What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat)

JKool · 06-20-2004, 11:39 AM

I'm reposting this, since it got lost in a different debate, and I think it is interesting.

I say we have no depth at CB, and it has nothing to do with this silly concept of a "shut down corner" whatever the fudge that is. Here is why:

(1) Depth defined: having at least one vetran who can step up and start for a few games if the starter is out - taken from an earlier discussion.
(2) Vetran defined: has more than 3 years NFL experience and has started at the position in question at least on occassion - ok that is mine, but sounds reasonable to me.

Our CBs:
Starters: Craft, Thomas
Nickle: Ambrose
Backups: Brown, Brooks, Craver, and some other guys that I can't think of off the top of my head - which is probably a bad sign.

Depth? Ambrose is the only one who even comes close to qualifying, and I'm pretty sure the second game he has to start teams go after him with quicker WRs and beat him (I really like Ambrose, but in a foot race, his best days have passed).

Thus, we are not deep at CB.

What the heck is a "shut down corner" anyway? Are these two examples of shut down corners? Deon Sanders and Champ Bailey? There can't be too many guys like that, so it would be ridiculous to say that a team needed such a guy to be deep at CB. Also, who really wants a Deon - he is a scheme nightmare, you have to protect him so he doesn't have to stop the run! A burden and not a boon, I'd say.

Would it make me happy if we had a guy who could take away a #2 WR? Heck yeah - that's what I think could make our defense dominant! However, do we need such a guy? No. Do I think we need another guy who can start at corner (even if he makes us a little nervous) to play behind Thomas, Craft, Brown, and Ambrose? Damn straight we do.

Cheers.

GumboBC · 06-20-2004, 11:52 AM

Defintion of shutdown corner: A CB that can neutralize the receiver he is covering with no help from other players. A la Deion Sanders. We don\'t have one but neither do a lot of other teams.

Originally posted by JKool:
(1) Depth defined: having at least one vetran who can step up and start for a few games if the starter is out - taken from an earlier discussion.

We have depth, JKool. We have as many CB\'s on our roster as just about any other team. I think what you are talking about is \"quality\" depth? I don\'t think the quality of our CB\'s beyond the 2 starting CB\'s is any worse than a lot of teams. If any of the other 31 teams number 1 CB gets hurt, who do they have that can step in and be a quality guy? Some teams are in better shape than others but MANY are in the same boat as us. The problem with our CB\'s isn\'t depth. It\'s \"starting quality.\" IMO.

[Edited on 20/6/2004 by GumboBC]

swamee · 06-20-2004, 12:47 PM

yes, we are thin at cb position. and even if we had a \"shut down\" corner what\'s to prevent the other team from going to the other side? this all goes back to the line....
many qb\'s exploited us last yr for lack of pressure..........
once coverage breaks down, it\'s just a matter of time......
was it dave waymer who was the head hunter yrs ago? no speed, but one hit and those recievers were never the same...........give me a guy with good instincts, a nose for the ball, and a crusher/punisher to instill fear in the reciever and i\'ll forego the speed.
just a little more depth though, and we\'re not looking bad at all.......swamee

lumm0x · 06-20-2004, 02:00 PM

We do have a lack of quality depth, but we also have a lack of play making CB\'s. They have physical limitations such as height, speed, instincts or experience. This forces us to be very conservative in their coverage options and forces assistance to them. Even a CB as erratic as a Terrell Buckley was a worry for a QB because he did have the ability to break on a read and make a big play at least once a game. I don\'t know enough about Jason Craft to rule this out of his game, but if we can get Tebucky and Mitchell on the field at Safety, with their make-up speed perhaps we could envision our corners a little more aggressive in making a play on the ball.

GumboBC · 06-20-2004, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by lummOx:
We do have a lack of quality depth, but we also have a lack of play making CB\'s. They have physical limitations such as height, speed, instincts or experience. This forces us to be very conservative in their coverage options and forces assistance to them. Even a CB as erratic as a Terrell Buckley was a worry for a QB because he did have the ability to break on a read and make a big play at least once a game. I don\'t know enough about Jason Craft to rule this out of his game, but if we can get Tebucky and Mitchell on the field at Safety, with their make-up speed perhaps we could envision our corners a little more aggressive in making a play on the ball.

lummOx --

I agree that we don\'t have starting quality depth at CB. But, who does? Sure there are SOME teams better equipped to handle an injury than us. But, not many.

