DMN Watkins/Breer: Roy is not going anywhere, but if he were to be gone...

[ABQcowboyJR]

I have faith that roy can once again be a player. He has showed all of us that he has a hitting instinct and can come up with some turnovers. He can be a primetime player if he wants to be. I believe he will turn the corner this season and hopefully we won't need Hamlin when, with fingers crossed, Watkins breaks the starting lineup.

 

[khiladi]

First of all, that's not correct. Roy had more tackles in 2006 than he had in 2005 or 2003. And secondly, comparing tackle numbers from season to season like that is pointless. Teams run different numbers of plays each season, different numbers of rushing plays and different numbers of completed passes, which means there are widely varying numbers of tackles that are even possible from season to season.



So why don't more safeties get five interceptions each season?

1.

That isn't what I read. According to yahoo statistics, Roy had 63 tackles in 2006, 13 less then in his 2003 season, his second worst season in tackles. In tackles alone, Roy was 4 worse in 2006.

2.

And QBs throw a wide variety of passes that may absolutely suck. For example, Jake Delhomme, the last quarter of the game, was throwing plain duds. There is a reason both in the Tampa and Carolina game, the passing attack had a measly 100 or so yards.

3.

If comparing tackles from season to season is pointless, so is interceptions, because QBs can have horrid games. Roy played a hell of a lot cover-2 in 2006, and Bill Parcells was extremely conservative at protecting against the big-play. He was playing a lot downfield and that is why his tackles, both assists and solo, were down.

 

[big dog cowboy]

First of all, that's not correct. Roy had more tackles in 2006 than he had in 2005 or 2003.

That isn't what I read. According to yahoo statistics, Roy had 63 tackles in 2006, 13 less then in his 2003 season, his second worst. In tackles alone, Roy was 4 worse in 2006.

FWIW.....

NFL.com stats:

2002 - 99
2003 - 72
2004 - 94
2005 - 81
2006 - 62
2007 - 92

 

[AdamJT13]

That isn't what I read. According to yahoo statistics, Roy had 63 tackles in 2006, 13 less then in his 2003 season, his second worst season in tackles. In tackles alone, Roy was 4 worse in 2006.

FWIW.....

NFL.com stats:

2002 - 99
2003 - 72
2004 - 94
2005 - 81
2006 - 62
2007 - 92

Both of those are unofficial tackle stats and are inherently flawed, as the NFL itself has stated.

The only tackle stats are official in any way are those kept by the team itself, and they list Roy with more tackles in 2006 than in 2005.

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

But like I said, comparing tackles from season to season is pointless, given the huge variance in the opportunities for tackles from season to season. I mean, hypothetically, are you any better for getting 90 tackles in 1,100 plays than you are for getting 88 tackles in 900 plays -- considering that it took you 200 extra plays to get those two extra tackles?

 

[Sarge]

IMO, I think RW has lost interest - perhaps not totally, but he clearly has changed in the last couple of years. The problem isn't so much how BAD he is, but how much we are paying him to be playing at a level less than what he once did.

I hope I didn't hurt anyone's feelings.

 

[Future]

IMO, I think RW has lost interest - perhaps not totally, but he clearly has changed in the last couple of years. The problem isn't so much how BAD he is, but how much we are paying him to be playing at a level less than what he once did.

I hope I didn't hurt anyone's feelings.

Great post.

People who say that he is BAD are ignorant, he's still a good player. But he should have been elite from what we saw early in his career and the way that he is being paid. Thats what makes his only being good dissappointing.