Redskins Blog:Bruce Allen Explains The Free Agent Evaluation Process

[Rymanofthenorth]

The change to a 3-4 is a good idea - have you noticed the playoff teams remaining? 75% run a 3-4.

When you get the chance to bring in a probowl QB who's run a similar system, you do it. That's the logic. Did it work out? No - but if I'm Bruce Allen, I'd pull the trigger again this season if I got the opportunity.

Wow, Really? So because Green Bay and Pittsburgh are great defences we should run whatever they are running? Thats brilliant you only missed one thing, WE DONT HAVE THE SAME PLAYERS THAT THEY DO. That just may be an issue.

lmao, I suppose we should also go towards a pure passing offence as well, one that depends on good receivers and a great QB, even if we dont have the players for it, just because we dont have an elite qb doesnt mean we shouldnt completely rely on the pass because we should run the exact same offence that GB runs because GB is really good.

You people who dont understand that the 3-4 itself isnt a panacea are amusing, NO DEFENCE OR OFFENCE WILL BE EFFECTIVE WITHOUT THE PROPER SCHEME AND PLAYERS TO EXECUTE IT. and the whole " we ran it so that our players could get used to it so it was better to do it now, well that may be the stupidest thing ever written on here, you dont run a defence based on players you dont have. Especially when you will be replacing the majority anyway.

Ergoe, no it wasnt a good decision based completely on the facts, just as bringing in Mcnabb was a bad decision, and repeating that bad decision would be a sign that Allen has no clue.

Fact- we are far worse in every single category except turnovers. And despite the lemming opinion that being better in turnovers somehow makes up for a 20 spot drop, it doesnt.
Fact- aggression in scheme results in turnovers not alignment.
Fact- we are no closer to being an effective defence than we were at this point last year. which is bad because teams should improve by the end of the season.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Well Ryman, we had a top 10 defense for years and exactly jack and **** to show for it, and jack left this past offseason. So yeah, trying something new is probably a good idea.

And also, your 'holier than though' attitude to all things football is more than a little tired. Please find new shtick, thanks.

 

[Goaldeje]

Looking at your signature Lanky, that sure SEEMED like a personal attack. No?

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Looking at your signature Lanky, that sure SEEMED like a personal attack. No?

Attacked the posts, not the poster.

 

[fansince62]

and if we hadnt absolutely sucked the change to a 3-4 would have been a great idea. I dont understand the logic in saying that a clear mistake wasnt a mistake because it COULD have worked.

where are they going to find the NT to make it work?

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

FS,That would be the first problem and the biggest, the next would be finding a 5tech, then finding a big banger at ILB to let fletch play his best game (which is pursuit) then finding an all around LB so that we could turn Rak loose.

Lanky, So let me get your position straight, you think that because our previous defence couldnt win games on its own despite what we all know was a bad offence and spotty specials, that we should "try something new" even though we were obviously unsuited for it? after this season I think that its safe to say the 3-4 doesnt win games on its own either.


Anyone with a brain knows you need a good TEAM to win, and changing simply because our top 10 defence wasnt good enough to win all by itself is abject stupidity especially when we NEEDED to address the holes in the offence. What an intelligent person would do, is address the actual issue on this team which WAS an offence that couldnt move the ball steadily or score and special teams that were spotty at best while using the strength of the team to stay decent. NOT blow up the only thing approximating a strength on the roster.

You need to start thinking for your self and not just parroting an argument that you cannot possibly believe, i've seen that you are not stupid, so when you parrot stupidity its very irritating. the moron position is that this change was good because any change is good and because certain teams run this defence so it is therefore better , that is simply not true and we have seen the results of change for changes sake. a team like Green Bay made the change for the correct reason, IT FIT, they had the players to make it work.

So think for your self.

Now if you can give me three reasons, actual reasons, that this was a good switch, and point to some examples, perhaps even show how this benefitted us long and short term, then I would stop being "holier than thou." btw I think you meant I was being condescending not holier than thou.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

You are right Mike, I perhaps was a bit harsh there, it gets tiresome when people say things that make no sense without anything to resembling a legitimate argument.

Sorry Lanky.