DMN Blog: Cowboys in Miami... Roy blurb

[WoodysGirl]

Because if you really don't care about other safeties, then we can say whatever the heck WE want about Roy. I could say that he is the greatest safety ever. I don't care what other safeties have done, Roy is the best ever. And that makes just as much sense as your stubborn refusal to look at Roy comparatively, rather than in the Dallas Cowboys Roy Williams bubble.

You saw my post in the Adams pro bowl thread, didn't you?

Seriously I agree with this. We, as fans, watch our team more than any other team. We track every personnel move the team makes. We disect the players play on said team much more than other teams. We break down their scouting reports and look for every aspect of their game as it relates to that report.

We can watch other teams play and just enjoy the game. We watch the 'boys play and we notice every move they make. It's the role we as fans play in this game of football. This is not about defending Roy to me, it's more about getting some perspective. You watch enough football and track certain players as closely as we track the 'boys and you'll notice the same errors.

Roy's biggest fault is that he's the highest profile player on the team. He has become the face of America's team and unfortunately the spotlight shines brighter on him.

It's not that Roy doesn't make bad plays. It's WHEN he's made those bad plays. They've seemingly been at the worst possible time. But it doesn't lessen the good plays he'll make in a game.

As I said in the other thread. He's prolly not as good as some fans make him out to be, but he's certainly not a piece of garbage running around out there.

 

[superpunk]

You saw my post in the Adams pro bowl thread, didn't you?

I saw it took a "Roy turn" and bailed. I'll have to check it out.

Seriously I agree with this. We, as fans, watch our team more than any other team. We track every personnel move the team makes. We disect the players play on said team much more than other teams. We break down their scouting reports and look for every aspect of their game as it relates to that report.

We can watch other teams play and just enjoy the game. We watch the 'boys play and we notice every move they make. It's the role we as fans play in this game of football. This is not about defending Roy to me, it's more about getting some perspective. You watch enough football and track certain players as closely as we track the 'boys and you'll notice the same errors.

Roy's biggest fault is that he's the highest profile player on the team. He has become the face of America's team and unfortunately the spotlight shines brighter on him.

It's not that Roy doesn't make bad plays. It's WHEN he's made those bad plays. They've seemingly been at the worst possible time. But it doesn't lessen the good plays he'll make in a game.

As I said in the other thread. He's prolly not as good as some fans make him out to be, but he's certainly not a piece of garbage running around out there.

Good call. It's a bulls-eye factor. I just can't figure out the need to disregard any comparisons. For instance, We hear over and over again how Steven abused Roy - I think TEK did a breakdown where he showed Polamalu get destroyed on the same route Stevens beat Roy on. That's not a put-down on Polamalu - he's a top safety, as well. But when you don't look at things comparatively you lose all sense of perspective - so how can you legitimately evaluate anything? The whole concept of sports and competition is comparison - who is better? Roy has apparently reached a level where no rules of logic or reason apply to him any longer. It's just how you 'feel" he played.

He finished the year TERRIBLY. That can't be disputed. Most of the TDs he allowed, missed tackels etc came in the last 5 games. That doesn't erase his phenomenal start from my mind, though. Maybe it's because it's the last thing people remember. Maybe the evaluations would be different if his pick-six against Detroit had stood. I don't know. ALl I know is, I can't think of many safeties I'd rather have on my team. Roy's got his weak points, so does everyone. IMO, the good does outweigh the bad with him - by far.

 

[EPL0c0]

Some don't value yards and touchdowns from the receiver position.

or INT's from the S position

 

[AdamJT13]

Why would you bring up Chris Hope and then dismiss all other safties ?

I didn't bring up Chris Hope, Junk did. He asked, and I provided the numbers.

 

[AdamJT13]

Not really. Uh, the only stats you guys have to support your stance are the ones that are "official" which of course you can't show me or provide links to. You vaguely reference STATS LLC even though I provided a link to STATS LLC showing the original tackles numbers are incorrect (I say "you" in this instance referring to AdamJT13 because you and superpunk lack the ability to provide any real numbers on your own.....rather just try to pass off someone's else unverified data as fact and then call names).

