Artie Burns Has PFF And Everyone Else Eating Their Post-Draft Words

[polamalubeast]

814849837325754368

[st33lersguy]

A nice surprise. Pro bowl potential is evident

[The bell ringer]

I don't think Burns has done anything that most Draft scouts didn't think he could. He had the height, speed, and all that. His shortcomings coming out are still ones he has now. He is way too grabby in coverage, which is why he has had more penalties called on him then any Rookie DB in the past 30 years ( Fact )..and his press coverage. But make NO mistake...Burns has improved in these areas greatly as the season has gone on. And if he continues, he will be a very good player for us.

[DesertSteel]

I don't think Burns has done anything that most Draft scouts didn't think he could. He had the height, speed, and all that. His shortcomings coming out are still ones he has now. He is way too grabby in coverage, which is why he has had more penalties called on him then any Rookie DB in the past 30 years ( Fact )..and his press coverage. But make NO mistake...Burns has improved in these areas greatly as the season has gone on. And if he continues, he will be a very good player for us.
What's your source on that 30-year penalty record. I'm not saying it isn't true, but it's hard to believe.

[polamalubeast]

Maybe Carnell Lake was not the problem for the weak secondary that the steelers had in other years.It was rather the talent that was the problem and in the 2016 draft was the first time in a very long time that the Steelers have drafted a DB early in the draft.

Davis and Burns have had a very good rookie season and if they continue to improve the future will be bright for its two players.

[fansince'76]

https://userscontent2.emaze.com/images/c448138b-618e-4ac3-a7ba-86db68523117/f0904334-9bfc-49ec-8882-3618c74d8866.jpg

:chuckle:

[Mojouw]

Burns has a ton of penalties - http://www.nflpenalties.com/position/defensive-back/cornerback?view=players&year=2016.

But so did Peters and Rhodes last year in their first year in the league - http://www.nflpenalties.com/position/defensive-back/cornerback?view=players&year=2015.

As for the 30 years stuff -- Gilmore had one more in his rookie year - http://www.nflpenalties.com/position/defensive-back/cornerback?view=players&year=2012

Once again, facts and information back up the claim that Burns had a pretty good rookie year for a CB. We will never truly know how good, since most of the rest of the CB class got hurt and everyone knew that Hargreaves and Ramsey were a cut above.

[The bell ringer]

What's your source on that 30-year penalty record. I'm not saying it isn't true, but it's hard to believe.


Actually...don't know who said it but it was during the Bills game on the Steelers radio broadcast, he did not say 30 years..but he said since the Bills own former DB, Derrick Burroughs..I truly forget how many penalties they said he had. But I know they said Burns has had the most since Burroughs.

[zulater]

Profootballfocus is a joke! Sorry to derail the thread but as a curiosity I recently paid the $20 bucks to subscribe to their player grades. Anywhere just as an example. We all know Ben hasn't had his greatest season. I think the knee injury he suffered impaired him in 2 games. Most of the Dolphin game, and all or the Raven game in Baltimore. Throw in the upheaval of his receiver core ( lost Wheaton, Heath Miller, M Bryant, injury to Coates and Green etc...) Regardless, even the most devoted Ben supporters among us would admit his season has been up and down. But just how bad has it been? Well according to PFF , for the season as a whole he's the NFL's 18 "best" qb! They have him listed below such luminaries as Tyrod Taylor, Andy Dalton, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, and Phil (throw another 4th qt pick) Rivers and Brian Hoyer! Gee I guess we should have kept Hoyer and made him our starter! :doh:

Just to show they know as little about running backs as they do qb's, when LeVeon Bell set the Steelers single game yardage record against the Bills a few weeks back their initial grade for him was 78.9! They had 6 separate backs for the week rated above him. I guess their own stupidity became apparent to even them and they regarded Bell and marked him up to an 86 later in the week making him the 2nd best back of the week to the Jets Bilal Powell.

One last nugget. They have William Gay listed as our best db! Now since losing his starting job to Artie Burns and being re- positioned in the slot his game has come on. But early in the season when he was lining up in coverage against opponents top receivers he was getting torched regularly.

I wont renew that subscription. :coffee:

[#CRASHFormation]

I really liked this draft. These three kids are going to be stars on this defense. If Golson can give anything in the slot it's a bonus.

Don't forget OT Jerald Hawkins either. He has the LT feet. Just has to get healthy.

[fansince'76]

PFF? This is all I have to say about that:

http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s480x480/e35/14276611_1088055767956491_1996242021_n.jpg?ig_cach e_key=MTM0MjM3OTUxNzgxMzExODE1Ng%3D%3D.2

:chuckle:

[#CRASHFormation]

Andrew Luck could be Butt-head's Dad.

