Welcome to the Redskins Chase Young DE Ohio State

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

 

Either way, as has been noted previously, guys on the DL are going to get rotated plenty I'm guessing so "starter" doesn't mean as much as it does at other positions. But with his really good play in the latter half of the season and his crazy upside, I'd be more prone to trying to get Sweat as many reps as possible to start maximizing his huge potential. 

 

This IMO is the operative point.  A good D line is rotational, its not like the O line.  You keep bodies fresh.  Heck rewatching Ohio State games they didn't have Young in on every snap.

 

Guys like Kerrigan likely get their fair of reps and not just at DE but also at OLB when they go with an under front formation.  In those scenarios, you could have Young, Sweat, Kerrigan on the field at the same time.  You can also throw one of the three to play inside on some passing downs.  Kerrigan has done it from time to time.  Young actually did it some at Ohio State,

 

When the Giants won their SBs, they had three pass rushers and made it work. 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[goskins10]

Anyone else see this? That's 54" or 4.5'   Yikes, dude is a freak of nature athletically?   Thursday cannot get here soon enough!   SOrry would not let me just put the image in. I will keep trying but here is the Youtube link. 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/post/Ugx5ybqfjGFR99l1JAZ4AaABCQ

Edited April 19, 2020 by goskins10

[Riggo#44]

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

When the Giants won their SBs, they had three pass rushers and made it work. 

 

When people say a pass rush itsn't going to win you a Super Bowl, I tell them they're right--it can win you 2.

[wit33]

24 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

When people say a pass rush itsn't going to win you a Super Bowl, I tell them they're right--it can win you 2.

Or how one can come to the conclusion the Niners not winning the SB last year diminishes the value of a pass rush. 
 

If you’re a contender and in the mix at the end of a season, then the formula worked. 

[Skinsinparadise]

18 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Or how one can come to the conclusion the Niners not winning the SB last year diminishes the value of a pass rush. 
 

If you’re a contender and in the mix at the end of a season, then the formula worked. 

 

Yep.  And I'd add the way this franchise has gone, I think we can all live with making to the SB but just coming a little short for winning it.   

[dyst]

The thing with Payne, he looked near unstoppable in the preseason, then the regular season barely showed up (stat wise at least). Hoping it was a Manusky thing.

[Mr. Sinister]

10 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

I think Landry was an ok pick but there were guys on the board who were much better. As far as what happened with him, some of it was bad luck with injuries, some of it was just him and bad decisions (with how he treated his injuries, doing PEDs, and focusing on becoming some huge bodybuilder). I don't really necessarily see an organizational thing because it isn't like he became a superstar after we cut him loose.

 

 

Nah what I meant was  that he was a great player in Gregg Williams defense. I would argue the majority of NFL players skillsets are scheme reliant, meaning they could look great one place, average at another, and terrible somewhere else. 

 

I think Landry was best suited near the los, as a blitzing, hammer type of prototype SS. As I recall, that was primarily how he was used, before circumstances changed, calling for him to play FS, where he lacked the instincts required to play coverage consistently.  IMO, that was the organizational failure.

 

I also remember there being some drama about how the achilles diagnosis was handled, but all in all, when you throw in the ped usage, 2011 onward kinda is a lost cause, and in terms of who we were drafting him to be, I view that stuff as a separate case entirely. 

 

It's not the first time the stars didn't align for a player (especially here in WAS) but we weren't wrong for taking him IMO. Not close.

 

The safety position was becoming en vogue then (Taylor, Dawkins, Sanders, Reed, Wilson, Polamalu, etc), and Grilliams' defenses were always centered around a dominant back end. He fit that philosophy like a glove, and IMO, that was one of the rare times that we didnt pass on an elite prospect because we already "Had a guy (Taylor)."

