Video: Bradie James & Roy Williams

[theogt]

If he is to be viewed as any other player, then it should not be tabu to hold him to his play on the field. That, to me, is not representative of the top 33% but I suppose that is subjective. Either way, in the end, we two have different views and expectations of RLW. You do not consider where he was taken in the draft and I feel it is definatly associative. If I find an UFA and he becomes a solid Starting QB in the NFL, then I view that player as a major success for the club. If I spend a top 10 pick on a safety and he only ever becomes as effective as the 10th or 12th best safety in the league, then I don't feel as if he is a major success. I feel as if we failed to capitolize on a rare opportunity. That's just how I see it.

I can see that, and I certainly agree that it's fine to take that perspective when considering whether a pick was a success or not for the team. I'm not really worried about that, though. I'm more worried about whether or not our starters are any good or whether we can upgrade them. We can easily upgrade James, but I doubt we could upgrade Roy, even if we tried.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I can see that, and I certainly agree that it's fine to take that perspective when considering whether a pick was a success or not for the team. I'm not really worried about that, though. I'm more worried about whether or not our starters are any good or whether we can upgrade them. We can easily upgrade James, but I doubt we could upgrade Roy, even if we tried.

I don't agree. I definatly think Roy could be upgraded if we wanted to do that. Personally, I think there might be 2 or 3 safeties in this draft that might be upgrades but that's just me.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't agree. I definatly think Roy could be upgraded if we wanted to do that. Personally, I think there might be 2 or 3 safeties in this draft that might be upgrades but that's just me.

Alright then who would those players be? Nelson and Landry are very much so free safeties and who could we trade for that would be better than he because there are certainly no free agents.

Id love to see our red zone defense with Landry or Nelson trying to assume Roy's role.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

ABQ your going on anecdots and not veru good ones at that. There are only about 3 or 4 strong safties that you could replace with and have them perform better in coverage. That is what Theo is trying to explain to you.

Factor he is arguably the best SS when it comes to stopping the run and there is no question why he goes to the probowl every year.

When you look at the stats of the safties in terms of YPA and comp% Roy Willimas is very good for safties in general but excellent for strong safties in particular. You can say hes a liability all day long but thats just an anecdote and really doesnt mean much beyond an emotional appeal.

if you want to see a SS thats a liability against the pass go look at how Boulware played last year for Seattle.

When Roy Lee Williams starts playing the position of SS, you let me know and then we can discuss this further. As I stated earlier, Roy has not played SS since he was a rookie. That's because we play a cover2. There are no strong and free in the scheme.

 

[TEK2000]

Alright then who would those players be? Nelson and Landry are very much so free safeties and who could we trade for that would be better than he because there are certainly no free agents.

Id love to see our red zone defense with Landry or Nelson trying to assume Roy's role.

I want to know why we'd draft a safety to replace Roy when he is clearly the best safety on our team. I don't know... I guess its just me but I figure if we're gonna use our 1st round pick... it would be to replace our worst players rather than our Pro Bowlers.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Alright then who would those players be? Nelson and Landry are very much so free safeties and who could we trade for that would be better than he because there are certainly no free agents.

Id love to see our red zone defense with Landry or Nelson trying to assume Roy's role.

Your evaluation of Landry is incorrect. He can play either free or strong and I believe he will prove to be superior to Roy when all is said and done but no matter. The problem here is that from a historic perspective, our cover2 scheme requires a Safety to both play the run and the pass equally well. If you can't do both, then you can't be a very good Safety in that scheme IMO.

For the record, I'd love to see all our defensive sets with Landry or Nelson in them. Shocking, I know.

 

[TEK2000]

When Roy Lee Williams starts playing the position of SS, you let me know and then we can discuss this further. As I stated earlier, Roy has not played SS since he was a rookie. That's because we play a cover2. There are no strong and free in the scheme.

That will definitely change this coming season.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

That will definitely change this coming season.

I've heard that for almost 3 years now. I hope it's true but just the same, I'd rather just wait and see if that actually does come true.