Very convenient that the only "official" stats that matter are ones that links aren't provided for. I went off of the NFL site and STATS LLC. The Cowboys main stats page links directly to NFL.com.

I originally posted those stats in a thread about a Mickey Spagnola column that gave some of Roy's stats for 2006 from the coaches' review.

Here's the link to Spagnola's column --

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?editorialAuthor=1&id=13A3720E-A47E-D78E-C60EFD6F1425A72F

And here's the link to Roy's bio on the Cowboys' Web site --

http://lb.dallascowboys.com/team_bios.cfm?playerID=457CE26E-0394-1C69-8CC5D48788478822

As you can see, Spagnola says Roy had 86 tackles this season, which is the number credited to him by the coaches' film review. And his bio says he had 82 tackles in 2005, also from the coaches' film review. That should "verify" those numbers for you.

Sorry I can't give you the same access to information that I have. If you don't trust me, that's your prerogative. But you'll only be extending your incognizance if you pretend that my information isn't accurate.

 

[JPM]

I didn't bring up Chris Hope, Junk did. He asked, and I provided the numbers.

I know, I was asking Junk...

 

[junk]

(a) There is no reason to doubt Adam's stuff. It has always been correct. He had Newman as giving up no TDs, then a few months later Parcells put it out there. I don't know what he does, but whatever it is, he's got access to this site, which is not publicly available. But, it is a service NFL teams pay for. Until Adam's stuff starts coming out as not correct, I'll trust it.

Typically, Adam's stuff is fairly accurate. However, in this case, it conflicts with almost every piece of published evidence available on the web.

That is the thing that gets me most about people that bash Roy. The only way ANY analysis can have a foundation is if you look at it comparatively. Otherwise, what is your base? What is your control? In this case, if you're evaluating Roy, you need to compare him to other top safeties in the league, to see if he matches up. If I wanted to evaluate Tony Romo's performance, would it make any sense to not compare it to other QBs? Not at all! If we have no basis for comparison, who the hell cares about a 95 QB rating? It's completely meaningless. The same principle applies to every other position.

So, you believe that because safety play is poor around the league that somehow absolves Roy of poor play (or in this case, failure to admit anything less than stellar play)?

So, if you hire a plumber and he floods your house, it is OK because the rest of the plumbers would have done the same thing?

He has shown a tendency to struggle in coverage the last two years. TEs are routinely beating him. His problems were one of the team's defensive weaknesses this year.

I apologize for the less-than-subtle jab, but honestly, your criteria for your safety analysis, without any comparative data,

Well, thanks, that is a start...

suggests either very little education or a learning disability. That's not intended to be a jab at you, it's just that stance makes ABSOLUTELY no sense.

but you can't follow through with it and revert to petty name calling.

No data is worth a hill of beans without something to compare it to. Stubbornly ignoring the comparitive data makes it impossible to take anything you say on this matter seriously.

Yet you are guilty of doing the exact same thing you are accusing me of. You conveniently ignore the downward trend of tackles, forced fumbles and sacks and instead concentrate on the cherry picked statistics that attempt to prove your point. Instead, try looking at the big picture. Roy's overall play has declined (IMO since his rookie year which was his best) even though the talent on the team around him has increased.

He gave up 32% of the team's touchdowns and was part of the 24th ranked pass defense. He isn't above criticism.

Because if you really don't care about other safeties, then we can say whatever the heck WE want about Roy. I could say that he is the greatest safety ever. I don't care what other safeties have done, Roy is the best ever. And that makes just as much sense as your stubborn refusal to look at Roy comparatively, rather than in the Dallas Cowboys Roy Williams bubble.

Isn't that what you are saying? What are you trying to say? Can you honestly say that Roy played well this year? Was his performance up to the standards of previous years?

I know I am labeled a Roy "hater", but the truth is that I only own one jersey from the current squad.....Roy Williams. I saw a guy that came into the league and showed the potential to be something truly special. However, his declining play combined with the reported stories of his lack of work ethic has really soured him on me.

However, people will continue to defend him no matter the situation. I'm not saying that he is the worst safety in the league. I'm just saying he isn't the best safety in the league, that he struggled (particularly in coverage) last year, his play was one of the defensive weaknesses last year and that his play has declined over the last few years.

