There are 98 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Why hasn't Roman been cut yet?

Originally posted by thorobred:
what is going on with this guy, i dont know why we didnt trade him on draft day we could of got something for him, at least a 6 or 7

You think any team would give up a 7th round pick for him?
  • fanoe
  • Info N/A
who's gonna trade for a guy about to be cut?
lets pretend he never existed.
Originally posted by Grigga2021:
Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
with goldson's injuries we'd be stupid not to keep roman on as a vet back up.

100% agree. If Goldson can stay healthy though, I think we have a stud.

based on what
  • GEEK
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 17,148
Unless Taylor and Williams have amazing training camps and pre-seasons, there is no reason why Mark Roman should be cut from our roster.

The worst thing we have in Mark Roman is a knowledgeable backup that has starting experience. He also has experience at FS and SS. I'd say we keep Roman as the primary backup to SS only, allowing Reggie Smith to compete with Goldson for the FS spot.

CB: Clements/Spencer/Free Agent Signing
CB: Harris/Brown
FS: Goldson/Smith
SS: Lewis/Roman
Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
with goldson's injuries we'd be stupid not to keep roman on as a vet back up.

Yeah that way if Goldson gets hurt, then Roman can go in...miss a few tackles...blow LOTS of coverages...and hey maybe if we're lucky, he'll cost us a coulple of games!

All while taking up a roster slot that "might" have gone to someone else that actually had a chance to help this team, or a younger player that might be developed.
Originally posted by RDB4216:
Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
with goldson's injuries we'd be stupid not to keep roman on as a vet back up.

Yeah that way if Goldson gets hurt, then Roman can go in...miss a few tackles...blow LOTS of coverages...and hey maybe if we're lucky, he'll cost us a coulple of games!

All while taking up a roster slot that "might" have gone to someone else that actually had a chance to help this team, or a younger player that might be developed.
Do you read what you posted? Come on, man. Roman isn't known for missing lots of tackles or blowing a lot of coverages. Even his harsher critics will admit that much. I'm not a Roman fan at all. He is a guy that doesn't make plays, but he's also a guy that doesn't make mistakes. B/c of that, he's the perfect backup for if/when Goldson gets injured. A rookie or younger player would be much more likely to miss a few tackles and blow coverages. Watch the games and think for yourself. We gain little or nothing by cutting Roman.
Originally posted by DownSouth:
Originally posted by RDB4216:
Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
with goldson's injuries we'd be stupid not to keep roman on as a vet back up.

Yeah that way if Goldson gets hurt, then Roman can go in...miss a few tackles...blow LOTS of coverages...and hey maybe if we're lucky, he'll cost us a coulple of games!

All while taking up a roster slot that "might" have gone to someone else that actually had a chance to help this team, or a younger player that might be developed.
Do you read what you posted? Come on, man. Roman isn't known for missing lots of tackles or blowing a lot of coverages. Even his harsher critics will admit that much. I'm not a Roman fan at all. He is a guy that doesn't make plays, but he's also a guy that doesn't make mistakes. B/c of that, he's the perfect backup for if/when Goldson gets injured. A rookie or younger player would be much more likely to miss a few tackles and blow coverages. Watch the games and think for yourself. We gain little or nothing by cutting Roman.


Yes Mr. Nolan, I do read what I write. I also watch games myself instead of listening to sportscasters or critics telling me what I should think. Roman may know the defense and can call the plays, but he can't execute. He is slow and out of proper position a lot. You realize that if a CB is in coverage and the play calls for coverage over the top by the Safety...and the CB lets the WR inside expecting that help and it isn't there...it's the CB that gets blamed for the play, but it's the Safety's fault.

I've never understood why we signed this guy in the first place. In Green Bay he was a mediocre tackle and worse in coverage. You are right about him not making plays. 5 INT's and 4 forced fumbles in 130 career games? Wow!

We gain little or nothing by cutting him? Already covered this. We gain a roster spot that can be used to carry a younger player and develop him. If Roman were a "perfect back-up" to Goldson (who he started over all last year), then he wouldn't have lost his starting job in the off-season.
Originally posted by RDB4216:
Roman may know the defense and can call the plays, but he can't execute. He is slow and out of proper position a lot.
He is not a liability in coverage. At worst, he's the 3rd best cover-safety on the roster, while at best, he's the 2nd best cover safety.

