PDA

View Full Version : Coleman at FS


tex
06-11-2004, 12:00 AM
I'm not against Coleman switching to FS, but when the Texans got Marlon McCree everyone said it was a steal, so why do the Texans need to switch to a new FS? idonno:

texan279
06-11-2004, 12:05 AM
I don't think he was a steal...IMO we got a quality FS who is an upgrade from Matt Stevens, who can start if needed, and will be a quality backup FS...

Vinny
06-11-2004, 12:11 AM
Depends on who you listen to. Just because someone types it, doesn't mean it is the gospel. McCree is a waiver wire pick up. You do not generally get quality NFL front line starters off the waivers. He is a good spot starter and a solid NFL reserve. That is good enough for me off waivers.

Scooter
06-11-2004, 04:16 AM
simply because we can upgrade his position with an existing player. if we had the choice of mccree or going out and hiring someone at coleman's price i'm willing to bet we stick with mccree. since coleman's here and robinson needs playing time at the cornerback spot, we upgrade two positions and have starter quality depth.

J-Man
06-11-2004, 07:40 AM
One thing you always have to remember about a guy you pick up off the wire...he got put on the wire for a reason. McCree is a C+ or B level player at best...not bad, but not quality either.

We are committed to Dunta and barring injury or suprisingly bad play he needs to be out there at corner. Once that move is made you have to take Coleman (with his 7 interceptions last year) and proven ability as a DB and utilize him. Coleman has plenty time as a safety so this is not as huge of a transition for him as people would believe.

Lucky
06-11-2004, 08:03 AM
Coleman has plenty time as a safety so this is not as huge of a transition for him as people would believe.
It's not a huge transition as far as learning the defense, Coleman is a vet and I'm sure he will be able to make the correct calls. The main question in the collective mind of the Coleman-to-FS doubters is, "Will he make the tackles?". Every Texan fan knows that having a FS who can't make an open field tackle is a killer for a team (a last dig at Mr. Stevens). Coleman has shown a tendency in his 2 seasons in Houston to whiff on an occasional tackle. Now he's the last line of defense. If he makes the tackles, Coleman can become one of the better FS in the game. But that remains to be seen.

J-Man
06-11-2004, 08:18 AM
I admit that the ability to come up in run support or make the stop in the middle of the field is going to be key for Coleman, and that is an ability that he definetly needs to work on.

No one ever accused Coleman of hitting like a ton of bricks, but I suspect that he will be up to the challenge of playing centerfield. Honestly, his contributions will stem more from his ball-hawking and coverage ability and I don't think that anyone (fans, players, coaches) have any illusions about that.

infantrycak
06-11-2004, 09:27 AM
No one ever accused Coleman of hitting like a ton of bricks

Actually one of the guys that originally scouted him coming out of college said he was a very hard hitter and that he suspected his change in hitting style was due to the difference between playing safety and CB. Who knows--I'll believe the heavy hitter part when I see it. Luckily we are in a more pass happy division than some so his coverage ability and ball-hawking will get more use.

Vinny
06-11-2004, 11:21 AM
It's not a huge transition as far as learning the defense, Coleman is a vet and I'm sure he will be able to make the correct calls. The main question in the collective mind of the Coleman-to-FS doubters is, "Will he make the tackles?". Every Texan fan knows that having a FS who can't make an open field tackle is a killer for a team (a last dig at Mr. Stevens). Coleman has shown a tendency in his 2 seasons in Houston to whiff on an occasional tackle. Now he's the last line of defense. If he makes the tackles, Coleman can become one of the better FS in the game. But that remains to be seen. Lucky shares my feelings as well as Infantrycak. I like heavy hitting Safeties but the FS is more of the coverage Safety than the Strong Safety is. Strong Safeties are engaged in more run support and generally play closer to the line of scimage on balance in most alignments. Coleman has the perfect build, coverage skills and all-around ball hawking instincts that a player needs as a NFL FS, but my visions of Tiki Barber turning him into a turnstile on that 70+ yard run still freaks me to this day. Coleman is going to have to be a sure tackler or this will not be a long-term switch.

