Goober

greg oden?

QUOTE(Felix @ Jan 22, 2006 -> 09:14 PM) Yes, thats true. You do have your own opinion. But stating that you have a blatent hate for the Bears and all their players (which includes Benson by the way), voids your opinion on the matter in my book. Thats my opinion but then again, you like the bears so wouldn't you have a bias towards the bears?

This post has been edited by the Soxtalk staff to remove objectionable material. Soxtalk encourages a free discussion between its members, but does not allow personal attacks, threats, graphic sexual material, nudity, or any other materials judged offensive by the Administrators and Moderators. Thank you.

I am partial to Ko Simpson.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 01:38 PM) Yeah I'm definitely a homer to say the #2 seed in the conference has a shot at going to the super bowl. Stop talking. haha man you just don't learn. since this thread has been about irony. i'm definitely a homer to say that a 3-time pro bowler is actually good? i back up how a pro bowler does not suck and you back up how a playoff team is a osuper bowl contender. they are pretty similar, n? if you are gonna say stuff, at least be consistent.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 01:36 PM) Thanks now I won't have to watch the games. Remind me...what wins championships? here comes the bears homer to back up his team

i'll give a comparable example. WRs. they have 2 things they can do. they can catch the ball and they can block. because a WR is not that good in blocking, makes him not great? no, he is great because he is great at what his most important job is, catching the ball. strong safety is not great because he is below average in coverage? no, he is great because he is great at what his most important job is, stopping the run. while coverage for a strong safety is more important than blocking for a WR, it is not that big of a difference. blocking is extremely underrated. yes coverage would be nice, but you aren't gonna find players who do that in addition to run. SF1, your list is right, those would be the ones good in both areas. except for brown. good might be a stretch in coverage. he is average, below good. i am not saying he is not a good safety, he is. look, below average coverage skills is perfectly fine for a strong safety with excellent run skills. he is still a great strong safety. thats the truth. if he had terrible coverage skills, yeah he would not be great, too much of a risk for a big play. but below average cover skills does not stop a strong safety from being a great one.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:33 PM) Last I checked, even linebackers had to be decent in coverage. So why does Roy Williams not have to be? Because he broke TO's ankle? Oh k ok, find me all the strong safeties that are good in both coverage and run.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:33 PM) # 1 - Where does it say that a safety needs to be good against the run to be a great safety? Kwame Lassiter wasn't a great safety? # 2 - If this is the case, than being good against the pass as well is a bonus...thus, you are proving our point that Brown is better than Williams. You are making no sense. A safety's job is in the passing game 1st. No matter strong safety or free safety. LB's defend both run and pass. DE's are supposed to stop the run and ruch the QB. All this junk you're making up is useless. i edited my last post with the word Strong in front of safety. if you are not good against the run, you are not a good strong safety. i seriously hope you can agree with this ok here. we got two strong safeties. player A is better against run than player B. who would you take? player A now player B is better against pass than player A. who would you take in this case? player B again, for strong safety, pass is not as important as run. its all specialization. pass rushing DE's and OLB's. its the same for FS and SS.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:31 PM) Ugh. He would be good if the opposition ran the ball every f***ing play but they don't. He has to play in pass coverage just as much as he has to play against the run. cornerbacks are there too you know. it does not come down to the safety having to break up the pass every play.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:25 PM) Brown is good against the run. Brown is good against the pass. Williams is good against the run. Williams is not good against the pass. Tmar.....do the math. ok i said this earlier. williams is better against the run than brown. (which is the main part of the job) brown is better than williams against pass. it would even out, except factor in the main point of ss, and williams wins.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:23 PM) Look... Roy Williams is good against the run Roy Williams is not good against the pass How can you be a GREAT player when around half the time you are below average? if your job is to be good against the run first and foremost, you have fulfilled your job title. great strong safety.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:20 PM) None of this backs up your argument. haha duh, i said that. my argument was what qualifies a strong safety. you guys decided to pick on the fact that i called reed a strong safety. i proved he was for the first 11 games. i am responding to your arguments in that post.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:14 PM) True. Mediocre = average to a bit above average Roy Williams is below average. Something isn't adding up Tmar? ok mediocre is defined as "Moderate to inferior in quality". below average certainly fills those qualifications, no? if you want to be like that then fine. substitute mediocre to below average. i have never said anything other than roy williams is BELOW AVERAGE in coverage. they way i am seeing it is that you guys for some reason are trying to say i am saying differently?

