Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

Back in February, or whenever he told that person about the Redskins going after RGIII, he put the last nail in his coffin. From what I remember they brought in Morris to get an understanding of the 3-4 with Haslett, and they'd fire him at the end of the season.

From what I'm also hearing, Haslett never got an extension, story is false.

[QUOTE=InsaneBoost;942590]Back in February, or whenever he told that person about the Redskins going after RGIII, he put the last nail in his coffin. From what I remember they brought in Morris to get an understanding of the 3-4 with Haslett, and they'd fire him at the end of the season.

From what I'm also hearing, Haslett never got an extension, story is false.[/QUOTE]

Forgot about that. See i knew it wasnt just the look on his face that appeared dumb.

[QUOTE=SFREDSKIN;942573]Yes, orakpo is a big loss but a rotation of Wilson, Jackson and white will surprise. As for the secondary we have the same guys as last year, look at Gomes he's better, Wilson is playing better, meriweather is better than not having Atogwe or Landry, Crawford so far looks better than Westbrook. Our weak links are griffin, Williams and Hall. Hell, even Hall is playing better.[/QUOTE]

Hall read Sam the other day and he dropped it like Carlos lol. But im one of the few hall fans I think

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

Yep, A lot of people have put blame on Haslett for his gameplan, but what people don't realize is we are thin int he secondary so we have to keep 4 LB's on the field as we did against the Rams. When Wilson went down it got even worse. So that means, Riley would of been in man coverage with one of the WR's if you wanted to Rush your two best Pass rushers in Rak, and Kerrigan.

So for people to assume that Haslett is a terrible coach is kinda a stretch. He's no hall of famer, but with the average secondary that is also injury ridden is something that hurts us more then Haslett's gameplan. Not many DC's can overcome the obstacle we have at the moment..

[QUOTE=Bucket;942596]Yep, A lot of people have put blame on Haslett for his gameplan, but what people don't realize is we are thin int he secondary so we have to keep 4 LB's on the field as we did against the Rams. When Wilson went down it got even worse. So that means, Riley would of been in man coverage with one of the WR's if you wanted to Rush your two best Pass rushers in Rak, and Kerrigan.

So for people to assume that Haslett is a terrible coach is kinda a stretch. He's no hall of famer, but with the average secondary that is also injury ridden is something that hurts us more then Haslett's gameplan. Not many DC's can overcome the obstacle we have at the moment..[/QUOTE]

Jim is that you?

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

no offense, but the 4th quarter D didn't really look any better than the first 3.

it's whatever, but losing orakpo and carriker doesn't make fixing the D any easier.

also, I don't really know why danny smith is here though when we have blocked kicks on a weekly basis and the guy he fought for fumbling and muffing returns at least once per game. our STs are kinda awful.

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

I just watch the NFL network replay and this is what I saw:

Lots of cushion by the DB's
Griffin the CB had a bad game
Rams OL got away with lots of holding
Refs were horrendous
Tackling by the defense in general was horrendous lots of mistackles
No anticipation by the defense on lots of plays (bad coaching)
Fred Davis dropped like 3 balls
Robinson dropping the deep ball (something was mentioned by the lights on the dome causing it)
Blocked punt changed the game
No one covering on Mulligan's TD in the endzone
easy 2 pt. conversion given
Overall the skins were in the game, a bonehead play by Morgan, a bad decision to go for a 62 yard field goal after initially looking like they were going for the first down.

Next week they kick ass on the Bengals.

[QUOTE=SFREDSKIN;942606]I just watch the NFL network replay and this is what I saw:

Lots of cushion by the DB's
Griffin the CB had a bad game
Rams OL got away with lots of holding
Refs were horrendous
Tackling by the defense in general was horrendous lots of mistackles
No anticipation by the defense on lots of plays (bad coaching)
Fred Davis dropped like 3 balls
Robinson dropping the deep ball (something was mentioned by the lights on the dome causing it)
Blocked punt changed the game
No one covering on Mulligan's TD in the endzone
easy 2 pt. conversion given
Overall the skins were in the game, a bonehead play by Morgan, a bad decision to go for a 62 yard field goal after initially looking like they were going for the first down.