While every DB will get beat, Roman doesn't make mistakes often. His physical limitations prevent him from making big plays (any big plays). That is why Goldson is being given a shot. Goldson isn't being put at FS b/c he beat Roman for the job or b/c Roman stunk out loud. Goldson got the job b/c he makes plays every year in TC, but not in preseason or actual games. It is to see if he can keep the job b/c it's pretty clear we've seen all Roman has got to give and he's on the last year of his deal.

Cutting Roman nets us exactly nothing, but a hole at backup FS that would be filled with a guy drafted to play CB (R.Smith/Hudson) an UDFA (Baker) or a 7th rd pick (Taylor). A roster spot? If that is all we gain, it's just not worth it imo. FS is a sore spot on the team as it is--Goldson can't stay healthy and Roman can't make plays--why count on a rookie or developmental guy to be the primary backup to a FS that has injury issues when you can keep a consistently average veteran to do backup duties?

It's true that by letting Roman shop for a trade, it's pretty clear the team isn't terribly worried about not having him. His contract is up so we won't have him next year anyway (worried or not). R.Smith is expected to see some time at FS and we did draft a FS from LSU that had a good season in 2007. The Matts were high on the 2 UDFA safeties last year Baker and Lewis(?).

It's likely we'll carry at least 9 DBs, maybe even 10. The first 7 are easy, but after that it gets harder. Roman won't be cut anytime soon b/c the team doesn't gain anything. Will Roman be cut after TC and preseason? Only if R.Smith, Taylor, Baker have a strong showing at FS. THEN it makes sense to cut Roman, but not now.
[ Edited by DownSouth on Apr 30, 2009 at 7:38 AM ]
  • Karma
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 762
I know that most of you opened this thread with anger already boiling in your blood. The vitriol spat in Roman's direction for the last few months has been incredible. Now, a few things I know:

1.) We are a better team with him on the bench or on another team.
2.) He has been M.I.A. when in comes to generating turnovers.
3.) Some of his coverage lapses last year were horrendous.

All that said, I still like the guy. He has been a good teammate and he filled in during a transitional phase. We have needed a young guy to step up and win the job from him, and it looks like Goldson has finally done it, but to you, Mark Roman, I say thank you for your effort and your leadership. Thank you for trying to be a better player than you could be. I have no problem bashing players that were lazy or didn't care enough about the team or prima donnas tha thought they WERE the team. Those players deserve to be lambasted. I don't think Roman is one. He worked hard, great attitude, but he just wasn't good enough.
Better a backup you know then one off the streets you don't. Roman, just good enough for the other team to win by 7pts.
Originally posted by GEEK:
Unless Taylor and Williams have amazing training camps and pre-seasons, there is no reason why Mark Roman should be cut from our roster.

The worst thing we have in Mark Roman is a knowledgeable backup that has starting experience. He also has experience at FS and SS. I'd say we keep Roman as the primary backup to SS only, allowing Reggie Smith to compete with Goldson for the FS spot.

CB: Clements/Spencer/Free Agent Signing
CB: Harris/Brown
FS: Goldson/Smith
SS: Lewis/Roman

no no no no no no no...


... that just makes way too much sense here on the Zone.

~Ceadder
Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Unless Taylor and Williams have amazing training camps and pre-seasons, there is no reason why Mark Roman should be cut from our roster.

The worst thing we have in Mark Roman is a knowledgeable backup that has starting experience. He also has experience at FS and SS. I'd say we keep Roman as the primary backup to SS only, allowing Reggie Smith to compete with Goldson for the FS spot.

CB: Clements/Spencer/Free Agent Signing
CB: Harris/Brown
FS: Goldson/Smith
SS: Lewis/Roman

no no no no no no no...


... that just makes way too much sense here on the Zone.

~Ceadder

youre right makes too much since so.........boooooooooo
i'm just saying the dude wanted to be traded instead of taking a back seat, is his roster spot gonna be tied to playing some ST, how much work is going to get in the nickel or dime package.

im not saying youre not right but is the dude worth it? really?
from sando's blog


'Mark Roman, free safety. The 49ers have already benched him and let him seek trade opportunities. There were no takers."
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
You do not make cuts until you have a replacement.

conventienal wisdom. I agree.