What would you do about Roy? Trade him?

[Stash]

It was just starting to fall off when you posted. Doh! Back up again.

On the plus side, it made my workday fly by!

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Did I say no one could guess right? No. I only state that they don't know, they are 'guessing', which gives them no more credibility than anyone on these boards. The fact that Dallas hasn't benched Roy but try to take advantage of his strengths and still put him in positions where he needs to cover only shows what they feel they have in the player.

If I'm reading you correctly, you're contending that Roy is a very good player because the organization has yet to bench him.

Correct?

If so, your opinion seems rooted in the premise that organizations seldom make mistakes regarding player personnel--a premise that seems overly idealistic, in my opinion. If personnel mistakes were rare, I doubt we would have suffered three consecutive 5 win seasons under Dave Campo.

I concede I lack the knowledge, experience, or expertise to evaluate the management decisions of a profootball organization (except on gameday when I'm screaming at my television ); however, I try to reach an opinion by weighing the analysis of various experts, both inside and outside the organization.

 

[firehawk350]

That's just not true. Those media analysts have access to GMs, personnel, players, trainers, coaches that a board member doesn't. Some, not all, also have the benefit of having played in the NFL before. Where as all the average board "expert" has is the game that is produced on TV and maybe a stat agency, like footballoutsiders.

That doesn't mean we should take their opinion as the gospel truth, but we shouldn't just dismiss an analyst's (one without a record of being biased in that subject) opinion.

 

[BigDFan5]

Has any of us ever "studied in Roy's specific scheme or position?"

Doubtful.

It seems that we criticize the opinions of these analysis for lacking direct experience with Roy Williams' assignments and responsibilities, yet none of us has that experience and we're perfectly comfortable drawing our own conclusions.

We are givng uninformed opinions on a message board, we are not passing our uninformed opinion off as fact to a national audience

 

[ScipioCowboy]

We are givng uninformed opinions on a message board, we are not passing our uninformed opinion off as fact to a national audience

So that absolves us from your "one mistake and out" rule?

 

[AdamJT13]

And yet the still scored two touchdowns against him?

Or none, if you think we actually have competent coverage schemes.

Sorry, but I don't see it that way.

Roy had a zone to cover firstly, no matter what else happened.

And who was the first receiver in his zone?

He vacated that zone because of what Watson did in front of him which allowed Moss to open up behind him.

If he had let Watson go, Newman would have covered him.

You're assuming two things -- one, that Roy knows what patterns both players are running before they run them. And two, that Watson would have kept running into Newman's zone if Roy wasn't covering him.

At the instant Watson turns around in front of Roy, Moss is running toward the back of the end zone. HOW can Roy know whether Watson is going to go outside or stay right there in his zone? How can Roy know whether Moss is going to keep going inside behind him or cut back to the corner? The coverage scheme has to account for ALL possibilities before they happen. You can't simply look at what did happen and reconstruct what the coverage could have been.

As I've said numerous times, if Roy is responsible for a curl or a hook at the goal line and a post at the back of the end zone, the coverage scheme is seriously flawed. And if he's supposed to know what routes each receiver is going to run before they run them, then we need superhuman players with clairvoyance.

 

[Hostile]

And yet the still scored two touchdowns against him?






Sorry, but I don't see it that way.

Roy had a zone to cover firstly, no matter what else happened.

He vacated that zone because of what Watson did in front of him which allowed Moss to open up behind him.

If he had let Watson go, Newman would have covered him.

That was the design of the coverage.

The Patriots schemed to attack the player that they felt would have the hardest time adjusting to the play.

And they were right.

And for the record, I don't agree with playing zone so close to the endzone.

The only way I could show you that Adam is 100% right would be to actually take you down on the Field and physically show you. But he is right.

 

[Hostile]

On the plus side, it made my workday fly by!

Mine too and it has been fun not frustrating.

 

[Hostile]

Or none, if you think we actually have competent coverage schemes.




And who was the first receiver in his zone?




You're assuming two things -- one, that Roy knows what patterns both players are running before they run them. And two, that Watson would have kept running into Newman's zone if Roy wasn't covering him.

At the instant Watson turns around in front of Roy, Moss is running toward the back of the end zone. HOW can Roy know whether Watson is going to go outside or stay right there in his zone? How can Roy know whether Moss is going to keep going inside behind him or cut back to the corner? The coverage scheme has to account for ALL possibilities before they happen. You can't simply look at what did happen and reconstruct what the coverage could have been.

As I've said numerous times, if Roy is responsible for a curl or a hook at the goal line and a post at the back of the end zone, the coverage scheme is seriously flawed. And if he's supposed to know what routes each receiver is going to run before they run them, then we need superhuman players with clairvoyance.

Can we get 4 of them right away?

Please.

