PDA

View Full Version : Sporting News: NFC Cornerbacks


Crazy_Chris
05-09-2008, 12:24 PM
I remember discussing these lists last year so let it begin once again.

1. Eagles. Lito Sheppard and offseason pickup Asante Samuel are supreme playmakers. Sheppard is every bit the ballhawk Samuel is, but injuries have limited him too often. Sheldon Brown is a punishing hitter.

2. Packers. Al Harris, 33, and Charles Woodson, 31, form perhaps the best press corner duo in the NFL, but they're getting old. Tramon Williams finished 2007 as the nickel; he is quick and tough but lacks size (5-11, 185).

3. Seahawks. Marcus Trufant is coming off a Pro Bowl season in which he led NFC corners in interceptions. Kelly Jennings was solid on the right side. Nickel back Jordan Babineaux's best trait is versatility.

4. Vikings. Antoine Winfield -- perhaps the NFL's best tackling corner -- and Cedric Griffin do a good job of pressing receivers. Charles Gordon might be the best cover guy among three players vying for the nickel job.

5. Cowboys. Terence Newman made the Pro Bowl last season but needs to intercept more passes. Anthony Henry knocks down balls with his long arms. If Pacman Jones is reinstated, he should excel in one-on-one coverage.

6. Panthers. Ken Lucas is underrated; he's a complete run/pass corner. Chris Gamble isn't much of a tackler but has pure cover ability. Nickel back Richard Marshall might eventually be the best of the group.

7. 49ers. Nate Clements covers the opponent's top receiver and isn't afraid to help in run support. Walt Harris' play dipped a bit last season, so the team drafted Reggie Smith with the hopes he can be a starter in the future.

8. Bears. Nathan Vasher is skilled in cover 2, and Charles Tillman is physical in press coverage and run support. Ricky Manning is an experienced nickel back but will be challenged by Trumaine McBride and Zackary Bowman.

9. Buccaneers. Rookie Aqib Talib gives the team a playmaker who is effective in man schemes. Ronde Barber is at his best working the slot on passing downs. Eugene Wilson and Phillip Buchanon are solid in man-to-man.

10. Redskins. Shawn Springs can cover one-on-one, press at the line or drop into a zone. Fred Smoot sometimes gives receivers too much cushion. Carlos Rogers is coming off a devastating knee injury.

11. Cardinals. Rod Hood and Eric Green are solid, but rookie Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie will challenge them for a job. Antrel Rolle was moved to safety but could return to his nickel slot, where he has had success.

12. Giants. Corey Webster was a revelation in the playoffs but must prove he can do it for the long haul. Aaron Ross is coming off a strong rookie year. Second-round pick Terrell Thomas is aggressive in press coverage.

13. Lions. The team made upgrades with the trade for Leigh Bodden, who is underrated, and the acquisition of free agent Brian Kelly, a Tampa 2 scheme veteran. Nickel back Travis Fisher is good in short zones.

14. Rams. The team lacks a difference-maker. Fakhir Brown is decent in coverage and is a sure tackler. Tye Hill has good speed but is undersized and injury-prone. Nickel back Ron Bartell must make better use of his size.

15. Saints. The team made marginal improvement at its weakest position by adding free agents Randall *** and Aaron Glenn and drafting Tracy Porter. *** and Porter will push starters Mike McKenzie and Jason David.

16. Falcons. The team's best starter is journeyman Von Hutchins, who is better suited to the slot. Chris Houston struggled as a rookie. The team drafted Chevis Jackson, but he doesn't have the speed to run with the fastest receivers.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=408428

princefielder28
05-09-2008, 12:35 PM
Packers #2!!!!

Jughead10
05-09-2008, 12:49 PM
Minnesota ranked dead last in yards allowed through the air a game.

Crazy_Chris
05-09-2008, 12:52 PM
They also got passed on 40 times a game due to the run defense and had barely any pressure from the D-line on a consistent basis. The CBs aren't as bad as that stat would make one think.

Vikes99ej
05-09-2008, 12:53 PM
The Vikings probably shouldn't even be in the top 16. Even with the anemic pass rush, Griffin and McCauley had their struggles in coverage.

Gay Ork Wang
05-09-2008, 12:56 PM
Only 8??? We should be at least 5...

Crazy_Chris
05-09-2008, 12:58 PM
The Vikings probably shouldn't even be in the top 16. Even with the anemic pass rush, Griffin and McCauley had their struggles in coverage.

Thats exagerating I'd probably move them down to below the redskins right now from their play last year but I'm expecting them to be much better this year.

A Perfect Score
05-09-2008, 01:14 PM
i hope they put one out for the AFC

Vikes99ej
05-09-2008, 01:23 PM
I remember discussing these lists last year so let it begin once again.




16. Falcons. The team's best starter is journeyman Von Hutchins, who is better suited to the slot. Chris Houston struggled as a rookie. The team drafted Chevis Jackson, but he doesn't have the speed to run with the fastest receivers

Wow. That's bad.

Turtlepower
05-09-2008, 01:27 PM
Giants secondary > Redskins Secondary. =D

Go_Eagles77
05-09-2008, 01:39 PM
Sheldon Brown is good enough to be the best corner on a couple of those teams.

xooberon
05-09-2008, 01:46 PM
that's probably a fair ranking for us, although i don't agree that the vikings should be so high

neko4
05-09-2008, 01:49 PM
IMO, who should be higher: New Orleans, Washington (If Rodgers is good to go)

Turtlepower
05-09-2008, 01:51 PM
IMO, who should be higher: New Orleans, Washington (If Rodgers is good to go)

Giants and Cards should be higher. I really think that Arizona will have a top-5 pass NFC pass defence next year.

neko4
05-09-2008, 01:55 PM
Giants and Cards should be higher. I really think that Arizona will have a top-5 pass NFC pass defence next year.
I can see it happening. Rolle should do much better at Safety. Rolle and Wilson should be great.