[polamalubeast]

Profootballfocus is a joke! Sorry to derail the thread but as a curiosity I recently paid the $20 bucks to subscribe to their player grades. Anywhere just as an example. We all know Ben hasn't had his greatest season. I think the knee injury he suffered impaired him in 2 games. Most of the Dolphin game, and all or the Raven game in Baltimore. Throw in the upheaval of his receiver core ( lost Wheaton, Heath Miller, M Bryant, injury to Coates and Green etc...) Regardless, even the most devoted Ben supporters among us would admit his season has been up and down. But just how bad has it been? Well according to PFF , for the season as a whole he's the NFL's 18 "best" qb! They have him listed below such luminaries as Tyrod Taylor, Andy Dalton, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, and Phil (throw another 4th qt pick) Rivers and Brian Hoyer! Gee I guess we should have kept Hoyer and made him our starter! :doh:

Just to show they know as little about running backs as they do qb's, when LeVeon Bell set the Steelers single game yardage record against the Bills a few weeks back their initial grade for him was 78.9! They had 6 separate backs for the week rated above him. I guess their own stupidity became apparent to even them and they regarded Bell and marked him up to an 86 later in the week making him the 2nd best back of the week to the Jets Bilal Powell.

One last nugget. They have William Gay listed as our best db! Now since losing his starting job to Artie Burns and being re- positioned in the slot his game has come on. But early in the season when he was lining up in coverage against opponents top receivers he was getting torched regularly.

I wont renew that subscription. :coffee:

I agree with you

Aaron Rodgers had a negative grade after having had 5 TD pass against the Chiefs last year ....

[#CRASHFormation]

Burns is raw with speed and skill. You can teach technique, you can't teach athleticism.

You either have it or you don't. Burns has it, a lot of it.

[The bell ringer]

Burns is raw with speed and skill. You can teach technique, you can't teach athleticism.

You either have it or you don't. Burns has it, a lot of it.




Good athlete, not elite athlete. Not elite speed, and his drill times were just above average. And his vertical jump is in the area of O-Linemen. So lets NOT make him out to be D.Revis or D.Sanders like Physical abilities.

[Mojouw]

Good athlete, not elite athlete. Not elite speed, and his drill times were just above average. And his vertical jump is in the area of O-Linemen. So lets NOT make him out to be D.Revis or D.Sanders like Physical abilities.

One guy per class has those kinds of physical abilities. That being said, Burns ran faster than Sherman, Norman, and Peters. Is within a tenth of a second or so of Revis and Peterson. Can not find his vertical jump published anywhere and I couldn't find comparison data on shuttle times and cone drills.

Google "burns scouting" and almost every report talks about his high end athleticism and excellent size-speed ratio for the CB position. He was rated poorly pre-draft because everyone thought his technique was poor, he couldn't tackle, and did not have a clue how to play zone. All of that we have seen this season. But his rapid improvement points to a great athlete who is still learning his position. Considering that his best college sport was track - none of this is really surprising.

Or we could go with your scouting report that to date is based on what?

[pczach]

Good athlete, not elite athlete. Not elite speed, and his drill times were just above average. And his vertical jump is in the area of O-Linemen. So lets NOT make him out to be D.Revis or D.Sanders like Physical abilities.


You are underestimating his athletic ability and his speed. Here's his draft grade from NFL.com. Mayock talks about his elite speed and his ability.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/artie-burns?id=2555344

[The bell ringer]

One guy per class has those kinds of physical abilities. That being said, Burns ran faster than Sherman, Norman, and Peters. Is within a tenth of a second or so of Revis and Peterson. Can not find his vertical jump published anywhere and I couldn't find comparison data on shuttle times and cone drills.

Google "burns scouting" and almost every report talks about his high end athleticism and excellent size-speed ratio for the CB position. He was rated poorly pre-draft because everyone thought his technique was poor, he couldn't tackle, and did not have a clue how to play zone. All of that we have seen this season. But his rapid improvement points to a great athlete who is still learning his position. Considering that his best college sport was track - none of this is really surprising.

Or we could go with your scouting report that to date is based on what?




I never said he was a Bad athlete, just not an elite one. But being a great Athlete has nothing, nothing at all with being able to be an elite level DB. There have been many Hall of fame DB's who at BEST ran a 4.6 forty who could easily stay stride for stride with a 4.2 WR. Straight speed is not that important. Burns does have more then good enough straight line speed. But what is more important is his great Instincts and Ball skills. His sudden and fast twitch quickness that can't easily be measured. Those other athletically elite players I mentioned like Revis and Sanders..no matter what their athletic skills, they both would have been busts if they did not possess those DB Instincts and ball skills. That is why there are so many drafted DB's who didn't possess those traits even though they had ELITE Speed, quickness or leaping ability..they did not have what truly is imprtant in being a good NFL DB...Like say Justin Gilbert for example.

