PFT.com: Washington promotes Greg Manusky to DC, Hires Jim Tomsula as Dline Coach. Hires Torrian Gray as DB coach!

[NewCliche21]

1 hour ago, Jacoby6644 said:

I would prefer Jenna Jamison lookalikes as cheerleaders on the sidelines if we have a choice

 

Yeah, you're gonna have to specify which year Jenna Jameson before I can get on board with that!

[MartinC]

7 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

We finally get a stud all down nose. OK great, if all goes to plan, and he stuffs the run on first. Is he going to jog off the field on every 2nd down, so that we can switch to our sexy hybrid, since it seems like that is what the man likes, even in his days in Indy?  Or, is the all down nose going to stay in, and make us more a pure 3-4? If he is jogging off for every passing down, that will kinda suck since we finally have an all down nose. I hope Scot doesn't overspend in this case.

 

 

 

I know it gets a bit 'technical' but its better to talk about the interior D'Line positions rather than 'nose'. Main ones being Zero tech (head up on the centre), 1 Tech on inside shoulder of the guard (These two are what people normally think of as the nose tackle positions), 3 tech (outside shoulder of the guard), 5 tech (outside shoulder of the tackle).

 

You also need to think about what scheme we are playing, 1 gap or 2 gap. Everything I read says we are likely staying mainly as a 1 gap defense.

 

We are in nickel about 2/3rds of the snaps - thats really our base defense. In that we play with 4 down - typically a 3 tech, 5 tech and then a 7 or 9 from the OLBs with their hands down. Sometimes one (or both) of those OLB might rush (or drop) standing up from a 7 or 9 tech.

 

So if we are a 1 gap defense thats actually using a 3 and 5 tech from its interior DTs most of the time and asking them to attack a gap and get upfield - there is not great value in a 2 gap run stuffing DT. He would mainly play zero or 1 tech in a base 3-4 and can maybe slide to 3 tech on run downs or goal line. 

 

When we go 3-4 its normally an under front - so a 3 tech, a 1 tech and 5tech. That 1 tech is a need, but he has to be someone who is able to play 1 gap and can slide out to 3 tech in nickel if you are giving him a big deal or drafting him in the first 3 rounds say.

[AzSkinsFan63]

Should have been done after week one!

[bobandweave]

28 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

The FAs they've got are pretty much not going to be resigned.  Given the value to the defense you noted, there are several guys on the defense they can cut and there are a few high paid under performers on offense that could see the door.  Yes, we can pay over-market for him but that if what you are reporting about him is agreed on by the Eagles FO and he isn't lying about wanting to remain an Eagle, that is the only way we get him,

 

Overpaying...hmmm. I never said that I advocated overpaying for him. I said money talks. And since money talks, how much money are we talking about?

 

Looking at this list

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2608301-br-nfl-1000-ranking-the-top-20-nose-tackles-from-2015

 

Which is someone's opinion about who the best NT in the 2015 season where (year later but still useful information) we need to think about these salaries and define them first before thinking about what it means to "overpay" for a NT. I wanted to look at what other teams were paying those guys when they hit Free Agency and answer "What is the price for a free agent good NT"?

 

That link has a top 5 player list featuring

 

1. Brandon Williams, Baltimore Ravens
2. Linval Joseph, Minnesota Vikings
3. Damon Harrison, New York Jets
4. Bennie Logan, Philadelphia Eagles
5. Ian Williams, San Francisco 49ers

 

Subjective of course, but looks reasonable.

 

In 2017 both Williams and Bennie Logan will be a Free Agents this year. Ian Williams is an unsigned FA at this time and trying to get his health back on track.

 

First we need to see what kind of money will Brandon Williams and Bennie Logan be looking at this off season to first see what overpaying would look like to understand if that is a good or bad move to make. If we use the recent past as an indicator we see

 

Joseph signed a FA contract in 2014 - Cost was 5 years, 31.25 million overall with 12.5 million guaranteed
Harrison signed a FA contract in 2016 - Cost was 5 years, 46.2 million overall with 24 million guaranteed

 

Quite a jump between the 2014 and 2016 contracts. So what can we guess from that? First I would imagine that Brandon Williams will get more money then Damon Harrison signed with the Giants last season. The market will set the prices this year but to me that's an expectation. I see 5 years, 60 million with 31 million guaranteed or something like that for Williams.