Look at the NFC South. Who has better depth at CB than us?

Tampa?
Carolina?
Atlanta?

lumm0x · 06-20-2004, 03:06 PM

One thing that always surprises me about Tampa is their ability to manufacture quality DB\'s. They always seem to have a new one popping up every year that looks impressive. Carolina\'s front seven is so much better than ours that it overshadows their secondary concerns moreso than us, and Atlanta\'s defense has so many holes it\'s like buffett night at the brothel. DeAngelo Hall will make some huge plays for them along the way this year though.

GumboBC · 06-20-2004, 03:13 PM

One thing that always surprises me about Tampa is their ability to manufacture quality DB\'s. They always seem to have a new one popping up every year that looks impressive

Well that was true up until last year when there starting CB got hurt and then they struggled big time stopping the pass. But, I belive their CB\'s success has been largely responsible because of the great pass rush from their front 4. Either that or they are a CB factory. Not so coniecidently there front 4 wasn\'t the same last year and neither was their pass rush??

Carolina\'s front seven is so much better than ours that it overshadows their secondary concerns moreso than us,

Understood. But, what does that have to do with having quality depth at CB? Sure their front seven is better and their CB will look better playing behind them but my point was about depth at CB. Not great front 7\'s.

All I\'m saying is I don\'t think depth is that big of a concern because a lot of teams are in the same boat as us. They just have better starters than us.

BlackandBlue · 06-20-2004, 06:58 PM

The following list is who I would classify as being a true \"shut-down corner.\" My definition may vary, but I would consider anyone who can make plays against the best receivers in the league, and is consistent with it.
Chris McAlister
Patrick Surtain
Ty Law
Charles Woodson
Champ Bailey
That\'s a real short list, folks. Feels like I\'m leaving someone out, though.
Watch out for Trufant this year. He might have a breakout season.

[Edited on 20/6/2004 by BlackandBlue]

JKool · 06-20-2004, 07:17 PM

BnB, I like the list - it looks about right to me.

Billy, \"quality depth\", good! That is what I was after - sorry I didn\'t say it so clearly.

LummOx, right on the nail! The problem is the lack of coverage options. Sure we can do fine without a bunch of them, but our defense (including our pass rush) will be improved greatly with more options.

Two things:
(1) I was just sick of hearing about this \"shut down corner\" crud. I don\'t think we need one, and I don\'t think anyone said we did. The question is just whether or not we have enough \"quality\" corners. There is a hidden problem here that has been teased out in this thread - depth isn\'t the only issue, it is the lack of true quality of even our starting guys. If we got another guy who could start two good things would happen - we would have better competition for the starting positions AND we\'d have another guy who could play just as well as the starters (thus, depth).
(2) The guy I have in mind is Ambrose before he got old. A guy with all the tools to take away one of the two WRs usually on the field - most of the time by himself (or with a rolling cover deep). It doesn\'t have to be the top guy (WR), the second guy will do.

At any rate, I agree with Billy that maybe it isn\'t all that bad after the top two - it just seems to me that the top two right now tend to fit better in specialty roles (like nickle).

Danno · 06-20-2004, 07:20 PM

A shut-dowwn corner can take any WR and remove him from the game.
I don\'t think there has been one since Deion, and I hate that jerk.
There isn\'t a SDCB in the game today.

The top corners in the game today are not shut-down corners, they are simply solid man-to-man corners. They play excellent man coverage but are far from being the shut-down CB moron-boy was.

And if it weren\'t for excessive holding not called, I think Mr. Law would have been toasted in the 2003 AFC title game.

Comparing todays CB\'s to Deion is like comparing todays running backs to Walter Payton or Jim Brown. There isn\'t a SDCB in the NFL today.