[Mojouw]

I never said he was a Bad athlete, just not an elite one. But being a great Athlete has nothing, nothing at all with being able to be an elite level DB. There have been many Hall of fame DB's who at BEST ran a 4.6 forty who could easily stay stride for stride with a 4.2 WR. Straight speed is not that important. Burns does have more then good enough straight line speed. But what is more important is his great Instincts and Ball skills. His sudden and fast twitch quickness that can't easily be measured. Those other athletically elite players I mentioned like Revis and Sanders..no matter what their athletic skills, they both would have been busts if they did not possess those DB Instincts and ball skills. That is why there are so many drafted DB's who didn't possess those traits even though they had ELITE Speed, quickness or leaping ability..they did not have what truly is imprtant in being a good NFL DB...Like say Justin Gilbert for example.

Here's the thing....I have no idea what your point is. Your postings are all over the place. Are you trying to say that Burns is not good. Not good yet. Lacks potential. Has potential to be a good to great DB. PFF sucks. PFF is awesome.

Only you know - unfortunately no one else does. You seemed to state that Burns wasn't that great of an athlete. I countered that Burns is not Revis or Sanders athletic, but that few are. I then pointed out how Burns compares favorable in measures of athleticism to other well regarded NFL corners.

You're most recent post seems to indicate that you agree with the general assessment that Burns has all of the physical tools needed to be an excellent impact corner. That was my only point as well.

As to Gilbert, I think he has Shamarko Thomas disease. Both are amazing athletes just far too stupid to get it done.

[The bell ringer]

Here's the thing....I have no idea what your point is. Your postings are all over the place. Are you trying to say that Burns is not good. Not good yet. Lacks potential. Has potential to be a good to great DB. PFF sucks. PFF is awesome.

Only you know - unfortunately no one else does. You seemed to state that Burns wasn't that great of an athlete. I countered that Burns is not Revis or Sanders athletic, but that few are. I then pointed out how Burns compares favorable in measures of athleticism to other well regarded NFL corners.

You're most recent post seems to indicate that you agree with the general assessment that Burns has all of the physical tools needed to be an excellent impact corner. That was my only point as well.

As to Gilbert, I think he has Shamarko Thomas disease. Both are amazing athletes just far too stupid to get it done.





No, my point is that even though Burns has played well overall, that PFF was not wrong on their initial report. They never said he was a bad pick or would not be good. They pointed out some of his on the field play that was a concern. I never saw it as a concern myself. And even though many draft experts said Burns was more of a 40-55 range player. I had no issue with us taking him at 25 cause too many other high rated DB's were off the board by 25, and there would have been no guarantee that he would last til our 2nd round pick.


But regardless his athletic traits or not...that is not even 10 % of the importance in being a good starting NFL DB.

[GBMelBlount]

I really liked this draft. These three kids are going to be stars on this defense. If Golson can give anything in the slot it's a bonus.

Don't forget OT Jerald Hawkins either. He has the LT feet. Just has to get healthy.

I really liked this draft too.

We had a lot of needs on defense and the draft was loaded with highly graded defensive players so we took advantage of it.

So while I was really unsure about Burns I was happy that we addressed a big position of need with that pick.

I believe next year is supposed to be very deep with edge rushers & defensive backs as well.

[The bell ringer]

I

I believe next year is supposed to be very deep with edge rushers & defensive backs as well.




is why I am PRAYING that we can get a hold of UCLA OLB Takkarist Mckinley. He is a James Harrison clone. Shorter, super strong and aggressive player. My only worry is that he might rise up boards before our 1st rounder comes up.

[polamalubeast]

is why I am PRAYING that we can get a hold of UCLA OLB Takkarist Mckinley. He is a James Harrison clone. Shorter, super strong and aggressive player. My only worry is that he might rise up boards before our 1st rounder comes up.


Someone in this forum will be crazy if the steelers select a linebacker in the first round for the 4th time in 5 years, but yes the position of OLB is a big need since Jarvis Jones is a big bust....

[DesertSteel]

Now that we have Ayers, maybe we can cut AB...

[Rotorhead]

But regardless his athletic traits or not...that is not even 10 % of the importance in being a good starting NFL DB.

What does this even mean?

Anyway, Burns has developed well, I am glad we got him. I am pretty sure most here thought he would progress well this year during TC when he was hungry and wanted to go against AB. It showed he wouldnt be a head case and that he wanted to get better and learn. He has the tools to be a top 10 DB, he is developing well enough to be a top 10 sooner rather than later.

[Steel Peon]

As a rookie, he made rookie mistakes which is to be expected, and played no worse than Antwon Blake, but nowhere have I seen greatness yet.

