DMN Blog: More than just Williams' coverage

[WoodysGirl]

1:23 PM Mon, Jun 02, 2008 | Permalink | Yahoo! Buzz
Todd Archer E-mail News tips
It seems most of the debate on Roy Williams has been about his coverage skills. I tend to think they're not as bad as everybody thinks. Safeties are going to get beat. It happens. Now, Wade Phillips can say Williams didn't get beat on a deep ball last year, which is probably true, but the cynic would say he was either off the field or playing a hybrid-linebacker role in passing situations to limit his work deep down the field.

Anyway, that's not my point.

It's the lack of impact plays.

He has not forced a fumble since Thanksgiving 2005 against Denver. Think about that? He has not forced a fumble in 37 games. He had 10 in the first 64 games of his career. That's not counting the hits he put up either. He would punish receivers after a catch and make them think twice about coming across the middle.

He has not had a sack in 43 games, since the 33-10 loss to Philadelphia on Oct. 9, 2005. He had 2.5 sacks in the first five games of the 2005 season and none in the last 43. He's had just four quarterback pressures in the last three seasons, including two last year. Too many times he just seemed to mirror his blocker on blitz attempts.



Comments (2) Leave comment | E-mail entry

 

[Rampage]

I agree, we need the big plays Roy!

 

[AdamJT13]

Roy did have a forced fumble in 2006, it just came on special teams.

And our coaches don't throw around "quarterback pressures" very easily. In 2006, they credited Roy with one pressure. STATS LLC credited him with 3.5. In 2005, the coaches credited Roy with one pressure. STATS LLC credited him with eight. The coaches credited DeMarcus Ware with four pressures (FOUR!) in 2006. STATS LLC credited Ware with 44. The coaches credited Greg Ellis with two pressures in 2006. STATS LLC credited Ellis with 19.5.

Earlier in Roy's career, the coaches credited him with more pressures, but the coaches back then were more generous with them. The coaches awarded 40 pressures to the entire team in 2006. STATS LLC awarded 143 pressures to the entire team that year. In 2002 (when the team had just 24 sacks), the coaches awarded 163 pressures! STATS LLC awarded the team just 75 to the team that year. In 2003, the coaches awarded 120 pressures. STATS LLC awarded awarded 79. Whereas STATS LLC's pressure numbers have gotten higher as the team's ability to pressure the quarterback has improved, the pressure numbers awarded by the coaching staff are lower now than when the team was much worse at it. So it's not surprising that the coaches haven't awarded Roy as many pressures in recent seasons -- the coaching staff in recent seasons (whoever is responsible for grading the defensive film) has been stingier when awarding pressures.

None of this should be construed to imply that Roy doesn't need to force fumbles or get a sack. It's just providing some context for what Archer posted.

 

[theogt]

It's good that the "negative side" is beginning to actually concede that he's not bad in coverage. Now the argument is boiling down to "impact plays."

"He's okay in coverage, he's good against the run, but he hasn't had a lot of 'impact plays' lately."

Yeah, okay, whatever that means.

 

[adamknite]

Roy did have a forced fumble in 2006, it just came on special teams.

And our coaches don't throw around "quarterback pressures" very easily. In 2006, they credited Roy with one pressure. STATS LLC credited him with 3.5. In 2005, the coaches credited Roy with one pressure. STATS LLC credited him with eight. The coaches credited DeMarcus Ware with four pressures (FOUR!) in 2006. STATS LLC credited Ware with 44. The coaches credited Greg Ellis with two pressures in 2006. STATS LLC credited Ellis with 19.5.

0.0 wow......

 

[DaBoys4Life]

It's good that the "negative side" is beginning to actually concede that he's not bad in coverage. Now the argument is boiling down to "impact plays."

"He's okay in coverage, he's good against the run, but he hasn't had a lot of 'impact plays' lately."

Yeah, okay, whatever that means.

Yea i agree with that.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

Roy Williams needs to start making those plays again...

 

[DragonCowboy]

1:23 PM Mon, Jun 02, 2008 | Permalink | Yahoo! Buzz
Todd Archer E-mail News tips
It seems most of the debate on Roy Williams has been about his coverage skills. I tend to think they're not as bad as everybody thinks. Safeties are going to get beat. It happens. Now, Wade Phillips can say Williams didn't get beat on a deep ball last year, which is probably true, but the cynic would say he was either off the field or playing a hybrid-linebacker role in passing situations to limit his work deep down the field.

Anyway, that's not my point.

It's the lack of impact plays.

