Entering 14th season, Broncos' Bailey as good -- and fast -- as he ever was

[topscribe]

I'm not ordinarily a Pete Prisco fan, but he manages here
to remind us of what we have in Champ Bailey.



ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Most of the focus relating
to the Denver Broncos might be on the future Hall of
Famer on the offensive side -- you know, that quarterback
named Manning -- but don't forget about the Canton
Corner on the other side of the ball.

Champ Bailey will turn 34 next week, but he's a true freak
of nature, a cover corner who still lines up week in and
week out and plays man coverage on the other team's
best receiver.

That's tough to do for a young corner. Imagine one in his
14th season?

Yet Bailey remains one of the NFL's best corners, his ability
to run stride-for-stride with top receivers making him one
of the all-time best at his position.

When Deion Sanders passed the corner greatness baton to
Bailey, he ran with it. But he's not ready to give it up just
yet to the next group. There's still too much football left to
play, too many passes left to knock down.

"I am still as good as I was when I was 22 or 23," Bailey
said during a break between practices here during the
team's minicamp. "I can't run as fast as I did then or jump
as high. But I am smarter. I know how to take care of my
body better. I know how to anticipate things a little better.
I understand football a lot better, which keeps me on top
of my game."

Rest - http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/19350948/entering-14th-season-bailey-as-good-and-fast-as-he-ever-was
.

[MOtorboat]

(Second-)Best trade ever!

I love Champ.

[Simple Jaded]

Seven hours and counting.......

[BroncoWave]

(Second-)Best trade ever!

I love Champ.

It's really hilarious to see the direction that Bailey and Portis' respective careers went after that trade. And also remember Washington traded us a second round pick in that deal. Gotta love Dan Snyder!

[Ravage!!!]

It's really hilarious to see the direction that Bailey and Portis' respective careers went after that trade. And also remember Washington traded us a second round pick in that deal. Gotta love Dan Snyder!

Actually, gotta love Shanahan :salute:

[Northman]

Yes, but Zam will tell you he is terrible and needs to move to safety.

[BroncoWave]

Actually, gotta love Shanahan :salute:

I don't think he could have pulled that trade over on most teams.

[Chef Zambini]

Actually, gotta love Shanahan :salute:shanahan told portis agent to find him a deal, thats all shanny did ! portis and champ had the same agent! the agent made that deal! shannys indifference to runningbacks is all he tendered to that deal.

[Chef Zambini]

the article is flawed, it proclaims that champ lines up against the opponents top receiver all the time. that is far from reality! champ lines up on the left95% of all plays and he takes the WR that the opponent sends out there regardless of who it is !
thats 95 % of the time !

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Bailey may have lost a step, but he's still fast.

[SR]

the article is flawed, it proclaims that champ lines up against the opponents top receiver all the time. that is far from reality! champ lines up on the left95% of all plays and he takes the WR that the opponent sends out there regardless of who it is !
thats 95 % of the time !

You need to go look at some game film. If Denver plays Detroit and Megatron lines up on the offensive left, Champ will follow. Champ has consistently taken the opposing team's top WR out of games for his entire tenure in Denver. To say otherwise is ignorant.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

the article is flawed, it proclaims that champ lines up against the opponents top receiver all the time. that is far from reality! champ lines up on the left95% of all plays and he takes the WR that the opponent sends out there regardless of who it is !
thats 95 % of the time !


I believe he stayed on one side under Shannahan, but since 09' he's usually been found shadowing the other teams top receiver.

[bcbronc]

You need to go look at some game film. If Denver plays Detroit and Megatron lines up on the offensive left, Champ will follow. Champ has consistently taken the opposing team's top WR out of games for his entire tenure in Denver. To say otherwise is ignorant.

Are you sure about that. I'm inclined to agree with Zam that Champ pretty much always lines up on the defense's left. I can't recall a single time I've noticed Champ line up on the right. Granted TV feeds don't tend to be ideal for watching where CBs line up, but I'd think I'd notice it once in a while, or the broadcaster would do a segment now and then iso-ing Champ following a specific WR. I dunno, I remember a couple seasons ago Champ played some slot CB. And maybe the other team almost always splits their best WR out to the d's left. I also remember times when Champ was put on Gates...and it was obvious watching the game.

Maybe someone has broken dowwn some coaches film and seen Champ moving from side to side following a specific receiver. But I can't say I've noticed it.

[TXBRONC]

I don't think he could have pulled that trade over on most teams.

If another team had been the exact same position as the Redskins there is no way anyone could prove that this kind of trade wouldn't have taken place.

[BroncoWave]

If another team had been the exact same position as the Redskins there is no way anyone could prove that this kind of trade wouldn't have taken place.

Notice I said "I think". I didn't claim to have any knowledge that was the case, just stating my opinion.

[Ravage!!!]

shanahan told portis agent to find him a deal, thats all shanny did ! portis and champ had the same agent! the agent made that deal! shannys indifference to runningbacks is all he tendered to that deal.

:lol: OK!! hahaha whatever you want to believe.

[Ravage!!!]

the article is flawed, it proclaims that champ lines up against the opponents top receiver all the time. that is far from reality! champ lines up on the left95% of all plays and he takes the WR that the opponent sends out there regardless of who it is !
thats 95 % of the time !

Your logic is flawed in believing it doesn't happen... AND.. that you think every team should (or does) play man-to-man on every snap of the game. You have been shown time and time again how this statement is completely false.

[Ravage!!!]

I don't think he could have pulled that trade over on most teams.

Possibly, but Shanahan was in charge of player personnel while in Denver. To say that Shanahan didn't make that trade happen, and couldn't have done it elsewhere isn't correct. There was only one Champ to trade for, and there was only one Champ that happen to of been in a contract negotiation the same time that Portis demanded a pay raise with 2 years left on his current one. Hard to say what kind of trade would have been made with other teams. We've even seen the "great" Bill Belicheck trade away great players.

[Chef Zambini]

yes the statement is false ! false for champ and the vast majority of NFL corners.
the staement,
"takes away half the field is also a falicy for champ and all his counbterparts !
so whar else you got?
read the article, its their misguided assertion, not mine.

[BroncoWave]

Possibly, but Shanahan was in charge of player personnel while in Denver. To say that Shanahan didn't make that trade happen, and couldn't have done it elsewhere isn't correct. There was only one Champ to trade for, and there was only one Champ that happen to of been in a contract negotiation the same time that Portis demanded a pay raise with 2 years left on his current one. Hard to say what kind of trade would have been made with other teams. We've even seen the "great" Bill Belicheck trade away great players.

I've been on record saying several times saying BB is the most overrated personnel person in the NFL. If he doesn't luck out on a 6th round pick (and the subsequent injury that got him on the field) he wouldn't have a fraction of the reverence he currently gets.

[Ravage!!!]

I've been on record saying several times saying BB is the most overrated personnel person in the NFL. If he doesn't luck out on a 6th round pick (and the subsequent injury that got him on the field) he wouldn't have a fraction of the reverence he currently gets.

agreed

[topscribe]

I've been on record saying several times saying BB is the most overrated personnel person in the NFL. If he doesn't luck out on a 6th round pick (and the subsequent injury that got him on the field) he wouldn't have a fraction of the reverence he currently gets.
That seems so common. Largely what makes a great coach is a great QB.
Lombardi had Bart Starr. Walsh had Montana. Noll had Bradshaw. Shanahan
had Elway, and Shanahan's glow diminished after Elway retired. And I'm sure
with a little research we would find they all made their personnel gaffs . . .
.

[BroncoWave]

That seems so common. Largely what makes a great coach is a great QB.
Lombardi had Bart Starr. Walsh had Montana. Noll had Bradshaw. Shanahan
had Elway, and Shanahan's glow diminished after Elway retired. And I'm sure
with a little research we would find they all made their personnel gaffs . . .
.

Those other teams also had great talent around the QB for the most part. If you look past Brady, NE isn't exactly loaded with talent, and they really never have been. Welker, Gronk, and Wilfork are great players but past that their talent level leaves alot to be desired. I'm not saying BB isn't a good coach, but I think he's mediocre to bad at evaluating talent.

As far as personnel departments go, I'd rank teams like GB, Pitt, Philly, NYG and Baltimore far above NE.

[SR]

yes the statement is false ! false for champ and the vast majority of NFL corners.
the staement,
"takes away half the field is also a falicy for champ and all his counbterparts !
so whar else you got?
read the article, its their misguided assertion, not mine.

Champ does take away half of the field. That's why Andre Goodman and who ever else starts opposite Champ gets shredded by the good QBs we play and Champ doesn't see any action. I forget which game it was last year but in the pregame show they were talking to the other QB who said he planned on throwing at Champ...Champ had a huge game that week. You don't throw the ball Champ Bailey's way...

[Chef Zambini]

half the field is a ludicrous exaggerastion of reality. get a clue !

[MOtorboat]

half the field is a ludicrous exaggerastion of reality. get a clue !

Hate leads to suffering.

[SR]

half the field is a ludicrous exaggerastion of reality. get a clue !

Its a figure of speech dude! It's not a literal thing. It's insinuating that if they're in a two WR set, Champ takes one WR out of the picture. I can't believe I'm having to spell this out for someone.

[Chef Zambini]

[QUOTE=bcbronc;1655793]Are you sure about that. I'm inclined to agree with Zam that Champ pretty much always lines up on the defense's left. I can't recall a single time I've noticed Champ line up on the right. Granted TV feeds don't tend to be ideal for watching where CBs line up, but I'd think I'd notice it once in a while, or the broadcaster would do a segment now and then iso-ing Champ following a specific WR. I dunno, I remember a couple seasons ago Champ played some slot CB. And maybe the other team almost always splits their best WR out to the d's left. I also remember times when Champ was put on Gates...and it was obvious watching the game.

Maybe someone has broken dowwn some coaches film and seen Champ moving from side to side following a specific receiver. But I can't say I've noticed .QUOTE]thanks for your view from realityville

[Chef Zambini]

Its a figure of speech dude! It's not a literal thing. It's insinuating that if they're in a two WR set, Champ takes one WR out of the picture. I can't believe I'm having to spell this out for someone.so you admit that at best, champ takes away just one receiver. thats a good first baby step for you.
Now when you accept the reality thaT CHAMP STAYS ON HIS SIDE OF THE FIELD, THE LEFT 95 % OF THE TIME, YOU WILL TAKE THE NEXT STEP OF REALIZATION THAt champ chases decoys all season long ! and is therefore wasted at corner !

[SR]

Maybe you could familiarize yourself with "realityville"

[SR]

so you admit that at best, champ takes away just one receiver. thats a good first baby step for you.
Now when you accept the reality thaT CHAMP STAYS ON HIS SIDE OF THE FIELD, THE LEFT 95 % OF THE TIME, YOU WILL TAKE THE NEXT STEP OF REALIZATION THAt champ chases decoys all season long ! and is therefore wasted at corner !

Well how many receivers can he realistically cover at once? And how can you say that he's a wasted corner when he has over 50 INTs and is one of the premier shut down corners ever?

[MOtorboat]

so you admit that at best, champ takes away just one receiver. thats a good first baby step for you.
Now when you accept the reality thaT CHAMP STAYS ON HIS SIDE OF THE FIELD, THE LEFT 95 % OF THE TIME, YOU WILL TAKE THE NEXT STEP OF REALIZATION THAt champ chases decoys all season long ! and is therefore wasted at corner !

Spouting numbers you can't prove...

Depends on the scheme. Against Kansas City he was asked to shut down Bowe. He did that. Other games he was asked to play short to middle zone, and he did that.

