DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2019 NFL Season 2019 NFL Draft Browns pick Greedy Williams 46th overall

You might want to look up Steve Wilkes defensive schemes.

Greedys clips are golden. He almost took the bait, but I'm more impressed that he actually has the confidence to almost say bold comments about some pretty good WRs.

Can't wait to see him in action.

I brought this up once with no response so I'll ask again.....

I think we both know that you can't play press coverage without having CB's that have the skill set to do so. We saw it here a couple of years ago when we were soft in the secondary.

So my question is does Wilks really favor and prefer cover 2 or is it that he's lacked the personnel to actually play press man coverage? Often times a coach is limited in what he can do based on the personnel he's being given to work with.

I have no idea of the answer to this question but it certainly seems odd that we've gone after the talent it takes and the style of players to play press man coverage to not implement it. I also know that most teams do not have what looks to be two possible man coverage CB's with the speed that we do.

While I appreciate the information it still doesn't answer if some of his defensive calls were based on the talent he was given. Actually when it comes to his time in Carolina it did state that he played a three LB'er set due to the strength of talent he had at the LB'er position.

I think we have corners who can do just about anything coverage-wise now. Hopefully, Wilks will mix it up. Press man might be a good place to start. However, there are plays and ways of countering man coverage.

I'm sure you know most of this. Felt worth mentioning, though.

I'm not sure Wilks has been in a coordinator position long enough in any one place to really implement "his D." It's kind of something that has to grow organically over time. Doing what they do best is most likely the ideal starting point. How fast they can pick things up and "perfect" them determines breadth.

And you're right. I certainly understand that not one single scheme will be used but it will be a mixture of defensive sets. You can't rely on any one type of D on every play.

I also understand that sometimes a coach can be limited in the schemes he can run based on the talent. You also bring up a good point that it takes time to fully implement your entire system. I just feel for anyone to come to a definitive conclusion on what Wilks will run here one would have to look at the personnel he had to work with to make an accurate determination if that is what he actually prefers to run or if that is what he was relegated to running based on personnel.

I think we both understand that it takes a pretty talented secondary group to run man coverage in something like a three WR set and it's not that many teams that can do that well based on personnel.

I don’t think any of us can answer that question until this team starts playing games. It is a great question because Wilks doesn’t have a long track record.

I could have been wrong. Maybe you didn't say we had the next Deion Sanders.

Ah, the condescending tone of Vers. You're right, I've never seen anything from Wilkes all knowing arbiter of truth.

This was my point, if Wilkes really plans to have two press man corners, who played nothing but press man in college (and ward last year) run a zone scheme only he is the wrong man for this job.

It would be like taking Baker who owns the middle of the field and getting the ball out quick run 7 step drops and slow developing plays to the outer hash.....you know, like Haley was having him do.


This idea that a coaches system doesn't change is archaic and only the old guys cling to the idea.

I'll answer this w/more detail later because I have to run, but you do realize I have been responding to posters who are claiming we are going to play a Press-Man, right?

Please point out where I said we are going to (implying certainty) be running a press man scheme?

Tossing this guy into a zone scheme is a waste of this all this skill. I suspect you will see elements of press man and some zone against down and distance. At no point did I say this would be a strict press man team.

I'll try to answer this, but as usual, this conversation has become a war w/some people instead of an actual football conversation.

Number one. I do NOT know what our primary coverages will be next year.

I also never said we would play Cover 2 primarily.

What I did say was that Steve Wilikes played more Zone Coverage than any other DC in the league when he was w/Carolina. That is a fact and not an opinion. I even explained the various coverages to give people an idea of what they are all about. No one really wanted to talk about that.

I also said that Steve Wilkes did not play the most Cover 2 in the league. Nor Cover 3. Not Cover 4 or Cover 6. That means he mixed up his zone coverages. I think one can see that that is factual and not an opinion.

I think the above facts should be at least recognized and considered when people are proclaiming what type of Coverages we will play.


I also said I hope we don't play much Cover 2 because in that particular coverage, you are not asking your corners to run w/WRs. Tackling is more important for the corners in a Cover 2 defense. That is also a fact. But again, I NEVER said Wilkes was going to play Cover 2 as our primary coverage.

I was looking to educate rather than fight. Education on fooball talks used to be valued on here. Now, it's about winning arguments.

With all that said, I do not know if Wilkes and will continue playing a ton of zone coverage like he did as a DC and probably learned from his mentors coming up through the coaching ranks as an assistant. That last part is not a fact. It's speculation based on sound reasoning. He may indeed switch to a Press-Man coverage as his primary scheme. It would fit his personnel, so he might. But, I don't think anyone can say for certain that he will make that switch. We only know what he has done in the past and I don't think that should just be thrown out the window because some posters say otherwise.

