DMN: Safety Roy Williams wants Dallas Cowboys to act today

[Alexander]

It's just annoying to watch a player who's one of the better players in the league at his position get lambasted unfairly just because people expect him to be better than he really is.

I don't see anything wrong with holding a player to a standard, which the player themselves set. It is nothing like being "lambasted unfairly".

There is not a person on this board who wasn't beside themselves watching Roy Williams his first few years in the league. Not a one. He was doing literally everything you could ask for from a safety (and more). He looked like a Hall of Fame player in the making.

It seems he lost something by 2005. Whether it was the fact he changed his lifestyle, was out of shape, adversely affected by the horsecollar flap or what, but the stellar level of play he established his first three seasons started to erode. It could even be a function of teams learning how to attack him. Regardless, it did happen. You could crunch all the stats you want and compare tackle numbers, but the spirit and fire he showed vanished into thin air in the space of three seasons.

And what a lot of people had a hard time doing was explaining it. Even Roy Williams couldn't explain it. Quite a few of the fans he made early in his career stuck by him and bought into the excuses (don't know the coverages, it was someone else's fault, he was a bad fit for the defense, he wasn't utilized correctly). What he and alot of the fans refused to believe is that something happened. It obviously did. The bar he set for himself suddenly became something that was supposed to be flexible. Unfortnately that goes against natural progression for most cases. He wasn't injured, he wasn't old.

Roy's got plenty of limitations and makes his share of mistakes. Everybody sees that. But the guy's not terrible in coverage, he is a good tackler, and he is somebody we definitely could have used on the field last year.

He's become something less than what he was or should be now. That's the general point. The hyperbole aside, what you said is accurate. He's not the worst. But he's being paid to be the best. He received a new contract with the expectation that he was simply in a slump. That's not the case and that is why it is at this point.

 

[jobberone]

Again, what are you claiming I was wrong about?

Your defense of Roy to an extreme when it was obvious he was not doing his job over the last few years. Your deflections when confronted often followed by personal attacks. Using stats as if they were the Holy Grail and wielding it like a weapon despite the fact most of the rest of the world sees the big picture differently than you even if it took awhile to get there for some.

You just refuse to admit you were wrong about Roy. Like now.

BTW, I owe you an apology from very long ago. You tried to teach me about the cap and I refused to listen. You were right and I was very wrong. I can be obstinate at times. It never helps me play well with others. I also should have never mentioned a professional opinion. That was clearly wrong of me to wield that esp under internet circumstances.

My personal opinion stands including subsequent ones which were complimentary to you.

 

[Idgit]

I don't see anything wrong with holding a player to a standard, which the player themselves set. It is nothing like being "lambasted unfairly".

There is not a person on this board who wasn't beside themselves watching Roy Williams his first few years in the league. Not a one. He was doing literally everything you could ask for from a safety (and more). He looked like a Hall of Fame player in the making.

It seems he lost something by 2005. Whether it was the fact he changed his lifestyle, was out of shape, adversely affected by the horsecollar flap or what, but the stellar level of play he established his first three seasons started to erode. It could even be a function of teams learning how to attack him. Regardless, it did happen. You could crunch all the stats you want and compare tackle numbers, but the spirit and fire he showed vanished into thin air in the space of three seasons.

And what a lot of people had a hard time doing was explaining it. Even Roy Williams couldn't explain it. Quite a few of the fans he made early in his career stuck by him and bought into the excuses (don't know the coverages, it was someone else's fault, he was a bad fit for the defense, he wasn't utilized correctly). What he and alot of the fans refused to believe is that something happened. It obviously did. The bar he set for himself suddenly became something that was supposed to be flexible. Unfortnately that goes against natural progression for most cases. He wasn't injured, he wasn't old.



He's become something less than what he was or should be now. That's the general point. The hyperbole aside, what you said is accurate. He's not the worst. But he's being paid to be the best. He received a new contract with the expectation that he was simply in a slump. That's not the case and that is why it is at this point.

I don't disagree with any of this. When I say he's picked on unfairly, I'm referring to situations where the player and the head coach both come out and say a particular blown coverage was not RW's fault and smart fans on this board won't believe it anyway. I'm referring to people who say he can't tackle, not because he actually can't tackle, but because they expected him to be a hall of famer at one point and they're mad he's not. There's no doubt he's underperformed his contract, or that his cap hit for this year can't be justified.