According to PFF, receivers covered by Bailey did not get over 50 yards in 11 games.

[SR]

Spouting numbers you can't prove...

Depends on the scheme. Against Kansas City he was asked to shut down Bowe. He did that. Other games he was asked to play short to middle zone, and he did that.

According to PFF, receivers covered by Bailey did not get over 50 yards in 11 games.

MO, go find realityville.

[Chef Zambini]

numbers, just check out the number of receptions each team makes against our broncos !
30 receptions a game !
yes, champ is having a huge impact !
and how many of those receptions, each game are made by either the #1 or #2 receiver for our opponent?
and where is champ?
folowing a decoy to the bathroom !

[Chef Zambini]

Spouting numbers you can't prove...

Depends on the scheme. Against Kansas City he was asked to shut down Bowe. He did that. Other games he was asked to play short to middle zone, and he did that.

According to PFF, receivers covered by Bailey did not get over 50 yards in 11 games.and how did that very critical # affect ourt win loss record?
thanks for playing.

[SR]

numbers, just check out the number of receptions each team makes against our broncos !
30 receptions a game !
yes, champ is having a huge impact !
and how many of those receptions, each game are made by either the #1 or #2 receiver for our opponent?
and where is champ?
folowing a decoy to the bathroom !

Champ is one person. He can't be everywhere at once, but where he is at any point in time he is doing his job better than the person he's covering. You're sorely out of the loop Zam

[SR]

and how did that very critical # affect ourt win loss record?
thanks for playing.

How didn't it? What if we had two Andre Goodmans on the field last year instead of Champ...

[Chef Zambini]

How didn't it? What if we had two Andre Goodmans on the field last year instead of Champ...

then opposing QBs would have been slipping on their own drool.

[SR]

then opposing QBs would have been slipping on their own drool.

Thank you.

[MOtorboat]

numbers, just check out the number of receptions each team makes against our broncos !
30 receptions a game !
yes, champ is having a huge impact !
and how many of those receptions, each game are made by either the #1 or #2 receiver for our opponent?
and where is champ?
folowing a decoy to the bathroom !

First off, the number was 20.8 per game.

Right at league average, which was 20.4. The Broncos were 16th in receptions allowed. Not great, I'll admit, but hardly the sieve you are trying to pass it off as. And Goodman was bad. Real bad.

Thankfuly, Denver has an all-world talent at cornerback, or it could have been much worse.

[MOtorboat]

The Broncos gave up 144 receptions to receivers listed as starting receivers in games this season (some teams started three, some two). That's 43 percent. I have no clue what that number means, but I'm going to guess its below league average.

[BroncoWave]

The Broncos gave up 144 receptions to receivers listed as starting receivers in games this season (some teams started three, some two). That's 43 percent. I have no clue what that number means, but I'm going to guess its below league average.

I'd guess part of that is Champ and part is our ineptness at covering backs and tight ends.

[Chef Zambini]

The Broncos gave up 144 receptions to receivers listed as starting receivers in games this season (some teams started three, some two). That's 43 percent. I have no clue what that number means, but I'm going to guess its below league average.it can ONLY mean that 144 times champ was NOT covering the #1 reciever !
did you bother looking up how many passes were actually completed against our broncos defense/
500/
600?
wow, chaMP HAVING A HUGE IMPACT SHUTTING DOWN HALF THE FIELD !

[BroncoWave]

it can ONLY mean that 144 times champ was NOT covering the #1 reciever !
did you bother looking up how many passes were actually completed against our broncos defense/
500/
600?
wow, chaMP HAVING A HUGE IMPACT SHUTTING DOWN HALF THE FIELD !

If 144 is 43% of what we gave up, that would mean we gave up 335 completions. That's simple math.

[MOtorboat]

it can ONLY mean that 144 times champ was NOT covering the #1 reciever !
did you bother looking up how many passes were actually completed against our broncos defense/
500/
600?
wow, chaMP HAVING A HUGE IMPACT SHUTTING DOWN HALF THE FIELD !

333. League average. Please keep up.

[Chef Zambini]

only 333 pASSES WERE COMPLETED AGAINST THE BRONCOS LAST YEAR?

[MOtorboat]

only 333 pASSES WERE COMPLETED AGAINST THE BRONCOS LAST YEAR?

Yes. These are easy things to look up.

[Chef Zambini]

YES, SO EASY ! our opponents had over 1,000 plays against us in the regul;ar season.
more than 500 were passes.
more than 300 were completions.
champ had 2 INTs and returned both for ZERO yards.

yes, champ with all his talent is making a HUGE impact for our defense!
look it up ! the numbers dont lie. champ wasted at corner !
144 times the oponents TOP receiver made a reception 43% of all passes! where was champ?
not with the #1 receiver, not involved with the defense that actually makes the plays !

[MOtorboat]

YES, SO EASY ! our opponents had over 1,000 plays against us in the regul;ar season.
more than 500 were passes.
more than 300 were completions.
champ had 2 INTs and returned both for ZERO yards.

yes, champ with all his talent is making a HUGE impact for our defense!
look it up ! the numbers dont lie. champ wasted at corner !
144 times the oponents TOP receiver made a reception 43% of all passes! where was champ?
not with the #1 receiver, not involved with the defense that actually makes the plays !

Unbelievable. There's absolutely zero context to any of that.

Now you're railing against ACTUAL stats that were BETTER than the crap you made up?

Jeebus.

[SR]

333. League average. Please keep up.

This is a waste of time. He won't ever get it. Maybe Zam and HammeredOut should be friends

[SR]

Unbelievable. There's absolutely zero context to any of that.

Now you're railing against ACTUAL stats that were BETTER than the crap you made up?

Jeebus.

Nauseating isn't it?

[SR]

YES, SO EASY ! our opponents had over 1,000 plays against us in the regul;ar season.
more than 500 were passes.
more than 300 were completions.
champ had 2 INTs and returned both for ZERO yards.

yes, champ with all his talent is making a HUGE impact for our defense!
look it up ! the numbers dont lie. champ wasted at corner !
144 times the oponents TOP receiver made a reception 43% of all passes! where was champ?
not with the #1 receiver, not involved with the defense that actually makes the plays !

It's amazing to me that you think you make sense

[MOtorboat]

He didn't get interceptions, because THEY DIDN'T THROW AT HIM.


Nauseating isn't it?

He just makes so much shit up out of thin air.

[Chef Zambini]

what dont you get?
one thousand plays against our defense and champ has 2 INTs tp show for his impact on the game.
as a corner in our defense, champ is easily ignored/ avoided/ rendered inconsequencial !
thats reality!

[MOtorboat]

what dont you get?
one thousand plays against our defense and champ has 2 INTs tp show for his impact on the game.
as a corner in our defense, champ is easily ignored/ avoided/ rendered inconsequencial !
thats reality!

It's not that they ignore him. They know exactly where he is and they don't throw at him.

Your personal hate is so obvious. Did he stiff you on the tip? Is that what this is all about?

[Chef Zambini]

He didn't get interceptions, because THEY DIDN'T THROW AT HIM.



He just makes so much shit up out of thin air.what shit did I make up?
plays against?
pass attempts/
completions?
champs 2 INTs for the entire season?
where is the make believe?
perhaps its in your thinking that champ makes a difference in our defense?
teams just beat us 10 on 1o and THEY decide who champ covers !

[SR]

what dont you get?
one thousand plays against our defense and champ has 2 INTs tp show for his impact on the game.
as a corner in our defense, champ is easily ignored/ avoided/ rendered inconsequencial !
thats reality!

As MO said, the QBs don't throw at him because they know better. Kinda hard to pick a ball off if it's on the other side of the field BECAUSE CHAMP HAS TAKEN AWAY HIS HALF OF THE FIELD.

[MOtorboat]

what shit did I make up?
plays against?
pass attempts/
completions?
champs 2 INTs for the entire season?
where is the make believe?
perhaps its in your thinking that champ makes a difference in our defense?
teams just beat us 10 on 1o and THEY decide who champ covers !

You made up a lot of shit until you were corrected.

Did he stiff you on an autograph? Maybe he didn't say "please" when he ordered the wine?

[SR]

what shit did I make up?
plays against?
pass attempts/
completions?
champs 2 INTs for the entire season?
where is the make believe?
perhaps its in your thinking that champ makes a difference in our defense?
teams just beat us 10 on 1o and THEY decide who champ covers !

You even said Champ makes a difference when you acknowledged that opposing QBs would be "slipping in their own drool" if we didn't have him.

[bcbronc]

As MO said, the QBs don't throw at him because they know better. Kinda hard to pick a ball off if it's on the other side of the field BECAUSE CHAMP HAS TAKEN AWAY HIS HALF OF THE FIELD.

I think that's kinds Zam's point. Because Champ is almost always lined up at LCB (unless someone has some evidence otherwise) it makes it easy for an OC to gameplan away from Champ.

Put Champ in the middle of he field, you make it a lot harder to just avoid him. Then he might actually be taking away half the field rather than just whichever WR splits out to the defences left.

Obviously Champ isn't moving this season, but anyone who hasn't noticed more balls getting caught on Champ than a couple of years ago isn't pauying attention. He's still a top corner, but he's not what he was.

[SR]

I think that's kinds Zam's point. Because Champ is almost always lined up at LCB (unless someone has some evidence otherwise) it makes it easy for an OC to gameplan away from Champ.

Put Champ in the middle of he field, you make it a lot harder to just avoid him. Then he might actually be taking away half the field rather than just whichever WR splits out to the defences left.

Obviously Champ isn't moving this season, but anyone who hasn't noticed more balls getting caught on Champ than a couple of years ago isn't pauying attention. He's still a top corner, but he's not what he was.

I've noticed. But that's bound to happen as he ages. And he's still better than every corner in the NFL save for Revis, in my opinion. There are a few on the same level, like Nnamdi, Flowers, Woodson, etc, but Champ is still premier. And to be clear, I'm all for moving Champ to safety, but when he's ready.

[MOtorboat]

I think that's kinds Zam's point. Because Champ is almost always lined up at LCB (unless someone has some evidence otherwise) it makes it easy for an OC to gameplan away from Champ.

Put Champ in the middle of he field, you make it a lot harder to just avoid him. Then he might actually be taking away half the field rather than just whichever WR splits out to the defences left.

Obviously Champ isn't moving this season, but anyone who hasn't noticed more balls getting caught on Champ than a couple of years ago isn't pauying attention. He's still a top corner, but he's not what he was.

He's one of the best stride for stride corners that has ever lived. You don't move him from corner. It's not even thought about. It's idiotic.

[MOtorboat]

Rod Woodson is the ONLY example. One example for thousands of cornerbacks, and 100s of pro bowl level cornerbacks, ONE got moved.

Why? Because an elite cornerback has a unique skill set that you can't duplicate.

[SR]

He's one of the best stride for stride corners that has ever lived. You don't move him from corner. It's not even thought about. It's idiotic.

Agreed, but I think Champ will one day move to Safety.

[MOtorboat]

Agreed, but I think Champ will one day move to Safety.

I don't know why. His ball skills are suited for corner. Not safety.

[SR]

I don't know why. His ball skills are suited for corner. Not safety.

Because its 2:50pm and I'm already drinking, that's why.

[MOtorboat]

Because its 2:50pm and I'm already drinking, that's why.

Lol. I have less than two days before I finally get cable back (switching companies and it took a few weeks), and my antenna is not pulling in NBC (golf), so I'm bored.

[SR]

Lol. I have less than two days before I finally get cable back (switching companies and it took a few weeks), and my antenna is not pulling in NBC (golf), so I'm bored.

