Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Irrefutable;1159756]They are already playing a significant amount of 4-3 defense. Kerrigan, Murphy, and Smith are in a 3 point stance, with Cravens at LB.[/quote]

Yep. This week they even played it several times with Foster and Spaight.

Re: The coordinators
 

Doesn't matter what type of front you play when you simply don't have enough talent.

Re: The coordinators
 

For the 4-3 advocates...

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/29286/redskins-defensive-woes-run-deep]Redskins' defensive woes run deep - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url]

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=MTK;1159766]Doesn't matter what type of front you play when you simply don't have enough talent.[/quote]

True, however it determines the type of personnel you go after.

And they need to stop striking-out on free agents (granted low level)...... Reyes,Bruton,Johnson, Toler, Hood,Paea, etc. Then draft talent on defense.

Re: The coordinators
 

[QUOTE=Irrefutable;1159773]True, however it determines the type of personnel you go after.[/QUOTE]



Of course, but the point is we need upgrades regardless. Just switching the front won't make a difference, and we're in 4-3 a big part of the time anyway.

Re: The coordinators
 

Ricky Jean, Ziggy hood just aren't DTs for 4-3. I don't think we have a good MLB either for the scheme. Wil isn't getting it done. Foster and Cravens on the outside...I can see that as a positive tandem.

Interesting last sentence from Keim "Smith will need a strong offseason"...

Re: The coordinators
 

4-3 or 3-4, doesn't matter. Kerrigan Murph and Smith are all flexible enough to play with the hand in the dirt or standing up.

Barry is a major part of the problem. Stick with me here on the X's and O's, but here's why his system is a bad fit.

- One of the premises of his system is an attack-style, one-gap approach at the defensive line and a lot of zone defense on the back end. The one-gap favors quickness and penetration up front to generate a lot of disruption and pressure, and the zone on the back end is designed such that DBs can have their eyes on the QB more, which can then lead to picks if the line penetrates and disrupts often enough.

- This system can be effective if you get enough penetration. We don't. Baker is the only one that occasionally shoots gaps.

- The obvious vulnerability that comes with shooting gaps is that it's easy for the offensive line to use your momentum against you and just wash you out of a play. So it can leave gaping holes for RBs to exploit.

- In order for a one-gap to be effective against the run, you need extremely athletic linebackers that can get into a gap vacated by a one-gapping lineman, they have to do it extremely quickly. And they have to be hitters capable of stalemating a lineman in the hole. We lack the athleticism and size at LB.

That's the problem with the scheme. There are also plenty of problems with the secondary - the safety position is undermanned, while the CB position should be better given the talent. I don't think Barry does a good job communicating when a CB should use inside or outside leverage and I don't think he has them understanding where their help is. But those aren't scheme things, that's just poor coaching.

Sticking with the scheme problem, I don't know how you continue to run a one-gap defense when you know you don't have the horses up front to penetrate often enough, and you know you don't have the LBs to make up for vacated gaps. With this personnel group I would be running more of a Greg Blache two-gap scheme. Given the limitations with the line talent, I would ask them to occupy blockers. It's much more vanilla but it would at least stop the run much better. That would keep linemen off our physically overmatched linebackers, and let them use their decent recognition skills to stop the ballcarrier.

You don't get too many game-changing disrupting plays with a scheme like this, but we haven't been doing that anyway because we lack the talent. If we had a Fletcher Cox alongside Baker, it'd be different. We should be two gapping, forcing teams into more 3rd and 7s, and then running stunts and twists to try to win on the obvious passing downs.

I don't like defensive coordinators who show an inability to adapt their system. Barry does the same damn thing every game. We one-gap, we get gashed by the run, we use Whitner in the box to help as the CBs back off the line, and we get destroyed in the secondary. He should be able to get more out of this group, and his inability to make adjustments is unsatisfactory.

If we had better personnel would Barry be better? Sure, duh. But even with better talent there will be times where our opponents are ripe for a one-gap with zone, and other times where other opponents are ripe for a two-gap. I don't like his lack of flexibility and poor adjustments.

We need a talent infusion at all three defensive levels but we also need some better thinking at D coordinator. It's truly an organizational failure. Barry needs to be replaced and a lot of the players need to be upgraded.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Schneed10;1159777]4-3 or 3-4, doesn't matter. Kerrigan Murph and Smith are all flexible enough to play with the hand in the dirt or standing up.

Barry is a major part of the problem. Stick with me here on the X's and O's, but here's why his system is a bad fit.

