Move Carroll to Safety?

[The Leaper]

As I've watched the games so far this year, it is becoming painfully clear that Manual is the exact same player as Collins...only much less talented athletically and much more experienced. Neither is worth a damn in coverage. Both excel closer to the line of scrimmage. Do we honestly need two safeties like that?

Carroll pretty much is a failure at CB. He is horrible in bump and run coverage...which is pretty much the bread and butter of the defense we run. He uses his hands far too much, and seems to be overpowered by larger WRs. Since WRs coming out of college aren't getting any smaller, he's up a creek without a paddle in that regard. However, he is a pretty good tackler and has amazing speed. Could Carroll possibly be the cover safety we need? I realize that he isn't very big as far as safeties go...but he does possess good leaping ability, which will be seen more if he is playing deep coverage than when he is running with a WR in coverage. If he is playing safety, he doesn't have to worry about bump and run coverage...or grabbing jerseys.

Does anyone else think it might be worth looking at later this year?

[BF4MVP]

Can't do it. We have little depth at corner, and Carroll is our third best corner right now..I think Blackmon will be a stud, but he hasn't even suited up in an NFL game yet..Preseason or regular. Plus, Carroll had a nice game other than the play he got beat for that TD. It happens.

Saying Collins isn't worth a damn in coverage is pretty harsh too..He had a bad game Sunday and he admitted as much..But he has put himself in position to make a number of plays over the past 18 games..His lack of ability to catch the football when he gets his paws on it is another matter..He'll have to work on that..But he's been pretty solid against the run, and in coverage.

[KYPack]

No, Leap.

He's too small for safety. I have the same problems with the safeties you have.

I've seen Manuel over the years and we definitely have the Hardy Nickerson syndrome goin' on here. This season is the worst one I've ever seen him have. He has lost what speed he had and his confidence in cover is shattered. All I can figure is that groin injury is still re-occuring. He can't run the field & he was weak on his cover anyhow. We need somebody & quick.

I've liked what I saw of Culver. What the hell, we're the Kiddie korps, let's give him a shot.

[Patler]

Too bad Underwood got hurt. He may have gotten his chance to prove that what he showed in training camp would carry over to the regular season.

[GBRulz]

Moving Carroll to the next flight out of town would be my choice :lol:

[ahaha]

Without Carroll, who is coming in for the nickel and dime packages? Jarrett Bush, Patrick Dendy, or Charlie Peprah? Young guys who couldn't make it with the teams they went to training camp with. That's scary.

[Badgepack]

I know run support is a big part pf the safeties job, but is not the number #1 rule "Nobody gets behind you", yet it seems to happens all the time.

[ahaha]

I know run support is a big part pf the safeties job, but is not the number #1 rule "Nobody gets behind you", yet it seems to happens all the time.

Especially in this defense. The safeties usually play back to stop big plays. Reggie Bush can change things though. The Packers were clearly using Nick Collins closer to the line of scrimmage a lot in an effort to slow Bush down.

[KYPack]

I know run support is a big part pf the safeties job, but is not the number #1 rule "Nobody gets behind you", yet it seems to happens all the time.

Yer right, of course. I don't think Manuel is physically capable of coming up to support the run, then getting back if it's a play pass.

He's known for being a big run supporter, so he's trying to guess.

When he guess run, and is wrong....

There's nobody home

[Patler]

No, Leap.

He's too small for safety. I have the same problems with the safeties you have.


Carroll is about the same size as Underwood, but is much faster and jumps well. Also tackles pretty well and isn't shy about making a tackle. I don't think his size would be a big hinderance at safety. The biggest drawback to Carroll as a safety is that he does not play the ball well, and you really would like your safeties to make plays on the ball.

[Patler]

If you need to move someone to safety, move Woodson.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If you need to move someone to safety, move Woodson.

ya, I would like to see this move. But of course, then you have to live with Carroll's occasional brain farts. I actually think Carroll plays well most of the time. But he still grabs when he gets beat.

Speaking of safeties ..... weren't you one of those in the preseason who INSISTED that Manuel was an upgrade over Roman? (sorry if you weren't.)

I have a problem when people say that a FA is DEFINITELY better than what we already have, based on stats from previous year, or a few press opinions. I don't believe Manuel is better than Roman until I see them both play, this year. That's why I was pissed when Roman was foolishly cut before camp. Same thing with Ben Taylor. When I see him outperform Poppinga, then I'll believe it.