 

[junk]

As I said in the other thread. He's prolly not as good as some fans make him out to be, but he's certainly not a piece of garbage running around out there.

That is the only point I am trying to make. He struggled this year, yet in trying to point that out, I get called ********.

 

[junk]

I originally posted those stats in a thread about a Mickey Spagnola column that gave some of Roy's stats for 2006 from the coaches' review.

Here's the link to Spagnola's column --

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?editorialAuthor=1&id=13A3720E-A47E-D78E-C60EFD6F1425A72F

And here's the link to Roy's bio on the Cowboys' Web site --

http://lb.dallascowboys.com/team_bios.cfm?playerID=457CE26E-0394-1C69-8CC5D48788478822

As you can see, Spagnola says Roy had 86 tackles this season, which is the number credited to him by the coaches' film review. And his bio says he had 82 tackles in 2005, also from the coaches' film review. That should "verify" those numbers for you.

Sorry I can't give you the same access to information that I have. If you don't trust me, that's your prerogative. But you'll only be extending your incognizance if you pretend that my information isn't accurate.

In what sense are team tackles "official"? I've heard the exact opposite. Team tackles are routinely inflated and considered inaccurate because there isn't a solid set of criteria for determining a tackle from team to team.

 

[superpunk]

Typically, Adam's stuff is fairly accurate. However, in this case, it conflicts with almost every piece of published evidence available on the web.

What? The tackle numbers? I don't know why you're clinging to them as some basis for safety play evaluation.

So, you believe that because safety play is poor around the league that somehow absolves Roy of poor play (or in this case, failure to admit anything less than stellar play)?

So, if you hire a plumber and he floods your house, it is OK because the rest of the plumbers would have done the same thing?

That's ridiculous. Safety play is not poor around the league. The best safeties are the best safeties for a reason - they make more plays. But they will also get ebat - all safeties do. When Roy gets beat LESS than the elite safeties in the game, I feel - using that a basis for comparison - that he is one of the top safeties. IMO, you could interchange him, Dawkins, and Reed, no matter the position, and you'd have one of the top 3 safeties in the league on your team.

but you can't follow through with it and revert to petty name calling.

I'm telling you, I'm not trying to call names, or anything like that. I just can't find anyway to express how ridiculous your idea that You can look at Roy, and judge him, WITHOUT it being a comparative analysis. What the hell are you basing your judgement of him on, if it's not comparative? And, if it's NOT comparative, what prevents me from saying whatever I want about him? He's the greatest safety of all time. If there's no point of reference, how can you deny that?

You can't.

It's just as ridiculous back the other way. They are petty jabs, I agree, but your notion of "couldn't care less what other safeties do" is completely nosensical. (Understand that I can separate your notion from YOU - it's your view I take issue with, not you, the person. I can separate those two thngs, and hopefully still get along with people. I don't mind my friends telling me that I'm ******** if I say something ********. I'm rambling....whatever.)

Yet you are guilty of doing the exact same thing you are accusing me of. You conveniently ignore the downward trend of tackles, forced fumbles and sacks and instead concentrate on the cherry picked statistics that attempt to prove your point. Instead, try looking at the big picture. Roy's overall play has declined (IMO since his rookie year which was his best) even though the talent on the team around him has increased.

I'm looking at what's important for safeties. IMO. How he performs in coverage. Do you agree that they aren't using him the same as his rookie year? IT follows that the sacks would be down - he RARELY blitzes. Forced fumbles are down, he should have more, if there's something he can work on, it's that I guess.

He gave up 32% of the team's touchdowns and was part of the 24th ranked pass defense. He isn't above criticism.

Where do you get the idea that I think he's above criticism. I've said - IN THIS THREAD - that he played horribly to close the year. His missed tackle on Alexander is UNFORGIVABLE to the Roy Williams I know. Was he injured? I don't care. He screwed up.

Here's an example of where comparative analysis is necessary. Yes, Roy gave up 32% of our team's TDs. Consider for a second Reed's relation to Roy -

Roy gave up less yardage, a lower completion pct., and a lower percentage of total TDs on a worse defense than Reed played on.

