Mike Lombardi on Roy Williams

[Sarge]

He's at his best in deep pass coverage...

He's at his best at the breakfast table.

 

[junk]

There have been quiet rumblings about Roy's work ethic for years.

Does anyone else find it odd that he's lost significant weight in the offseason for the last two years? As soon as the season ends, does he just sit on the couch eating McDonalds for a month straight?

 

[junk]

He's at his best at the breakfast table.

Perhaps I should have stated that differently. If he is going to be on the field in coverage on a passing down, he seems better in the deep portion of the field than up near the line.

 

[Sarge]

Perhaps I should have stated that differently. If he is going to be on the field in coverage on a passing down, he seems better in the deep portion of the field than up near the line.

.........

 

[Seven]

That is why the Cowboys send him on blitzes all the time.


Where have I been?

 

[DallasEast]

That is why the Cowboys send him on blitzes all the time.


Where have I been?

You've lost your memory. I'll fill you in.

You're a professional football player. During one of Roy's gazillion blitzes last season, Roy hit you so hard that it put you in a coma. Thank goodness you're finally awake. You wouldn't believe the bashing Roy gets over his blitzing.



WOO HOO! 7,000 posts, baby! Only 46,583 more posts and I'll catch Hos! :beatit:

Waitasec. Even if I created one post per second, it would still take me nearly 13 hours to catch him. wth???

 

[Idgit]

I'm confused. Can we clarify whether or not cutting Roy now is prohibitive for our cap? I've seen Adam say that the idea that cutting him is prohibitively expensive is a myth. Now Inman says it's not.

Because the answer says something about what the team felt about keeping Roy vs. a less expensive option like, say, Keith Davis (or pick your street FA). Or an option like Watkins/Hamlin (safeties who can play on 3 levels). Assuming we kept him when we could have afforded to let him go, that says something to me about the estimation of our scouting staff v. the opinion on Lombardi's weblog.

 

[theogt]

I'm confused. Can we clarify whether or not cutting Roy now is prohibitive for our cap? I've seen Adam say that the idea that cutting him is prohibitively expensive is a myth. Now Inman says it's not.

Because the answer says something about what the team felt about keeping Roy vs. a less expensive option like, say, Keith Davis (or pick your street FA). Or an option like Watkins/Hamlin (safeties who can play on 3 levels). Assuming we kept him when we could have afforded to let him go, that says something to me about the estimation of our scouting staff v. the opinion on Lombardi's weblog.

It was NOT cost prohibitive to cut him this year. It could have saved nearly $4.5 million on the cap this year.

 

[firehawk350]

I'm confused. Can we clarify whether or not cutting Roy now is prohibitive for our cap? I've seen Adam say that the idea that cutting him is prohibitively expensive is a myth. Now Inman says it's not.

Because the answer says something about what the team felt about keeping Roy vs. a less expensive option like, say, Keith Davis (or pick your street FA). Or an option like Watkins/Hamlin (safeties who can play on 3 levels). Assuming we kept him when we could have afforded to let him go, that says something to me about the estimation of our scouting staff v. the opinion on Lombardi's weblog.

The deal with cutting him is the June 1st exemption. Basically, if you cut him after June 1st, or use an exemption for cutting him that works on the salary cap like a June 1st cut, you can distribute somewhere around 67% of his dead cap to the 09 cap with the other 33% on the 08 cap. So, you can do it but you'll carry around $4m in dead cap on the 09 salary cap.

 

[Aliencowboy]

I don't feel that his evaluation of where Roy is limited to playing is correct. In fact, I feel that the "second level" is where Roy's game gets exposed the most. Because he does not have good change of direction, if he anticipates wrong, he will get beat badly. Because he is still a tremendous athlete, no matter what people say, he can still make the tackle even when he gets beat like that.

Where Roy excels is in that third level. Where he can roam and use his anticipation to his advantage. Why we elected to use him at that second level in passing situations is beyond me - I think it's a poor fit.

You wonder where the big hits went - he wasn't put in a position to make them, truly. I guess we wanted him there because his presence at the second level instantly improves our run support against spread formations. I really believe, and of course it's just speculation, that if we had played Hamlin at strong and Roy at free, you would have seen identical results. Because what Roy does is track the ball well in the air - not cover short routes that require quick hips and excellent anticipation if you even want to have a prayer of stopping them.