- One of the premises of his system is an attack-style, one-gap approach at the defensive line and a lot of zone defense on the back end. The one-gap favors quickness and penetration up front to generate a lot of disruption and pressure, and the zone on the back end is designed such that DBs can have their eyes on the QB more, which can then lead to picks if the line penetrates and disrupts often enough.

- This system can be effective if you get enough penetration. We don't. Baker is the only one that occasionally shoots gaps.

- The obvious vulnerability that comes with shooting gaps is that it's easy for the offensive line to use your momentum against you and just wash you out of a play. So it can leave gaping holes for RBs to exploit.

- In order for a one-gap to be effective against the run, you need extremely athletic linebackers that can get into a gap vacated by a one-gapping lineman, they have to do it extremely quickly. And they have to be hitters capable of stalemating a lineman in the hole. We lack the athleticism and size at LB.

That's the problem with the scheme. There are also plenty of problems with the secondary - the safety position is undermanned, while the CB position should be better given the talent. I don't think Barry does a good job communicating when a CB should use inside or outside leverage and I don't think he has them understanding where their help is. But those aren't scheme things, that's just poor coaching.

Sticking with the scheme problem, I don't know how you continue to run a one-gap defense when you know you don't have the horses up front to penetrate often enough, and you know you don't have the LBs to make up for vacated gaps. With this personnel group I would be running more of a Greg Blache two-gap scheme. Given the limitations with the line talent, I would ask them to occupy blockers. It's much more vanilla but it would at least stop the run much better. That would keep linemen off our physically overmatched linebackers, and let them use their decent recognition skills to stop the ballcarrier.

You don't get too many game-changing disrupting plays with a scheme like this, but we haven't been doing that anyway because we lack the talent. If we had a Fletcher Cox alongside Baker, it'd be different. We should be two gapping, forcing teams into more 3rd and 7s, and then running stunts and twists to try to win on the obvious passing downs.

I don't like defensive coordinators who show an inability to adapt their system. Barry does the same damn thing every game. We one-gap, we get gashed by the run, we use Whitner in the box to help as the CBs back off the line, and we get destroyed in the secondary. He should be able to get more out of this group, and his inability to make adjustments is unsatisfactory.

If we had better personnel would Barry be better? Sure, duh. But even with better talent there will be times where our opponents are ripe for a one-gap with zone, and other times where other opponents are ripe for a two-gap. I don't like his lack of flexibility and poor adjustments.

We need a talent infusion at all three defensive levels but we also need some better thinking at D coordinator. It's truly an organizational failure. Barry needs to be replaced and a lot of the players need to be upgraded.[/quote]

Great post, thanks. This is the kind of posts I came here for. Improving my knowledge of this game.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Schneed10;1159777]4-3 or 3-4, doesn't matter. Kerrigan Murph and Smith are all flexible enough to play with the hand in the dirt or standing up.

Barry is a major part of the problem. Stick with me here on the X's and O's, but here's why his system is a bad fit.

- One of the premises of his system is an attack-style, one-gap approach at the defensive line and a lot of zone defense on the back end. The one-gap favors quickness and penetration up front to generate a lot of disruption and pressure, and the zone on the back end is designed such that DBs can have their eyes on the QB more, which can then lead to picks if the line penetrates and disrupts often enough.

- This system can be effective if you get enough penetration. We don't. Baker is the only one that occasionally shoots gaps.

- The obvious vulnerability that comes with shooting gaps is that it's easy for the offensive line to use your momentum against you and just wash you out of a play. So it can leave gaping holes for RBs to exploit.

- In order for a one-gap to be effective against the run, you need extremely athletic linebackers that can get into a gap vacated by a one-gapping lineman, they have to do it extremely quickly. And they have to be hitters capable of stalemating a lineman in the hole. We lack the athleticism and size at LB.

That's the problem with the scheme. There are also plenty of problems with the secondary - the safety position is undermanned, while the CB position should be better given the talent. I don't think Barry does a good job communicating when a CB should use inside or outside leverage and I don't think he has them understanding where their help is. But those aren't scheme things, that's just poor coaching.

Sticking with the scheme problem, I don't know how you continue to run a one-gap defense when you know you don't have the horses up front to penetrate often enough, and you know you don't have the LBs to make up for vacated gaps. With this personnel group I would be running more of a Greg Blache two-gap scheme. Given the limitations with the line talent, I would ask them to occupy blockers. It's much more vanilla but it would at least stop the run much better. That would keep linemen off our physically overmatched linebackers, and let them use their decent recognition skills to stop the ballcarrier.

