View Full Version : Watson- why it's unfair to single him out
Judge
10-01-2002, 07:35 AM
Think back- how many of the penalties called on Watson have you thought were really ticky-tack marginal calls? I think at least 1 in each of the last 2 games was a bogus penalty.
On top of that- Watson is our #3 CB, and yet he's been forced into covering the #1 WR on the opposing team on a seemingly regular basis for at least the past 3 games. Considering he's gone up against Moss, Rod Smith, and Booker regularly, he has hung in there.
And he made a HUGE pass defense in OT Sunday- to lead to the WIN!
Stop singling out Watson as a scape goat.
Cntrygal
10-01-2002, 07:40 AM
The voice of reason. Good post Judge! :up:
LtBillsFan66
10-01-2002, 07:40 AM
The problem is is that the other teams are singling him out, and having success doing so.
I think he us putting up a gutsy effort. I think the lack of a decent pass rush needs to share the blame.
Judge
10-01-2002, 07:46 AM
Originally posted by BillsFanOne
I think the lack of a decent pass rush needs to share the blame.
Excellent point-
w/o a decent pass rush, pass coverage can break down and even a crummy QB like Jim Miller can have the time to find someone breaking open.
Patrick76777
10-01-2002, 08:01 AM
Nice post Judge.....of course..........
Personally, I think it's to be expected. Teams are avoiding our top two corners. I think it says a lot for Clements and Winfield.....Teams are afraid to throw against them.
mchurchfie
10-01-2002, 08:28 AM
Good points. I also think that the defensive scheme of having him play off the receiver 10-12 yds instead of bump-n-run has a lot to do with it and is stupid. Even a journeyman like Miller can complete a quick 7 yd pass before Watson has a chance to get to him and that is exactly what he was doing.
casdhf
10-01-2002, 10:02 AM
http://www.limpleg.com/bears24.jpg
I'll get off Watson's back when I start seeing him toe-to-toe w/ the WRs he's covering istead of 2-5 yards, or more, behind them. He often lets his guy go even when the ball isn't thrown his man's way. I don't think he gets too much criticism at all.
It's one thing when you go up against the better WRs and struggle some, it's completely another when you're constantly getting schooled by them, turned around, burned deep, or otherwise simply outplayed and overmatched.
Besides, in zones that's what happens. You often get stuck w/ the better WRs. The bottom line, whether you want to make excuses or not, is that Watson is the weak link in our nickel backs. I would quite honestly rather see one of our Ss in there instead. Sure Bostic is not great, but he's young and we didn't trade a 4th round pick for him.
I would really prefer Irvin w/ all of his faults. I'm guessing that Watson won't be around next season. We should be able to get a couple of decent CBs this offseason. The jury's still out w/ Bostic, he may improve. But Watson, for a 4th year guy playing the way he is, I'm not holdin' out hope. He's so sloppy in his coverage that it's a travesty.
You must remember that the primary reason we traded Denver for Watson was his punt and kick returning. That didn't pan out. So why are we hanging onto him as a CB? Doesn't make sense to me since he's not good.
Kelly The Dog
10-01-2002, 10:29 AM
That is so far off, wys. Watson had obviously played two sub-par games and must play better but if these are sub-par, I will take it. He hasn't given up a lot of yards. He has ZERO long plays against him. For all the crap he took about the Broncos game, against one of the very best receivers in the game, Rod Smith, Watson gave up 6 catches for 65 yards and almost everyone here, even the notorius complainers, noted that one of his two penalties was a crock (I guess, of course, because it still allowed them to complain). For all his "he needs to be cut" play against the Bears, the Bears managed a total of 188 yards passing as a team. And 240 total yards including an overtime possession. Yes, Watson needs to step up, yes he is giving up too many first downs, but he has yet to give up a long play, and I can't even remember a TD that he has against him.