 

If you expect that and understand that this is the cost of doing business today for the best players, we need to ask if it is it wise to "overpay" for Logan? To overpay for Logan your looking at 5 years, more then 60 million, and more then 31 guaranteed. To me that's easy to answer, We absolutely can not pay Logan that much money because NT isn't the only area of the team needing helped and it's just too much for a NT.

 

So can we overpay? No, we must not overpay.

 

So how can we be players without overpaying? We can offer market value for this guys services. If you were Bennie Logan and you knew that the Eagles were cash strapped and your peers were getting these kinda deals wouldn't you want this as well? I bet you would its only fair, and if your the Eagles who have many holes on the roster besides this player to fill with only 3.5 million in space at the moment (They will create space but how much?) do you want to throw all your resources into this one guy? I don't think so. Truth is the Eagles lost with him and without him, to them he is a nice to have not a core player.

 

I believe that Logan will not be an Eagle next season because of the fact the Eagles like us need a lot of help everywhere but unlike us do not have the ability to sign him and other players this year. We do have that ability and it's why I think we can pay him market value, not over pay, and could see him here next year. Doubt it takes overpaying to get him, I think considering the circumstances market value would get it done, all imo

[Commander -JB-]

21 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Tomsula is one of the best DL coaches in the league, you don't really know what you're saying here. Who cares if he failed as a HC, like with Callahan that's not what he's being paid to do here. He certainly isn't a "dingbat", he was just in way over his head in SF.

Man, please.  If he was one of the best DL coaches in the league then why the hell was he still available?  I'm not saying that he can't coach the DL at an adequate level.  I am saying that these moves have not been awe inspiring.  I am also saying that him being in way over his head in SF absolutely earns him the label "dingbat."  ?

[Darth Tater]

@bobandweave

Never said you did but reasonable compensation is not an issue here.  While they only have 3.8 million available now, they can easily create another 7 and all 10.8 would be available for resigning Logan.  So, you would HAVE to be saying we can get him if we are willing to give him unreasonable money.  Remember, a 10 cap hit in year 1, is probably around 12-15 million average over 6.

 

Further, I disagree with you about the Eagles needing a lot of help.

[Conn]

45 minutes ago, -JB- said:

Man, please.  If he was one of the best DL coaches in the league then why the hell was he still available?  I'm not saying that he can't coach the DL at an adequate level.  I am saying that these moves have not been awe inspiring.  I am also saying that him being in way over his head in SF absolutely earns him the label "dingbat."  ?

 

He had a really embarrassing experience as a HC for a franchise he had a good history with previously, and took a year off afterwards. This year he was deciding whether to come back to coaching, and probably chose us because he's close with Manusky and possibly Scot. 

 

Either way he's a very good DL coach, and it's not debatable. 

 

A position coach not being cut out for a HC job doesn't make him a "dingbat", whatever the hell the definition of that is. You seem irrational about this, with almost no facts, so I'll end the discussion here. 

[NeverSurrender]

2 hours ago, Morneblade said:

 

Very true, but I think we're also lacking some depth at ILB. We literally do not have ANYONE that can cover. Starter or depth.

I would really like to see Speights get more time.  I think he could be a gem.  Who knows though.

[Morneblade]

22 minutes ago, NeverSurrender said:

I would really like to see Speights get more time.  I think he could be a gem.  Who knows though.

 

I like Spiaght as a thumper, but he was god awful in space and in coverage.

[Commander -JB-]

27 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

He had a really embarrassing experience as a HC for a franchise he had a good history with previously, and took a year off afterwards. This year he was deciding whether to come back to coaching, and probably chose us because he's close with Manusky and possibly Scot. 

 

Either way he's a very good DL coach, and it's not debatable. 

 

A position coach not being cut out for a HC job doesn't make him a "dingbat", whatever the hell the definition of that is. You seem irrational about this, with almost no facts, so I'll end the discussion here. 

Oh, get off your high horse.  I never said being a bad head coach means you're automatically a bad position coach.  Hes a very good DL coach and it's not debatable?  How is that factual?  