You don't get too many game-changing disrupting plays with a scheme like this, but we haven't been doing that anyway because we lack the talent. If we had a Fletcher Cox alongside Baker, it'd be different. We should be two gapping, forcing teams into more 3rd and 7s, and then running stunts and twists to try to win on the obvious passing downs.

I don't like defensive coordinators who show an inability to adapt their system. Barry does the same damn thing every game. We one-gap, we get gashed by the run, we use Whitner in the box to help as the CBs back off the line, and we get destroyed in the secondary. He should be able to get more out of this group, and his inability to make adjustments is unsatisfactory.

If we had better personnel would Barry be better? Sure, duh. But even with better talent there will be times where our opponents are ripe for a one-gap with zone, and other times where other opponents are ripe for a two-gap. I don't like his lack of flexibility and poor adjustments.

We need a talent infusion at all three defensive levels but we also need some better thinking at D coordinator. It's truly an organizational failure. Barry needs to be replaced and a lot of the players need to be upgraded.[/quote]
BLUF: Joe Barry sucks.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Schneed10;1159777]4-3 or 3-4, doesn't matter. Kerrigan Murph and Smith are all flexible enough to play with the hand in the dirt or standing up.

Barry is a major part of the problem. Stick with me here on the X's and O's, but here's why his system is a bad fit.

- One of the premises of his system is an attack-style, one-gap approach at the defensive line and a lot of zone defense on the back end. The one-gap favors quickness and penetration up front to generate a lot of disruption and pressure, and the zone on the back end is designed such that DBs can have their eyes on the QB more, which can then lead to picks if the line penetrates and disrupts often enough.

- This system can be effective if you get enough penetration. We don't. Baker is the only one that occasionally shoots gaps.

- The obvious vulnerability that comes with shooting gaps is that it's easy for the offensive line to use your momentum against you and just wash you out of a play. So it can leave gaping holes for RBs to exploit.

- In order for a one-gap to be effective against the run, you need extremely athletic linebackers that can get into a gap vacated by a one-gapping lineman, they have to do it extremely quickly. And they have to be hitters capable of stalemating a lineman in the hole. We lack the athleticism and size at LB.

That's the problem with the scheme. There are also plenty of problems with the secondary - the safety position is undermanned, while the CB position should be better given the talent. I don't think Barry does a good job communicating when a CB should use inside or outside leverage and I don't think he has them understanding where their help is. But those aren't scheme things, that's just poor coaching.

Sticking with the scheme problem, I don't know how you continue to run a one-gap defense when you know you don't have the horses up front to penetrate often enough, and you know you don't have the LBs to make up for vacated gaps. With this personnel group I would be running more of a Greg Blache two-gap scheme. Given the limitations with the line talent, I would ask them to occupy blockers. It's much more vanilla but it would at least stop the run much better. That would keep linemen off our physically overmatched linebackers, and let them use their decent recognition skills to stop the ballcarrier.

You don't get too many game-changing disrupting plays with a scheme like this, but we haven't been doing that anyway because we lack the talent. If we had a Fletcher Cox alongside Baker, it'd be different. We should be two gapping, forcing teams into more 3rd and 7s, and then running stunts and twists to try to win on the obvious passing downs.

I don't like defensive coordinators who show an inability to adapt their system. Barry does the same damn thing every game. We one-gap, we get gashed by the run, we use Whitner in the box to help as the CBs back off the line, and we get destroyed in the secondary. He should be able to get more out of this group, and his inability to make adjustments is unsatisfactory.

If we had better personnel would Barry be better? Sure, duh. But even with better talent there will be times where our opponents are ripe for a one-gap with zone, and other times where other opponents are ripe for a two-gap. I don't like his lack of flexibility and poor adjustments.

We need a talent infusion at all three defensive levels but we also need some better thinking at D coordinator. It's truly an organizational failure. Barry needs to be replaced and a lot of the players need to be upgraded.[/quote]

One of the best post i seen in a while.

Re: The coordinators
 

Agree, great post.

[B]Did someone already do an in-depth analysis on why our running game sucks? [/B] Callahan is supposed to be a O-line / run game guru, and everyone says the O-line is "one of the best" and we have two pro-bowlers --- but they only seem to pass-block well. I know Kelley isn't Elliott, but we're only 14th in rushing and they rarely create big holes. Kelley seems to have to make guys miss in the backfield & we seem like we're routinely 2nd and 8 or worse after running. I feel like our redzone ineffectiveness is likely partly due to a poor run game, and all the attempted fade routes in redzone are likely due to lack of confidence in run game. Aside from the Mack Brown long run and 1-2 runs from Thompson, all we had was Kelley 19 of 76 for 4 yard average against Chicago..