Furthermore, Watson was a completely raw cornerback coming out of college. The draftniks were all impressed with his size and speed and raw talent and he was the classic "project" CB. He wasn't known for only being a return man whatsoever. And the only reason the Broncos let him go was they had several good cornerbacks as well as a new return man they wanted to give the ball to. Watson also played well as a CB two years ago and last year for the Bills, even as a starter on a crappy defense.
Funny you say that Kelly. For every single game this season, and you can even ask Jaded as she sat w/ me for one of the games, I've pointed out specifically how Watson's played and how even on plays where the ball doesn't come his way he's way behind his man.
So no, I'm not way off base. Watch the games and take particular note of where Watson is on most passing plays and count how many times he gets beat and also count the number of penalties that he has in a given game and what those penalties cost us.
He had a nice illegal contact which was unnecessary had he been able to cover, to turn a 3rd and 5 or 6 from the Bears own 25 or so, into a first down which resulted in a total change of field-position against us as the Bears drove another 30 or 40 to put us deep.
If he could cover, or chuck legally at the LoS, then he wouldn't have cost us that change in FP.
BTW, if you think I'm off base, then why is the entire sports media, particularly those that cover the Bills also recognizing the same thing??
I'll wager you anything that in 2 more weeks the heat is gonna be so deep that it'll be painfully clear to everyone exactly how inept he is as CBs go. I really don't know what your watching to defend Watson as anything other than well below average.
As to the long plays against him, I cannot count the times when his guy is 5-10 down the field past him whether the ball comes his way or not. The man simply can't cover. Watch this week v. the Raiders. You'll see. He was actually burned very deep this past week. I think Winfield got the rap in the zone, but it was clear that the CB on the WR was Watson primarily. In any event, Watson was more positioned to make the play than Winfield.
Wasn't Watson on the coverage, and behind Terrell, on one of the two alleged TDs?
He had least 7 passes for 50 yards against him, the Bears, a weak passing team on Sunday. That's almost a third of the total passing yards for Chicago. Also, who was supposed to be covering Booker on that 33 yd. pass he caught. I don't remember exactly, but if I'm not mistaken, Watson was supposed to be there. He also had a key illegal contact penalty on 3rd and 5 to give the Bears a 1st and keep their drive alive when the D was playing well and going to hold them.
V. Denver he was again, the weak link:
6 passes for 65 yards, one v. Lelie and 1 P.I. penalty that gave the Broncos a first down. That penalty was b/c he can't cover and had to commit it.
In any case, for a P/T cover guy, that's not good! And again, that's almost a third of the total passing yards that Denver had!
Meanwhile, does he have any INTs? No! Sacks? No! Is he great on run D, no! He's one of the weakest tacklers on the team. Just watch him.
What about past? 1 INT his entire career. 0 sacks.
Whatever...
Earthquake Enyart
10-01-2002, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
So no, I'm not way off base.
BTW, if you think I'm off base, then why is the entire sports media, particularly those that cover the Bills also recognizing the same thing??
Whatever...
Geez, wys. Just cause you were wrong about Drew and RJ doesn't mean you have to get so defensive.:angry:
LABillsFan
10-01-2002, 11:20 AM
See Weakest link part I and II. I won't accept the rationalizing that he is the 3rd Corner and is not expected to play all that well, or as far as 3rd Corners he's not bad. The only thing he can cover is his head under the sheets this week because he is going to get S M O K E D against the Raiders. Gray has to come up with the scheme of all schemes to protect Watson. Watson is going to develope twitches after this game. It wouldn't suprise me if he gets 10 speeding tickets this week because he is afraid of a car getting passed him. Some say the Bills need a better push from the DL. While the DL could get a better push, I seem to remember Griese being knocked down, hurried and sacked on manyoccasions , yet Watson still got BronKO'd in his coverage. Don't buy it, don't sell me it, don't leave it on my door step, don't fertilize my lawn with it. He is the Weakest link, Good bye.
EE,
Until I pass this kidney stone, I'm "itchy." LOL
LA,
You heretic you!!! ;)
It will be painfully clear to all Bills fans whose attention it may have slipped that Watson is clearly the one player who needs to as soon as possible after playing the Raiders and the Phins. Houston, well, they have no air game, so if Watson proves that v. them, then he's worth cutting on the plane ride home...
