ARTICLE: Former Cowboy Mel Renfro has advice for S Roy Williams

[khiladi]

While I do agree stats reflect a certain degree of the truth, as other posters rightly said they do not capture the whole truth. The DE for the Giants right now has how many sacks? And 6 of them game against a rookie lineman in his first game, and he, Winston, officially played the worst game in the history of the league. A rather good case has been made regarding the timing of interceptions for Roy. For example, when they are made and in what point of the game, against which QB can really tell a person a somewhat different picture. I am not arguing for or against Roy in coverage, but one should take these things into consideration.

I think this stats thing can be overblown, especially as it related to the Dallas defense last year. While we led the league for a time period overall statistically in defense last year, what happened in December? Did the stats really reflect how good this defense was?

I believe the essential question is how does Wade maximize the real talents of Roy. We all believe he can effectively change agame based upon his skills, so how does Wade take advantage of this fact? These things are only considered if a player possesses certain skills that make him unique. I just think it is a matter of time, when the secondary is healthy, that Roy will be playing a more game-changing style of play. If Roy devaststaes, you can be damn sure that Wade Phillips will be hailed as a coach that understands how to get the most out of his players and a genius.

 

[zrinkill]

Atleast you're right about that, but at the same time it's not sayin' a whole heck of alot either.

This coming from someone who is on the same level as Prophet, Phillo, Munchis, and Edunce.

Makes me laugh.

 

[superpunk]

Why would I want to think like a Skins fan?

I was walking down the street today, and I happened upon two gentlemen having an argument. For the sake of the story, we'll call one of them, Oh, I don't know.....Adam - and we'll call the other, um.....Charles.

So, Adam has this diamond. He really likes it. He's compared it to other diamonds, has certificates outlining the color, carat, clarity, and cut of the diamond. But Charles - Charles is convinced that Adam doesn't have a diamond, he has a zirconia.

So Adam says - "Look. Compare my diamond to other diamonds. Compare it to a Zirconia, see how the light reflects differently and is clearly more brilliant in my diamond."

Charles replies - "I don't want to compare it. I simply know from looking at it that it is not a diamond." (Charles has no jeweller experience, btw)

So Adam says - "Look at this certificate! I've had it proved time and time again. This stone is what I say it is."

Charles remains unconvinced. He questions the legitimacy of the institution that issued Adam his certificate, resorting to ad hominem attacks on the authority rather than actually look at the information provided, and assess whether or not the institution was credible and trustworthy. Finally, he declares "It doesn't matter what proof you give me. I don't want to compare your stone to other stones. I know what my eyes tell me, and my eyes tell me that THAT is not a diamond." He becomes more and more belligerent, repeating the same things over and over again while mocking Adam as some irrelevent dorky pencil-pushing Jewel-evaluator, intimating that he is pathetic when in fact he simply really enjoys his diamond.

I wonder who most people would side with in this particular debate, upon observing how both sides conduct themselves?

 

[zrinkill]

Get out while you can, you are about to enter the no logic zone. This person has clearly demonstrated time and again that they don't know the fundamental basics of this thing called football.

That was almost as good as his "Roy is the best strong safety in football .... but he is average" remark. :laugh2:

 

[zrinkill]

I was walking down the street today, and I happened upon two gentlemen having an argument. For the sake of the story, we'll call one of them, Oh, I don't know.....Adam - and we'll call the other, um.....Charles.

So, Adam has this diamond. He really likes it. He's compared it to other diamonds, has certificates outlining the color, carat, clarity, and cut of the diamond. But Charles - Charles is convinced that Adam doesn't have a diamond, he has a zirconia.

So Adam says - "Look. Compare my diamond to other diamonds. Compare it to a Zirconia, see how the light reflects differently and is clearly more brilliant in my diamond."

Charles replies - "I don't want to compare it. I simply know from looking at it that it is not a diamond." (Charles has no jeweller experience, btw)

So Adam says - "Look at this certificate! I've had it proved time and time again. This stone is what I say it is."

Charles remains unconvinced. He questions the legitimacy of the institution that issued Adam his certificate, resorting to ad hominem attacks on the authority rather than actually look at the information provided, and assess whether or not the institution was credible and trustworthy. Finally, he declares "It doesn't matter what proof you give me. I don't want to compare your stone to other stones. I know what my eyes tell me, and my eyes tell me that THAT is not a diamond." He becomes more and more belligerent, repeating the same things over and over again while mocking Adam as some irrelevant dorky pencil-pushing Jewel-evaluator, intimating that he is pathetic when in fact he simply really enjoys his diamond.

I wonder who most people would side with in this particular debate, upon observing how both sides conduct themselves?

 

[dallasfaniac]

........So maybe you should be man enough and accept Roy can't cover even if he had a blanket

He covered Wade, who had burnt Charles Woodson for a 40 pass weeks before, fine one on one last weekend.

 

[khiladi]

I was walking down the street today, and I happened upon two gentlemen having an argument. For the sake of the story, we'll call one of them, Oh, I don't know.....Adam - and we'll call the other, um.....Charles.