[GoSlash27]

Something you *think* you heard during a broadcast is not "fact".

[stillers4me]

Now that we have Ayers, maybe we can cut AB...

It would certainly save us a lot of money. The Rooneys are pretty cheap.

:stirthepot:

[fansince'76]

As a rookie, he made rookie mistakes which is to be expected, and played no worse than Antwon Blake, but nowhere have I seen greatness yet.

Rookie growing pains aside, he's been a damn sight better than Antwon Blake...

[Craic]

Good athlete, not elite athlete. Not elite speed, and his drill times were just above average. And his vertical jump is in the area of O-Linemen. So lets NOT make him out to be D.Revis or D.Sanders like Physical abilities.

Other than his vertical (31.5), I don't know where you get your stats from, but they're not right.

40 yd dash: 4.46, 6th fastest of this year's combine

20 yd dash: 2.63, tied for 12th out of 30, but 2 others posted a 2.62 which is virtually equal (slight misstep causes a greater loss than that. So, in all actuality, he's in the top 3rd.

[Shoes]

Rookie growing pains aside, he's been a damn sight better than Antwon Blake...

Agreed, he surely has improved from the start of the year. Blake, what a nightmare!

[SteelerFanInStl]

Rookie growing pains aside, he's been a damn sight better than Antwon Blake...

Most definitely.

[st33lersguy]

Yes, Artie has made rookie mistakes. He's a rookie CB, a raw rookie CB learning a very difficult position. Of course he was going to make rookie mistakes. The fact that he is also making plays, is improving, and seems to be dedicated to getting better should be a good sign.

- - - Updated - - -


As a rookie, he made rookie mistakes which is to be expected, and played no worse than Antwon Blake, but nowhere have I seen greatness yet.

He's played much better than Burntwon Blake

[Craic]

As a rookie, he made rookie mistakes which is to be expected, and played no worse than Antwon Blake, but nowhere have I seen greatness yet.

Why is "Greatness" the only measuring stick we seem to use anymore? The Steelers have not had "Greatness" at CB since the 70s. And no, I would not put Rod Woodson in that category. He was excellent, even one of the best at the position, but "Greatness" is an entirely different elite level. It is Troy Polomalu at Safety or Jack Lambert at Linebacker, and Woodson, IMO, was just not quite as good as those two at his position (Again, he was a great player, but "Greatness" with the capital "G" is a different measure).

As for Burns, he is on track to be an above average to very good CB. Perhaps, the second best CB since Woodson (Ike Taylor being the other). He might even surprass Taylor as I think he will have (in the future) the same coverage skills with better hands.

[#CRASHFormation]

Boy to not claim Rod was great? Wow.

[polamalubeast]

Boy to not claim Rod was great? Wow.


Agree...He is a first ballot HOF for a reason.

[Psycho Ward 86]

Why is "Greatness" the only measuring stick we seem to use anymore? The Steelers have not had "Greatness" at CB since the 70s. And no, I would not put Rod Woodson in that category. He was excellent, even one of the best at the position, but "Greatness" is an entirely different elite level. It is Troy Polomalu at Safety or Jack Lambert at Linebacker, and Woodson, IMO, was just not quite as good as those two at his position (Again, he was a great player, but "Greatness" with the capital "G" is a different measure).

As for Burns, he is on track to be an above average to very good CB. Perhaps, the second best CB since Woodson (Ike Taylor being the other). He might even surprass Taylor as I think he will have (in the future) the same coverage skills with better hands.

r u ok

[Method28]

Woodson was the best I've ever watched play the position.

Wasnt around to watch Blount back in the 70s, but im no spring chicken either lol Woodson to me is most DEFINITELY under that Greatness category

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[Craic]

Boy to not claim Rod was great? Wow.


Agree...He is a first ballot HOF for a reason.


r u ok

Never said he wasn't great. In fact . . .


Why is "Greatness" the only measuring stick we seem to use anymore? The Steelers have not had "Greatness" at CB since the 70s. And no, I would not put Rod Woodson in that category. He was excellent, even one of the best at the position, but "Greatness" is an entirely different elite level. It is Troy Polomalu at Safety or Jack Lambert at Linebacker, and Woodson, IMO, was just not quite as good as those two at his position (Again, he was a great player, but "Greatness" with the capital "G" is a different measure).

As for Burns, he is on track to be an above average to very good CB. Perhaps, the second best CB since Woodson (Ike Taylor being the other). He might even surprass Taylor as I think he will have (in the future) the same coverage skills with better hands.

Greatness, to me, is a once-in-a-generation player, like Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, or Jerry Rice. I have no problem putting Troy P. in that category. Woodson didn't outplay every contemporary so much that he was on an exponentially higher level year in and year out. Sequentially higher level? Absolutely. For a few years, he was the best CB in the NFL. But Exponentially higher like Gretzky was to Hockey, or Jordan to basketball, or Rice to football? No.

