Is Roy Williams a liability in coverage?

[Rack]

I do, and he is superior to most SS's in coverage

David

He's superior to pretty much EVERY other SS in the league.


But he doesn't cover like Deion so he must suck.

 

[smarta5150]

I do, and he is superior to most SS's in coverage

David

Thank you.

People are forgetting Roy Williams is a STRONG SAFETY.

As I said before all SS are liabilities in coverage.

If they werent liabilitie they would be a FS or a CB.

 

[dbair1967]

He's superior to pretty much EVERY other SS in the league.


But he doesn't cover like Deion so he must suck.

yep...I really dont know what people expect...

for the record, I will say if we are going to continue to waste his ability like we do, that we should just pursue a trade or release him next yr after June 1...I think he is a great player, one capable of making a huge impact on a week to week basis...but he will never be that player with these simpletons who are running our defense now...we've wasted this guy since the start of the 2004 season, when Zimmer apparently thought it was a brilliant idea to have him play 15-25 yds off the LOS every down

David

 

[zrinkill]

How many Int's does Roy have this year?

Yea thats a liability.

 

[khiladi]

As I said before all SS are liabilities in coverage.

If they werent liabilitie they would be a FS or a CB.

We play a lot of cover-2, meaning we rely on our SS just as much as our FS to protect against the deep pass... They are both playing essentially the same roles on opposite sides of the field... Many of the TDs against the Cowboys, such as the one on Roy against the Saints, was from a Cover-2 defense. That situation would have happened despite there being a world class free safety on the other side of the field, let alone Keith Davis...

DO you really think this problem is going to be rectified with the addition of a FS? I don't see it unless Bill Parcells is going to adjust by playing a lot less Cover-2? We will continue to expose our liabilities, especially since we are getting absolutely no pass rush... It is poart of this whole bend-don't-break defense.

we've wasted this guy since the start of the 2004 season, when Zimmer apparently thought it was a brilliant idea to have him play 15-25 yds off the LOS every down

Do you think that was Zimmer or Parcells? Why would Zimmer do that? Even our linebackers drop farther back than normal linebackers in a 3-4 do... The 3-4 is what Bill wanted... We play a conservative type of 3-4 because of Bill Parcells... Maybe Roy Williams is dropping back in coverage because of Bill Parcells..

As far as I can tell, Bill Parcells is expecting his front 3 to do way too much... He is expecting them to constantly beat their men and provide pressure while stopping the run, yet he's moving the linebackers away from the line, as well as players like Roy Williams, because of his desire to play way too much zone to protect against the long ball...

our linebackers were consistently out of place to stop the flat passes consistently run by NOs... that is one of the reasons we get no pressure either... think about it... Bill is trying to protect against the long ball by playing a lot of cover two, and our linebackers are farther back to 'read-and-react', and yet we have 3 men trying to control both gaps by turning the OL in those gaps, and still epxecting them to put pressure on the QB...

That is why I say, in the schemes of Bill Parcells, every player needs to be a superman for every position... we can always say, "the players don't execute", but seriously... you need to coach according to your players... you can't keep plugging and playing this far into the season... we don't have the greatest LB to ever play n the game in LT, where he could single-handedly disrupt the offense by himself...

And honestly, I am beginning to believe Bill can't do it, unless he has someone like Bill Bellichek...

 

[smarta5150]

We play a lot of cover-2, meaning we rely on our SS just as much as our FS to protect against the deep pass... They are both playing essentially the same roles on opposite sides of the field...

So why would we continue to expose our liabilities, especially when we are getting absolutely no pass rush?

Further, many of the TDs against the Cowboys, such as the one on Roy against the Saints, was from a Cover-2 defense. That situation would have happened whether we had a world class free safety on the other side of the field, or we had Keith Davis...

DO you think this problem is going to be rectified with the addition of a FS?

Do you think Bill Parcells is going to adjust his Cover-2 scheme, and play less of it?

I have been anti-cover2 around here since all this RW flaming started.

He's is 1 of the best at his position and our coaches are making him look bad by putting him in vulnerable situations.

RW is not the guy to get locked up 1 on 1. If I know this our coaches should know this.

Please do soemthing about this.

Let our CBs cover downfield. They are athletic enough.

 

[dbair1967]

when your team is tied for 25th in the league in sacks and only 4 teams in the league have less, the problem is obvious and it has NOTHING to do with any players "coverage" abilities

last yr the excuses for Zimmer were as follows:

1) never coached the 3-4 before
2) too many young players
3) too many injuries

none of those apply now...so whats the problem?