 

 

 

 

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

I knew Ioannidis was good, but not that good. That's interesting. Wasn't Allen injured last year though? I thought he had a nagging injury. Payne though, I thought would be more of a pass rusher. I am really excited about having a legitimate DC this year--for the first time since Gregg Williams. It's clear to me that the previous staff was not getting the best out of anyone.

 

IIRC yes, Allen sprained his knee or something like that early in the season, so that's a legit point. He was still able to play but I'm sure it hampered his lateral agility and explosion. 

 

I never expected to Payne to be much of a pass rusher, so I didn't have high expectations. He had really weak pass rushing stats at Bama, but a lot of that was potentially a result of scheme. That being said, I was actually pleasantly surprised by Payne's pass rushing ability his rookie season. He didn't dominate, but 5 sacks for a NT (though he played penetrating 1 tech NT, not pure space eating 0 for the most part) is not bad. Last season was a down year for him but it could be scheme based. 

 

I'm interested to see how both Allen and Payne look this year not only with an actual competent defensive coaching staff, but (almost certainly) with a beast like Chase Young thrown into the mix. 

 

41 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

Nah what I meant was  that he was a great player in Gregg Williams defense. I would argue the majority of NFL players skillsets are scheme reliant, meaning they could look great one place, average at another, and terrible somewhere else. 

 

I think Landry was best suited near the los, as a blitzing, hammer type of prototype SS. As I recall, that was primarily how he was used, before circumstances changed, calling for him to play FS, where he lacked the instincts required to play coverage consistently.  IMO, that was the organizational failure.

 

I also remember there being some drama about how the achilles diagnosis was handled, but all in all, when you throw in the ped usage, 2011 onward kinda is a lost cause, and in terms of who we were drafting him to be, I view that stuff as a separate case entirely. 

 

It's not the first time the stars didn't align for a player (especially here in WAS) but we weren't wrong for taking him IMO. Not close.

 

The safety position was becoming en vogue then (Taylor, Dawkins, Sanders, Reed, Wilson, Polamalu, etc), and Grilliams' defenses were always centered around a dominant back end. He fit that philosophy like a glove, and IMO, that was one of the rare times that we didnt pass on an elite prospect because we already "Had a guy (Taylor)."

 

 

All fair points. Another reason Landry was forced into the FS role was of course the death of ST 😢

 

Truth be told, I was fine with the Landry pick at the time. But that was almost 13 years ago that we drafted him and I've learned a lot more about the game, watching film, and evaluating players since them, though I'm still very much a novice compared to plenty of our resident experts here who have coached, watched film, and evaluated players for a long time. At the time I knew much less and was much more about guys who were just fearsome and exciting hard hitters...and that was Landry. 

 

Watching his LSU stuff now I see a guy who was a fearsome hitter (though a ton of his hits back then would be penalties today), had excellent straight line speed, pretty good nose for the ball, was an so-so tackler but went for the big hit too often instead of wrapping up so missed sometimes, who was stiff in the hips, had only mediocre change of direction ability, and was a liability in coverage outside of the box.

 

I suppose some of it could still be colored by hindsight, but watching Willis, Peterson, and Revis clips from college again currently if I knew then what I did now, I'd be screaming for one of those guys over Landry just based on what I saw on tape. 

[98ORAKPO98]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yep.  And I'd add the way this franchise has gone, I think we can all live with making to the SB but just coming a little short for winning it.   

I would rather not make the superbowl if we're going to lose and keep our winning super bowl record at 3-2.

 

Also, I would rather get to watch dominant players that are exciting and fun to cheer for, and not make the superbowl, than make one super bowl with a bunch of average players and win it. But I guess if we have super star players on our roster we have a good chance to reach the super bowl. 😀

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

This IMO is the operative point.  A good D line is rotational, its not like the O line.  You keep bodies fresh.  Heck rewatching Ohio State games they didn't have Young in on every snap.

