The end of the "we reached for Whitner" argument.

[The Dean]

Precisely right.

 

Let's not forget Jason Witten's 9 catches for 110 yards in last year's Monday Night debacle.

 

 

Not sure how that relates to Whitner, as he was not the predominant defender on Witten that night.

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playbyplay?g...7&week=REG5

 

BTW, THREE passes to Witten were intercepted, that night.

[C.Biscuit97]

Not sure how that relates to Whitner, as he was not the predominant defender on Witten that night.

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playbyplay?g...7&week=REG5

 

BTW, THREE passes to Witten were intercepted, that night.

 

 

Silly facts don't matter when the Dawg is preaching. Obviously, the Whitner pick was the sole reason we lost the only game we have lost all season.

[StupidNation]

Not sure how that relates to Whitner, as he was not the predominant defender on Witten that night.

 

BTW, THREE passes to Witten were intercepted, that night.

 

Let me get this straight... do you count the guy who tackles the receiver the guy in coverage? If so how in the hell do you consider me infantile for stat checking if you can't watch the game?

 

Next, you say Whitner wasn't the guy predominantly defending him, so you end up using a stat for INTs in your defense? When does Whitner not intercepting a ball have to do with anything? Second, how do you end up saying Whitten wasn't being defending predominantly by Dante yet use interceptions by the QB to players other than Dante as your defense?

 

The bizarro world you make statements is hard for anyone to fathom.

 

You never answered how anyone would consider it insightful if you made the same comparisons to other SS saying they were great in coverage but had nothing to back it up. I inserted the names Lott, or Dawkins, but feel free to do that with any safety who is good in coverage I'd love to hear how it's possible.

[Dawgg]

Silly facts don't matter when the Dawg is preaching. Obviously, the Whitner pick was the sole reason we lost the only game we have lost all season.

 

Well... Whitner standing around and watching the onsides kick didn't help the outcome that fateful Monday night

 

As for "facts" see SN's post directly below yours. Those are facts... keep dancing around them if you so choose.

[Ramius]

Silly facts don't matter when the Dawg is preaching. Obviously, the Whitner pick was the sole reason we lost the only game we have lost all season.

 

I'm surprised we haven't heard more spam from Dawg about how "awesome" of a QB Vince Young is. But, as you said, Dawg never lets facts get in the way of a good anti-marv rant. Because, you know, we could have had a player like Daniel Manning who he's been pimping. This would be the same daniel manning that can't crack the starting lineup in chicago.

[Williams+Williams+Williams]

Hey Dawgg Still think the Pats* D isn't old and/or their best, and final, shot wasn't last year?

 

Fred Jackson sure as hell played like a "great" player last week. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a look as an alternate pro-bowler. But, what does it matter? The fact is that he is a great part of this team, and we would certainly miss him if he was out.

 

My definition is the exact same that you hear everyone else use when the talk about the draft, so why is it suddenly only "convenient" when it is applied to Whitner?

 

Whitner made two game changing plays the first game he ever played. We are talking about a third year SS here, not a RB or a G, so let's realize that amount of mental work that goes into being elite at Whitner's position, especially in a Cover-2 based defense. We are coming up against teams/players Whitner has seen before, and let's see how he does. My bet is he's going to light them the f up.

 

WTF does McCargo have to do with any of this? So drafting McCargo makes drafting Whitner a bad idea? We drafted Whitner first! You have a lot of explaining to do on that one.

 

Whitner might not be as flashy or talked about as Sanders or Polamalu but the role he plays on our team is worth the early pick. He plays good football and hes a leader, and the Bills drafted him for that.

 

I cant speak to Sanders or Polamalu's leadership ability cause Ive only watched them play and not listened to them speak. I like what Dante Whitner brings to the team. I like that he tackled Wilson in the endzone for showboating at the Ralph. He has convictions, he loves the game, and hes a team guy.

[tombstone56]

THE ARGUMENT WASNT NECESSARILY THAT WHITNER WAS A QUALITY PLAYER... IT WAS ,,, WAS HALOTI NGNATA

 

WAS A BETTER PICK,??, our pro player dept that year sat on their hands in the off season that

 

year when a huge number of quality safties were available ,,,,

[San-O]

THE ARGUMENT WASNT NECESSARILY THAT WHITNER WAS A QUALITY PLAYER... IT WAS ,,, WAS HALOTI NGNATA

 

WAS A BETTER PICK,??, our pro player dept that year sat on their hands in the off season that

 

year when a huge number of quality safties were available ,,,,

 

What other safties were available.

