There are 172 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

CJ Spillman vs Goldson

Originally posted by red42x:
Tampa Bay Buccaneers SS Dashon Goldson is scheduled to receive $25.5 million in guaranteed money in the first three years of his five-year contract.

So he is going to see that 8+mill a year no matter for those first 3 years. When you are the best in world at your job position, you will get paid accordingly.

Weddle got $19 mill upfront.
It was risky for Goldson, but he finally got Dat Weddle $$$$ and some....and rightfully so.
Here is what NONE of us know in the Goldson vs Spillman/Robinson question - we all judge athletes largely by their perceived athleticism, but there is so much more too it that only the coaches know from practice, diagnosing the play calls of games, and the classroom time.

1. COVERAGE CALL OUTS: Goldson had the experience to call out coverages 5 years at the position,right? Were the coaches happy with it? Enough to keep him the starter, yes. Have Spillman or Robinson gained the trust of the coaches? Or could Whitner take over that duty?

2. SPEED - IF Spillman's faster 40 translates into him playing fast, which it seems it does on special teams, does he diagnose plays quick enough and accurately enough to translate the speed into getting to the ball. On punts and kicks, the defender knows where the ball is going. Goldson seemed pretty good at arriving where the ball was going. Make-up speed and over the top speed have more to do with diagnosing (per above) and smoothness of transition (change of direction). If a player is awkward or stiff in transition, it really hinders their game speed. Football is rarely a straightline game - but special teams coverage is more straight line than pass coverage. Goldson was fluid. We'll have to see if Spillman or Robinson can be a fluid in transitions so their speed can be realized.

3. SIZE - Although they weigh the same, and are only 2 inches different in height, Goldson appears to have a really large wingspan. And some guys are just more solid even at the same weight as others. Goldson seems that type - very solid for his weight. I'll give you an example, LOL. My wife has a pitbull - 76 pounds. I have a husky, 82 pounds. Lifting them in the car -- I would swear that darn pitbull weighs more - it is just so damn solid if feels like it weights a ton. The husky is faster :)

4. BALL SKILLS -- Goldson's wingspan did not seem to translate into INTs - he was good at "center field" INTs -- not necessarily "highest point" or cuttng off the throw INTs with his long arms. So if Spillman/Robinson are better at getting to the ball at it's highest point, or slashing in front of the throw, they may in fact be better. But maybe the coaches see in practice that they are horrible at judging the ball - we just don't know.

5. TACKLING - Goldson was good at laying a womp on people - sometimes for a penalty. I'll take the occassional penalty to intimidate receivers in the middle. The biggest thing is the fearlessness and toughness to lay the hit, and then be a sure enough tackler to bring the guy down. Spillman appears to be a sure tackler, and you have to be pretty fearless to run down on coverage units - blockers can really level you sometimes. But again, only the coaches know if Spillman or Robinson can be the "force" on the back end.

All of these things really argue against a rookie starting, unless they are just exceptional in their football IQ. Dahl - experience and high football IQ? Sounds like a good addition while trying to sort through and develop starters. I say smart move. (Plus, you get some great insight into that darn Rams D that stymied us twice last year - that's worth $1MM right there :)
  • LVJay
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,377
Originally posted by HearstFan:
Here is what NONE of us know in the Goldson vs Spillman/Robinson question - we all judge athletes largely by their perceived athleticism, but there is so much more too it that only the coaches know from practice, diagnosing the play calls of games, and the classroom time.

1. COVERAGE CALL OUTS: Goldson had the experience to call out coverages 5 years at the position,right? Were the coaches happy with it? Enough to keep him the starter, yes. Have Spillman or Robinson gained the trust of the coaches? Or could Whitner take over that duty?

2. SPEED - IF Spillman's faster 40 translates into him playing fast, which it seems it does on special teams, does he diagnose plays quick enough and accurately enough to translate the speed into getting to the ball. On punts and kicks, the defender knows where the ball is going. Goldson seemed pretty good at arriving where the ball was going. Make-up speed and over the top speed have more to do with diagnosing (per above) and smoothness of transition (change of direction). If a player is awkward or stiff in transition, it really hinders their game speed. Football is rarely a straightline game - but special teams coverage is more straight line than pass coverage. Goldson was fluid. We'll have to see if Spillman or Robinson can be a fluid in transitions so their speed can be realized.