And no, I wouldn't put most 1st ballot HOFs in the realm of Greatness, either.

[pczach]

r u ok


Yeah, Woodson really was average. That's why he was voted onto the 75th anniversary All-time Team. :crazy:

http://www.nfl.com/history/legends/75th


He's one of the greatest players ever. He may be the best cornerback ever.

To say he was not a great player is just silly.

[The bell ringer]

Yeah, Woodson really was average. That's why he was voted onto the 75th anniversary All-time Team. :crazy:

http://www.nfl.com/history/legends/75th


He's one of the greatest players ever. He may be the best cornerback ever.

To say he was not a great player is just silly.




WTF ? Who said Rod was not good ? He was easily one of the top-5 greatest CB's to play of all time when with us. And was also probably a top-10 Safety after he left us. He made several All-Pro teams as a S. To call him not good is like saying " Jessica Alba " is NOT Beautiful...or that Roseanne Barr is better looking then her. :der::der:

[pczach]

WTF ? Who said Rod was not good ? He was easily one of the top-5 greatest CB's to play of all time when with us. And was also probably a top-10 Safety after he left us. He made several All-Pro teams as a S. To call him not good is like saying " Jessica Alba " is NOT Beautiful...or that Roseanne Barr is better looking then her. :der::der:


Craic was saying Rod Woodson isn't great. He's a Hall of Fame player.

He is undoubtedly great.....period.

There really is no argument. He's a great player, not good.

When he came into the league, he was a rare athlete and became the gold standard for size/speed/athleticism. He was the guy that started the push for finding cornerbacks that were at least 6 feet in height, that had elite cover skills, and could hit like a safety in run support. He was the only guy in the NFL that could play that way with that kind of speed and athleticism when he entered the NFL.

Again, he was voted to the first ever NFL 75th Anniversary team. That's all-time great, whether you agree with that or not.

[Craic]

Craic was saying Rod Woodson isn't great. He's a Hall of Fame player.

He is undoubtedly great.....period.

There really is no argument. He's a great player, not good.

When he came into the league, he was a rare athlete and became the gold standard for size/speed/athleticism. He was the guy that started the push for finding cornerbacks that were at least 6 feet in height, that had elite cover skills, and could hit like a safety in run support. He was the only guy in the NFL that could play that way with that kind of speed and athleticism when he entered the NFL.

Again, he was voted to the first ever NFL 75th Anniversary team. That's all-time great, whether you agree with that or not.

READING SKILLS, PEOPLE. . . . .USE THEM PLEASE

Show me where I said he was not a great player.

AGAIN, let me quote myself ONE MORE TIME: "he was a great player"

He was not, in my opinion, in the same league as Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, or Jerry Rice when it comes to absolutely dominating the entire league year in and year out. THAT is GreatNESS which is VERY different than just "being great."

Please, read what I have written, not what you think ​I have written.

[pczach]

Why is "Greatness" the only measuring stick we seem to use anymore? The Steelers have not had "Greatness" at CB since the 70s. And no, I would not put Rod Woodson in that category. He was excellent, even one of the best at the position, but "Greatness" is an entirely different elite level. It is Troy Polomalu at Safety or Jack Lambert at Linebacker, and Woodson, IMO, was just not quite as good as those two at his position (Again, he was a great player, but "Greatness" with the capital "G" is a different measure).

As for Burns, he is on track to be an above average to very good CB. Perhaps, the second best CB since Woodson (Ike Taylor being the other). He might even surprass Taylor as I think he will have (in the future) the same coverage skills with better hands.


You state in this post that he was "excellent", but that he was not as good as Polomalu or Lambert at his position. You say he's a great player, but he doesn't meet your standard of true "Greatness".


You didn't compare him to Wayne Gretzky or Michael Jordan or Jerry Rice in this post. You compared him to Troy Polamalu and Jack Lambert at their respective positions.

He may have been the greatest cornerback ever. I believe he is in that conversation without hesitation. You can argue the same for Troy and Lambert. Of the three, Lambert was the least transcendent. He was surrounded by the most talent, and there were many contemporary inside LB's that you could argue were on his level or above him.

That's why what you're saying about Woodson doesn't make sense to me.

Again, he was voted one of the starting cornerbacks of the first 75 years of pro football. That's "Greatness".

[#CRASHFormation]

Wayne Gretzky never won a Cup again when he left the Oilers.

They Oilers did win, without him. Messier won the Cup in New York, without Wayne.

- - - Updated - - -

Rod was the best corner of his era. Hell he won the 1994 game vs. Buffalo on his own.

