Maybe Roy William IS the problem
- Thread starter Temo
- Start date
theogt
Surrealist
- Messages
- 45,846
- Reaction score
- 5,912
This is precisely the problem with posting these statistics. Some people just aren't sharp enough to look at the stats and realize what they mean.bracey;1848608 said:
At least not when A.J. Feeley is throwing directly at Tatupu.Rampage;1848635 said:
Temo
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,946
- Reaction score
- 362
theogt;1848633 said:
Yea, I know... but it's not like he only ever covers from the LB role in the nickel. In fact, there's whole packages now where he doesn't even see the field. The fact is that Pat Watkins has become a better deep defender than Roy despite being awful last year. And that's my main point about Roy regressing this year as a pass defender.
theogt
Surrealist
- Messages
- 45,846
- Reaction score
- 5,912
He's in coverage most often from the nickel linebacker role.Temo;1848639 said:
He plays in all but 2 of our 7 or so defensive packages. There are only 4 players on defense that play in all 7 packages, and 2 of those 4 get substituted out pretty regularly, leaving only 2 players that play just about every snap. The 2 packages in which Roy does not play make up probably less than 5% of all of our defensive snaps on the season.
Temo
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,946
- Reaction score
- 362
Perhaps I should clarify my position on Roy, I kinda look all over the place right now.
I don't think he was terrible last year, I think a lot of his troubles were inaccurately attributed to him because of the troubles that Keith Davis/Pat Watkins had beside him. However, Pat Watkins has since then become a better deep defender than Roy... and not because he's more athletic or faster either.
Charting all the cowboy's games, it's not often that you even see Williams out of position or trailing a defender. Usually, he'll be right around the ball, but he simply lacks the ability (or aptitude, or whatever) to track a ball in the air and put himself in a position to make a play on it. It's not unlike what I saw when I taught little league baseball for a summer, if that helps you to understand what I'm saying.
He STILL does things that are very beneficial to the team. There is a reason why you don't see Ken Hamlin manning up on Shockey when he's split wide, for example. Roy is still very strong, very athletic, and he hasn't lost any of his speed (he's not speedster, but he's pretty fast for a guy his size). All of this is why Wade has had him playing up to the line more and more in man coverage as opposed to zone, where Roy often has trouble tracking the ball.
At the same time, Williams is not at the point where he can reliably shut down slot receivers or even the occasional TE split wide either, so now Wade has him off the field entirely in certain packages where the offense goes with 4 or 5 receivers out on the field.
I guess my initial mistake was in naming this thread "is roy williams the problem", because he isn't now... Wade Phillips is already compensating for all his worst attributes. Indeed, just looking at my charting data, Roy had much more of his unsuccessful plays come in the first half of the year, when he was playing zone coverage on intermediate routes.
I don't think he was terrible last year, I think a lot of his troubles were inaccurately attributed to him because of the troubles that Keith Davis/Pat Watkins had beside him. However, Pat Watkins has since then become a better deep defender than Roy... and not because he's more athletic or faster either.
Charting all the cowboy's games, it's not often that you even see Williams out of position or trailing a defender. Usually, he'll be right around the ball, but he simply lacks the ability (or aptitude, or whatever) to track a ball in the air and put himself in a position to make a play on it. It's not unlike what I saw when I taught little league baseball for a summer, if that helps you to understand what I'm saying.
He STILL does things that are very beneficial to the team. There is a reason why you don't see Ken Hamlin manning up on Shockey when he's split wide, for example. Roy is still very strong, very athletic, and he hasn't lost any of his speed (he's not speedster, but he's pretty fast for a guy his size). All of this is why Wade has had him playing up to the line more and more in man coverage as opposed to zone, where Roy often has trouble tracking the ball.
At the same time, Williams is not at the point where he can reliably shut down slot receivers or even the occasional TE split wide either, so now Wade has him off the field entirely in certain packages where the offense goes with 4 or 5 receivers out on the field.