El Tejano
06-11-2004, 11:50 AM
Mcree is a steal for what he is a back up reserve. We would've had to entrust rookies or journeymen at that position had we not got him. But the fact that he is the back up to Coleman creates some pretty nice depth for us and to me that makes him a steal.

Vinny
06-11-2004, 11:51 AM
Right now I'd have to classify McCree as a 'journeyman' player to be honest.

DominatorDavis
06-11-2004, 12:08 PM
I think that you guys are all making good points. I like what is shared here. I can say this: who ever fills in for Matt Stevens will be an upgrade. That guy couldn't tackle a coffee table. I am happy that he is no longer on the team. Whether it is McRee or Coleman or eventually Earl - you can bet your last dime that the Texans will address the safety issue in the future. If *we* are talking about it here on the boards then you know that management is as well. Right now, quarterback and saftey are the big question marks for this team. Carr has to play better and Coleman and McRee need to produce.

Did I mention that I am glad that Stevens is gone?

BuffSoldier
06-11-2004, 01:19 PM
I like the switch, it upgrades 2 positions and we still have a backup CB if either of our starters get hurt, you can move COleman back to CB and start McCree at FS.

But I have a question. What do you guys think about haveing Coleman play as the 3rd CB in the nickel and having McCree come in and play FS?

Yellow no 5
06-11-2004, 02:43 PM
What about Earl ? He was suppose to have been a first rounder till his inj. If and I know I said If he has comeback to 100% I think he will be in the # 2 spot at FS. Then what would you do with McCree ?

Fiddy
06-11-2004, 03:04 PM
What about Earl ? He was suppose to have been a first rounder till his inj. If and I know I said If he has comeback to 100% I think he will be in the # 2 spot at FS. Then what would you do with McCree ?Earl wont play this year. Capers will take him along slowly like they did to Hollings last year and it gives Earl a year to learn the terminology and system.

I wouldnt be surprised to see McCree on the field in nickle and dime formations a little. You could have Coleman, Robinson, and Glenn at CB and McCree and Brown at the S. Kenny Wright is a good nickel corner though so I dont know if Capers would want Coleman alternating. I dont see a big deal if Coleman does switch positions.

texans
06-11-2004, 03:07 PM
What about Earl ? He was suppose to have been a first rounder till his inj. If and I know I said If he has comeback to 100% I think he will be in the # 2 spot at FS. Then what would you do with McCree ?
he is a ss and that is whear his future is

Yellow no 5
06-11-2004, 03:23 PM
Thanks for the correction.

infantrycak
06-11-2004, 04:46 PM
he is a ss and that is whear his future is

Texans is correct--Earl was brought in as a SS prospect. Casserly has said that he can play either position though. Jamaal Lord was brought in as an experiment to see if he could convert to FS.

Ediddy73
06-11-2004, 05:06 PM
One thing you always have to remember about a guy you pick up off the wire...he got put on the wire for a reason. McCree is a C+ or B level player at best...not bad, but not quality either..
McRee was a Coughlin aquisition, and Del Rio drafted Rashean Mathis. Mathis was slated as high as 17th overall and considered by some the best safety prospect in the draft. No shame in losing your starting job to a guy like that. Just like Coleman lost his spot to Dunta. If we had to cut Coleman to clear roster space after a littany of injuries and capology, would you grade him as low as McRee? McRee got on Del Rio's bad side, and once Mathis was up to speed, he was released. He wasn't bad, just expendable. It cleared the way for Jax to sign K. Johnson and Stokes because Jimmy Smith was injured. anyone remember JR Redmond? #17? Why do you think he played against us? they were that depleted at WR, and needed the extra money McRee was taking up as second string to fill that need. He wasn't the Matt Stevens of the Jags.

Blake
06-11-2004, 05:09 PM
He does add quality depth. Hes not good enough to bump our starters down, but he gives us an excelent option, of one of the players went down.

A Texan
06-11-2004, 06:12 PM
I'm not sure what McCree's deficiencies are. It could be that they don't see him as the QB of the defense. It sure isn't that he isn't good at interceptions. He had 6 in 2002 at Jacksonville. Don't forget that McCree just converted from LB a few years ago. As for Earl, he's a strong safety, not a free safety.