[mission]

Same thing with Ben Taylor. When I see him outperform Poppinga, then I'll believe it.

but could taylor really be any worse? im not just talking about the obvious mistackles and bad coverage but just the fact that he only recorded one tackle. im not sure he's really doing anything out there aside from occasionally holding up a blocker for everyone else.

[MJZiggy]

I've heard that Taylor could do a lot worse--against the run where Pop's been relatively good.

[Harlan Huckleby]

but could taylor really be any worse?

I find it hard to evaluate the play of linebackers on tv. I would be happy to see Poppinga and Taylor alternate series. What the hell! They do it with defensive linemen all the time. They'd really learn which player is better.

[Fosco33]

According to M3, Manuel is the best communicator on the defense and will be seen as a leader by mid season.

I can't say the same about Carroll.

[mmmdk]

According to M3, Manuel is the best communicator on the defense and will be seen as a leader by mid season.

I can't say the same about Carroll.

By mid season??? Who's the leader now?

[Fosco33]

According to M3, Manuel is the best communicator on the defense and will be seen as a leader by mid season.

I can't say the same about Carroll.

By mid season??? Who's the leader now?

Barnett

[Patler]

Speaking of safeties ..... weren't you one of those in the preseason who INSISTED that Manuel was an upgrade over Roman? (sorry if you weren't.)


I doubt I INSISTED on it, because I was never that down on Roman as a player. In fact, I argued with someone (Gureski?) about whether or not he was the weak link in the defense. I described him as being a player you could play with, but would like to improve if you could.

I did like signing Manual to what really is not a very expensive contract, and I thought he could be an upgrade over Roman because I felt he was better against the run and no worse against the pass, but I never thought it was a huge signing. I agreed with letting Roman go after he copped an attitude and others like Underwood and Culver showed potential.

I think TT's attraction to Manual is the same as what he hoped to get from Little last year, a guy that could run the backend of the defense, making the necessary calls and adjustments. Little just couldn't play anymore, so couldn't provide that. Roman has never been described as "a coach on the field." Manual has been, even Collins mentioned it in TC. If he can provide that on the field and play no worse than Roman, it will be an improvement and may take pressure off Collins, hastening his development.

Roman was nothing special. If in the end you have exchanged six of one for a half-dozen of the other, so what?

[Scott Campbell]

Roman was nothing special. If in the end you have exchanged six of one for a half-dozen of the other, so what?


I think they might have kept Roman if Underwood had been hurt prior to Roman being cut, unless he was so unhappy about them bringing in Manual that he wouldn't have been kept under any circumstances.

[mmmdk]

I saw Roman's jersey in week 1 vs the Cards - Roman was barely playing. I don't know about week 2.

Manuel seem pedestrian vs Saints - I didn't see the Bears game.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Roman was nothing special. If in the end you have exchanged six of one for a half-dozen of the other, so what?

Roman made some dumb comments about being betrayed. He did change his tune, tho. When a team invests a big signing bonus in FA, it is natural for the old player to guess that he won't get a fair shake to win the job.

Here's what I would have prefered: McCarthy & Thompson should have reassured Roman that he would get a fair competition for a job. Then have that fair competition.

Roman wasn't making a big salary, they should have kept him for depth. Or cut him at end of summer. As things have turned out, they could use him now.

[Scott Campbell]

Here's what I would have prefered: McCarthy & Thompson should have reassured Roman that he would get a fair competition for a job.


We have no knowledge that such a conversation didn't occur.

[Patler]

Roman wasn't making a big salary, they should have kept him for depth. Or cut him at end of summer. As things have turned out, they could use him now.

They did Roman a favor, cutting him early and giving him a chance to earn a spot elsewhere. Most vets prefer that. He was no longer in GB's plans, so they let him go. It was simply a numbers game, even in training camp.

[Patler]

I think they might have kept Roman if Underwood had been hurt prior to Roman being cut, unless he was so unhappy about them bringing in Manual that he wouldn't have been kept under any circumstances.

I also think that may have happened.

[Harlan Huckleby]

They did Roman a favor, cutting him early and giving him a chance to earn a spot elsewhere.

I don't want the GM doing favors for players at the team's expense. (Although I don't buy this explanation anyway.)

I think Thompson invested a good deal of money and ego in bringing his boy Manuel back from Seattle. He had no interest in seeing a competition with Roman for the starting job. As things played out, Roman probably would be the starter today, if only due to Manuel's injury. At a minimum he would have made the final cut, providing valuable depth.

(My opinion on all this is colored by fact that I thought Roman had a decent season in 2005.)

