DMN Blog: Is Roy a Coverage Liability?

[BigDFan5]

So, where are all of the witty retorts, calling someone "idiot," questioning of ones "footall knowledge," or flat out denials that we have come to expect from some of you (you know who you are)?

Mr MacMahon said the same things that some of us have said about Roy, i.e. bad angle on Grant's run and Roy on the sideline for 11 plays, but so far, not a peep outta you guys.

Typical.

Perhaps you might consider that some of may actually have a legitate point or two in our observations about Roy.

Ladies and gentlemen this is what happens when you read 2 words of a post (Roy Liability) and then decide to make a post.

Your post makes 0 sense in the context of the article, this article is saying Roy makes the defensive pass coverage BETTER

BTW before you can have a legitimate point, you must be able to spell legitimate

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I love this one right here

*open mouth*
*insert foot*

 

[zrinkill]

So, where are all of the witty retorts, calling someone "idiot," questioning of ones "footall knowledge," or flat out denials that we have come to expect from some of you (you know who you are)?

Mr MacMahon said the same things that some of us have said about Roy, i.e. bad angle on Grant's run and Roy on the sideline for 11 plays, but so far, not a peep outta you guys.

Typical.

Perhaps you might consider that some of may actually have a legitate point or two in our observations about Roy.

Ladies and gentlemen this is what happens when you read 2 words of a post (Roy Liability) and then decide to make a post.

Your post makes 0 sense in the context of the article, this article is saying Roy makes the defensive pass coverage BETTER

BTW before you can have a legitimate point, you must be able to spell legitimate

http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v210/zrinkill/friday-damn.jpg

 

[Hostile]

Ladies and gentlemen this is what happens when you read 2 words of a post (Roy Liability) and then decide to make a post.

Your post makes 0 sense in the context of the article, this article is saying Roy makes the defensive pass coverage BETTER

BTW before you can have a legitimate point, you must be able to spell legitimate

Post of the day.

 

[BigDFan5]

:thankyou:

Post of the day.

 

[Nors]

Hats off to Wade Phillips for reducing Roys role in coverage packages. He is best deployed in the Box as a SS/LB.

Anyone that thinks he is equipped to be chasing WR's downfield is remiss. And don't give me situational team stats for a game and infer its all about Roy.

Wade Phillips deserves a lot of credit for making this move....

 

[Doomsday]

Nice work gathering the stats, but all that really tells us is Nate Jones might actually be worse in coverage then Roy Williams.

 

[jobberone]

Let's see. GB came out throwing bombs downfield. Therefore you'd expect a lower than normal pass completion percentage. We actually covered very well. Favre gets hurt and they put an inexperienced QB in the game. They gave the kid short passes with high completion probablities. He was 11-11 or the like at one point. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with Roy or Reeves but the situation. We were ahead, had no reason the think that kid would put GB back in the game and played to prevent the longer passes and gave up the short game.

Kudos to GB for getting back to their winning ways and more to Rodgers for playing like a veteran. I could say giving up that kind of game to a untested QB proves the problem we have in pass coverage but I don't think it 'proves' anything but the fact we gave them underneath.

Wonder if they will play that package substantially more again.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Maybe Jones should go in the game only when he is blitzing!

 

[jterrell]

This is an excellent point.

yup.
You are not going to allow a 235 pound RW to blast your QB. Favre would not have been out for the game he would have been retired had he allowed a free-running RW to bury him there.

RW is still a plus starter at safety but he is not a top 5 safety.

Earlier in the year when he seemed to be favoring his shoulder; he was pretty bad, but now he is knocking heads again and providing more than adequate safety coverage. But you still have to insure he doesn't get caught one on one against good athletes.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

They gave the kid short passes with high completion probablities. He was 11-11 or the like at one point. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with Roy or Reeves but the situation. We were ahead, had no reason the think that kid would put GB back in the game and played to prevent the longer passes and gave up the short game.