 

FWIW: I think they did reach for Whitner, and should have taken Ngata, and kept the 2nd round pick instead of

reaching again for McCargo, and I thought this when they drafted that year.

 

 

 

[Dawgg]

I'm surprised we haven't heard more spam from Dawg about how "awesome" of a QB Vince Young is. But, as you said, Dawg never lets facts get in the way of a good anti-marv rant. Because, you know, we could have had a player like Daniel Manning who he's been pimping. This would be the same daniel manning that can't crack the starting lineup in chicago.

 

Ah the usual Ramius to C. Biscuit reach-around.

 

Pretty typical of you considering that you have blindly supported every move the Bills made, like a sheep. But wait... there was ONE move you were pretty vocally against: Benching JP Losman in favor of Trent Edwards. How does that one look now?

 

Looks as though you're still trying to defend the McCargo pick, as you have for the past few years. Dvoracek and Manning vs. John McCargo -- you do the math. Dvoracek is starting and playing well at DT. Manning has contributed a lot to the team, both on kick returns and defense.

 

As for Vince Young, he has hit a setback but he has accomplished quite a bit in his limited career and he'll be back.

[freester]

This should be the final statement in this thread. I like Whitner alot but, Haloti Hgata has made Justin Bannan seem like a good player. For Ngata to achieve this in his short playing career will likely result in enshrinement in Canton.

[The Dean]

Let me get this straight... do you count the guy who tackles the receiver the guy in coverage? If so how in the hell do you consider me infantile for stat checking if you can't watch the game?

 

Next, you say Whitner wasn't the guy predominantly defending him, so you end up using a stat for INTs in your defense? When does Whitner not intercepting a ball have to do with anything? Second, how do you end up saying Whitten wasn't being defending predominantly by Dante yet use interceptions by the QB to players other than Dante as your defense?

 

The bizarro world you make statements is hard for anyone to fathom.

 

You never answered how anyone would consider it insightful if you made the same comparisons to other SS saying they were great in coverage but had nothing to back it up. I inserted the names Lott, or Dawkins, but feel free to do that with any safety who is good in coverage I'd love to hear how it's possible.

 

 

Let's see if I can do this simply enough for you to understand:

 

I simply cited the interceptions, because Dawgg failed to do so. If Whitner was in coverage on Witten, all day, he is likely at least partially responsible for some of those INTs. Tthe guy making the INT isn't always, or even usually, the guy covering the intended receiver, but that good coverage often plays a big part in the INT. I wasn't giving credit to Donte for the INTs, I was simply saying that if you blame him for the receptions, the INTs should be mentioned.

 

Next, I understand that the play-by-play notes who made the tackle on any given play. I know Whitner was the primary defender on Witten, because I watched the game. But, had he been the primary defender, he would have likely been involved in the tackles after Witten made the catch. It isn't as if Whitner isn't a very good tackler (I think even you realize that). Whitner had six tackles in that game. One would assume that more than ONE would have come on Witten, had he been the primary defender.

 

If you still have doubts, watch the highlights from the game on NFL.com.

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/boxscore?gam...7&week=REG5

 

Whitner is NOT in coverage on the Witten TD and has PERFECT coverage of Witten on the pass intercepted by DiGorgio in the End Zone. The one time they show Witten catching a pass on Whitner, is in the 4th Q, with the Bills in prevent. Witten caught the ball and is IMMEDIATELY tackled by Whitner. So, explain to me how Whitner is responsible for Witten's 9 catches for 103 yards. Truth is Dawgg lied, and you bought it.

 

Whitner didn't make the best play on the on-side kick recovery, though.

 

Finally, comparing all-time great safeties with long careers, from different teams (who were used very differently from how the Bills use their SS) to Whitner on two stats, is a meaningless exercise that I simply won't engage in. We have shown you, through statements from the coaches, reporters and Witner himself, that Whitner is used in a myriad of ways in the Bills D. You simply wont' acknowledge that it makes a big difference in stats, on how and where a player is used on D. You obviously lack the ability to notice the subtleties in the game.

 

If you want to notice how good Whinter is in coverage, notice how rarely he is thrown on. Notice how few big plays are made with him in coverage. Whitner is in his 3rd year in the NFL and is being discussed for Pro Bowl consideration. Yet, you dismiss him as a good SS, because he doesn't have a pile of INTs and passes defended. I suggest you find a different Stupid crusade.

