Bring back William Gay....Yeah i said it!!

When did we lose Gay? He had a decent season last year.

 

he's a FA this year and we have made no offer to him. our money is tied up waiting to see what is going to happen with wallace and how much an offer sheet from another team may cost us to match if we intend to do that, or how much a long term contract will cost to sign him. we're broke waiting or could have some money to play with if we lose him. they just don't know yet. he's keeping us in limbo for signing others.

 

Please for the love of all that is lovable in a non gay way just dump him! He can't cover and when you get burned by Joe Flacco you are not worthy of the black and gold. In Mike Tomlin's 1st season I remember he said that he benched Anthony Smith because "he couldn't keep the ball in front of him!" For the love of all that is lovable in a non gay way WHAT HAS TOOK HIM SO LONG WITH WILLY??!

 

Honestly think this is an unfair assessement because strength of schedule. He sucked in 2010 and improved his game significantly in 2011 when CL joined the coaching staff. So lets wait and see if he gets signed how he performs in 2012 before we throw him out of the Burgh

 

I think "average at best" is a fair way to put it. He's had ups and downs since being drafted. When he's down, he's one of the worst in the league. When he's up, he's average. What he has going for him is that his most recent year was up, so there's hope that it's that way to stay. I would keep him if we can afford it. $1 million seems like too much. He's only going into his 6th year. Is that the minimum?

Anyway, I would definitely NOT hand him anything. I would make it known that he is NOT the #2 CB, and that the position is 100% up for grabs, as are #3 and #4. Let him compete and see how things work out.

 

hey guys I'm here!

 

Free agent Big Play Willie Gay is still waiting by his phone for that call.

<crickets chirping>

 

William Gay to visit Titans Tues...Following a meeting with Arizona on Monday... .
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/03/report-william-gay-to-visit-titans-on-tuesday/

 

that was actually nor is clarks fualt then it was gays. Clark was supposed to have deep containment and bit on the underneath route. Anytime a corner thinks he has help over the top he is going to play under the wr.

 

right that play was all on clark , but i saw enough of gay in the superbowl and in denver ,just to remember our last two most important games

 

Denver was on ike he was the one getting burnt all game long. It could have been the worst game of gis career.

 

If Gay can learn to stay on top of the receiver, take him up the middle, hold on and not lose containment, match the receiver move for move and take the receiver all the way, I believe he has a shot at making the team! All you haters will need to get over your phobias!

 

yeah , but i remember royal td in face of gay too

 

Yeah i remeber that to but ike played far worse then gay that day.

 

I don't understand this line of thinking at all. It was all on Clark, not on Gay? Since when does a CB not have to cover a WR just because he's supposed to have safety help? The fact that Clark bit on the underneath route and was late getting over does nothing more than make it the fault of both of them, not just Clark.

Here's what happened: Gay had good coverage at first, then as he turned to look at the QB, he slowed down and Smith got ahead. After that, Smith stiff-armed him a little, but the coverage was beaten. Meanwhile, Ryan Clark took a step or two in the wrong direction and couldn't recover. He arrived too late. So what's the supposed point here? Gay thinks, "Okay, even though there are 4 or 5 receivers on this play, I am assuming that the safety responsible for my half of the field will make it to the back corner of the end zone perfectly in time to help me, so I'm not going to bother to cover him well." OR "Okay, even though there are 4 or 5 receivers on this play, I am assuming that the safety responsible for my half of the field will make it to the back corner of the end zone perfectly in time to help me, so I'm going to slow down at the last minute and 'cover underneath', on the off-chance this is a 20 yard stop route or the QB underthrows him. Yes, that will leave him open in the end zone if it's a streak, but theoretically there will be a safety there, so that's okay." You HAVE to COVER the RECEIVER! I'm not excusing Clark, but it's like the fact that there were two people responsible for that play has totally given one of them a pass, and I don't get it.

PLUS, Gay had been beaten like a drum all night before that play. He was responsible for almost every yard given up on that 92 yard drive, not just the last 20 something. Flacco picked on him all game. Lewis and Ike also had bad games, but Gay was far worse.

 

There is no assumptions that he is there. When your job is nobody gets behind you then nobody is supposed to get behind you. In that scenario then the cb does play under the wr since the safety is supposed to be over the top. If both guys try to go over the top then they hit each other and cancel each other out. Clatk had deep responsibilty and went underneath. He said as much after the game. Its a scheme thing and clark failed on it.

 

In that scenario? You mean with 8 seconds left in the game when only a touchdown will beat you? You play underneath and rely on the safety to pick the right guy to cover?? How about trying to stop a touchdown and "risking" an underneath completion, instead of vice versa?

 

If clark would have been where he was supposed to be then they would have ran into each other. Thats like being in the military and somebody saying take that hill i will cover you and then not taking a single shot. Is it your fualt for assuming that they were going to cover you. Clark was supposed to be there and gay played it just the way he should have. Lets say they both go over the top amd dont knock each other off the ball amd flacco throws a back shoulder pass then guess what smith has a very easy catch with nobody in front of him. Clark wasnt where he was supposed to be amd didnt do his assignment.