Next week they kick ass on the Bengals.[/QUOTE]

Thanks Alot for the recap. I had almost blocked (no pun intended) most of it out of my mind. Lol. Agreed about next week.

Regardless of how bad he was doing you never change play calling mid game. In the 2nd game of the season! This is clowntown status if true.

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

[quote=InsaneBoost;942590]Back in February, or whenever he told that person about the Redskins going after RGIII, he put the last nail in his coffin. From what I remember they brought in Morris to get an understanding of the 3-4 with Haslett, and they'd fire him at the end of the season.

From what I'm also hearing, Haslett never got an extension, story is false.[/quote]

Well I don't believe that at all. I have serious doubts that Shanny would come out and bold face lie about an extension for his DC. That's really hard to believe.

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

[quote=punch it in;942598]Jim is that you?[/quote]

No it's not. It's a realistic fan. I'm not defending Jim Has. I'm simply stating what happen against the Rams.

You want to rush your best Pass Rush... IE - Rak and Kerrigan, now put together all of our active secondary, and remember that they are human beings, and not robots so they need breathers etc. Now put together a scheme that involves having your best Pass rushers on the field, and a solid secondary...

When they come out in 4 WR's which they did almost 70% of the game. You cant throw all 4-5 DB's in Man coverage. You need a zone over top.. So who do you put man on in the secondary w/o pulling Rak or Kerrigan to do so? Would lay on Riley, and Fletcher to cover slot's, and TE's.

Now, would I of started putting Hall on there biggest threat in the slot in man, and work coverages around? Sure, it sounds simply but most defenses are run around scheme's and coverages.. If you are running a Cover 2 Tampa, then you can just say.. Hey, let's man up on the slot, and leave a hole in the zone.

Redskins were caught off gaurd from the sleeper slot WR this game, and never recovered because we didn't have the man power to adapt without crippling our pass rush even more.. We switched to our deepest DB set when Rak got a hurt a few times, and pulled Jackson which resulted in Bradford changing the play at the line and the RB running through holes as big as a truck.

One of our biggest issues against the Rams was Gholston getting abused, and the lack of pass rush because of Bradfords quick releases.

All the blame doesn't go on our DC. It can be evenly distributed to our secondary talent, depth, injuries, Haslett, and other factors..

Bottom line is we can't stop many people atm with our defense the way it is, and won't be able to stop many teams that have speedie slot WR's.

I wouldn't be surprised if AJ Green had 200 yards receiving this week.

[QUOTE=Bucket;942613]No it's not. It's a realistic fan. I'm not defending Jim Has. I'm simply stating what happen against the Rams.

You want to rush your best Pass Rush... IE - Rak and Kerrigan, now put together all of our active secondary, and remember that they are human beings, and not robots so they need breathers etc. Now put together a scheme that involves having your best Pass rushers on the field, and a solid secondary...

When they come out in 4 WR's which they did almost 70% of the game. You cant throw all 4-5 DB's in Man coverage. You need a zone over top.. So who do you put man on in the secondary w/o pulling Rak or Kerrigan to do so? Would lay on Riley, and Fletcher to cover slot's, and TE's.

Now, would I of started putting Hall on there biggest threat in the slot in man, and work coverages around? Sure, it sounds simply but most defenses are run around scheme's and coverages.. If you are running a Cover 2 Tampa, then you can just say.. Hey, let's man up on the slot, and leave a hole in the zone.

Redskins were caught off gaurd from the sleeper slot WR this game, and never recovered because we didn't have the man power to adapt without crippling our pass rush even more.. We switched to our deepest DB set when Rak got a hurt a few times, and pulled Jackson which resulted in Bradford changing the play at the line and the RB running through holes as big as a truck.

One of our biggest issues against the Rams was Gholston getting abused, and the lack of pass rush because of Bradfords quick releases.