:D
Kelly The Dog
10-01-2002, 11:29 AM
The 33 yard play was the guy that REPLACED Watson, Jason Bostic, the next in line in case you want Watson benched. How can you badmouth a guy for NOT getting beat by saying that receivers are open against him but dont get the ball and dont make the catch. He simply has NOT given up one long play. I may be wrong but I think it was Prioleau who was on Terrell on that TD, someone here could probably substantiate that either way. You're complaining that a guy who is playing the worst of all our CBs gave up 65 and 50 yards? I will, and I guarantee you, every single coach in league history would take two consecutive games that your worst CB performance was giving up 50 and 65 yards. He is also a sure tackler, as evidenced by him always tackling the guy catching the 6 yard pass in front of him. He is our weakest link and he is not playing well but he is NOT weak and he is NOT getting killed. He's just getting nitpicked on.
Earthquake Enyart
10-01-2002, 11:30 AM
The keen blowout AND a kidney stone?
That explains it. I passed a gall stone once and I thought I was gonna die.
lordofgun
10-01-2002, 11:33 AM
I don't understand why they continualy put watson on the #1 receivers. I don't care what the defensive scheme is. Our best CBs need to be covering their best WRs.
If the coaches can't figure that out, something's wrong.
MissBuffalo
10-01-2002, 11:49 AM
I agree lordofgun!!!! He should not be matched up against their #1's. I can't even count how many times I yelled during the Denver game when he was matched up against Smith.
What ever happend to the CB we drafted from Vegas?? Wasn't it Kevin Thomas?? I remember Gray talking all this great stuff about him. Did they practice squad him???
Creemoredrinker
10-01-2002, 12:43 PM
His job description keeps changing with the Bills. Watson was brought here as a Punt/Kickoff Returner. Then Wade changed it to Punt Catcher. Now is the first off the bench in the nickel or dime.
Furthermore, we played some zone on Sunday, but NOT much. He is matched up against their best receiver with very little help from our safeties.
I do NOT have faith in CW as a Returner, but I think he will come around as a DB.:earpoke:
Herdwatcher
10-01-2002, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Judge
Think back- how many of the penalties called on Watson have you thought were really ticky-tack marginal calls? I think at least 1 in each of the last 2 games was a bogus penalty.
On top of that- Watson is our #3 CB, and yet he's been forced into covering the #1 WR on the opposing team on a seemingly regular basis for at least the past 3 games. Considering he's gone up against Moss, Rod Smith, and Booker regularly, he has hung in there.
And he made a HUGE pass defense in OT Sunday- to lead to the WIN!
Stop singling out Watson as a scape goat.
Great points! If anything he is learning under heavy fire. might make a much better CB in the end.
Judge
10-01-2002, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
You must remember that the primary reason we traded Denver for Watson was his punt and kick returning. That didn't pan out. So why are we hanging onto him as a CB? Doesn't make sense to me since he's not good.
Did you watch the OT play he made to stop the Bears drive?
Watson has matured into a credible cornerback for this team.
Earthquake Enyart
10-01-2002, 01:28 PM
That pic shows the problem. He spends too much time with that idiot special teams coach.
Fat Tony
10-01-2002, 01:48 PM
I hear a million yells for replacing Watson but not a single suggestion with whom. Kevin Thomas obviously could not even beat out Bostic, who left his jockstrap all over the field on that one play.
Give me a name of a guy out there ......
Judge
10-02-2002, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by Fat Tony
I hear a million yells for replacing Watson but not a single suggestion with whom. Kevin Thomas obviously could not even beat out Bostic, who left his jockstrap all over the field on that one play.
Give me a name of a guy out there ......
Great point!
If Wys and company are so smart, explain who is available or on the team who is BETTER than Watson?