I'm bored too...my son doesn't wanna play with me so my iPad is keeping me company

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Lol. I have less than two days before I finally get cable back (switching companies and it took a few weeks), and my antenna is not pulling in NBC (golf), so I'm bored.

On this link, it says "Click this link to watch the coverage live online." (US Open)

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golftalkcentral/nbc-sports-live-coverage-112th-us-open/

[MOtorboat]

On this link, it says "Click this link to watch the coverage live online." (US Open)

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golftalkcentral/nbc-sports-live-coverage-112th-us-open/

Thanks, Carol, but they are only showing continuous coverage of two holes. Gets kind of boring and monotonous after about five minutes.

[BroncoWave]

Thanks, Carol, but they are only showing continuous coverage of two holes. Gets kind of boring and monotonous after about five minutes.

You could always try www.firstrowsports.eu

They show a lot of live streams of sporting events.

[Chef Zambini]

I think that's kinds Zam's point. Because Champ is almost always lined up at LCB (unless someone has some evidence otherwise) it makes it easy for an OC to gameplan away from Champ.

Put Champ in the middle of he field, you make it a lot harder to just avoid him. Then he might actually be taking away half the field rather than just whichever WR splits out to the defences left.

Obviously Champ isn't moving this season, but anyone who hasn't noticed more balls getting caught on Champ than a couple of years ago isn't pauying attention. He's still a top corner, but he's not what he was.they refuse to see my point! they continue to try and portray my trake on champ as something it is not ! I continue to say that champ is being ignored, and they say well heck how can he catch INTs if the qb ignores him?
I call it wasted talent, and they accuse me of saying champ is a waste. they are mentaly retarded. its pathetic.

[Chef Zambini]

144 times in 16 games the top WR caught a pass against the broncos! where is the Champo impact in that? whop is he shutting down?
what part of the field is he taking away?
how many NFL receivers got 100 receptions in 16 games?
maybe 10?
and no-one came close to 144 receptions so the top WR was way above the norm when facing the broncos !
wow, chAMP MAKES A HUGE IMPACT ON OUR DEFENSE PLAYING CORNER!

[MOtorboat]

they refuse to see my point! they continue to try and portray my trake on champ as something it is not ! I continue to say that champ is being ignored, and they say well heck how can he catch INTs if the qb ignores him?
I call it wasted talent, and they accuse me of saying champ is a waste. they are mentaly retarded. its pathetic.

No. I see your point. Your point is stoopid. And has been for the last seven years.

Seriously, its beyond stupidity that drives your drivel. He's ignored? Yeah, he's ignored, because of you throw it his way, bad things happen. Of course he's ******* ignored, because if he wasn't he'd have a ton of interceptions.

Did he refuse your daughter's hand at marriage? What is it that makes you hate him so much?

Because its not intelligent. It's stoopid.

[SR]

144 times in 16 games the top WR caught a pass against the broncos! where is the Champo impact in that? whop is he shutting down?
what part of the field is he taking away?
how many NFL receivers got 100 receptions in 16 games?
maybe 10?
and no-one came close to 144 receptions so the top WR was way above the norm when facing the broncos !
wow, chAMP MAKES A HUGE IMPACT ON OUR DEFENSE PLAYING CORNER!

Do you put THC in the shit you cook and eat?

Do you honestly not understand that the ball doesn't come Champ's way because his coverage is so good that the other team's QB doesn't wanna risk an INT or incomplete pass when they know they can throw at the other corner who isn't even close to being in Champ's league and move down the field? And the 144 receptions was for opposing team's starting receivers. No team has just one starting receiver...

Since you obviously now everything, tell me how many passes were completed against Champ and how many we're against Goodman.

[SR]

they refuse to see my point! they continue to try and portray my trake on champ as something it is not ! I continue to say that champ is being ignored, and they say well heck how can he catch INTs if the qb ignores him?
I call it wasted talent, and they accuse me of saying champ is a waste. they are mentaly retarded. its pathetic.

I'm getting tired of your constant hypocritical name calling.

[MOtorboat]

they refuse to see my point! they continue to try and portray my trake on champ as something it is not ! I continue to say that champ is being ignored, and they say well heck how can he catch INTs if the qb ignores him?
I call it wasted talent, and they accuse me of saying champ is a waste. they are mentaly retarded. its pathetic.

No. I see your point. Your point is stoopid. And has been for the last seven years.

[MOtorboat]

I'm getting tired of your constant hypocritical name calling.

Which, for some reason, is allowed.

[SR]

Which, for some reason, is allowed.

Every time i do it I get an email from a mod. Weird. Usually that means someone reported the post. Should we report Zam? ;)

[MOtorboat]

Every time i do it I get an email from a mod. Weird. Usually that means someone reported the post. Should we report Zam? ;)

It is queer that he can insult anyone he chooses.

[Npba900]

I think that's kinds Zam's point. Because Champ is almost always lined up at LCB (unless someone has some evidence otherwise) it makes it easy for an OC to gameplan away from Champ.

Put Champ in the middle of he field, you make it a lot harder to just avoid him. Then he might actually be taking away half the field rather than just whichever WR splits out to the defences left.

Obviously Champ isn't moving this season, but anyone who hasn't noticed more balls getting caught on Champ than a couple of years ago isn't pauying attention. He's still a top corner, but he's not what he was.

Let's also keep in mind the term "Shut Down Corner" really doesn't exist in today's NFL due to the rule changes over the years that benefit the WR and QB. The hands off--no chuck rule after 5 yards has all but taken away a CB's main weapon against covering/shutting down or knocking out of sync the timing WR's have with the QB. You also take into consideration of today's WR's are bigger, taller, stronger and sometimes faster than today's CB's, only adds to the reality that a true shut down corner of years past is beginning to be an after thought.

I'm not taking nothing away from Champ! He's adjusted his game nicely to all the rule changes benefiting the offense, the QB and WR's. But lets recognize the negative impact the NFL rule changes against CB's has had. I 'd say the no hands-chuck rule against CB's is like a QB only allowed to pass the ball twice vs 4 times during an offensive series.

[SR]

It is queer that he can insult anyone he chooses.

Which begs the question: who is Zam REALLY in bed with?

[cmc0605]

Are you sure about that. I'm inclined to agree with Zam that Champ pretty much always lines up on the defense's left. I can't recall a single time I've noticed Champ line up on the right. Granted TV feeds don't tend to be ideal for watching where CBs line up, but I'd think I'd notice it once in a while, or the broadcaster would do a segment now and then iso-ing Champ following a specific WR. I dunno, I remember a couple seasons ago Champ played some slot CB. And maybe the other team almost always splits their best WR out to the d's left. I also remember times when Champ was put on Gates...and it was obvious watching the game.

Maybe someone has broken dowwn some coaches film and seen Champ moving from side to side following a specific receiver. But I can't say I've noticed it.

Champ typically lines up on the left side, but there's been plenty of times where I've seen him line up on the defenses right side too. I remember back in his big year with Shanahan, anytime I see the other QB even look to their right side, I was like "here comes a pick!"; that wasn't the case last year...not necessarily because of Champ's production drop-off, but because Goodman, Harris, or someone else often took the LCB role (so it largely depends on defensive coordinator and play call as well).

It depends a lot too on whether the other teams #1 receiver is "elite" or just a typical below-average to average #1, as well as the teams depth at receiver. There's a big drop off between Megatron and whoever Seattle, Jacksonville, or many other teams have playing the top receiver spot. If the latter, then Goodman might line up against the #1 guy if they went to the offenses left side, and Bailey might line up as LCB just because right-handed QBs like to throw to their right side more. With other teams, if a team has several talented WRs or the QB don't necessarily have a favorite target (like New Orleans) it might not make sense to have Bailey targeting a specific guy. Sometimes the "best one" might line up in the slot position where Bailey struggled, in which case he would not follow.

As an aside, I still think Bailey is one of the best tackling corners in the game. I've noticed a bit of a drop off last season in that aspect, but typically you don't have a whole lot of confidence in DBs making a tough tackle against a RB for example. With Champ I typically think of it as automatic. That aspect of his game I will miss even more than his coverage ability. That, along with his ability to play all over the field, is why I'd take a young Champ over Revis any day.

[BroncoWave]

Every time i do it I get an email from a mod. Weird. Usually that means someone reported the post. Should we report Zam? ;)

Same here. I've been banned for way less than this guy is getting away with.

[Chef Zambini]

Do you put THC in the shit you cook and eat?

Do you honestly not understand that the ball doesn't come Champ's way because his coverage is so good that the other team's QB doesn't wanna risk an INT or incomplete pass when they know they can throw at the other corner who isn't even close to being in Champ's league and move down the field? And the 144 receptions was for opposing team's starting receivers. No team has just one starting receiver...

Since you obviously now everything, tell me how many passes were completed against Champ and how many we're against Goodman.duh .

[Chef Zambini]

I surrender. and i apologise for the name calling. please forogive my pathetic attempts at enlightenment.
it was an exercise in futility, my bad.
sorry if i actually hurt anyones feelings.
champ is the greatest, we are lucky to have him.

[TXBRONC]

Notice I said "I think". I didn't claim to have any knowledge that was the case, just stating my opinion.

I didn't say you stated it as fact.

[TXBRONC]

I've been on record saying several times saying BB is the most overrated personnel person in the NFL. If he doesn't luck out on a 6th round pick (and the subsequent injury that got him on the field) he wouldn't have a fraction of the reverence he currently gets.


agreed

I'll second that.

[SR]

duh .

All the BS claims you made and firm stances you made then you fold when someone asks you to provide concrete evidence to support your claims?

[Chef Zambini]

Since you obviously now everything, tell me how many passes were completed against Champ and how many we're against Goodman.


are you using your parents computer?
wait for the dial-tone!
why would anyone throw a ball near champ when they can throw the ball AT goodman?
yes, thats exactly my point !
and if your top WR wants to make catches and YAC for his team, why would you line him up on CHAMPS side of the field?

how many ways do I have to say it?
so champ is ignored/ game pl;anned out/ avoided, rendered moot, inconsequential, not part of the play, aint gonna be seein no balls , wasted, isloted, uninvolved, dismantled . emasculated, DECOY!
other than following around a receiver of the OFFENSES CHOOSING, champ is by design, taken out of the equasion, and our opponents play 10 on 10 football with the ten of their choosing.
Champ could be USSAIN BOLT, LEBRON JAMES and ray nitchke all rolled into onehe could be ironman, and yet...
as a corner with a man on man assignment, he could still be manuevered out of making any impact for the defense.

[Chef Zambini]

that moron mike nolan who wouldnt know a defense if it kissed him on the backside, TWICE asked Champ to consider playing SAFETY and both times, in D.C. and in denver, champ vetoed the idea.
If I have any real problem with champ, its that he feels comfortable in his role of DECOY follower

[MOtorboat]

that moron mike nolan who wouldnt know a defense if it kissed him on the backside, TWICE asked Champ to consider playing SAFETY and both times, in D.C. and in denver, champ vetoed the idea.

Proof?

[SR]

I'm pretty sure Champ was never asked to play safety in DC

[SR]

And I'm sure that since Champ is so worthless as a CB his 10 Pro Bowl selections, which is the most all time for a CB, must be a fraud

[Northman]

I'm pretty sure Champ was never asked to play safety in DC

Im convinced that Zam is bi-polar.

[MOtorboat]

Im convinced that Zam is bi-polar.