I guess my initial mistake was in naming this thread "is roy williams the problem", because he isn't now... Wade Phillips is already compensating for all his worst attributes. Indeed, just looking at my charting data, Roy had much more of his unsuccessful plays come in the first half of the year, when he was playing zone coverage on intermediate routes.
CowboyWay
If Coach would have put me in, we'd a won State
- Messages
- 4,445
- Reaction score
- 554
Good info Temo.
You'll soon realize that there are those on this site that choose not to see whats right in front of them because a certain player wears the silver and blue.
Most of us know that Roys the reason we're being killed in the secondary. I just wish Watkins wasn't out this week so he could play full time.
I think people are going to watch Keith Davis back there and say "see, roys not that bad afterall", knowing full well that Davis is horrible in coverage as well.
Granted, Strong safeties aren't exactly cover guys, but Roy seems like he's absolutly lost back there. Its almost as if Wade pulled out the popcorn vendor from section 214 and threw him out there.
You'll soon realize that there are those on this site that choose not to see whats right in front of them because a certain player wears the silver and blue.
Most of us know that Roys the reason we're being killed in the secondary. I just wish Watkins wasn't out this week so he could play full time.
I think people are going to watch Keith Davis back there and say "see, roys not that bad afterall", knowing full well that Davis is horrible in coverage as well.
Granted, Strong safeties aren't exactly cover guys, but Roy seems like he's absolutly lost back there. Its almost as if Wade pulled out the popcorn vendor from section 214 and threw him out there.
Nexx
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 4,041
- Reaction score
- 5,476
03EBZ06;1848576 said:
you just insulted Darren Woodson. remember when he played with roy, darren was the SS. guess who covered the slot receiver in our dime and nickle packages, thats right darren woodson. to say SS is the weak link might be true, but our current SS is THE worst in the NFL in coverage. you cant excuse that from a "probowl" player, someone who received a huge contract just a short time ago, to someone who seems like has lost the fire, the desire to be better, to someone who isnt dedicted to lose some weight like he should, to someone who instead of publicly whinning about the criticism should be using it to fuel his fire. there is no excuse imho.
Rack
Federal Agent
- Messages
- 23,906
- Reaction score
- 3,106
Nexx;1848993 said:
1. Just cuz Roy isn't as good in coverage as quite possibly the greatest cover STRONG safety in NFL history, doesn't mean he sucks.
2. "but our current SS is THE worst in the NFL in coverage" This is a absolute gigantic load of BS.
AdamJT13
Salary Cap Analyst
- Messages
- 16,583
- Reaction score
- 4,529
Temo;1848579 said:
The list is only for defensive backs who had been targeted 35 times or more through Week 13 (minus a bunch of games that hadn't been charted yet). Unless you have information that you didn't post, there's no way to know how many safeties even qualified for the list. But it's probably not many. (I see only three safeties on ANY of those lists.)
Aaron Schatz said the average team had been charted in 10.5 games, and no team could have been charted in more than 12 games (each team had one bye). So the only safeties who qualified for the list are those who were targeted about three times per team game. Last year, according to Football Outsiders, only 10 safeties would have qualified for the list. In 2005, only one would have.
And as has been mentioned in this thread, simply looking at Success Rate without any of the other stats doesn't tell us much. (According to Success Rate, Adrian Peterson, LaDainian Tomlinson and Fred Taylor are three of the worst starting running backs in the NFL this season. Chris Brown is the best.)
In this case, we know that Roy's yards allowed per pass in charted games was less than 8.8, which is what it was last year, when he had a 59 percent success rate (which would just miss this year's top 10 list in the first post). There were plenty of safeties last year who allowed more than 8.8 yards per attempt, so again, it's strange that Michael Huff shows up on the list -- suggesting that many more would, if more safeties qualified. And I haven't had time to go through last year's list (it's not organized well in the book), but in 2005, there were 16 qualifying safeties whose success rate was less than 41 percent.
At any rate, it's a stretch -- and probably erroneous -- to look at the stats posted and claim that Roy is the "worst coverage safety." All we know is his success rate ranked third out of the three safeties mentioned, and his yards per pass was either first or second. And based on the past two years' stats for all safeties, neither of those stats would put Roy very close to the bottom of the league. His success rate was low, but his yards per pass (whatever it was, but less than 8.8) was about average.
