What do you guys make of Church?

[perrykemp]

I honestly feel its too hard to gauge him being he doesn't have a suitable safety next to him back there.......

The pass defense in on pace to be the worst in NFL history. The team has 24 sacks which is middle of the road -- not terrible. I just don't feel like the kind of play we are seeing can be excused.

IMHO, the entire back 7 is responsible for the poor coverage and no-one escapes blame -- even Sean Lee who struggled mightily in the beginning of the season.

In the end, I think Church is part of the problem and not part of the solution. I hope I am wrong on that, but I just don't see Church being a difference maker against the passing game.

 

[dcstands4]

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.

I was onna make this post and ask about Durant too. But the first half of the season he was playn good and leading all safeties in forced fumbles. I think as a whole this defense has declined. Not solely Church's fault

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

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.

Chuch is strickly CFL material, if that.
He's up and down. Ever time he make a good play it is highlighted by his past poor play.
Inconsistent, just like his teammates.

Chuch is the type of player we half been happy to half in the past. And that's too bad.

 

[Rogerthat12]

We need to draft another S this year!

 

[CowboyStar88]

Church is a good player. I think he is getting a bad rap by some of the fans here. He's made a lot of plays and is a very good tackler and he diagnoses plays very fast. He does lack some top end speed, but I think a bigger problem with Church is he plays so fast that he takes bad angles. Personally the pass defense has to be on the LBrs and the lack of depth they are getting and it's exposing the seams just like in preseason. He is going to be a solid safety for years to come and he's been the best we've had in a long time

 

[DallasDW00ds0n]

Making many plays? Dude this defense isnt making ANY plays... Church is slow, a bruiser, but if you have been watching games like the rest of us, you'd notice 42 is a tick behind every WR/TE hes on.

 

[Picksix]

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.

I think he can be like a Kam Chancellor, who's primarily a box safety and big hitter type. They both have 40's in 4.6-4.7 range. Problem is, we need an Earl Thomas to go along with him, so he can stay in the box, and not have to play deep. I think that's the reasoning behind drafting Johnson and Wilcox, and picking up Allen, but since they can't stay healthy (or just aren't good enough), we end up putting Church back there, with mixed results.

Personally, I think he can be a great box safety, but we need to have others around him like the Seahawks do, or move to more of a 4-2-5 system like the Giants have used.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The pass defense in on pace to be the worst in NFL history. The team has 24 sacks which is middle of the road -- not terrible. I just don't feel like the kind of play we are seeing can be excused.

IMHO, the entire back 7 is responsible for the poor coverage and no-one escapes blame -- even Sean Lee who struggled mightily in the beginning of the season.

In the end, I think Church is part of the problem and not part of the solution. I hope I am wrong on that, but I just don't see Church being a difference maker against the passing game.

I don't disagree. Its hard to say anything good about this secondary. But while we shouldn't give them any excuses, I do think we need to look back at last season and ask ourselves was the secondary this bad? Scandrick is probably the only guy playing better this year than he did last year but you could argue he's playing just as well as he did last year. At some point you do have to ask yourself is your coaches putting their players in the best position to succeed. IF you feel they are then some of these guys do need to be replaced. Which is a shame because we just gave Carr and Church long-term deals and we still have Claiborne for awhile on his rookie deal.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

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.

He's part of the problem, not the solution.

He generally tackles well and people mistake that for good play.

I see him screw up quite often in his assignments. If we're lucky, usually Lee bails him out or the opposing team doesn't see it. If we're not, he kills us.

It's been a couple of weeks since I watched All-22. But, I saw a few plays against the Vikings where I'm pretty much 100% positive that he was supposed to take a player. He would then get fooled and go the wrong direction. Lee would kinda drift off towards Church's responsibility, kinda waiting for Church to pick his guy up. Ponder just couldn't find him because he sucks as well.