I also know that he likes to run an aggressive 4-3 defense and we saw that in Grateful's tweet. Zone coverage makes sense behind that type of approach.

I do hope that he incorporates some Cover 1 into our defense. I think it fits the personnel. The best zone coverage fit for our personnel is Cover 3, in my opinion. Cover 4 makes sense at the end of halves and games and/or in situations where we have a large lead. Cover 6 is tough in the NFL because the hashmarks are much closer together than they are in college and high school.

But again, despite some attempts from others to put words into my mouth, I never said what coverages we are going to primarily go with. And I better mention this just in case someone wants to use it to debunk what I'm saying. I think all DCs mix up their coverages. You want to keep the offense play caller off-balance and confuse the QB and receivers by showing one look and playing another coverage. We saw that w/Wilkes when he mixed up his zone coverages between Cover 2, Cover 3, Cover 4, and Cover 6. Hopefully, he will throw in some Cover 1 and Cover 0, which are your man coverages.

I hope that helps answer your questions and explains my position.

You made a false claim about what I said, to which I rebutted. That is not a war, that is not you teaching me something that is me calling out the FACT since you want to get hung up on facts that you made a false statement based on my post on what Greedy Williams is as a player. At no point did I say we were going to play press man as a base defense or even at all, we could very well still play mostly zone.

You have a very hard time when anyone rebutes you, that's on you. You smugly told me to go watch some Wilkes tape and then doubled down by saying "some posters" (like we don't know who you are talking about), claim we are going to run press man, again not accurate.

Happy to learn, but you're not going to misinterpret what I said and then try to talk down to me.

Okay. You're right. I'm wrong. Have a nice day.

I wasn't trying to make light of, nor dispute the facts you presented.

My question was more about the possible circumstances that may have led to those facts. I do think that a good coach, which I'm not sure if Wilks is or isn't, will scheme to the talent he has. I just wondered if you knew if the talent he had was best suited for man coverage.

If not, that may help explain why he used more cover two. I certainly have no idea myself and hope he will adjust based on the talent we have on the roster.

You could be right about the talent. I don't know. I just think that you have to examine a man's past when predicting his future.

He might change. I hope he does. It would make sense. But Pit, the other thing that we have to factor in--and I didn't explain it very well--is who were Wilkes mentors? Are they zone guys or man guys? That's probably important, too.

We'll see what happens. But again, when I made my initial post on the Cover 2 thread in the PFF, I was trying to "educate" folks and was not looking for a fight. And again, that used to be valued. Not so much, anymore.

Skill sets you covet:

WR's: Their primary attribute should be the ability to catch the ball.

DB's: Their primary attribute should be the ability to prevent WR's from catching the ball.


Tackling is a secondary requirement. Unless they are being called up in run support or to blitz the QB, it is not required until/unless the DB fails at their primary task.... and they can usually get away with a big, solid hit.

Oh I agree that if you raise your voice in any direction other than the "opinion du jour" it gets attacked and labeled with nothing of substance in the form of debate.

I thought that Greedy Williams, responed appropriately to the question of his tackling in his presser.
He basically said ... I played pressman coverage, with a confused look on his face.

When a CB is in pressman coverage with his back to the play behind him, after he has flipped his hips ... This is not very conducive to defending screens and delayed rushing plays.
Even at the start of a play, in pressman, the CB is in position to be blocked by the receiver, when it is a run. Some times they defeat the block, some times not, but it is harder for the receiver to block in space, then it is in pressman.

Playing in a zone coverage, as a CB you can see the play development in front of you and you should be more of a factor in the run game support.

It is called man on man ... Attempt to throw the receivers timing off, cover man by defending/intercepting the pass, and or tackle/strip man of ball, if he catches a pass.

The benefits are in defending against the big play ... Vs giving up the dinks and dunks.

Having good LBs' and DLs' is the antidote to this liability of pressman coverage.

j/c

Not that it's a big deal, but it's Wilks not Wilkes.

Also found this interesting....

Thought it could be relevant here...


Link

Wilks. Source: https://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/coaches-roster/

j/c:

As I mentioned earlier, Carolina--under Wilks, played more zone coverage than any other team in the league when he was their DC. I thought it might be important to see who he assisted in order to get a better feel for what his tendencies might be.

Wilks spent 11 of his first 12 years in the NFL w/Ron Rivera in Chicago, San Diego, and Carolina. I really couldn't find which coverages Riverboat Ron preferred, but did see that Sean McDermont, the DC who proceeded Wilks for the Panthers, played zone coverages.

The big difference between the two is that McDermont's D sat back a lot and Wilks' unit blitzed like crazy. According to PFF, Wilks blitzed 43% of the time, which was second most in the NFL. The one article that I was reading was during the season, but at that point Carolina blitzed 50% of the time on 3rd downs, while the league average was 35.6%.