Thompson made a mistake. Maybe a small one, but the small ones add up.

[Partial]

They did Roman a favor, cutting him early and giving him a chance to earn a spot elsewhere.

I don't want the GM doing favors for players at the team's expense. (Although I don't buy this explanation anyway.)

I think Thompson invested a good deal of money and ego in bringing his boy Manuel back from Seattle. He had no interest in seeing a competition with Roman for the starting job. As things played out, Roman probably would be the starter today, if only due to Manuel's injury. At a minimum he would have made the final cut, providing valuable depth.

(My opinion on all this is colored by fact that I thought Roman had a decent season in 2005.)

Thompson made a mistake. Maybe a small one, but the small ones add up.


ding ding ding we have a winner!

[Patler]

Naw, not having Roman doesn't qualify as a "mistake". Its called "moving on". It's as much of a mistake as not having Grey Ruegamer back. Both might have been better backups than what you have, but you would like your backups to provide something else, too. Versatility, future improvement, special teams play, etc. Roman provided nothing other than being a 4th safety at the time, or the 3rd safety after Underwood's injury. I'm certainly not ready to say he would be starting ahead of Manual.

[KYPack]

They did Roman a favor, cutting him early and giving him a chance to earn a spot elsewhere.

I don't want the GM doing favors for players at the team's expense. (Although I don't buy this explanation anyway.)

I think Thompson invested a good deal of money and ego in bringing his boy Manuel back from Seattle. He had no interest in seeing a competition with Roman for the starting job. As things played out, Roman probably would be the starter today, if only due to Manuel's injury. At a minimum he would have made the final cut, providing valuable depth.

(My opinion on all this is colored by fact that I thought Roman had a decent season in 2005.)

Thompson made a mistake. Maybe a small one, but the small ones add up.

Well Well.

I totally agree with HH in this case.

That must mean I'm dead wrong.

I have BIG problems with TT's moves in the FA arena. Roman & Ruegy are '"marginal" guys. Vets that are playing out the string. They are also better solutions than rookies that will never play in the league.

Neither player could start for us, but they were far better answers than raw rooies that will never play in the league.

Patler speaks of moving on. Yeah, ya gotta move on, but move FORWARD.

We needed a vet in the OLine and a vet in the secondary for back-up going into this season. Thompson's manuverings left us with NO answers, just kids.

That's a fuck-up on his part.

[Harlan Huckleby]

It's as much of a mistake as not having Grey Ruegamer back.

Agreed. I also thought it was foolish to let Ruegamer go before finding decent replacements. Roman & Ruegamer are providing quality depth to other teams, while the Packers are hurting for depth at safety and Oline.

[Patler]

I never thought I would read fans lamenting the loss of Mark Roman and Grey Ruegamer. We really need something better to discuss than this! :mrgreen:

A year ago most couldn't show Roman the door fast enough. Now its a "mistake" that he is gone. In reality Roman is one of the interchangeable parts that fill NFL rosters. It really doesn't matter which one you have. He provided experience, not much more. Some provide potential, some speed, some great special teams play, etc. etc, etc,

If you have concerns about Roman being gone you are overthinking the make-up of a roster way, way too much.

I wouldn't mind if he was here. I don't care that he is gone. It doesn't make a difference.

Losing Underwood was much more significant. He was past his rookie year, was physical and was the leading ST tackler. He contributed in a number of ways.

[Bretsky]

Good points Patler,

Roman is probably as good as some of our roster players. But as you noted he is interchangeable so TT tries to fill his spot with players he thinks may develop more. Sure Roman is probably better than a couple, but Mark Roman talent is not hard to replace.

B

[red]

no, the less time grabby McGee is on the field the better IMO. he can't cover a guy without grabbing him, he's a liability every time he's on the field.

i agree with GBM, his next move sould be on the next plane out of town.

[Partial]

Good points Patler,

Roman is probably as good as some of our roster players. But as you noted he is interchangeable so TT tries to fill his spot with players he thinks may develop more. Sure Roman is probably better than a couple, but Mark Roman talent is not hard to replace.

B

We all agree its not hard to replace, its the fact that TT didn't do that that bothers us.

[Patler]

Good points Patler,

Roman is probably as good as some of our roster players. But as you noted he is interchangeable so TT tries to fill his spot with players he thinks may develop more. Sure Roman is probably better than a couple, but Mark Roman talent is not hard to replace.

B

We all agree its not hard to replace, its the fact that TT didn't do that that bothers us.

Didn't replace Roman? Your kidding, right?