Vinny
06-12-2004, 11:40 AM
Earl backs up Brown. He is NOT a free safety. McCree backs up Coleman.

BornOrange
06-13-2004, 06:41 PM
I don't think Earl is really quite the same time frame as Hollings for several reasons.

First, Hollings was injured earlier in the season, after only 3-4 games. Earl was injured about a month later in the season, so he will probably take about a month longer to rehab. Hollings was actually way ahead of schedule and was able to practice at the beginning of training camp, although he was a little limited. I don't know if Earl is going to be ready to go at the beginning of camp.

More importantly, there is a little more depth at strong safety this year than there was at running back last year. There was a need to get Hollings on the field ASAP because no one knew if Mack was going to be the answer as a full-time starter, if Wells was going to step up as a second year player, or if Davis was going to be able to be more than a return man. There was a lot of uncertainty at RB last year, much more uncertainty than there is at strong safety this year. Brown has been a pretty solid starter the last two years and Walker has shown some potential at safety while being a strong special teams player.

I see the Texans being even more cautious with Earl this year than they were with Hollings last year. He may be on the injured list all year just so they don't have to make a roster decision about cutting either Brown or Walker, assuming Walker is fully recovered from his injury last year.

Texansbacker
06-13-2004, 08:52 PM
Earl may see some time this year but my guess would be it won't be significant, unless there are a string of injuries. That, or he takes the league by storm and is on a mission to prove all the naysayers wrong.

McRee may surprise some people this year, myself included but I wouldn't bet on it. Heard whisperings he may even play a little strong safety.

The Lord project would be a nice one to work out as he sounds like a good character and Lord seems to be quite an athlete.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 07:20 AM
I am out of state too and I find myself asking the same questions. Am I just overzealous in believing that we can win 10 games this year and go to the playoffs? Perhaps. But perhaps 10 games just may be hopeful thinking. On the positive side of things we have done a lot from year one to solidify this team. Our lines are powerful on both sides of the ball, runningback is set, wide recievers are young and good, tight ends are strong, and line backers and special teams are a core strength of the team. Our weakness next season will be our secondary. Coleman is undersized and is playing out of position, we have a talented yet rookie corner who will be tested early and often, and a banged up veteran for the other corner who is only very very good when healthy. So it is not like we can go into this year and say to ourselves "Man were set - there are no weaknesses on this team." Because there are and other teams know that. We will be exploited deep from time to time but we should be better at producing a pass rush with the acquisition of Babin. Hopefully that can generate some ill timed throws and perhaps some turnovers and interceptions. My prediction 7-9 to 8-8.

cap1
06-14-2004, 07:34 AM
Our weakness next season will be our secondary. Coleman is undersized and is playing out of position, we have a talented yet rookie corner who will be tested early and often, and a banged up veteran for the other corner who is only very very good when healthy.


How I Coleman Undersized? He is 6'2" and 210 pounds. That is big for a free safety.

aj.
06-14-2004, 08:31 AM
Coleman is undersized and is playing out of positionColeman is probably the biggest free safety in the NFL, and he played the position in college so it's not totally foreign to him.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 09:59 AM
You guys are paraniod. Some notably sized safeties in the league for you critics.

Earl, Glenn SS 6-1 222
Taylor, Sean S 6-2 231
Lynch, John S 6' 2" 220
Jones, Tebucky S 6-2 218
Williams, Tank S 6-2 223

It didnt take long to find either. Coleman is tall and thin and undersized. No insult to him but I don't think that he is a guy who can really lay the wood. He *is* fast and will help with some coverage so we'll have to wait and see. And I don't buy the fact that he played college safety either - what has that got to do with the price of tea in China? He's been playing corner much longer. I am right on this one, sorry.

dmt217
06-14-2004, 10:11 AM
undersized?

Brian Dawkins
Height: 6-0
Weight: 205

Ed Reed
Height: 5-11
Weight: 205

Rod Woodson
Height: 6-0
Weight: 205

Darren Sharper & Marcus Coleman
Height: 6-2
Weight: 210

Blake
06-14-2004, 10:17 AM
I think Coleman is a great size for safety. And just because you think he cant "lay the wood", doesnt mean he is undersized.

