Tank Williams - Oakland Raiders Forum | Message Board

raiderofOregon · #1 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 11:50 AM

Tank Williams, S, Tennessee Titans [78 tackles, 1 INT]

Williams moves to the top of a solid if unspectacular group of remaining free agents. An excellent athlete, Williams has become a solid contributer over the years despite the deterioration of the Titans on the field. Not much of a ball hawk, Williams is an excellent tackler and reads plays well, always there to meet a ball carrier once he reaches his particular zone. The antithesis of Archuleta, Williams is more cereberal and caluclating, lining up big hits rather than seeking them out. He would be a calming presence in a young secondary, and less expensive than the flashier Archuleta, while offering the bonus of being three years younger.

GOOD FITS: Oakland, NY Jets, New Orleans

EARLY PICK: The Raiders currently have terrible cap problems, but releasing Woodson and some other veterans may give Al Davis enough room to bring in a player such as Williams. A former Stanford player, he would bring a veteran presence to an extremely young secondary. If the money isnt there, teams like the Jets or the Saints may prove to be a better alternative. New Orleans especially as Williams is a Gulfport, MS native. In the end, Tennessee will be as active in signing Williams as any other team, and will likely be in the bidding with Oakland and New Orleans to the very end.

I like the way he plays and think that he'd be a great fit in our secondary. if we can free up some cap room to go after some o-linemen AND tank I'm all for it. Plus, his name is tank

Clay · #2 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 12:05 PM

I've actually followed this guy since he was a standout at Stanford. I had no idea he was FA this offseason but now that I know I'm pretty excited. This guy is a flat out animal at the Safety position. With the way our secondary is built as of right now, this guy would be a HUGE upgrade to our defense. The reason I say huge is because most of our DB's are the cover type and we really don't have the big physical safety to either back them up with big hits or to rush up and stop the run.

We need a big physical safety as of right now and this guy would fit right in with Oaktown. You combined the physical nature that this guy brings with the quick cover DB's that we have and youv'e got yourself a very much improved defensive backfield. And to top everything off, the guy is from Stanford, anybody think he'll want to join the Silver & Black in Oaktown, heh.

MasterShake2388 · #3 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 12:05 PM

ill take him, but he isnt the answer at SS... hes more of a quick fix.

MasterShake2388 · #4 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay

I've actually followed this guy since he was a standout at Stanford. I had no idea he was FA this offseason but now that I know I'm pretty excited. This guy is a flat out animal at the Safety position. With the way our secondary is built as of right now, this guy would be a HUGE upgrade to our defense. The reason I say huge is because most of our DB's are the cover type and we really don't have the big physical safety to either back them up with big hits or to rush up and stop the run.

We need a big physical safety as of right now and this guy would fit right in with Oaktown. You combined the physical nature that this guy brings with the quick cover DB's that we have and youv'e got yourself a very much improved defensive backfield. And to top everything off, the guy is from Stanford, anybody think he'll want to join the Silver & Black in Oaktown, heh.

our DBs are the cover type cuz our scheme calls for the cover type, Tank isnt a cover DB so he really doesnt fit the scheme but neither does Gibson, Tank can stay healthy to he'd be fine but he isnt gonna be the answer.. we need a cover SS thats young.. but I dont think we'll be able to find one yet.

raiderofOregon · #5 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterShake2388

our DBs are the cover type cuz our scheme calls for the cover type, Tank isnt a cover DB so he really doesnt fit the scheme but neither does Gibson, Tank can stay healthy to he'd be fine but he isnt gonna be the answer.. we need a cover SS thats young.. but I dont think we'll be able to find one yet.

I just like him because he's a disciplined player and a sure tackler. Those are two things that we could use a little bit more of on our defense, especially in the secondary because it's so young

**cheapshotartist** · #6 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterShake2388

our DBs are the cover type cuz our scheme calls for the cover type, Tank isnt a cover DB so he really doesnt fit the scheme but neither does Gibson, Tank can stay healthy to he'd be fine but he isnt gonna be the answer.. we need a cover SS thats young.. but I dont think we'll be able to find one yet.

Safetys can't cover thats why their safetys. If he can tackle and play in the box I'll take him.

MasterShake2388 · #7 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapshotartist

Safetys can't cover thats why their safetys. If he can tackle and play in the box I'll take him.

then why dont we just keep Gibson?

cuz he cant cover, neither can Tank.. a SS needs to be able to cover, they cover TEs and HBs... Tank isnt very good at doing this but he can play in the box and tackle, he can make a good amount of plays... its a quick fix cuz he can stay healthy, but hes not a long term answer.

Raiders18 · #8 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 01:12 PM

I just want at least one saftey who will f*ck people up on the feild like what Jack Tatum and Ronnie Lott used to do. The other 3 DB's and be the cover guys.

Rage · #9 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 01:24 PM

Hope, the safety for the Steelers is a FA and bringing him here would be a major boost.

r8erray · #10 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 01:54 PM

I'll take him we need some tackling in the secondary to make me forget about Stu's pathetic tackling.

Raiders4Life79 · #11 (**permalink**) 02-09-2006, 04:55 PM

Yeah he seems like he could be a major contributor to the defense

Clay · #12 (**permalink**) 02-10-2006, 03:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterShake2388

then why dont we just keep Gibson?

cuz he cant cover, neither can Tank

Neither can Tank??? I've followed the guy for yrs and I'm tell'n you, the guy can cover pretty well for his size. Now he's still a ways away from being a pro bowl'r, but it's just his physical nature that draws me to like the guy. We NEED a STRONG safety that will come up and MAKE the tackles and that's exactly what Tank's specialty is. I know we need some help in the coverage and he may not be the biggest upgrade in that category, but he has great vision on the field and he'll take on any guy who has the rock, even Jamal Lewis.

Anybody that thinks this guy wouldn't be a good fit for our defense is completely lost and knows nothing about the guy. I say we take a good look at the guy and highly consider bringing him in.

**r8der51o** · #13 (**permalink**) 02-10-2006, 04:59 AM

Why not offer Cooper a contract.... he's a strong tackler... I remember stu trying to tackle the bus and he just bounced right off him like throwing a tennis ball at a wall

cat4 · #14 (**permalink**) 02-10-2006, 05:10 AM

We Need A Safety, Why Not