Crazy_Chris
05-09-2008, 01:57 PM
i hope they put one out for the AFC

They did I posted it in a seperate thread

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22455

fenikz
05-09-2008, 02:16 PM
They also got passed on 40 times a game due to the run defense and had barely any pressure from the D-line on a consistent basis. The CBs aren't as bad as that stat would make one think.

same with the cardinals but no one seems to notice

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 02:31 PM
How are the Seahawks and Vikings ahead of the Cowboys?

Terence Newman is way better than anything the Vikings have, and he's every bit as good as Marcus Trufant.

I think most people will take Anthony Henry over Cedric Griffin/Kelly Jennings any day.

PackerLegend
05-09-2008, 02:50 PM
How are the Seahawks and Vikings ahead of the Cowboys?

Terence Newman is way better than anything the Vikings have, and he's every bit as good as Marcus Trufant.

I think most people will take Anthony Henry over Cedric Griffin/Kelly Jennings any day.

I cant believe im going to back the Vikings but I wouldnt say Terence Newman is way better then anything the Vikings have. He is better but they do have Winfield who is pretty good and goes unoticed.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 03:07 PM
I cant believe im going to back the Vikings but I wouldnt say Terence Newman is way better then anything the Vikings have. He is better but they do have Winfield who is pretty good and goes unoticed.

Aw c'mon, who are we kidding here? Antoine Winfield is what we think he is.. a decent cover guy, who's great in run support and is a great tackler, and that's about it. Terence Newman is in another level when you compare him to Winfield.

I wouldn't say that Winfield goes unnoticed, because he was a highly sought after Free Agent after being with Buffalo, and he got some very good money at the time for a corner. Anthony Henry is better than Cedric Griffin, who's no slouch by the way, but is still very young.

Terence Newman > Antoine Winfield
Anthony Henry > Cedric Griffin
Mike Jenkins > Marcus McCauley
Adam Jones > Marcus McCauley

So what's the deal then?

TitleTown088
05-09-2008, 03:10 PM
The Vikings probably shouldn't even be in the top 16. Even with the anemic pass rush, Griffin and McCauley had their struggles in coverage.

Yeah, they are way too high. Being above the Cowboys is prob not right.

Packers #2, for how much longer? I think there is going to be a big drop off in Harris's play this season.

eaglesalltheway
05-09-2008, 03:15 PM
Just thought I'd mention, a few guys seem to think this is about the secondary, but its not, its just about the CBs, and though CB are vital in the secondary they only make up approximately 50% of the secondary.(Depending on how much the nickel is used) Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that the Eagles are in this istuation, and find it funny that teams aren't even debating that the Eagles have the #1 CB team in the NFC at all. That is a statement that you can't even dispute if homerism is involved. In the whole NFL though, it is tough, the Eagles are definitely up there though. One more thing to add, the Cowboys CBs should be higher on the list. Newman and Henry are solid, but the depth behind is very, very good. Pacman is a great #3 CB if he can get on the field, and even if he can't, Jenkins is a guy who I liked going into the draft.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 03:47 PM
If we hang onto Sheppard, our secondary will be fabulous, assuming Dawkins can stay healthy and the strong safety of the week can be average.

LonghornsLegend
05-09-2008, 04:02 PM
Ehhh, I don't know, the Pack are at #2 but were at #5? How is that, when you could argue that both our starting corners are equal, but we have more depth and potential behind those 2....They have Patrick Lee at nickel, our best case has Adam Jones as the nickel, and worst case Mike Jenkins...The Seahawks do have Trufant but lets not act like Jennings has played anything better then solid and thats still generous, who else do they have? And while I don't think the Vikings corners are that bad, I don't think you can put them that high.


I would have us #2/#3 at worst...So now everyone can't assume the media or sportswriters suck off the Cowboys, our depth is better then almost every team on that list at this point, we kept our 2 starting corners from last year who were damn good, and got rid of the terrible depth behind them.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 04:05 PM
Ehhh, I don't know, the Pack are at #2 but were at #5? How is that, when you could argue that both our starting corners are equal, but we have more depth and potential behind those 2....The Seahawks do have Trufant but lets not act like Jennings has played anything better then solid and thats still generous, who else do they have? And while I don't think the Vikings corners are that bad, I don't think you can put them that high.


I would have us #2/#3 at worst...So now everyone can't assume the media or sportswriters suck off the Cowboys, our depth is better then almost every team on that list at this point.

I think the reason for having Green Bay ahead if because neither of Green Bay's starting corners are ******* ******** off the field and there's a good chance both Woodson and Harris will be around for the whole season. Plus, Patrick Lee is decent. And they'll be practicing against JORDYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ which will make them beastly.

Boston
05-09-2008, 04:08 PM
Ehhh, I don't know, the Pack are at #2 but were at #5? How is that, when you could argue that both our starting corners are equal, but we have more depth and potential behind those 2....They have Patrick Lee at nickel, our best case has Adam Jones as the nickel, and worst case Mike Jenkins...The Seahawks do have Trufant but lets not act like Jennings has played anything better then solid and thats still generous, who else do they have? And while I don't think the Vikings corners are that bad, I don't think you can put them that high.


I would have us #2/#3 at worst...So now everyone can't assume the media or sportswriters suck off the Cowboys, our depth is better then almost every team on that list at this point, we kept our 2 starting corners from last year who were damn good, and got rid of the terrible depth behind them.

Charles Woodson is much better than Anthony Henry.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 04:09 PM
Charles Woodson is much better than Anthony Henry.

Charles Woodson is the greatest ever!

Boston
05-09-2008, 04:11 PM
Charles Woodson is the greatest ever!

People need to get with the program...

LonghornsLegend
05-09-2008, 04:13 PM
Charles Woodson is much better than Anthony Henry.