In this particular case, he's made something up to support his pre-conceived opinion. He doesn't like Champ. He thinks he's arrogant, so he creates things, or twists words to fit this pre-conceived notion. Then uses the anecdotes as proof that his opinion was correct, even if there's no evidence to support any of it.

[Northman]

In this particular case, he's made something up to support his pre-conceived opinion. He doesn't like Champ. He thinks he's arrogant, so he creates things, or twists words to fit this pre-conceived notion. Then uses the anecdotes as proof that his opinion was correct, even if there's no evidence to support any of it.

Dont forget likes to play "victim" when people point out his fallacies.

[Chef Zambini]

I'm pretty sure Champ was never asked to play safety in DCive gin on line and found old on line conversations about the move but archive evidence from the local newspapers requires joining and PAYMENT, and its not worth it to me to pay money to set some clowns straight.
NOLAN, bopth in d.c. and denver proposed the move to champ, he declined.
I did not make that up !

[SR]

Is that English?

[MOtorboat]

ive gin on line and found old on line conversations about the move but archive evidence from the local newspapers requires joining and PAYMENT, and its not worth it to me to pay money to set some clowns straight.
NOLAN, bopth in d.c. and denver proposed the move to champ, he declined.
I did not make that up !

How convenient.

[Northman]

ive gin on line and found old on line conversations about the move but archive evidence from the local newspapers requires joining and PAYMENT, and its not worth it to me to pay money to set some clowns straight.
NOLAN, bopth in d.c. and denver proposed the move to champ, he declined.
I did not make that up !

Your full of shit. Ive been in Maryland since 91' and get both news on Ravens and Redskins frequently. Nolan NEVER asked Champ to move to safety in Washington.

[Chef Zambini]

Your full of shit. Ive been in Maryland since 91' and get both news on Ravens and Redskins frequently. Nolan NEVER asked Champ to move to safety in Washington.if you simply google mike nolan redskins champ baily safety you will see plenty of articles rteferencing that very subject. are you a member of the washington post, check out their archives.

[MOtorboat]

if you simply google mike nolan redskins champ baily safety you will see plenty of articles rteferencing that very subject. are you a member of the washington post, check out their archives.

And there are no references to Nolan moving Bailey to safety on either google search for that term, or the archives of the Washington Post.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

This was written 3 days ago:


Champ Bailey says he doesn't anticipate a move to safety. "I'm a realist, though, if I see myself on tape and I think it's time to make a move, I'll know it's time to make a move, I'll be the first to see it, I'll be the first to know it," Bailey said, smiling. "In my mind, though, I might not say it right away, I might wait for somebody to ask."

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/tag/_/name/champ-bailey

Doesn't appear to me that anyone has previously suggested for Champ to move to safety???????

[Northman]

This was written 3 days ago:


http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/tag/_/name/champ-bailey

Doesn't appear to me that anyone has previously suggested for Champ to move to safety???????

Ooops, you hear that? I think somebody just flushed a Zambini turtlehead down the toilet.

[SR]

I'm sure he'll say Carol is wrong

[shank]

WTE, please forfeit your username.

[bcbronc]

He's one of the best stride for stride corners that has ever lived. You don't move him from corner. It's not even thought about. It's idiotic.

Right, so idiotic that even Champ acknowledges the possibility of moving one day. It's so not even thought about that Carol posts articles written about whether Champ is staying at corner. lol.


Rod Woodson is the ONLY example. One example for thousands of cornerbacks, and 100s of pro bowl level cornerbacks, ONE got moved.

Why? Because an elite cornerback has a unique skill set that you can't duplicate.

Aeneas Williams is another example. And probably a great comparison to Champ. He extended his career by a couple of years playing FS.

I do agree that MOST elite cornerbacks don't have the skill set to move to S. Primetime or Revis for example, wouldn't think either would make a good safety, but both are/were great CBs. But SOME elite CBs do have a skill set that transfers. So since it's such an idiotic idea to you, what part of Champ's game do you feel wouldn't transfer to FS? And saying he's a great CB so you don't move him doesn't address the question, because sometime soon Champ will have lost enough physically that he'll no longer be an elite CB.

Personally, when that day comes, I'd rather have a pro-bowl calibre FS than an average #2 CB.


This was written 3 days ago:


http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/tag/_/name/champ-bailey

Doesn't appear to me that anyone has previously suggested for Champ to move to safety???????

Sorry Carol, this is a huge leap in logic on your part. In the context of the interview, Champ waiting for someone to ask him doesn't mean he wasn't asked 10 years ago. I don't know if he was or wasn't, but this comment doesn't provide evidence one way or another.

It does, however, show some people are at least thinking about it. That shows Mo is talking out his ass as much as anyone in this thread. :coffee:

[MOtorboat]

A.) Champ hasn't lost it. So it's not time to switch. What he acknowledged.

B.) Shutdown corner is much more important than safety. That's not debatable, no matter what Zam says.

C.) Well, you got me folks, there were all of two all pro cornerbacks that moved to safety. :rolleyes:

D.) Zam has been wanting Bailey to move to safety since he was traded for, thus showing the nature of his argument.

E.) Not a leap in logic by Carol, because it didn't happen. Bailey is a cornerback.

[Ravage!!!]

Right, so idiotic that even Champ acknowledges the possibility of moving one day. It's so not even thought about that Carol posts articles written about whether Champ is staying at corner. lol.



I don't think anyone said it wasn't a good idea for someday down the road. The point is, when a corner is as good at being a CORNER as Champ is, you don't move him. When he's diminished enough at corner to HAVE to move to safety in order to extend his career, and his ability to help a team, THEN that is the time you think about making the move.

However, right now is not that time. Despite Zam's ridiculous statements of inaccurate facts, Champ is one of the VERY best in the NFL at his position. No coach is going to take a top corner and switch them to safety while they are still playing at a HIGH level from the corner position. THAT is the discussion. Zam thinks Champ is purely doing his best to "hide" over on one side of the field and "live off of reputation" by doing nothing at all. Its absurd, its ridiculous, and its completely unsubstantiated.

Obviously since Rod Woodson moved to corner after losing so much from his knee injury, that people talk about moving Champ Bailey to safety. The discussion is inevitable that its even brought up. But being CONSIDERED a 'real' option at this time in Champ's career, is not a wise decision. That's what everyone has been saying....except Zam.

[SR]

Well said Rav

[topscribe]

Those other teams also had great talent around the QB for the most part. If you look past Brady, NE isn't exactly loaded with talent, and they really never have been. Welker, Gronk, and Wilfork are great players but past that their talent level leaves alot to be desired. I'm not saying BB isn't a good coach, but I think he's mediocre to bad at evaluating talent.

As far as personnel departments go, I'd rank teams like GB, Pitt, Philly, NYG and Baltimore far above NE.
A little off the topic, but that gives me hope for the Broncos. They have great
players in Bailey, Dumervil, and Miller, and very good players in Clady, Kuper,
McGahee, D.J., and Porter, and maybe DT, Decker, Tamme, Adams, Warren,
Harris, Wolfe, and Hillman, et al. Add Peyton to the mix . . . does that perhaps
give them a peer to NE?
.

[NightTerror218]

With the help in the secondary finally I could see champ/porter having 6 ints between them alone. Champ with shut out a WR and QB will try to pick on Porter or QB will being forcing ball into WRs who are covered well and make mistakes. I think more ints will come from safeties and nickle CB.

[NightTerror218]

A little off the topic, but that gives me hope for the Broncos. They have great
players in Bailey, Dumervil, and Miller, and very good players in Clady, Kuper,
McGahee, D.J., and Porter, and maybe DT, Decker, Tamme, Adams, Warren,
Harris, Wolfe, and Hillman, et al. Add Peyton to the mix . . . does that perhaps
give them a peer to NE?
.

The one thing lacking is experience together. Getting timing down and knowing what the other will do before he does it, such as WR making a break and ball already on the fly. Or WR adjusting route and QB picking up on it. Such as Welker/Brady combo.

[Chef Zambini]

I don't think anyone said it wasn't a good idea for someday down the road. The point is, when a corner is as good at being a CORNER as Champ is, you don't move him. When he's diminished enough at corner to HAVE to move to safety in order to extend his career, and his ability to help a team, THEN that is the time you think about making the move.

However, right now is not that time. Despite Zam's ridiculous statements of inaccurate facts, Champ is one of the VERY best in the NFL at his position. No coach is going to take a top corner and switch them to safety while they are still playing at a HIGH level from the corner position. THAT is the discussion. Zam thinks Champ is purely doing his best to "hide" over on one side of the field and "live off of reputation" by doing nothing at all. Its absurd, its ridiculous, and its completely unsubstantiated.

Obviously since Rod Woodson moved to corner after losing so much from his knee injury, that people talk about moving Champ Bailey to safety. The discussion is inevitable that its even brought up. But being CONSIDERED a 'real' option at this time in Champ's career, is not a wise decision. That's what everyone has been saying....except Zam.
you completly misrepresent what I have tried toi suggest as an ADVANTAGE in moving champ to corner.
why is that not surprizing.

Ihave stated so many times that as a corner, champ is easily ignored.
as a safety he can decide where he can play,
who or where he will cover, and the QB has no pre snap insight.
but go ahead with the zam bashing you and otherts excell at that endeavor.

champs motivations as to why he has refused to move are moot.

I am confident he would have a more positive impact for our defense if he was not just locking up on 1 receiver and reducing the game to ten on ten,
especially when that 1 receiver is NOT the #1 receiver!

MO's own stats suggest that 144 times last year the opponents #1 receiver caught a pass against us
thats 44% of all completions against us !

so those of you who hang by the notion that champ locks down the #1 guy all game long,
all season long,
need to find a new reality !
the NFLs best reciever did not catch 144 passes last season ! so against us the top receiver is performing above the NFLs best !
where is cahmp?
on the wrong side of the field to shut down anything other thaN A DECOY OF THE offenses CHOOSING! if you cant recognize this reality then you fail to have an objective thought on the matter and just want to sling some mud or cling to your chaMP JERSEY AND MUTTER SOME MONTRA WHILE YOU ROCK IN THE CORNER OF YOUR ROOM.

[NightTerror218]

you completly misrepresent what I have tried toi suggest as an ADVANTAGE in moving champ to corner.
why is that not surprizing.

Ihave stated so many times that as a corner, champ is easily ignored.
as a safety he can decide where he can play,
who or where he will cover, and the QB has no pre snap insight.
but go ahead with the zam bashing you and otherts excell at that endeavor.

champs motivations as to why he has refused to move are moot.

I am confident he would have a more positive impact for our defense if he was not just locking up on 1 receiver and reducing the game to ten on ten,
especially when that 1 receiver is NOT the #1 receiver!

MO's own stats suggest that 144 times last year the opponents #1 receiver caught a pass against us
thats 44% of all completions against us !

so those of you who hang by the notion that champ locks down the #1 guy all game long,
all season long,
need to find a new reality !
the NFLs best reciever did not catch 144 passes last season ! so against us the top receiver is performing above the NFLs best !
where is cahmp?
on the wrong side of the field to shut down anything other thaN A DECOY OF THE offenses CHOOSING! if you cant recognize this reality then you fail to have an objective thought on the matter and just want to sling some mud or cling to your chaMP JERSEY AND MUTTER SOME MONTRA WHILE YOU ROCK IN THE CORNER OF YOUR ROOM.

Zam the thing is Bailey tends to cover the #1 most of the time or shutting down 1 side of the field letting safeties cheat over depending on the routes. Bailey has shut down Fitzgerald, Bowe, and numerous others in last couple years. What he needed was help on the other side of field.