 

Guys like Kerrigan likely get their fair of reps and not just at DE but also at OLB when they go with an under front formation.  In those scenarios, you could have Young, Sweat, Kerrigan on the field at the same time.  You can also throw one of the three to play inside on some passing downs.  Kerrigan has done it from time to time.  Young actually did it some at Ohio State,

 

When the Giants won their SBs, they had three pass rushers and made it work. 

Yep we can have a similar package to the Giants Nascar defensive line  package. Young, Sweat, Kerrigan all rushing with one other player.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.denverpost.com/2012/02/04/giants-unique-pass-rush-focuses-on-tom-brady/amp/

Edited April 19, 2020 by 98ORAKPO98

[PartyPosse]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Guys like Kerrigan likely get their fair of reps and not just at DE but also at OLB when they go with an under front formation.  In those scenarios, you could have Young, Sweat, Kerrigan on the field at the same time.  You can also throw one of the three to play inside on some passing downs.  Kerrigan has done it from time to time.  Young actually did it some at Ohio State,

My only worry with this, and I may he completely off base with the 4-3, but aren’t you running the risk of having say Sweat or Kerrigan at OLB being forced into coverage? Wasn’t that, especially Sweat’s, biggest downfall was that he ended up in coverage far too often?

[Vanguard]

On 4/18/2020 at 11:42 AM, mistertim said:

 

So clearly teams were not nearly as scared of Payne or Allen as they were of Ioan, and it showed. But he still put up some very good numbers for an interior DL. IMO at the moment Ioan is definitely our best interior DL.

I’ve been convinced Ioannidis is our best interior lineman for a while.

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

My only worry with this, and I may he completely off base with the 4-3, but aren’t you running the risk of having say Sweat or Kerrigan at OLB being forced into coverage? Wasn’t that, especially Sweat’s, biggest downfall was that he ended up in coverage far too often?

 

If they play a 4-3 under front as some say Del Rio prefers, you are going to at times in all likelihood have a DE play in coverage at times.   The OLB can be a pass rusher like lets say Kerrigan who would be standing up and either rushing the passer or dropping back into coverage.  That's what Del Rio did at times with Von Miller. 

 

IMO the Manusky is a dolt narrative that runs on twitter because he'd drop a 3-4 OLB in coverage was weird.  If you are running a 3-4 defense, typically one of the OLBs has to drop otherwise you'd be rushing 5 all the time.  The 4-3 under front borrows some concepts from the 3-4.

 

Heck watching Chase's college games, he's dropped into coverage some.  Chase in interviews likes to say he takes pride in his ability to cover.  

 

Some say Preston did better in GB because he didn't cover as much but the numbers were run at some point during the season which showed Preston went into coverage even more there then in DC.   I think Preston did better there because they had a better coordinator and also a more formidable edge guy on the other side.

 

I am not too worried about a DE covering at times.  IMO Manusky wasn't a good coordinator but not because he had his OLBs drop -- he if anything IMO would look more the fool if they didn't drop.  You can't rush 5 all the time and also that makes things predictable if you always know which OLB was dropping all the time.  You have to mix it up.  If they run a 4-3 under front, you'll see some edge guys drop from time to time.  

Edited April 19, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[PartyPosse]

I always envisioned having your better coverage guys at OLB in a 4-3, especially when you have guys like Sweat, Allen, Young, Ion, Payne etc always on your DL. Teams can’t double everyone and if one of those 4 can’t get at least pressure on the QB at all times then something is seriously wrong. I guess you could have one of your DE in at OLB but I just assume they’re the most easily exploitable quick out for a QB in that scenario. If we’re moving Young back into coverage then we’re wasting his talentS

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

I haven’t bought a jersey in years and when I do, it ends poorly.

 

But Chase might be an exception 

[PartyPosse]

I also know it’s impossible but I have dreams of drafting Young and Xavier McKinney and watching Xavier rack up 15 sacks as a pure Inside blitzing safety lol.