Just because a DT doesnt get alot of sacks, doesnt mean he isnt a good player. He could be stuffing the line.

I think we should wait to see him in action.

infantrycak
06-14-2004, 10:30 AM
Earl, Glenn SS 6-1 222
Taylor, Sean S 6-2 231
Lynch, John S 6' 2" 220
Jones, Tebucky S 6-2 218
Williams, Tank S 6-2 223

It didnt take long to find either.

Showing that Coleman is not as big as the biggest five safeties in the league doesn't does not prove your point that he is undersized--to prove that you need to show that he is one of the bottom 5-10 free safeties. By the way the list above includes three strong safeties--only Sean Taylor (who was hyped in this draft in part because he was huge for a FS) and Tebucky Jones are FS's.

Lucky
06-14-2004, 10:33 AM
Does anyone remember the Bengal safety David Fulcher? I think he was listed at 230 lbs, but looked closer to 250. Compared to Fulcher, Coleman is very undersized. :)

In a side note, Fulcher was probably the most dominant defensive player in Madden '93. He could play like a LB on the line or cover WR's. Awesome baby! :D

Vinny
06-14-2004, 10:34 AM
Coleman is not undersized for a FS. In my eyes he is built more like a FS than a CB. I think he will make a better FS than CB.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 11:17 AM
Fine. I still think that he is small and that he has to show that he can hit.

And really I don't care how big a guy is as long as he is a player and can produce. Do I really care if he is 6'2 210. No. Do I care that there are others who are the same size that are stellar safeties? No. And neither should anyone else. We are talking about Coleman. But untill he gets accomidated to playing safety in professional football I consider him the weak link in the secondary - of course along with Dunta since his is a rookie.

Let me ask you guys this question: Him moving to safety, is he now the strength of this secondary?

Absolutely not. He is a question mark. And a potential liability. Why do you think we drafted Earl? We do not know how MC will make the transition to safety. I guess you guys think that players can just up and switch a position like one could just up and change his boxer shorts. It is not easy. There is no gague or tangible mechanism that could quantify how Coleman will do. I *do* know this - he is fast and is a decient tackler and was a solid corner. Beyond that, I am sorry - I am being realistic. Coleman *is* playing out of position and as far as I am concerned he is a little on the lean side for me.

Having said all that I think the Texans will go about 7-9 to 8-8.

infantrycak
06-14-2004, 11:28 AM
Absolutely not. He is a question mark. And a potential liability. Why do you think we drafted Earl?

As a potential replacement for Eric Brown--Earl is a strong safety. FYI--Jamaal Lord was brought in as a potential FS, but of course he will have to make the transition from QB to FS.

We do not know how MC will make the transition to safety. I guess you guys think that players can just up a switch a position like one could just up and change his boxer shorts.

Folks don't think players can just willy nilly change positions--they understand that Coleman has played safety at the HS, college and NFL levels previously in his career. IMO at this point it is reasonable to expect Coleman to be a better than average coverage safety and that we will have to see how his tackling is before we know his real potential overall at FS.

aj.
06-14-2004, 11:33 AM
You guys are paraniod. Some notably sized safeties in the league for you critics.

Earl, Glenn SS 6-1 222
Taylor, Sean S 6-2 231
Lynch, John S 6' 2" 220
Jones, Tebucky S 6-2 218
Williams, Tank S 6-2 223

It didnt take long to find either. Coleman is tall and thin and undersized

Lynch, Earl, and Tank Williams are strong safeties, as are Ed Reed and Darren Sharper.

Just for the sake of apples-to-apples comparison, here are the height and weight of the AFC starting FS's:

Coleman 6-2, 210
Bashir 6-2, 198
Grant 6-2, 210
Schulters 6-0, 202

Ferguson 5-11, 201
Woods 6-2, 210
Woodson, 6-0, 205
Lassiter, 5-11, 207

Demps 5-11, 205
Herring 5-11, 200
Little 6-0, 200
Logan 6-0, 210

Reese 6-2, 190
Freeman 6-0, 200
Wilson 5-10, 195
McGraw 6-3, 206

There's one starting FS in the AFC that's taller than Coleman and none that are heavier. If Coleman is "tall thin and undersized," then the rest of the AFC is really in a world of hurt.