So, Adam has this diamond. He really likes it. He's compared it to other diamonds, has certificates outlining the color, carat, clarity, and cut of the diamond. But Charles - Charles is convinced that Adam doesn't have a diamond, he has a zirconia.

So Adam says - "Look. Compare my diamond to other diamonds. Compare it to a Zirconia, see how the light reflects differently and is clearly more brilliant in my diamond."

Charles replies - "I don't want to compare it. I simply know from looking at it that it is not a diamond." (Charles has no jeweller experience, btw)

So Adam says - "Look at this certificate! I've had it proved time and time again. This stone is what I say it is."

Charles remains unconvinced. He questions the legitimacy of the institution that issued Adam his certificate, resorting to ad hominem attacks on the authority rather than actually look at the information provided, and assess whether or not the institution was credible and trustworthy. Finally, he declares "It doesn't matter what proof you give me. I don't want to compare your stone to other stones. I know what my eyes tell me, and my eyes tell me that THAT is not a diamond." He becomes more and more belligerent, repeating the same things over and over again while mocking Adam as some irrelevent dorky pencil-pushing Jewel-evaluator, intimating that he is pathetic when in fact he simply really enjoys his diamond.

I wonder who most people would side with in this particular debate, upon observing how both sides conduct themselves?

The problem is your talking about human behavior, and measuring human behavior on the field is way more complex than talking about the authenticity of a diamond. Stats don't reflect the whole truth for a human being, but for a diamond, the karat does always set the price.

 

[superpunk]

The problem is your talking about human behavior, and measuring human behavior on the field is way more complex than talking about the authenticity of a diamond. Stats don't reflect the whole truth for a human being, but for a diamond, the karat does always set the price.

Now I have no idea what you're talking about.

I was merely sharing a story about my commute to work with Hostile.

 

[dallasfaniac]

I was walking down the street today, and I happened upon two gentlemen having an argument. For the sake of the story, we'll call one of them, Oh, I don't know.....Adam - and we'll call the other, um.....Charles.

So, Adam has this diamond. He really likes it. He's compared it to other diamonds, has certificates outlining the color, carat, clarity, and cut of the diamond. But Charles - Charles is convinced that Adam doesn't have a diamond, he has a zirconia.

So Adam says - "Look. Compare my diamond to other diamonds. Compare it to a Zirconia, see how the light reflects differently and is clearly more brilliant in my diamond."

Charles replies - "I don't want to compare it. I simply know from looking at it that it is not a diamond." (Charles has no jeweller experience, btw)

So Adam says - "Look at this certificate! I've had it proved time and time again. This stone is what I say it is."

Charles remains unconvinced. He questions the legitimacy of the institution that issued Adam his certificate, resorting to ad hominem attacks on the authority rather than actually look at the information provided, and assess whether or not the institution was credible and trustworthy. Finally, he declares "It doesn't matter what proof you give me. I don't want to compare your stone to other stones. I know what my eyes tell me, and my eyes tell me that THAT is not a diamond." He becomes more and more belligerent, repeating the same things over and over again while mocking Adam as some irrelevent dorky pencil-pushing Jewel-evaluator, intimating that he is pathetic when in fact he simply really enjoys his diamond.

I wonder who most people would side with in this particular debate, upon observing how both sides conduct themselves?

Superpunk does it again.

 

[dcowboysfan76]

just like every other strong safety in the league.
We only discussing Roy..........right?


his style of tackling (which I wish he would stop doing) has nothing to do with him being "out of position", he could have made any of those tackles the traditional way if he had wanted too.
yeap he could have if he'd taken the proper pursuit angle


Just like every other strong safety in the league
Only discussing Roy, if he's doing the same thing as others and you say Roy is the best.....that would mean they are not good either......Right?


There are just as many analyst that say he is the best strong safety in the league.
I haven't heard any of them say that he's miles above the others...I've heard his ex coach specifically say, "Teams were successful on us last year when they were able to get Roy in man to man coverage, or a TE up the seam"......

Anyone can see the foolish things you have been saying in this thread .... Roy is average, Roy only tackles by pulling a guys jersey down, Roy always gets beat deep. You look even more stupid trying to deny it.

No one has said he "only" tackles by pulling a guys jersey down, and no one has said that he "always" gets beat deep....You make yourself look ******** everytime you attempt to post ghost comments....Smart guy or should I say "lil bus"

 

[zrinkill]

I am still waiting on an answer too

Name a strong safety in the league that you would not like to get T.O., Witten, Glenn, Crayton, or even Hurd matched up with single coverage?

Yet Roy gets slammed for not being able to cover Burress or Moss.

Amazing.

 

[Royal Laegotti]

I was walking down the street today, and I happened upon two gentlemen having an argument. For the sake of the story, we'll call one of them, Oh, I don't know.....Adam - and we'll call the other, um.....Charles.

So, Adam has this diamond. He really likes it. He's compared it to other diamonds, has certificates outlining the color, carat, clarity, and cut of the diamond. But Charles - Charles is convinced that Adam doesn't have a diamond, he has a zirconia.