PBJTime
Semper Fidelis
- Messages
- 2,717
- Reaction score
- 1
CowboyWay;1848959 said:
We're getting killed in the secondary? I wouldn't go that far. We are about in the middle of the pack, which is pretty good considering we get passed on a lot more than most teams. Teams have been playing catch up most of the season against us. Killed is not the word I'd use for it. Could we improve? Sure.
Kilyin
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 8,041
- Reaction score
- 244
Rampage;1848600 said:
You pretending you knew anything is downright hilarious. You joined this board with the handle bigbadroy and you had an avatar of Roy Williams on a Madden cover. Then you saw the Roy Willy bashing bandwagon and hopped on board. You should really learn to form your own opinions and thoughts instead of being a parrot.
Hostile
The Duke
- Messages
- 119,565
- Reaction score
- 4,544
Temo, let me start by saying of all the Roy Williams is a liability threads, this one was by far the best represented. It really is. I give you nothing but credit for how well this was done. I do however think it has some flaws. Don't be insulted. All arguments do, to some degree. Yes, his supporter's arguments too. The problem I see with success rate is that very few players can qualify for the matrix or criteria. This is why your analysis is so heavily weighted towards CBs.
Look, I have never said Roy is great in coverage. He's not. However what is it going to take for some fans to realize that a Hall of Fame Coach in Bill Parcells, and a coach who has a team 12-2 both want this guy on the field? It's time for Roy's detractors (and I am not calling you one by any means) to try and figure that out. Because quite frankly I don't think most of them have any idea why.
They also seem to be denying that Roy's planned assignments have changed due to the lingering injuries to our starting CBs. The plan was to blitz Roy and play him closer to the LOS. Be honest, other than against the Eagles last week, have you seen much of it? How did the Defense do in that game? I think they finally showed up.
Why? The answer lies in the Zone coverages that we play. What is the purpose of a Zone? Simply put to keep coverage schemes in front of the defenders as much as possible and bring the defenders closer together so that the chance of one being close enough to make a play goes up.
Us old timers constantly talk about Zones being created to slow down Bob Hayes. Maybe, just maybe it's time to explain how. In Man Coverage the CB opposite Hayes had to give him a huge cushion. The reason was simple. If they didn't he would blow right past them. Double cover him with a 2nd defender deep? It didn't help because you still had to give him a cushion and respect his speed. Roy also returned kicks and punts in his career and had some success. That means that 11 potential tacklers were in between him and the endzone, not just 1 or 2 for double coverage.
How did the Zone help this? Because it didn't require any defender to play Hayes which was bound to have built in insecurities attached to it. All they had to do was defend a Zone and pay attention to Hayes when he came into that Zone. Otherwise he ran them all over the field and they couldn't keep up. No one could. Walt Garrison tells a story about Hayes being asked about a Giants CB covering him and was he worried. This CB was also a track star. Hayes said something like, "no, he only runs a 10 flat."
Now, let me ask this. When the PASS RUSH gets to the QB in 2 to 3 seconds how deep is the coverage in a Zone concentrated? What happens when it takes 4 to 5 seconds or longer? The answer is simple to anyone paying attention. As the WRs have more time to get open, they also do it deeper and deeper and spread the Zone coverage further and further apart opening bigger seams.
Ideally, the goal of a defense is to be tight enough to break up passes and deny completions. This is easier accomplished when the QB has to get rid of the ball quicker. Think about it. At the snap of the ball the Offense and Defense are in a very small, confined area. It is easier to play tighter coverage. As the Offense gets deeper, the coverage Zone gets bigger.
We rarely play man coverage. The detractors on this site seem to not be able to grasp that. One guy on this site was asked "do you account coverage assignments by the guy lined up across from the Receiver at the snap of the ball?" The fool said "yes." That's ridiculous. They think on every play the Defender should be locked in on one man and sticking to him like glue. That isn't what Zone coverage does. Each has their advantages. Each has disadvantages.
