Thomas Davis at SS

agreed. It seemed clear to me that the team wanted him to match up on the TE and improve the run D, considering the trend toward blitzing more than the initial 'blueprint' and our inability to stop the TE. I don't see him being matched on Vick, I see him being every Sunday's answer to us being ripped by the TE on 3rd down. By Flajole's words, I'm obviously not alone.

 

No problem, HC. As for Branch, I didn't chart every play the way KC did, but he had Branch and Minter with tight/good coverage about the same percentage of the time at all levels (Branch had a higher percentage than Minter at medium depth). So that suggests that he wasn't giving cushion much more often than Minter. Instead I think it can be attributed either to the fact that Minter is slower than Branch (which he is), or the nature of his coverage assignments. I don't know what those 4 TDs were on without going over the DVDs, but I seem to recall Minter trailing tight ends with regularity.

And yeah, I do believe that Minter is both limited in coverage and that he can be tricked into moving up. That may be the source of the two blown coverages, as Branch didn't bite on fakes or double moves the way Minter did. As for the CBs, yeah, they were pretty bad. Manning was god-awful, and Gamble was almost there. Gamble did pretty well on the deep stuff, where he could use his athleticism, but he did give a ton of cushion and seemed very slow to react on short and medium routes. That will change as he gets experience and gains confidence (I hope so anyway), but they were both pretty serious liabilities in 2004. They were the main reason we couldn't get off the field on third downs.


Regarding Branch's switch, Davis was apparently going to win a competition with Minter or Branch at SS. It was just a matter of deciding which player we wanted to use at FS, and when they extended Minter, the team made its choice. While Branch wasn't bad, I think they felt better about Davis beating out a guy who has started only one season than one of the team's leaders.

 

Que? I think you're smoking some funny business if you think Flajole ever said that Davis would be fine playing SLB. By all means, correct me if I'm wrong and point out any quote where he said Davis would be fine at SLB, but I haven't seen any such thing. In fact, I'm pretty sure from just having re-read the quote that Flajole said that Davis would be considered only for a limited role at linebacker on third downs, and that he would be a good match-up for tight ends. If you'll care to notice, that is exactly what I said Davis would be good at doing, either in nickel or as a strong safety.

I didn't say that they wouldn't take a look at Gardner. I said that it wasn't a need, because most teams don't have an abundance of starting-caliber options (note that Washington is as thin as anyone in the league at WR and yet released Rod). In fact, I said that I'd like to see Gardner but that I didn't believe we'd get the chance since other teams would offer him more money. We got around that by trading for him. But sure, I'll grant you that giving up a 6th is some indication of a "need," although I'd at least note that we held out for quite a while as Was's demands came down, which indicates that it wasn't the "let's panic" need you were making it out to be.

It isn't SLB either, but for the record, joker positions for teams around the league are almost universally filled by players who man WLB in base defense.

Yeah, I did. And you were wrong about Davis fitting at SLB, just as you were wrong about him fitting at FS. I'd love to know where you got this notion that opinions can't be wrong. You certainly blast anyone who voices an opinion you think is ridiculous, but simply can't take it when I do that to you.

No, Fox was either misleading the media (which we all know he has done on more than one occasion), or oversimplifying the issue (also a habit of his). Fox knows that the SS responsibilities aren't exactly the same as the FS responsibilities, just as you do. Absolutely no person on earth could look at a tape of our games and come to any other conclusion. But I do like the fact that you keep spinning this as me saying I know more than Fox, when Ide already pointed out that Fox did not mean that the safeties are exactly the same. What he meant, as per his clarification, is that a FS occasionally has to assume SS responsibilities, and vice versa. That is obviously true, and is the case for every team in the league. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure that you saying Fox and Richt were wrong to compare Davis with Derrick Brooks won't be so easily resolved with a clarification.

Ok, explain why Minter didn't stay at SS with Davis taking over at FS. I'd love to see you attempt an explanation on that. We're all waiting with baited breath.

 

So nobody saw me? Pity. If anyone ever wants to play a pick-up football game, though, I'm up for that.

 

You're right - you've come to quibble over tremendously minor points, odd for how much of a slam dunk you paint this (and everything else). The quote pertaining to the TEs speaks differently than to where he'll be used for the moment, but sure. If you want to look at it your way, and I look at it mine, then we're where we were. With me speaking of potential and possibility, and you looking to be right.




>>which indicates that it wasn't the "let's panic" need you were making it out to be.

I never indicated any panic. I said we needed another guy who could start. And we got said guy.

this position isn't a joker spot. Obviously, since it doesn't involve WW coming off the field. It wasn't in Capers' D, either.

Ooh, bold. That makes it true, and stuff. Even though we're a couple days into his pro career and all. And that it's opinion.

>>or oversimplifying the issue

You're probably overcomplicating it, actually. Obviously, they're not exactly the same. "The same" does not equal interchangeable. Just as a favorable comparison doesn't equal a set of limiting negatives.

 

Neither of us is ever going to be convinced by the other on this issue. Everyone else knows where we stand and they can decide for themselves.

 

but if that was the case and KC was right about Branch being better than Minter, why wouldn't you leave Branch at FS to duke it out with Minter, and let Davis duke it out with the newbies?

 

um, ya do realize you're quoting a girl to support your position
















only teasing linda

 

anyone? why does it make more sense to have Minter at FS and Davis at SS rather than the other way around?

 

Is he as handsome in person?