Tebucky is the same height and 8 lbs heavier than Coleman. Taylor is a freak of nature playing FS at 230. Roy Williams is the other NFC FS who stands out because of his size.

To revise my earlier statement, Marcus Coleman isn't THE biggest FS in the league, but he's certainly ONE OF the biggest.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 11:49 AM
Thanks for the clairification AJ. It is like I said, I still think he is undersized and a potential liability. A question mark. If he was bigger or smaller it does not matter - what matters is that he produces.

let me say that again in case you guys want to pull it out and put it in quotations on your next post:

"WHAT MATTERS IS THAT HE PRODUCES."

How can you disagree with me? Jimminy Crickets! Comming from another position that he has never started an NFL season at - leaves me a guessing. We do not know what to expect. Who cares if he played safety in Highschool or College! That does not always ensure a smooth transition to the NFL.

How long do you want to go back and forth with this? He is a liability untill he proves that he is not.

Blake
06-14-2004, 12:14 PM
Thanks, I think I will quote you.
He is a liability untill he proves that he is not.

This is the dumbest logic I have ever heard.

Thats like saying you are guilty until proven innocent.

Yeah that David Carr, and Andre Johnson, they are a liability on offense until the prove something to me.


Jimminy Crickets

Vinny
06-14-2004, 12:24 PM
In today's NFL you have to have FS's with coverage skills of corner backs. The Safety position has been evolving as the NFL has been turning into a passing league. Coleman at FS in a Division of Leftwich, Manning and McNair is smart. If you had a bigger, slower FS back there you are putting yourself at a clear disadvantage. Coleman is effectively the third CB on the field. Most of our division rivals thrive either in a 3 wr package or use TE's with exceptional WR skills so with Coleman as the FS you do not have to substitue players when the teams spread you out in pass situations.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 12:40 PM
DC_ROCK

He is a liability untill he proves that he is not.

"This is the dumbest logic I have ever heard."


Your 22. I forgive you.

Shotgun30
06-14-2004, 12:46 PM
I agree with Vinny

texasguy346
06-14-2004, 12:49 PM
I agree the disagreement over size is silly. I also understand the concern about Coleman's adjustment to playing FS, but I disagree that he will be a liability. He is still in the same defensive system so its not as if he's a rookie having to adjust to the speed and learn the scheme. He has played some games at FS for the Jets, so its not as if hes totally foreign to the position at the NFL level. The biggest adjustment for him will be learning the other 10 players responsibilities on the field. I believe that in our system the FS serves as the 'quarterback' of the defense, and its up to him to ensure everyone is lined up right. In the event that Coleman doesn't adjust well then we have McCree to come in as a good replacement. All in all its not as big of an issue as some people make it out to be. It will be interesting to see it all play out.

infantrycak
06-14-2004, 12:52 PM
The biggest adjustment for him will be learning the other 10 players responsibilities on the field. I believe that in our system the FS serves as the 'quarterback' of the defense, and its up to him to ensure everyone is lined up right.

The FS is called the QB, but it is only for the DB's. One of the LB's calls the front 7.

J-Man
06-14-2004, 01:25 PM
Thanks for the clairification AJ. It is like I said, I still think he is undersized and a potential liability. A question mark. If he was bigger or smaller it does not matter - what matters is that he produces.

let me say that again in case you guys want to pull it out and put it in quotations on your next post:

"WHAT MATTERS IS THAT HE PRODUCES."

How can you disagree with me? Jimminy Crickets! Comming from another position that he has never started an NFL season at - leaves me a guessing. We do not know what to expect. Who cares if he played safety in Highschool or College! That does not always ensure a smooth transition to the NFL.

How long do you want to go back and forth with this? He is a liability untill he proves that he is not.

Dominator...first it is not all that uncommon for DBs to move around from CB to Safety or even vice versa (which by the way is an even tougher transition). You are correct in that just because a guy has a some expeirence in the past that doesn't mean he will be sucessful at the transition. However...it is a common move for CBs to move to safety at some point in their career (ie. Rod Woodson). Another example would be Carnell Lake of the Steelers a few years ago...he went from being a Pro Bowl safety one season to being a Pro Bowl CB the next, and he had never played Corner prior to that. Attitude and the willingness to excell as a team opposed to as an individual plays a large role in position shifts being sucessful or not.

