What would you do about Roy? Trade him?

[StanleySpadowski]

These type of threads continue to amaze me.

Anyone who thinks that Williams isn't one of the better safeties in the game has the brains that God gave a turnip.

Why subject yourself to such utter stupidity? If they don't know their rectum from a hole in the ground on this issue, why would anyone care about their opinion on any other issue? Use the "ignore" feature and this is a much more enjoyable forum.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Been following this thread with some curiosity and just wondered if you really think Roy Willams is a better overall safety than Bob Sanders.

Not trying to troll, just wondering how you feel Roy Williams is a better SS then Sanders.

You didn't ask me, but yep I do feel Roy is better than Bob Sanders.

Bob Sanders is a great energizer for the Colts, but he's not a better SS, even when he's healthy. Good player, tho. Definitely good for Indy.

 

[LatinMind]

I don't think he's coming up with excuses; I think the point he is making is only the Dallas Cowboy's staff know who's responsibility is who's on any given play and no matter how much tape Tom Jackson or any other person not employed by Jerry Jones breaks down, it doesn't mean a hill of beans.

well i think these guys who study film and analyze film know a little something how a zone is played. tom jackson might not have played DB, but he is a football player. seems that fans only question analysts when they have something bad to say about their favorite teams players.

if tom jackson were to say roy is the best Ss in the league, the majority would be praising him for doing so.

 

[iceberg]

You're right.

I have this sick need to see Roy Williams repeatedly beaten in coverage, costing my favorite team wins. and if he's not beaten, i'll find some journalist that says he is because this is what i need to see to make me a happy beavis.

I'm twisted that way.

But apparently I can warp reality to make that happen.

Now I need to obsess about the lottery........

there, fixed it for you.

 

[WoodysGirl]

These type of threads continue to amaze me.

Anyone who thinks that Williams isn't one of the better safeties in the game has the brains that God gave a turnip.

Why subject yourself to such utter stupidity? If they don't know their rectum from a hole in the ground on this issue, why would anyone care about their opinion on any other issue? Use the "ignore" feature and this is a much more enjoyable forum.

On slow news days, these types of threads keep the juices flowing.

 

[Vtwin]

1. they don't like the player for "x" reason.
2. they find article after article to support that view of why the player sucks.
3. they dismiss all other bits of news that can show otherwise.

it's *not* having an open mind about things because you have some "need" to see a player in a particular light.

It would be a big mistake to lump everyone who doesn't think RW is all that into this category. We're not all that shallow.I can't believe there are that many people who WANT to see a player fail, especially a high draft pick big money player.

 

[Stash]

you asked how he could run a curl at the back of the endzone.

he told you.

you still did not answer.

dude, it must suck to be you. i'd play in traffic a lot if i were you.

Luckily for both of us, you're not me then.

Save the sympathy, you've brought absolutely jack to this conversation while others have at least tried to make their points.

Maybe you should go play and let the grownups talk?

 

[zrinkill]

Been following this thread with some curiosity and just wondered if you really think Roy Willams is a better overall safety than Bob Sanders.

Not trying to troll, just wondering how you feel Roy Williams is a better SS then Sanders.

You didn't ask me, but yep I do feel Roy is better than Bob Sanders.

Bob Sanders is a great energizer for the Colts, but he's not a better SS, even when he's healthy. Good player, tho. Definitely good for Indy.

Glad you quoted him since I missed this post ....

the answer to you "funguy" is yes ....... Roy is better than Sanders ..... and gets beat less.

His "fans" just do not attack his every mistake and ignore his every play.

In all fairness I think your safety is better than him as well .... your guys problem is he has never figured out he is not faster than most everyone else like he was in college.

 

[AdamJT13]

I've answered your questions.

No, you did not. You answered one, to which I posed a follow-up question (since when you answered it correctly, you should have realized the problem with the supposed coverage scheme). And you asked stupid questions in response to the other three questions.

If the Cowboys had a strong safety who could cover would they have won that game?

No, because it wasn't the strong safety who was getting beaten on the vast majority of plays. If he's responsible for allowing more than one catch in the game (the 28-yarder to Watson), then we have completely inept coverage schemes.

 

[Vintage]

Been following this thread with some curiosity and just wondered if you really think Roy Willams is a better overall safety than Bob Sanders.

Not trying to troll, just wondering how you feel Roy Williams is a better SS then Sanders.

Sanders is a perfect fit for Indi's cover 2.

 

[Stash]

Wrong. Neither of them has said that, and Belichick had Brady throw in Roy's direction only a few times in the entire game. And never mind that on both of the touchdowns when you're blaming Roy, he had someone covered on the play. You're just assuming that Roy was covering the wrong guy, which you don't know.

Not wrong.

Nobody has to 'say' anything!

Because newsflash! Talking accomplishes nothing - good or bad.

What good would it do any Dallas coach to admit Williams' shortcomings?

What good would it do Belichick or anyone else?

Actions speak louder than words.

And the fact that the guy is a constant target of opposing offenses tells us more than their words ever could.

You answer my question, who exactly was Roy covering on those two plays?

That's right, the same guy someone else was already covering.

 

[Vtwin]

I have no clue ..... but a few of you tend to do it all the time .....

See Edunce, bbgun, Gimmie, stash, Kangaroo.


And I have never denied my agenda to point it out.