This sounds alot like how people mercilessly picked on Ken Irvin. In reality, he was a solid DB. It wasn't his fault that Thomas Smith and Jeff Burris played so well, and opponents DID go after him to stay away from Smith and Burris. Irvin got burned occasionally, as all DB's do. But he also made alot of good plays and was more than serviceable.
Just like Watson.
I don't hear Wys banging the drum to replace Antoine Winfield, who was lit up as much as Watson in the Denver game.
Bottom line: Wys is wrong again. Watson is a solid DB, and is proving his worth. He actually is holding his own out there.
I'll take detailed notes on Sunday's game and post them following. Tape the game so that you can all review it.
I agree LOG, and that's part of the problem here.
Also, once again, the logical deduction experts, :D, seem to once again associate my comments w/ the notion that I think Bostic is some great CB. Sorry fellas, never said that. He's not that great either. But at least he hasn't played for 4 seasons and sucked bigtime last year here too.
Again, for those that either can't or don't like to read, it should have, like much else, have been addressed in the offseason. But still, I find it difficult to believe that there isn't a better CB available on waivers.
As to the nonsense that he's not getting help from the safeties, that shouldn't matter in 1-on-1 man coverage. Watson SUCKS at man-to-man! Period.
Again, I have to tape the game on Sunday and watch it after to write the review, but I will provide detailed analysis on how well Watson plays along w/ the time in the game. I'll do it based on what I see on replays whether he gets the ball thrown his way or not. He shouldn't be excused, as he is, for being 8 yards behind his man simply b/c the opposing QB doesn't throw his way or otherwise see that his man is wide open.
He's a liability. The coaches are simply talking him up b/c they have no other options and it doesn't behoove them to talk him down. I'm sure they're trying to be encouraging realizing the depth issue at CB that we have.
As to solutions, instead of Bostic, as many of you seem to feel that at some point I've said Bostic should make the probowl, I simply feel that perhaps our b/u Ss might be better at man-to-man! It would be tough for me to imagine them being much worse. Watson over the past two games has allowed approximately 30% of ALL the passing yards against us. He doesn't even start for cryin' out loud! He comes in on nickel packages. If that doesn't say it all I really don't know what does. If we had two Watson's then any average receivers would become all-stars when they played us.
He'll be quite tested this week if GW really believes that he's our best and only option right behind Winfield and Clements. I'll wager that even the announcers make a point of pointing it out this week.
We'll see...
lordofgun
10-02-2002, 10:52 AM
I put the Blame on Grey and GW WAY before I put it on Watson. It's obvious he isn't a top corner. So why is he playing against the opposite team's #1 wideout?
THAT is the problem, IMO. And, wys, I think you're overlooking that and not giving it enough weight in your arguments. NO TEAM's #3 CB can cover a #1 wideout. Show me one who can!
Judge
10-02-2002, 11:38 AM
Wys-
When you post your "review" of Watson's game on Sunday, make sure to include your resume/CV.
I want to see how you claim to be such an expert in professional football to be capable of understanding what you're watching so well that your critique is worth anything more than a piece of garbage.
I'm guessing you won't be able to see anything more than I can- and can't understand anything better than I can. If you want to be influenced by commentators and the media who like to seek out a scapegoat, so be it.
If Watson gives up a bunch of to the WR's, but the Raiders WR's don't get much more than that, don't you think in all reality Watson has done his job? As the #3 CB, if he can essentially contain what's thrown at him, then he'll have accomplished his job. He isn't a #1 CB, and I don't think he claims to be. But he is serviceable and I don't see a reason to call him out by saying he "sucks".
Well judge, if a CB who is supposed to be covering a WR is say at our 40 YL, while the WR is say at our 30 YL , and the LoS is at say our opponent's own 40, then something bad and not good has happened. It doesn't take an NFL GM to figure that out.
Now, many things could have happened. The CB could have slipped. He could have been illegally pushed. He could have lost his shoe. He could have run into the ref. OR...
He could have been SCHOOLED by the WR. I've seen that happen quite a bit. Watson spinning around as if he just got off the handle of a baseball bat doing that "spin drill" that they do at picnics. See, that isn't good! It's bad. It's a sign that he's outmatched or bites on the most fundamental of juke moves.