If he moves to safety does not mean he will be able to free lance like Polulamo does.

[MOtorboat]

I shouldn't even have brought a real stat into the conversation knowing Zam would just misrepresent it, when there's no context to it.

You can't even use the stat in the context he wants to, unless you compare it to all 32 teams, which I didn't do.

[Ravage!!!]

Zam thinks that a safety can just roam freely without responsibilities. Safeties can be ignored and manipulated as much as any other player on the field.. and in the meantime, they aren't limiting anyone at WR. Zam has proved time-and-time-and-time-and-time again not to know very much about how football works. Paying any attention to his ideas and thoughts on the matter are pretty moot and non-productive.

[Chef Zambini]

Zam the thing is Bailey tends to cover the #1 most of the time or shutting down 1 side of the field letting safeties cheat over depending on the routes. Bailey has shut down Fitzgerald, Bowe, and numerous others in last couple years. What he needed was help on the other side of field.

If he moves to safety does not mean he will be able to free lance like Polulamo does.why not?
the only reason to justify taking him out of the role of corner and moving him to safety is so he can do the same things troy and ed reed do.
please do me a favor and explain to MO that he himself said the opponents top WR caught 133 passes against us!
so obviously champ haD LITTLE IMPACT on the opponents top receiver! either champ didnt cover him ( thats reality)
or champ did a shitty job( tyhats the only alternative.
explain to MO why he cant deny BOTH options !
and YOU should no better than saying a CORNER takes away HALF the field !

[bcbronc]

A.) Champ hasn't lost it. So it's not time to switch. What he acknowledged.

Champ hasn't lost all of it, but he has lost SOME.


B.) Shutdown corner is much more important than safety. That's not debatable, no matter what Zam says.

lol, of course it's debatable. What a ridiculous thing to say. If there was one indisputable best way to play football, everybody would be doing it. You say shutdown corner is so much more important than safety, yet Pittsburgh doesn't have one. Neither does Baltimore, the other best defense of the past decade. Both have elite S's though. NE didn't have one for their Superbowls, unless you consider Ty Law a shutdown corner. Had a great safety though. I don't consider Charles Woodson a "shut down" corner, but he's certainly elite. Backed up by an All-Pro S though when they won. Giants don't have great safeties...or corners. TB, Rolle and Lynch. I wonder if Philly would have traded one of their shutdown CBs for a S this past season. NYJ has the great CB.

Since it's not debatable, you name me a Superbowl champ that had elite CBs and average safeties, and I'll name one that had the opposite. Let's see who runs out of teams first.


C.) Well, you got me folks, there were all of two all pro cornerbacks that moved to safety. :rolleyes:

Again, what part of Champ's game do you feel wouldn't transfer to safety? Don't duck the question this time.


D.) Zam has been wanting Bailey to move to safety since he was traded for, thus showing the nature of his argument.


So Zam wants his best players in the middle of the field where they can influence plays sideline to sideline. Many great coaches have followed similar philosophy. In Champ's case, I wouldn't agree with moving him in his prime--he's one of the all-time great CBs--but he's not in his prime anymore. It's obviously not going to happen this year, put as soon as next year? If he's lost another half-step, it might be time imo.


E.) Not a leap in logic by Carol, because it didn't happen. Bailey is a cornerback.

being correct doesn't mean your logic is sound.


I don't think anyone said it wasn't a good idea for someday down the road.

I think Mo has.


The point is, when a corner is as good at being a CORNER as Champ is, you don't move him. When he's diminished enough at corner to HAVE to move to safety in order to extend his career, and his ability to help a team, THEN that is the time you think about making the move.

No disagreement. The only thing is whether you'd rather be a year ahead of the curve or a year behind. I mean lets' be honest, Champ is ancient when it comes to playing the game the way he does.

[Chef Zambini]

I shouldn't even have brought a real stat into the conversation knowing Zam would just misrepresent it, when there's no context to it.

You can't even use the stat in the context he wants to, unless you compare it to all 32 teams, which I didn't do.how many catches did the opponents top receiver catch against us last year?
what % was that of the total receptions?
who was covering the top reciver ?
ytou know the answer to those questions yet you FAIL to acknowledge the reality! dont balame me that all your assertions have been blown out of the water! you loaded the canon !

[SR]

why not?
the only reason to justify taking him out of the role of corner and moving him to safety is so he can do the same things troy and ed reed do.
please do me a favor and explain to MO that he himself said the opponents top WR caught 133 passes against us!
so obviously champ haD LITTLE IMPACT on the opponents top receiver! either champ didnt cover him ( thats reality)
or champ did a shitty job( tyhats the only alternative.
explain to MO why he cant deny BOTH options !
and YOU should no better than saying a CORNER takes away HALF the field !

For the 37281947 time, it was the STARTING RECEIVERS, with an S, that caught 144 passes against the Defense. For someone who tries real hard to prove his point, you sure can't read worth a shit.

[SR]

how many catches did the opponents top receiver catch against us last year?
what % was that of the total receptions?
who was covering the top reciver ?
ytou know the answer to those questions yet you FAIL to acknowledge the reality! dont balame me that all your assertions have been blown out of the water! you loaded the canon !

Don't grill MO with questions when you can't even answer the ones people ask you.

[EastCoastBronco]

I like Champ.
His career and durability remind me of Darrel Green from the Redskins.
Even though I don't think he's as good now as he ever was, he's still better than half the corners in the damn league.

[MOtorboat]

how many catches did the opponents top receiver catch against us last year?
what % was that of the total receptions?
who was covering the top reciver ?
ytou know the answer to those questions yet you FAIL to acknowledge the reality! dont balame me that all your assertions have been blown out of the water! you loaded the canon !

Again. I obviously, shouldn't have brought the stat to begin with, because unless we compare the stat to all 32 NFL teams, it's a useless stat, that you've taken completely out of context, which is of no real surprise.

[Chef Zambini]

how is it out of context?
it is not ! you just hate the reality that it reveals! you are angered because I used your stat to prove ny point!
144 times the opponents top receiver caught a pass against the broncos so, there are only 2 alternatives.
1. if champ is ALWAYS covering the top receiverhe sucjed !
so we all know THAT cant be true
or 2, at least 1444 times, which is 43% of all the completions against us, the top receiver performed at a rate that esceeds the numbers of all receivers in the NFL, which can only mean the QB had a field day against us, finding it easy to avoid champ, who was off chasing decoys.
its one or the other.
we all know its #2 which means that champ does NOT take the top receiver , every game, every play !
he stays on his side of the field the vast majority of the time.
\ and NO secondary player takes away HALF the field! thanks to your other post its crystal clear that in zone or man, a defender is assigned anywhere from a fifth to a deep fourth of the field.
so lets stop trying to kid ourselves.
CHAMP DOES NOT LOCK DOWN THE OPPONENTS TOP RECEIVER.
CHAMP DOES NOT TAKE AWAY HALF THE FIELD.
your arguments are valueless when they stand on a platform of fantasy and non-truth.

[MOtorboat]

First of all, it's the top two or three receivers for each team, not the top receiver, so there's out of context No. 1.

Out of context No. 2 is the fact that there IS NO context to the number, because we don't know if that's higher or lower than average across the league.

I brought up the number, because your original numbers were SO factually wrong it was absurd. And then you use the real, much lower number, to then make your same ridiculous point. That's out of context No. 3.

[Chef Zambini]

The Broncos gave up 144 receptions to receivers listed as starting receivers in games this season (some teams started three, some two). That's 43 percent. I have no clue what that number means, but I'm going to guess its below league average.i found this post from you. I must in all sincerity apologize.
I thought it said top receiver not STARTING receivers.
I have not been corredt in my referances to this post, or what it implies.
I was mistaken.
but the FACT remains that as a corner playing one on one champ is simply ignored, and because he does NOT take the opponents top recveiver every play, but instead stays on his side of ther field the VAST MAJORITY of the time. he covers who the opponent wantsw him to cover, sending him a decoy to take him away from the actiuon !
my opinion is simply this:
all of champs great skill and taklent woul;d have a greater impact if he was a safety!
If he would lock on to the top receiver every game, every play, I would not hold that opinion, but he does NOT take the top receiver one on one all game long.


again, first and foremost, I apologise misrepresenting your original post.

[Ravage!!!]

Champ hasn't lost all of it, but he has lost SOME.

Not enough to move to safety. He's still easily a top 3 Corner in the NFL. That may not be THE top, but how close do you want to be?


lol, of course it's debatable. What a ridiculous thing to say. If there was one indisputable best way to play football, everybody would be doing it. You say shutdown corner is so much more important than safety, yet Pittsburgh doesn't have one. Neither does Baltimore, the other best defense of the past decade. Both have elite S's though. NE didn't have one for their Superbowls, unless you consider Ty Law a shutdown corner. Had a great safety though. I don't consider Charles Woodson a "shut down" corner, but he's certainly elite. Backed up by an All-Pro S though when they won. Giants don't have great safeties...or corners. TB, Rolle and Lynch. I wonder if Philly would have traded one of their shutdown CBs for a S this past season. NYJ has the great CB.
Pitt doesn't have a top Corner.... what does that have to do with them not considering a top corner more important?? Same with the Giants or Baltimore?? Neither of those teams MOVED an elite Corner to safety.

Ty Law was considered the best CB in the NFL when they won their SUper Bowl, and shut down nearly EVERY WR he faced. Absolutely he was a shut-down. You convenietly forgot to mention Barber with Tampa Bay.

No one said that you can't win a Super Bowl without a shut-down corner. Thats not even the debate, so I'm not sure why you are trying to prove it as a point, bc. :confused: NY won without a top corner and a top safety (as you pointed out)....so does that mean we shouldn't have either one??


Since it's not debatable, you name me a Superbowl champ that had elite CBs and average safeties, and I'll name one that had the opposite. Let's see who runs out of teams first.
The reason he stated that its not debatable is based on the amount of money that teams PAY top corners vs top safeties. Its not close. GMs and Coaches have repeatedly said that a top corner is more valuable to a team, than a safety (this discussion was asked to them when Woodson made the commnt that he would play safety). So it may be debatable between you and I, and Zam and everyone else, but when it comes to people in the NFL, its pretty widely acknowledged that a top corner is more valuable to a team than safety is.



Again, what part of Champ's game do you feel wouldn't transfer to safety? Don't duck the question this time.

Experience at safety.


So Zam wants his best players in the middle of the field where they can influence plays sideline to sideline. Many great coaches have followed similar philosophy. In Champ's case, I wouldn't agree with moving him in his prime--he's one of the all-time great CBs--but he's not in his prime anymore. It's obviously not going to happen this year, put as soon as next year? If he's lost another half-step, it might be time imo.
Possibly


being correct doesn't mean your logic is sound.
?? :confused: ??


No disagreement. The only thing is whether you'd rather be a year ahead of the curve or a year behind. I mean lets' be honest, Champ is ancient when it comes to playing the game the way he does.
Why is it one or the other? What makes you think that you are either ahead or behind? You use one of the best corners at his primary position for as long as he can, and then you move him IF he can be moved. Thats not "behind"..thats on time.

[Ravage!!!]

all of champs great skill and taklent woul;d have a greater impact if he was a safety!
If he would lock on to the top receiver every game, every play, I would not hold that opinion, but he does NOT take the top receiver one on one all game long.

No corner in the NFL does this. None. That would require that the defense play man-to-man all game long, and NO defense does this. Its the easiest defense to beat on a consistent basis.