Fine, whatever, I'm not arguing about being ranked below the Packers, I just dont agree with being ranked behind the Seahawks and Vikings.


And once again in my post I said, "an argument could be made that both starting corners are a wash", just as easily as you said Woodson is better then Henry with no argument backing it up, I could easily make a case for Henry being better then Woodson, who was leading the NFL in int's before he got his high ankle sprain, and I'm positive you don't watch Henry that much...I could also make an argument that Newman is slightly better then Harris, and Woodson is slightly better then Henry, once again making the two starting corners a wash, it would depend on who you ask so its not worth disputing...Im pretty sure you do think Woodson is better then Henry, thus my point "you can make an argument for either".

Sniper
05-09-2008, 04:16 PM
People need to get with the program...

Sorry, my Michigan homerism jumps out sometimes. 1997 HEISMAN TROPHY WINNER AND ONLY DB TO EVER WIN IT! Whoops there it goes again.

619
05-09-2008, 04:25 PM
Bucs corners are a little bit under the radar. I cannot say enough about what I think of their secondary going into next season. Top 5 is not out of the question for me.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 04:25 PM
I made my case already for the Cowboys being better than the Vikes and Seahawks.

But it's okay, bring on the Cowboy hate. It gives me something to do these boring summer days.

no love
05-09-2008, 04:52 PM
Giants and Cards should be higher. I really think that Arizona will have a top-5 pass NFC pass defence next year.

The Cardinals? Really?

DMC will be a rookie. And Green and Hood are not guys who I would think of in a top 5 pass defense.

I will give you the Giants though. They have a nasty pass rush that would make any secondary look good.

Turtlepower
05-09-2008, 04:54 PM
The Cardinals? Really?

DMC will be a rookie. And Green and Hood are not guys who I would think of in a top 5 pass defense.

I will give you the Giants though. They have a nasty pass rush that would make any secondary look good.

I guess I'm also looking at safety as well where they have a nice tandem of Rolle and Adrian Wilson.

xooberon
05-09-2008, 05:19 PM
statistically speaking rod hood was one of the best CB's in the league last year, 1st in YAP, and 2nd in success rate LINK (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/12/21/ramblings/stat-analysis/5920/)

although i didn't watch much of the cards last season so maybe the stats don't fully convey the performance

no love
05-09-2008, 05:46 PM
I guess I'm also looking at safety as well where they have a nice tandem of Rolle and Adrian Wilson.

Ah. I guess if you include safeties they have a nice tandem there. But they are mighty thin at CB.

Giants have a lot of potential at CB and S in Ross, Webster and Phillips.

Addict
05-09-2008, 05:48 PM
Barring an amazing revelation, Atlanta's secondary is going to be the equivalent of a written invitation to pass.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 06:41 PM
Barring an amazing revelation, Atlanta's secondary is going to be the equivalent of a written invitation to pass.

What ever happened to Jimmy Williams?

It would be sweet if him and Chris Houston could develop properly at the CB position. That'd be a sweet CB duo

holt_bruce81
05-09-2008, 06:45 PM
What ever happened to Jimmy Williams?

It would be sweet if him and Chris Houston could develop properly at the CB position. That'd be a sweet CB duo

His heads not in the right place, he has a horrible work ethic.

yodabear
05-09-2008, 06:46 PM
14th for the Rams? Thats a bit lineant.

holt_bruce81
05-09-2008, 06:47 PM
Giants and Cards should be higher. I really think that Arizona will have a top-5 pass NFC pass defence next year.

Lol they better hope DRC learns quickly. Eric Green can't cover anyone.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 06:48 PM
His heads not in the right place, he has a horrible work ethic.

He seems like a perfect candidate to get traded to the Cowboys!

holt_bruce81
05-09-2008, 06:49 PM
14th for the Rams? Thats a bit lineant.

Rams never get a "stud" CB......they always get a CB with RAW talent, like Tye Hill, Ron Bartell, Jonothan Wade, and now Justin King.

Everyone of these guys are going to take 3-4 years to reach their potential.

PackerLegend
05-09-2008, 07:09 PM
Aw c'mon, who are we kidding here? Antoine Winfield is what we think he is.. a decent cover guy, who's great in run support and is a great tackler, and that's about it. Terence Newman is in another level when you compare him to Winfield.

I wouldn't say that Winfield goes unnoticed, because he was a highly sought after Free Agent after being with Buffalo, and he got some very good money at the time for a corner. Anthony Henry is better than Cedric Griffin, who's no slouch by the way, but is still very young.

Terence Newman > Antoine Winfield
Anthony Henry > Cedric Griffin
Mike Jenkins > Marcus McCauley
Adam Jones > Marcus McCauley

So what's the deal then?

In no way was I saying the Vikings CB's were better then the Cowboys if thats how you took it. I was just saying, that I didnt know if I would call Newmanway better then Winfield, but he is better.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 07:10 PM
Mike Jenkins > Marcus McCauley


I'm gonna go ahead and wait until Jenkins plays a couple snaps in the NFL before I judge him to be better than a veteran.

LonghornsLegend
05-09-2008, 07:24 PM
What ever happened to Jimmy Williams?

It would be sweet if him and Chris Houston could develop properly at the CB position. That'd be a sweet CB duo

They moved Jimmy Williams to FS, as he was pretty much considered a tweener at CB/S coming out...Since they are playing a cover 2, I actually think he will be pretty good.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 07:39 PM
I'm gonna go ahead and wait until Jenkins plays a couple snaps in the NFL before I judge him to be better than a veteran.

LOL, so now a guy that has played limited time in a horrible pass defense is a Veteran?

I'd be surprised if there was more than a handful of GM's that would take Marcus McCauley over Mike Jenkins.

