HTTR24-7:Coordinated Chaos- Mike Shanahans History With Defensive Coordinators

[SWFLSkins]

Please read more carefully. I didn't speculate that Haslett called for the pick on that play.?

But OF what you are saying is that his MO is teaching more TO's (great) but not situation coverages? They don't practice the two minute drill on D? There is so much fail here to consider it is giving me a headache.

---------- Post added November-3rd-2012 at 10:12 AM ----------

If I had to put a blame chain together it would start with Mike Shanahan. Should never have hired a DC who did not want to run a 3-4 in the first place.

My Uncle was a very successful businessman, and I worked for a time with him when I was young. Usually when the upper managers start blaming the subordinates, He would just look at them and say, are you trying to make my decision to hire you a poor one? The guy would just look at him weird. And he would say well, You hired him and now you are wrong, I hired you so,,,,what are we saying here? I am wrong? lol Someone needs to sit down with Mike after the season and let him know that in the area of Defense he has failed, and needs to make a change ....or.......maybe Mike is not the guy for the job.

[Lavarleap56]

Please read more carefully. I didn't speculate that Haslett called for the pick on that play.

---------- Post added November-3rd-2012 at 09:56 AM ----------

I wonder how much choice he had. If you were an up-and-coming DC would you put your future in the hands of Mike Shanahan given his Denver management of DCs?

They didn't target any up and coming DCs to be fair. Mike wanted Zimmer but he didn't leave the Bengals. Romeo Crennel called to express interest but Mike didn't want him. Haslett was the fall back since they worked together so much in 2009 when Mike wasn't coaching. I think Mikes DC record is 50/50 and when they are good they stay. Think he might of had a quick hook at times.

[Oldfan]

But OF what you are saying is that his MO is teaching more TO's (great) but not situation coverages? They don't practice the two minute drill on D? There is so much fail here to consider it is giving me a headache.

Call it a blown coverage if you like, but why did he blow the coverage in that situation? Isn't an over-emphasis on takeaways a reasonable explanation for such over-aggressiveness?

[Skinsinparadise]

Williams was over-aggressive. The only reason for him to be playing up that close was to be in position to jump the route for a pick. If coaches over-emphasize takeaways, players play over-agressively and often get burned.

Recall in the past under zorn you were pushing for a defense which is more about creating turnovers. Is it Haslett is too far to the extreme on it? If you don't support a bend but don't break more conservative defense then I gather you prefer a more aggressive one.

On the other hand, Mike has the final say on the defensive strategy. So, it's hard for me to fix the blame.

I fix the blame on Mike for hiring Haslett and the personnel. But he's not calling the plays. Ditto i didn't give Gibbs credit or blame for Gregg Williams X's and O's on defense.

[SWFLSkins]

Call it a blown coverage if you like, but why did he blow the coverage in that situation? Isn't an over-emphasis on takeaways a reasonable explanation for such over-aggressiveness?

The guy was completely out of position, so yeah blown coverage is what I call it. No an over-emphasis on takeaways is great but not without an emphasis on down and distance, time remaining, what team is leading, spot on the field, game characteristics, personnel and on and on. IF Williams is a one trick pony and only plays with aggression on every play how in the world did he make it to the NFL? You know this as a DE, you just can't head up field every play and get undercut by the run. You can't just stay home every play waiting for the run. Yes you do a little of both, but Williams failed to adjust or did Haslett fail to adjust Williams? That is the question?

Based on evidence thus far this season, something even with the talent level, is horribly askew in the secondary. As bad as they are they are being coached down. Five to ten yards off in a two minute drill and a safety over the top should not result in a long TD, unless someone misses a tackle, the ball is perfectly placed between defenders or a blown coverage. I saw blown coverage by Williams, now who's fault is that I don't know.

[Oldfan]

Recall in the past under zorn you were pushing for a defense which is more about creating turnovers. Is it Haslett is too far to the extreme on it?

Yes. We went from one extreme to the other.

I use the traffic light analogy to explain how I look at it:

Red = Take few risks -- we have a lead to protect.

Amber = Take prudent risks -- it's a tight game

Green = Take more risks -- we need to come from behind.

Blache was mostly stuck on red; Haslett is mostly stuck on green.


If the goal is to achieve a higher ranking on the points against stat, Blache's method was smart and Haslett's approach is dumb. If the goal is to win football games, they are both poor risk management strategies.

[Lavarleap56]

Yes. We went from one extreme to the other.

