Video: Bradie James & Roy Williams

[baj1dallas]

The problem with this assessment is that if it were a Cover 2, then Roy had no responsibility covering the deep middle at all. The fact that he was even in the vicinity just goes to show how instinctive he is.

A better coverage safety is supposed to allow us to play less Cover 2.

Regardless of "responsibility", Roy still had a shot at a clean tackle on the first clip....and whiffed.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Probably not the Browns. They've got Andra Davis at jack and Leon Williams at mike. Davis is a very good tackler and Leon has potential because of his has amazing size/speed/strength combination (6'3", 245, 4.54, 25 reps). Apparently he came on pretty well last year.

Maybe San Francisco or the Jets. The 49ers definitely need some ILBs. The Jets have Jonathan Vilma and Victor Hobson who are both very good linebackers, but they're undersized for the 3-4. They've also got Anthony Schlegel, who they just spent a 3rd on, but that was probably a huge reach. Being such a reach may mean that they think very highly of him, though.

The 49ers would probably be the best bet. THey're starving for linebackers.

I just thought of Crennel off the top of my head since he coached under Parcells. But the Jets are another good one. And we've made trades or reported near-trades with them a few times the last couple of years.

Maybe if they're looking for an ILB in the draft and they whiff, they might consider it?

 

[theogt]

Regardless of "responsibility", Roy still had a shot at a clean tackle on the first clip....and whiffed.

That's true, but that play wasn't a Cover 2, so I wasn't talking about it.

By the way, it looked like Roy was going for a play on the ball rather than the tackle. That caused him to miss on the tackle, but his goal wasn't to preventing a TD; rather, it was to prevent a catch altogether. It's a risk and he took it, but it's not like he simply went for the tackle and missed.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Roy Williams catches so much crap that he doesnt deserve it isnt even funny

No, he isnt good in coverage, but believe it or not, not every pass TD we give up is on him. Everyone around the league jsus assumes it was his man anytime our defense gives up a big play.

 

[DCBoysfan]

Roy NEEDS to make that tackle! but they went 4-wide so why did they have a single safety?????? that was a dumb defense to call or audible to

 

[TEK2000]

That's true, but that play wasn't a Cover 2, so I wasn't talking about it.

By the way, it looked like Roy was going for a play on the ball rather than the tackle. That caused him to miss on the tackle, but his goal wasn't to preventing a TD; rather, it was to prevent a catch altogether. It's a risk and he took it, but it's not like he simply went for the tackle and missed.

What... you mean Roy made a play for the ball instead of ONLY looking for the big hit? I thought that's all Roy does is look for the big hit... hmm.
(sarcasm not directed AT you theogt)

:laugh1:

 

[dboyz]

I agree that B. James is a problem in coverage.

The plays also are also good anecdotal evidence for the defense at the end of the year "losing it's mojo." I think that's the way Ware put it.

Roy looked kind of hesitant back there, almost like he didn't know what to expect. The X's and O's have been broken down very well by others. In a way, I'm not sure that was the biggest problem, although scheme and confidence are probably interrelated.

We just weren't playing with confidence. Roy is as good of an example as anyone. He could have made some of those players. It's like we were playing scared. As important as changing the scheme may be, I think as important will be Phillips ability to get the defense to play with swagger, to make plays instead of waiting for something bad to happen.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I know Bradie is board persona non grata these days and everyone wants to pile on (especially at the defense of Roy), but how in the world can you blame him for that first play? James is covering a 5'10" slot WR 25 yards down field. In the spirit of Occam's razor I'm trying to find the most likely scenerio ... a) Our MLB was asked to cover a 5'10" slot WR 30 yards downfield or b) our Pro Bowl safety, originally lined up 3 yards from where the catch was made, was supposed to break out of his backpedal quicker and make a play on the pass caught 5 feet front of him. I'm going to have to go with B. At the very least, Roy was supposed to make the tackle (instead of whiffing trying to make the hightlight reel hit).



As far as the problems in Cover 2, they were there. No denying that. But its not 100% Bradie's fault and not 100% Roy's fault .. its a combination of the two. There are always soft spots in the zone, that's the weakness of zones.. When you have slow linebackers COMBINED with slow safeties, it makes the soft spots that much bigger. I'll contend we weren't even in Cover 2 that much, but "Cover 2" has become some sort of rallying cry to defend Roy Williams' honor any time he made a poor play. "Its not fair to Roy, we were in Cover 2 !!!". We certainly weren't in Cover 2 on that first touchdown.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

I know Bradie is board persona non grata these days, but how in the world can you blame him for that first play? He's covering a 5'10" slot WR 25 yards down field. What MLB isn't going to look "awkward", "unfluid" or "unnatural" in that situation?