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=ethat001;1160081]Agree, great post.

[B]Did someone already do an in-depth analysis on why our running game sucks? [/B] Callahan is supposed to be a O-line / run game guru, and everyone says the O-line is "one of the best" and we have two pro-bowlers --- but they only seem to pass-block well. I know Kelley isn't Elliott, but we're only 14th in rushing and they rarely create big holes. Kelley seems to have to make guys miss in the backfield & we seem like we're routinely 2nd and 8 or worse after running. I feel like our redzone ineffectiveness is likely partly due to a poor run game, and all the attempted fade routes in redzone are likely due to lack of confidence in run game. Aside from the Mack Brown long run and 1-2 runs from Thompson, all we had was Kelley 19 of 76 for 4 yard average against Chicago..[/quote]

I'm not a Lauvao fan, Kouandjio should be starting in his place, only reason is not happening is the money invested in Lauvao.

Re: The coordinators
 

I am looking for a post but i can't find it. I thought I read a post where someone mentioned Cooley discussing possible replacements for Barry. Does anybody remember this post?

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=ethat001;1160081]Agree, great post.

[B]Did someone already do an in-depth analysis on why our running game sucks? [/B] Callahan is supposed to be a O-line / run game guru, and everyone says the O-line is "one of the best" and we have two pro-bowlers --- but they only seem to pass-block well. I know Kelley isn't Elliott, but we're only 14th in rushing and they rarely create big holes. Kelley seems to have to make guys miss in the backfield & we seem like we're routinely 2nd and 8 or worse after running. I feel like our redzone ineffectiveness is likely partly due to a poor run game, and all the attempted fade routes in redzone are likely due to lack of confidence in run game. Aside from the Mack Brown long run and 1-2 runs from Thompson, all we had was Kelley 19 of 76 for 4 yard average against Chicago..[/quote]

It comes down to the coaches' commitment. Moses, Trent and schreff all excel at run blocking. Lauvao is a much better run blocker than pass blocker. We have some inexperienced running backs but physical. So it comes down to Gruden and mcvay doing a better job gameplan and instituting a physical run attack consistently.

Certainly our stats state when we commit to the running game we win period. Mcvay and Gruden haven't shown that commitment every game and that is certainly where the fault lies. Damn shame cause we would probably be more effective in the red zone if we would.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Chico23231;1160087]Certainly our stats state when we commit to the running game we win period. Mcvay and Gruden haven't shown that commitment every game and that is certainly where the fault lies. Damn shame cause we would probably be more effective in the red zone if we would.[/quote]

I agree with you, but it's always tricky to say simply running more leads to more wins. And the fact that we win more when we run more -- could simply be because when you're winning by the second half -- you run out the clock, increasing the numbers of runs. And if you're losing early by a lot or your run game sucks early, you may not call many runs -- and calling more runs in those situations would NOT help you win. In other words, simple run % may not determine the game but may reflect the nature of the game.

I think we need to fix the running game first, and then stay committed to it AFTER we've proven the run game is consistently effective.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=ethat001;1160088]I agree with you, but it's always tricky to say simply running more leads to more wins. And the fact that we win more when we run more -- could simply be because when you're winning by the second half -- you run out the clock, increasing the numbers of runs. And if you're losing early by a lot or your run game sucks early, you may not call many runs -- and calling more runs in those situations would NOT help you win. In other words, simple run % may not determine the game but may reflect the nature of the game.

I think we need to fix the running game first, and then stay committed to it AFTER we've proven the run game is consistently effective.[/quote]

Well, certainly a more balance attack in the offense is important...but my motivation is to keep the ball, control the clock and keep our leaky defense on the sideline. I've seen us too many times give the ball back on offense where we throw the ball 3 times in a row without any results...ashame when it happens in the red zone

Re: The coordinators
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1160090]Well, certainly a more balance attack in the offense is important...but my motivation is to keep the ball, control the clock and keep our leaky defense on the sideline. I've seen us too many times give the ball back on offense where we throw the ball 3 times in a row without any results...ashame when it happens in the red zone[/QUOTE]
Agreed, fact is we won when we ran the ball and lost when we didn't.