[Edited on 20/6/2004 by Danno]

06-20-2004, 11:39 AM	#1
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) I'm reposting this, since it got lost in a different debate, and I think it is interesting. I say we have no depth at CB, and it has nothing to do with this silly concept of a "shut down corner" whatever the fudge that is. Here is why: (1) Depth defined: having at least one vetran who can step up and start for a few games if the starter is out - taken from an earlier discussion. (2) Vetran defined: has more than 3 years NFL experience and has started at the position in question at least on occassion - ok that is mine, but sounds reasonable to me. Our CBs: Starters: Craft, Thomas Nickle: Ambrose Backups: Brown, Brooks, Craver, and some other guys that I can't think of off the top of my head - which is probably a bad sign. Depth? Ambrose is the only one who even comes close to qualifying, and I'm pretty sure the second game he has to start teams go after him with quicker WRs and beat him (I really like Ambrose, but in a foot race, his best days have passed). Thus, we are not deep at CB. What the heck is a "shut down corner" anyway? Are these two examples of shut down corners? Deon Sanders and Champ Bailey? There can't be too many guys like that, so it would be ridiculous to say that a team needed such a guy to be deep at CB. Also, who really wants a Deon - he is a scheme nightmare, you have to protect him so he doesn't have to stop the run! A burden and not a boon, I'd say. Would it make me happy if we had a guy who could take away a #2 WR? Heck yeah - that's what I think could make our defense dominant! However, do we need such a guy? No. Do I think we need another guy who can start at corner (even if he makes us a little nervous) to play behind Thomas, Craft, Brown, and Ambrose? Damn straight we do. Cheers.

06-20-2004, 11:52 AM	#2
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) Defintion of shutdown corner: A CB that can neutralize the receiver he is covering with no help from other players. A la Deion Sanders. We don\'t have one but neither do a lot of other teams. Originally posted by JKool: (1) Depth defined: having at least one vetran who can step up and start for a few games if the starter is out - taken from an earlier discussion. We have depth, JKool. We have as many CB\'s on our roster as just about any other team. I think what you are talking about is \"quality\" depth? I don\'t think the quality of our CB\'s beyond the 2 starting CB\'s is any worse than a lot of teams. If any of the other 31 teams number 1 CB gets hurt, who do they have that can step in and be a quality guy? Some teams are in better shape than others but MANY are in the same boat as us. The problem with our CB\'s isn\'t depth. It\'s \"starting quality.\" IMO. [Edited on 20/6/2004 by GumboBC]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

06-20-2004, 12:47 PM	#3
swamee Registered Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 67	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) yes, we are thin at cb position. and even if we had a \"shut down\" corner what\'s to prevent the other team from going to the other side? this all goes back to the line.... many qb\'s exploited us last yr for lack of pressure.......... once coverage breaks down, it\'s just a matter of time...... was it dave waymer who was the head hunter yrs ago? no speed, but one hit and those recievers were never the same...........give me a guy with good instincts, a nose for the ball, and a crusher/punisher to instill fear in the reciever and i\'ll forego the speed. just a little more depth though, and we\'re not looking bad at all.......swamee
swamee Registered Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 67

06-20-2004, 02:00 PM	#4
lumm0x Resident antediluvian Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,026	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) We do have a lack of quality depth, but we also have a lack of play making CB\'s. They have physical limitations such as height, speed, instincts or experience. This forces us to be very conservative in their coverage options and forces assistance to them. Even a CB as erratic as a Terrell Buckley was a worry for a QB because he did have the ability to break on a read and make a big play at least once a game. I don\'t know enough about Jason Craft to rule this out of his game, but if we can get Tebucky and Mitchell on the field at Safety, with their make-up speed perhaps we could envision our corners a little more aggressive in making a play on the ball.

