HTTR 24-7.com: Defensive Dysfunction: How Mike Shanahan Can Fix His Achillies Heel

[Skinsinparadise]

During the stretch run of 2005, Gibbs must have asked for more from Williams because we temporarily got a much more aggressive defense. Brunell's stats looked great because he took advantage of several short field advantages to beef up his TD total. Allowed to take a wider split during that stretch run, and to forego his run first responsibility, Phil Daniels got four sacks in one game.

Williams first year with the Saints they got a ton of turnovers. I think Williams' defense was more aggressive than Blache's though they both at times played bend don't break. Haslett is definitely an aggressive oriented defensive coach and Shanny along with Haslett have said its all about turnovers. But clearly, thus far they have been bad at getting the horses for the scheme -- am not a Haslett guy -- but i put more of the blame on Shanny than Haslett, its Shanny that put together the personnel for the secondary. I don't think the secondary has underachieved, I just don't think they got good players.

[Oldfan]

Williams first year with the Saints they got a ton of turnovers. I think Williams' defense was more aggressive than Blache's though they both at times played bend don't break. Haslett is definitely an aggressive oriented defensive coach and Shanny along with Haslett have said its all about turnovers. But clearly, thus far they have been bad at getting the horses for the scheme -- am not a Haslett guy -- but i put more of the blame on Shanny than Haslett, its Shanny that put together the personnel for the secondary. I don't think the secondary has underachieved, I just don't think they got good players.

I think we have been through this before.

Gregg Williams knows how to use his defense to create turnovers if he wants to. In his stint here, he didn't want to except for that six-game stretch in 2005. The reason he didn't want to is that a defense that plays a passive bend don't break will rank higher on the points against stat which many fans, media, and even NFL coaches think is a good way to grade defenses. The stat is deceptive.

Haslett is over-agressive. His unit will create takeaways, it will help the offense score more points, but they will look bad on the points against stat.

The best defense is passive or aggressive depending on the score. Neither approach works out well full-time.

[Lavarleap56]

I watched this quick video on "The secrets of Super Teams" thinking about the Washington Redskins. The team needs less dictatorship and less yes men to ever improve.. And yes it is sad that 70% of what I watch I associate and compare with the Redskins..

[RandyHolt]

If you hired Gruden, you'd have the same problem you have with Mike Shanahan; a head coach with unilateral control over the football team in terms of personnel and coaching hire decisions. ....

I dont mind full control when the team is run wisely.

Would Gruden have gone 34 with a mostly 43 guy to run it, and switched up the OL to be zone blockers? Those things take years to implement and here we are in year 3 at 3-6 yet have the ever elusive QB and LT in the fold.

I speculate that Gruden would have had selected linemen that can do more than run block, maybe gotten a proven 34 guy to run to teach a D in transition. And I bet he would have had more than 1 guy he trusts to run the ball.

While I am speculating I think those are somewhat reasonable assumptions

To say he is only a better interview rings a bit shallow.

[Lavarleap56]

I dont mind full control when the team is run wisely.

Would Gruden have gone 34 with a mostly 43 guy to run it, and switched up the OL to be zone blockers? Those things take years to implement and here we are in year 3 at 3-6 yet have the ever elusive QB and LT in the fold.

I speculate that Gruden would have had selected linemen that can do more than run block, maybe gotten a proven 34 guy to run to teach a D in transition. And I bet he would have had more than 1 guy he trusts to run the ball.

While I am speculating I think those are somewhat reasonable assumptions

To say he is only a better interview rings a bit shallow.

I personally do not want Gruden.. History shows Super Bowl winning coaches don't win in other cities.

[Rufus T Firefly]

Since you're asking me, I'd say MS hasn't earned any kind of trust in making sound judgments about the defense, and I suspect it will be more a matter of good fortune (especially as in who's available) than shrewd analysis if our next hiring is significantly better (assuming MS makes the call). And even then it will depend on how much MS lets the guy run his own show.

I'm very ambivalent about keeping MS at this point. In general, I think it's better than even money we've made another misstep at HC at this point (it was a dice roll from the beginning). And there's more to all that (keeping MS), involving Allen's and even Snyder's roles/competencies (quite prominently IMV).

Frankly, at the moment,the "MS situation" is one of the Redskins football topics I'm fatigued of discussing (sorry, amigo). I am in Dark Mode in general, team-wise (minus a few bright spots). I probably need a brief respite (and beating the iggles would help ).

My feeling has always leaned towards keeping Shanahan because I'm worried about what Snyder does if he fails. But right now, I'm at least close to equal in my worry about what MS will do in a "make or break" offseason.

[NLC1054]

I dont mind full control when the team is run wisely.

Would Gruden have gone 34 with a mostly 43 guy to run it, and switched up the OL to be zone blockers? Those things take years to implement and here we are in year 3 at 3-6 yet have the ever elusive QB and LT in the fold.

I speculate that Gruden would have had selected linemen that can do more than run block, maybe gotten a proven 34 guy to run to teach a D in transition. And I bet he would have had more than 1 guy he trusts to run the ball.

While I am speculating I think those are somewhat reasonable assumptions

To say he is only a better interview rings a bit shallow.

Those are straw men arguments; we don't know what the hell Gruden would do. It'd be like me asking "Do you think John Gruden would've marched naked through the streets after he signed his contract!?". I don't know.

