Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does Foxworth Have A Future At Safety?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Does Foxworth Have A Future At Safety?

    Personally, I didn't think that Foxworth played all that well at safety, but I defer to Shanahan's view:

    Nickel cornerback Domonique Foxworth will continue to get significant playing time at strong safety, Shanahan said.

    Foxworth played there against Seattle. Curome Cox, who replaced injured Nick Ferguson at Kansas City on Nov. 23, also will play there. Cox played in nickel situations against Seattle.

    Ferguson was lost for the season with a knee injury suffered Nov. 19 against San Diego.

    Foxworth is getting the call in an attempt to get Denver's best players on the field. Foxworth has played extensively since being drafted in the third round in 2005.

    "He did a great job, not playing the position before," Shanahan said. "I think he'll get better and better at the position the more comfortable he feels, being able to adjust to the ball in a different area of the field which he's not used to. He's got great ball skills, extremely bright. Even though he's not very big, he still makes tackles and can cover great one-on-one. So I thought it was a good move, not to take anything away from Curome Cox, because he played extremely well."
    If Foxworth continues to develop into a starting quality player, then the obvious thing to do is have him play cover safety and backup CB to spell Darrent Williams.

    That would leave Karl Paymah as the backup to Champ. Potentially, Paymah could spell Williams too as long as Foxworth was in the lineup.

    This all presupposes that John Lynch remains at Strong Safety to play up in run support, because Foxworth isn't a great run-defender.

    But, one of Denver's biggest weaknesses has been the lack of a true cover safety to provide help over the top for the CBs. Champ Bailey perhaps doesn't need such help but Darrent Williams sure as hell does!

    A ball-hawking cover-safety is key. Last year Nick Ferguson had a good year and got 5 interceptions, which is good for a safety. But, he's not a true cover safety, becuase he doesn't have outstanding speed and cover skills. He IS 20 lbs. heavier than Foxworth who is only 5'11" 180 lbs. That's way too slight to be a good run-support safety.

    Lynch by comparison is 6'2" 220 lbs (3" taller and 40 lbs heavier).

    But, from Shanahan's comments about Foxworth's tackling ability it's clear he's satisfied with that aspect of his play.

    I think this move could ultimately shore up Denver's pass-defense which is STILL the weak spot on the defense, especially on third downs.

    Of course this is due to the pathetic pass-rush, not the secondary play, which has been good enough even without considering Champ Bailey.

    (Bailey is in another world -- his 6 interceptions have all been inside the 3 yard line, so he's personally saved the Broncos defensively a minimum of 18 points and more probably closer to 36 points on the season!)

    But, I would like to see this experiment continue next year, since it would solve one problem area for the Broncos. Nick Ferguson could continue to backup both Lynch and Foxworth and appear in the nickel package, so it's not as if he wouldn't be useful.
    sigpic

  • #2
    I put Foxworth as SS in NFL Head Coach game. He is pretty good, but it is just a game....
    XBL: The1Executioner

    Comment


    • #3
      I've always thought Paymah had the size and ability to play safety and always thought due to Foxworth's lack of bulk he wouldn't be able to do it. I like that idea a lot, and it sort of eliminates a need; but then the Broncos would need to grab another body at CB if he made such a switch anyways. . .

      Comment


      • #4
        I say put Chukwurah back there.
        Originally posted by Soldier96B
        i also took a crap and it was orange

        Comment


        • #5
          The only thing about the move is that Foxworth is much better in man coverage rather than zone. However he is still young and learning zone defences, so as the years go by im sure he will improve.

          Paymah is comming is along and maybe another cb will come along in the future.

          Comment


          • #6
            ridiculous! a 180 pound safety?? why the hell can't we just get a SAFETY to play safety, instead of moving a natural corner with a corner's build and skill-set back there? sure, fox is a solid tackler in the open field, but how in the hell is he supposed to fill against the run and shed blocks?? people around here get obsessed with that phrase "cover safety"-- it's a bad over-simplification! safeties have to do more than cover-- you can't just drop a guy into coverage on every single play. . . if lynch plays in the box and foxy at safety drops into coverage every down, we'd be so predictable it wouldn't even be funny. . . .

            besides, he's a good cornerback, and if we move him to safety then we have to find another nickel back, and quite frankly it's harder to find good corner prospects in the draft than good safeties, who are often available in the middle rounds. . . . what we need to do is start SAM BRANDON at strong safety next year-- a natural safety with years of experience at the position. . . this move wouldn't be any brighter than the aborted attempt to move dumervil to defensive tackle. . . . what, we want to be the smallest D in the league? why, because it works so well for indy?