And just look at the argument, to have to wait on judgment on a guy that started, as compared to a guy that's probably gonna be 4th on our depth chart is enough to say that we have a better set of CB's than the Vikings

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 07:40 PM
They moved Jimmy Williams to FS, as he was pretty much considered a tweener at CB/S coming out...Since they are playing a cover 2, I actually think he will be pretty good.

Well yeah, i realized that, but he's just been completely transparent since being on the team, so i'm wondering why he isn't on the field making an impact, seeing as the guy has talent spewing out of his veins.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 07:52 PM
LOL, so now a guy that has played limited time in a horrible pass defense is a Veteran?

I'd be surprised if there was more than a handful of GM's that would take Marcus McCauley over Mike Jenkins.

And just look at the argument, to have to wait on judgment on a guy that started, as compared to a guy that's probably gonna be 4th on our depth chart is enough to say that we have a better set of CB's than the Vikings

Um....I don't know how to put this. But once your rookie season is over, you're considered a veteran.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 07:58 PM
Um....I don't know how to put this. But once your rookie season is over, you're considered a veteran.

By who?

I like to reserve that term for players that have seen the field more than one year, but that's just me. I guess Drew Stanton, who was on IR all season last year is a Veteran also.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 08:01 PM
By who?

I like to reserve that term for players that have seen the field more than one year, but that's just me. I guess Drew Stanton, who was on IR all season last year is a Veteran also.

By the NFL.

Does Drew Stanton have to go through rookie hazing again? No. Okay, then he's a veteran.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 08:04 PM
By the NFL.

Does Drew Stanton have to go through rookie hazing again? No. Okay, then he's a veteran.

Lmao, okay. I guess the "he's been hazed already" argument constitutes an NFL veteran. But anyway, that's besides the point.

Marcus McCauley is still not better than our 4th best CB.

Marcus McCauley, the starter at one point for the Vikings.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Sniper
05-09-2008, 08:12 PM
Lmao, okay. I guess the "he's been hazed already" argument constitutes an NFL veteran. But anyway, that's besides the point.

Marcus McCauley is still not better than our 4th best CB.

Marcus McCauley, the starter at one point for the Vikings.

Nothing more needs to be said.

What I'm saying is that you can't say Mike Jenkins will be better/is better than Marcus McCauley until he plays a down in the NFL. For all you know, Mike Jenkins could be absolutely brutal in the NFL. Will he? Unlikely. Could he? Yup.

MetSox17
05-09-2008, 08:18 PM
What I'm saying is that you can't say Mike Jenkins will be better/is better than Marcus McCauley until he plays a down in the NFL. For all you know, Mike Jenkins could be absolutely brutal in the NFL. Will he? Unlikely. Could he? Yup.

Alright, for the sake of compromise, and for that reason only, i'll go ahead and say that Mike Jenkins has the POTENTIAL to be better than McCauley.

We still have better CB's overall though.

Burns336
05-09-2008, 08:52 PM
In no way was I saying the Vikings CB's were better then the Cowboys if thats how you took it. I was just saying, that I didnt know if I would call Newmanway better then Winfield, but he is better.

Newman is way better than Winfield.

Newman is way better than Harris.

Im_a_Romosexual
05-09-2008, 09:51 PM
Lmao, okay. I guess the "he's been hazed already" argument constitutes an NFL veteran. But anyway, that's besides the point.

Marcus McCauley is still not better than our 4th best CB.

Marcus McCauley, the starter at one point for the Vikings.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Hell I'd even say Scandrick>McCauley is possible

TheGreatEscape
05-09-2008, 10:17 PM
Giants CBs are good fits for our scheme and unproven so I have no gripes about this ranking. Yes Ross had a great rookie season and Webster was able to reach new heights and we are 5 deep at the position, but Webster and ross have to do it for a whole season and Thomas has to prove himself, Madison has to not play like he's a year older and dockery is just a very good depth guy.

Crazy_Chris
05-09-2008, 10:49 PM
Hell I'd even say Scandrick>McCauley is possible

Now that is just ridiculous, McCauley is being under rated.

As for MetSox, Mike Jenkins hasn't played a down so I don't see any reason to call him better than McCauley. Unless you think just because he is a first rounder that automatically makes him better and automatically makes him have more potential to be better than McCauley this year.

BlindSite
05-10-2008, 12:52 AM
Vikings should switch places with the cowboys and then with the panthers my top 5 is this:

Eagles
Packers
Cowboys
Seahawks
Panthers

Caddy
05-10-2008, 01:18 AM
The Buccaneers had the number #1 pass defense in the entire NFL, largely due to the play of Ronde Barber and Phillip Buchanon yet they are ranked 9th?

MetSox17
05-10-2008, 01:10 PM
Now that is just ridiculous, McCauley is being under rated.

As for MetSox, Mike Jenkins hasn't played a down so I don't see any reason to call him better than McCauley. Unless you think just because he is a first rounder that automatically makes him better and automatically makes him have more potential to be better than McCauley this year.

Well honestly i do see more potential with Mike Jenkins. McCauley is a great athlete, but he looked very raw and unpolished when he got the chance to start this year. The point that i'm making is that Jenkins to begin the season will most likely be our 4th CB (if Jones is re-instated), and McCauley was starting games for the Vikings last year. There's no way that you can put their CB staff up against ours and see anything comparable.

TheGreatEscape
05-10-2008, 01:50 PM
Terrance Newman is way better than god.

I do like the potential duo of Newman/Pacman, two great man corners. Not very high on Henry, he has long arms and great hands but he no longer has the speed and physicalness needed to be a top flight starter. And I'm not a fan of Jenkins at all, thought him and Talib where two guys who needed to be in a primarily zone scheme in this year first round.

MetSox17
05-10-2008, 01:54 PM
I do like the potential duo of Newman/Pacman, two great man corners. Not very high on Henry, he has long arms and great hands but he no longer has the speed and physicalness needed to be a top flight starter. And I'm not a fan of Jenkins at all, thought him and Talib where two guys who needed to be in a primarily zone scheme in this year first round.