[The Dean]

This should be the final statement in this thread. I like Whitner alot but, Haloti Hgata has made Justin Bannan seem like a good player. For Ngata to achieve this in his short playing career will likely result in enshrinement in Canton.

 

 

I'm not dissing Ngata, as i think he is a very good player...but, don't you think the fact that even Bannan looks good in that D suggest that it is the entire D that is good on that team, and that players are likely to look better on D there, than they would on other teams? That D was great before Ngata got there. I wouldn't give him the bulk of the credit for how the other guys are playing there.

[Steely Dan]

Ngata is not a just 3-4 player, and allegations supporting this are garbage. He's nimble enough to play the 1 tech in a classic C2 defense while offering the versatility to handle the NT spot in a 3-4. By the way, what does Baltimore run? It's a 4-3!

 

Look, there's nothing going to change what happened two and a half years ago re: Whitner versus Ngata. We can say that Whitner talks and plays well and he's not going to bust. That's true. But instead of blindly supporting the front office at every opportunity, it's necessary to know that teams win at the LOS more often than in the secondary. Heck, look at Denver. They've got two excellent CB's, and they can't stop the pass to save their lives. They didn't do that well when John Lynch was a legit pro bowler either.

 

All elements of a defense work in tandem, especially in a C2. The pass rush and run stuffers set up the DB's whether it's 1970, 1990 or 2008.

 

I'm sorry when I said Baltimore runs 3-4 I went by fact not a made up "so called" fact. If you look at the depth chart for Baltimore that I linked you'll see three DL's and four LB's on their starting lineup:

 

LDE - T. Price

NT - J. Bannan

RDE - H. Ngata

 

LOLB - J. Johnson

LILB - R. Lewis

RILB - B. Scott

ROLB - T. Suggs

 

I don't know maybe I'm wrong but that sure looks like a 3-4 to me.

 

Even though they have Ngata as LDE and not as a NT it's still a 3-4.

[YOOOOOO]

It's not infantile to hope for PDs or INTs. Only idiots deny those things, and I mean ONLY idiots. Let's re-do some conversations in history, tell me how funny they would be:

 

"Ronnie Lott was great at safety, he was great in pass coverage despite only 1 INT and 1 PD a season."

 

"Brian Dawkins has been fantastic in pass coverage this year despite only 1 INT and 1 PD a season."

 

Only in homer-land would that work.

 

Yes, my infantile insistence is called logic, which is cold and characteristically unbearable to those who try to work around it.

 

But let's look at it another way, and I wasn't thinking about him, why was Scott covering Gates rather than Whitner? Didn't we draft Whitner for that reason? Wasn't it to stop the new Os that focus on TEs so we needed a fast SS who could stop them?

 

It might have something to do with 9 Rec for 90 yards back in 2006 and realized that Dante was going to get torched by their best receiver for the game. Scott, a back-up, was better in coverage with Gates. SS line up with TEs by the way.

 

Gates in 2006 when Whitner covers him 9 rec 90 yards

Gates in 2008 with Scott, back-up, covers him 4 rec 55 yrds

 

Don't let your rose-colored sunglasses stop you from watching the game.

 

 

 

OK how bout we settle this.....For the rest of the season imma start a Donte Whitner thread before every game....In that thread as the game plays we will log in every opposing teams passes.....the defender, the zone responsiblity and the result.......

 

 

I'll bet you any amount of money($50, $100, $1000)....at years end....Whitner is the least thrown to player(of the starters) in our secondary....Will you take it???

[Steely Dan]

OK how bout we settle this.....For the rest of the season imma start a Donte Whitner thread before every game....In that thread as the game plays we will log in every opposing teams passes.....the defender, the zone responsiblity and the result.......

 

 

I'll bet you any amount of money($50, $100, $1000)....at years end....Whitner is the least thrown to player(of the starters) in our secondary....Will you take it???

 

He might take the bet and then argue about every single pass.

[GripnRip]

Every thread I read "SupidNation" is typing up long-winded threads that do nothing but show how little he knows about football. You are a VERY uneducated fan and I suggest you watch football for a few more years before you post anything else.

[YOOOOOO]

He might take the bet and then argue about every single pass.

 

 

Thats fine....I have years of experience, breaking down game film.....and everyone on this board can weigh in on there opinion on a particular play.....