As I see it, and maybe I'm missing something here, you don't have to be a GM or head coach, or even an OC or DC to see and realize that. Simple common sense and a set of working eyes will suffice. ;)
LOG has it absolutely correct. If you read my pregame analysis of the last two games you would have noticed that I mentioned that GW/JG should simply keep Watson away from Booker and Smith. Even McCaffrey who would school Watson. Yet did they do that? No! My fault? No. I have no control over that.
Does it make sense? Oh, I think so. So does LOG! Do you? B/c neither of us have any sort of NFL coaching credentials. Certainly none that I'm sure match yours. :D
In any case, just watch the game. I agree w/ LOG that he's had to take on some tough WRs. I did just look at the P-B-P for the Bears game and noticed that Watson singlehandedly allowed Robinson's season game average v. him on one single drive. Two other WRs that Watson let catch passes are the legendary J. Davis and D. White!!!
V. the Broncos, one of the passes that Watson let go good was the one to a ROOKIE Lelie for 16 yards on a 3rd and 13 in a drive which ended up in a touchdown! He also allowed a 6 yard completion on a 4th and 5 in yet another drive which ended up in a touchdown.
So you see, it isn't just Harrisons and Owens' that he's going up against! He apparently can't even stop a totally unproven rookie on a big play on 3rd and 13 who until that game had 1 catch in the NFL.
Also, one thing that those arguing for Watson are direly overlooking is that he's a penalty machine. He has a propensity for making key errors in the form of penalties. And if you watch closely, it's usually to cover up the fact that if he doesn't make them, his man gets so open that it's a guaranteed TD!
Now, see, again it doesn't take a GM or HC or even a coordinator or other coach or even a former NFL player to recognize those things. All you have to be able to do is read. The play-by-play has all that stuff. So even if you have never watched a game before, you can draw quite a few conclusions using only a fair amount of common sense and general knowledge about the game.
In any event, I think you've beaten this horse enough. Why don't we simply see what happens on Sunday. Then you can begin next week's thread on "making excuses for why Watson" sucks! :D LOL
In the meantime, let's just see how he plays on Sunday. And yes, again, acknowledging what LOG is saying, if GW/JG had the sense God gave a lemon, then he'd make sure that AW and NC line up on Rice and Brown all game in a man-to-man. This zone we've been playing as LOG suggests, is a part of the problem, not the solution. W/ a zone, you need some good CBs or otherwise DBs. You certainly need some speed on the parts of the DBs if you play a zone, at least if you want it to be effecitve. Watson from what I've seen is as far from speedy as Bledsoe is for their given positions. Again, as I've suggested, perhaps instead of Watson, we should use our backup Ss. I think that's a good plan.
Judge,
I'll make a standing wager w/ you if you like. This will keep some of your attention on Watson each week as I've had mine.
I'll wager you for each of the remaining 12 RS games, that Watson commits a penalty that cost us a 1st down. For each game that happens, I get +1, for each game that it does not, you get +1. You can figure out what we wager, a friendly variety however.
I'll make a second one as well; Watson only plays nickel. He doesn't start. I think he allows way too many yards percentage wise and I think it's b/c opposing HCs realize exactly what I'm saying. But you would figure that in any given game, the two CBs are the cover guys on ~ 50% of the passing plays that are completed. It stands to reason since they're lined up against the top 2 WRs usually. Since the top 2 WRs generally yield over half the receiving yards, at least on average, it would stand to reason also that the remaining 50% are fairly equally dispersed amongst the starting Ss and the cover LBs, no?
My point, the percentage of passing yardage going over Watson each week is inordinate. Why?
Anyway, the second wager, again, of the friendly variety, each week that Watson allows over 25%, which is very generous on my part, and assuming that he's available to play and not hurt for more than 1 Q, that the same rules apply. +1 for me, +1 for you depending upon the outcome.