 

Furthermore as a corner you are taught that if you have help over the top you play underneath. So you want gay to go against everything he has ever been tuaght for 1the play. That just doesnt make sense gay did what he was supposed to do amd forced flacco into throwing the ball over to him which clark still almost got to. If clark doesnt go up field first that pass is probably intercepted. You cant juat go against what you have been trained to do.

 

Your arguing the point as if you knew what Clark's assignment was on that particular play. He could have taken a step or two forward because of what he was told to do or read and when he realized Gay was beat he tried to make up ground and didn't. There are a lot of factors that can make or break your argument here. It is quite possible that Smith wasn't a primary receiver and Clark was keying in on the primary but, as soon as Smith broke free, that changed the dynamics. It wasn't like we were getting to Tebow and forcing him to make quick decisions. Or could be you are right and all that I mentioned is off base...who knows (that is my point)!

 

I seem ti remember a lot of people including clark saying he had deep containment on the play.

 

He has no brain? "He can only do what he was trained to do and nothing else. He was taught that when he has safety help to take underneath coverage." And I suppose we can't blame a RB who cuts inside to the middle of the field for more yards at the end of the game instead of running out of bounds and stopping the clock, which is what we really need? After all, he's been taught to fake guys out and get the most yards possible. It's what his instincts should tell him... Except in football, part of the game is knowing what's going on. And wouldn't you know it, the players are each given 30-40 seconds to think about what's going on before every play! Knowing situations should be part of his job, not just memorizing coverage responsibilities and executing them like a player on Madden, with no regard to what's really going on. The fact that he's more concerned with a short pass than a deep pass is silly. And while safety help is always nice, it's silly to just assume it will be there, and risk the whole game on it, when he is not the only defender that needs help. Clark had another receiver to worry about on his side of the field on that play. The one he bit on. I'm assuming Gay knew it wasn't a 1 receiver route. But if he did what you say he did, and intentionally let Smith get ahead of him so that he could have the underneath coverage and put the fate of the game in Ryan Clark getting over in time, then that is just terrible football. Stupid, idiotic football. But hey, maybe it was LeBeau's call. Maybe he didn't want the CB trying to stop the TD with the safety coming over to help. Maybe he wanted the CB trying to stop the curl route with the safety coming over to help. This, again, with 8 seconds left in the game when the Ravens HAD to score a touchdown.

I also think it's ridiculous to suggest that a back shoulder throw against tight coverage is easier to complete than a standard over the shoulder pitch and catch to a wide open receiver. Or as you put it, "Forcing Flacco to throw the ball over him." Yeah, I guess you could say he did that. He also threw it over all the linemen and linebackers (it's not that hard!). I'm not even sure what to make of your idea that if Gay had been running parallel to Smith instead of behind him, that he and Clark would have crashed into each other and fallen down, leaving Smith wide open to catch the ball shorter and run into the end zone. I guess that's a possible way for them to score, but I also guess it's slightly less likely than just leaving him open in the end zone.

 

For the record, I have never said Clark did not mess up. My only point is that Gay also messed up. You do not stop covering because you expect safety help. It's not like this was a cover 2 and there was a TE in the flat for him to switch to. This was a freakin' hail mary, and he let the guy get behind him. There should have been two Steelers there, Clark and Gay, and there were zero. Clark's failure is well documented, but people are letting Gay get by with a pass for some reason.

 

I just rewatched the video and the steelers were in a man cover 1. Clark was cover 1 so that means he is responsible for anything deep. Nobody gets behind you when you play that. And to your running back thing offense and defined nse is different you dont want guys do what they want to do on defense. Gay followed his assignment. I have 17a years of actual football experience 12 playing and 5 coaching. If i seen some on my defense trying to be a monster man and i didnt call for him to do so he would be on the bench. You have responsibilies that you have to cover and follow and in a man cover one the safeties job is not to let anybody get behind him.

 

Alright, you're losing me, I think you're typed out. But I will do my best to respond.

You're strengthening my argument. I already happily agreed that Clark messed up. That's not the argument.

If it's cover one, that means there's ONE safety deep for the entire field. And you're telling me Gay intentionally let Smith get behind him, to form some kind of bracket coverage, based on the idea that Clark would absolutely, positively be there, even though he had a whole field to worry about? What if Flacco looked left first, or pump faked left? Would you expect Clark to not be fooled and cover Smith anyway? Because then it's not a cover one, it's just double coverage, and that's clearly not the case here. He has to worry about all of the other receivers. If Flacco looked him off would you expect him to somehow recover? Gay cannot expect someone to save him. If he gets beaten, that's one thing. He can't just slow down and "force Flacco to hit the receiver in stride in the end zone" on what's basically a short hail mary. When I have 17 years of football experience I hope I don't tell my cornerbacks they don't have to stay on the WR in a cover one.