- - - Updated - - -


Of the three, Lambert was the least transcendent. He was surrounded by the most talent, and there were many contemporary inside LB's that you could argue were on his level or above him.

No way, Jack did things that no MLB did before him.

[st33lersguy]

In 2010, rod Woodson was ranked the 41st greatest player ever. The only steelers ranked higher were joe Greene and jack lambert

[Craic]

You state in this post that he was "excellent", but that he was not as good as Polomalu or Lambert at his position. You say he's a great player, but he doesn't meet your standard of true "Greatness".


You didn't compare him to Wayne Gretzky or Michael Jordan or Jerry Rice in this post. You compared him to Troy Polamalu and Jack Lambert at their respective positions.

He may have been the greatest cornerback ever. I believe he is in that conversation without hesitation. You can argue the same for Troy and Lambert. Of the three, Lambert was the least transcendent. He was surrounded by the most talent, and there were many contemporary inside LB's that you could argue were on his level or above him.

That's why what you're saying about Woodson doesn't make sense to me.

Again, he was voted one of the starting cornerbacks of the first 75 years of pro football. That's "Greatness".

I disagree. To me, Greatness is the once in a generation, it'll take twenty+ years before another player equals what he does, level.

I truly believe Troy P. equals that level of greatness. There is no safety that has ever played the position like Troy did. He revolutionized the position, making it akin to a wildcard spot from which the defense can draw a safety, a CB, or a LB whenever he needed it, or, he could just let Troy play rover and do whatever he wanted to (which is what LeBeau did often with Troy). I have no problem saying Troy P. is to football what Gretzky is to Hockey or Jordon is to basketball. And, on the field (although I fully admit I might be wearing my Black and Gold glasses for this one), I feel the same way about Jack Lambert.

I simply do not see that with Woodson. I do not see him being so superior, so elite to every other player in his day or days after that you would say, "He's the Rod Woodson of football."

That goes FAR beyond being a "Hall of fame" player. Lots of great players are in the HOF, and some great players aren't. It goes beyond being on the 75th Anniversary team. On that team alone, I'd take Night Train Lane and Blount over Woodson.

You see Greatness as an achievable level for any player who excels. I have defined it repeatedly as an exclusive level only a few can hold. Which, going back to my original post, is why I think it absurd to hold a rookie up to those standards in order to decide if he had a good year, or was worth the draft pick, or is something to be excited about in the future.

(And, no, in that post I did not say he was great. I did in other posts when I realized people were not taking the time to realize what I was saying and conflating Greatness with being a top player, or even one of the best players, because it is simply a whole other level, as I defined in another post.)

[#CRASHFormation]

I truly believe Troy P. equals that level of greatness. There is no safety that has ever played the position like Troy did.

Sure their was, Rod Woodson in Baltimore and Oakland was dominant. And was old then.

[pczach]

In 2010, rod Woodson was ranked the 41st greatest player ever. The only steelers ranked higher were joe Greene and jack lambert


I'm not trying to lessen what Jack Lambert did. I'm trying to justify and show how great Rod Woodson was.

Everybody in the press says Deion Sanders was the best ever. Sanders was the best pure cover corner. Woodson was a hair behind him I that category. In every other area of the position, I would take Rod Woodson a million times out of a million. Sanders was a liability in run support. I would take 2 Woodsons as my starting corners over 2 Sanders every day of the week and twice on Sundays. He was a complete cornerback that can beat you with his physical presence as well as his cover skills and athleticism.

[Craic]

Sure their was, Rod Woodson in Baltimore and Oakland was dominant. And was old then.

:doh:

Dominant? I give up.

[pczach]

I disagree. To me, Greatness is the once in a generation, it'll take twenty+ years before another player equals what he does, level.

I truly believe Troy P. equals that level of greatness. There is no safety that has ever played the position like Troy did. He revolutionized the position, making it akin to a wildcard spot from which the defense can draw a safety, a CB, or a LB whenever he needed it, or, he could just let Troy play rover and do whatever he wanted to (which is what LeBeau did often with Troy). I have no problem saying Troy P. is to football what Gretzky is to Hockey or Jordon is to basketball. And, on the field (although I fully admit I might be wearing my Black and Gold glasses for this one), I feel the same way about Jack Lambert.

I simply do not see that with Woodson. I do not see him being so superior, so elite to every other player in his day or days after that you would say, "He's the Rod Woodson of football."

That goes FAR beyond being a "Hall of fame" player. Lots of great players are in the HOF, and some great players aren't. It goes beyond being on the 75th Anniversary team. On that team alone, I'd take Night Train Lane and Blount over Woodson.

You see Greatness as an achievable level for any player who excels. I have defined it repeatedly as an exclusive level only a few can hold. Which, going back to my original post, is why I think it absurd to hold a rookie up to those standards in order to decide if he had a good year, or was worth the draft pick, or is something to be excited about in the future.