Kudos to GB for getting back to their winning ways and more to Rodgers for playing like a veteran. I could say giving up that kind of game to a untested QB proves the problem we have in pass coverage but I don't think it 'proves' anything but the fact we gave them underneath.

Wonder if they will play that package substantially more again.

Jobberone, I have to disagree somewhat.

We were extremely aggressive when Brett Favre was in the game. In some instances, we even blitzed Ware, Spencer and Ellis at the same time, which can be seen here.

When Aaron Rodegers came into the game, The Cowboys backed off and decided to play zone. Cris Collinsworth did a really good job of pointing this out. I believe the Cowboys wanted to force an inexperienced QB to throw short passes, hoping that at some point he would grow impatient and force a throw into coverage.

 

[Skin]

yup.
You are not going to allow a 235 pound RW to blast your QB. Favre would not have been out for the game he would have been retired had he allowed a free-running RW to bury him there.

RW is still a plus starter at safety but he is not a top 5 safety.

Earlier in the year when he seemed to be favoring his shoulder; he was pretty bad, but now he is knocking heads again and providing more than adequate safety coverage. But you still have to insure he doesn't get caught one on one against good athletes.

I don't want to argue, mainly because I've been frustrated with Roy for awhile, but for my edification, give me your "Top 5" strong safeties. I want to know who they are, because I watch a lot of games on Sunday Ticket each week and I don't note many strong safeties who are noticeably better than Roy. Admittedly I am not breaking down film, but it just seems like his play is equal to or better than the majority who are manning the the strong safety position in the NFL.

 

[TEK2000]

than you're just being stubborn. Roy took himself out of that play. even the guy who wrote the article could see it.

Roy couldn't see the ball carrier till the guy was already at full speed and blowing past the Front 7.

Its not that Roy did something foolish on the play... its that he had about 8 or 9 huge bodies between him and the ball carrier.

I can't imagine the gap that Grant ran through was the gap that was Roy's responsibility. USUALLY your Safeties and CB's are responsible for OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT.

 

[AdamJT13]

Roy couldn't see the ball carrier till the guy was already at full speed and blowing past the Front 7.

Like I said in another thread, on third-and-short, the safeties are going to crash the line of scrimmage when it's a run up the middle. They aren't expecting the running back to go through the line untouched and come out of the traffic running at full speed. That's why you see a lot of long runs in short-yardage situations.

I blame the front seven more than either safety on that play.

 

[Rampage]

Like I said in another thread, on third-and-short, the safeties are going to crash the line of scrimmage when it's a run up the middle. They aren't expecting the running back to go through the line untouched and come out of the traffic running at full speed. That's why you see a lot of long runs in short-yardage situations.

I blame the front seven more than either safety on that play.

my point was he took a bad angle to the rb. that is all

 

[AdamJT13]

In some instances, we even blitzed Ware, Spencer and Ellis at the same time, which can be seen here.

That's our new 3-3 nickel, which I really like.

And we used it when Rodgers was in the game, too -- with 7:53 left in the second quarter. They had a screen pass called, but Rodgers threw it too high under heavy pressure.

 

[AdamJT13]

my point was he took a bad angle to the rb. that is all

Saying he took a "bad angle" implies that he could possibly have known where Grant was going to come out of traffic and which way he was going to cut. Roy didn't do anything WRONG on the play.

 

[Rampage]

Saying he took a "bad angle" implies that he could possibly have known where Grant was going to come out of traffic and which way he was going to cut. Roy didn't do anything WRONG on the play.

you got an excuse everytime. he took a bad angle to the rb. accept it. everybody makes mistakes man

 

[theogt]

you got an explanation for why I'm wrong everytime.

Fixed.

 

[TEK2000]

you got an excuse everytime. he took a bad angle to the rb. accept it. everybody makes mistakes man

And you keep trying to apply the same flawed logic.