Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I'm going to go against the grain here and say that I'd rather have a dominant cornerback.  Yeah, that's right.

 

If you proposed this scenario 10-12 years ago, I would say without doubt, a defensive end.  However, recently offenses have seen a vast expansion in the passing attack, utilizing formations with 3, 4 and even 5 receivers to spread the defense out.  A physical, tough shutdown corner can neutralize the offense's biggest weapon and that in and of itself handicaps the quarterback.

 

I'll give you two real-world scenarios:

 

1) The Bills managed to completely neutralize Jason Taylor in both meetings by simpily taking him out of the game.

 

2) Remember New England's Super Bowl runs in which Ty Law shut down Marvin Harrison?

310923[/snapback]

I'm already on the DE over CB side of this, and I think the argument could be made the 3-5 receiver sets require more emphasis on secondary depth and LB's with coverage ability than a star CB.

 

I also think the rules changes/enforcement makes it even harder on the CB's, making a star DE a more effective use of your money than spending it on a star CB.

Posted

No one in this thread has brought up another and obviously huge factor in this argument. At least half the plays in a game are running plays. There are guys at DE who get a lot of pub, as well as CBs, who add very little or even get killed on running plays because they are so intent on getting their sack numbers up or at least disrupting the passing game. There are few CBs, like Antoine, that play a major factor in the running game. But a good DE that is good against the run, too, will have a larger impact on the overall game and overall defense than a CB.

 

I still say, however, you take Sam Adams out of the Bills defense and it's a bigger loss than if you take Schobel or Spikes or Clements out. Without the run stuffer and pocket pusher in the middle, both the run and pass defense is considerable weakened.

×
×
  • Create New...