If playing Safety in the NFL was ONLY about coverage abilities I might think that the "Roy is a liability" crowd had a solid point. It isn't, and no amount of whining about him being the "Golden Child" of his supporters is going to change that. Make no mistake about it, those smart enough to know, realize that's just hyperbole tossed out by those who can't stand to be disagreed with and see it as persecution.
Perfection is expected. It isn't possible. Not against NFL caliber players. Fans here would have said Reggie White was no good as a pass rusher if they had only taken into account how he played against Erik Williams.
So again, I come back to one irrefutable fact. Two Head Coaches with solid credentials have kept Roy Williams on the field. He continues to go to the Pro Bowl, and while I could care less about that, the honest thing to do is ask why? Honesty hurts though, so few give it a try. The answer is really simple. As a FOOTBALL Player Roy Williams is very good. Meaning when looking at the entire spectrum of what a football player does.
Why do you think the supporters keep asking for someone to name a better alternative, and why no answer is ever given?
Once again, in coverage Roy has weaknesses. No doubt about it. But the idea that he is the weakest link on the Defense, or that it is all on him is ludicrous, and you saw evidence last week in how well the Defense actually played. He plays the run as good or better than any other Safety in the NFL. Some fool will now mention a single run here or there as evidence this isn't true. Name me one player who has never missed a tackle. I won't hold my breath while you frantically search for one if it's okay with you. Simply look at his tackle stats versus others who play the same position. They speak louder than anything I can say in his defense.
In other words the guy also has strengths to add to a Defense. Denying this is foolish, yet it continues to happen on a weekly basis.
So, back to your analysis. You do say "maybe" and I give you credit for that. You aren't definitively calling him THE problem. You do however bring up the possibility. That's fair. It's also fair to ask you why the 2 Head Coaches have wanted him on the field isn't it? Please tell me why football savvy men making millions of dollars want this. When a player IS "the problem" he gets 86ed. There's plenty of History to prove this.
So, why not Roy? Because he has supporters on this forum? I mean we're to the point of ridiculous that this has to be asked. Is it because guys like me and Adam defend him? I know it has nothing to do with me. As much faith and respect as I have in Adam I doubt he has that kind of Jedi powers over 2 football coaches.
So, what's the answer? Couldn't it just possibly be that he has skills that cannot be replicated by most others playing his position and this makes him VALUABLE to this Defense? Why was Akin Ayodele so outspoken this week about the Horse Collar? If Roy is such a liability, why does Akin want him on the field?
It's time for some honest answers. Why do I doubt we'll get them?
Again, the best argued thread on him as "the problem" on Defense that I have seen. As I said, "by far." As good as it is I still think it requires too much factual evidence to be ignored to reach that conclusion.
Look, I have never said Roy is great in coverage. He's not. However what is it going to take for some fans to realize that a Hall of Fame Coach in Bill Parcells, and a coach who has a team 12-2 both want this guy on the field? It's time for Roy's detractors (and I am not calling you one by any means) to try and figure that out. Because quite frankly I don't think most of them have any idea why.
They also seem to be denying that Roy's planned assignments have changed due to the lingering injuries to our starting CBs. The plan was to blitz Roy and play him closer to the LOS. Be honest, other than against the Eagles last week, have you seen much of it? How did the Defense do in that game? I think they finally showed up.
Why? The answer lies in the Zone coverages that we play. What is the purpose of a Zone? Simply put to keep coverage schemes in front of the defenders as much as possible and bring the defenders closer together so that the chance of one being close enough to make a play goes up.
Us old timers constantly talk about Zones being created to slow down Bob Hayes. Maybe, just maybe it's time to explain how. In Man Coverage the CB opposite Hayes had to give him a huge cushion. The reason was simple. If they didn't he would blow right past them. Double cover him with a 2nd defender deep? It didn't help because you still had to give him a cushion and respect his speed. Roy also returned kicks and punts in his career and had some success. That means that 11 potential tacklers were in between him and the endzone, not just 1 or 2 for double coverage.