All the blame doesn't go on our DC. It can be evenly distributed to our secondary talent, depth, injuries, Haslett, and other factors..

Bottom line is we can't stop many people atm with our defense the way it is, and won't be able to stop many teams that have speedie slot WR's.

I wouldn't be surprised if AJ Green had 200 yards receiving this week.[/QUOTE]

Well if you blame Haslett (even partly) than what could he have done because according to your stance on things he simply had no options?
I do not think that we are the least talented or leAst deep secondary in the league and i do not think you will see danny amendola have a game like that ever again so i am going to say again that the scheme was piss poor.

[QUOTE=Bucket;942613]No it's not. It's a realistic fan. I'm not defending Jim Has. I'm simply stating what happen against the Rams.

You want to rush your best Pass Rush... IE - Rak and Kerrigan, now put together all of our active secondary, and remember that they are human beings, and not robots so they need breathers etc. Now put together a scheme that involves having your best Pass rushers on the field, and a solid secondary...

When they come out in 4 WR's which they did almost 70% of the game. You cant throw all 4-5 DB's in Man coverage. You need a zone over top.. So who do you put man on in the secondary w/o pulling Rak or Kerrigan to do so? Would lay on Riley, and Fletcher to cover slot's, and TE's.

Now, would I of started putting Hall on there biggest threat in the slot in man, and work coverages around? Sure, it sounds simply but most defenses are run around scheme's and coverages.. If you are running a Cover 2 Tampa, then you can just say.. Hey, let's man up on the slot, and leave a hole in the zone.

Redskins were caught off gaurd from the sleeper slot WR this game, and never recovered because we didn't have the man power to adapt without crippling our pass rush even more.. We switched to our deepest DB set when Rak got a hurt a few times, and pulled Jackson which resulted in Bradford changing the play at the line and the RB running through holes as big as a truck.

One of our biggest issues against the Rams was Gholston getting abused, and the lack of pass rush because of Bradfords quick releases.

All the blame doesn't go on our DC. It can be evenly distributed to our secondary talent, depth, injuries, Haslett, and other factors..

Bottom line is we can't stop many people atm with our defense the way it is, and won't be able to stop many teams that have speedie slot WR's.

I wouldn't be surprised if AJ Green had 200 yards receiving this week.[/QUOTE]

And also its not like bradford is a threat to run so make him beat you by making throws into tite coverage atleast and forget about pressure pressure pressure. I mean it took all of 3 seconds to see the zone was not working. Was a game of can rak get to sam before sam throws to danny. Any other dc would have laid off and said ok were going to make you earn those yards by throwing into coverage atleast. Even if you give him time to do so by rushing three it is better than what haslett did. We kept giving them ten or twelve yard passes to a wide open guy and they kept taking it. Haslett was being so damn stubborn. The rams must have been laughing to themselves.

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

[quote=punch it in;942619]Well if you blame Haslett (even partly) than what could he have done because according to your stance on things he simply had no options?
I do not think that we are the least talented or leAst deep secondary in the league and i do not think you will see danny amendola have a game like that ever again so i am going to say again that the scheme was piss poor.[/quote]

Contradiction...

We are one of the least "deep" and talented in the league, and you may not see Amendola have a better game then this because there are better secondary's that'll be able to man up and jam him off the line.

Haslett didn't have many options.. I don't know what he could of done besides play man across the board, and hope for the best. Even then, I don't see Riley being able to man up on the slot all game.

If it was ME. I would of brought in Crawford to man up Amendola in rotation w/ Hall and run a Over Man at the top. Still wouldn't of stopped the quick throws, but at least we could made Bradford think about it.

Re: Did Shanny Strip Haslett of Play Calling vs Rams?
 

[quote=InsaneBoost;942590]Back in February, or whenever he told that person about the Redskins going after RGIII, he put the last nail in his coffin. From what I remember they brought in Morris to get an understanding of the 3-4 with Haslett, and they'd fire him at the end of the season.

From what I'm also hearing, Haslett never got an extension, story is false.[/quote]

See I had always thought Haslett's original deal was thru '13