[Chef Zambini]

ravage you are smart. you know your football, you must therefore also know that teams often employ mixed coverages of zaone and man on the same play!
REVIS he goes with his receiver while everyone else plays zone
assmugger when he was a raider ALWAYS took away the top receiver every play every game, while the rest of the team played zone or man.
you know this is true,
CHAMP, you also know stays on his side of the field with very rare exception! and in fact, the occasional time when champ does folow his assignment to the other side of the field, those are most likely the times that we are in mixed coverage, a combination of zone and man.
you know this is true.

[Chef Zambini]

you also know that my detractors continue to portray champ as either
1. the guy who locks down the #1 receiver on every play, or
2. he takles away half the field.
you know neither is even close to the truth.

yes we do play zone, yes champ is very talented, yes QBs are smart enough to not throw the ball his way, and that same intellect tells them to line up their best receiver, away from champ because more than 90 % of the time, he is not going to cover that guy, but insted stay on hios side of the field.
and even when he does cover that guy, they just send the 2 of them on a deep sideline run, taking champ away from the action.

[Ravage!!!]

ravage you are smart. you know your football, you must therefore also know that teams often employ mixed coverages of zaone and man on the same play!
REVIS he goes with his receiver while everyone else plays zone
assmugger when he was a raider ALWAYS took away the top receiver every play every game, while the rest of the team played zone or man.
you know this is true,
CHAMP, you also know stays on his side of the field with very rare exception! and in fact, the occasional time when champ does folow his assignment to the other side of the field, those are most likely the times that we are in mixed coverage, a combination of zone and man.
you know this is true.
Revis doesn't play man-up on every play. When we play man-to-man, Champ is on the guy that the defense wants/needs him to be on. Sometimes when a team has two good WRs, it makes more sense to play man-up on the 2nd guy and have a safety and bracket on the #1. You are making claims about defenses that you have absolutely NO knowledge about, and YOU Know this to be true.

You don't like Champ, have never liked Champ, and your entire argument about Champ being used to follow "decoy" WRs is absurd to the highest of degrees....BECAUSE you don't like Champ. I've not heard a SINGLE person, with football knowledge, make these kinds of claims about any corner in the NFL...especially Bailey.

You attempt to make it sound as though Safeties can not be manipulated as much as corners are. You make it sound as if Champ couldn't simply be avoided at safety. The funny part is, that your very argument that "Champ is avoided" points out that teams don't throw in the direction of Champ. Thats what good corners do. If you don't believe that top corners are important to teams, BECAUSE of that, than why do they pay top corners so much more than top safeties?

Also..... please please please stop with this "Champ doesn't do this...." junk. Champ isn't calling the defense. Champ isn't telling the coach that he "won't" play here nor there. Champ isn't making the defensive schemes, drawing up the gameplans, and isn't telling the coaches he refuses to man-up on anyone. If you actually believe that allllllll these coaches are trying to "hide" Champ off to the side and not use him to the absolute BEST way that would benefit the defense, then you are fooling yourself into believing your own conspiracy theories.

No-one has EVER ever ever, come out and suggested that Champ is riding the coaches to stay on his side of the field, and the defensive coaches are doing their best to hide Champ's lack of skills. Coaches and reporters have come out about a LOT of players over the years, throughout the NFL...GREAT PLAYERS... pointing out that their age has gotten the better of them, and their skills have diminished enough that they have to be replaced, moved, or substituted in certain situations. If you believe that allll the coaches and sports writers are hiding this about Champ....well...then you are worse off in your own hate than you realized.

[Ravage!!!]

and even when he does cover that guy, they just send the 2 of them on a deep sideline run, taking champ away from the action.

omg... unbelievable.

[SR]

Rav, don't waste your time man. It's like trying to teach calculus to a door knob.

[Timmy!]

:pound: wow. Just wow.

[Chef Zambini]

Revis doesn't play man-up on every play. When we play man-to-man, Champ is on the guy that the defense wants/needs him to be on. Sometimes when a team has two good WRs, it makes more sense to play man-up on the 2nd guy and have a safety and bracket on the #1. You are making claims about defenses that you have absolutely NO knowledge about, and YOU Know this to be true.

You don't like Champ, have never liked Champ, and your entire argument about Champ being used to follow "decoy" WRs is absurd to the highest of degrees....BECAUSE you don't like Champ. I've not heard a SINGLE person, with football knowledge, make these kinds of claims about any corner in the NFL...especially Bailey.

You attempt to make it sound as though Safeties can not be manipulated as much as corners are. You make it sound as if Champ couldn't simply be avoided at safety. The funny part is, that your very argument that "Champ is avoided" points out that teams don't throw in the direction of Champ. Thats what good corners do. If you don't believe that top corners are important to teams, BECAUSE of that, than why do they pay top corners so much more than top safeties?

Also..... please please please stop with this "Champ doesn't do this...." junk. Champ isn't calling the defense. Champ isn't telling the coach that he "won't" play here nor there. Champ isn't making the defensive schemes, drawing up the gameplans, and isn't telling the coaches he refuses to man-up on anyone. If you actually believe that allllllll these coaches are trying to "hide" Champ off to the side and not use him to the absolute BEST way that would benefit the defense, then you are fooling yourself into believing your own conspiracy theories.

No-one has EVER ever ever, come out and suggested that Champ is riding the coaches to stay on his side of the field, and the defensive coaches are doing their best to hide Champ's lack of skills. Coaches and reporters have come out about a LOT of players over the years, throughout the NFL...GREAT PLAYERS... pointing out that their age has gotten the better of them, and their skills have diminished enough that they have to be replaced, moved, or substituted in certain situations. If you believe that allll the coaches and sports writers are hiding this about Champ....well...then you are worse off in your own hate than you realized.you are in denial.

[SR]

Or you could realize that when EVERYONE agrees that YOU are wrong, it's because you're wrong.

[Chef Zambini]

you are in denial.HONESTLY, I do consider that.
but in the past I have been chastized for my opinion of other broncos, by the vast majority and proven to be correct once the smoke cleared.
examples/
shanahan
lelie
JMCD at 6-1
hillis
portis
plummer
moreno
and others.
when I am wrong, I admit it.
my opinion on champ is that he could be more effective, a GREATER VALUE to our team if he played safety.
its an opinion.
i see what he does now.
I see what safties like reed and palomalo do for their teams, and I think, gosh, a guy like champ with so much talent could be far more effective in the roile of safety then following some clown to the bathroom.
its my opinion, i recognize the majority of you dont share it.

[Timmy!]

Now zam is answering his own posts.....

[SR]

HONESTLY, I do consider that.
but in the past I have been chastized for my opinion of other broncos, by the vast majority and proven to be correct once the smoke cleared.
examples/
shanahan
lelie
JMCD at 6-1
hillis
portis
plummer
moreno
and others.
when I am wrong, I admit it.
my opinion on champ is that he could be more effective, a GREATER VALUE to our team if he played safety.
its an opinion.
i see what he does now.
I see what safties like reed and palomalo do for their teams, and I think, gosh, a guy like champ with so much talent could be far more effective in the roile of safety then following some clown to the bathroom.
its my opinion, i recognize the majority of you dont share it.

Well when the entire message board disagrees with your wrong opinion it's because it's illogical, makes zero sense, and isn't worth reading. So take that in to consideration before you start calling us retards and everything else you've called some of us.

[Ravage!!!]

HONESTLY, I do consider that.
but in the past I have been chastized for my opinion of other broncos, by the vast majority and proven to be correct once the smoke cleared.
examples/
shanahan
lelie
JMCD at 6-1
hillis
portis
plummer
moreno
and others.
when I am wrong, I admit it.
my opinion on champ is that he could be more effective, a GREATER VALUE to our team if he played safety.
its an opinion.
i see what he does now.
I see what safties like reed and palomalo do for their teams, and I think, gosh, a guy like champ with so much talent could be far more effective in the roile of safety then following some clown to the bathroom.
its my opinion, i recognize the majority of you dont share it.

I dont have a problem with your opinion. Its just when you think you are smarter than DCs and GMs in the NFL that have said over and over that moving a guy like Champ is NOT what you want to do because a corner is MORE VALUABLE to a defense than the safety. Thus you just want to believe they are wrong. The IDEA that Champ is purely following around a "decoy" is so ridiculously absurd, it makes ANY argument you have, laughable.

What you are saying, is that EVERY top corner in the NFL should be moved to safety because then they "couldn't be avoided"... or whatever ridiculous statement that backs up your theory. Yet, teams pay more money for corners than they do safeties. But I'm going to guess thats because the coaches and GMs don't have the "foresight" that you do, and you can see better into the "now" instead of how things "used to be." They just aren't as intelligent as you are.

[bcbronc]

Not enough to move to safety. He's still easily a top 3 Corner in the NFL. That may not be THE top, but how close do you want to be?

Last year. But what about THIS year, and NEXT year. We won't know until the season's played out, but there's no denying that Champ is on the downslope of his career.


Pitt doesn't have a top Corner.... what does that have to do with them not considering a top corner more important?? Same with the Giants or Baltimore?? Neither of those teams MOVED an elite Corner to safety.


If these teams considered a top corner so important, they'd be trying hard to get one. That's my point. That and the fact that over the past decade or so the best defenses have almost always had great S's in common but rarely have had great CBs. And the defenses without great S's have always had dominant DL play.

There's basically two discussions going on here: 1, whether it's time to move Champ to S (I agree with you and recognize now is not the time) and 2, whether S or CB is more important to putting together a great defense. The evidence (ie results on the field) strongly support that an elite S is more important than an elite CB...two different discussions.


Ty Law was considered the best CB in the NFL when they won their SUper Bowl, and shut down nearly EVERY WR he faced. Absolutely he was a shut-down. You convenietly forgot to mention Barber with Tampa Bay.

Ty Law was not considered the best CB in the NFL, and NE won their Superbowls playing a complex blitz-zone scheme. He was a ball-hawk in zone, not a shut-down corner. And Ty Law has NEVER been considered better than Champ.

As for Barber, I said Rolle but meant Barber (Ronde, Rolle, what's the difference?). Still had a HOF S nonetheless. Funny though, the past couple of years there's been talk of Barber moving to S...considering elite CBs never get moved to S, why even discuss it?


No one said that you can't win a Super Bowl without a shut-down corner. Thats not even the debate, so I'm not sure why you are trying to prove it as a point, bc. :confused: NY won without a top corner and a top safety (as you pointed out)....so does that mean we shouldn't have either one??

The debate is what's more important, S or CB. The goal is to win Superbowls. Therefore, patterns that result in more Superbowl wins should be considered more important. The pattern clearly and undeniably shows that more Superbowl champions have elite S's with average (or good, but not elite) CBs than vice versa.

To use an example dear to your heart Rav, TB won a Superbowl without an elite QB but that doesn't negate that Superbowl champions USUALLY have an elite QB...just because a couple of teams have won a Superbowl with an elite RB but without an elite QB doesn't make RB more important. IMO there's three constants that Superbowl champs have at least two of: elite QB, elite S, elite DL. When teams start winning Superbowls with elite CBs as the strength of their team, let me know.



The reason he stated that its not debatable is based on the amount of money that teams PAY top corners vs top safeties. Its not close. GMs and Coaches have repeatedly said that a top corner is more valuable to a team, than a safety (this discussion was asked to them when Woodson made the commnt that he would play safety). So it may be debatable between you and I, and Zam and everyone else, but when it comes to people in the NFL, its pretty widely acknowledged that a top corner is more valuable to a team than safety is.

The games changing Rav. It used to be pretty widely acknowledged that a top RB was a priority...not any more. Or a top TE was a luxury...not any more.