David

 

[smarta5150]

when your team is tied for 25th in the league in sacks and only 4 teams in the league have less, the problem is obvious and it has NOTHING to do with any players "coverage" abilities

last yr the excuses for Zimmer were as follows:

1) never coached the 3-4 before
2) too many young players
3) too many injuries

none of those apply now...so whats the problem?

David

Ummm. Zimmer.

 

[dbair1967]

Let our CBs cover downfield. They are athletic enough.[/

QUOTE]

isnt this the OBVIOUS answer? Isnt this why they drafted Newman 5th overall and signed Henry to a premium level contract? Wasn't it said that Zimmer needed good CB's to give him options in the defense?

This isnt what happens on most downs...instead we constantly see zones with gaping holes or LB's/safeties lined up on other teams starting WR's

and thats what you call S T U P I D

David

 

[bbgun]

Plucked from another board:

Zimmer's mainstay defense is the zone coverage defense. It seems that its played about 95% of the time. Once in a while he would blitz a linebacker, but our basic defense is zone coverage and rushing 4 men during passing downs. Now think about....why would you play a zone when you have one of the best man to man cover corner in football and a pretty good #2 corner in Henry?

My opinion is that our zone defense is the defenses major weakness. Here is why:

1. It doesn't play up to our players talent and abilities. We all know that Roy is better close to the LOS. We also know that Newman is as close as there is to a shutdown corner. We also have a pretty good #2 corner in Henry.

However, Roy is not really that great in coverage. If so why do we play a zone scheme or even a 2 deep zone with Roy going deep covering the other teams best recievers? Why can't we go man to man coverage with our corners running stride for stride with the receivers downfield? Its harder and seems more complicated to have our corners pass off receivers to the safeties in a zone coverage and it just has hard to figure out who is supposed to be covering who. Lets face it. The zone defense looks good on paper. But it doesn't work.

2. When we play zone, our linebackers play 10 feet back from the LOS. Then when the ball is snap, they backtrack further away from the LOS and go into coverage. Why? Linebackers in a 3-4 are more effective closer to the line than in pass coverage. The zone makes our linebackers play to what the offense is showing. We need to disquise our blitzes and have the possibility of blitzing our linebackers from anywhere.

3. Lastly, this is the same zone defense that Zimmer runs year after year. There has been no changes to this scheme whatsoever. Even when Miami blitzed us with a no name QB in 2003 it was the same defense. This makes this zone defense easier to score against. Easier to gameplan and basically easier to play against.

The only difference is that we now run a 3-4 alignment. But the philosophy of that bend but don't break zone defense is still ingrained into this defense.

We need to dump this foolish zone defense into the trash.

We need to mix up the defense by going to a man to man pressure type of defense.

Make Newman shadow the opponents best reciever. Give Henry safety help deep. This should free up Roy Williams to come closer to the LOS. Use Burnett more into coverage....especially, those runningbacks and TEs that come out into the flat.

Allow Burnett to shadow some of the other teams best runningbacks such as Tiki Barber and Reggie Bush. We are totally under utilizing Burnett's cover skills by having him sit on the bench and he can take over cover duties for Ware.

Move Ware around. Allow him free reign in rushing the passer. The offense will send their best runningback out in the flat to expose Ware's passrushing. We can then counter that by bringing Burnett to cover the runningback.

Alternate Ratliff and Hatcher like we alternate Jones/Barber. At least it makes it harder for teams to gameplan when we have different personnel all the time. And it gives Spears/Canty resting time.

Blitz other linebackers such as Akin rather than just Ware.

With this aggressive man to man defense we stick with the strength of the team and allow them to play their game instinctually. All in all, I think this style of defense that will fit this team and would give opposing teams fits. There won't be anymore easy Zimmer's zone defense to contend with anymore.

I'm not saying I know more about defense than Zimmer. But I know he ain't doing a good job. He is the defensive coordinator and needs to make this team into a championship defense. So far he has been nothing more than a disappointment.

Thats why I'm all for getting a new def. coordinator next year. Zimmer won't change this defense and we will waste another year of teams taking advantage of our weak zone defense.

We have talent on this team. He just doesn't know how to use them.

 

[smarta5150]

QUOTE]

isnt this the OBVIOUS answer? Isnt this why they drafted Newman 5th overall and signed Henry to a premium level contract? Wasn't it said that Zimmer needed good CB's to give him options in the defense?