 

[Rampage]

The only way I could show you that Adam is 100% right would be to actually take you down on the Field and physically show you. But he is right.

i thought once roy stuck with watson newman was supposed to cover moss?

 

[FCBarca]

Roy Williams, overrated...Love to see him get traded.

 

[dallasfaniac]

If I'm reading you correctly, you're contending that Roy is a very good player because the organization has yet to bench him.

Correct?

If so, your opinion seems rooted in the premise that organizations seldom make mistakes regarding player personnel--a premise that seems overly idealistic, in my opinion. If personnel mistakes were rare, I doubt we would have suffered three consecutive 5 win seasons under Dave Campo.

I concede I lack the knowledge, experience, or expertise to evaluate the management decisions of a profootball organization (except on gameday when I'm screaming at my television ); however, I try to reach an opinion by weighing the analysis of various experts, both inside and outside the organization.

What I am saying is that no one outside of the orginization has a Cowboy's playbook, therefore everything we say is conjecture. I am also saying that the organization continues to put Roy in coverage, even though the media outlets say the blown coverage responsibilities were on Roy. I am also saying that Wade himself said in a press conference that the media do not know what they are talking about; that they do not know coverage responsibilities. And finally, I am saying that if Roy is such a liability in coverage as the media suggests, then that is on the coaches for putting him in that position not on Roy himself.

You wouldn't ask Bledsoe to spread the defense and then run for the first like you would with Young, so why would the defensive staff put Roy in coverage if he is to blame for giving up all the big plays like the media claims. The only argument left is that the media don't know the coverage responsibilities and MAYBE Roy is credited with much more blame than is reality.

 

[TRUTH87]

o.m.f.g....yeah lets trade em ..n put Davis out there. if we're talking insanity, why not put Watkins back there.

 

[Hostile]

Roy Williams, overrated...Love to see him get traded.

I could never take anyone serious who has a soccer avatar.

Has nothing to do with the nonsensical stance in this case. Purely the av.

 

[koolaid]

can stanback play safety?

seriously guys, we are 5-1
if our safety's sucked as bad as everyone seems to think then how could we have held the bills and rams to a combined 3 points before the pats game? cmon we lost to the best team since the salary cap came along, get a grip

 

[Hostile]

can stanback play safety?

seriously guys, we are 5-1
if our safety's sucked as bad as everyone seems to think then how could we have held the bills and rams to a combined 3 points before the pats game? cmon we lost to the best team since the salary cap came along, get a grip

I said the other day to put Barber at Safety. Just let him hit someone and fire these guys up.

 

[DTK]

WOW! I can't believe how long this thread is. We're playing better than we have in a decade and people are ready to get rid of one of our better players.

It's time for everyone to realize what Roy is: a strong safety. He's great in run support and does a good job in coverage on plays that are in front of him. Plays that are behind him give him fits. But then again, how many safeties don't struggle with plays behind them? Roy is not a CB. To expect him to cover like one is idiotic.

As for the 2 TD's up for debate. The one with Moss, I don't know what happened. It looked to me like at least 2 guys messed up, not just one. The one that most assuredely was in the wrong position was Hamlin. You have Moss and Watson on your right, Welker and Stallworth on the left. At the 6 yard line, in which direction would you lean? If it's me, I'd think about Moss and Watson. Welker and Stallworth are not red zone targets. Now whether or not Newman and Roy were in man or zone, I'll never know unless Wade announces it at a press conference. Any way you spin it, Hamlin should have been in the neighborhood.

As for Kyle Brady's TD. The pats had their goal line package in with 3 TE's in an offset I I believe. To me it looked as if Newman or Burnett were to have Brady. If not, what was Newman doing? He just stood there. And who were the other backers covering? I don't think Roy blew that assignment. Like Adam and others have stated before, why would Roy be assigned to a TE lined up on the far side of the formation?

Just my .02. Roy is not Ronnie Lott. But I'll take him on our team anyday. Besides, what other options do we have?

 

[Haley94]

My beef with Roy isn't that he is a liability in coverage based on his physical attributes, it's that he hasn't developed the "football smarts" I would expect him to have at this stage in his career.

Physical limitation can be made up for by playing sound technique, being in good position based on the coverage, and most of all, hard mental work in the film room.

It is my impression that he is mentally lazy at times and seems to guess 'wrong" a lot. However, i'm glad he talked to the media after the game. He must face the music in order to get better. Not making the pro bowl this year will probably force the issue even more.

 

[CNY Cowboy]

As I said in the other dumb post;



I think we should trade Williams and Romo, and start rebuilding after that humbling loss To the Pats.

















Man You guys are killing me.

Best start in years and I have to read this crap.:bang2:

 

[Everlastingxxx]

Best start in years and I have to read this crap.:bang2:

Hey this crap is on #31

/lock thread