Hey John: Love the stuff. I read the Skins worked out Demetrius Williams from Baltimore. What do you think the chances are of signing him over Roydell Williams. He’s tall and he’s made some nice plays with the Ravens. I think it would be a good pick up. What do you think?

Pascal Todd

Pascal: I wonder about guys like Williams who seemingly have a lot of talent but end up on the street, especially when a team that once had a need at receiver is the one that lets him go. Usually a sign that the guy struggles to learn offenses or isn’t very disciplined. I know he had some injury issues, too. Guys like that can take a while to develop. Roydell Williams is limited and isn’t exactly going to make a big difference this year. At some point I could see them making a move for another guy. Surprised something like that hasn’t been done already.

JK

Hi John: Last week I asked a Mike Sellers question and he looked good so I figure a secondary question might work this week. In the 2nd half the Rams went to what Carlos Rogers referred to as a quick game which seemed to be similar to how the Cowboys went at the Redskins in game 1. From where I was sitting the secondary kept playing the zone reads hoping for a good read and pick instead of man up and hopefully force Bradford to hold the ball a little longer. Do you think with the Eagles we might actually adjust quicker to a Man to Man or at least a Press Zone?

Phil Hatem
Brooklyn

Phil: The Redskins are a bit too focused on trying to get turnovers, almost at the expense of playing sound defense. Talked to one person who thinks they’re trying to do too much. Anyway, as far as coverage, part of the problem is the linebackers don’t play very well in zone. But they did play a little more man than normal vs. St. Louis. If they play too much zone this week, that could be a problem because they’re not applying enough pressure to make this strategy effective. So they’d be wise to play more man. Plus, they have corners who can match up with these wideouts (whether they stop them or not is another matter, but their styles do match up).

JK

Hi John: Why do you think Haslett was out coached? I agree with you it sure looked like that. I think what we saw of the Skins in the 1st 2 games was a facade. The Rams exposed the Skins for who they really are…a bad team with a long way to go to be good. They will be 1-5 before they have another chance for a win. Your columns are the best Redskins coverage to be found anywhere.

Best regards,
Chris Day
Richmond, VA

PS Did you find any “studs” in the Rams game?

Chris: Ha, I did find a couple studs. Had to look hard, though! And appreciate the compliment. Why was he out-coached? Some of what I answered above probably applies; some people think they’re trying to do too much. When that happens, there’s confusion or hesitation and that’s what seems to be happening in coverage at times. Doesn’t help that it’s a new defense for all of them. Sometimes the other team just has a better game plan and the Rams almost always had control of this game, on both sides of the ball. The Redskins weren’t surprised by the short passes; had some guys made tackles they might have fared a little better. Oh, and I agree that the Skins have a long way to go.  

JK

John: It seems that Mike Shanahan is guilty of trying to have his cake and eat it too. He made many offseason acquisitions that were “Win Now” moves such as trading draft picks for Mcnabb and Jamaal Brown. He also signed a lot of aging players while burying some younger guys deep on the depth chart. This conflicts with a radical defensive scheme change that they had to know would take 1 or 2 seasons to implement and has essentially made 4 players out of our front seven ineffective. (Haynesworth, Fletcher, McIntosh, and Carter)  The 3-4 Defense Switch would have made sense if they were going to rebuild the team and go with youth. Now it just looks like another case of Snyder hiring a once great Head Coach (Shanahan, Gibbs, Schottenheimer) and watching that coach shoot himself in the foot with bad management decisions. Wondered what your thoughts were on my opinions?
 
Thanks
 
Brian Moseley

Brian: I think they thought (man, that’s an awkward start to a sentence) the defense had enough talent to make this an easier transition. So, in their minds, they could switch to a perceived better defense yet not suffer a dropoff. Had they done a complete overhaul, it would have taken a lot longer to envision success. The problem is, they didn’t bring in enough guys who knew this system. Therefore, everyone is learning on the fly. Never a good thing.

JK

John: Thanks so much for your fantastic coverage of the Redskins. What do you think is the real reason for D. Thomas not getting playing time at WR? In my opinion, he clearly has the most potential of any WR on the team. Is it not working hard enough, attitude, unreliable pass patterns, inadequate blocking, etc? It seems like such a waste of talent to not at least give him a limited number of plays which he could work on and perfect. It should also help Moss as a defense would have to give serious attention to Thomas.
 
Charles Silberberg
North Tustin, CA

Charles: I know the coaches say they want him to be more “professional.” That has to mean: better approach, in practice, film room, etc. That means being more focused on the details of the game, especially route-running. Don’t think they trust him to run the right routes and if that’s the case, he won’t play until he changes their minds. In talking to one veteran last offseason, I was surprised how down he was on the future of Thomas and Malcolm Kelly. Just never thought they’d “get it.” I understand that the coaches want more from him, but I can’t believe Williams plays over him. He is talented and could help on some routes. Really, and this is just an educated guess, I think it comes down to Shanahan not liking him when he came out of college and then seeing in person the things he didn’t like about him then.

JK

Follow me on Twitter @John_Keim