Thread: Bradley Roby open to seeing time at free safety

At the league meetings March 24, Head Coach Gary Kubiak floated the notion of using cornerback Bradley Roby at safety in some situations to get him on the field more often.

The 2014 first-round pick still sees himself as a cornerback first. That's understandable, given how well he played the position as a rookie last year. But he is receptive to the idea.

"I would definitely like to play cornerback a majority of the time, but they talked to me about possibly moving to free safety at certain times in the game, and in certain packages," Roby said. "I'm open to it."

A dual role seems like a perfect match for Roby and his skill set. He first distinguished himself last summer with aggression against the run, gaining confidence by making plays in space. It would put an end to games like the one he had in St. Louis last November, where he played in 38,5 percent of the snaps because the Rams' packages kept the Broncos' base defense on the field so often. He was also limited to less than 60 percent of the snaps in losses to Cincinnati and Indianapolis.

rest - http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-an...3-e1f7408c4519

It makes sense. If he can play free safety on base downs, it gets your best 11 on the field. On nickel downs he can line up at corner, and Stewart can come in and cover the free safety spot while a linebacker goes off. It gets Roby on the field every play along with Harris and Talib.

It sounds like a simple way to get him in the field more, but the concern is he becomes a jack of all trades and a master of none.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

It sounds like a simple way to get him in the field more, but the concern is he becomes a jack of all trades and a master of none.

Why? In this scenario he plays the same amount of time at corner than he would if he only played corner. The difference is, he's not sitting on the bench in base defense.

I'd rather Webster

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

It sounds like a simple way to get him in the field more, but the concern is he becomes a jack of all trades and a master of none.

Having him on the fields outweighs any negatives.

Originally Posted by Ziggy

Why? In this scenario he plays the same amount of time at corner than he would if he only played corner. The difference is, he's not sitting on the bench in base defense.

Because he has to take snaps at both positions in practice. Hopefully my concern is ill founded.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

It sounds like a simple way to get him in the field more, but the concern is he becomes a jack of all trades and a master of none.

There's nothing wrong with that. I've made a living of that for the last 12 years working on planes. He can do it with football.

Originally Posted by underrated29

I'd rather Webster

The only reason I would tend to agree here is because Webster is feisty and always seems to be looking for contact. Roby's cover skills are better though. I think Roby also reads the QB better.

some day before i die, the broncos will actually get some decent safeties who aren't forty years old, and then they won't have to do this shit. . .

Originally Posted by dogfish

some day before i die, the broncos will actually get some decent safeties who aren't forty years old, and then they won't have to do this shit. . .

Ward is pretty good, but yeah, it's been a while since we've had an elite fs.

Harris said he, Roby, and Webster could all play safety.

Originally Posted by dogfish

some day before i die, the broncos will actually get some decent safeties who aren't forty years old, and then they won't have to do this shit. . .

Jeez, some of you guys will worry about anything!

Originally Posted by dogfish

some day before i die, the broncos will actually get some decent safeties who aren't forty years old, and then they won't have to do this shit. . .

Too young to have seen the Dennis Smith, Steve Atwater days Dog?

Originally Posted by Ziggy

Too young to have seen the Dennis Smith, Steve Atwater days Dog?

only as a child, but i still miss it. . . you're right, though, should have said "again". . .

of course, it's the legacy of those guys that bums me out so much about the marquand manuel's, kennoy kennedy's and rahim moore's of the world. . .