I don't know about you guys, but his style sounds very similar to Gregg Williams' approach.

John Dorsey explains why he loved Greedy Williams in the draft

https://brownswire.usatoday.com/2019/05/...s-in-the-draft/

In a recent guest spot on Sirius XM NFL Radio, Browns GM John Dorsey went into greater detail on why he wanted to move up and snag CB Greedy Williams in the second round of the 2019 NFL Draft. The Browns traded up from No. 49 to 46 to acquire the LSU cornerback with the team’s top pick in this draft class.

“There were four guys that we had penciled in really high at the top of that second round,” Dorsey told host Pat Kirwan. “I thought if we could move up a couple of spots just to be safe and not give up too much compensation, I was okay with that.”

What about Williams made him so special in Dorsey’s eyes?

“He’s smooth. He’s easy. He’s fluid. What I like about him is his feet. He’s got great feet. He makes plays with his feet. And he’s got really unique body control in his movement skills.”

Dorsey also talked up Williams’ experience against the top talents in the country in college.

“He’s played against the top receivers in the SEC. He’s competed and he’s shut them down.”

One interesting tidbit: Kirwan led into the discussion by stating how highly he regarded Williams as a press man cover corner. Dorsey strongly agreed with that assessment. For fans wondering about the fit in new coordinator Steve Wilks’ defense, it sure seems like the Browns know what they’re getting in Williams.

It might also be interesting to take a look at the top 2 Cb's for each of those teams that see where their talents lie. Were they skilled at man but week in zone? Were they weak at man and strong in zone. Good at both, Bad at both?

How he pairs his Zone vs Man percentages would give us some insight into Wilks. I don't know how to evaluate the Cb's to do this. But if some is skilled enough and motivated, it might be nice to see.

Agreed. Pit brought this up earlier. I've been thinking of looking into it, but I don't seem to get a lot of replies when I actually invest time into researching things or explaining things--such as the zone coverages in the Cover 2 thread in the PFF--as I do for other reasons.

I'll think about it because it could be a good conversation. I just wonder how many people are interested in that?

I said the day we hired him it was the PERFECT SYSTEM REPLACEMENT for Williams .... just like the stars aligned for us with Dorsey sitting there mid season they aligned for us to have such a perfect scheme replacement fit for Williams style as far as personal went ... there both HYPER AGGRESSIVE DC’s whose personal needs are very similar ...

SWEEEET .... it sure is nice to have the stars aligned right for a change ... lord only knows we were due

As far as his history and scheme are concerned with how he may run his D here ... u bring up 100% valid info that is factual and are a part of the equation .... history in most cases is a great teacher and our own history definelty influences our decisions ... so Wilks history is a part of the equation ....

When u finish this equation I believe there is overriding factors to his history that have me personally feeling very comfie with Wilks running many different coverages with man leading the way and press man being the biggest portion of that .... here is how i finished the equation ....

- i agree with everything u said about his past ... 100% ...
- i also agree with Pit as do u that personal and your HC’s history influence what u do greatly ...

Now, the rest of the equation ...

- The first thing Freddie did when he took over as OC was implement plays that fit the players skill sets and he even went around and gave the players input into some play designs they could excel at and/or would like to see implemented ....

- in there press conferences Dorsey, Freddie and both new coordinators all mentioned rowing in the same direction and getting input from the entire staff ... if the new guys weren’t on board with that then why did they take the jobs?

So now we hire Wilks and i felt comfie right away based off all of the above that we were going to continue to BUILD what Williams was building an aggressive D ...

- then WE TRADED UP FOR GREEDIE ....

Why would we trade up for GREEDIE if we weren’t going to run more man than zone as Greedie’s skill set clearly is a much better fit for man especially if he’s an unwilling or not a very good tackler ....

Trading up for GREEDIE makes zero sense if u want to run mainly zone coverages ... thats not a smart way to build a football team ... Dorsey does not try and fit square pegs in round holes ...

So for me, when i add it all up .... Wilk’s history + our org philosophy + trading up to take GREEDIE = More man coverage than zone by a statistically significant margin ....

But thats just me and my logic ... i feel very comfie with that conclusion based off the entire picture ...

Greedy is exactly who I wanted out of this draft. I am super pumped to have him opposite another athletic freak in Ward. Two of the most athletic, quick and fast guys in the league.

Very exciting time to be a Browns fan. Almost surreal to think this team is one season removed from 0-16.

I think we're pretty much on the same page here. It would seem odd to me to draft two CB's in consecutive seasons that are both known mainly for their great man coverage only to divert away from that.

Then Vers also has a point when looking at Wilks history. So it's certainly going to be interesting in how this all plays out.