I can also assure that no professional coaching staff would trade down so to speak taking (according to your logic) an unproven/liability of a rookie CB and create another liability by moving a proven preformer to a new position if what you say holds true. No matter what you think of Coleman the guy is an excellent cover man with a knack for pick-offs and he is now playing centerfield for us. Coleman IS the best upgrade we could have managed at FS giving the market at is position in Free Agency or the Draft, there was no one we could have picked up to improve the position more than he could have by making the transition. Also, making the rotation with Robinson gives us a better than average chance at upgrading 2 positions for the price of one.

Blake
06-14-2004, 01:36 PM
Your 22. I forgive you.

Wow, great argument.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 01:43 PM
DC_Rock

"Wow, great argument."

"This is the dumbest logic I have ever heard."



So are insults.

aj.
06-14-2004, 01:49 PM
"WHAT MATTERS IS THAT HE PRODUCES."Well, of course. The same goes for other players who will be at new positions, e.g., Babin, Wong, Pitts... The only thing I disagree with is the claim that Coleman is undersized, which if he is undersized, then about 80% of the FS's in the league are undersized. If the point is now whether player X will produce because he is "out of position," then that's a totally different argument which is more difficult to prove one way or another.

I happen to think he will be as good or better at FS than he was at CB the last two seasons. He has the physical ability to cover from the top -- it's more a matter of what goes on in his head and whether seeing the entire field is confusing to him after spending so many years looking at eyes and numbers. His problems on run support were usually due to getting caught out of position by overpursuing or being drawn inside and losing outside contain.

TheOgre
06-14-2004, 02:00 PM
Jimminy Crickets!
Who says that any more? What are you 80 years old?

DD I really disagree with about everything you have said in this thread. From your take on Coleman to your looking down on DC for being young. Your arguments are basically "I feel the way I feel and to be damned with the facts!!"

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 02:26 PM
Look guys - all I am saying is that Coleman is a question mark. There is a spirited debate on both sides here and I can absolutley understand and appreciate that. My view is my view. I acknokledged Colemans ball hawking abilities and his speed and how good of a corner that he is. And that is super. There is just more here then some think.

It may *not* be tough for Coleman to transition. And you know what, if that is the case - then I would be the happiest Texan fan that you will ever see. But that is yet to be seen because the season has not started.

It is almost as though by pointing out a valid concern folks see me as disloyal. That is just plain silly talk.

I want Coleman to do well. I really do. The coaching staff thinks that he will do well or they would not have put him there. And apparently there are a bunch of fans who think the same. I however, am not sold. I am iffy about a player who is playing out of position despite his experience in the secondary. And everyone, coaches and fans alike, no matter if your mind is changed or not, will wonder the same thing through and through untill that player passes his test.

To give you an analogy - it is not guilty untill proven innocent. It is more like a chemical engineer being tested and asked to perform in a mechanical engineering field - sort of speak. It is engineering but different disciplines. Or vice verses - a ME asked to perfom and be tested in chemical engineering. He can do it - but it is not his specialty. (no disrespect to any Chem-E's that are out there)

Either way there will be adjustments - and that adjustment period will result in some ugly looking plays where we will be left wondering if we have all of the 11 defenders on the field. That is my point. Not Colemans size, or speed, or abilities, but the transition to another position.

But I am left to ask who is better to put there? The answer is that there is no one who is better. There is no player that the Texans could put at FS who would do better job then Coleman, period. So the Texans will do what they must. It is not ideal which is why it is in question.

All in all I think that Coleman will be adequate. Not a Pro-Bowler.

Here is a thought: How many innumerable examples in NFL history are there where a player in the secondary has changed positions and it NOT work out? We can mention with myopia all day long the examples of players who it has worked for. Can someone do some research and find that out? That would be great.

Anyway, I am not trying to stirr up a bee's nest. I was just stating a valid point that people need to look a little closer at. If you think that the secondary is this teams strength then make your case. I do not believe that it is. And I think a large part of that is in Coleman playing out of position.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 02:49 PM
Your arguments are basically "I feel the way I feel and to be damned with the facts!!"


