What do you guys make of Church?

TTexasTT

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,930
Reaction score
737
With the D playing so poorly its really hard to guage safety play. He seems to make many plays but with the rest of the players looking terrible it makes it hard to evaluate his play.
 

Jenky

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,671
Reaction score
4,252
He's playing poorly also. I think Wilcox is actually playing better.
 
Messages
18,222
Reaction score
28,531
Church is a pretty good tackler and is decent when he plays in the box.

But he is a liability in space. Doesn't have the range or speed to cover even average receivers. And is way too slow to play Monte Kiffen's system.
 

TheCoolFan

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,136
Reaction score
9,854
He's not the answer. But knowing Jerry and his history, he will crown him with a long-term contract because he loves these "diamond in the rough" players like Miles and Ratliff and it will continue to set us back.
 

perrykemp

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,503
Reaction score
9,274
Would have been a pro-bowl safety in the 80s or 90s. His type of safety is slowly becoming extinct in the NFL for all sorts of reasons.

It's too bad.
 

Plankton

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,258
Reaction score
18,650
Church is a good run support safety with decent instincts, but no range in coverage.

His ceiling in today's NFL is a special teams stalwart and nickel LB.
 

perrykemp

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,503
Reaction score
9,274
Elaborate on that, if you dont mind.

He plays the position tremendously physical. Big hitter, great tackling ability, etc.

Before it became essentially illegal to hit WRs hard and try to dislodge the ball, safeties like Church were celebrated.

The problem with that is today's rules are forcing the safety position into essentially something closer to CBs. The ability to cover is paramount and I just don't see Church being able to line up against top RBs, TEs, or even occasional slot WRs.
 

speedkilz88

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,951
Reaction score
23,099
I think he just has too much on his plate since he's the only "vet" they have. If they ever find a true FS I think he could be very solid.
 

TTexasTT

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,930
Reaction score
737
He plays the position tremendously physical. Big hitter, great tackling ability, etc.

Before it became essentially illegal to hit WRs hard and try to dislodge the ball, safeties like Church were celebrated.

The problem with that is today's rules are forcing the safety position into essentially something closer to CBs. The ability to cover is paramount and I just don't see Church being able to line up against top RBs, TEs, or even occasional slot WRs.

ahh... makes sense. Thanks.
Perhaps even guys like Atwater and Lott wouldnt have as much success these days either.

Ya know, I had hopes Dallas would take Ray Ray Armstrong as a undrafed FA but he was picked up by the Rams and immediately converted to LB. This also makes more sense now.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
84,017
Reaction score
76,722
I honestly feel its too hard to gauge him being he doesn't have a suitable safety next to him back there.......
 

Howboutdemcowboys31

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,091
Reaction score
9,455
With the D playing so poorly its really hard to guage safety play. He seems to make many plays but with the rest of the players looking terrible it makes it hard to evaluate his play.

Church to me is a good place to go and pray Garrett gets fired
 

TheFinisher

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,479
Reaction score
4,920
He's not the answer at safety despite how bad the team and some fans want him to be.
 

TTexasTT

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,930
Reaction score
737
Church to me is a good place to go and pray Garrett gets fired

touche'
Jokes on you though. Ive been sacrificing goats by the dozen to keep JG in his position.



He's not the answer at safety despite how bad the team and some fans want him to be.
I wouldnt say hes the answer either but hes pretty damn far down the list of problems at this point.
 
Top