[Riggo#44]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

IMO the Manusky is a dolt narrative that runs on twitter because he'd drop a 3-4 OLB in coverage was weird....
IMO Manusky wasn't a good coordinator but not because he had his OLBs drop -- he if anything IMO would look more the fool if they didn't drop.  You can't rush 5 all the time and also that makes things predictable if you always know which OLB was dropping all the time.  You have to mix it up.  If they run a 4-3 under front, you'll see some edge guys drop from time to time.  

 

Agree, and that's an excellent breakdown. Manusky wasn't an idiot because he had LBs cover--he was incompetent because there was so much confusion, constantly on the defense, at every level. We had a conglomeration of position coaches who had some amount of reputation (like Tomsula)--we just had no actual coordination, hence the title.

 

I'm very interested in seeing JDR's approach.

[mistertim]

40 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If they play a 4-3 under front as some say Del Rio prefers, you are going to at times in all likelihood have a DE play in coverage at times.   The OLB can be a pass rusher like lets say Kerrigan who would be standing up and either rushing the passer or dropping back into coverage.  That's what Del Rio did at times with Von Miller. 

 

IMO the Manusky is a dolt narrative that runs on twitter because he'd drop a 3-4 OLB in coverage was weird.  If you are running a 3-4 defense, typically one of the OLBs has to drop otherwise you'd be rushing 5 all the time.  The 4-3 under front borrows some concepts from the 3-4.

 

Heck watching Chase's college games, he's dropped into coverage some.  Chase in interviews likes to say he takes pride in his ability to cover.  

 

Some say Preston did better in GB because he didn't cover as much but the numbers were run at some point during the season which showed Preston went into coverage even more there then in DC.   I think Preston did better there because they had a better coordinator and also a more formidable edge guy on the other side.

 

I am not too worried about a DE covering at times.  IMO Manusky wasn't a good coordinator but not because he had his OLBs drop -- he if anything IMO would look more the fool if they didn't drop.  You can't rush 5 all the time and also that makes things predictable if you always know which OLB was dropping all the time.  You have to mix it up.  If they run a 4-3 under front, you'll see some edge guys drop from time to time.  

 

Great post, but I have a couple of questions. My understanding was that in a 4-3 under (and over) you'd still generally have 4 guys with their hands in the dirt (though you can always have your "Leo" in a 2 point stance if you want) but you'll usually have your SAM up close to the LOS on the strong side to cover TEs, seal against outside strong side runs, or rush the passer sometimes. Are you saying that we'd put Kerrigan in at SAM in some situations while keeping Sweat at strong side DE? Or that we'd be more likely to run fire zone blitzes where we drop DL guys into shallow coverages and pass rush with LBs? Also, what do you think Manusky's biggest issue was? Predictability? 

Edited April 19, 2020 by mistertim

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Agree, and that's an excellent breakdown. Manusky wasn't an idiot because he had LBs cover--he was incompetent because there was so much confusion, constantly on the defense, at every level. We had a conglomeration of position coaches who had some amount of reputation (like Tomsula)--we just had no actual coordination, hence the title.

 

I'm very interested in seeing JDR's approach.

 

I'd add his pass rush was predictable, fire zones mostly.  When they finally funk'd it up a little towards the end of the season by using unbalanced formations on one side or another, it helped.  He oddly almost never would send a S-or CB in a blitz.  Gregg Williams for example had Shawn Springs one season get 6 sacks. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

8 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yep I know.  And I think for this reason the Redskins roster building can get twisted especially by the national media.  They recall some of the high profile FA signings where they've attempted to bring star power.  Though the reality of that has been mostly former stars not in their prime or overpaying for dudes who were never stars.  There were some exceptions like Haynesworth, etc. But this is not a franchise that has gone the star route in spite of their attempts. 

 

I think Bruce more than anyone has contributed to the downfall of the franchise with more causal fans (who you need to fill a stadium) as a national attention type franchise.  Pre Bruce, this team was at least a little interesting even though they did things the wrong way.  Bruce was mostly yawn in FA.  Old school Redskins (under Dan) were losers but somewhat interesting.  Under Bruce they were losers (worse record than Vinny) and boring.   We can't even get a SNF game anymore because not enough people care to watch us.  That wasn't the case pre Bruce.