(And, no, in that post I did not say he was great. I did in other posts when I realized people were not taking the time to realize what I was saying and conflating Greatness with being a top player, or even one of the best players, because it is simply a whole other level, as I defined in another post.)


I hear you. I just don't agree with you about your definition of greatness or who you say is or isn't "great".

By the way, in my post you quote above I acknowledge that you said Woodson was great. I started the second sentence with it. Post #47

You're wrong about me thinking every player can achieve "Greatness" if they excel. I never said that or believe that. I simply think that Woodson was an historically great player that was the template for the modern era cornerbacks with his combination of size, athleticism, speed, tackling, and physical play. Much the way Mel Blount was before him. It's not a coincidence that both players made that 75th Anniversary team.

I guess we agree to disagree about Woodson's place in history or the definition of "Greatness".

[#CRASHFormation]

Dominant? I give up.

He was the best free safety in football and it wasn't even close. Led the league in picks twice and was a Pro Bowler the four full seasons he played the position. Also still played the run well.

[lotas]

While I do not agree nor disagree with the argument on either side I just want to say Craic: I get what you're saying and understand where you're coming from. Your original intent really had less to do with Rod Woodson and more to do with why we use the measure of "greatness" to assess a rookie CB when that is a level that is attainable by only the best of the best, the top 1% if you will. It's an unrealistic measure and it's unfair and impractical to measure young talent by claiming if you see "greatness" in them or not.

RE: Artie Burns --- I love the kid, have since we drafted him. He has surpassed my expectations this year, and I'm excited to see how he progresses because I too think he can be a great cover corner and ultimately better than Ike Taylor, which would put him as the top Steelers CB in the last 20 years or so.

[pczach]

Sure their was, Rod Woodson in Baltimore and Oakland was dominant. And was old then.

An old Rod Woodson playing safety in Baltimore did not play at the level that Troy did in his prime. I just want to clarify that. He was terrific, and made pro bowls, but he wasn't as good as Troy was.

[pczach]

While I do not agree nor disagree with the argument on either side I just want to say Craic: I get what you're saying and understand where you're coming from. Your original intent really had less to do with Rod Woodson and more to do with why we use the measure of "greatness" to assess a rookie CB when that is a level that is attainable by only the best of the best, the top 1% if you will. It's an unrealistic measure and it's unfair and impractical to measure young talent by claiming if you see "greatness" in them or not.

RE: Artie Burns --- I love the kid, have since we drafted him. He has surpassed my expectations this year, and I'm excited to see how he progresses because I too think he can be a great cover corner and ultimately better than Ike Taylor, which would put him as the top Steelers CB in the last 20 years or so.


I agree with this. That's why I originally didn't respond directly to Craic about Woodson. I know that the discussion started about Burns.

Psych Ward 86 made a semi-humorous post, and I made a bit of a tongue in cheek comment, and a link about the 75th anniversary team. I wasn't trying to attack Craic.

I guess it came out wrong.

[The bell ringer]

All anyone needs to know about Rod Woodson is......


http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/329198/g13c0009f00e0b95fb0c6fc0679e9b495e552aeba21e429.jp g

[ALLD]

Woodson was the best I've ever watched play the position.

Wasnt around to watch Blount back in the 70s, but im no spring chicken either lol Woodson to me is most DEFINITELY under that Greatness category

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk


Two different styles like trying to compare Jimmy Page and Eddie Van Halen. Each is amazing and unique in their own right.

Blount wouldn't let the WRs get off the LOS when that was still legal. He was also tall and had an eye to be around the ball. Woodson was slightly more cagey as evidenced by his ability to return kicks very well. He was also around the ball a lot. Both had lots of interceptions. Jack Ham (LB) was more like Woodson than Woodson was like Blount if that means anything to you.

[Craic]

I hear you. I just don't agree with you about your definition of greatness or who you say is or isn't "great".

By the way, in my post you quote above I acknowledge that you said Woodson was great. I started the second sentence with it. Post #47

You're wrong about me thinking every player can achieve "Greatness" if they excel. I never said that or believe that. I simply think that Woodson was an historically great player that was the template for the modern era cornerbacks with his combination of size, athleticism, speed, tackling, and physical play. Much the way Mel Blount was before him. It's not a coincidence that both players made that 75th Anniversary team.

I guess we agree to disagree about Woodson's place in history or the definition of "Greatness".

Just to clarify, We actually probably agree with Woodson's place in history. What we disagree on is the terms used for it, if that makes sense.

And to the latter, I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. Sorry about that. I was only saying that it seems your standard of "Greatness" is one that is available for anyone to reach if they have the talent and the work ethic, whereas I define it as something that so few can reach, if one does reach it, it'd probably knock another out who was already there from the same sport.