 

[Idgit]

Your defense of Roy to an extreme when it was obvious he was not doing his job over the last few years. Your deflections when confronted often followed by personal attacks. Using stats as if they were the Holy Grail and wielding it like a weapon despite the fact most of the rest of the world sees the big picture differently than you even if it took awhile to get there for some.

You just refuse to admit you were wrong about Roy. Like now.

BTW, I owe you an apology from very long ago. You tried to teach me about the cap and I refused to listen. You were right and I was very wrong. I can be obstinate at times. It never helps me play well with others. I also should have never mentioned a professional opinion. That was clearly wrong of me to wield that esp under internet circumstances.

My personal opinion stands including subsequent ones which were complimentary to you.

jobberone, I'm surprised to see you take this position. Adam's defended Roy's performance v. perception, but it's always been just that. There are a lot of silly perceptions on the board. What's wrong with defending a Cowboy player--even one who hasn't met your expectations--against unfair attacks?

Note, I'm referring to unfair attacks and not to any of the several topics of criticism of RW that are legitimate.

 

[goshan]

Adam used stats to argue that Roy was still in the 'upper echelon' of strong safeties as recently as the season before last. He created elaborate posts of how it was actually others people's fault (sometimes it was).

Based upon his contract and standards for an NFL SS, Roy wasn't any good the last 2-3 years. And it was obvious to those watching the games.

 

[jobberone]

jobberone, I'm surprised to see you take this position. Adam's defended Roy's performance v. perception, but it's always been just that. There are a lot of silly perceptions on the board. What's wrong with defending a Cowboy player--even one who hasn't met your expectations--against unfair attacks?

Note, I'm referring to unfair attacks and not to any of the several topics of criticism of RW that are legitimate.

I knew there would be some who wouldn't agree with me and some that would. I don't take it lightly when I confront anyone. I will admit I'm not being completely altruistic either. But I'm getting little gratification. I don't believe I've said anything unfairly except throwing my professional opinion around which was not proper in that situation. Most people on this board are not treated 'fairly' at times some more than the vast majority. They generally bring it on themselves though.

This board is exceptionally civil and the reason I stay here and support it.

 

[AdamJT13]

Your defense of Roy to an extreme when it was obvious he was not doing his job over the last few years.

Such as when?

Was I wrong when I said Roy made a lot of big plays but allowed too many big plays in 2006?

Was I wrong when I said Roy didn't make a lot of big plays but didn't give up many big plays in 2007?

Was I wrong when I said Roy didn't play much in 2008?

That's exactly how I've evaluated Roy's performance over the past few years. What was I wrong about? Please tell me.

Your deflections when confronted often followed by personal attacks.

Please show an example of me ever using a "personal attack" when confronted.

Using stats as if they were the Holy Grail and wielding it like a weapon despite the fact most of the rest of the world sees the big picture differently than you even if it took awhile to get there for some.

It's wrong to use facts to support an opinion?

What kind of world do we live in where saying things that aren't true is perfectly OK, but citing facts as evidence is wrong?

 

[AdamJT13]

Adam used stats to argue that Roy was still in the 'upper echelon' of strong safeties as recently as the season before last.

The season before last, I said Roy didn't deserve to go to the Pro Bowl.

 

[jobberone]

Such as when?

Was I wrong when I said Roy made a lot of big plays but allowed too many big plays in 2006?

Was I wrong when I said Roy didn't make a lot of big plays but didn't give up many big plays in 2007?

Was I wrong when I said Roy didn't play much in 2008?

That's exactly how I've evaluated Roy's performance over the past few years. What was I wrong about? Please tell me.




Please show an example of me ever using a "personal attack" when confronted.




It's wrong to use facts to support an opinion?

What kind of world do we live in where saying things that aren't true is perfectly OK, but citing facts as evidence is wrong?

Adam, I'm not going to get into a blow by blow with you as it will go nowhere. If you don't get it you don't get it and no amount of facts or opinions are going to change your mind.

If I say more then it will appear I'm defending my position which I don't feel is necessary. It will also appear I have an axe to grind with you.

I would hope you can reflect upon all this with the understanding I bear you no malice. I personally have too many flaws that need my constant attention to be pointing fingers at anyone else. My judgment for when and where to vocalize my opinions is obviously not always for the best.

My best regards.

 

[AdamJT13]

Adam, I'm not going to get into a blow by blow with you as it will go nowhere. If you don't get it you don't get it and no amount of facts or opinions are going to change your mind.

So I'm being asked to "admit" I was "wrong" about something, but you (nor anyone else) can't come up with one single, specific thing you claim I was wrong about? Nice.