[Partial]

Good points Patler,

Roman is probably as good as some of our roster players. But as you noted he is interchangeable so TT tries to fill his spot with players he thinks may develop more. Sure Roman is probably better than a couple, but Mark Roman talent is not hard to replace.

B

We all agree its not hard to replace, its the fact that TT didn't do that that bothers us.

Didn't replace Roman? Your kidding, right?

No, I am dead serious. He could have been kept for depth as we're arguing, and others are saying he's easily replaceable move on. Well, I see absolutely ZERO depth behind the starting safeties. I would say TT did an awful job of addressing that. How can anyone possibly argue otherwise?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Roman is probably as good as some of our roster players. But as you noted he is interchangeable so TT tries to fill his spot with players he thinks may develop more. Sure Roman is probably better than a couple, but Mark Roman talent is not hard to replace.

Bretsky, you've been critical of Thompson for not picking up a vet guard. Why didn't he keep Ruegamer? Rueg was a tough player.

They have a real fish for the 4th safety.

It's true that I am nit-picking.

[b bulldog]

Woodson to S would be the better move imo.

[MateoInMex]

I am trying to sum up in two words Ahmad Carroll...


CARROLL SUCKS!!!

Trade him for a new set of Packer cheerleaders....anything.. blazing speed...yet as Deputy Nutz stated on Wonderwoman Carroll's hold against the Saints..HE ARM-BARRED THE RECEIVER!

This guy is dead wood...please someone in the GB organization make WONDERWOMAN GO AWAY! Maybe when he skips offseason workouts in GB, he can sport a golden lasso in the boxing ring.

[Patler]

No, I am dead serious. He could have been kept for depth as we're arguing, and others are saying he's easily replaceable move on. Well, I see absolutely ZERO depth behind the starting safeties. I would say TT did an awful job of addressing that. How can anyone possibly argue otherwise?

He released Roman in the initial TC cutdown to get to 83, as I recall. They had a glut in the defensive backfield, where typically they work safeties in pairs. They had 7 safeties at the time, including Manual, Collins and Underwood, all of whom were ahead of Roman in their minds. Culver was going to be in camp as a drafted rookie they needed to see. Bigby did well in NFLE and looked to provide value on ST before he was injured. Both Bigby and Boger were eligible for the practice squad, so merited a look in training camp as possible players to work with for a year.

Roman offered nothing and was a logical cut at the time. Even now, with Underwood and Bigby on IR, I'm not sure that Culver is a major step back from Roman, and at least provides a possibility of future development.

[Partial]

No, I am dead serious. He could have been kept for depth as we're arguing, and others are saying he's easily replaceable move on. Well, I see absolutely ZERO depth behind the starting safeties. I would say TT did an awful job of addressing that. How can anyone possibly argue otherwise?

He released Roman in the initial TC cutdown to get to 83, as I recall. They had a glut in the defensive backfield, where typically they work safeties in pairs. They had 7 safeties at the time, including Manual, Collins and Underwood, all of whom were ahead of Roman in their minds. Culver was going to be in camp as a drafted rookie they needed to see. Bigby did well in NFLE and looked to provide value on ST before he was injured. Both Bigby and Boger were eligible for the practice squad, so merited a look in training camp as possible players to work with for a year.

Roman offered nothing and was a logical cut at the time. Even now, with Underwood and Bigby on IR, I'm not sure that Culver is a major step back from Roman, and at least provides a possibility of future development.

Ok, and what happens if two safeties get hurt now? Roman didn't have 10 years left on his contract and it wasn't a big money deal. If those players were eligible for the practice squad any way, why not let them all compete with a veteran and make them raise their game up to his level, meanwhile soaking up his wisdom and learning how to prepare for NFL life from a veteran?

[MJZiggy]

Because you can only have 8 guys on the practice squad and none of them can be vets with more than 2 seasons I believe.

[Patler]

Because you can only have 8 guys on the practice squad and none of them can be vets with more than 2 seasons I believe.

That, and what I was trying to point out earlier, that when he was released, there were reasons to keep the other 6 safeties in camp. They felt they had too many safeties on the roster to work with effectively in camp, so one had to go and Roman gave them no real reason to keep him.

[Patler]

I also forgot to mention that Bigby was a "freebie" on the roster. Having been in NFLE he did not count toward the maximum number allowed. So if they wanted only 6 safeties in camp, it really came down to releasing either Roman or Boger.

[Partial]

Because you can only have 8 guys on the practice squad and none of them can be vets with more than 2 seasons I believe.