What say ye? If you win then I'll send you the difference in wing sauce. If I win, you can send me something equivalent or something else. Like I said, just a friendly wager to keep track of this "debacle." LOL
P.S. We'll get our data from the NFL.com gamebook PBP.
Earthquake Enyart
10-02-2002, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
I'll make a second one as well; Watson only plays nickel. He doesn't start. I think he allows way too many yards percentage wise and I think it's b/c opposing HCs realize exactly what I'm saying. But you would figure that in any given game, the two CBs are the cover guys on ~ 50% of the passing plays that are completed. It stands to reason since they're lined up against the top 2 WRs usually. Since the top 2 WRs generally yield over half the receiving yards, at least on average, it would stand to reason also that the remaining 50% are fairly equally dispersed amongst the starting Ss and the cover LBs, no?
My point, the percentage of passing yardage going over Watson each week is inordinate. Why?
Anyway, the second wager, again, of the friendly variety, each week that Watson allows over 25%, which is very generous on my part, and assuming that he's available to play and not hurt for more than 1 Q, that the same rules apply. +1 for me, +1 for you depending upon the outcome.
Like I said, just a friendly wager to keep track of this "debacle." LOL
Wys,
Since nickel situations are inordinately passing downs, passing yards can be fairly estimated using a hyperbolic differential equation. Also since Watson is a third CB, the probability is much higher that QB's would go to the weakest link. Therefore Watsons yardage allowed should be "normalized" using curve estimating and smoothing calculus techniques taking these factors into account. The yardage allowed should be no more than root mean square of the teams passing yards with Watson off the field compared to the standard deviation of the yardage gotten directly against Watson compared to the yardages against the other CB's when Watson is on the field. Squared.
Fair enough then. What is it? LOL
I think the key words were "weakest link"! LOL
Earthquake Enyart
10-02-2002, 12:38 PM
Seriously, like I said somewhere else, I think we are spoiled because we've always had good DB's in the past. Watson is mediocre, but I'm getting a little worried about Winfield because he is getting beat lately too.
Creemoredrinker
10-02-2002, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
Judge,
I'll make a standing wager w/ you if you like. This will keep some of your attention on Watson each week as I've had mine.
I'll wager you for each of the remaining 12 RS games, that Watson commits a penalty that cost us a 1st down. For each game that happens, I get +1, for each game that it does not, you get +1. You can figure out what we wager, a friendly variety however.
I'll make a second one as well; Watson only plays nickel. He doesn't start. I think he allows way too many yards percentage wise and I think it's b/c opposing HCs realize exactly what I'm saying. But you would figure that in any given game, the two CBs are the cover guys on ~ 50% of the passing plays that are completed. It stands to reason since they're lined up against the top 2 WRs usually. Since the top 2 WRs generally yield over half the receiving yards, at least on average, it would stand to reason also that the remaining 50% are fairly equally dispersed amongst the starting Ss and the cover LBs, no?
My point, the percentage of passing yardage going over Watson each week is inordinate. Why?
Anyway, the second wager, again, of the friendly variety, each week that Watson allows over 25%, which is very generous on my part, and assuming that he's available to play and not hurt for more than 1 Q, that the same rules apply. +1 for me, +1 for you depending upon the outcome.
What say ye? If you win then I'll send you the difference in wing sauce. If I win, you can send me something equivalent or something else. Like I said, just a friendly wager to keep track of this "debacle." LOL :calm:
But, it sounds a little too complicated for me. I have faith that Watson will play much better in the next 12 games -- barring injury -- then he did in the first four. If you can devise some sort of wager on that, I'm in for two bottles of your hot sauce v. 4 big bottles of Creemore Beer. Collection date to be determined.
:phone:
I'd be game Cree. I hope that he plays better too. He didn't last year however. I know we blew, but man-to-man is man-to-man. If a CB can't cover in mtm, then he can't cover in mtm. It has nothing to do w/ the rest of the team or how it plays.
EE,
Yeah, Winfield has quietly lapsed in his play as well. Not much talk about that. I am kind of hoping that it has something to do with coaching or something. Fat chance I know. He played better last year it seemed.