Henry is a great man CB. He doesn't have the speed anymore, but to say that he has no physicality in man coverage is absurd. We don't need him to be a top-flight starter. We have one of those already. We need him to man his side of the field, and that's it. And it's funny that you say that Jenkins needs to be in a zone to succeed, when he's played man coverage pretty much all his career and been very good at it. He has the great size-speed ratio and he knows the coverages so he's been put in a good situation.

toonsterwu
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
My 2 cents on ranking NFC cornerbacks as units. That said, this is always iffy, since a lot is

A) Dependent on scheme.
B) Dependent on Pass rush.

I'm looking towards next season, thus it's a blend of last season and how I think guys will progress.

1. Carolina Panthers - Best unit in the game. Are there better individual talents? Without a doubt. Better tandems? Certainly debatable. Better threesome? Only the Eagles are in the debate. There's a good blend of size, cover ability, physicality, and so forth with this threesome. They'll be critical to how the Panthers do, because the pass rush is iffy.

2. Philadelphia Eagles - Sure, there are health issues with Sheppard. But it's a solid three man unit that fits what Jim Johnson wants real well.

3. Dallas Cowboys - Newman is good, and they've added superb depth. Is Henry better off at safety? Sure. But he's still a decent number 2 option.

4. Green Bay Packers - Based off last year, they could be at 2 or 3. I just wonder if age catches up. That said, Patrick Lee should take over the nickel spot, pushing Williams to a better fit at dime.

5. Seattle Seahawks - Trufant is hitting his prime. I don't really love Kelly Jennings, though.

6. Tampa Bay Buccaneers - All about fit here. There's teams with better individual talents, but this team has good talent and great fit. The loss of Kelly isn't that big. Buchanon offers Monte the ability to man up more.

7. Chicago Bears - Could go higher. Solid fits, and there's good depth. Even if Manning is cut, McBride is fine for nickel. Health is key.

8. Minnesota Vikings - Comes down to how the kids develop. There's talent there, though.

9. New Orleans Saints - Health is big, but if healthy, McKenzie is a solid starter, and Porter upgrades their man ability immediately.

10. New York Giants - The Physical talent is there. Can they put it together?

11. Arizona Cardinals - Not sure DRC is as ready to help as some think, and Hood and Green are only decent guys at best.

12. San Francisco 49ers - Clements is fine. Harris is on the downside. Color me not sold on Spencer or Smith at CB.

13. Washington Redskins - Sure, Springs is still fine at his age. Um, Rogers off injury? Smoot? Cause for concern.

14. Detroit Lions - Will be much better than lsat year, and the fit is there. That said, Bodden, while underrated, has some questions, and Kelly is aging.

15. St. Louis Rams - They need the kids to develop.

16. Atlanta Falcons - Rebuilding.

Addict
05-10-2008, 02:20 PM
it's tragic that the lions are bottom 3 in almost every secondary ranking, and still everyone is saying "they're way better than last year"...

Crazy_Chris
05-10-2008, 03:14 PM
Well honestly i do see more potential with Mike Jenkins. McCauley is a great athlete, but he looked very raw and unpolished when he got the chance to start this year. The point that i'm making is that Jenkins to begin the season will most likely be our 4th CB (if Jones is re-instated), and McCauley was starting games for the Vikings last year. There's no way that you can put their CB staff up against ours and see anything comparable.

McCauley had his bad times along with some bright moments too as any rookie. He had one of the better seasons for a rookie CB. The only reason he was starting though is because Winfield was hurt. Also I'm not trying to compare them I am just trying to make the point that you were under rating McCauley by just assuming Jenkins is going to come in and be better right away.

MetSox17
05-10-2008, 03:28 PM
McCauley had his bad times along with some bright moments too as any rookie. He had one of the better seasons for a rookie CB. The only reason he was starting though is because Winfield was hurt. Also I'm not trying to compare them I am just trying to make the point that you were under rating McCauley by just assuming Jenkins is going to come in and be better right away.

Well to make the assumption that Jenkins will be a more polished CB coming in is not very far-fetched. Yes, McCauley has a year under him now, but Jenkins was a 3 year starter at USF, and is very experienced in man-coverage.

I took back the statement where i just said he's flat out better, but it still doesn't take away from the argument i was making that their staff is no where near as good as the Cowboys'.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 04:44 PM
for me , the bears should be atleast number three . they could be number 2 or 1 easily .... tillman and vasher are beast-ish.

samuel , brown and sheppard are only good on paper , harris and woodson are old and winfield and griffin are crap. winfield has about 75% completed passes on his WR , he is overrated.

princefielder28
05-10-2008, 04:47 PM
for me , the bears should be atleast number three . they could be number 2 or 1 easily .... tillman and vasher are beast-ish.

samuel , brown and sheppard are only good on paper , harris and woodson are old and winfield and griffin are crap. winfield has about 75% completed passes on his WR , he is overrated.

The Bears CBs better than the Eagles CBs??? No way

Samuel, Shepard, and Brown are definitely good on paper and they back it up on the field too

Sniper
05-10-2008, 04:48 PM
samuel , brown and sheppard are only good on paper

How so? Sheppard is a 2x Pro Bowler, Brown is one of the more underrated corners in the league (Ask Reggie Bush what he thinks of Sheldon) and Samuel is also a Pro Bowler and has the most INTs in the league in the past 2 years. So how are they only good "on paper"?

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 04:50 PM
statistically speaking rod hood was one of the best CB's in the league last year, 1st in YAP, and 2nd in success rate LINK (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/12/21/ramblings/stat-analysis/5920/)

although i didn't watch much of the cards last season so maybe the stats don't fully convey the performance

ahhh i was looking for this list to own princefielder...