That, and what I was trying to point out earlier, that when he was released, there were reasons to keep the other 6 safeties in camp. They felt they had too many safeties on the roster to work with effectively in camp, so one had to go and Roman gave them no real reason to keep him.

except that it would be a better team until the end of romans contract than it would be without him. If they are just going to sign an undrafted free agent with "potential", they could do that when his contract runs out. There was no sense in not keeping him on the team in a back-up role.

[MJZiggy]

Who do you drop to keep him?

[Partial]

Who do you drop to keep him?

4th safety who has been a packer for 3 weeks. It would have been good for Underwoods and Culver's development to have a veteran back-up to lean on throughout the camp, and Culver's throughout this year 'cause of the injury. You don't need to drop anyone from camp.

[Patler]

Who do you drop to keep him?

4th safety who has been a packer for 3 weeks. It would have been good for Underwoods and Culver's development to have a veteran back-up to lean on throughout the camp, and Culver's throughout this year 'cause of the injury. You don't need to drop anyone from camp.

A starter the last two years and you expect him to quietly accept the role as a 4th safety? Not likely an amicable situation.

Plus, it's almost mandatory that your backup safeties and backup corners be contributors on Special Teams. Often the 4th safety and 4th or 5th corner are picked because of their play on special teams moe than their abilities to play n defense. Especially the safeties tend to be the real physical ones. I don't believe Roman was considered an asset to special teams.

[Bretsky]

Roman is probably as good as some of our roster players. But as you noted he is interchangeable so TT tries to fill his spot with players he thinks may develop more. Sure Roman is probably better than a couple, but Mark Roman talent is not hard to replace.

Bretsky, you've been critical of Thompson for not picking up a vet guard. Why didn't he keep Ruegamer? Rueg was a tough player.

They have a real fish for the 4th safety.

It's true that I am nit-picking.


I had full faith TT figured he'd bring in a more talented veteran guard than Ruegy. He did not and I have no issues with TT bashing for not doing so. He left us dangerously thin at OL IF his goal was to win short term

[Bretsky]

Who do you drop to keep him?

Too many to choose from

[Zool]

Who do you drop to keep him?

4th safety who has been a packer for 3 weeks. It would have been good for Underwoods and Culver's development to have a veteran back-up to lean on throughout the camp, and Culver's throughout this year 'cause of the injury. You don't need to drop anyone from camp.

A starter the last two years and you expect him to quietly accept the role as a 4th safety? Not likely an amicable situation.

Plus, it's almost mandatory that your backup safeties and backup corners be contributors on Special Teams. Often the 4th safety and 4th or 5th corner are picked because of their play on special teams moe than their abilities to play n defense. Especially the safeties tend to be the real physical ones. I don't believe Roman was considered an asset to special teams.Roman also squeeked a little when Manual was signed. He wasnt happy about being replaced. Manual appears to be the same or slightly better in coverage than Roman, but Manual is actually willing to tackle someone.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Manual appears to be the same or slightly better in coverage than Roman, but Manual is actually willing to tackle someone.

So wrong. Roman's strength was his tackling, he really wrapped up. I agree Manuel might be an even better tackler.

Manuel better in coverage? Manuel looks like he is pulling a wagon out there.

Some reality checks:
1) Thompson paid a sizeable salary, including a $2M signing bonus, to a player who is now the weakest link on the defense. Manuel is a tough tackler against the run, but overall he is a liability. I hope the Packers bench him in favor of the rookie, or move Woodson to safety.
2) Roman was an inexpensive, decent player who would be an asset to this team as a backup. Manuel also is just backup quality, and might be worse than Roman. Thompson weakened the roster by prematurely cutting Roman.

[Zool]

Manual appears to be the same or slightly better in coverage than Roman, but Manual is actually willing to tackle someone.

So wrong. Roman's strength was his tackling, he really wrapped up. I agree Manuel might be an even better tackler.

Manuel better in coverage? Manuel looks like he is pulling a wagon out there.

Some reality checks:
1) Thompson paid a sizeable salary, including a $2M signing bonus, to a player who is now the weakest link on the defense. Manuel is a tough tackler against the run, but overall he is a liability. I hope the Packers bench him in favor of the rookie, or move Woodson to safety.
2) Roman was an inexpensive, decent player who would be an asset to this team as a backup. Manuel also is just backup quality, and might be worse than Roman. Thompson weakened the roster by prematurely cutting Roman.We'll have to agree to disagree. Roman let up far too many long passes 2 years ago. He shored it up some last year, but the writing was on the wall with the Manual siting.