[Morneblade]

1 hour ago, -JB- said:

Man, please.  If he was one of the best DL coaches in the league then why the hell was he still available?  I'm not saying that he can't coach the DL at an adequate level.  I am saying that these moves have not been awe inspiring.  I am also saying that him being in way over his head in SF absolutely earns him the label "dingbat."  ?

 

4 minutes ago, -JB- said:

Oh, get off your high horse.  I never said being a bad head coach means you're automatically a bad position coach.  Hes a very good DL coach and it's not debatable?  How is that factual?  

 

Dude, seriously? Are we doing #alternativefacts here now? Guy was a great position coach and got promoted for interim HC for one game, and his guys played inspired. Then, got fired and took a year off. Don't think so he's not a great defensive coach (because you know nothing about him) go take a look at what he has done.

[Conn]

16 minutes ago, -JB- said:

Oh, get off your high horse.  I never said being a bad head coach means you're automatically a bad position coach.  Hes a very good DL coach and it's not debatable?  How is that factual?  

 

...because I believe the word of players, fellow coaches, and media around the league that have spoken about his work as a DL coach, over the random contrarian opinion of a message board poster who is offering no evidence of his own opinion. 

[bobandweave]

1 hour ago, Darth Tater said:

@bobandweave

Never said you did but reasonable compensation is not an issue here.  While they only have 3.8 million available now, they can easily create another 7 and all 10.8 would be available for resigning Logan.  So, you would HAVE to be saying we can get him if we are willing to give him unreasonable money.  Remember, a 10 cap hit in year 1, is probably around 12-15 million average over 6.

 

Further, I disagree with you about the Eagles needing a lot of help.

 

Well unless I'm missing something here you aren't saying why you disagree with me, other then we can't have Logan because they can save up to 10.8 million and would give it all to him? Let me break this down and you fill in the blanks for me.

 

Just showed you what guys like Logan are worth today, much more then they have to give him but okay so they push most of that to the back years. Say they only use 5 million to sign him, and have 5 million left. Yet you just said they won't resign  there free agents who are

 

Stephen Tulloch
Nolan Carroll
Bryan Braman
Bennie Logan
Najee Goode
Dwayne Gratz
Kenjon Barner
Jaylen Watkins
Trey Burton
C.J. Smith
Rick Lovato
Terrell Watson
Michael Johnson    

 

So forget all of those guys. They will need some $$ to sign its draft picks too right? How much none of us knows but the formula is here:

 

http://overthecap.com/rookie-contracts-nfl-draft/

 

So for the sake of argument lets say they need 5 million to sign its picks, ummm Houston you got a problem. They need a bunch more players (Offensive DVOA 20th overall - 25th ranked Pass, 9th ranked Rush) and you have no money to get them now.

 

Forget the fact that Boy Wonder in his last 8 games played had 4 TDs to his 12 INTs and they went 3-5 and the starting RB is always injured, this team was 7-9 last year and entering the QB season that's always associated with the word "SLUMP", in what way is this how you expect them to manage the cap to allow them to compete next season?

 

[SkinsTillIDie]

0% chance Bennie Logan re-signs in Philly. Howie Roseman locks up his building blocks a year before they enter their contract year. They'd sooner sign 2 wide receivers and 2 cornerbacks before outbidding 31 other teams for Logan's services. Moreover, Logan only played ~60% of snaps for them last season when he was healthy (and 45% of all snaps), while offering little to nothing as a pass rusher. Given their cap situation and ample needs on both sides of the ball, Logan is as good as gone.

[Commander -JB-]

2 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

...because I believe the word of players, fellow coaches, and media around the league that have spoken about his work as a DL coach, over the random contrarian opinion of a message board poster who is offering no evidence of his own opinion. 

Pardon me as I won't take part in this Jim Tomsula love affair.  I prefer the show and prove approach.  I am a Redskins fan.  I'm smart enough to know that we've been burned penty times before hoping that wonder coaches could change the culture..

[Thinking Skins]

5 hours ago, MartinC said:

 

I know it gets a bit 'technical' but its better to talk about the interior D'Line positions rather than 'nose'. Main ones being Zero tech (head up on the centre), 1 Tech on inside shoulder of the guard (These two are what people normally think of as the nose tackle positions), 3 tech (outside shoulder of the guard), 5 tech (outside shoulder of the tackle).

 

You also need to think about what scheme we are playing, 1 gap or 2 gap. Everything I read says we are likely staying mainly as a 1 gap defense.