            this reeks of desperation. . . you don't have to move a good corner to safety to find a safety that can cover, shenanigans-- just draft a coverage safety, or pick up a free agent. . . we don't always have to move guys around-- nate jackson isn't a good TE, dumervil didn't work at DT, and deltha o'neal isn't a wide receiver. . . stop grasping at straws and just bite the bullet and invest the picks or free agent dollars necessary to find adequate talent, instead of trying to manufacture some out of thin air. . . our nickel back gets a ton of action, and paymah hasn't shown ANY indication that he's ready to handle that role-- and if we move foxy, our depth is non-existent, and then if somebody gets hurt and you want to move him back, he has to re-adjust. . . don't overburden the kid with learning a new position-- he's doing fine where he is, why stunt his development?? it's been SO long since we've had good corners, why throw that away?
            Officially Objectified by the GPA

            rest in peace, darrent williams and damien nash-- you will be missed!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by dogfish
              ridiculous! a 180 pound safety?? why the hell can't we just get a SAFETY to play safety, instead of moving a natural corner with a corner's build and skill-set back there? sure, fox is a solid tackler in the open field, but how in the hell is he supposed to fill against the run and shed blocks?? people around here get obsessed with that phrase "cover safety"-- it's a bad over-simplification! safeties have to do more than cover-- you can't just drop a guy into coverage on every single play. . . if lynch plays in the box and foxy at safety drops into coverage every down, we'd be so predictable it wouldn't even be funny. . . .

              besides, he's a good cornerback, and if we move him to safety then we have to find another nickel back, and quite frankly it's harder to find good corner prospects in the draft than good safeties, who are often available in the middle rounds. . . . what we need to do is start SAM BRANDON at strong safety next year-- a natural safety with years of experience at the position. . . this move wouldn't be any brighter than the aborted attempt to move dumervil to defensive tackle. . . . what, we want to be the smallest D in the league? why, because it works so well for indy?

              this reeks of desperation. . . you don't have to move a good corner to safety to find a safety that can cover, shenanigans-- just draft a coverage safety, or pick up a free agent. . . we don't always have to move guys around-- nate jackson isn't a good TE, dumervil didn't work at DT, and deltha o'neal isn't a wide receiver. . . stop grasping at straws and just bite the bullet and invest the picks or free agent dollars necessary to find adequate talent, instead of trying to manufacture some out of thin air. . . our nickel back gets a ton of action, and paymah hasn't shown ANY indication that he's ready to handle that role-- and if we move foxy, our depth is non-existent, and then if somebody gets hurt and you want to move him back, he has to re-adjust. . . don't overburden the kid with learning a new position-- he's doing fine where he is, why stunt his development?? it's been SO long since we've had good corners, why throw that away?

              Venting a little there aren't you. But I agree. we don't want to hurt his development also he's just to small to play safety and would be a big liablity there. Safety requires more reads and zones then a corner so it would be a big adjustment. It's best just to use a draft pick on a safety.
              President Cool

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Dream
                I've always thought Paymah had the size and ability to play safety and always thought due to Foxworth's lack of bulk he wouldn't be able to do it. I like that idea a lot, and it sort of eliminates a need; but then the Broncos would need to grab another body at CB if he made such a switch anyways. . .
                This is the point I was going to raise. But I have to think that Paymah has not developed like the coaching staff had hoped. I think he will be a good player, he just hasnt grown at the same pace that Darrent and Foxy have. I like the idea of getting your best players out on the field, and I think Foxworth will do a great job at coverage once he gets used to the position. I just hope he can bulk up a little to improve his run support skills. Cox and Foxworth are both very athletic and they give us a lot of speed to help cover more ground from the safety position. Something that we have severly lacked. The price, however, is that our safeties are not exactly feared like they once were. Atwater, Smith, Kennedy, Lynch... We have been known to have safeties that punish you for going over the middle. I do not think we intimidate too many teams like we used to. Lynch has lost a step and isnt the impact player that he once was.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I still think that Paymah would be suited at safety. Good tackler, very fast and good size (6'0 200".

                  He is better at man coverage than zone but that can be taught.

