn't turn ugly like the last time we crossed paths here, lol, but you've got to stop doing this. 

 

I know some seem to be okay with it, and I doubt your intentions are bad here, but the results are what they are. It's plagiarism. 

 

Yes, you show the poster here your tweet and what you quoted from them, but no one sees that on twitter. For all they know, those are your words. You're getting credit for it. Any like, retweet, or comment made on that tweet is one directed at you and one that is assuming you're the source. 

 

Were I to copy your work and then show it to someone else (let alone a massive audience like the one on twitter), without telling them it was your work while having them assume it was mine... I doubt you'd be okay with it just because I let you know that I did that. Even if you accepted that for yourself, you'd be wrong to. 

 

So this is a Mod directive. From here on out, if you'd like to quote an ES'er here using your twitter account, please put the quote in quotations and provide a link to the post in that tweet. 

 

This will ensure the source is being credited properly and that traffic is also being driven to where it's deserved.  

 

As always, the content you've provided here is a great service and is appreciated. You're probably not believing that right about now, but it is. And (good news for everyone) the twitter thread is on its way back soon! We hope you'll contribute there like you have in the past, but no pressure.  

 

If you'd like to respond, send me a PM. No need to further divert this thread. If you or anyone is wondering, this isn't only from me, hence the Mod directive. 

[Cooleyfan1993]

@thesubmittedone, what made you guys want to bring back the twitter thread? Was it only shut down for the season, or did you guys recently decide to start it up again but after the season ends?