 

We are in nickel about 2/3rds of the snaps - thats really our base defense. In that we play with 4 down - typically a 3 tech, 5 tech and then a 7 or 9 from the OLBs with their hands down. Sometimes one (or both) of those OLB might rush (or drop) standing up from a 7 or 9 tech.

 

So if we are a 1 gap defense thats actually using a 3 and 5 tech from its interior DTs most of the time and asking them to attack a gap and get upfield - there is not great value in a 2 gap run stuffing DT. He would mainly play zero or 1 tech in a base 3-4 and can maybe slide to 3 tech on run downs or goal line. 

 

When we go 3-4 its normally an under front - so a 3 tech, a 1 tech and 5tech. That 1 tech is a need, but he has to be someone who is able to play 1 gap and can slide out to 3 tech in nickel if you are giving him a big deal or drafting him in the first 3 rounds say.

 

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say we'll be a 1-gap team still? Manusy did indeed say that we needed a nose, so I'd take him at face value there. What that means I don't know, but I'd say that we are not the first team to play a 3-4 defense in this pass happy league. We just saw the Patriots stop Pitt on the goal line with a big run suffer in Alan Branch.

 

I know this is a pass happy league right now, but I think Manusky said it right in that it all centers around stopping the run. There are a few exceptional QBs or offenses that can put together yards when they have no running game, but those guys are few and far between. Without a running game we're putting the ball on the shoulders of basically a bunch of game managers. And in the long stretch I like those odds. 

 

There are a number of players (FA and the draft) that could be upgrades to our team, but how depends a lot on the type of system we run. Sounds like we'll have the corners playing man. How often will they be on islands vs depending on S help? Will they press at the line or play 5-7 yards off? How often will we blitz our LBs vs putting them in coverage? How much speed will we have at LB and S? Will we get another CB to replace Phillips and Toler? How good will they be at man and how fast will they be? Will our linemen occupy blockers or penetrate the gaps? How much of the OLBs assignment will be playing run and screens? Will we ever see lineups with Smith/Kerrigan/Murphy/Junior all in? What about 2 on the same side (one at DE one at OLB)? 

 

I think the 3-4 vs 4-3 debate is important because, its kinda what you infer here - if we say we're a 34 and then sign guys who are 34 ready, but then only run it 33% of the time, then 67% of the time we're likely to have guys playing out of position or being underutilized. Let alone that they all become like Cravens was last year learning multiple positions at once and have their growth possibly slowed. 

[MartinC]

12 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say we'll be a 1-gap team still? Manusy did indeed say that we needed a nose, so I'd take him at face value there. What that means I don't know, but I'd say that we are not the first team to play a 3-4 defense in this pass happy league. We just saw the Patriots stop Pitt on the goal line with a big run suffer in Alan Branch.

 

Its a bit of an assumption but I'm basing it on his comments about being an attacking defense and having ILBers 'thump' downhill. That sounds like a 1 gap defense.

 

i think 1 gap versus 2 gap is a much bigger decision and far more important than 3-4 v 4-3.

[Conn]

1 hour ago, -JB- said:

Pardon me as I won't take part in this Jim Tomsula love affair.  I prefer the show and prove approach.  I am a Redskins fan.  I'm smart enough to know that we've been burned penty times before hoping that wonder coaches could change the culture..

 

What are we talking about at this point? No one is saying he's a miracle cure for the defense lol. Just that he's a really good DL coach. That's it. Which you disputed with no reasoning or evidence that I can figure out other than wanting to find more reasons to be unhappy than we already have. 

[NoCalMike]

I am fine with the hire right now.  I know we wanted a bigger name, someone with a track record, but at the same time even the famous coordinators started somewhere before they were known and built their name and reputation up.  Here is hoping Manusky is that guy. 

 

I am not thrilled that they are keeping the 3-4, however just because that is the base doesn't lock them into to having any specific formations or styles on every down in every game. 

 

I look forward first and foremost to getting some upgrades in personnel and then going from there. 