So Adam says - "Look. Compare my diamond to other diamonds. Compare it to a Zirconia, see how the light reflects differently and is clearly more brilliant in my diamond."

Charles replies - "I don't want to compare it. I simply know from looking at it that it is not a diamond." (Charles has no jeweller experience, btw)

So Adam says - "Look at this certificate! I've had it proved time and time again. This stone is what I say it is."

Charles remains unconvinced. He questions the legitimacy of the institution that issued Adam his certificate, resorting to ad hominem attacks on the authority rather than actually look at the information provided, and assess whether or not the institution was credible and trustworthy. Finally, he declares "It doesn't matter what proof you give me. I don't want to compare your stone to other stones. I know what my eyes tell me, and my eyes tell me that THAT is not a diamond." He becomes more and more belligerent, repeating the same things over and over again while mocking Adam as some irrelevent dorky pencil-pushing Jewel-evaluator, intimating that he is pathetic when in fact he simply really enjoys his diamond.

I wonder who most people would side with in this particular debate, upon observing how both sides conduct themselves?

Well if you're happy that the Cowboys SS is toast and continues to stay that way then rejoice, you have what you want.

Cute story BTW!

 

[dallasfaniac]

"Teams were successful on us last year when they were able to get Roy in man to man coverage, or a TE up the seam"......

Link please.

When you provide it, I can provide one with Wade telling the media that they think they know what they are seeing when they look at a play and try to establlish blame but they really don't know what they are talking about.

 

[zrinkill]

No one has said he "only" tackles by pulling a guys jersey down, and no one has said that he "always" gets beat deep....You make yourself look ******** everytime you attempt to post ghost comments....Smart guy or should I say "lil bus"

I only see him reaching and locking onto someone's jersey and pulling them down......

:laugh2:

What troubles me about Roy is that whenever a QB begins to throw deep, you already know the pass will be completed

Excellent points my friend!!

So you did not agree that he always gets beat deep huh?

Keep trying "lil Edunce"

 

[dcowboysfan76]

:laugh2:






So you did not agree that he always gets beat deep huh?

Keep trying "lil Edunce"

Because I said excellent points? Wow you are a scholar!!
Amazing how you can attempt to manipulate posts....you are a real Johnny Cochran......

 

[dcowboysfan76]

Link please.

When you provide it, I can provide one with Wade telling the media that they think they know what they are seeing when they look at a play and try to establlish blame but they really don't know what they are talking about.

It wasn't a link it was on Countdown......all you have to do is watch the Seattle game.........

 

[zrinkill]

Because I said excellent points? Wow you are a scholar!!
Amazing how you can attempt to manipulate posts....you are a real Johnny Cochran......

Amazing how you say things "or at least strongly allude to them" ... then try to cowardly weasel out of them.

But then again, in your mind, being the best at a position and being average are the same thing.

 

[dallasfaniac]

It wasn't a link it was on Countdown......all you have to do is watch the Seattle game.........

Surprising, you keep pointing out things you 'saw' but have yet to provide concrete evidence on anything.


Here's a quote from an article, I CAN provide a link if you need it.

Yet Cowboys coach Bill Parcells said Williams is not the problem. "We've had some problems at the safety position overall," Parcells said. "But I think Roy is an improved player from what he was in the past as far as knowing what he's doing. They stay away from him a little bit. ... So I would say opportunity-wise with what he's had to do, I think he's been OK. (There were) a couple plays that he didn't find that he could have found, but that's the way it is when you play back there.

This is exactly the reason we brought in Hamlin, because the FS, who's job it is to cover the deep pass, wasn't up to snuff. Roy is at his best closer to the line of scrimmage where he can take away the short crosses, stop the run, get after the QB, etc. NOT to cover the deep pass which is the FS responsibility.

 

[Kangaroo]

Because I said excellent points? Wow you are a scholar!!
Amazing how you can attempt to manipulate posts....you are a real Johnny Cochran......

Funny I keep seeing [SIZE=-1]Sigourney Weaver character in Galaxy Quest flashing in my head because she just repeated what the computer said.[/SIZE]

 

[dcowboysfan76]

Surprising, you keep pointing out things you 'saw' but have yet to provide concrete evidence on anything.


Here's a quote from an article, I CAN provide a link if you need it.



This is exactly the reason we brought in Hamlin, because the FS, who's job it is to cover the deep pass, wasn't up to snuff. Roy is at his best closer to the line of scrimmage where he can take away the short crosses, stop the run, get after the QB, etc. NOT to cover the deep pass which is the FS responsibility.

Wow I feel like I am in the "Twilight Zone"....you guys don't believe that Roy Williams is average.....You act like you don't remember Roy allowing plays against the Skins and Hawks...What more concrete evidence do you need?..Don't you watch any pregame shows, NFL Live, etc....Haven't you watched any games? What has Roy done to solidify himself as the top SS in the league....I admit that he is the best SS at the position on our current team, but he's still average....I've also stated that he's done better this year, however he's allowed a couple plays in coverage, and tackling.....