I use the traffic light analogy to explain how I look at it:

Red = Take few risks -- we have a lead to protect.

Amber = Take prudent risks -- it's a tight game

Green = Take more risks -- we need to come from behind.

Blache was mostly stuck on red; Haslett is mostly stuck on green.


If the goal is to achieve a higher ranking on the points against stat, Blache's method was smart and Haslett's approach is dumb. If the goal is to win football games, they are both poor risk management strategies.

I'm not following the logic oldfan.. How is Haslett or any other DC in the NFL dumb for trying to limit points and yardage?

The "philosophy of defense" pic I posted is straight from Dick LeBeau. It's the same philosophy and scheme Lou Spanos brought with him from Pittsburgh and implemented here in Washington. If you are. Hard to call that philosophy stupid when it has resulted in numerous top 5 rankings in yards,& points. Steelers have rode that defensive philosophy to multiple 10,11,12,13 win seasons in the last 7-8 years while winning super bowls.

Now if we want to talk about how the scheme is called, player choices, or any other issue that's fair game. I can't get behind a debate criticizing a defensive philosophy that has had more success than any other in the NFL for 10 years plus probably.

[Oldfan]

I'm not following the logic oldfan.. How is Haslett or any other DC in the NFL dumb for trying to limit points and yardage?

The "philosophy of defense" pic I posted is straight from Dick LeBeau. It's the same philosophy and scheme Lou Spanos brought with him from Pittsburgh and implemented here in Washington. If you are. Hard to call that philosophy stupid when it has resulted in numerous top 5 rankings in yards,& points. Steelers have rode that defensive philosophy to multiple 10,11,12,13 win seasons in the last 7-8 years while winning super bowls.

Now if we want to talk about how the scheme is called, player choices, or any other issue that's fair game. I can't get behind a debate criticizing a defensive philosophy that has had more success than any other in the NFL for 10 years plus probably.

You are claiming that Pittsburgh is successful because of their defensive philosophy to coach for a high ranking on a stat. While I have a high regard for your football knowledge, the reasons Pittsburgh has been successful are far too complex an issue for anyone, no matter how expert, to sum up so neatly.

Do you understand that a defense can adopt a strategy that results in a lower scoring game for BOTH teams? Do you understand how that would help the defense achieve a better ranking on the points against stat but not help his team win the game?

If you understand that, then it is just a logical deduction that coaching defense to a higher ranking on the points against stat and coaching the defense to win football games are two different goals requiring different strategies. Coaching to win is all that matters.

So, do you understand how a defensive strategy to keep the opponent's score down might only result in lowering the score for both teams?

BTW, an over-aggressive defensive strategy to create more takeaways and short-field advantages for the offense might only result in higher scoring games if your defense is often burned by the opponents' offense.

[Voice_of_Reason]

There will be several 3-4 type defensive coordinators out on the market after the season. The DC from Notre Dame is an iteresting choice, Rex Ryan and when the Chiefs fire Romeo or Romeo, he's there also.

I don't think that Raheem Morris is the DC in waiting. His background is the 4-3. We don't run a 4-3, and I don't think that we'll flip back.

There are some others that might be available. I think it's a certainty that Haz is gone. I don't think it happens during the season. But I have to imagine that the comments after the Bengal's game, with the Bengal's players saying they KNEW what the defense was going to be probably sealed Haz's fate. Shanahan is nothing if not prepared, and I imagine it hurt him to the core to think that his team was out-coached.

[SkinsFTW]

IF Williams is a one trick pony and only plays with aggression on every play how in the world did he make it to the NFL? You know this as a DE, you just can't head up field every play and get undercut by the run. You can't just stay home every play waiting for the run. Yes you do a little of both, but Williams failed to adjust or did Haslett fail to adjust Williams? That is the question?

I think the Giants had ran that play several times and the receiver went short, Williams was being too aggressive obviously but that's likely how the Giants come back on teams every week. They fool the defense at the end of the game on plays like that. Williams should know that his job is to stay on top at all times but obviously he thought he had it figured out and was going to jump the route, which makes him look like a complete idiot.

[cphil006]

How were they over aggressive on the Cruz TD? It's not as if there was only one backer back there covering him, Williams simply played to shallow and took a bad angle as the over the top safety, leaving both chasing Cruz. I did not see an over blitzing package on that play, just a blown coverage.

def agree... weren't over-agressive... the safety had his feet planted... instead of playing backing up over the top. He got caught looking at the QB maybe