I want the facts - I am sorry if that has not been clear.

infantrycak
06-14-2004, 02:51 PM
It is almost as though by pointing out a valid concern folks see me as disloyal.

Dominator--IMO most of the folks on this MB, particularly some of those you have encountered in this thread such as aj, theOgre and J-Man, are more than willing to discuss concerns and often raise non-rose colored glasses points themselves. JMO but your concern about the position switch got largely lost because your dogged position on Coleman's size marred the perceived validity of your post.

Lucky
06-14-2004, 04:25 PM
Here is a thought: How many innumerable examples in NFL history are there where a player in the secondary has changed positions and it NOT work out? We can mention with myopia all day long the examples of players who it has worked for. Can someone do some research and find that out? That would be great.
Here's another thought: Since you are questioning whether Coleman can make the transition from corner to safety, maybe you should "do some research" regarding the past failures of players making similar position changes. Isn't it your responsibility to uphold your side of a debate? That would be even greater.

Speaking of undersized, out-of-position types making the transition from corner to FS, the Pats' Eugene Wilson did a pretty good job last season as a rookie.

DominatorDavis
06-14-2004, 04:37 PM
It would be like drinking from a firehose Lucky. My request was not entirely sincere.

Wolf
06-14-2004, 05:05 PM
on the bright side. If coleman doesn't work out... McCree is still here also If Coleman doesn't work out.. He is still an upgrade over Stevens (did I say that outloud? ). If Daunte struggles, well we can shift Coleman back to CB.. It is great that we finally have some options on this team.

I hope Coleman can do it. I could be wrong,but I figure it is alot easier to switch from CB to FS then vice versa.

infantrycak
06-14-2004, 08:26 PM
From someone who has a pretty good idea what he is talking about--Aaron Glenn:

“Marcus is a no-brainer,” teammate Aaron Glenn said about Coleman’s success in a new position. “That guy is probably one of the better athletes in this league and for him to accept the role of leaving cornerback and moving to free safety, a lot of guys can’t do that.

“He accepted it and he’s out there making plays and he’s getting out to the middle of the field better than any safety I’ve seen in a while so I think he’s going to do a good job for us at the safety position.”

dmt217
06-15-2004, 09:12 AM
"WHAT MATTERS IS THAT HE PRODUCES."

Not Colemans size, or speed, or abilities, but the transition to another position.

Coleman is undersized and is playing out of position, we have a talented yet rookie corner who will be tested early and often, and a banged up veteran for the other corner who is only very very good when healthy.

Should've posted....

-Coleman is playing out of position, we have a talented yet rookie corner who will be tested early and often, and a banged up veteran for the other corner who is only very very good when healthy.

Vinny
07-03-2004, 11:17 AM
Good piece with a few Texans mentioned and Babins salary at the bottom of the page. Seems that word around the league is that Marcus Robinson is converting to Safety with ease.

By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1833379)

If the suggestions are really legitimate that Marcus Coleman has made the transition from cornerback to free safety with incredible adroitness this spring -- and even the veteran defensive back acknowledges that the reports skew the reality -- the Houston Texans will have taken a major step toward shoring up their secondary.

But position switches in the NFL can be dicey propositions, even for an eight-year pro like Coleman, so one can only imagine the pressure on the seven or eight rookies who are being asked to change stripes in their maiden season in the league. The daunting task has been likened to learning a foreign tongue in record time, much faster even than they teach language classes at Berlitz schools, but even that analogy might understate the difficulty.

Ibar_Harry
07-03-2004, 03:18 PM
Marcus Robinson must be a cross between Duante Robinson and Marcus Coleman.

Vinny
07-03-2004, 04:10 PM
Marcus Robinson must be a cross between Duante Robinson and Marcus Coleman.Our new combo player? I guess I had ex-Oiler Marcus Robertson on the brain when typing about FS's.

edo783
07-03-2004, 04:18 PM
Sounds like a good player to me!

powda
07-04-2004, 04:19 PM
with all this talk of coleman being the "quarterback" of the secondary, i'd be curious to find out what his wic score was...