 

I don't think any of this stuff is a reason to draft Chase Young.  But IMO Chase will likely bring seriously needed gravy to the franchise.  You put on a football show and Chase is almost always there, being interviewed or talked about.  No one is talking about dudes like Daron Payne.   We've not really had a genuine star under Dan with the exception of Sean's last seson and RG3 in 2012.  And I can't think of a franchise more starving for star power than this one.   

 

 

They offered 2 #1's for Ocho Cinco right before his inevitable decline and the Bengals turned it down. Still trying to figure who to laugh harder at for this, probably the Bengals.  

[Riggo#44]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I'd add his pass rush was predictable, fire zones mostly.  When they finally funk'd it up a little towards the end of the season by using unbalanced formations on one side or another, it helped.  He oddly almost never would send a S-or CB in a blitz.  Gregg Williams for example had Shawn Springs one season get 6 sacks. 

 

I didn't think Dan liked Vanilla...

[dyst]

33 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

I haven’t bought a jersey in years and when I do, it ends poorly.

 

But Chase might be an exception 

DON'T DO IT!

[Skinsinparadise]

27 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Great post, but I have a couple of questions. My understanding was that in a 4-3 under (and over) you'd still generally have 4 guys with their hands in the dirt (though you can always have your "Leo" in a 2 point stance if you want) but you'll usually have your SAM up close to the LOS on the strong side to cover TEs, seal against outside strong side runs, or rush the passer sometimes. Are you saying that we'd put Kerrigan in at SAM in some situations while keeping Sweat at strong side DE? Or that we'd be more likely to run fire zone blitzes where we drop DL guys into shallow coverages and pass rush with LBs? Also, what do you think Manusky's biggest issue was? Predictability? 

 

This seems to be the look.  As for who does what?  I don't know.   But it's a way to incorporate all three at the same time.  The 5th guy in the under front who is lined close to the line of scrimmage is 2 stance.   Maybe that guy is Chase ironically because you can see the value of having a dude with quick get off thriving from that vantage point. 

 

As for Manusky I ironically had a couple of chances to talk to him for a few minutes.  He struck me a nice guy and definitely not stupid.  But yeah I think his blitzes were super predictable.  And some say their zone coverages were too complicated and weren't taught well so the secondary was perpetually confused. 

 

 

 

 

 

Messing around one time looking at Del Rios defenses.  He has some unbalanced looks also had two defenders rushing standing up, with 5 on the line of scrimmage -- very 3-4ish.   The first two clips -- 1st is the pre-snap look, the 2nd is what they actually did. 

 

The third clip looks a traditional under front formation.  The 4th clip has two guys standing up.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[Ashburn Dave]

7 hours ago, 98ORAKPO98 said:

The WP writer above seems to think Kerrigan will be the starter, I'm not so foolish then am I eh? Kerrigan will dominate next year, as could Sweat and Young, regardless of who starts. Same can be said in the Allen,  Ioannidis, Payne debate. 

 

My guess is that our defense becomes competent with our new competent coaches.  Guys like Payne and Allen will perform like expectations regardless of getting Chase or not.  With Chase and our competent coaches we will be dominant.  Just my 2 cents but I'm starting to get a gut feeling about it.  I'll need to forget that feeling though on fantasy draft night otherwise I'll get laughed at when I take the Redskins DEF early.

[Warhead36]

I think the coaches value Kerrigan a lot higher than the fans do. Now if Sweat makes a big step up he could start but as of now its gonna be Kerrigan at one DE and Young at the other I'd assume.

[Mr. Sinister]

3 hours ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

I haven’t bought a jersey in years and when I do, it ends poorly.

 

But Chase might be an exception 

 

Yeeeaaaaaah. Let's not be hasty