To me, this defense is probably Free Safety friendly, but it really needs a SS to make it work. It asks a lot from the Strong Safety because they have to play in the box and deep. They have to help out in deep coverage along with play some man-to-man, even against WR's. That's why this defense worked for years, it had John Lynch. Fortunately, Kiffin was pretty good at finding safeties that fit his system when Lynch left. But, it was never quite the same. Still very good, but not dominating like it was around 2002.

Skill wise I don't think he's a major issue. He doesn't have great cover skills, but he has range which is most important in zone coverage and he tackles well which is also crucial in zone coverage. He just incorporates bad technique because he gets fooled quite often. I think that's why they stick with Church, thinking that he will eventually get it. I have my doubts. In many ways, his not knowing where to go is very Tony Dixon-ish.




YR

 

[reddyuta]

the lack of pass rush has made it really difficult to evaluate our DBs.

 

[NumOneQB]

Liability in pass defense, like most of the players on this team from the 2nd level up (LBers & DBs). He can play the run but safeties that can play the run are like off guards in the NBA. They're a dime a dozen.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think he can be like a Kam Chancellor, who's primarily a box safety and big hitter type. They both have 40's in 4.6-4.7 range. Problem is, we need an Earl Thomas to go along with him, so he can stay in the box, and not have to play deep. I think that's the reasoning behind drafting Johnson and Wilcox, and picking up Allen, but since they can't stay healthy (or just aren't good enough), we end up putting Church back there, with mixed results.

Personally, I think he can be a great box safety, but we need to have others around him like the Seahawks do, or move to more of a 4-2-5 system like the Giants have used.

He would probably be a decent fit for them, and the scheme they run. However, in order to do the same here, we can't really run the Tampa 2. We would also have to find a way to generate the kind of pressure Seattle does. To many square pegs for the round holes this defense has IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

He's part of the problem, not the solution.

He generally tackles well and people mistake that for good play.

I see him screw up quite often in his assignments. If we're lucky, usually Lee bails him out or the opposing team doesn't see it. If we're not, he kills us.

It's been a couple of weeks since I watched All-22. But, I saw a few plays against the Vikings where I'm pretty much 100% positive that he was supposed to take a player. He would then get fooled and go the wrong direction. Lee would kinda drift off towards Church's responsibility, kinda waiting for Church to pick his guy up. Ponder just couldn't find him because he sucks as well.

To me, this defense is probably Free Safety friendly, but it really needs a SS to make it work. It asks a lot from the Strong Safety because they have to play in the box and deep. They have to help out in deep coverage along with play some man-to-man, even against WR's. That's why this defense worked for years, it had John Lynch. Fortunately, Kiffin was pretty good at finding safeties that fit his system when Lynch left. But, it was never quite the same. Still very good, but not dominating like it was around 2002.

Skill wise I don't think he's a major issue. He doesn't have great cover skills, but he has range which is most important in zone coverage and he tackles well which is also crucial in zone coverage. He just incorporates bad technique because he gets fooled quite often. I think that's why they stick with Church, thinking that he will eventually get it. I have my doubts. In many ways, his not knowing where to go is very Tony Dixon-ish.




YR

Tampa2 really is a scheme that makes stars of the Safeties. Both really need to be exceptional IMO because they are asked to do so much. Teams really draft for Safeties in this scheme and not really CBs for a reason, historically.

Good capture of exactly what is wrong with our secondary IMO Rich.

 

[ChooChoo73]

I can't tell. The unit is playing so bad it's hard to see what he brings. Sean Lee manages to stick out mostly in a positive way even in a bad defense. I would say that Church has not distinguished himself and appears to be deficient when he is in space with a receiver but most safeties are. Gut says we need a better pass rush and then Church will be considered a decent safety. I think most safeties would look like crap on our team.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Tampa2 really is a scheme that makes stars of the Safeties. Both really need to be exceptional IMO because they are asked to do so much. Teams really draft for Safeties in this scheme and not really CBs for a reason, historically.