How did the Zone help this? Because it didn't require any defender to play Hayes which was bound to have built in insecurities attached to it. All they had to do was defend a Zone and pay attention to Hayes when he came into that Zone. Otherwise he ran them all over the field and they couldn't keep up. No one could. Walt Garrison tells a story about Hayes being asked about a Giants CB covering him and was he worried. This CB was also a track star. Hayes said something like, "no, he only runs a 10 flat."
Now, let me ask this. When the PASS RUSH gets to the QB in 2 to 3 seconds how deep is the coverage in a Zone concentrated? What happens when it takes 4 to 5 seconds or longer? The answer is simple to anyone paying attention. As the WRs have more time to get open, they also do it deeper and deeper and spread the Zone coverage further and further apart opening bigger seams.
Ideally, the goal of a defense is to be tight enough to break up passes and deny completions. This is easier accomplished when the QB has to get rid of the ball quicker. Think about it. At the snap of the ball the Offense and Defense are in a very small, confined area. It is easier to play tighter coverage. As the Offense gets deeper, the coverage Zone gets bigger.
We rarely play man coverage. The detractors on this site seem to not be able to grasp that. One guy on this site was asked "do you account coverage assignments by the guy lined up across from the Receiver at the snap of the ball?" The fool said "yes." That's ridiculous. They think on every play the Defender should be locked in on one man and sticking to him like glue. That isn't what Zone coverage does. Each has their advantages. Each has disadvantages.
If playing Safety in the NFL was ONLY about coverage abilities I might think that the "Roy is a liability" crowd had a solid point. It isn't, and no amount of whining about him being the "Golden Child" of his supporters is going to change that. Make no mistake about it, those smart enough to know, realize that's just hyperbole tossed out by those who can't stand to be disagreed with and see it as persecution.
Perfection is expected. It isn't possible. Not against NFL caliber players. Fans here would have said Reggie White was no good as a pass rusher if they had only taken into account how he played against Erik Williams.
So again, I come back to one irrefutable fact. Two Head Coaches with solid credentials have kept Roy Williams on the field. He continues to go to the Pro Bowl, and while I could care less about that, the honest thing to do is ask why? Honesty hurts though, so few give it a try. The answer is really simple. As a FOOTBALL Player Roy Williams is very good. Meaning when looking at the entire spectrum of what a football player does.
Why do you think the supporters keep asking for someone to name a better alternative, and why no answer is ever given?
Once again, in coverage Roy has weaknesses. No doubt about it. But the idea that he is the weakest link on the Defense, or that it is all on him is ludicrous, and you saw evidence last week in how well the Defense actually played. He plays the run as good or better than any other Safety in the NFL. Some fool will now mention a single run here or there as evidence this isn't true. Name me one player who has never missed a tackle. I won't hold my breath while you frantically search for one if it's okay with you. Simply look at his tackle stats versus others who play the same position. They speak louder than anything I can say in his defense.
In other words the guy also has strengths to add to a Defense. Denying this is foolish, yet it continues to happen on a weekly basis.
So, back to your analysis. You do say "maybe" and I give you credit for that. You aren't definitively calling him THE problem. You do however bring up the possibility. That's fair. It's also fair to ask you why the 2 Head Coaches have wanted him on the field isn't it? Please tell me why football savvy men making millions of dollars want this. When a player IS "the problem" he gets 86ed. There's plenty of History to prove this.
So, why not Roy? Because he has supporters on this forum? I mean we're to the point of ridiculous that this has to be asked. Is it because guys like me and Adam defend him? I know it has nothing to do with me. As much faith and respect as I have in Adam I doubt he has that kind of Jedi powers over 2 football coaches.
So, what's the answer? Couldn't it just possibly be that he has skills that cannot be replicated by most others playing his position and this makes him VALUABLE to this Defense? Why was Akin Ayodele so outspoken this week about the Horse Collar? If Roy is such a liability, why does Akin want him on the field?
It's time for some honest answers. Why do I doubt we'll get them?
Again, the best argued thread on him as "the problem" on Defense that I have seen. As I said, "by far." As good as it is I still think it requires too much factual evidence to be ignored to reach that conclusion.