Review: Heath vs Giants & Skins

Sydla · Sep 18, 2019

xwalker said:
Other than the 1 big run by Barkley, can you point out the plays in games 1 & 2 this season where he took bad angles that caused a significant gain for the opponent?

Well for starters, I've said elsewhere he played better in the Skins game. He didn't play well in the Giants game and other places such as PFF also noted he wasn't all that good in the Giants game, but way more effective in the Skins game.

My opinion of Heath isn't also just based on two games. It's his career. He's been an average at best starting S. It's been noted elsewhere by other analysts, outlets, etc. Do I want him cut? Nope.

I'd prefer they find a better SS to start and then have Heath play in packages and man special teams. I never said he sucks or is the worst or is too slow or can't play or should be sent packing. He's a guy with a certain skill set that can play a valuable role on a contending team. Starting SS probably isn't one of those roles (you could argue he probably would be better off at FS).

jwooten15 · Sep 18, 2019

xwalker said:
I reviewed all snaps played on defense by Jeff Heath in games 1 & 2 of 2019.

I rate plays as:
Pass
Fail
Good Enough

An example of Good Enough is when it should have been a 5 yard gain but instead was a 7 yard gain but still was not enough for the opponent to get a 1st down.

For both games combined I had the following:
5 plays that were possible fails.
5 plays that were good enough.
All other plays Pass.

Of the 5 possible fails:
3 were almost identical plays. Heath made the same deliberate move each time; therefore, I can't say with 100% certainty that he was at fault.

1 play was the 59 yard run by Barkley. Heath was 15 yards back from the line at the point Barkley crossed the line of scrimmage. It was open field with only Heath between Barkley and the endzone. The probability of making the tackle is below 50% for any Safety considering that Barkley is a top 3 RB and possibly the best open field RB in the NFL. Where Heath failed was in not cutting off Barkley's path to the outside. If Heath had moved more to the outside, then Barkley would cut back inside where other defenders were located. I would still likely be a 20 plus yard gain, but it might have been less than the 59 yards. Awuzie would likely need to be in on the tackle but would obviously be much closer than than having to cross the entire field which is what actually happened on the play.

1 play was the ball hitting Heath's helmet. This play was a Pass or at worst case a Good Enough play as the pass was incomplete. Heath was looking at the WR and DB covering him & was focused on not colliding with them. It does seem odd that he didn't look up at the ball because he had been looking right at the QB until the QB started this throwing motion. It might have been funny to see for some fans but this not a fail.

The group of fans that love to complain about Heath are comical. Let's call the group Heath Haters for reference.

Nobody that I've seen is saying that Jeff Heath is a great player. We would all take a healthy Derwin James type player at Strong Safety if given the choice, but having Vander Esch at LB is more valuable than upgrading from Heath at SS.

Heath Haters as a group are comically uninformed.

I don't really understand the emotional need that people have to continually post about how much they think certain players suck.

I had a thread earlier this year called "Cowboys Safety Quiz". None of the Heath haters could show that they knew any details about the Cowboys Safeties and how the Cowboys used them in 2018 & 2017. Most didn't even know if Heath played SS or FS. None of them appear to have signed up for the NFL Game Pass to review the All-22 coaches film. Safety more than any position is difficult to evaluate based on broadcast game footage.

People that have posted dozens of times that Heath sucks can't even be bothered to review the games to see the details of what Heath does or does not do well. Most just repeat what they've heard such as "bad angles". A few have concluded that Heath lacks lateral agility. I've seen several say that Heath is too slow which is one of the most moronic statements that I've seen anywhere with regards to the Cowboys players. Heath has good speed for a Safety. That should be obvious considering that last year he chased down Barkley from behind. Heath's 4.48 forty time should also be a clue.

Good review, man. Even if you piled on with the "Heath sucks" crowd, I'd respect it since you did your research. I wish I could like this multiple times.

RoboQB · Sep 18, 2019

CF74 said:
Why make a thread defending a jag if no crush? Eh....

I guess you have a personal issue with the OP.
A middle aged man claiming a middle aged man has a "man crush"
on a player, or anyone, based on his review sounds incredibly childish.

Let's work on setting a better example for our younger posters.

SoupcanSam · Sep 18, 2019

xwalker said:
Which scent do you prefer???

I am a lysol kinda guy myself.

Berry scent. You are doing it all wrong.

Sydla · Sep 18, 2019

Since I get called out as a Heath "hater" here is what I think.

- He's an average, at best, safety. Probably better suited to play more of a FS role than a SS role.

- He has value to this team because he can be a solid special teams guy and can play a variety of roles in certain packages, etc. He should not be cut (although it will be interesting to see if the Cowboys re-sign him)

- He's not a very good/consistent tackler and that bears out with his missed tackles numbers the previous two seasons.

- He can be wildly inconsistent from game to game, season to season. He was pretty decent in 2017, not nearly as good in 2018. He was OK in the Giants game, better in the Skins game.

I think the Cowboys should have been looking to upgrade the SS spot. Yes, I know there is a line of thinking out there that says because the Cowboys start Heath there, obviously he's good. But the Cowboys aren't infallible. They've made personnel mistakes before.

Sydla · Sep 18, 2019

SoupcanSam said:
I am a lysol kinda guy myself.

Berry scent. You are doing it all wrong.