[joeken24]

On 1/22/2017 at 0:36 PM, dckey said:

Manusky DC Rankings

 

San Francisco 2007-2012

2007 25th YPG - 20th PPG - 19th 3rd Down %

2008 13th YPG - 23rd PPG - 12th 3rd Down %

2009 15th YPG - 4th PPG  - 10th 3rd Down %

2010 13th YPG - 16th PPG - 19th 3rd Down %

 

San Diego 2011

2011 16th YPG - 22nd PPG - 32nd 3rd Down %

 

Indianapolis 2012-2015

2012 26th YPG - 21st PPG - 14th 3rd Down %

2013 20th YPG - 9th PPG  - 15th 3rd Down %

2014 11th YPG - 19th PPG - 2nd 3rd Down %

2015 26th YPG - 25th PPG - 17th 3rd Down % 

 

9 years experience. Looks like he's never had a top 10 defense. Hmm

 

[skinny21]

3 hours ago, MartinC said:

 

Its a bit of an assumption but I'm basing it on his comments about being an attacking defense and having ILBers 'thump' downhill. That sounds like a 1 gap defense.

 

i think 1 gap versus 2 gap is a much bigger decision and far more important than 3-4 v 4-3.

First off, I think I agree with your last statement.  

 

Couple of clueless questions/points:

 

If they are focused on addressing NT, wouldn't that imply more 2 gapping? Or, at the least maybe a mix of the two?  Or, is it that we switch it up based on if we're in our base vs nickel D?  The latter probably makes the most sense to me since it would move us toward a more traditional 3-4, while still keeping the traditional 1 gapping you see in a 4-3 (at least as I understand them).

  

I hope they (continue to?  I should know that...) run a hybrid.  A better dlineman (or more) that can play the run/occupy blockers/demand attention, ought to help the inside linebackers.  Judging by the last year+, I'm not sure I see our linebackers, particularly Compton, as thumpers.  It's going to be interesting who they start at ILB and how/if the scheme adjusts around them.  I'd think Manuskey could be more flexible if they pick up the nose (preferably one that can slide to DT), man corner and edge rusher (a more traditional LDE for nickel), he wants.  I'm guessing we see the strong safety in the box a lot, for example. 

 

 

 

 

[JSSkinz]

I watched Jays interview on CSN and he said they liked Manusky because "he believed in the talent that was here".

 

 

[bedlamVR]

5 hours ago, jschuck12001 said:

I watched Jays interview on CSN and he said they liked Manusky because "he believed in the talent that was here".

 

 

 

That is going to get jumped on as a negative but a good coach does with what he has . We also have some good young talent that needs developing . I know everyone wants massive roster churn - and I do think it is coming - and Scott knows we need talent and we are positioned to make a move but-  Manusky did not come in with a laundry list of things he wants to change . The team is close . It needs a better defence first ... then you build off that ..

 

If You end up with elite unit comprised entirely of high priced players it is going  to be hard to develop talent and keep the units together . 

 

If you get a process going where people buy into a defence and there is a churn of new and developing talent . It might not be an elite unit statistical but it might be good enough for a lot longer . 

 

If if you win the Super Bowl you don't get extra points for winning it with the No.1 offence or No.1 defence .

 

How many players on the Gibbs Super Bowl teams were considered now or at the time the best at their positions ? 

 

It is, at the end of the day not how many pro bowlers you have but how many super bowls ... 

And just to make it clear ... we absolutely do need more talent . The defence does have quality starters, but all on the outside .

 

The defence needs an influx of talent up the spine . Cravens might be part of the answer but he needs more . 

[skinzplay]

9 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say we'll be a 1-gap team still? Manusy did indeed say that we needed a nose, so I'd take him at face value there. What that means I don't know, but I'd say that we are not the first team to play a 3-4 defense in this pass happy league. We just saw the Patriots stop Pitt on the goal line with a big run suffer in Alan Branch.

 

Yep, and I tell you what --- If I see Kedric Golston anywhere near that Dline this season, I'm not taking any of our defensive coaches seriously, no matter how much rah-rah-sis-boom-bah energy they have.

[Commander -JB-]

9 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

What are we talking about at this point? No one is saying he's a miracle cure for the defense lol. Just that he's a really good DL coach. That's it. Which you disputed with no reasoning or evidence that I can figure out other than wanting to find more reasons to be unhappy than we already have. 

So, basically what you are saying is that if you say Tomsula is a "great" Dline coach you don't have to have any reasoning or evidence but you do if you do not think he's a "great" Dline coach?  Gotcha.