06-20-2004, 02:06 PM	#5
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) Originally posted by lummOx: We do have a lack of quality depth, but we also have a lack of play making CB\'s. They have physical limitations such as height, speed, instincts or experience. This forces us to be very conservative in their coverage options and forces assistance to them. Even a CB as erratic as a Terrell Buckley was a worry for a QB because he did have the ability to break on a read and make a big play at least once a game. I don\'t know enough about Jason Craft to rule this out of his game, but if we can get Tebucky and Mitchell on the field at Safety, with their make-up speed perhaps we could envision our corners a little more aggressive in making a play on the ball. lummOx -- I agree that we don\'t have starting quality depth at CB. But, who does? Sure there are SOME teams better equipped to handle an injury than us. But, not many. Look at the NFC South. Who has better depth at CB than us? Tampa? Carolina? Atlanta?
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

06-20-2004, 03:06 PM	#6
lumm0x Resident antediluvian Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,026	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) One thing that always surprises me about Tampa is their ability to manufacture quality DB\'s. They always seem to have a new one popping up every year that looks impressive. Carolina\'s front seven is so much better than ours that it overshadows their secondary concerns moreso than us, and Atlanta\'s defense has so many holes it\'s like buffett night at the brothel. DeAngelo Hall will make some huge plays for them along the way this year though.

06-20-2004, 03:13 PM	#7
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) One thing that always surprises me about Tampa is their ability to manufacture quality DB\'s. They always seem to have a new one popping up every year that looks impressive Well that was true up until last year when there starting CB got hurt and then they struggled big time stopping the pass. But, I belive their CB\'s success has been largely responsible because of the great pass rush from their front 4. Either that or they are a CB factory. Not so coniecidently there front 4 wasn\'t the same last year and neither was their pass rush?? Carolina\'s front seven is so much better than ours that it overshadows their secondary concerns moreso than us, Understood. But, what does that have to do with having quality depth at CB? Sure their front seven is better and their CB will look better playing behind them but my point was about depth at CB. Not great front 7\'s. All I\'m saying is I don\'t think depth is that big of a concern because a lot of teams are in the same boat as us. They just have better starters than us.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

06-20-2004, 06:58 PM	#8
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) The following list is who I would classify as being a true \"shut-down corner.\" My definition may vary, but I would consider anyone who can make plays against the best receivers in the league, and is consistent with it. Chris McAlister Patrick Surtain Ty Law Charles Woodson Champ Bailey That\'s a real short list, folks. Feels like I\'m leaving someone out, though. Watch out for Trufant this year. He might have a breakout season. [Edited on 20/6/2004 by BlackandBlue]

06-20-2004, 07:17 PM	#9
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) BnB, I like the list - it looks about right to me. Billy, \"quality depth\", good! That is what I was after - sorry I didn\'t say it so clearly. LummOx, right on the nail! The problem is the lack of coverage options. Sure we can do fine without a bunch of them, but our defense (including our pass rush) will be improved greatly with more options. Two things: (1) I was just sick of hearing about this \"shut down corner\" crud. I don\'t think we need one, and I don\'t think anyone said we did. The question is just whether or not we have enough \"quality\" corners. There is a hidden problem here that has been teased out in this thread - depth isn\'t the only issue, it is the lack of true quality of even our starting guys. If we got another guy who could start two good things would happen - we would have better competition for the starting positions AND we\'d have another guy who could play just as well as the starters (thus, depth). (2) The guy I have in mind is Ambrose before he got old. A guy with all the tools to take away one of the two WRs usually on the field - most of the time by himself (or with a rolling cover deep). It doesn\'t have to be the top guy (WR), the second guy will do. At any rate, I agree with Billy that maybe it isn\'t all that bad after the top two - it just seems to me that the top two right now tend to fit better in specialty roles (like nickle).
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

06-20-2004, 07:20 PM	#10
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	What the heck is a "Shut Down Corner"? (A bit of a repeat) A shut-dowwn corner can take any WR and remove him from the game. I don\'t think there has been one since Deion, and I hate that jerk. There isn\'t a SDCB in the game today. The top corners in the game today are not shut-down corners, they are simply solid man-to-man corners. They play excellent man coverage but are far from being the shut-down CB moron-boy was. And if it weren\'t for excessive holding not called, I think Mr. Law would have been toasted in the 2003 AFC title game. Comparing todays CB\'s to Deion is like comparing todays running backs to Walter Payton or Jim Brown. There isn\'t a SDCB in the NFL today. [Edited on 20/6/2004 by Danno]