All I know is that he took the team that Tony Dungy and Rich McKay had built and more or less turned the franchise completely mediocre immediately following the Super Bowl. They had two losing seasons coming off that Super Bowl win, they jettisoned guys like Warren Sapp and John Lynch that were (excuse the pun) lynchpins of their defense, and then couldn't find adaquate replacements for them because they had a nasty habit of trading draft picks for veteran players. They had really bad drafts, a revolving door at quarterback, and Gruden rubbed his staff members and front office personnel the wrong way. Gruden's career winning percentage in Tampa Bay was .509%, which is about as mediocre as you can get, and that was all with him as the de facto GM because, as we know, Bruce Allen is really the cap/contracts/trades guy, and, as I mentioned, he had pushed out McKay. After their one Super Bowl run, Gruden's record in the playoff's was 0-2; in the 6 seasons after the Super Bowl, he made the playoffs twice, and lost in the first game both times.

Those aren't strawmen arguments. Those are facts. Gruden's bark really is bigger than his bite; he's got a big mouth and a big personality which tends to mask the fact that he was basically a one trick pony taking a team other guys built to the Super Bowl who effectively did jacksquat after that one run when, by all accounts, he was basically the general manager and head guy in charge of everything.

[Skinsinparadise]

I think we have been through this before.

Gregg Williams knows how to use his defense to create turnovers if he wants to. In his stint here, he didn't want to except for that six-game stretch in 2005. The reason he didn't want to is that a defense that plays a passive bend don't break will rank higher on the points against stat which many fans, media, and even NFL coaches think is a good way to grade defenses. The stat is deceptive.

Haslett is over-agressive. His unit will create takeaways, it will help the offense score more points, but they will look bad on the points against stat.

The best defense is passive or aggressive depending on the score. Neither approach works out well full-time.

Just saying I don't think Gregg was as much of a bend but don't break guy as Blache, he'd blitz more among other things. But my main point is I think the #1 problem with defense is the personnel so I put that more on Shanny than scheme.

[Oldfan]

Just saying I don't think Gregg was as much of a bend but don't break guy as Blache, he'd blitz more among other things. But my main point is I think the #1 problem with defense is the personnel so I put that more on Shanny than scheme.

Agree on Blache and Williams.

The over-aggressive defensive scheme might be put on Shanahan also. He knows that those takeaways produce short-field opportunities for his offense. He was once called the "mastermind" on offense. I think that reputation is very important to him.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Agree on Blache and Williams.

The over-aggressive defensive scheme might be put on Shanahan also. He knows that those takeaways produce short-field opportunities for his offense. He was once called the "mastermind" on offense. I think that reputation is very important to him.

Along with everything else, I think that reputation is fast slipping the longer this year, and his time here rolls.

Hail.

[Oldfan]

Along with everything else, I think that reputation is fast slipping the longer this year, and his time here rolls.

Hail.

He's in deep doo doo, no doubt. There's a way he could turn this around. I'll try to write it up and start a thread on it next week.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

He's in deep doo doo, no doubt. There's a way he could turn this around. I'll try to write it up and start a thread on it next week.

Appreciated as always my good man.

Good discussion will be a most welcome distraction next week from the fall out I fear the next two games will of brought around.

Hail.

[Skinsinparadise]

Agree on Blache and Williams.

The over-aggressive defensive scheme might be put on Shanahan also. He knows that those takeaways produce short-field opportunities for his offense. He was once called the "mastermind" on offense. I think that reputation is very important to him.

Probably, but I think its more important for him to win. If we want to go on ego stuff -- what could be worse for him than being a wins and loss failure with the Redskins, a highly ranked offense IMO doesn't do squat to save his rep unless he wants to go down as a Norv Turner type, he can call a good offense but doesn't get the rest of it right.

He's the architect of a secondary of Josh Wilson, D. Hall, M Williaims, Gomes/Doughtry -- guess now we will see Merriweather. Most of whom would be backups IMO on most teams. You combine that with linebackers who aren't good at covering -- its not that shocking to me that they are horrible against the pass. This isn't in defense of Haslett again, but yeah I put the defenses failures lets say 80% on Shanny, 20% on Haslett.

[NLC1054]

He's the architect of a secondary of Josh Wilson, D. Hall, M Williaims, Gomes/Doughtry -- guess now we will see Merriweather. Most of whom would be backups IMO on most teams. You combine that with linebackers who aren't good at covering -- its not that shocking to me that they are horrible against the pass. This isn't in defense of Haslett again, but yeah I put the defenses failures lets say 80% on Shanny, 20% on Haslett.

These aren't guys Shanny forced on Haslett; these are all guys Haslett approved of. And not to use the cap hit as a total excuse (there were better safeties available than Madieu), but it seemed like the plan was to get help in the back end as well. I don't think Shanny ignored that part of the team, or at least he didn't plan to. But if there was anyone Haz didn't want, he could speak up about it.

And Haslett's answer to having a struggling secondary, and linebackers who struggle at covering, has been to rush four, and then force a group of guys who struggle to cover into coverage. Usually zone of off man coverage on top of that, and even when we do "press" our corners never put a hand on a guy to disrupt timing or reroute receivers. That's all coaching stuff, and Shanny doesn't call the defense.

The talent isn't great and that does ultimately fall on Shanahan. But this passive defense Haslett has employed is just as bad as everything else. I'd say it was 50-50 at least.

[8181]

So do we keep HAZ now?