But I'd say our O-line has been less consistant in the running game than in pass protection.
Some games it seems Fat Rob was contacted in the backfield on every carry.
No matter how good he is at breaking tackles, that doesn't speak great run blocking.

Envoyé de mon TOMMY en utilisant Tapatalk

Re: The coordinators
 

Play calling is a big part of the problem, especially earlier this season.
One thing that is not talked about as much is TE, WR, RB and FB run blocking.
We are built to pass. Not one of our TE's, RB's, WR's and FB's is a [B][U]great[/U][/B] run blocker. We have a couple of pretty good run blockers in Pierre Garcon, Vernon Davis and Rob Kelly is a good pass blocker. But that is it. We do not have a TE that puts the fear in a defensive player. That is part of the problem. Jordan Reed when healthy is a top receiving TE, but his run blocking is not very good.....and I am being nice. A run blocking TE that can catch as well is a need. We are one dimensional for a reason.

Re: The coordinators
 

[url=http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18357761/buffalo-bills-fire-head-coach-rex-ryan]Buffalo Bills fire head coach Rex Ryan[/url]

Hire him as DC!

Re: The coordinators
 

[url=http://was.247sports.com/Bolt/Report-Coaching-staff-changes-on-deck-for-Redskins-50051249]Report: Coaching staff changes on deck for Redskins[/url]

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;1160231][url=http://was.247sports.com/Bolt/Report-Coaching-staff-changes-on-deck-for-Redskins-50051249]Report: Coaching staff changes on deck for Redskins[/url][/quote]

That answers my earlier question. Any thoughts on a replacement?

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=OmahaRedskins;1160245]That answers my earlier question. Any thoughts on a replacement?[/quote]

I think that question was answered earlier too . . . Rex Ryan would make a great d-coordinator and nobody will hire him as a head coach any time soon either. Would love it!!

Re: The coordinators
 

I would be stoked to have Rex as our DC.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=punch it in;1160308]I would be stoked to have Rex as our DC.[/quote]

Blech. No thanks.

He had a shut down defense with the Ravens - true enough. He also had: Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Hali Ngota, Chris McCalister, Terrell Suggs & Bart Scott. Pretty sure [I][B]I[/B][/I] could coordinate a shut down D with those players.

In Buffalo, he took the 4th ranked D (2014-2015) and turned it into the 19th ranked D (this season). By most accounts, most of the Buffalo defensive players did not buy into his complex scheme and, by the end of the season, he had "lost the room."

He is a bombastic, divisive personality and I want no part of his clown show.

Re: The coordinators
 

If Rex just could concentrate on defense here...id take it. But can he do that? big question

Re: The coordinators
 

Three words..., Joe fucking Barry. Rex as a DC would not get the press time to sound like an idiot or be a distraction. I think he could be a valuable piece of the puzzle as DC.

Re: The coordinators
 

Rex's resume does not impress me.
Pass on son of Buddy.....

Re: The coordinators
 

Do not hire Rex. Please

Re: The coordinators
 

Rex has no connections here i doubt he is on our short list

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Re: The coordinators
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;1160321]Rex has no connections here i doubt he is on our short list

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]



I do not see it happening. I just like the idea.

Re: The coordinators
 

Putting aside his clown show, Rex runs a complex scheme and, for everyone screaming about Barry's inability to adapt, Rex expects players to play his way. There was a mini-rebellion in Buffalo b/c they had a solid D under Jim Schwartz; Rex came in and changed the scheme entirely. After two years, the Buffalo D still needed time to adapt to the schemes that the Ryans run.

[url]http://www.buffalorumblings.com/buffalo-bills-opinion/2015/12/16/10287888/rex-ryan-defensive-scheme-is-complicated-per-buffalo-bills-players[/url]
[url=http://larrybrownsports.com/football/rex-ryan-scheme-too-complex/340947]Marcell Dareus: Rex Ryan defense was too complex for some players | Larry Brown Sports[/url]

In the two years prior to Rex, Mario Williams had 13 & 14.5 sacks; first year under Rex - 5.0; Maybe he dropped off b/c of age, but, the drop off was consistent with the entire D's performance under Ryan. After being 4th in both pts. allowed and yards allowed, in the first year under Rex, Buffalo's defense dropped to 15th and 19th respectively.

Rex ran a great D when he had HOF players. Since then, pfffft. He's all ego and clown show.