If we keep him down there, we'll continue to see good run defense, I have no doubt of that. But if we do that, I think we can forget about the big hits and interceptions returning. There just aren't that many opportunities to make those plays from the position he's playing. So I would really question just how much of Roy Williams Mr. Lombardi has watched, and broken down. Because if you do watch him, I can't see how you could possibly come to the same conclusion as Mr. Lombardi - unless you're operating under the misguided assumption that Wade plays Roy in the nickel LB role to "protect/hide him".

It's so sad to listen to these Roy sympathizers try to rationalize his failures.

You can't go back and use Roy like we did in the past because OC game plan to attack Roy's weakness and keep him from being able to hang out at level 2 without coverage responsibilities.

FS and SS are interchangeable now. You need to have it all. If Roy has a good year in 2008, it's because he's not 6' 225 but 6' 205 and improved his coverage skills. Trust me, Roy will not have to worry about horse collaring anyone because he'll tackle the guy at the waist instead of being 3 steps behind.

This article dead on.

Your analysis is bogus and your responses are condescending. Let it go. Roy has been awful the last two years. Let it go- like hopefully Dallas will after June 1.

 

[iceberg]

It's so sad to listen to these Roy sympathizers try to rationalize his failures.

You can't go back and use Roy like we did in the past because OC game plan to attack Roy's weakness and keep him from being able to hang out at level 2 without coverage responsibilities.

FS and SS are interchangeable now. You need to have it all. If Roy has a good year in 2008, it's because he's not 6' 225 but 6' 205 and improved his coverage skills. Trust me, Roy will not have to worry about horse collaring anyone because he'll tackle the guy at the waist instead of being 3 steps behind.

This article dead on.

Your analysis is bogus and your responses are condescending. Let it go. Roy has been awful the last two years. Let it go- like hopefully Dallas will after June 1.

june 1 doesn't matter, so let it go.
he's still here, so let the whining go.
jones feels he's good enough to keep, let the whining go

it's not sympathy for roy as much as ourselves and a constant pummelling of this topic.

 

[Taz]

The best thing Roy williams can do is to injury a player or multiple players... Then it is a trade off of how many times you want to send a play roys way... when he hit hard chance of player injured versus play meant less plays his way..

really the best way to fix roys liability is to make teams afraid to go towards roy..

 

[Aliencowboy]

june 1 doesn't matter, so let it go.
he's still here, so let the whining go.
jones feels he's good enough to keep, let the whining go

it's not sympathy for roy as much as ourselves and a constant pummelling of this topic.

You don't squat about what the team will do after June 1st.

If a player is getting paid like Roy and the comments he does and plays like he has, I don't have to "let it go".

There's no whining here.

The article is new and brought some new information to an on going issue.
People are discussing it.

Sympathy for yourselves? Are you kidding?
Take the panties off and put them back in your sister's draw.

Go read a Jenkins is doing well in OTAs if you want optimism.
Go back to your comic book if reality is besieging you.

 

[iceberg]

You don't squat about what the team will do after June 1st.

If a player is getting paid like Roy and the comments he does and plays like he has, I don't have to "let it go".

There's no whining here.

The article is new and brought some new information to an on going issue.
People are discussing it.

Sympathy for yourselves? Are you kidding?
Take the panties off and put them back in your sister's draw.

Go read a Jenkins is doing well in OTAs if you want optimism.
Go back to your comic book if reality is besieging you.

no, you're right. you can keep it and let it eat you up and STILL can't change the fact he's here.

if it's your ultimate right to post about it, fine. i've got the same right to go "son of a bisquet eater, again?"

 

[jobberone]

The deal with cutting him is the June 1st exemption. Basically, if you cut him after June 1st, or use an exemption for cutting him that works on the salary cap like a June 1st cut, you can distribute somewhere around 67% of his dead cap to the 09 cap with the other 33% on the 08 cap. So, you can do it but you'll carry around $4m in dead cap on the 09 salary cap.

You don't have to wait until June 1st to qualify a player as a Jun1 cut. You can qualify them as a Jun 1 cut beforehand and release the player while absorbing an acceleration of bonuses as if they were cut after Jun1. I don't know the dates for this but I think you could do it right now.

It's so sad to listen to these Roy sympathizers try to rationalize his failures.

You can't go back and use Roy like we did in the past because OC game plan to attack Roy's weakness and keep him from being able to hang out at level 2 without coverage responsibilities.