2015: LCB: Charles Tillman, RCB:Josh Norman

2016: LCB: James Bradberry, RCB: Daryl Worley

2017: LCB: James Bradberry, RCB: Daryl Worley

• None of their CBs were ever very productive. Low INTs by all of them in every season.
• The most was four by Josh Norman in 2015; aside from that the most was two by any of them.
• The Charles Tillman they had was not the rock star Charles Tillman that got famous in Chicago, this was end-of-the-road, last-year-of-his-career Charles Tillman. He played one season in Carolina before retiring.

In 2018, in Arizona, he had Patrick Peterson, but he also had someone named CB Bene Benwikere opposite him. Peterson made the Pro Bowl even with mediocre stats. Benwikere was with him in Carolina, but was apparently bad enough to get released eleven games into the season. He was picked up by Oakland two weeks later and racked up 2.5 tackles in four games... he is currently out of work.

Tre Boston has seemed to follow Wilks everywhere, but I don't think he is in our future.


Looking at the scouting reports on Bradberry & Worley, neither were ever really considered fluid or great Man Cover corners.
In short, it does not look like he's ever had a secondary as talented at man coverage as this one to play with.

IMO .... Its all ready played out bro ... now were just waiting for the proof ... these guys do what makes sense ... this is a NO-BRAINER as far as what makes sense and what don’t ...

The cool part ... we have BALLERS regardless of witch scheme we play ...

Were used to not having the talent to run any scheme ... just look at that 0 - 16 secondary ... Peppers base position was most teams Hail Mary spot for their safety ... *L* ....

Now its a matter of UTILIZING our talent as opposed to figuring out ways to HIDE the lack of it ....

Much better convo ...

LETS GOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo

Just because people don't reply doesn't mean that the post isn't read and appreciated. I don't reply to a lot of those type posts becuse I don't feel that I have the knowledge to contribute.

Looks to me that outside of Peterson, he didn't have the Cb's to play a lot of man.

It's also the nature of a message board, unless I disagree, even if I have some knowledge on it, it's been covered well so what should I be adding?

The key really is that coverages have to be mixed up. Every good DC makes a variety of calls depending on personnel, opponent's personnel, game situation, etc. There should be an element of randomness there, as well as disguise. The offense shouldn't know what coverage you're going to play based on down and distance and the look you're giving.

I do hope we play more man coverage. That comes in a variety of flavors, but cover 1 is always nice when you have the players to run it. That means getting a pass rush with 5 rushers, 5 players in man coverage, a safety deep to significantly reduce big plays compared to 'zero' (6 rushers, no deep safety.)

The thing is though, cover 1, while solid, is still pretty risky. It's one thing to use against a team like the Colts that will pretty reliably line up with 3 wide receivers, you go man to man and let the best player win. But then you play a team like the Patriots, and they start motioning Edelman (can't really press him then) or other receivers, they are motioning backs out of the backfield, they run pick plays and so on. All ways to just completely chew up man coverage. If you were doing it in Madden, your opponent would whine about motion glitches but in the NFL this is something you have to actually contend with.

You're going to have to play some zone coverage to mix things up. Or maybe a couple of your corners get injured, or they can't get their footing on a wet day, or whatever the case may be. So you mix it up and give different looks.

The Colts mainly ran cover 2 and cover 3 this year. Young, very cheap defense (they pay Luck and still have a huge amount of cap space) but actually fairly effective because they play good fundamental football, and there's not a tremendous amount of overlap between the concepts to beat cover 2 and those to beat cover 3.

So for example, the classic cover 3 buster is overloading the zones. Outside receiver runs a fly, slot receiver a corner or deep out, back runs to the flat. One of those is usually open. Yet in a cover 2, that outside receiver is probably getting jammed, and this can severely screw up the timing. If the pass rush does its job, the offense is looking at a check down at best.

The hybrid coverages are interesting but agree that cover 6 is a little soft. I kind of like a modified cover 3, where one outside corner jams the receiver and plays the flat, and the other corner and 2 safeties play deep thirds. It's an unusual look but very sound. You probably won't fool Tom Brady with it, but Sam Darnold.. maybe.

You don't want to overuse these concepts because they aren't the greatest use of Ward's or William's talents but it's good to change things up nonetheless.. it might not even be one of those two anyway. One might be off the field, or Ward may be lined up inside or whatever.

Somebody posted earlier the cover 3 looks with man elements built in that Steve Wilks used in the past. That can be very effective when you have the players to run it (and we do) and I'd expect a lot of that. That is similar Seattle's base coverage several years back when they had the legion of boom. Cover 3, corners often pressed which is somewhat uncommon in cover 3 (you can bend the rules when you have Earl Thomas playing deep), good pass rush with speedy linebackers to clean things up underneath. That's a winning combination. It's still good to mix things up though.