[StupidNation]

Let's see if I can do this simply enough for you to understand:

 

Since you won't address the Charges game and why they put Scott over Whitner I know I'm not the one who needs simplification. Whitner is a fantastic tackler in the run game, I'm not impressed with his tackling in the passing game as he always plays in "prevent" and then tries to destroy the guy. The guy is good taking angles with the opposition coming up-field, but I've yet to see him do anything in the passing game that stops a big play unless he is ahead of them.

If Whitner was in coverage on Witten, all day, he is likely at least partially responsible for some of those INTs. Tthe guy making the INT isn't always, or even usually, the guy covering the intended receiver, but that good coverage often plays a big part in the INT.

 

Not at all. Most INTs that are done because of athleticism are usually when they read the eyes of the QB and jump the route. Dante DID do that in his first season once, and almost did it again in the same game. He has yet to do that again. His other INTs are from over-throws and he was in position. Those are lucky, but they do count and players should get credit.

 

I wasn't giving credit to Donte for the INTs, I was simply saying that if you blame him for the receptions, the INTs should be mentioned.

 

Then explain Gates for me and why they put in Scott over Whitner. Who is more important to the Charges offense: Nickel or SS? Case closed, Gates is the most important person when Chambers is out.

 

Whitner had six tackles in that game. One would assume that more than ONE would have come on Witten, had he been the primary defender.

 

Assumptions are worthless as most of the INTs were bad passes picked off by overthrows to Wilson, or by LBs who were in their zones in passing lanes.

 

If you still have doubts, watch the highlights from the game on NFL.com.

 

I watched the clips and Whitner gives a cushion. I doubt he could do what Crowell did. Crowell averages more INTs and PDs than Whitner does.

 

Witten caught the ball and is IMMEDIATELY tackled by Whitner. So, explain to me how Whitner is responsible for Witten's 9 catches for 103 yards. Truth is Dawgg lied, and you bought it.

 

Whitner was brought in to stop the new Os of today who pass to run right? It shows a couple of things, first he isn't used in that role because he can't do it, and when he is used he isn't effective.

Whitner didn't make the best play on the on-side kick recovery, though.

 

Did it occur to you he lacks ball instincts? He has great tackle instincts, and may be top 3 in run defense as a strong safety.

 

Finally, comparing all-time great safeties with long careers, from different teams (who were used very differently from how the Bills use their SS) to Whitner on two stats, is a meaningless exercise that I simply won't engage in.

 

Let me make easy for you:

Would you say that Roy Williams is good in pass coverage if he only averaged 1 INT and 1 PD? (Williams sucks but outshines Whitner in this regard)

How about Polamalu would he be considered good in coverage?

 

Compare the stats. Anyone considered decent in coverage has a minimum of 2 INTs a year and 8 PDs.

 

We have shown you, through statements from the coaches, reporters and Witner himself, that Whitner is used in a myriad of ways in the Bills D. You simply wont' acknowledge that it makes a big difference in stats, on how and where a player is used on D. You obviously lack the ability to notice the subtleties in the game.

 

Until Whitner is used on the D line and used in the secondary PDs and INTs are a measure to show they are good on pass defense. The coaches have shown me they don't trust him enough to use him against Gates or Witten.

 

If you want to notice how good Whinter is in coverage, notice how rarely he is thrown on. Notice how few big plays are made with him in coverage. Whitner is in his 3rd year in the NFL and is being discussed for Pro Bowl consideration. Yet, you dismiss him as a good SS, because he doesn't have a pile of INTs and passes defended. I suggest you find a different Stupid crusade.

 

It's not a Crusade. I don't start threads, but I respond to homerism. Being considered for Pro Bowl by the fans isn't the same as him being good in coverage. I've noticed when he's passed on all the time. I can see you don't.

[GripnRip]

Whitner was used all over the field vs San Diego in an attempt to help out the corners.

 

DJ even said before and after the game they would be using Scott to matchup with Gates, not only because of the physical match-up, but to allow Whitner to help our depleted CB core. If anything this move contradicts your argument entirely. Whitner's cover ability allows him to act like a nickel or ballhawk when needed.

 

Theres your answer, stop trumpeting the same stupid statement over and over.

[Steely Dan]

Thats fine....I have years of experience, breaking down game film.....and everyone on this board can weigh in on there opinion on a particular play.....

 

He'll just keep moving the goalposts.