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:08 PM) :headshake what? reed was not the point of my argument. i did not get the point of trying to use whether he is SS or FS against me, which is still disputed by the way. Demps was the teams FS starter for the first 11 games. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/303043/gamelogs/2005 he got injured, so Reed moved over to FS.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:07 PM) So a below average cover man can be a GREAT SS? if he plays the run great, yes. that is what a typical SS is. mediocre coverage, great run D. of course, every team wants one that has both skills, but those players are few and far between.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:05 PM) I did and all you said was that Roy Williams is average in coverage, which isn't true. i said below average.

ok so there are split opinions on what reed plays. doesn't even matter though, since i stated he was good against pass and run. that means he can play either FS or SS. haha way to try to find some way to make me seem wrong.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 03:57 PM) Yeah that can't go both ways or anything... So it ends up being you overrating him, while you complain about other underrating him. Funny. Look you are a Cowboy fan...everytime they are discussed you come in and back them, if Roy Williams was on the Bears you would bash him. ok, then every single argument can come down to people's opinion. why even bother then? coaches, players, and fans each count for 1/3 of the voting. for williams to make it, shows that players and coaches also voted for him. are you better at evaluating players than other players and coaches are? no, you are not. haha and if brown was on the cowboys, you'd bash him. dude come up with an argument rather than just calling homerism.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 03:50 PM) Let's compare Mr. Williams to Mr. Brown shall we? Both plays Strong Safety. Both are excellent against the run. Both are hard hitters. One can actually cover while one gets burned. Which is the better of the 2? The one who does not get burned. Therefore, Mr. Brown > Mr. Williams. That was my lesson. Is Brown as good as Williams against the run? not quite. He is a small notch below. Brown is maybe average to slightly above average in coverage. it evens out. consider then that run is more important, and you have your winner. Mr. Williams.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 03:49 PM) and Ed Reed isn't a SS NFL.com seems to think otherwise http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302218

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 03:48 PM) Obviously SS most importantly must be good against the run but that is no excuse to be pitiful in coverage. He would be good for an OLB, but he doesn't player there, he plays SS which (while run is more important) must be strong against both to be as good as you claim him to be. You cannot be a great SS when you blow nuts in pass coverage. pitiful? cause he got beat twice by speedy santana moss? you underrate is coverage. he was a free safety for the first 2 years of his career. he was satisfactory. earlier in this thread it was said that polamalu is good in coverage but just had lapses. is against washington not a lapse? besides that washington game, he has not been "pitiful", as you stated. ask him to cover a TE, and he will do satisfactory, ask him to cover moss, one of the fastest in the league, and you are asking for too much. he is no better and no worse than below average against the pass. so it ends up being you underrating him, while you complain about others overrating him. funny.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 03:47 PM) Thanks for the lesson Professor Football. no problem.

hey hey, way to be an anti-cowboys homer. works the same way :rolly you take out the words roy williams from my posts, and the same message is there. do you agree with what i said?

hahaha do you guys not know what a Strong Safety is and what his role is? Alright i will teach you guys. Strong Safety (abbreviated SS commonly) is more of a LBer, hence more valuable in stopping the run. Coverage skills would be nice, but doesn't make or break a strong safety. Few besides Ed Reed have both. If you are below average in coverage and excellent against the run, you are one damn fine STRONG safety. A free safety (often abbreviated FS) on the other hand is more of a coverage back, with run stopping a secondary talent. If you have below average coverage skills as a Free Safety (FS), you are not a good free safety. So when you guys try to evaluate safeties, keep in mind that there are two different safeties. It does not work if you compare them to a different position. You wouldn't say "Urlacher isn't good at catching TD passes" cause of course, he is not supposed to be, otherwise he would be a WR. Roy Williams is a strong safety, run is more important than pass. Check and Mate.