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 04:52 PM
How so? Sheppard is a 2x Pro Bowler, Brown is one of the more underrated corners in the league (Ask Reggie Bush what he thinks of Sheldon) and Samuel is also a Pro Bowler and has the most INTs in the league in the past 2 years. So how are they only good "on paper"?



sheldon is a good corner , but not because of the reggie hit .... please get serious. i can say the same about reggie : bush is an elite RB , ask the 49ers.

samuel is good in the pats system, you can quote me on that : Samuel will not be the best Eagles corner.

Sniper
05-10-2008, 04:54 PM
sheldon is a good corner , but not because of the reggie hit .... please get serious. i can say the same about reggie : bush is an elite RB , ask the 49ers.

samuel is good in the pats system, you can quote me on that : Samuel will not be the best Eagles corner.

Samuel won't be good in a system that thrives on bringing pressure and therefore making QBs more prone to throw bad balls? Mmmmmmmk. Now that we have upgraded our DL, Samuel will be especially good.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 04:54 PM
The Bears CBs better than the Eagles CBs??? No way

Samuel, Shepard, and Brown are definitely good on paper and they back it up on the field too

paper is patiently ... but vasher and tillman showed that they are reliable.

d34ng3l021
05-10-2008, 04:54 PM
Number 16. This is going to be a long seasoooon. I cant wait.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 04:55 PM
Samuel won't be good in a system that thrives on bringing pressure and therefore making QBs more prone to throw bad balls? Mmmmmmmk. Now that we have upgraded our DL, Samuel will be especially good.

i donīt argument against it .... all what i said : samuel is not the best eagles (cover) corner.

Go_Eagles77
05-10-2008, 04:57 PM
sheldon is a good corner , but not because of the reggie hit .... please get serious. i can say the same about reggie : bush is an elite RB , ask the 49ers.

samuel is good in the pats system, you can quote me on that : Samuel will not be the best Eagles corner.

Jim Johnson, the eagles Defensive Coordinator, said Samuel is a perfect fit in the eagles defense. I'm sure he is a better judge of that than you.

DragonFireKai
05-10-2008, 05:00 PM
paper is patiently ... but vasher and tillman showed that they are reliable.

And Brown and Sheppard aren't? Aside from Sheppard's injury last season, they've been one of the top CB tandems in the NFL, and adding Samuel is only an improvement, given that even if he is a straight up product of the system, which I don't believe is true, he's still better than Toastolio.

princefielder28
05-10-2008, 05:00 PM
ahhh i was looking for this list to own princefielder...

own me in what way?

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:01 PM
Jim Johnson, the eagles Defensive Coordinator, said Samuel is a perfect fit in the eagles defense. I'm sure he is a better judge of that than you.

iam fine with that , but since this is a discussion board i can tell you my view.

p.s. : johnson would be stupid if he said otherwise.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:02 PM
own me in what way?

just look at mike mckenzie stats.

princefielder28
05-10-2008, 05:02 PM
iam fine with that , but since this is a discussion board i can tell you my view.

p.s. : johnson would be stupid if he said otherwise.

they would not have invested that much money on a player if he didn't fit

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:03 PM
And Brown and Sheppard aren't? Aside from Sheppard's injury last season, they've been one of the top CB tandems in the NFL, and adding Samuel is only an improvement, given that even if he is a straight up product of the system, which I don't believe is true, he's still better than Toastolio.

sheppard and brown , i donīt know where you wanna make an argument , but they signed samuel not only for jersey sales.

i love them both , dont get me wrong. they were instant starters beside mckenzie , but the eagles FO felt other way


ah you guys are funny , stole my reputation :D

princefielder28
05-10-2008, 05:05 PM
just look at mike mckenzie stats.

I don't care about stats it is a collective effort and the field and McKenzie gets owned more often than he owns. Look at Asomugha last season, he had one interception, but everyone knows that stats don't tell the whole story and that Aso is one of the best CBs in the league.

Sniper
05-10-2008, 05:06 PM
sheppard and brown , i donīt know where you wanna make an argument , but they signed samuel not only for jersey sales.

i love them both , dont get me wrong. they were instant starters beside mckenzie , but the eagles FO felt other way


ah you guys are funny , stole my reputation :D

They signed Samuel because Sheppard is complaining about his contract, is oft-injured and because Samuel is a perfect fit for JJ's D.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:07 PM
I don't care about stats it is a collective effort and the field and McKenzie gets owned more often than he owns. Look at Asomugha last season, he had one interception, but everyone knows that stats don't tell the whole story and that Aso is one of the best CBs in the league.


oh man .... follow the link.

again you show me you didnīt see one saints game.


i donīt care of nfl.com/stats.

but other stats , just as succes rate and completiton rate , speaks for him. mckenzie didnīt allow a TD until the second game against the falcons , when roddy white toasted him.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/12/21/ramblings/stat-analysis/5920/


this side donīt lie

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:08 PM
They signed Samuel because Sheppard is complaining about his contract, is oft-injured and because Samuel is a perfect fit for JJ's D.

ok .... a fact i didnīt look at.

but i stay with this : samuel will not be the best eagles corner next season.

p.s. i like the fact you are stealing me reputation just because iam not on your side of view. i didnt offend anyone

princefielder28
05-10-2008, 05:09 PM
oh man .... follow the link.

again you show me you didnīt see one saints game.


i donīt care of nfl.com/stats.

but other stats , just as succes rate and completiton rate , speaks for him. mckenzie didnīt allow a TD until the second game against the falcons , when roddy white toasted him.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/12/21/ramblings/stat-analysis/5920/


this side donīt lie

I may not be a doctor but I think you have a strong case of homeritis

DragonFireKai
05-10-2008, 05:11 PM
sheppard and brown , i donīt know where you wanna make an argument , but they signed samuel not only for jersey sales.