He has not forced a fumble since Thanksgiving 2005 against Denver. Think about that? He has not forced a fumble in 37 games. He had 10 in the first 64 games of his career. That's not counting the hits he put up either. He would punish receivers after a catch and make them think twice about coming across the middle.

He has not had a sack in 43 games, since the 33-10 loss to Philadelphia on Oct. 9, 2005. He had 2.5 sacks in the first five games of the 2005 season and none in the last 43. He's had just four quarterback pressures in the last three seasons, including two last year. Too many times he just seemed to mirror his blocker on blitz attempts.



Comments (2) Leave comment | E-mail entry

win?

Roy did have a forced fumble in 2006, it just came on special teams.

And our coaches don't throw around "quarterback pressures" very easily. In 2006, they credited Roy with one pressure. STATS LLC credited him with 3.5. In 2005, the coaches credited Roy with one pressure. STATS LLC credited him with eight. The coaches credited DeMarcus Ware with four pressures (FOUR!) in 2006. STATS LLC credited Ware with 44. The coaches credited Greg Ellis with two pressures in 2006. STATS LLC credited Ellis with 19.5.

Earlier in Roy's career, the coaches credited him with more pressures, but the coaches back then were more generous with them. The coaches awarded 40 pressures to the entire team in 2006. STATS LLC awarded 143 pressures to the entire team that year. In 2002 (when the team had just 24 sacks), the coaches awarded 163 pressures! STATS LLC awarded the team just 75 to the team that year. In 2003, the coaches awarded 120 pressures. STATS LLC awarded awarded 79. Whereas STATS LLC's pressure numbers have gotten higher as the team's ability to pressure the quarterback has improved, the pressure numbers awarded by the coaching staff are lower now than when the team was much worse at it. So it's not surprising that the coaches haven't awarded Roy as many pressures in recent seasons -- the coaching staff in recent seasons (whoever is responsible for grading the defensive film) has been stingier when awarding pressures.

None of this should be construed to imply that Roy doesn't need to force fumbles or get a sack. It's just providing some context for what Archer posted.

 

[aggiecurt05]

I wonder whether he's been completely hamstrung by the new rules. I know it's been discussed, but it seems like every time he delivers a hard hit, one that players such as James Washington were known for, he gets fined. Seriously, how do you deliver an impact hit in today's NFL if you are in the secondary?

To be clear, I'm not talking about the horse collar rule as that's a result of bad angles. I'm talking about laying a player out if he comes across the middle and wants to catch a pass.

 

[superpunk]

...let's put the goalposts over here.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

RW needs to find the qb

 

[cowboys2233]

I wonder whether he's been completely hamstrung by the new rules. I know it's been discussed, but it seems like every time he delivers a hard hit, one that players such as James Washington were known for, he gets fined. Seriously, how do you deliver an impact hit in today's NFL if you are in the secondary?

To be clear, I'm not talking about the horse collar rule as that's a result of bad angles. I'm talking about laying a player out if he comes across the middle and wants to catch a pass.

No, it's not the rules, it's his desire. I would actually take the writer's views one step further. No, Roy is not that bad in coverage, not great certainly, but not that bad. However, he has become god-awful at slicing through blockers to get to the ball carrier -- he gets absolutely eaten up at the point of attack.

I think Ronnie Lott should reassess who his favorite player is, because Roy ain't living up to his earlier praise.

 

[Aliencowboy]

It's good that the "negative side" is beginning to actually concede that he's not bad in coverage. Now the argument is boiling down to "impact plays."

"He's okay in coverage, he's good against the run, but he hasn't had a lot of 'impact plays' lately."

Yeah, okay, whatever that means.

No, you got it wrong again. :bang2:

He's saying that RW is not even playing in obvious passing situations or he's moved up to LB because he can't cover well. Wade has said the guy is not as bad as he's being made out to be, but again he's being protected by not having him play SS half the time.

The article is saying hey a safety and corner can get beat. RW was being put in positions to use his talents and avoid his weaknesses. But, where are the results of putting him in a position to cause fumbles, makes sacks and a big hit to change momentum.

37 games. About two and a half years. That's a problem.
Before they didn't expect him to TNew type coverage skills but you got ST else in return. Now there's neither going on.

 

[Hoofbite]

It's good that the "negative side" is beginning to actually concede that he's not bad in coverage. Now the argument is boiling down to "impact plays."

"He's okay in coverage, he's good against the run, but he hasn't had a lot of 'impact plays' lately."

Yeah, okay, whatever that means.

I was thinking the same thing. Forever it was all about how poor his coverage was. When shown to be wrong, they now move on to him being O.K. in coverage but not doing enough.