The next two plays were tight ends.

Roy is initially lined up about 3 yards away from where the pass is eventually completed, and he still doesn't have the range or footspeed to break out of his backpedal and break up the pass. He then couples that with a poor tackle (trying to make the knockout blow), and gives up an easy walk in touchdown.

Roy played it to the outside and the ball was thrown to the inside, which was available because Bradie was grossly burned.

They aren't in Cover 2 in that play.

The next two plays they are.

Its not 100% Bradie's fault and not 100% Roy's fault .. its a combination of the two. There are always soft spots in the zone, that's the weakness of zones.. When you have slow linebackers COMBINED with slow safeties, it makes the soft spots that much bigger.

Plus you could say it was partly the D-lines fault. Point is...Bradie and Roy HAVE to improve their game.

 

[InmanRoshi]

You mean like on this play? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvs9JNGiNaQ

The play where Roy had a free path untouched into the backfield to make a tackle behind the line of scrimmage, but got crumpled like a cheap soda pop can by Mack Strong?

Is this what we have to look forward to with Roy playing more in the box?

 

[InmanRoshi]

The next two plays were tight ends.



Roy played it to the outside and the ball was thrown to the inside, which was available because Bradie was grossly burned.



The next two plays they are.



Plus you could say it was partly the D-lines fault. Point is...Bradie and Roy HAVE to improve their game.

Oh okay, well then I agree with you. Aside from the fact that Bradie James was covering a slot WR in a non Cover 2 alignment , that play perfectly illustrated Bradie James' problems covering TE's in the cover 2.

 

[demdcowboys#1]

Bradie James gets beat sooooooooooooooooooo much, his game diminished so much since his breakout year in 05, when he led the team in tackles i believe and was all over the field!!!! Hopefully the Phillips 34 will help him!

 

[alicetooljam]

He's definetly not good in coverage and teams exploited that to score on us But 3rd and inches and he usually makes a play. The simple solution is take him off the field when running the cover 2...


Nice work on the video

Watch what you say now...granted its 4th and inches not 3rd.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvs9JNGiNaQ&NR=1

Admit it, Bradie SUCKS...

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Oh okay, well then I agree with you. Aside from the fact that Bradie James was covering a slot WR in a non Cover 2 alignment , that play perfectly illustrated Bradie James' problems covering TE's in the cover 2.

It will never be Roy's fault Rosh. It will never be so because too many wanted him so badly in the draft. For it to be on Roy, it would mean that too many have been wrong. It will never be on Roy.

 

[CF74]

Watch what you say now...granted its 4th and inches not 3rd.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvs9JNGiNaQ&NR=1

Admit it, Bradie SUCKS...

ok, he sucks

 

[theogt]

It will never be Roy's fault Rosh. It will never be so because too many wanted him so badly in the draft. For it to be on Roy, it would mean that too many have been wrong. It will never be on Roy.

What's the point of saying things like this? If you disagree with someone's assessment of a play, then point out your disagreement. I defend Roy a lot here, because I honestly believe what I'm saying. I rag on other players on the team because I honestly believe they're not very good. I just don't understand the point claiming that people will defend a player no matter what.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

What's the point of saying things like this? If you disagree with someone's assessment of a play, then point out your disagreement. I defend Roy a lot here, because I honestly believe what I'm saying. I rag on other players on the team because I honestly believe they're not very good. I just don't understand the point claiming that people will defend a player no matter what.

It's true. That is the point.

 

[theogt]

It's true. That is the point.

It's also true that people will always criticize Roy even if he doesn't deserve the criticism. That's true, but what's the point? It doesn't get us anywhere. Do you think he's worthy of the criticism? If so, why? If someone refutes your criticism, will you simply dismiss them as being a homer for Roy?

 

[DragonCowboy]

It will never be Roy's fault Rosh. It will never be so because too many wanted him so badly in the draft. For it to be on Roy, it would mean that too many have been wrong. It will never be on Roy.

There's got to be a balance. Half the people think that it's never his fault, and half the people think it's always his fault.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's also true that people will always criticize Roy even if he doesn't deserve the criticism. That's true, but what's the point? It doesn't get us anywhere. Do you think he's worthy of the criticism? If so, why? If someone refutes your criticism, will you simply dismiss them as being a homer for Roy?

No. I will dismiss it as a waste of time. This is not new ground for anybody who has been posting on this board for the last 3 or 4 years. However long it's been. Even this footage has been discussed previously over and over. Opinions will not be changed. It is a waste of time and effort to discuss it further. It will not change anything.