FS and SS are interchangeable now. You need to have it all. If Roy has a good year in 2008, it's because he's not 6' 225 but 6' 205 and improved his coverage skills. Trust me, Roy will not have to worry about horse collaring anyone because he'll tackle the guy at the waist instead of being 3 steps behind.

This article dead on.

Your analysis is bogus and your responses are condescending. Let it go. Roy has been awful the last two years. Let it go- like hopefully Dallas will after June 1.

Well, the article is not dead on. Saying we blitzed Roy all the time to keep him out of level three is totally incorrect. We seldom blitzed RW last year. I will say I don't think Roy is blitzing as effectively as he used to. But I'm one who thinks his level of play has dropped off significantly all around.

But where I think some people are getting upset is the Roy sucks stuff, we need to cut him, he can't cover, teams are going after him all the time.

When you start using always and never you are setting yourself up as it is rarely true.

In fact RW is playing because no one on the team can beat him out. And they have gotten enough playing time to push him. No one does in all around play. I'm not entirely certain what that means beyond he plays better than Keith Davis and Watkins. But it does say that. So when people say we could have kept Keith Davis and cut RW, you are losing credibility.

The problem with RW is he has not gotten significantly better. He has gotten significantly worse. That's a problem. And he is doing things to aggravate fans and other players. Sure Ellis says some dumb things. But there was truth in what he said. His teammates are wondering what is going on with him. Why. Because they see the problem and it APPEARS they don't know if he is doing all he should do; in the least they wonder if he is distancing himself. Do I actually know that. Not for certain. But it APPEARS there is some llevel of truth in what he said.

And players who are on top of their game don't change their jersey number. That says reams. Sure you can write it off. But I think you're burying your head in the sand if you do.

So Roy does not suck, there isn't anyone here to take his place, and he needs to improve. There is not a lot to argue about with that statement. If you're fair.

 

[peplaw06]

And players who are on top of their game don't change their jersey number. That says reams. Sure you can write it off. But I think you're burying your head in the sand if you do.

There's a certain NBA MVP who changed his number from 8 to 24 who would disagree with you. There goes that always and never thing.... pesky little bugger.

 

[Hoofbite]

There's a certain NBA MVP who changed his number from 8 to 24 who would disagree with you. There goes that always and never thing.... pesky little bugger.

He said it as if players who suck frequently change their number out of the desire to do so.

Simple fact is nobody is really notoriously known for changing their number. Players just do it for whatever reason.

Sean Taylor changed his number. Granted at the time he wasn't playing as well as he was in his last season but he changed it.

In fact, I'd bet the list of good players changing numbers is greater than the list of bad players changing numbers. In fact, it has to be cause who in the hell remembers a bad player?

 

[jobberone]

There's a certain NBA MVP who changed his number from 8 to 24 who would disagree with you. There goes that always and never thing.... pesky little bugger.

Where do you see me saying that players never change their jersey number? It has happened in the NFL before this. And not because someone on their new team has it or they want to be a different person. Can't remember who or when but I'd bet a fair amt of money it happened.

RW is changing his jersey number, rededicating himself, yada yada. It's not because he's the best safety in the league he's going about things differently (allegedly).

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Anybody who says Roy Williams is not the guy that is targeted when throwing the ball on the Cowboys is foolish.

OCs scheme to get this guy in pass coverage.

Lots of Safeties are targeted on Sundays.

 

[Aliencowboy]

In fact RW is playing because no one on the team can beat him out. And they have gotten enough playing time to push him. No one does in all around play.

So Roy does not suck, there isn't anyone here to take his place, and he needs to improve. There is not a lot to argue about with that statement. If you're fair.[/QUOTE]


I'll be fair

I didnt use words like "never" or "always" and I didn't see it in the article, but I agree we surely didn't blitz him every down. I think we did more in the beginning of the season, but it was fruitless and they did it less and less.

If Parcells wanted to bench him and Jones won out that argument and Dallas was taking him out or re-positioning at WLB last year, that would mean somebody was playing his (SS) position better than he could.

Parcells got overruled. Watkins played his position in obvious passing situations, so that would mean he's better, no?

To ignore the fact of Roy signed a huge extension recently and Jones desire to see him recover or at least have that opportunity to play is a bit naive. Jones is slowly conceding that Roy is costing the team plays, and the contract is looking like a mistake. He has the year (I imagine) to prove he's worth the money. I think by week two someone else will be starting next to Hamilton.

Is that fair?