EDIT: More from last year -
[url=http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/22980/five-problems-bills-players-have-with-rex-ryans-defense]Five problems Buffalo Bills players have with Rex Ryan's defense - Buffalo Bills Blog- ESPN[/url]

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=punch it in;1160314]Three words..., Joe fucking Barry. Rex as a DC would not get the press time to sound like an idiot or be a distraction. I think he could be a valuable piece of the puzzle as DC.[/quote]

My desire to be rid of Barry does not mean we should just grab the next big name that happens along.

Still pissed they passed on W. Phillips.

Re: The coordinators
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;1160326]My desire to be rid of Barry does not mean we should just grab the next big name that happens along.



Still pissed they passed on W. Phillips.[/QUOTE]



I would take Wade over Rex. What about Rex with the Jets though?

Re: The coordinators
 

Just say no to Rex Ryan. He's a clown who craves attention and is all talk.

We need someone who will make our players better by creating a scheme to fit the talent (or lack thereof) we have and getting the best out of them. Barry is probably a good coach and knows his X's and O's, but he isn't a difference maker. We need a difference maker.

Re: The coordinators
 

F the Ryans, overrated

Re: The coordinators
 

Neither Ryan is coming here. They're not part of club... aka Tampa North.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1160365]Neither Ryan is coming here. They're not part of club... aka Tampa North.[/quote]

Correct, but Gus Bradley is part of the club. Worked under Jon Gruden in Tampa from '06 - '08, and left to become Seattle's D coordinator in '09 when Gruden was let go from Tampa.

Gus Bradley was defensive quality control coach for Monte Kiffin in 2006, and then took over coaching the linebackers in 2007 when none other than Joe Barry left to become the coordinator of the Lions.

That period of course overlapped with Jay Gruden's time in Tampa, when he was an offensive assistant.

And then in 2009 when Bradley joined the Seahawks as the defensive coordinator from 2009 - 2012, that period overlapped with Scot McCloughan's tenure in Seattle, when he was a personnel executive there supporting Jon Schneider from 2010 - 2014.

Guaranteed Bradley is the top D coordinator target. Redskins One will be fueled up the moment our season ends.

Re: The coordinators
 

Fewell is already on the team has previous DC experience, same goes for Manusky. Olivadotti could also ve considered. I think if Barry is fired, it will be an internal promotion.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Schneed10;1160367]Correct, but Gus Bradley is part of the club. Worked under Jon Gruden in Tampa from '06 - '08, and left to become Seattle's D coordinator in '09 when Gruden was let go from Tampa.

Gus Bradley was defensive quality control coach for Monte Kiffin in 2006, and then took over coaching the linebackers in 2007 when none other than Joe Barry left to become the coordinator of the Lions.

That period of course overlapped with Jay Gruden's time in Tampa, when he was an offensive assistant.

And then in 2009 when Bradley joined the Seahawks as the defensive coordinator from 2009 - 2012, that period overlapped with Scot McCloughan's tenure in Seattle, when he was a personnel executive there supporting Jon Schneider from 2010 - 2014.

Guaranteed Bradley is the top D coordinator target. Redskins One will be fueled up the moment our season ends.[/quote]

From what I've read Bradley fielded horrid defenses early on in his tenure I'm Sea because he had no talent to work with. It wasn't until his units were stacked with perennial players that he started to look like a defensive guru. If he comes here and still has the same players that Coach Barry has the D will not fare that much better.

That being said The Jags defense is rated very high this season so when Gus does have talent he can do a little something something. Barry has never had that chance. Each defense he over saw had a litany of jabronis that were out of the leauge in year. When he was The Chargers LB coach his unit was the strength of the D and his players spoke very highly of him.

Re: The coordinators
 

[quote=Schneed10;1160367]Correct, but Gus Bradley is part of the club. Worked under Jon Gruden in Tampa from '06 - '08, and left to become Seattle's D coordinator in '09 when Gruden was let go from Tampa.

Gus Bradley was defensive quality control coach for Monte Kiffin in 2006, and then took over coaching the linebackers in 2007 when none other than Joe Barry left to become the coordinator of the Lions.

That period of course overlapped with Jay Gruden's time in Tampa, when he was an offensive assistant.

And then in 2009 when Bradley joined the Seahawks as the defensive coordinator from 2009 - 2012, that period overlapped with Scot McCloughan's tenure in Seattle, when he was a personnel executive there supporting Jon Schneider from 2010 - 2014.

Guaranteed Bradley is the top D coordinator target. Redskins One will be fueled up the moment our season ends.[/quote]

Wouldn't surprise me at all.