 

[TEK2000]

I've heard that for almost 3 years now. I hope it's true but just the same, I'd rather just wait and see if that actually does come true.

I'm referring to the Cover 2 scheme. I don't see any way that Wade Phillips runs a Cover 2 almost all the time with the style of defense that he plays.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

When Roy Lee Williams starts playing the position of SS, you let me know and then we can discuss this further. As I stated earlier, Roy has not played SS since he was a rookie. That's because we play a cover2. There are no strong and free in the scheme.

We didnt always run a cover2 especially early in the season and in the red zone. When we were in those other coverages Roy was the strong. Also as a rookie Woodson retained his same strong safety position he always played.

And how you can make a comment like this and refuse to see how it was a schematic thing just shows your being stubborn.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I'm referring to the Cover 2 scheme. I don't see any way that Wade Phillips runs a Cover 2 almost all the time with the style of defense that he plays.

I hope this is true. I have been waiting for this since we drafted Roy. I really hope we can get to a point where he can do his thing because when he was doing that at OU, he was really something to watch.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

We didnt always run a cover2 especially early in the season and in the red zone. When we were in those other coverages Roy was the strong. Also as a rookie Woodson retained his same strong safety position he always played.

And how you can make a comment like this and refuse to see how it was a schematic thing just shows your being stubborn.

If you say so Fuzzy.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you say so Fuzzy.

So youre saying that Woodson was the free safety that first year or that it was Williams inability to cover and not the cover2 or that Williams can easily be replaced?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So youre saying that Woodson was the free safety that first year or that it was Williams inability to cover and not the cover2 or that Williams can easily be replaced?

I'm saying that when Woodson was here, Roy was allowed to do what Roy was allowed to free lance much more. I'm saying that Roy Williams is a bad fit for a Cover2. I'm saying that if we continue to play Cover2, yes, he can be replaced. I do not like Cover2. I never have since the days Pittsburg played it. I like the traditional Strong Free with lots of man principles. I really like bump and run with heavy pressure. Unfortunatly, what I like is rarely what I get.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm saying that when Woodson was here, Roy was allowed to do what Roy was allowed to free lance much more. I'm saying that Roy Williams is a bad fit for a Cover2. I'm saying that if we continue to play Cover2, yes, he can be replaced. I do not like Cover2. I never have since the days Pittsburg played it. I like the traditional Strong Free with lots of man principles. I really like bump and run with heavy pressure. Unfortunatly, what I like is rarely what I get.

kk then i guess that clear it up. you kind of threw me for a loop saying Williams could easily be replaced. Zimmer is gone and with him all dependency on cover2.

There is hope.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

kk then i guess that clear it up. you kind of threw me for a loop saying Williams could easily be replaced. Zimmer is gone and with him all dependency on cover2.

There is hope.

As I said before, I've been waiting, like the rest of the Cowboy nation, for more then just a few years now to see this happen. I hope it does but I'm not sold it will.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

As I said before, I've been waiting, like the rest of the Cowboy nation, for more then just a few years now to see this happen. I hope it does but I'm not sold it will.

Mike Zimmer is gone. He of the same blitz package and coverages for game after game ad nauseum. i guess its better to be pleasantly surprised than disappointed.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

i guess its better to be pleasantly surprised than disappointed.

That's no joke. I will say this though, the best Safety tandom I ever saw was the one Phillips coached in Denver with Dennis Smith and Steve Atwater (who I believe was the best safety I ever saw). I am hopeful.

 

[theogt]

That's no joke. I will say this though, the best Safety tandom I ever saw was the one Phillips coached in Denver with Dennis Smith and Steve Atwater (who I believe was the best safety I ever saw). I am hopeful.

If I recall correctly, Phillips said recently that Roy was better than both of those players.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If I recall correctly, Phillips said recently that Roy was better than both of those players.

I would expect him to say that however, I saw both those players play. That is a sentimant I would not share. At least, not at this point in RLW career.