Have you ever thought that maybe there is no agenda and that posters are just saying what they feel?If someone offered me a tofu sandwich I would say no thanks, I don't like tofu.That doesn't mean I have an agenda to discredit tofu. If someone challenged my assertion that I did not like tofu I would argue against them but only because they challenged me.I have a live and let live realtionship with tofu.Same thing with posters on internet discussion boards who don't agree with me.No agenda and it doesn't bother me if you like tofu.Live and let live.

 

[iceberg]

It would be a big mistake to lump everyone who doesn't think RW is all that into this category. We're not all that shallow.I can't believe there are that many people who WANT to see a player fail, especially a high draft pick big money player.

ok, you're backing up a tad, so will i.

i don't think people *want* to see him or anyone fail. i *do* think that some people buy into the media hype about a player and then get this "yea, i see that!" mentality going on and develop some hate for the guy because they feel he can't play.

now, instead of talking to adamjt about why roy may or may not be a good safety, he's hellbent on saying he sucks regardless of what adam or anyone else puts out there. he's asked me time and again but if he doesn't get adams message, he damn sure won't get mine. i learned long ago when someone develops a hate that deep they also develop whatever vision is necessary to make it always that way.

maybe stash-momma is right and adam-i know all the rules is wrong. it's possible, sure. but i see adam asking a specific coverage question and what does beavis do? asks how that pattern can be run and never answers it.

those who won't answer honestly have the most to lose in this type of a discussion.

it would be a world difference in reactions *if* stash baby would come out and say "you know adam, you may have a point...help me understand this part of coverage and why tom would say this yet you point to that"?

then i see an open mind trying to get to the bottom of something still. but instead agenda driven people think they are at the the bottom of it all and only the signs that prove it are relevant and all else are just wrong or stupid.

so i look at *how* people argue in as much as what they argue about or say.

stash is a mule with a hatred for roy. his "agenda" will be to continue to whine about it till i suppose jerry jones hears it and realizes a fan has the great tom jackson to reference so we must get rid of roy. THEN he'd be happy because he's "right" and events bore it out.

but if events are bearing out he's wrong, the argument just gets more absurd.

 

[superpunk]

Roy hasn't been the same since he turned his life over to...




















RAPTOR JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[iceberg]

Luckily for both of us, you're not me then.

Save the sympathy, you've brought absolutely jack to this conversation while others have at least tried to make their points.

Maybe you should go play and let the grownups talk?

dude, you can't handle the simple logic adam is throwing at you. and based on your "style" anything i'd say you'd dismiss out of your own need to see it your own way.

i grew tired of "adults" like you long ago. you want evidence not to understand, but to refute.

this "child" doesn't have time for such childish games. but being in on the convo is kinda fun.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Allow me to preface my comments with this: I've defended Roy Williams tirelessly over the years. On another board, I was in constant debate with another poster who despised Roy Williams. He actually became so agitated with me that he started making terrible comments about my wife.

But I never wavered in my support of Roy and never reciprocated his attacks. I just accepted Roy as a player who excelled in run support but was average in coverage.

However, after last season and the beginning of this season, I'm less certain about my position, and I'm forced to wonder about Roy, "At what point do we call a spade a spade?"

I know what my eyes see on Sundays. They see a player beaten repeatedly in coverage. Of course, my observations are less than meaningless. I don't understand coverages; I can't recognize their idiosyncrasies. And even if I could, I don't have access to game film. What do I know?

However, week in and week out, different analysts--former players normally--go about breaking down game film and telling me just how poor, how much of a liability, Williams is in coverage. For instance, last Week on the NFL Network, Sterling Sharpe explained how teams scheme to put Roy in coverage, hoping to exploit his weaknesses. Should I simply dismiss them as agenda-driven Cowboy haters, or people who are blinded by the negative press surrounding Roy Williams?

Perhaps I should dismiss them, but what do I do about Mickey Spagnola--the biggest Cowboy apologist ever--who spent the offseason castigating Roy for his coverage woes, stating he needed to make substantial improvements.

Please understand I have no agenda against Roy. I want him to succeed. Although I'm a Longhorn fan, I was ecstatic when the Cowboys selected him on draft day. But my confidence in him is wavering.

And before you chide me too harshly, ask yourself this: What if Roy Williams was a Commander or an Eagle? What would you say then?

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Roy hasn't been the same since he turned his life over to...




















RAPTOR JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You should not make fun of this.......his play yea, but not this ....sorry!:bang2:

 

[AdamJT13]

Not wrong.

Nobody has to 'say' anything!

And they haven't, which makes it impossible for you to claim to know what they think.

And the fact that the guy is a constant target of opposing offenses tells us more than their words ever could.

How many times did the Patriots target Roy on their 46 pass attempts? How many times did the Dolphins, Bears, Rams and Bills target Roy? I guarantee you, Roy wasn't a "constant target" in any of those games.

You answer my question, who exactly was Roy covering on those two plays?

That's right, the same guy someone else was already covering.

Nobody else was already covering Watson. And on Brady's TD, Roy was covering the only receiver lined up on his side of the field.

 

[bbgun]

Roy hasn't been the same since he turned his life over to...



RAPTOR JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks a lot. I just had a seizure.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Roy hasn't been the same since he turned his life over to...



RAPTOR JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I gave mine over to the Burger King!