No, they signed him because they thought he'd be an impact player for the team, and with the arms race going on in the NFC East you need every good defender you can get.

i love them both , dont get me wrong. they were instant starters beside mckenzie , but the eagles FO felt other way


ah you guys are funny , stole my reputation :D

That statement doesn't even make any sense. It's statements like that that killed your rep. We are only the instruments.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:12 PM
I may not be a doctor but I think you have a strong case of homeritis

you donīt know me , sir.

iam very pessimist with the saints but :Honour to whom honour is due.

its an old german adage

(the rest of our defense sucks and can get replaced anytime soon )

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:13 PM
That statement doesn't even make any sense. It's statements like that that killed your rep. We are only the instruments.

i donīt understand. there are some points i canīt follow . iam solid in english but far away from great or perfect.

Gay Ork Wang
05-10-2008, 05:15 PM
I think what he was trying to say is that both Sheppard and Samuel were great CBs that couldve started opposite of McKenzie, but that the Eagles FO prolly thought they are more valueable and paid more

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:17 PM
I think what he was trying to say is that both Sheppard and Samuel were great CBs that couldve started opposite of McKenzie, but that the Eagles FO prolly thought they are more valueable and paid more

and strangely enough they signed another starter....

Gay Ork Wang
05-10-2008, 05:20 PM
thats were i am confused now. Didnt u want to say what i said? or what did u mean with that sentence?

and who signed another starter?

DragonFireKai
05-10-2008, 05:22 PM
I think what he was trying to say is that both Sheppard and Samuel were great CBs that couldve started opposite of McKenzie, but that the Eagles FO prolly thought they are more valueable and paid more

But I don't understand where McKenzie came into the discussion. He's not on the Eagles, and niether Brown nor Sheppard were going to NO.

And German, it seems to me that you didn't read the entire article. McKenzie is a starting calibur corner, but nothing exceptional. His stats were inflated by playing across from Jason David, who was quite literally worse than not having anyone there.

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:22 PM
thats were i am confused now. Didnt u want to say what i said? or what did u mean with that sentence?

and who signed another starter?


i agreed with you and was wondering why the eagles brought in some (expensive) competition. but the eagles fan told me it was because lito bitching around. so i accepted it and iam looking forward to the new season.

meanwhile the whole board saying mckenzie sucks , i donīt. its not a big deal.


in anderen worten : gehen die kerle mir aufn sack.

Gay Ork Wang
05-10-2008, 05:26 PM
But I don't understand where McKenzie came into the discussion. He's not on the Eagles, and niether Brown nor Sheppard were going to NO.

And German, it seems to me that you didn't read the entire article. McKenzie is a starting calibur corner, but nothing exceptional. His stats were inflated by playing across from Jason David, who was quite literally worse than not having anyone there.
well Lito was bitching and a trade wasnt out of Question and Samuel was a free agent, i think he was saying that he wouldve liked to see both of them opposite of Mckenzie

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:26 PM
But I don't understand where McKenzie came into the discussion. He's not on the Eagles, and niether Brown nor Sheppard were going to NO.

And German, it seems to me that you didn't read the entire article. McKenzie is a starting calibur corner, but nothing exceptional. His stats were inflated by playing across from Jason David, who was quite literally worse than not having anyone there.


i give you that , but most attempts on his way ended up being incomplete . the year before mckenzie played without david. iam not saying he is the best thing sinced sliced bread, but give this man some honor . he progressed every year since he is not gambling anymore and had 3 shutdown-ish season in a row for the saints
( yes also the really bad 2005 campaign ) i dont want do give him the elite stamp , but saying he is awful is far away from reality.

DeathbyStat
05-10-2008, 05:35 PM
I think the cowboys should be alot higher especially if they get Pac-Man.

Asante Samuel might struggle if the eagles expect him to play more man coverage than he played in New England

Sniper
05-10-2008, 05:36 PM
I think the cowboys should be alot higher especially if they get Pac-Man.

Asante Samuel might struggle if the eagles expect him to play more man coverage than he played in New England

Except they won't, so that point is moot.

DragonFireKai
05-10-2008, 05:45 PM
in anderen worten : gehen die kerle mir aufn sack.


Du bist auf einem Brett mit Sitz in den USA. Gewöhnen Englisch.

well Lito was bitching and a trade wasnt out of Question and Samuel was a free agent, i think he was saying that he wouldve liked to see both of them opposite of Mckenzie

A trade was never going to happen unless the Eagles were going to rob someone blind in the process. All the rumors of Lito being traded were made up by the media.

i give you that , but most attempts on his way ended up being incomplete . the year before mckenzie played without david. iam not saying he is the best thing sinced sliced bread, but give this man some honor . he progressed every year since he is not gambling anymore and had 3 shutdown-ish season in a row for the saints
( yes also the really bad 2005 campaign ) i dont want do give him the elite stamp , but saying he is awful is far away from reality.

And yet the 2005 season was the last time he was stationed across from a CB above replacement level. In 2006, he was across from Fred Thomas who hit a wall and broke down, and consequently wasn't much better than Jason David.

LonghornsLegend
05-10-2008, 05:48 PM
Except they won't, so that point is moot.

Does JJ use alot of zone coverages with all those blitzes? I wasn't exactly sure what type of roles they asked of their DB's, I know he brings alot of pressure from lots of different places, does the secondary usually play like a Cover 3?

GermanSaint
05-10-2008, 05:59 PM
Du bist auf einem Brett mit Sitz in den USA. Gewöhnen Englisch.


bad german, but i get you.

and most time i write in english , so calm down :D

DragonFireKai
05-10-2008, 06:02 PM
bad german, but i get you.

and most time i write in english , so calm down :D

It's been 18 years since I lived there, so you'll have to pardon the rust.

Sniper
05-10-2008, 10:46 PM
Does JJ use alot of zone coverages with all those blitzes? I wasn't exactly sure what type of roles they asked of their DB's, I know he brings alot of pressure from lots of different places, does the secondary usually play like a Cover 3?