Which GMs and coaches are you referring to, Rav? The one in Philly? Or the one in PIT? Because they haven't exactly got equal results from their different philosophies re: CBs + Ss.

As for money, supply and demand are not the same as value. The athletic skill set required to cover an NFL WR man on man is so rare that supply can't meet demand. I'm not taking away the value an elite CB can have...but we've had one of the best all-time over the past decade or so, and some of the most embarrasingly bad defenses I've ever seen. Teams pay more for the rare skill set...but these teams don't win Superbowls. Troy P wins Superbowls, Champ hasn't. Rod Woodson won a Superbowl...after he moved to S. It's great to say it's widely acknowledged, and yet the best defensive mind of his era (Bellichik) considers CB such a high proirity he's twice had to use WRs in the position.

The overvaluation of corners is a left-over residue of the 1990s. In today's NFL the S is more valuable, something not every GM and coach has yet figured out. If you really want to see which is more valuable, don't look at contract $$$'s that's the result of supply and demand on a specific skill set, look instead at Superbowl champions.





Experience at safety.

Rod Woodson didn't have experience at S either when he moved.


?? :confused: ??


yeah, not really interested in explaining logic 101 to you.


Why is it one or the other? What makes you think that you are either ahead or behind? You use one of the best corners at his primary position for as long as he can, and then you move him IF he can be moved. Thats not "behind"..thats on time.

It becomes behind if Champ has a season where it becomes obvious to everyone he's no longer a great CB. We're not there yet, he's still one of the best in the game. But being a #1 CB requires such elite athleticism that a guy can seemingly lose it over night. You then go through an entire season (don't think there's much chance of moving him in mid-season) where instead of having a pro-bowl calibre FS you have an average #1 CB. Sure, there's still IF he can be moved to consider, but I feel Champ is like Rod...just a great football player and great DB that will make the move relatively seamlessly. We'd then have our best DB in the middle of the field where he can influence the entire field....just like the best defenses in the league these days are set up.

It's a new era in football...the era of the safety. A handful of teams are ahead of the curve and reaping the awards...just like the handful of teams that were ahead of the curve in going back to the 34 reaped the awards, or the handful of teams ahead of the curve re: zone blocking reaped the awards. Unless you have the DL of NYG, you can't be a great defense without at least one great safety...but you can with only average corners. That's the value I find important, not how much they get paid.

[MOtorboat]

Rod Woodson didn't have experience at S either when he moved.

He played safety at Purdue.

Bailey did not play safety at Georgia.

It's not the era of the safety because there are two good ones in the league.

[MOtorboat]

It also needs to be noted, in reference to Woodson, that Baltimore switched him to free safety after drafting Chris McAlister at No. 10.

[Chef Zambini]

if they dont throw at champ, because he is so talented, what would YOU call the guy he is covering?
I call him a decoy, regardless of what you or I call him, neither of those guys are gpoing to see any balls.
they might as well be at an all girls camp !

[Chef Zambini]

Last year. But what about THIS year, and NEXT year. We won't know until the season's played out, but there's no denying that Champ is on the downslope of his career.



If these teams considered a top corner so important, they'd be trying hard to get one. That's my point. That and the fact that over the past decade or so the best defenses have almost always had great S's in common but rarely have had great CBs. And the defenses without great S's have always had dominant DL play.

There's basically two discussions going on here: 1, whether it's time to move Champ to S (I agree with you and recognize now is not the time) and 2, whether S or CB is more important to putting together a great defense. The evidence (ie results on the field) strongly support that an elite S is more important than an elite CB...two different discussions.



Ty Law was not considered the best CB in the NFL, and NE won their Superbowls playing a complex blitz-zone scheme. He was a ball-hawk in zone, not a shut-down corner. And Ty Law has NEVER been considered better than Champ.

As for Barber, I said Rolle but meant Barber (Ronde, Rolle, what's the difference?). Still had a HOF S nonetheless. Funny though, the past couple of years there's been talk of Barber moving to S...considering elite CBs never get moved to S, why even discuss it?



The debate is what's more important, S or CB. The goal is to win Superbowls. Therefore, patterns that result in more Superbowl wins should be considered more important. The pattern clearly and undeniably shows that more Superbowl champions have elite S's with average (or good, but not elite) CBs than vice versa.

To use an example dear to your heart Rav, TB won a Superbowl without an elite QB but that doesn't negate that Superbowl champions USUALLY have an elite QB...just because a couple of teams have won a Superbowl with an elite RB but without an elite QB doesn't make RB more important. IMO there's three constants that Superbowl champs have at least two of: elite QB, elite S, elite DL. When teams start winning Superbowls with elite CBs as the strength of their team, let me know.




The games changing Rav. It used to be pretty widely acknowledged that a top RB was a priority...not any more. Or a top TE was a luxury...not any more.

Which GMs and coaches are you referring to, Rav? The one in Philly? Or the one in PIT? Because they haven't exactly got equal results from their different philosophies re: CBs + Ss.

As for money, supply and demand are not the same as value. The athletic skill set required to cover an NFL WR man on man is so rare that supply can't meet demand. I'm not taking away the value an elite CB can have...but we've had one of the best all-time over the past decade or so, and some of the most embarrasingly bad defenses I've ever seen. Teams pay more for the rare skill set...but these teams don't win Superbowls. Troy P wins Superbowls, Champ hasn't. Rod Woodson won a Superbowl...after he moved to S. It's great to say it's widely acknowledged, and yet the best defensive mind of his era (Bellichik) considers CB such a high proirity he's twice had to use WRs in the position.

The overvaluation of corners is a left-over residue of the 1990s. In today's NFL the S is more valuable, something not every GM and coach has yet figured out. If you really want to see which is more valuable, don't look at contract $$$'s that's the result of supply and demand on a specific skill set, look instead at Superbowl champions.






Rod Woodson didn't have experience at S either when he moved.



yeah, not really interested in explaining logic 101 to you.



It becomes behind if Champ has a season where it becomes obvious to everyone he's no longer a great CB. We're not there yet, he's still one of the best in the game. But being a #1 CB requires such elite athleticism that a guy can seemingly lose it over night. You then go through an entire season (don't think there's much chance of moving him in mid-season) where instead of having a pro-bowl calibre FS you have an average #1 CB. Sure, there's still IF he can be moved to consider, but I feel Champ is like Rod...just a great football player and great DB that will make the move relatively seamlessly. We'd then have our best DB in the middle of the field where he can influence the entire field....just like the best defenses in the league these days are set up.

It's a new era in football...the era of the safety. A handful of teams are ahead of the curve and reaping the awards...just like the handful of teams that were ahead of the curve in going back to the 34 reaped the awards, or the handful of teams ahead of the curve re: zone blocking reaped the awards. Unless you have the DL of NYG, you can't be a great defense without at least one great safety...but you can with only average corners. That's the value I find important, not how much they get paid.bravo, I applaud you for expressing your opinion and not being afraid to do so, even if it puts you on my side of the fense.

[MOtorboat]

if they dont throw at champ, because he is so talented, what would YOU call the guy he is covering?

Useless. And one less dude the defense has to worry about.

And when you go from 11 guarding 10 to 10 guarding 9, you have a distinct advantage.

When your front four adds Von Miller and Elvis Dumervil, your secondary becomes more effective, and suddenly, you have a 3 or 4 receivers versus 6 or 7 defenders, and your defense becomes incredibly more effective against the pass.

[Chef Zambini]

Useless. And one less dude the defense has to worry about.

And when you go from 11 guarding 10 to 10 guarding 9, you have a distinct advantage.

When your front four adds Von Miller and Elvis Dumervil, your secondary becomes more effective, and suddenly, you have a 3 or 4 receivers versus 6 or 7 defenders, and your defense becomes incredibly more effective against the pass.
so champ is covering someone who is worthless, thank-you.
now your reactive response will be,

"a-hole, champ is the guy that makes him worthless",

and I agree! ( I have always agreed)

Now just a post earlier, you called me out for thinking I know more than coaches and GMs, didn't you !

so what moron GM or coach is going to line-up his top WR against champ, just so he can be worthless?
... i'll give you a moment to change the subject....

[MOtorboat]

so champ is covering someone who is worthless, thank-you.
now your reactive response will be,

"a-hole, champ is the guy that makes him worthless",

and I agree! ( I have always agreed)

Now just a post earlier, you called me out for thinking I know more than coaches and GMs, didn't you !

so what moron GM or coach is going to line-up his top WR against champ, just so he can be worthless?
... i'll give you a moment to change the subject....

First-off.

That was Rav. But I do agree with him. You think you know more than GMs and Coaches, and you don't.

Why is a shutdown corner important? Simple math. I conveyed that in my previous post. Learning that would be beneficial for you.

The player Champ is against is useless to the offense.

This is ******* simple math, dude. would you rather defend 10 players, or 9?

[Chef Zambini]

First-off.

That was Rav. But I do agree with him. You think you know more than GMs and Coaches, and you don't.

Why is a shutdown corner important? Simple math. I conveyed that in my previous post. Learning that would be beneficial for you.

The player Champ is against is useless to the offense.

This is ******* simple math, dude. would you rather defend 10 players, or 9?just as I suspected, you avoided my question. listen you cant see beyond cahmp. a guy who takes away one player. I invision champ as a safety, who like reed or palomalo, can make a far greater impact, and cannot be so easily ignored or "occupied".
we will always seem to disagree, on champ and probably anything else!
it is what it is!

[Denver Native (Carol)]

article written 9-8-11


It's one thing to keep up with the NFL's fastest wide receivers and swat down a deep pass a couple of times a game. It's another thing altogether to completely eliminate one side of the field or neutralize another team's best offensive players.

Darrelle Revis has his "island," where many Pro Bowl wide receivers have disappeared. Nnamdi Asomugha could make fans watching Raiders games forget he was playing. That's how little action he saw.

There's a reason true shutdown cornerbacks are rare. And there's a reason they command big money. Even quarterbacks with the strongest arms and the best accuracy will usually avoid throwing their way.

"This game is all about matchups and if you get a lockdown corner, the chances of that great receiver being successful go down," said John Elway, the Broncos' executive vice president of football operations.


rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18827126

[Denver Native (Carol)]

The Broncos have their lockdown cornerback, veteran Champ Bailey, whose 48 career interceptions rank third among active NFL players. Bailey is 33 now, and quarterbacks have been trying to test him more in recent years. Bad idea. Just ask Kansas City's Pro Bowl receiver, Dwayne Bowe. With Bailey assigned to shadow him in a game at Kansas City last December, Bowe was held without a catch and had only three passes thrown his way. At the time, he was the NFL's hottest receiver.

On one of those attempts, Bailey drew an offensive pass interference call, a sure sign that a receiver is getting frustrated with blanket coverage.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18827126

[MOtorboat]

just as I suspected, you avoided my question. listen you cant see beyond cahmp. a guy who takes away one player. I invision champ as a safety, who like reed or palomalo, can make a far greater impact, and cannot be so easily ignored or "occupied".
we will always seem to disagree, on champ and probably anything else!
it is what it is!

If he plays safety its 11 on 10. If he plays cornerback its 10 on 9.

This is simple, simple math.

Would you rather guard 10 guys, or 9? Talk about avoiding a question...

And as far as your "question," someone lines up against him on every play. That player is shut down. It doesn't matter if its the No. 2 or the No. 1 or the No. 3, he won't be effective during the play. So, frankly, it's a stupid, useless question.

