Wrong. He was given the job before training camp started.WoolfolksUncle said:
"Woolfolk is going to line up there on the other side and it’s his job to lose. It’s his, I gave it to him, and he’s going to have to keep it. He’s got work to do, we’re going to keep him out of the nickelback spot and leave him at the corner, and we’re going to get him ready to start the season" - Jeff Fisher - 7/28/05
The rest is history.
Brian said:
Coach Fisher's Monday report
HEAD COACH JEFF FISHER, Oct. 10, 2005
(on the nickel defense packages and rookie Reynaldo Hill)
Our nickel packages are basically week-to-week, and we’ll look at our opponent this week and see how we best match up. But, he [Reynaldo Hill] did fine. He missed a couple tackles, which you don’t want to see, but from an awareness standpoint and a coverage standpoint, I thought he did a nice job.
Andre [Woolfolk] was inside, familiar with his old position and did well in there.
Like the X Files, the truth is always out there.l......;
What does that have to do with him being handed the outside spot before camp and then losing it to a rookie 7th round draft pick?
Brian said:
What I have said all along is that Andre did not move inside so much because of his play outside, he moved inside because Hill cannot tackle well (and that proved itself as the remainder of the season played out) which is a must as the nickel . He was not awarded the position until after Andre's injury.... want that part posted up here also.... no problem. Nickelbacks must tackle well... If you need this broken down any further, I cannot help you.
Thats true Brian, Woolfolk was a dominating shut down CB but because Hill didn't tackle well they decided to play Hill on the outside against the better WRs for 100% of the defensive plays and Woolfolk on the inside for the 50% or so nickel plays. Sometimes you just don't get it Brian.
Brian said:
I didn't say it Brian.... Jeff Fisher did and during the season, it proved itself. Hill would be in place to make plays sometimes, and sometimes he would (don't count the 3 ints because all three came straight to him no play to be made like fielding a punt almost). Don't blame me for bringing the low tackling ability to light (last season - sure he's working on it and will improve), blame SportsCenter. Although I did watch the games and I am sure everyone did and knows this is true.
Gunny - Nothing against Hill personally, just making a point backing up what I said as true
I like your ability - Brian - and Soxcats ability to ignore the quote I posted from Fisher. I did the same thing you did. Soxcat, your sarcastic comment following this one is just stamped with what Fisher said. It has nothing to do with Brian or I. Here it is again and your personal copy of the book that can help you out as well:
Coach Fisher's Monday report
HEAD COACH JEFF FISHER, Oct. 10, 2005
(on the nickel defense packages and rookie Reynaldo Hill)
Our nickel packages are basically week-to-week, and we’ll look at our opponent this week and see how we best match up. But, he [Reynaldo Hill] did fine. He missed a couple tackles, which you don’t want to see, but from an awareness standpoint and a coverage standpoint, I thought he did a nice job.
Andre [Woolfolk] was inside, familiar with his old position and did well in there.
That was directly from Jeff Fisher's comments but in case you are still having trouble understanding, I went ahead and did the research for another title. You may not be confident in the one provided for your buddy:
Now, having said all this to you guys and respond however you will what you will.... .I won't continue this petticoat junction, doesn't make a difference, none of us make a difference in what is going to happen, so does it really matter conversation....
Jeff said it best but we didn't listen.
Whatever happens will happen and we will have to wait until mid-August/September to see how it all happens. Press on gentlemen, enjoy your publications, enjoy mini-camp and Camp ..... that's what I will do.... BYE BYE, REALLY....
P.S. All you that PMd me or will PM me, well chat later..... WU
I think Bush is gonna pull the troops and bring em to GoTitans.com to prevent the War that is brewin'
:brow:
:brow:
I think the #2 CB is clearly Hill's to lose. He's likely spent the entire offseason working out and improving his ability to jam at the line. He's worked on technique, viewed film, etc. There is no reason to think he'll not be improved over last season when he beat out Woolfolk as a seventh-round rookie. Why would anyone assume Hill isn't the favorite to start opposite Pacman right now?
I'm all for hoping Woolfolk has improved to the point he challenges but we need to be realistic here. Woolfolk isn't even guaranteed to win the nickel spot at this point. Fuller was getting a lot of praise up to the time he was injured. Though there is probably a lot of unknown on him, he too looks to have that upside factor Woolfolk lost last season.
I'm all for hoping Woolfolk has improved to the point he challenges but we need to be realistic here. Woolfolk isn't even guaranteed to win the nickel spot at this point. Fuller was getting a lot of praise up to the time he was injured. Though there is probably a lot of unknown on him, he too looks to have that upside factor Woolfolk lost last season.
i'd say thats a pretty good way to put it. fuller's versailtility is also a factor. he can play outside and/or inside corner and also both safety spots. like jeff said its hill's job to lose on the outside and i bet woolfolk pushes pretty hard for a spot on the inside/outside, in which i love competition. let the best man win. i'd love to see dre' succeed.there saying pac looks very good in OTA's so far, so thats very encouraging to hear. the only thing im slighty concerned with is the depth @ corner. after pac renayldo and dre' theres only gardner left because of waddell's injury. but this is where fuller helps out so i think well be ok. other than that, this defense has a chance to be very good.
Ok WU, so if Woolfolk was moved to nickle back simply because he was a better tackler and not because he couldn't cover well then why when the team was not in Nickle did he not play over Reynaldo? If he was better then why only play 50% of the snaps as Soxcat pointed out? Just currious. Do you really think Woolfolk is better than Reynaldo?
Hill jumps routes and covers man better but he does tackle poorly.
Woolfolk plays off too much but he does tackle well.
It's a toss up in my book "who is better" becaue their individual strengths are different. I've seen both of them look solid only to be disappointed a play or two later.
Woolfolk plays off too much but he does tackle well.
It's a toss up in my book "who is better" becaue their individual strengths are different. I've seen both of them look solid only to be disappointed a play or two later.
I think both show flashes and have consistency issues.Riverman said:
In Hill's case, you can chalk a lot of it to inexperience and something he'll improve on in time. I don't think Woolfolk can claim inexperience though injury has limted him throughout his career.
:ha:WoolfolksUncle said:
Yeah ok. Kinda like Andre's only interception last year.....When he was following Bulluck on a blitz. Bulluck tipped the pass straight up and Andre happened to be right there behind him when it came down. I guess that doesn't count either.
Hill made his plays because he was in position in pass coverage. It's the sign of a good DB. Andre was the one who was "fielding a punt". More like a hand-off.
WoolfolksUncle said:
After that "quote" by Fisher Hill started 10 of 11 games at CB.
Hill improved as the season went on which you would expect for a guy coming as a rookie. Woolfolk was in his 3rd year. Obviously they saw a lot more upside in Hill.
On Fuller: the only thing I'm worried about is that he's played one game since the end of 2004. I was ready to buy into the hype last year before he got injured. Now I'm holding back.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