While I do not agree nor disagree with the argument on either side I just want to say Craic: I get what you're saying and understand where you're coming from. Your original intent really had less to do with Rod Woodson and more to do with why we use the measure of "greatness" to assess a rookie CB when that is a level that is attainable by only the best of the best, the top 1% if you will. It's an unrealistic measure and it's unfair and impractical to measure young talent by claiming if you see "greatness" in them or not.

RE: Artie Burns --- I love the kid, have since we drafted him. He has surpassed my expectations this year, and I'm excited to see how he progresses because I too think he can be a great cover corner and ultimately better than Ike Taylor, which would put him as the top Steelers CB in the last 20 years or so.

Yeah. That's about it. Although I'd probably say the top .01 percent, but you've hit the main idea straight on.


I agree with this. That's why I originally didn't respond directly to Craic about Woodson. I know that the discussion started about Burns.

Psych Ward 86 made a semi-humorous post, and I made a bit of a tongue in cheek comment, and a link about the 75th anniversary team. I wasn't trying to attack Craic.

I guess it came out wrong.

Which is why, after reading this post, I said we probably do agree on Woodson's place. Hey, at least it helped distract me from work today!! :wink02:

[lipps83]

I hear what you are saying Craic. Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, Tom Brady. They hit your idea of what GREATNESS means (although maybe not Brady). A step above everyone else (and yes, I included Brady, it is probably going to be a long long time before anyone equals what he has accomplished).

That doesn't mean Franco Harris, Randy Moss, Brett Favre weren't great. They just were not at that same level.

I see where you are coming from.

However, you get a negative for mentioning Gretzky over Lemieux.

HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!111111 DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHICH FORUM YOU ARE ON?????

lol

[Craic]

I hear what you are saying Craic. Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, Tom Brady. They hit your idea of what GREATNESS means (although maybe not Brady). A step above everyone else (and yes, I included Brady, it is probably going to be a long long time before anyone equals what he has accomplished).

That doesn't mean Franco Harris, Randy Moss, Brett Favre weren't great. They just were not at that same level.

I see where you are coming from.

However, you get a negative for mentioning Gretzky over Lemieux.

HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!111111 DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHICH FORUM YOU ARE ON?????

lol

LMBO. Lemieux was a figure skater in pads; whining every time someone touched him! (Can you tell I was a defenseman?) 6' 4" and 240, yet he was a candy-ass on the ice! (Seriously, however, him beating lymphoma and coming back to play . . . I tip my cap).

[#CRASHFormation]

Oh great a Wayne loving douche bashing Mario.

:flipoff:

[polamalubeast]

Mario Lemieux > Wayne Greztky!

[zulater]

LMBO. Lemieux was a figure skater in pads; whining every time someone touched him! (Can you tell I was a defenseman?) 6' 4" and 240, yet he was a candy-ass on the ice! (Seriously, however, him beating lymphoma and coming back to play . . . I tip my cap).

Bull fucking shit! Because of his size and the Penguins lack of surrounding talent ( early in his career) and no genuine enforcer to protect him, more "liberties" were taken with Mario in a period than Prince Wayne would have taken against him in a season. Mario "whined" because of the blind eye that was turned towards him by unsympathetic refs. Mario carried more of a burden than anyone I've ever seen on the ice. The sun of a bitch would have bodies draped all over him and still by some miracle get off a perfect pass or blistering shot! :upyours:

[pczach]

Only all of us can turn a thread about Artie Burns turning out to be a much better player than PFF and a bunch of other media types rated him........into a conversation about whether or not Rod Woodson was a great player.....or being in the same category of Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, or Jerry Rice.......Someone challenged my reading skills. :lol: ..........Someone tried to make the point that Mark Messier won a Cup without Gretzky.......Troy Polomalu and Jack Lambert came up.........We drop a Tom Brady reference in there........We found out that Mario Lemieux was a figure skater in pads :goal:......While another poster calls another a Wayne loving douche........:interference:


Yeah....I'd say we took this thread around the world a few times!

:rofl2:

[#CRASHFormation]

It's a Festivus miracle!

[zulater]

By the way Woodson was great by any definition. An exceptional cover corner with remarkable ball skills, who also tackled like a linebacker. What the hell was there not to like? Then after tearing up his knee and thus losing a step he made a career transition to safety and became the games best safety. Oh yeah might have been the best kickoff returner in Steelers history as well! He was great no ifs and or but's about it.

[Mojouw]

Can't seem to post images on my tablet. But this thread is screaming for like NHL 90 whatever the heck that let you make heads bleed.

[#CRASHFormation]

NHL 94 was the shit! I still own a Sega Genesis just for that game.