Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Originally posted by Psinex:
Not sure if this is a legit argument. Would I keep Goldson over Bowman, no. Is it really an either/or? I doubt it. However, we have a whole group of guys that may need to be exstended (or uped) Brown, Culliver, Bowman, Soap and Justin. Not sure how it all works out.
I think that our team's money would be better spent on extending NaVarro Bowman's contract. For all the great plays, people seem to forget that Dashon injured Tarell Brown on what probably would've been a Niners interception if he had looked to see who he was decapitating. Then he disrupted a Carlos Rogers int in progress. And these were both potentially game-changing plays against the Giants in the NFC Championship!
I've been wondering about this as well given who we need to resign down the road, the financial talks of the Manning would-be-effects, etc. Sometimes you've got to lose one to gain many more. What's best for the team down the road?
And then when I read the articles on Spillman
today, it got me thinking. They've had two years to offer Goldson a contract (and they did, twice). It has been Goldson who has not accepted the LT offer (b/c he wants Weddle money?).
So from Donetell's perspective, it's next man up. That next man is Spillman, who just signed a LT contract and from what was quoted by these coaches, the DB's are evolving with the wide-open offenses in the league, stating they are looking at shorter S's (5'9 to 6'0) but who have great cover skills, range and make-up speed to counter these 3 & 4 WR spread sets. Spillman first was used as a CB and now the coaches seem to describe him as a FS who likes to hit, has excellent speed, is 6'0" but the same weight as Goldson (Goldson is 6"2"), great coverage skills (used an example of his knock-down coverage of a pass to Moss), competitive, hard worker, ST ace (nose for the ball and ball carrier), etc. I'm sure Donetell would love to have Goldson in an working with the entire defense BUT he also sounds happy that Spillman is getting the reps as a starter as well as the experience the backups are getting (Robinson and UDFA's).
The big concerns I've had with Goldson's game is his lack of range (unless he starts 30 yards deep) from the middle of the field to the sidelines. I've yet to see a S get to the sidelines in time to help with over-the-top coverage. I can't remember one single knock-down or INT all year. I felt with, essentially, 2 strong safeties in Goldson/Whitner, we'll be stellar in run support and the intermediate zones and 50/50 in the RZ. That's how it played out to a T. The other holes in his game is his propensity to take very poor angles, hesitation and you could argue his selfishness to make the "big INT" at all costs (some look to the NFCCG as examples where twice his teammate was in better position to make the INT but he went for it himself and crushed our own guys). We had ZERO S held on the simple RZ post route TD to Manningham also with good off-the-bench CB coverage outside-in (blown coverage?). And let's be honest, aside from two of Goldson's INT's (diving INT & baiting Brees), those were some of the worst thrown balls I have ever seen. They were literally tossed right to him in the middle of the field. The intimidation factor was a big intangible for our S's as well as their leadership and experience.
But no way, IMHO, is Goldson worth more than 5 years 25 million (the same contract we've offered him the past 2 years) and I'd even write in some incentives for PD's (over INT's) esp. for those re: range and PD's along the sidelines.
I liken Goldson to Crabtree this year. It's time to put up or shut up b/c it sounds like we have some hungry guys behind them with great attitudes and work ethics and who may even have more upside and fit our philosophies better just waiting for their chance. And that's a good thing.
[ Edited by NCommand on Jun 1, 2012 at 7:44 AM ]