Berry? Ohhh

Lemon or don't even bother.

xwalker · Sep 18, 2019

Sydla said:
Well for starters, I've said elsewhere he played better in the Skins game. He didn't play well in the Giants game and other places such as PFF also noted he wasn't all that good in the Giants game, but way more effective in the Skins game.

My opinion of Heath isn't also just based on two games. It's his career. He's been an average at best starting S. It's been noted elsewhere by other analysts, outlets, etc. Do I want him cut? Nope.

I'd prefer they find a better SS to start and then have Heath play in packages and man special teams. I never said he sucks or is the worst or is too slow or can't play or should be sent packing. He's a guy with a certain skill set that can play a valuable role on a contending team. Starting SS probably isn't one of those roles (you could argue he probably would be better off at FS).

PFF downgraded him in the Giants game based on the 1 big play.

You are just correlating your opinion with PFF.

Is it that hard to point out 5 plays from the Giants game where he was "terrible"?

D4KADON · Sep 18, 2019

Honestly, after the final 3rd down play with Goff in last year's playoff game, there is no way he's back on my team the following year. I still can't grasp how he lost Goff, GOFF in that play.

xwalker · Sep 18, 2019

jwooten15 said:
Good review, man. Even if you piled on with the "Heath sucks" crowd, I'd respect it since you did your research. I wish I could like this multiple times.

Thanks.

I just want to see the Heath Haters point out 5 plays per game where he "sucked".

I seems that their opinions are all based on 1 or 2 "bad" plays or plays that they perceive as bad.

If PFF agrees then they reference that but if it shows him to have been good like it does for the Skins game, then they avoid that or find bizarre reasons that PFF was correct when they rated him low but incorrect when they rated him as having a good game.

It's not really just about Heath, but the player Hater groups in general.

Somehow repeating that a player sucks gives certain people a great deal of satisfaction.

If people are going to post more than once that a Safety sucks, then they should at least know which position that player played each year (FS or SS).

Sydla · Sep 18, 2019

xwalker said:
PFF downgraded him in the Giants game based on the 1 big play.

You are just correlating your opinion with PFF.

Is it that hard to point out 5 plays from the Giants game where he was "terrible"?

Why do you keep using the word "terrible"?

I never said he was terrible.

SoupcanSam · Sep 18, 2019

Sydla said:
Berry? Ohhh

Lemon or don't even bother.

Yeah if you were born back in like BC times. Berry is definitely the modern way to go.

Sydla · Sep 18, 2019

SoupcanSam said:
Yeah if you were born back in like BC times. Berry is definitely the modern way to go.

Jeff Heath would use berry.

Zach Martin would use lemon.

G2 · Sep 18, 2019

The vast majority of SS in the league are not going to wow Heath haters. He's the best we have at this point. I'm all for improving at safety, but you can't expect every player to a HOF.

CowboysRule · Sep 18, 2019

Can you point out 5 plays in each game that were "good"? A player doesn't necessarily need to be a part of a bad play to a poor player. Not having any impact on the game can make a player replaceable.

KingintheNorth · Sep 18, 2019

xwalker said:
Fans that repeatedly exclaim "Heath Sucks" are like a kid in a classroom raising his hand to inform the teacher that he does NOT know the answer BEFORE the teacher has even asked the question. Basically the kid just wants everyone in the classroom to know he is uninformed.

Or he just isn't very good and creating your own categories to rate him is not really scientific?

But maybe?

xwalker · Sep 18, 2019

D4KADON said:
Honestly, after the final 3rd down play with Goff in last year's playoff game, there is no way he's back on my team the following year. I still can't grasp how he lost Goff, GOFF in that play.

There was 1:51 remaining in the game after that play.

The Cowboys defense had just been gashed for over 250 yards at that point.

It's not shocking that Heath stayed inside looking for the RB or a misdirection play.

It was a bad play for Heath as he thought the RB had taken the handoff; however, at that point in the game considering the thrashing the Cowboys defense received by the Rams running game, it's odd to focus on this play by Heath at this point in the game.

By the way, Goff had a WR wide open on that play.

xwalker · Sep 18, 2019

KingintheNorth said:
Or he just isn't very good and creating your own categories to rate him is not really scientific?

But maybe?

That makes no sense.

Determining if a Safety failed on a play is your definition of scientific?

Hennessy_King · Sep 18, 2019

He was very bad against the giants. Awful in the run game. Awful on the one sack against eli. He was blocking himself on the play lol. He was ok in coverage. He had a good day against the Commanders was where he was supposed to be pretty much all day long.

CF74 · Sep 18, 2019

RoboQB said:
I guess you have a personal issue with the OP.
A middle aged man claiming a middle aged man has a "man crush"
on a player, or anyone, based on his review sounds incredibly childish.

Let's work on setting a better example for our younger posters.

You got me... :laugh:

xwalker · Sep 18, 2019

CowboysRule said:
Can you point out 5 plays in each game that were "good"? A player doesn't necessarily need to be a part of a bad play to a poor player. Not having any impact on the game can make a player replaceable.

Yes, if you post 5 specific plays in a specific game that were "terrible" then I'll post 5 that were good.

Remember I've only said that the player does not "suck".

If you actually read my original post I said that we would all like to have an All Star type Strong Safety to replace Heath if we had a choice.

I would also like Aaron Donald at DT and Khalil Mack at RDE.

Review: Heath vs Giants & Skins

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Taco Engineer

Well-Known Member

Chris in Arizona

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Vet Min Plus

Well-Known Member