Simon Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 Are you suggesting Nate could tackle like Winfield? He wasn't as technically sound as Antoine but he brought a lot more lumber. As far as their coverage skills, I loved the way Antoine played the game but he wasn't even in the same league as Clements.
WellDressed Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 #22-----------Shut down corner with ability to turn an int. into a quick six---Solid, not spectacular punt returner---Solid tackler (not quite as good as #26)
Stl Bills Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 Are you suggesting Nate could tackle like Winfield? Nate was damn good tackling CB in his own right, not saying he was as good as AW but in my mind its a lot closer than people think. Its pretty close but I'd take the consistent play of AW. Nate might have made more big plays but I'll never forget 2005.....he sucked that entire year IMO (I know he didn't get a lot of help from the DL but he was still very bad).
l< j Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 My dream Bills lineup for the early 90s would have included Antoine or Clements to go along with Nate the 1st. Add Ted Washington in lieu of Jeff Wright and pair Henry Jones with Kurt 'I know nothing' Schulz in the backfield, and wanna bet they go 3 of 4 minimum? If they had Wade Phillips instead of that guy who left the bar with the swizzle stick in his mouth . . . kj
DDD Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 I know it's a random question, but after watching highlights this year and last, it seems as if Antoine has been the much bigger impact player for his new team. WHo would you say it was when they played for us? Clements was the big play guy, and Winfield was the run support guy. They were supposed to be our bookend CB's for a decade.
The Dean Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 Nate was damn good tackling CB in his own right, not saying he was as good as AW but in my mind its a lot closer than people think. Its pretty close but I'd take the consistent play of AW. Nate might have made more big plays but I'll never forget 2005.....he sucked that entire year IMO (I know he didn't get a lot of help from the DL but he was still very bad). Nate was a fine tackler, I agree. But, jarthur said Nate was equal to Winfield in every way. Winfield was more consistent and solid, on the tackle, IMO. It seems all OSU DB's can tackle. Youboty is from that same mold. I agree with you, that Winfield was more consistent. and that's a big deal for a CB, to me. When a WR makes a catch on Winfield there is rarely any RAC to discuss. OTOH, when a WR makes a catch on Nate, he gets visibly pissed..I LOVE that. Both of those guys were great players, for da Bills.
Saint Doug Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 I'll go with Winfield. He was a freight train while tackling and seemed to be more a consistent player. Seemed like a great team player too. Nate was a lot more flashy, with all those interceptions, but he seemed to just be playing for the big pay day. There were those middle years where we really didn't hear much about him. Then, his contract year....
BillZerk Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 I'll go with Antoine. I liked his toughness. The way he would decleat a 265 lb tide end. I got tired watching Nate run along side the receiver who just caught the ball playing pattycake and trying to strip the ball while the receiver racked up the RAC. I also got tired ot Nate and his agent telling how great he was
Recommended Posts