What does that mean? Just look at it logically. Roy was on a worse defense, yet had better stats. That means people were targeting Reed more. It follows that Reed was MORE of a liability that Roy in coverage.

Can you conclude anything else? I don't see how you could.

Is Reed a top safety? I say yes - one of the best, if not THE best. Yet, Roy equaled him statistically and was better in coverage on a WORSE defense. How can you look at that and conclude that Roy is a disappointment? I think WG is right - we look at him in this vacuum, and when we watch other teams, we don't reserve the same critical eye for THEIR safeties. Thus, we conclude Roy is far worse. When in reality, we're just not paying attention.

 

[spindoc]

Sorry I can't give you the same access to information that I have. If you don't trust me, that's your prerogative. But you'll only be extending your incognizance if you pretend that my information isn't accurate.

This reminds me about your campaign/support for Al Johnson a year or so ago. If my memory hasn't totally failed me, I believe you selected some stats supporting his stellar play too. I do find it remarkable that fans of this team can reach such contrary opinions about Dallas players since we are watching the same games.

 

[JPM]

This reminds me about your campaign/support for Al Johnson a year or so ago. If my memory hasn't totally failed me, I believe you selected some stats supporting his stellar play too. I do find it remarkable that fans of this team can reach such contrary opinions about Dallas players since we are watching the same games.

Happens all the time. I agrue with my friends over the Yankees every day in the season.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

Maybe the evaluations would be different if his pick-six against Detroit had stood.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[AdamJT13]

In what sense are team tackles "official"?

The NFL doesn't recognize tackles at all. NFL.com even states "tackles are not an official NFL statistic." There are no official league records for tackles.

Teams, however, often recognize their tackle numbers as an official statistic and keep records. And they use the numbers compiled from the coaches' film review. For example, Darren Woodson is recognized as the Cowboys' all-time leader in tackles, with 1,350.

Here are a couple of links to "verify" that --

http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/DAL/8043677

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=9070317A-AE2B-CBE0-455F843DFA46C4B2

However, if you look at the numbers "widely available" on the Web, Woodson had only 940 tackles --

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/2233/

Team tackles are routinely inflated and considered inaccurate because there isn't a solid set of criteria for determining a tackle from team to team.

That's the reason ANY tackle statistics can't be compared from team to team, and why they're not official. There is NO league-wide source for tackles that is compiled using the same criteria for every team in every game. The numbers you find at NFL.com, ESPN.com or anywhere else usually come from the "Gamebooks" and are all compiled by different people using different criteria in different games. In some games, anytime two players are in on a tackle, one gets credited with a "solo" tackle and the other with an assist. In other games, anytime that happens, both players get an assist, and nobody gets a "solo" tackle. And in some games, assists are awarded much more generously than in others. (For example, compare our game at Jacksonville, where both teams combined for a grand total of FOUR assists, to our game at Tennessee, where both teams combined for 45 assists.) The same thing applies to passes defensed in Philadelphia, but that's another topic.

 

[junk]

What? The tackle numbers? I don't know why you're clinging to them as some basis for safety play evaluation.

Because you want to try to ridicule the critics about facts not supporting their observations, but you turn around and use inaccurate "facts" as the basis of your argument. For someone so absorbed in "facts", I'd think you'd like to dig up some of your own.....I haven't seen you do that yet.

Where do you get the idea that I think he's above criticism.

And really it all boils down to this. I originally said I thought he struggled in coverage and had a poor year in general. I stand by that no matter what Ed Reed did.

Yet several pages later and after you called me ********, threw some inaccurate stats at me and accused anyone who criticized Roy of not having a clue due to these so called facts, you come back around and say he isn't above criticism?

He struggled this year (especially down the stretch although he was getting beat by TEs for TDs as far back as Tennessee). Coverage from James and Williams had a big affect on the defensive performance this year. Considering the reports of his pedestrian work ethic, I think he deserves some criticism.

However, the hordes jump to his defense and try to ridicule those critics with facts......facts that after it is all said and done aren't even official, aren't agreed upon anywhere, aren't accurate and prove absolutely nothing.