This isnt what happens on most downs...instead we constantly see zones with gaping holes or LB's/safeties lined up on other teams starting WR's

and thats what you call S T U P I D

David

Its nice to hear someone who knows what they are talking about.

I am getting tired of having to defend RW every day in a newly created thread questioning his ability.

 

[dbair1967]

Its nice to hear someone who knows what they are talking about.

I am getting tired of having to defend RW every day in a newly created thread questioning his ability.

if RW played for just about any defensive coordinator other than Zimmer, people would be talking about how he had changed the game and was a once a decade type player (ie, like the one we saw at OU)

even with the extra strength handcuffs of the Zimmer boob scheme, RW still makes more than his share of plays...unfortunately the fickle folks here dont give him any credit for them

David

 

[LaTunaNostra]

When folks think of the 2006 Oakland Raiders, not many areas of excellence come to mind.

But has anyone noticed how those two no names are playing such superlative man-to-man coverage, and how MUCH of it they play?

I saw an article a week or so ago in which Chad Johnson
was heaping praise on Ashomughu (sic?) and Washington and mentioned his surprise at the degree of trust the Raiders DC has to let them play so much man coverage.

Chad Johnson isn't the first person I'd think of to assess the nuances of coaching, but I think he hit on something with his 'trust' take.

You've got to trust your corners to hang with a receiver and smother him.

Now I'm sure someone will say Oakland's pass D is high ranked becaue you can run on them, or find some reason why these two lesser talents are so effective, but in the Oakland games I have seen this year there has been no time I haven't seen these two isolated on that 'island' and the rest of the D up in the box with minimal help from one safety.

And they came through.

I didn't see any of their last game so don't know if they boomed or bombed vs Cincy, but every time I spotted a few minutes of a previous Sunday Ticket Oakland game, I had to ask myself "why not us"?

That 'trust' issue is starting to feel compelling.

 

[khiladi]

Plucked from another board:

Zimmer's mainstay defense is the zone coverage defense. It seems that its played about 95% of the time. Once in a while he would blitz a linebacker, but our basic defense is zone coverage and rushing 4 men during passing downs. Now think about....why would you play a zone when you have one of the best man to man cover corner in football and a pretty good #2 corner in Henry?

Why do we keep blaming Zimmer? Zimmer use to blitz all the time before Parcell's came... He was damn aggressive... From what I remember to, is we use to play a lot of man-to-man... If Zimmer was coaching the defense now in the 4-3 with this talent, I bet he would be a lot more successful than the 3-4 we are running now...

he could still suck, but the suckiness would be a lot less than what it is now...

The zone is a STAPLE of Bill Parcell's. Bill Parcell's plays a lot of cover-2...

Can we get it through our heads that just because Mike Zimmer was calling the shots before, does not necessarily mean he is calling the shots now... We went to a 3-4 because of Bill Parcells... Why would Zimmer wanmt to go to a 3-4? Do you think he wanted to? our defensive line could never generate a significant push... Our problem even before Parcells was our pass rush... yet, we have gotten even worse because of the 3-4, but we have better players on the line...

 

[smarta5150]

Why do we keep blaming Zimmer? Zimmer use to blitz all the time before Parcell's came... He was damn aggressive... From what I remember to, is we use to play a lot of man-to-man... If Zimmer was coaching the defense now in the 4-3 with this talent, I bet he would be a lot more successful than the 3-4 we are running now...

he could still suck, but the suckiness would be a lot less than what it is now...

The zone is a STAPLE of Bill Parcell's. Bill Parcell's plays a lot of cover-2...

Can we get it through our heads that just because Mike Zimmer was calling the shots before, does not necessarily mean he is calling the shots now... We went to a 3-4 because of Bill Parcells... our defensive line could never generate a significant push... Our problem even before Parcells was our pass rush... yet, we have gotten even worse because of the 3-4, but we have better players on the line...

OK.

I blame the coaching staff.

Is that better?

 

[Rack]

Why do we keep blaming Zimmer? Zimmer use to blitz all the time before Parcell's came... He was damn aggressive... From what I remember to, is we use to play a lot of man-to-man... If Zimmer was coaching the defense now in the 4-3 with this talent, I bet he would be a lot more successful than the 3-4 we are running now...

he could still suck, but the suckiness would be a lot less than what it is now...

The zone is a STAPLE of Bill Parcell's. Bill Parcell's plays a lot of cover-2...