3. SIZE - Although they weigh the same, and are only 2 inches different in height, Goldson appears to have a really large wingspan. And some guys are just more solid even at the same weight as others. Goldson seems that type - very solid for his weight. I'll give you an example, LOL. My wife has a pitbull - 76 pounds. I have a husky, 82 pounds. Lifting them in the car -- I would swear that darn pitbull weighs more - it is just so damn solid if feels like it weights a ton. The husky is faster :)

4. BALL SKILLS -- Goldson's wingspan did not seem to translate into INTs - he was good at "center field" INTs -- not necessarily "highest point" or cuttng off the throw INTs with his long arms. So if Spillman/Robinson are better at getting to the ball at it's highest point, or slashing in front of the throw, they may in fact be better. But maybe the coaches see in practice that they are horrible at judging the ball - we just don't know.

5. TACKLING - Goldson was good at laying a womp on people - sometimes for a penalty. I'll take the occassional penalty to intimidate receivers in the middle. The biggest thing is the fearlessness and toughness to lay the hit, and then be a sure enough tackler to bring the guy down. Spillman appears to be a sure tackler, and you have to be pretty fearless to run down on coverage units - blockers can really level you sometimes. But again, only the coaches know if Spillman or Robinson can be the "force" on the back end.

All of these things really argue against a rookie starting, unless they are just exceptional in their football IQ. Dahl - experience and high football IQ? Sounds like a good addition while trying to sort through and develop starters. I say smart move. (Plus, you get some great insight into that darn Rams D that stymied us twice last year - that's worth $1MM right there :)

Nice!!

I'm not excited about the Dahl signing, but he does bring 3 things that's definitely worth the money (not expensive/reasonable) dished out -- experience (both safety positions/special teams/familiar with NFC west), an "emergency" back up and that "insight"...
Originally posted by LVJay:
Originally posted by HearstFan:
Here is what NONE of us know in the Goldson vs Spillman/Robinson question - we all judge athletes largely by their perceived athleticism, but there is so much more too it that only the coaches know from practice, diagnosing the play calls of games, and the classroom time.

1. COVERAGE CALL OUTS: Goldson had the experience to call out coverages 5 years at the position,right? Were the coaches happy with it? Enough to keep him the starter, yes. Have Spillman or Robinson gained the trust of the coaches? Or could Whitner take over that duty?

2. SPEED - IF Spillman's faster 40 translates into him playing fast, which it seems it does on special teams, does he diagnose plays quick enough and accurately enough to translate the speed into getting to the ball. On punts and kicks, the defender knows where the ball is going. Goldson seemed pretty good at arriving where the ball was going. Make-up speed and over the top speed have more to do with diagnosing (per above) and smoothness of transition (change of direction). If a player is awkward or stiff in transition, it really hinders their game speed. Football is rarely a straightline game - but special teams coverage is more straight line than pass coverage. Goldson was fluid. We'll have to see if Spillman or Robinson can be a fluid in transitions so their speed can be realized.

3. SIZE - Although they weigh the same, and are only 2 inches different in height, Goldson appears to have a really large wingspan. And some guys are just more solid even at the same weight as others. Goldson seems that type - very solid for his weight. I'll give you an example, LOL. My wife has a pitbull - 76 pounds. I have a husky, 82 pounds. Lifting them in the car -- I would swear that darn pitbull weighs more - it is just so damn solid if feels like it weights a ton. The husky is faster :)

4. BALL SKILLS -- Goldson's wingspan did not seem to translate into INTs - he was good at "center field" INTs -- not necessarily "highest point" or cuttng off the throw INTs with his long arms. So if Spillman/Robinson are better at getting to the ball at it's highest point, or slashing in front of the throw, they may in fact be better. But maybe the coaches see in practice that they are horrible at judging the ball - we just don't know.

5. TACKLING - Goldson was good at laying a womp on people - sometimes for a penalty. I'll take the occassional penalty to intimidate receivers in the middle. The biggest thing is the fearlessness and toughness to lay the hit, and then be a sure enough tackler to bring the guy down. Spillman appears to be a sure tackler, and you have to be pretty fearless to run down on coverage units - blockers can really level you sometimes. But again, only the coaches know if Spillman or Robinson can be the "force" on the back end.

All of these things really argue against a rookie starting, unless they are just exceptional in their football IQ. Dahl - experience and high football IQ? Sounds like a good addition while trying to sort through and develop starters. I say smart move. (Plus, you get some great insight into that darn Rams D that stymied us twice last year - that's worth $1MM right there :)

Nice!!

I'm not excited about the Dahl signing, but he does bring 3 things that's definitely worth the money (not expensive/reasonable) dished out -- experience (both safety positions/special teams/familiar with NFC west), an "emergency" back up and that "insight"...

as long as mark roman never sees the field playing important defensive snaps