 

[AbeBeta]

And it's funny how you claim not to be afraid to "call me out" or whatever, but not a single one of you has pointed out one time when you think I've been wrong, even though I keep asking.

Adam, I've called you on this over and over. The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on. You target extreme comments that reflect hyperbole and then chop them down. Good for you, you are great at beating up on straw men. You aren't technically "wrong" because you are so very careful to pick and choose the questions that you choose to address and the information you choose to present.

The fact of the matter is that you now choose to only address questions with clear right/wrong answers rather than the more interesting questions that do not have such clear answers. I've continued to call you out on those issues and you continue to ignore that.

 

[Doomsay]

Adam, I've called you on this over and over. The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on. You target extreme comments that reflect hyperbole and then chop them down.

Being the occasional straw guy, I'll also point out that the focus of the retort is usually a cherry-picked flamboyant statement rather than the real import of a post. When confronted with the actual meaning of the post there is often no-response, or another re-direct into winnable, yet insignificant minutia.

I respect his cap work though, very impressive.

 

[jobberone]

So I'm being asked to "admit" I was "wrong" about something, but you (nor anyone else) can't come up with one single, specific thing you claim I was wrong about? Nice.

Adam if I chose to search the archives I could point them out but you could also search my posts and others here who are pointing out the same things. It would be a thankless task and only inflame things IMO.

And the 'Nice' at the end is a passive aggressive comment that is typical of you. Do you remember the 'thanks for adding to the thread' and other comments to me? I see you do that to others as well when you feel cornered. Only you can decide if that behavior is helpful to you. And asking for examples is deflection and denial. You have the right to reject or reflect upon it. There is no right and wrong here only behavior. Obviously I was wrong to confront you as it has not helped only worsened things. I do not wish to appear to be an 'internet tough guy' or a bully who relishes in the discomfort of others. I now have the task to examine my own motives over this. It's time for me to withdraw from this counterproductive exchange.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Darn it. I was hoping this would continue. It's the most entertaining thing that has been on these forums in quite some time.

 

[BAT]

That really just means the rest of our S's really suck in your opinion.

I have news for you, being the best of the worst is not a compliment.

I have news for you .... getting rid of the best, even the best of the worst, and retaining the worst of the worst is stupidity.

 

[Doomsay]

I have news for you .... getting rid of the best, even the best of the worst, and retaining the worst of the worst is stupidity.

Not when the best of the worst cant be effective anymore (at least in our system).

I think that people are forgetting what an incredible coverage liability he was in 2007. If he was effective at the LOS, that would have been one thing, but he really didn't seem comfortable there either.

 

[EveryoneElse]

Not when the best of the worst cant be effective anymore (at least in our system).

I think that people are forgetting what an incredible coverage liability he was in 2007. If he was effective at the LOS, that would have been one thing, but he really didn't seem comfortable there either.

I think that we can all agree on one thing, Roy was known as a hitter early on, but he hasn't hit anyone in a few years. Everytime he met somebody at impact the other guy folded and was sent 3-5 yards the other way. Somewhere along the line he lost that.

 

[BigDFan5]

While Adam might have been correct on some of his points (yes, Roy did have a lot of tackles [even Adam admits that tackles is a subjective statistic]), the fact that Roy is on the verge of being released proves, "substantially," that Adam overestimated Roy's value to the Cowboys.

Being released in 2009 does not show Adam was wrong about Roys value in 2006

 

[AdamJT13]

Adam, I've called you on this over and over. The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on. You target extreme comments that reflect hyperbole and then chop them down. Good for you, you are great at beating up on straw men. You aren't technically "wrong" because you are so very careful to pick and choose the questions that you choose to address and the information you choose to present.

How many times are you going to completely miss the point? Seriously.

The fact of the matter is that you now choose to only address questions with clear right/wrong answers rather than the more interesting questions that do not have such clear answers. I've continued to call you out on those issues and you continue to ignore that.

What are you talking about? As far as I can tell, I've answered every single question you have asked me.

On the other hand, I can't get a single one of my questions answered from some people, nor can I get a single, specific example of anything anyone in this thread has claimed about me. Not a single one.

 

[AdamJT13]

Being the occasional straw guy, I'll also point out that the focus of the retort is usually a cherry-picked flamboyant statement rather than the real import of a post. When confronted with the actual meaning of the post there is often no-response, or another re-direct into winnable, yet insignificant minutia.

Link, please.

Come on, someone has to be able to support something they've claimed.