He used to have his corners play more man to man than he does now. He incorporates a lot more zone defenses than he used to. That's not good for Sheppard, who's strictly a man to man guy, but it works well for guys like Brown and Samuel.

BeerBaron
05-10-2008, 11:25 PM
the bears should NOT. i repeat NOT. be that low. whoever wrote that needs real life neg repped (i like to call it a kick in the balls, lol)

DragonFireKai
05-10-2008, 11:42 PM
the bears should NOT. i repeat NOT. be that low. whoever wrote that needs real life neg repped (i like to call it a kick in the balls, lol)

To be honest, I could see them as high as 6th, but 8th doesn't seem unreasonable either. That defense has always been fueled by the front seven.

BeerBaron
05-11-2008, 12:07 AM
To be honest, I could see them as high as 6th, but 8th doesn't seem unreasonable either. That defense has always been fueled by the front seven.

it is, but for what theyre asked to do and how deep they are, they should be higher.

now if this were specified as like "overall performance of the top 2 regardless of scheme" then whatever, but for the cover 2, i think your hard pressed to find a better group.

vasher and tillman, great for the cover 2. do what theyre supposed to do in that scheme and they do it well. play physical, intercept passes, help out in the run, cover the flats.....great.

manning is maybe one of the best true nickel backs there is. he struggles when forced to start but as a nickel, hes fantastic.

then throw in the depth mcbride provides and the potential bowman brings as a rookie, and they have a great crew.

compare that to even say the packers, who have aging starters and only a rookie for any real depth behind that.

umphrey
05-11-2008, 01:14 AM
The Bears secondary is good but I would almost call them system players - they wouldn't be that hard to replace and benefit greatly from other defenders and scheme.

DragonFireKai
05-11-2008, 04:35 AM
it is, but for what theyre asked to do and how deep they are, they should be higher.

now if this were specified as like "overall performance of the top 2 regardless of scheme" then whatever, but for the cover 2, i think your hard pressed to find a better group.

vasher and tillman, great for the cover 2. do what theyre supposed to do in that scheme and they do it well. play physical, intercept passes, help out in the run, cover the flats.....great.

manning is maybe one of the best true nickel backs there is. he struggles when forced to start but as a nickel, hes fantastic.

then throw in the depth mcbride provides and the potential bowman brings as a rookie, and they have a great crew.

compare that to even say the packers, who have aging starters and only a rookie for any real depth behind that.

Aging is unimportant here, we're talking about the best units for 2008. Would you honestly take Vasher and Tillman over Harris and Woodson for 2008? I'd say you're being a blatant homer if you would. It's a different story if we're talking about the full situation, contracts and future production. But with regards to strictly the 2008 season, the Packers have a significantly better lineup at corner than the bears. And I'd say that the differential between Harris and Woodson, and Tillman and Vasher is enough to make up for the differential between Blackmon and Lee and Manning and McBride. Especially when you factor in the difference in playing time between the starters and the nickel and dime backs.

PACKmanN
05-11-2008, 04:44 AM
it is, but for what theyre asked to do and how deep they are, they should be higher.

now if this were specified as like "overall performance of the top 2 regardless of scheme" then whatever, but for the cover 2, i think your hard pressed to find a better group.

vasher and tillman, great for the cover 2. do what theyre supposed to do in that scheme and they do it well. play physical, intercept passes, help out in the run, cover the flats.....great.

manning is maybe one of the best true nickel backs there is. he struggles when forced to start but as a nickel, hes fantastic.

then throw in the depth mcbride provides and the potential bowman brings as a rookie, and they have a great crew.

compare that to even say the packers, who have aging starters and only a rookie for any real depth behind that.

where would you place them? every team listed lower has the same amount of depth as the Bears do and some even better.

The rookie name Lee is already ready for our type of defense. He loves to play bump-and-run, plus thats all we ask from our CBs We play man-on-man and you bump the guy at the line.

toonsterwu
05-11-2008, 08:13 AM
for me , the bears should be atleast number three . they could be number 2 or 1 easily .... tillman and vasher are beast-ish.

samuel , brown and sheppard are only good on paper , harris and woodson are old and winfield and griffin are crap. winfield has about 75% completed passes on his WR , he is overrated.

Comes down to how you grade DB's. Vasher and Tillman work for our scheme. While both can play in other schemes, I think it's fair to ask if they can play at a similar level to warrant a top 3 ranking. That said, we do have depth to our advantage.

BamaFalcon59
05-11-2008, 08:18 AM
On paper the Falcons are in contention for the worst group in the NFL. Hopefully Chris Houston steps up, Hutchins suprises, and Jackson is NFL ready.

BeerBaron
05-11-2008, 09:26 AM
where would you place them? every team listed lower has the same amount of depth as the Bears do and some even better.

The rookie name Lee is already ready for our type of defense. He loves to play bump-and-run, plus thats all we ask from our CBs We play man-on-man and you bump the guy at the line.

it doesnt change that lee is a rookie. and in the bears system, i wouldn't touch harris or woodson unless they were playing safety.

if your going to play that argument, you have to look at it in reverse too. your guys are in a good system for them too...

Comes down to how you grade DB's. Vasher and Tillman work for our scheme. While both can play in other schemes, I think it's fair to ask if they can play at a similar level to warrant a top 3 ranking. That said, we do have depth to our advantage.

exactly.

look past the starters and say that balance out due to system. packers have lee who has lots of potential but they have very little proven.

the bears have a great nickel back in RMJ and 2nd year man trumaine mcbride who got a lot of experience last year due to injury and looked good at times. another year of development and he could be good if something happens to one of our starters again.

and i could say that zach bowman is an other guy with lots of potential.

YAYareaRB
05-11-2008, 01:07 PM
WOW 7th huh? I'm happy with that