Like davidyee said in another thread, Roy is at his best near the line or in deep coverage where he can keep the receivers in front of him so that he can move forward to make a play on the ball. He struggles when he has to turn and run with a TE or receiver. Hopefully, the new defensive staff can remedy that situation (which on another topic is why I hope Todd Bowles doesn't become DC).

 

[junk]

That's the reason ANY tackle statistics can't be compared from team to team, and why they're not official. There is NO league-wide source for tackles that is compiled using the same criteria for every team in every game. The numbers you find at NFL.com, ESPN.com or anywhere else usually come from the "Gamebooks" and are all compiled by different people using different criteria in different games. In some games, anytime two players are in on a tackle, one gets credited with a "solo" tackle and the other with an assist. In other games, anytime that happens, both players get an assist, and nobody gets a "solo" tackle. And in some games, assists are awarded much more generously than in others. (For example, compare our game at Jacksonville, where both teams combined for a grand total of FOUR assists, to our game at Tennessee, where both teams combined for 45 assists.) The same thing applies to passes defensed in Philadelphia, but that's another topic.

So, please explain how, with the widely varying rules for recording these stats, they could ever be the basis of some sort of argument proving a player's worth during the season?

And how could something like pass completion percentage against a DB ever be calculated by anyone other than the coaching staff?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

The ONLY place tackles are an "official" statistic is for the team, and the team says Roy had 86 tackles in 2006 and 82 tackles in 2005. Those numbers were compiled by the defensive coaches.



Again, according to the defensive coaches, Roy had 17 PDs in 2006, compared to eight PDs in 2005.



No, it's just what I said. According to the defensive coaches, Roy had the same number of quarterback pressures in 2006 as he did in in 2005, even though the coaches were much more generous awarding pressures in 2005.



According to STATS, Hope allowed 12 more catches, 44 more yards and a completion rate 15.5 percentage points higher, and he allowed only one fewer touchdown.




It's called perspective. And any analysis is worthless without it.

ouch, that's gonna leave a mark

 

[Bob Sacamano]

That is the only point I am trying to make. He struggled this year, yet in trying to point that out, I get called ********.

he excelled, and then he struggled, along w/ everyone else on D

 

[Clove]

Roy did not look good for the most part this year. I appreciated all the interceptions, but I would've like to see more knock outs, more plays behind the LOS, and more passes defensed.

Roy was in position to make atleast 5 to 6 more interceptions this year, he let 2 of them go right through his hands. This means that Roy is in position to make plays, just isn't making them.

Get more pressure on the QB next season, then I'll let you know for a fact is Roy truly does suck.

 

[AdamJT13]

So, please explain how, with the widely varying rules for recording these stats, they could ever be the basis of some sort of argument proving a player's worth during the season?

Like I said, they obviously can't with any degree of precision. The only worthwhile comparisons are between players in the same game and between players on the same team.

And how could something like pass completion percentage against a DB ever be calculated by anyone other than the coaching staff?

Why do you think Roy struggled in coverage this season? Because you saw some plays when you think Roy got beat? Well, instead of just relying on their memory, some people actually keep track of those types of things for every player in every game of the season, and they record all of the statistics. They might be wrong occasionally because they don't know each player's responsibility all of the time -- just as you might be wrong occasionally for the same reason -- but as long as they're using the same criteria for every player, they shouldn't be significantly more wrong for one player than they are for another player. That makes them somewhat useful.

And you'd be surprised how similar the stats can be for the same player from different sources. For example, STATS says that in 2005 (not 2006), Roy Williams was thrown at 47 times and allowed 29 catches for 482 yards and four touchdowns. ESPN.com's K.C. Joyner says he was thrown at 47 times and allowed 29 catches for 463 yards and five touchdowns. For Sean Taylor in 2005, STATS has 63 attempts, 21 completions, 480 yards and three touchdowns allowed, while K.C. Joyner has 62 attempts, 22 completions, 488 yards and three touchdowns allowed.

Although those numbers are extremely similar, they're not identical, and they're not necessarily precise. But those two sources and Football Outsiders' Pro Football Prospectus books give us three different sources, all of which track the passes against every player in every game. And together, they give us pretty good perspective for comparing players in coverage.