Good capture of exactly what is wrong with our secondary IMO Rich.

Monte Kiffin has shown that Free Safety isn't a problem for him. Look at his Tampa teams. They had Robinson, he wanted too much money and they let him go. They had Jackson...wanted too much money and let him go. And they stunk when they went elsewhere to teams with virtually similar schemes.

So I tend to think that his scheme is suited to help the free safety quite bit. I think Wilcox has talent, but it was quite remarkable how well he played for being a safety for only his 2nd year and transitioning to the NFL. I tend to think it's more scheme.

So I don't think you need to be exception in Kiffin's scheme at FS. Lynch wasn't without his coverage weaknesses either. But, he knew where to be and he was great in the box.

As far as my perception of Church, I started to keep a closer eye on it once Sturm pointed out that the pass to Gates that Sean Lee 'gave up' was likely Church's man and Lee tried to take Gates when Church missed his assignment. Ever since then I've kept a close eye on it and Church has a real problem with it.

Scandrick can be a problem as well. He tends to gamble a bit more than he should. If he could stay a bit more disciplined he'd be having an incredible season.





YR

 

[Roadtrip635]

He's a liability in pass coverage, does not have adequate instincts playing in space. He gets caught looking into the backfield too often, doesn't position himself well to defend passes and reflexes are slow in coverage. He is better in run support, but he has whiffed his share of tackles. I noticed he doesn't always position himself well at times and prone to taking poor angles. Honestly, he's a back up safety at best, a stop gap until we can draft/sign a better one.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Monte Kiffin has shown that Free Safety isn't a problem for him. Look at his Tampa teams. They had Robinson, he wanted too much money and they let him go. They had Jackson...wanted too much money and let him go. And they stunk when they went elsewhere to teams with virtually similar schemes.

So I tend to think that his scheme is suited to help the free safety quite bit. I think Wilcox has talent, but it was quite remarkable how well he played for being a safety for only his 2nd year and transitioning to the NFL. I tend to think it's more scheme.

So I don't think you need to be exception in Kiffin's scheme at FS. Lynch wasn't without his coverage weaknesses either. But, he knew where to be and he was great in the box.

As far as my perception of Church, I started to keep a closer eye on it once Sturm pointed out that the pass to Gates that Sean Lee 'gave up' was likely Church's man and Lee tried to take Gates when Church missed his assignment. Ever since then I've kept a close eye on it and Church has a real problem with it.

Scandrick can be a problem as well. He tends to gamble a bit more than he should. If he could stay a bit more disciplined he'd be having an incredible season.





YR

I think you do need to have certain abilities at FS in this scheme. I think you must have very good speed, I think you must be able to turn and run very, very well and I think you must be able to locate and play the ball if you want to create TOs. I think your FS must have all of those things for this scheme in order to really make it work.

I think Church is in the wrong scheme.

 

[AKATheRake]

If you look at his stats he's having a top 5 season at the position.

If you look at his play during the games he looks like the rest of this defense and team for that matter.

Not making winning plays.....

 

[jobberone]

Ask me when we have decent pressure and LB play which means Ware, Hatcher, and X and Y are healthy as well as Lee, Durant and whomever assuming Carter is still in a flunk. Until then it's difficult to watch the DBs unless you know a lot and can sit and watch the film.

 

[Picksix]

He would probably be a decent fit for them, and the scheme they run. However, in order to do the same here, we can't really run the Tampa 2. We would also have to find a way to generate the kind of pressure Seattle does. To many square pegs for the round holes this defense has IMO.

From what I can see, and what I hear, which granted can be suspect, we're not really running the pure Tampa 2. Monte is using more man coverage principles. I also remember him saying after he was hired, that he wanted his players to start watching film of the Seahawks, I presume with the intent of playing more their style of defense. Not sure if that's what's actually happening, but that's what I gather.