                  Foxworth should be left at CB in my opinion, however temporarily is not bad.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by dogfish
                    ridiculous! a 180 pound safety?? why the hell can't we just get a SAFETY to play safety, instead of moving a natural corner with a corner's build and skill-set back there? sure, fox is a solid tackler in the open field, but how in the hell is he supposed to fill against the run and shed blocks?? people around here get obsessed with that phrase "cover safety"-- it's a bad over-simplification! safeties have to do more than cover-- you can't just drop a guy into coverage on every single play. . . if lynch plays in the box and foxy at safety drops into coverage every down, we'd be so predictable it wouldn't even be funny. . . .

                    besides, he's a good cornerback, and if we move him to safety then we have to find another nickel back, and quite frankly it's harder to find good corner prospects in the draft than good safeties, who are often available in the middle rounds. . . . what we need to do is start SAM BRANDON at strong safety next year-- a natural safety with years of experience at the position. . . this move wouldn't be any brighter than the aborted attempt to move dumervil to defensive tackle. . . . what, we want to be the smallest D in the league? why, because it works so well for indy?

                    this reeks of desperation. . . you don't have to move a good corner to safety to find a safety that can cover, shenanigans-- just draft a coverage safety, or pick up a free agent. . . we don't always have to move guys around-- nate jackson isn't a good TE, dumervil didn't work at DT, and deltha o'neal isn't a wide receiver. . . stop grasping at straws and just bite the bullet and invest the picks or free agent dollars necessary to find adequate talent, instead of trying to manufacture some out of thin air. . . our nickel back gets a ton of action, and paymah hasn't shown ANY indication that he's ready to handle that role-- and if we move foxy, our depth is non-existent, and then if somebody gets hurt and you want to move him back, he has to re-adjust. . . don't overburden the kid with learning a new position-- he's doing fine where he is, why stunt his development?? it's been SO long since we've had good corners, why throw that away?
                    well.. We have two injured safeties... so I'm guessing it is a move out of deperation. As far as Shanahan's comments, I think it may simply saying something positive about a bad situation where he is pretty limited in his choices. Why would he choose to say something negative when I'm sure he's trying to build the player's confidence. Plus, there have been MANY cases where a corner has moved to safety and done a fantastic job.

                    We are dealing with injuries, and when you have a limited selection of athletes, you MUST try to put the best players ON the field. Plus he's not getting playing time at corner because as of right now, he's being beat out by Williams. So putting him on the field is at least using some of his skills to help the team. How do you know he's doing fine where he is and wouldn't be better suited for a safety? YOu don't really know that.

                    I think its just a move that is being made because of injuries. I wouldn't exactly say this is something he planned on doing when we had all of our depth in place.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Bring back Kenoy

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Madden really seemed to like the move, and I really believe that his (Foxworth's) speed and ball awareness was part of what kept the Seahawks Offense out of rhythm. Hasslebeck said in the interview after the game that going in they felt they could take advantage of shown blitzes, but whether we bailed out of the blitz or actually blitzed, they were never able to develop a good passing game. If our LB's can continue to shed blocks and run sideline to sideline, we should be able to hold up agiainst the Chargers running game & allow Foxworth to be a third CB, a small nickel package that gives good coverage of crossing patterns. The only liability could be his tackling of a large TE like Gates.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          It depends....

                          Long term, I still like Lynch and Fergie as our safeties, but in the short term Fergie's gone and so is Brandon as Lynchs backup, so it makes since to get Foxy out there as an extra coverage man who can COVER. Personally, I've always liked him better than D-Will as a CB, but nobody asked me what I thought. And I disagree that our secondary is still the weak link (though man, oh, man was it for a while there. ) With the addition of a HoF CB and two more who will end up in a few Pro Bowls before they're done, PLUS John Lynch, our secondary is rock solid. While Courtney Brown is off the field too often for my liking, I'm happy with both Lang and Dumervil, so all we really might need is another good backup so Chucky doesn't have to cover for both of them. If we're gonna make a change on D I'd like to see a top tier DT replacing Myers and I think our front four would be scary. Though if someone were to, say, draft a brutal NT, a big fast end and another ILB while moving Elvis and/or Chucky to OLB with a (very slightly) bigger D.J. in a 3-4, well, I'd probably be Ok with that....

                          But I'm getting off on a tangent: through the end of the season, I'd rather have Foxworth at safety than Cox, but next year I think we should have Lynch and Ferguson back there, not least because 180 lbs. is too small to play free OR strong safety long term. I see and hear our safeties a lot during games and on the boards, same with our LBs, same with our DEs. But our DTs are another story entirely.
                          SIGN RANDALL GODFREY FOR SLB AND BACKUP MLB NOW!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Morambar
                            Long term, I still like Lynch and Fergie as our safeties.
                            I don't know if this is a paradox or not, but it's sort of hard to like Lynch and Ferguson as long-term safeties when both are in their 30's nearing the ends of their careers.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Dream
                              I don't know if this is a paradox or not, but it's sort of hard to like Lynch and Ferguson as long-term safeties when both are in their 30's nearing the ends of their careers.
                              I still regret us not taking Ed Reed...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X