LABillsFan
10-03-2002, 02:05 AM
Sorry it took so long to post, this job thing is killing me.
originally posted by Judge. If Wys and company are so smart, explain who is available or on the team who is BETTER than Watson?
I take it I'm part of the group. Well... Heretically speaking ;) , The Post I started "The Weakest Link" was entitled just that, not "The Weakest link and who should replace him." I also mentioned that Gray is going to have to come up with the scheme of all schemes to protect Watson from getting burned. Obviously there is little the Bills can do as far as replacing him THIS year, and the responsibility falls into the coaches lap. Watson is doing the best he can for a punt catcher..err... Pass interferer...err... corner hack ...err... 3rd string DB, but he can't be relied on to hold his own when the defensive play calls upon him to go one on one.
Why, is everybody getting upset at that and coming to his defense. Can't he defend himself...errr...maybe that was a bad choice of words.
Creemoredrinker
10-03-2002, 07:23 AM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
I'd be game Cree. I hope that he plays better too. He didn't last year however. I know we blew, but man-to-man is man-to-man. If a CB can't cover in mtm, then he can't cover in mtm. It has nothing to do w/ the rest of the team or how it plays....
What is the bet itself?
LA, Fine!
Not a problem. But by your own admission then, he's not that good. So riddle me this?
Why was he on Rod Smith single-handedly at least 8 times, of at least 4 went for catches?!
THAT'S what I want to know. Rod Smith is one of the best WRs in the league over the past several years. He's still one of the best. He's their best for sure. Our best CBs and starters are AW and NC.
So since you like to slam me for lacking intelligence, can you provide a reasonable answer for why our best guys were on who, Lilie, a rookie who had one NFL catch prior to that game. Or was it Montgomery?! I mean only one of them can cover McCaffrey, right! Or did Jerry Gray have them doubling up on McC and put Watson on Smith?!
Just checking, b/c all I've said is to keep Watson away from the opponents' top WRs. THAT clearly isn't being done!
Or perhaps you and those defending Watson think it's wise to put him on Smith, Moss, Booker, and Rice and Brown this weekend?
IDK. Fill us in...
;)
Kelly The Dog
10-03-2002, 10:55 AM
Most teams play zone defenses in their nickel and dime packages. Opposing offenses know where each of their DBs are going to be most of the time, too, and pick on them accordingly. Most teams also put their #3 CB in the middle of the field covering the slot receiver, and hence, get beat down the middle a lot, usually for long plays. The Bills choose to take that away with Winfield and have Watson give up short passes to the wide-outs. That's a good trade-off IMO. And they haven't gotten beat a lot lately. In case you hadn't seen the stats, Booker is leading the league in yards receiving, he is no slouch, and he didn't burn Watson for a lot of them, in fact he had less than 50. The one play Watson went out, he caught a 33 yarder wide open against his replacement Bostic.
Judge
10-03-2002, 12:31 PM
I don't have the time to read what you posted- too complicated for me! Besides, as usual you try to skew the bet in a way that favors you- there is an outstanding probability that ANY of our DB's can and will be flagged for PI, holding, or similar penalties every game.
I never claimed to be such a football expert that I could break down the nuances of DB play, like you seem to be able to do.
All I can do is watch what I watch- and from my view Watson has been flagged countless times for marginal penalties that he should not be blasted for, and has made as many good pass defenses as he has been burned. Is he an all-pro? No. Nobody claimed he was. Is he a serviceable nickel guy? Absolutely.
LABillsFan
10-04-2002, 01:01 AM
Wys, where did I slam you and why are you asking me why Gray has Watson covering the #1 guy???? I don't know either but he is being put in that position and not getting the job done. I'm not slamming you or anyother poster, I just cringe in passing situations knowing Watson is going to be the target and more often than not is going to get beat or commit a penalty and wanted to vent about it.
LABillsFan
10-05-2002, 01:35 AM
Wys still don't know where you got the idea I slammed you. But edited the post because it may have been taken out of context.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.