Pierson Prioleau or Matt Bowen?

[TheMalcolmConnection]

To be honest, Bowen played pretty well in pass coverage last week. If he can keep up that type of play, I'd feel fine with him back there while PP is out.

[hail_2_da_skins]

Bowen is S.L.O.W. That's not a good attribute for a defensive back. He did have a descent week but he didn't go into the game as the starter and Seattle has had a week to gameplan and exploit his weaknesses -- Pass Coverage. When he comes up to the line of scrimmage, it is pretty predictable that he will blitz because he is too slow to recover and get into pass coverage. I like Ryan Clark. Prioleau is a better option than Bowen. Bowen scares me when he is back there.

[illdefined]

it's Bowen's closing speed i see as his problem. he can't make those 2 steps up once the ball is in the air. seen too many 'oh, almost there's

[Top-Skin-K]

Originally Posted by illdefined

it's Bowen's closing speed i see as his problem. he can't make those 2 steps up once the ball is in the air. seen too many 'oh, almost there's

I like bowen playing this week. He is a good run stopper and tackler. We'll need that for Alexander. I don't think IMO there is a better blitzing saftey on the team including Taylor. (from what i've seen of cource) Bowen gets to the QB. He has been shaky in pass coverage in the past but he sure did'nt look bad when he made that play on Keyshawn J. late in the Cowgirl game on the sideline. We can use the pressure on Matt; his WR can't catch anyway. (lets hope they get the drops like they had last year!!

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Top-Skin-K

.....I don't think IMO there is a better blitzing saftey on the team including Taylor. (from what i've seen of cource) Bowen gets to the QB. He has been shaky in pass coverage in the past but he sure did'nt look bad when he made that play on Keyshawn J. late in the Cowgirl game on the sideline. We can use the pressure on Matt; his WR can't catch anyway. (lets hope they get the drops like they had last year!!

It is not that Matt Bowen is better at blitzing the QB than Sean Taylor, it is just that the offensive players (QB's in particular) pay more attention to where ST is than MB. They might not notice when Matt Bowen is blitzing, but the QB is always aware of where ST is and if he is blitzing. So ST is less likely to a clear path to the QB.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

It is not that Matt Bowen is better at blitzing the QB than Sean Taylor, it is just that the offensive players (QB's in particular) pay more attention to where ST is than MB. They might not notice when Matt Bowen is blitzing, but the QB is always aware of where ST is and if he is blitzing. So ST is less likely to a clear path to the QB.

Bowen is just a FOOTBALL PLAYER. A Kamikaze special teamer, legitimized as a defensive starter. Fun to watch as he plays with abandon. But, you are correct. You cannot overlook ST-he's a FORCE

[illdefined]

that's true, good point. does Seattle have anyone you'd consider a burner?

[MTK]

Bowen ran a 4.5 coming out of college, that's really not what I would call slow for a safety.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...php?pyid=22297

Sean Taylor in comparison ran a 4.51

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/foo...ers/44570.html

How about Roy Williams? 4.53

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2002/brandt_group1.html

His problem isn't speed, it's his angles and decision making that need work. But if we're talking about straight up speed, he's fine.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Bowen ran a 4.5 coming out of college, that's really not what I would call slow for a safety.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...php?pyid=22297

Sean Taylor in comparison ran a 4.51

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/foo...ers/44570.html

How about Roy Williams? 4.53

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2002/brandt_group1.html

His problem isn't speed, it's his angles and decision making that need work. But if we're talking about straight up speed, he's fine.

don't all those guys get burned deep semi-regularly? think it's good to have one run support/big hitter safety and one effectively playing dimeback, isn't that the differnce between a strong (covers the TE?) and free safety or did i just word associate?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by illdefined

don't all those guys get burned deep semi-regularly? think it's good to have one run support/big hitter safety and one effectively playing dimeback, isn't that the differnce between a strong (covers the TE?) and free safety or did i just word associate?

ST gets beat deep because he's very too aggressive and bites too easily on playaction. That flea-flicker against Dallas was probably called with him in mind.

Bowen and Williams just stink in coverage period.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

ST gets beat deep because he's very too aggressive and bites too easily on playaction. That flea-flicker against Dallas was probably called with him in mind.

Bowen and Williams just stink in coverage period.

right but isn't generally good to have one safety specialize in coverage for the slot receiver? having two aggressive/support safeties doesn't sound wise except under certain conditions.