Pro And Con On Jim Haslett, The Bill Belichick Of The UFL
The Redskins named Jim Haslett their defensive coordinator today, confirming a move that's been rumored for a few days now, and filling a position that opened when Greg Blache retired.
Haslett coached the UFL's Florida Tuskers to an undefeated season and a loss in the championship game last year, which pretty much makes him the Bill Belichick of the UFL. (It also means that he fills an interesting parenthetical niche as the second guy the Redskins have signed who was involved with that UFL Championship game -- mid-season replacement kicker Graham Gano kicked the gamewinning field goal to beat Haslett's Tuskers.)
And he has NFL cred as well. He was the defensive coordinator of the New Orleans Saints in 1996, the Pittsburgh Steelers from 1997-99, and the St. Louis Rams in 2006, 2007 and for the first four games of 2008 before being named interim head coach in St. Louis. (And beating the Redskins the following Sunday, in fact.)
He played in the NFL as well, as linebacker for the Buffalo Bills, where he won defensive rookie of the year in 1979 and went to the Pro Bowl in 1980. The picture above -- Haslett stopping Tony Dorsett for a short gain -- is really all the backstory I need to embrace the guy as a Redskins coach. But not everyone agrees with me on that.
On his Redskins blog The Om Field, the eponymous Om is less than enthused by the hiring.
The defensive numbers are ... less-than-optimal, let's say. Haslett's defenses in Pittsburgh slipped noticeably in the rankings from the time he took over, from 2nd before he got there to 6th and then to 12th in the league. And that's certainly less-than-ideal. (This would be the "con" perspective, in case you hadn't guessed.)Not really sure why, but I have never much cared for Haslett. Something about the guy has just always rubbed me the wrong way.
So ... trying to rise above such pettiness, I dug into his record as a defensive coordinator in the NFL real quick, to be sure I wasn't cutting off my nose to spite my face (whatever the hell that old saw means). Can't be letting vague personal get in the way of potential for success after all.
But here's the thing: the defense in Washington has been ranked well numerically the last couple of years, but that ranking never seemed to be fully reflected on the field. If you're being honest with yourself, what do you picture when you picture the 2009 Redskins pass defense, for example?
Do you think of it as the 8th ranked pass defense in the NFL (which it was), or do you think of the defensive secondary playing ten yards off the line of scrimmage on a third-and-8? Or of Tony Romo passing the Cowboys down the field to the game winning touchdown? Based on my emails and what I see on Twitter, I suspect that most of you think of something more like those second things.
So rankings are meaningless. Fine. But does that actually address the concerns Om expresses about Haslett?
Yes, actually, according to ESPN.com's Matt Mosley:
(That's the "pro" perspective.)Haslett, a former NFL linebacker, has an outstanding reputation as a defensive coordinator in the league and you can guarantee that he'll field a more aggressive unit than Greg Blache featured the past two seasons. Redskins fans clung to stats that showed they were a top-10 defense on Blache's watch, but this unit didn't cause enough turnovers and never really took over games.
Honestly, I'd rather see a more aggressive defense -- one that gets takeaways and (even more) sacks and tried to assert its will on an opponent -- even if it means giving up the occasional big play. Because, really, the defense seemed to be doing that anyhow last year, without the aggressive part.
The best thing I've heard about Haslett, though, has just been the general gossip on the guy, which goes something like this: he's not rigid, he's not attached to a particular system, and he's very good at putting his players in position to take advantage of their natural abilities. If that's accurate, it could help any number of players on the defense -- and make at least one grouchy defensive tackle much happier.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-15-2010 @ 5:47PM
skramer12 said...
There is a common theme there that I hope holds true with Shanahan and Haslett- adapting schemes at least somewhat to the players' abilities. I think the better coaches do that rather than trying to install an exact system that doesn't quite work as well as they otherwise stubbornly or naively expect will work.
Reply
1-15-2010 @ 6:14PM
michael.denz said...
My main objection to Jim Haslett aside from his real lack of success as a head coach is his desire people have reported to install more 3-4 elements.
While I think with Brian Orakpo and Chris Wilson we have a good set of 3-4 outside backers that can rush the passer. But I don't think the rest of our LBing corps are a really good fit for it. And we're really built for an aggressive, man cover, single high safety, blitz happy 4-3 defense with an aggressive defensive line. A 3-4 would require some severe retooling I think.
Reply
1-15-2010 @ 6:35PM
Eric Johnson said...
I heard Haynesworth does not want to move to a NT for any type of 3-4 scheme. Not saying thats true, but I heard it. What does everyone else think?
Reply
1-15-2010 @ 8:03PM
Jim Burneti said...
Can you build around a nose tackle who doesn't play on second down, takes every third series, and every fourth game off?
1-16-2010 @ 3:46PM
mtenan said...
Haynesworth would not likely be a nose tackle in a 3-4. He would be a more natural DE. You don't waste a talent like Haynesworth as a space eater to keep the guards and center away from your linebackers.
1-16-2010 @ 1:41PM
Jon said...
If we get to the QB more next year, I will be much happier. We need to rattle the QB week-in-week-out in order to make sure that our corners are not shown in the spotlight for as...weak...as they have shown they can be.
The Redskins D was the most overrated top10 defense in the league. We could bend, but not break...until the 4th quarter, where we dropped a bunch of games that would have given us a much better record.
There is definite leadership on the Defense, but we need better, deceptive plays that will get us turnovers. I don't remember many times where a certain defensive stop has secured a game for us this year. I remember last year, when we stopped the Eagles early in the year when they drove down to the red zone but we stopped them on fourth down to win the game. That's what needs to come back.
Reply
1-16-2010 @ 2:04AM
dirtythirty said...
I think that as long as he works the kinks out in the secondary as far as playing off the line of scrimage 15 yards and catching the balls thrown our way (Carlos). We should have a good coach in place to get the best out of our D. I hear that he brings some emotion with his coaching style and we'll see if he can fire these guys up a little bit and maybe get ol' 92 into his groove. We definatly have the talent to win games with our D, we just have to figure out if its gonna be a 3-4 or 4-3. Either way, its all starts up front. If the front seven do thier job, Dirty Thirty and the boys should have a field day this year.
Reply
1-16-2010 @ 9:54AM
fsaunders said...
I'd say that there is a 99% that we line up in the 3-4 next season. I'd say that the odds of Fat Albert being a part of that are below 50%.
Reply
1-16-2010 @ 11:01AM
al-holmes said...
It is very fashionable to blast DT Hainsworth. And, maybe he deserves some of it. But, I think a big part of the problem just retired, and Albert will have a great year "under new management". Also, remember what good numbers the defensive ends had rushing. You have to think that a lot of the improvement in this area was due to Big Albert.
Reply
1-16-2010 @ 4:23PM
om.steven said...
Thanks for the pickup, Matt ... good read. Fun to respond to, as well. :)
http://www.theomfield.com/2010/01/digging-deeper-defensive-coordinator.html
Onward and upward, brother.
Reply
1-17-2010 @ 12:22PM
danielnick said...
I am not impressed. This pick honestly doesn't make sense to me unless there simply wasn't anyone else available. I'm not saying Hasslet isn't competent, but who the hell want's competent after the last 10 years? You can argue numbers vs "intangible leadership" all you want, but it takes both.
However, according to coachescorner.com, we have the 24th and 18th ranked D's winning Saturday and the 1st vs 16th and the 6th vs 9th ranked D's today. 3 teams deep down the D rankings in the playoffs. So maybe???
Can we get 24th ranked Williams back? ;-)
Reply