I wish I had game footage here to show you, but Roman was the classic matador tackler.

Yes Manual is far overpaid for his performance thus far. That I will agree with you, but I was more than happy to watch Roman leave. He wouldnt take on a RB head up to save his life.

Sidestep, throw out an arm. OLE!

[Partial]

Who do you drop to keep him?

4th safety who has been a packer for 3 weeks. It would have been good for Underwoods and Culver's development to have a veteran back-up to lean on throughout the camp, and Culver's throughout this year 'cause of the injury. You don't need to drop anyone from camp.

A starter the last two years and you expect him to quietly accept the role as a 4th safety? Not likely an amicable situation.

Plus, it's almost mandatory that your backup safeties and backup corners be contributors on Special Teams. Often the 4th safety and 4th or 5th corner are picked because of their play on special teams moe than their abilities to play n defense. Especially the safeties tend to be the real physical ones. I don't believe Roman was considered an asset to special teams.

He was the starting safety, I don't think I ever saw him on special teams. Perhaps with a camp of special teams under his belt, he'd be good at it!

[Partial]

Manual appears to be the same or slightly better in coverage than Roman, but Manual is actually willing to tackle someone.

So wrong. Roman's strength was his tackling, he really wrapped up. I agree Manuel might be an even better tackler.

Manuel better in coverage? Manuel looks like he is pulling a wagon out there.

Some reality checks:
1) Thompson paid a sizeable salary, including a $2M signing bonus, to a player who is now the weakest link on the defense. Manuel is a tough tackler against the run, but overall he is a liability. I hope the Packers bench him in favor of the rookie, or move Woodson to safety.
2) Roman was an inexpensive, decent player who would be an asset to this team as a backup. Manuel also is just backup quality, and might be worse than Roman. Thompson weakened the roster by prematurely cutting Roman.We'll have to agree to disagree. Roman let up far too many long passes 2 years ago. He shored it up some last year, but the writing was on the wall with the Manual siting.

I wish I had game footage here to show you, but Roman was the classic matador tackler.

Yes Manual is far overpaid for his performance thus far. That I will agree with you, but I was more than happy to watch Roman leave. He wouldnt take on a RB head up to save his life.

Sidestep, throw out an arm. OLE!

You mean like giving up an easy touchdown to week 1 to Berrian? I'm sure there are plenty of other poor pass plays, but thats the first one that comes to mind.

[Zool]

Manual appears to be the same or slightly better in coverage than Roman, but Manual is actually willing to tackle someone.

So wrong. Roman's strength was his tackling, he really wrapped up. I agree Manuel might be an even better tackler.

Manuel better in coverage? Manuel looks like he is pulling a wagon out there.

Some reality checks:
1) Thompson paid a sizeable salary, including a $2M signing bonus, to a player who is now the weakest link on the defense. Manuel is a tough tackler against the run, but overall he is a liability. I hope the Packers bench him in favor of the rookie, or move Woodson to safety.
2) Roman was an inexpensive, decent player who would be an asset to this team as a backup. Manuel also is just backup quality, and might be worse than Roman. Thompson weakened the roster by prematurely cutting Roman.We'll have to agree to disagree. Roman let up far too many long passes 2 years ago. He shored it up some last year, but the writing was on the wall with the Manual siting.

I wish I had game footage here to show you, but Roman was the classic matador tackler.

Yes Manual is far overpaid for his performance thus far. That I will agree with you, but I was more than happy to watch Roman leave. He wouldnt take on a RB head up to save his life.

Sidestep, throw out an arm. OLE!

You mean like giving up an easy touchdown to week 1 to Berrian? I'm sure there are plenty of other poor pass plays, but thats the first one that comes to mind.Like i said, same or slightly better. Maybe the slightly better was an exaggeration, but I am the leader of the I Hate Mark Roman club. Too many games I watched him chase down backs and recievers from behind. I didnt watch many Seattle games last year, but alot of Hawks fans think the game turned when Manual got hurt.

Maybe he's playing slow because he didnt have much for a TC?

[Patler]

You mean like giving up an easy touchdown to week 1 to Berrian? I'm sure there are plenty of other poor pass plays, but thats the first one that comes to mind.

I believe Harris admitted that he was the one who made the mistake in coverage, not Manual. Manual was trying to make up for it and ended up looking bad.

[Partial]

HH, take over. Patler has exhausted my efforts with solid rebuttles. Jerk! :mrgreen: