PDA

View Full Version : Best by Position: CB


neko4
05-06-2008, 10:14 PM
Green Bay has some aging ones, but a bunch of young, unproven guys
Minnesota has an aging Winfield, but two replacements
Detroit added some good CB's, but not as good as other teams, IMO
Chicago's was hurt last year but still has a great unit

BeerBaron
05-06-2008, 10:19 PM
chicago has the perfect crew for their system.

vasher and tillman are a great set of starters. RMJ is possibly the best true nickel back there is. and trumaine mcbride got extensive playing time last year when the other guys were hurt and did well. excellent backup.

and throw in the potential of zack bowman who they picked up late who could have been a first rounder without injury.

bears have a great group for now and the future

awfullyquiet
05-06-2008, 10:24 PM
yeah. but.

who's better still? today i'd pick green bay for the unit i'd want to defend against any 1-2 receivers.

bears are a real close second in my book. they're good. very good. very solid and will continue to be good. but as long as harris and woodson still have the skillset they're stil the best.

Zbikowski_9
05-06-2008, 10:34 PM
I voted Bears, they are argubly the best now (could go either way with the Pack), but by the end of the season IMO the Bears will either progress or maintain, and the Pack will regress a bit with age.

BeerBaron
05-06-2008, 10:47 PM
the bears are going to be better for longer than the pack though....theyre guys are nearing the end of the line....

and remember the bears depth too. plenty of it as i outlined earlier

awfullyquiet
05-06-2008, 11:25 PM
the bears are going to be better for longer than the pack though....theyre guys are nearing the end of the line....

and remember the bears depth too. plenty of it as i outlined earlier

oh, clearly. its really close between quality of starters... on a good day, harris and woodson will shut down receivers. on any given day, vasher and tillman will limit receivers greatly, but not to the same point that teams will abandon the passing game (unless it's the point where they have to pass).

the ceiling is much higher for GB than Chicago, but, the average would push them right next to each other...

i can't think of anyone in the nfc which has as good of pair of starting corners...

BeerBaron
05-06-2008, 11:35 PM
well remember, if tillman and vasher do exactly what theyre supposed to do given teh scheme, they'll help stop any runs to the outside, shut down the flats, and collect some the forced passes and take em back the other way...something theyre both very good at.

so while harris and woodson are 'better' at shutting their man down, theyre doing what they supposed to be doing, and the bears guys are doing just what theyre supposed to be doing.

its really a cover 2 vs. man situation....

sweetness34
05-07-2008, 01:33 AM
If Tillman and Vasher stay healthy it's the Bears...Because Manning is terrible as a starter, he needs to stay at Nickel but we have depth at the position as well to go along with two Pro Bowl caliber CB's.

Gay Ork Wang
05-07-2008, 08:54 AM
Al Harris and C. Woodson are great. But after that their is a drop. U picked Lee but he didnt play yet. The Bears have Tillman and Vasher who are arguebly just as good as Harris and Woodson but Manning is a great nickel (horrible horrible starter) and McBride showed some promise.
I go bears

Yatta!
05-07-2008, 09:32 AM
Harris and Woodson are better than Vasher and Tillman without doubt and I expect Lee to step up pretty soon into the nickel role.

BeerBaron
05-07-2008, 09:36 AM
Harris and Woodson are better than Vasher and Tillman without doubt and I expect Lee to step up pretty soon into the nickel role.

whoa whoa whoa.....not a chance its "without a doubt." its close as all hell. vasher and tillman might be the best pair of cover 2 corners on the same team there is and it all depends on how you look at it. i personally think for what the scheme calls for them to do, vasher and tillman are better

Yatta!
05-07-2008, 09:37 AM
whoa whoa whoa.....not a chance its "without a doubt." its close as all hell. vasher and tillman might be the best pair of cover 2 corners on the same team there is and it all depends on how you look at it. i personally think for what the scheme calls for them to do, vasher and tillman are better

Fair enough not without a doubt, bad use of the term. But i d still take the Green Bay corners, they can go on an island against almost any receiver.

Sportsfan486
05-07-2008, 09:41 AM
Al Harris and C. Woodson are great. But after that their is a drop. U picked Lee but he didnt play yet. The Bears have Tillman and Vasher who are arguebly just as good as Harris and Woodson but Manning is a great nickel (horrible horrible starter) and McBride showed some promise.
I go bears

No no, I agree. That 27th ranked pass defense of the Bears is terrifying. Absolutely. Ditto for the 31st and 32nd ranked Detroit and Minnesota teams respectively. Horrifyingly stellar, I would say.

... :)

Or maybe the T-14th, T-17th or T-20th ranked defensive INT (Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota respectively) is where the fear is brought!!!

I'll take 12 and T-6th for a team with one horrible cover safety + nickelback and an inability to cover TEs PLUS actually blows opponents out forcing them to pass rather than getting blown out and "forcing" the opponent to run the clock out, thanks. Green Bay and it's not even close.

BeerBaron
05-07-2008, 09:47 AM
No no, I agree. That 27th ranked pass defense of the Bears is terrifying. Absolutely. Ditto for the 31st and 32nd ranked Detroit and Minnesota teams respectively. Horrifyingly stellar, I would say.

... :)

Or maybe the T-14th, T-17th or T-20th ranked defensive INT (Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota respectively) is where the fear is brought!!!

I'll take 12 and T-6th for a team with one horrible cover safety and an inability to cover TEs, thanks. Green Bay and it's not even close.

dude thats a completely asinine argument. the entire bears defense was hurt for a good chunk of last season, both corners included.

take the cheese off your head and look beyond one year. in the years before last, the bears corners did exactly what they were supposed to do in one of the leagues top rated defenses.

if your going to make an argument, take everything into account. its one thing if you leave out some important details if your a lawyer trying to keep your client out of jail, but your not....over the past several years, and heading into the future, the bears corners are younger and better at what they do

Sportsfan486
05-07-2008, 09:54 AM
dude thats a completely asinine argument. the entire bears defense was hurt for a good chunk of last season, both corners included.

take the cheese off your head and look beyond one year. in the years before last, the bears corners did exactly what they were supposed to do in one of the leagues top rated defenses.

if your going to make an argument, take everything into account. its one thing if you leave out some important details if your a lawyer trying to keep your client out of jail, but your not....over the past several years, and heading into the future, the bears corners are younger and better at what they do

Who CARES what they did 2 years ago? Do you think players can just suddenly revert through injury, lack of playing time, etc to old form? The Bears were anemic last year. That leads me to believe they will be anemic this year. Two years ago is ancient history, gone.

Hell, even looking at two years ago it was a dead heat between the two teams. So let's add this up.. 2 years ago = just about even... 1 year ago = Packers way, way ahead, not even close. What seems most likely for this year?

umphrey
05-07-2008, 09:55 AM
You talk about systems...

Harris and Woodson are asked to do more than any corner in the NFL.

Vasher and Tillman have it easy playing in a cover 2.

This is why I think it easily the pack.

Gay Ork Wang
05-07-2008, 10:05 AM
yea cause everyone can play in a cover 2?

Sportsfan u know that on 1 defense there are also Safeties? The CB dont make the Pass defense, they are part of it. Also Vasher was hurt for most of the season. Tillman missed 1-3 games too. I dont get why u can say the Statistics can tell u who is better

so if the bears were bad last year they are going to be bad next year? Really?
Why dont we just stop watching Football cause every year teams gonna just turn out like the season before? The Packers were 4-12 they shouldve been bad the following year too right?
Ur arguments are just ridiculous. i mean we dont even say the ur CBs are worse than ours and we are the best, we say its about even and u have to insist on saying ur CBs are way better? Great!

BeerBaron
05-07-2008, 10:27 AM
playing corner in a cover 2 requires just as specialized of skill set of any other CB job. it also requires that they help out in run defense, something i don't recall seeing the packers call on their CBs for all that much....

plus, lets look beyond the starters. i said it earlier, the bears have a great true nickel back in ricky manning plus mcbride who got a lot of experience last year and is a great backup. throw in zach bowman and his potential and the bears have great depth, maybe the best CB depth in the league.

behind harris and woodson the packers have......a 2nd round rookie. thats it. god help you if one of your starters go down. (or both as happened to the bears last year, proving that its possible)

PackerLegend
05-07-2008, 02:55 PM
I read somewhere Ricky Manning could be on his way out in favor of Mcbride or something like that, not 100% sure. Anyways you keep bringing up Zach Bowman and his potential...Its pointless. I could say Patrick Lee, Jarret Bush, Tramon Williams and Will Blackmon and all their potential. It's close I will still take the Packers duo at this point because they havent shown any huge signs of age yet. If I was looking towards the future and not worrying about schemes I would take Vasher, Tillman because of the age advantage. Bears have better depth but hopefully someone steps up for us.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-07-2008, 03:22 PM
playing corner in a cover 2 requires just as specialized of skill set of any other CB job. it also requires that they help out in run defense, something i don't recall seeing the packers call on their CBs for all that much....

plus, lets look beyond the starters. i said it earlier, the bears have a great true nickel back in ricky manning plus mcbride who got a lot of experience last year and is a great backup. throw in zach bowman and his potential and the bears have great depth, maybe the best CB depth in the league.

behind harris and woodson the packers have......a 2nd round rookie. thats it. god help you if one of your starters go down. (or both as happened to the bears last year, proving that its possible)

Well god help the Bears if 1 corner gets injured too. Because that is what happened last year except Tillman missed 1 game so for 1 game you were missing 2 corners.Vasher missed almost the entire season. Charles Woodson missed 1 game last year too. You make it sound like the Bears were missing both their starting corners for the majority of last year. That is not the case, Vasher missed 12.5 games(3rd Qtr injury vs Cowboys), Tillman missed 1, Manning didn't step up and McBride is very young and inexperienced with not much expected out of him.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=4493

Ricky Manning did not fill in well last year as the number 2 corner, Tillman was the number 1. I don't consider the Bears to have good depth at corner based on last year because Manning wasn't a good starter. The depth proved to be a fraud. Now Vasher/Tillman with Manning at nickel is a different story(very good secondary then).

BeerBaron
05-07-2008, 03:39 PM
Well god help the Bears if 1 corner gets injured too. Because that is what happened last year except Tillman missed 1 game so for 1 game you were missing 2 corners.Vasher missed almost the entire season. Charles Woodson missed 1 game last year too. You make it sound like the Bears were missing both their starting corners for the majority of last year. That is not the case, Vasher missed 12.5 games(3rd Qtr injury vs Cowboys), Tillman missed 1, Manning didn't step up and McBride is very young and inexperienced with not much expected out of him.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=4493

Ricky Manning did not fill in well last year as the number 2 corner, Tillman was the number 1. I don't consider the Bears to have good depth at corner based on last year because Manning wasn't a good starter. The depth proved to be a fraud. Now Vasher/Tillman with Manning at nickel is a different story(very good secondary then).

and you think the packers non-existant depth behind their guys is any better? they both have pairs of starters who are very good at what they do. i feel the bears starters are better as cover 2 corners as they are younger and going to be around a little longer....the packers guys are getting up there.

and at least the bears have experienced depth. manning isnt much as a starter, no, but he is a damn good true nickel back. he does his best work in the nickel lurking and snapping up picks, something taht with vasher hurt he didnt get to do as much last year. and mcbride does have 1 year of experience under his belt vs. the packers 1 2nd round rookie who really is all of their worthwhile depth....

BeerBaron
05-07-2008, 03:41 PM
I read somewhere Ricky Manning could be on his way out in favor of Mcbride or something like that, not 100% sure. Anyways you keep bringing up Zach Bowman and his potential...Its pointless. I could say Patrick Lee, Jarret Bush, Tramon Williams and Will Blackmon and all their potential. It's close I will still take the Packers duo at this point because they havent shown any huge signs of age yet. If I was looking towards the future and not worrying about schemes I would take Vasher, Tillman because of the age advantage. Bears have better depth but hopefully someone steps up for us.

thanks for being a little more civil than a few others, lol. i agree in that both sets of corners are very good at what theyre asked to do in their schemes. depends on preference and scheme i guess. theyre hard to compare overall because of that.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-07-2008, 03:46 PM
and you think the packers non-existant depth behind their guys is any better? they both have pairs of starters who are very good at what they do. i feel the bears starters are better as cover 2 corners as they are younger and going to be around a little longer....the packers guys are getting up there.

and at least the bears have experienced depth. manning isnt much as a starter, no, but he is a damn good true nickel back. he does his best work in the nickel lurking and snapping up picks, something taht with vasher hurt he didnt get to do as much last year. and mcbride does have 1 year of experience under his belt vs. the packers 1 2nd round rookie who really is all of their worthwhile depth....

I didn't say the Packers had depth either. Both teams will need somebody to step up big time(or be screwed) if Harris,Woodson,Tillman,Vasher go down early in the season. Even more so with Vikes with Winfield and the Lions with Bodden.

Base package, Woodson/Harris are the better corners. Nickel package, Bears have the better corners. Bush/Tramon Williams have a year of experience as nickel for the Pack and Patrick Lee might just be a better corner than McBride(only time will tell). Based on prospect potential, Lee should be better, but that doesn't mean much until you prove it. Plus experience doesn't always mean success. Experience and learning from that experience is the key.

Sportsfan486
05-07-2008, 03:57 PM
Since Gonzo just feels like neg repping and not even responding, here goes!

Gonzo said "The Vikings sucked at pass protection due to no pass rush and having two slow safeties, both of which were fixed this year. Terrible argument as it was not the CB's fault at all."

No Gonzo, you're right. Your pass defense had NOTHING to do with your corners, how silly of me to think so. It was all your pass rush (41 sacks to GBs 36, btw) or your two slow safeties (have you ever watched the GB safety carousel?)

Your LBs inability to cover TEs hurt too. Oh, wait, that was the Packers.

So in short, the Packers had a worse pass-rush, equally bad safeties and couldn't cover a TE. Our corners also played in a system that is completely dependant on them opposed to the Bears style of D which vastly limits what the corners are asked to do.

Woodson and Harris were considered the best duo in the ENTIRE league all of last year. Considering the Bears didnt add a star corner I think it's crazy not to consider the Packers corners better. I'll give the Bears the benefit of the doubt at a couple other positions, and I do think they're number 2 in the division for corners, but I can't see the arguement for corners.

neko4
05-07-2008, 04:13 PM
well remember, if tillman and vasher do exactly what theyre supposed to do given teh scheme, they'll help stop any runs to the outside, shut down the flats, and collect some the forced passes and take em back the other way...something theyre both very good at.

so while harris and woodson are 'better' at shutting their man down, theyre doing what they supposed to be doing, and the bears guys are doing just what theyre supposed to be doing.

its really a cover 2 vs. man situation....
Which can get tricky to compare.

If you need a CB to jam at the line, none better than Al Harris
Also, its just a projection, but I think Patrick Lee will have a good first year as a 3rd corner

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-07-2008, 04:24 PM
Its Packers
Bears migth have the better nickel but if I'm building a team
1) Al Hariss
2) Woodson
3) Vasher
4) Tillman

Harris and Woodson are 1 and 2, so they have the best. The others are both very good though.

Gay Ork Wang
05-07-2008, 04:25 PM
If im building a Cover 2 team:
1) Vasher
2) Tillman
3) Al harris
4) Woodson

so it really depends on ur system...

neko4
05-07-2008, 04:26 PM
in a general system i'd take Al Harris and Charles Woodson

Yatta!
05-07-2008, 04:30 PM
in a general system i'd take Al Harris and Charles Woodson

well said, thats the key point. And who voted for Detroit??

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-07-2008, 04:31 PM
Yeah I think man corners are more valuable than Cover 2 corners. So if I were building a team, I would use man corners.

And I think Harris and Woodson could be very good Cover 2 corners. They are both physical enough.

Gay Ork Wang
05-07-2008, 04:33 PM
how do u know how Tillman and Vasher play M2M...im just wondering, cause i dont know

Sportsfan486
05-07-2008, 04:38 PM
If im building a Cover 2 team:
1) Vasher
2) Tillman
3) Al harris
4) Woodson

so it really depends on ur system...

But if Woodson and Harris had experience in a cover 2 there's no reason to think they wouldn't excel. Cover 2 is a dumbed down, physical corner system and Woodson and Harris both have assets that strongly suit it. At worst it's hard to say they wouldn't be at least solid.

Conversely, Tillman would likely get humiliated in a man-system such as GB uses and the worst case scenario is complete bust. Vasher is kind of undersized but he had the potential for being a man guy coming out so I can't say he definitely wouldn't do well.

Renji, Tillman was viewed as only having potential as a zone corner or safety in the pros and hasn't done anything to rid himself of that.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-07-2008, 04:38 PM
how do u know how Tillman and Vasher play M2M...im just wondering, cause i dont know

I think Tillman and Vasher could play man too. They have good ball skill sets but lack the elite speed. Just not as well as Harris/Woodson at man which is proven very good. And I know Harris/Woodson are physical. Them playing Cover 2 is just a hunch based on their physicalness and the fact less talented corners usually fit into a Cover 2. Heck Dre Bly didnt' fit but because of his cover skills he was still better than any Cover 2 corner we had on our team last year. And I think man corners are more valuable because man skills are tougher to find (a reason we picked up Bodden, good physicalness and good man cover skills). Therefore, I value Harris/Woodson more.

Gay Ork Wang
05-07-2008, 04:43 PM
we played more man than tampa 2 when Vasher went down afair. its not like Tillman only plays zone. And ur really telling me that if a corner is better in m2m he can play Tampa 2 defense? gtfo

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-07-2008, 04:46 PM
we played more man than tampa 2 when Vasher went down afair. its not like Tillman only plays zone. And ur really telling me that if a corner is better in m2m he can play Tampa 2 defense? gtfo

Well, did Tillman have a good year. The 27th pass ranking may be deceiving.

I saw it first hand with Dre Bly. He was a man corner and played Cover 2 better than any Cover 2 fitting corner we had and Dre Bly isn't very physical. Harris and Woodson are physical so that makes me belive they could play Cover 2 fairly well if Bly did it without being physical.

Gay Ork Wang
05-07-2008, 04:49 PM
i wasnt talking about u but to sportsfan. Im almost positive that a good Tampa 2 player wont be automatically a good M2M corner (its tampa 2 btw, cover 2 is a play ;)) But to say Harris and Woodson will have no problems and its easy than its just really biased. There are alot of players who are good in M2M and not so good in zone coverage and vice versa. I see ur point, but i just dont see why the gap should be that big. For me its 1a and 1b and not 1 and 2.

neko4
05-07-2008, 05:11 PM
Harris would probably be the worst Tampa 2 CB of the bunch due to poor ball skills. Woodson i think would be as good of a Tampa 2 CB as he is a Bump n Run. Chicago's CB's bump too i bliev, but then they go into zone.

I'll close this poll in a couple hours

Sportsfan486
05-07-2008, 05:46 PM
yea cause everyone can play in a cover 2?

Sportsfan u know that on 1 defense there are also Safeties? The CB dont make the Pass defense, they are part of it. Also Vasher was hurt for most of the season. Tillman missed 1-3 games too. I dont get why u can say the Statistics can tell u who is better

so if the bears were bad last year they are going to be bad next year? Really?
Why dont we just stop watching Football cause every year teams gonna just turn out like the season before? The Packers were 4-12 they shouldve been bad the following year too right?
Ur arguments are just ridiculous. i mean we dont even say the ur CBs are worse than ours and we are the best, we say its about even and u have to insist on saying ur CBs are way better? Great!

As I pointed out numerous times. Yes, there are other factors to pass defense. Such as pass rush.. which the Bears were BETTER at.. safeties.. which were bad for both teams.. TE covering linebackers.. which is a bigger weakspot for the Packers. Overcoming these deficiencies to end up with a very good pass D means our corners were ballin'.

And yes, the Packers went 4-12. Then 8-8. Then 13-3. It's called g-r-o-w-t-h. You're somehow predicting that a cornerback group that got annihilated last year is going to outperform the best cornerback tandem in the league last year.

Oh, and at least I take the time to think out an arguement for being a homer rather than just neg repping people for not agreeing that a horrible cornerback group will suddenly be amaaaaazing!

neko4
05-07-2008, 06:02 PM
Green Bay wins:
http://media.scout.com/Media/College_Football/500441_harrisEndZone300.JPG
http://www.mikedesimone.com/mpix/woodsonap1.jpg
http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2007/writers/dr_z/03/15/mailbag/p1_woodson.jpg

TitleTown088
05-08-2008, 07:28 PM
Who the heck voted for Minny and Detroit?

This is a two man race and GB wins by a hair in my book because Woodson has played just nasty the last two years.

toonsterwu
05-09-2008, 08:58 AM
It's either Green Bay or Chicago for me, and I'm not sure. That said, I guess if I was a betting man, I'd bet on the Bears unit and their depth as I do wonder if Woodson and Harris can maintain their top play. But it's close. So, hmm .. .voted Chicago.

Crazy_Chris
05-09-2008, 12:39 PM
The Vikings group definatly has the potential to be the best they look real bad right now because they have been left out to dry by the D-line so much last year. That and Antione Winfield was hurt most the year, they have the best depth of the NFC North. But with that said the packers starting 2 is excellent even though Al Harris looked iffy at times this year so they get my vote.

Vikes99ej
05-09-2008, 12:41 PM
1. Green Bay
2. Chicago
3. Detroit
4. Minnesota

Gay Ork Wang
05-09-2008, 01:03 PM
The Vikings group definatly has the potential to be the best they look real bad right now because they have been left out to dry by the D-line so much last year. That and Antione Winfield was hurt most the year, they have the best depth of the NFC North. But with that said the packers starting 2 is excellent even though Al Harris looked iffy at times this year so they get my vote.
i wouldve said we have the best depth...

umphrey
05-09-2008, 03:36 PM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22454

For NFC
Packers #2
Bears #8

Basically what I've been saying. The youth of the Bears will help them in the near future but this year belongs to the Pack.

Gay Ork Wang
05-09-2008, 04:58 PM
hell that list is dumb, they have vikes 4

asmitty45
05-09-2008, 08:53 PM
it's still GB for me, if the lions play their cards right and their guys pan out they will have some very dynamic guys on the outside, but Harris and Woodson are still the best, imo

Bearsfan123
05-10-2008, 11:32 AM
Green Bay for the top 2 guys. Al Harris and Woodson can fit a good man scheme and thats a bit harder to find than a Tampa 2 guy.

Nickel-Bears
Depth-Bears
Youth-Bears

So in overall category of corners, Bears. Lee might be great but thats like last year when we went over TE Greg Olsen shouldve been great but no one could know for sure. Depth wise, McBride made me happy with his play for a rookie.

EDIT: To summarize if we are picking just the top two guys, Packers. But if we are looking at the position as a whole, then the Bears have to be the pick IMO.