Can we get it through our heads that just because Mike Zimmer was calling the shots before, does not necessarily mean he is calling the shots now... We went to a 3-4 because of Bill Parcells... Why would Zimmer wanmt to go to a 3-4? Do you think he wanted to? our defensive line could never generate a significant push... Our problem even before Parcells was our pass rush... yet, we have gotten even worse because of the 3-4, but we have better players on the line...

Oh really? Zimmer use to blitz "All the time" before BP took over?


Why then, do tell, did he only manage 23 sacks per season during those three years before BP?


1. Either you're full of it and he didn't "blitz all the time" or

2. He blitzed and STILL couldn't get to the freakin' QB.


Either way, Zimmer sucks. He has NEVER been able to produce a good consistent pass rush.

 

[khiladi]

You've got to trust your corners to hang with a receiver and smother him...

And we have one of the best, if not the best, 1-2 CB combination in the league today. The only logical explanation I have for this is Parcells... He wants to play so much cover-2 to protect against the long ball. He does NOT TRUST the players to make plays, as much as he trusts his scheming.

And his scheming fails him. When the scheme fails, the excuse is the player's do not execute... That is why we just keep plugging away players. The FS does not resolve the issues where Roy gets burned...

That 'trust' issue is starting to feel compelling.

It took two games ONLY for Bilkl Parcells to lose 'trust' in Pat Watkins, despite the fact that in pre-season he was all over the place.. After crappy play by Keith Davis, Parcells kept saying that Pat needs to be ready because of the poor play. Instead of changing Keith Davis back to Pat, he waited to sign this other guy. This is evidence to the level of Parcell's 'trust' factor'..

Bill Parcell's does not 'trust' easily... That is why he brings all his former players to his new teams if he has a chance, even if it is a washed up 40 year old QB... That is a sign of going with what your familiar with, as opposed to taking risks and 'trusting'.

 

[jrumann59]

For all the Roy haters he is better than or at least equal to a FS that many people like to sniff the jock strap of. One Sean Taylor and for a FS his coverage skills are as good as Greg Ellis.

 

[khiladi]

Oh really? Zimmer use to blitz "All the time" before BP took over?


Why then, do tell, did he only manage 23 sacks per season during those three years before BP?


1. Either you're full of it and he didn't "blitz all the time" or

2. He blitzed and STILL couldn't get to the freakin' QB.


Either way, Zimmer sucks. He has NEVER been able to produce a good consistent pass rush.

Dude.. chill out...

I said Zimmer used to blitz all the time... I did not say Zimmer was successful at the blitz... My point is that Zimmer was trying to be aggressive.. Our secondary was horrid, and one of the staples of Zimmer was to try and create pressure to not expose our CBs... This was well acknowledged during those years...

Now are defense is purposely not aggressive, but is 'read-and-react'... I don't think Zimmer is that responsible for it.

 

[Rack]

2002:

24 sacks

7.5 by Ellis.
6.5 by Glover


The rest of the TEAM has 10 sacks. HORRIBLE.


2001:

24 sacks

6.0 from Greg Ellis

The rest of the team has a whopping 18 sacks. Again.. HORRIBLE



2000:

25 sacks

6.5 from Ekuban

5 from Spellman


13.5 sacks for the rest of the entire team. HORRIBLE.


Yet people make it sound like he had some great pressure D before BP got here.



Ok... Zimmer's sack output SINCE BP has been here..


2003:

32 sacks

Already 7 sacks better then his previous BEST season.


8 sacks for Ellis. Amazing how much better Ellis got after BP got here.


Too bad BP's influence wasn't enough to completely erase Zimmer.


2004:

33 sacks


9 sacks for Ellis.

Still not great, but MUCH improved under BP.


2005:

37 sacks


Solid, but still not "Great"


Ware and Ellis both with 8 sacks.




So to those trying to say our pass rush was better before BP got here... please, slap yourself in the face.



2006 (so far):

23 sacks (with 3 games to go). Horrible, again.



Anyway you slice it, our pass rush has NEVER been good under Zimmer. At least it improved with BP's guidance, but still not great.



And just FYI:

1999 (before Zimmer took over the DCoord job):

35 sacks


1998:

34 sacks


1997:

38 sacks



Amazing the dropoff after Zimmer took over. Amazing how it improved with BP's influence.


Every great coach in history has made mistakes. BP's mistake here was keeping Zimmer.