[Chef Zambini]

article written 9-8-11



rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18827126thaNKS CAROL, READ THE ARTICLE, SO NOW CHAMP IS PLAYING THE SLOT RECEIVER.
NOW HE WILL BE THE DECOY. CHAMP, MOBVING INSIDE AND CLOSER TO THE ROLE OF safety.

I look forward to the next series of BS from my adversaries.

[MOtorboat]

thaNKS CAROL, READ THE ARTICLE, SO NOW CHAMP IS PLAYING THE SLOT RECEIVER.
NOW HE WILL BE THE DECOY. CHAMP, MOBVING INSIDE AND CLOSER TO THE ROLE OF safety.

I look forward to the next series of BS from my adversaries.

Would you rather guard 10 players or 9?

[Chef Zambini]

If he plays safety its 11 on 10. If he plays cornerback its 10 on 9.

This is simple, simple math.

Would you rather guard 10 guys, or 9? Talk about avoiding a question...

And as far as your "question," someone lines up against him on every play. That player is shut down. It doesn't matter if its the No. 2 or the No. 1 or the No. 3, he won't be effective during the play. So, frankly, it's a stupid, useless question.sport, both teams field 11 players, are you trying to suggest the QB is NOT a member of the offense?

[SR]

just as I suspected, you avoided my question. listen you cant see beyond cahmp. a guy who takes away one player. I invision champ as a safety, who like reed or palomalo, can make a far greater impact, and cannot be so easily ignored or "occupied".
we will always seem to disagree, on champ and probably anything else!
it is what it is!

Your football IQ is less than four.

[Chef Zambini]

Would you rather guard 10 players or 9?would you rather have sex with a goat or a pig!
WTF arte you talking about/
football is 11 on 11.

[Chef Zambini]

get back to me when you want to have a rational discussion.

[MOtorboat]

would you rather have sex with a goat or a pig!
WTF arte you talking about/
football is 11 on 11.

This is simple, simple math, zam.

Quarterback. He's taken out of the play, because he's the quarterback.

That makes it, essentially 11 on 10 during passing plays. If you have a player with the ability to shut down another player on that play, that makes it 10 on 9.

So, again, I ask, would you rather defend 10 players or 9?

Actually, let's really simplify it for you, because this is an extremely hard concept for you.

Five offensive lineman and the quarterback equals 6 players. If you can equalize those six players with your front four, as the Broncos can do with Miller and Dumervil, then you essentially are playing 7 on 5. If you have a player that can shut down one of those five players, then you have 6 guys to defend 4.

That makes it easier for those six guys to cover those four other guys.

Can you comprehend this?

[Denver Native (Carol)]

thaNKS CAROL, READ THE ARTICLE, SO NOW CHAMP IS PLAYING THE SLOT RECEIVER.
NOW HE WILL BE THE DECOY. CHAMP, MOBVING INSIDE AND CLOSER TO THE ROLE OF safety.

I look forward to the next series of BS from my adversaries.

From article:


Bailey has spent most of his Denver career lined up at left cornerback. New Denver defensive coordinator Dennis Allen, a former defensive backs coach, is moving Bailey inside to the slot position when the Broncos are playing the nickel package — a position switch that will match Bailey with the opponent's hot receiver and make it more difficult for a quarterback to avoid Bailey.

"I like how we're putting Champ in the slot," Elway said. "It gives you that ability to shut down people, make big plays and get interceptions."

So, because Allen moved Champ to the slot position in the nickel package ONLY, which matched Champ with the opponent's hot receiver, you are running with that as that was a move to get him closer to moving to safety??????

WELL - OK

[MOtorboat]

From article:



So, because Allen moved Champ to the slot position in the nickel package ONLY, which matched Champ with the opponent's hot receiver, you are running with that as that was a move to get him closer to moving to safety??????

WELL - OK

No, he's not actually running with that, because he didn't know it before you posted it.

Anything you post, he'll find a reason to fit his opinion about Bailey. In two years, he'll be telling you he refused to play the top receiver because he wanted to play the slot. Even though, that's not even close to reality.

[Chef Zambini]

From article:



So, because Allen moved Champ to the slot position in the nickel package ONLY, which matched Champ with the opponent's hot receiver, you are running with that as that was a move to get him closer to moving to safety??????

WELL - OKyes, I am! because now he is in the middle, or at least closer to it, and he will be playing closer to the LOS, where he can instead of covering, BLITZ, or he can back-out, after showing man coverage, and play the QB instead, just like a safewty !
look Mo and I will never agree. he will alway post contrary to whatever I post ! but the proof will be in the pudding !

[MOtorboat]

yes, I am! because now he is in the middle, or at least closer to it, and he will be playing closer to the LOS, where he can instead of covering, BLITZ, or he can back-out, after showing man coverage, and play the QB instead, just like a safewty !
look Mo and I will never agree. he will alway post contrary to whatever I post ! but the proof will be in the pudding !

Your ego is amazing.

I am not disputing your ideas because its you. I'm disputing your ideas because they are stupid.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

yes, I am! because now he is in the middle, or at least closer to it, and he will be playing closer to the LOS, where he can instead of covering, BLITZ, or he can back-out, after showing man coverage, and play the QB instead, just like a safewty !
look Mo and I will never agree. he will alway post contrary to whatever I post ! but the proof will be in the pudding !

That was last year, ONLY in the nickel package, and it was Allen, who is no longer with the Broncos, who put that in. And, since it was put in ONLY to match Champ with the opponent's hot receiver, how can you possibly assume that means he will be moved to safety any time soon?

[Chef Zambini]

I am saying from that location he can actuaLLY PLAY more like a safgety, comin g off his man assignment to offer run support, blitz, or recat to the play or read the QB while dropping into a short zone coverage.
if he stay man on man, the opponents will continue to run him away from the action and play 10 on 10 football.

[Chef Zambini]

This is simple, simple math, zam.

Quarterback. He's taken out of the play, because he's the quarterback.

That makes it, essentially 11 on 10 during passing plays. If you have a player with the ability to shut down another player on that play, that makes it 10 on 9.

So, again, I ask, would you rather defend 10 players or 9?

Actually, let's really simplify it for you, because this is an extremely hard concept for you.

Five offensive lineman and the quarterback equals 6 players. If you can equalize those six players with your front four, as the Broncos can do with Miller and Dumervil, then you essentially are playing 7 on 5. If you have a player that can shut down one of those five players, then you have 6 guys to defend 4.

That makes it easier for those six guys to cover those four other guys.

Can you comprehend this?it may be simple math, but you apparently lack the ability to count to eleven.

[Chef Zambini]

so champ is covering someone who is worthless, thank-you.
now your reactive response will be,

"a-hole, champ is the guy that makes him worthless",

and I agree! ( I have always agreed)

Now just a post earlier, you called me out for thinking I know more than coaches and GMs, didn't you !

so what moron GM or coach is going to line-up his top WR against champ, just so he can be worthless?
... i'll give you a moment to change the subject....still no response, other than eat poop zam, or youre retarded zam, or anything other than a direct response.
sandusky had a better defense.

[Timmy!]

Pretty sure champ bailey is a corner, not a safety.......just saying.

[Chef Zambini]

champ is a corner.
he could be more effective as a safety.

[SR]

champ is a corner.
he could be more effective as a safety.

You should be very successful as an NFL coach because apparently you know something they don't.

[MOtorboat]

it may be simple math, but you apparently lack the ability to count to eleven.

It's not a difficult concept to understand, and it's the reasoning coaches and GMs covet cornerbacks. I'm sorry you can't understand this simple logic.

[MOtorboat]

still no response, other than eat poop zam, or youre retarded zam, or anything other than a direct response.
sandusky had a better defense.

It's a dumb question, because every team lines up their best wide receiver on him.

[Ravage!!!]

I am saying from that location he can actuaLLY PLAY more like a safgety, comin g off his man assignment to offer run support, blitz, or recat to the play or read the QB while dropping into a short zone coverage.
if he stay man on man, the opponents will continue to run him away from the action and play 10 on 10 football.


it may be simple math, but you apparently lack the ability to count to eleven

This is the most ignorant statements that you've made in the entire discussion.....and you have made a BUNCH of them.

When going AFTER the QB, you are not guarding the QB...thus he is NOT someone you have to "match up with" from the start of the snap. The QB is not going to block someone, thus, he is taken OUT of the count when considering how many blockers you have to PROTECT the QB. This may be hard for you to understand, but the QB doesn't count himself when at the LoS to be sure he has enough blockers so he won't be sacked.

I knew you were pretty basic when it came down to understanding defensive concepts, I just didn't realize you were this basic.

[SR]

This thread isn't in the Black Hole yet? Ought to be.

[topscribe]

One side thinks Champ ought to be a safety.

Another side thinks Champ should stay at corner.

Okay, we get it. Moving right along . . . :coffee:
.

[Ravage!!!]

Last year. But what about THIS year, and NEXT year. We won't know until the season's played out, but there's no denying that Champ is on the downslope of his career.
Again, no one is saying that later on down the road this isn't a possibility. Its talking about NOW. We are saying that RIGHT NOW, thw way Champ is playing at THIS MOMENT in time, at THIS STAGE of his career.....he's MORE VALUABLE at corner than safety. Period. UNTIL he proves that he's not capable of playing better at corner, and unable to hold down that position... moving him is detrimental to the defense.


If these teams considered a top corner so important, they'd be trying hard to get one. That's my point. That and the fact that over the past decade or so the best defenses have almost always had great S's in common but rarely have had great CBs. And the defenses without great S's have always had dominant DL play.
So the Steelers, Ravens, and Bucs didn't have great DL and LBs when they were great?????? WHAT makes them great, the defensive Line, the LBs, the DBs??? Combo?


There's basically two discussions going on here: 1, whether it's time to move Champ to S (I agree with you and recognize now is not the time) and 2, whether S or CB is more important to putting together a great defense. The evidence (ie results on the field) strongly support that an elite S is more important than an elite CB...two different discussions.
The evidence is clear to YOU becuase thats what you want to see. But DCs, GMs, and coaches highly disagree with you on that fact.


Ty Law was not considered the best CB in the NFL, and NE won their Superbowls playing a complex blitz-zone scheme. He was a ball-hawk in zone, not a shut-down corner. And Ty Law has NEVER been considered better than Champ.
Yes he was, and he was known for SHUTTING DOWN WRs during those few years by locking them up. He was an absolute SHUT DOWN corner.


As for Barber, I said Rolle but meant Barber (Ronde, Rolle, what's the difference?). Still had a HOF S nonetheless. Funny though, the past couple of years there's been talk of Barber moving to S...considering elite CBs never get moved to S, why even discuss it?
The last couple of years, but he hasn't been moved until THIS Point of his career........ you just made my point for me. They haven't moved him UNTIL he's not a top corner anymore, or isn't the best corner on the team any longer.


The debate is what's more important, S or CB. The goal is to win Superbowls. Therefore, patterns that result in more Superbowl wins should be considered more important. The pattern clearly and undeniably shows that more Superbowl champions have elite S's with average (or good, but not elite) CBs than vice versa.
I'm sorry bc, but that doesn't really prove anything. Thats taken one single factor and looking for similarties. There was a player that was on the Bill's team during their 4 Super Bowl run, and then changed teams (after their 4th loss) to either the 49ers, or the Chargers (can't remember). The reason I remember at all, is because that team went to the Super Bowl the following season. So by logic I could say that HE was the reason that these teams went to the Super Bowl. After all, he did go to 5 in a row.


To use an example dear to your heart Rav, TB won a Superbowl without an elite QB but that doesn't negate that Superbowl champions USUALLY have an elite QB...just because a couple of teams have won a Superbowl with an elite RB but without an elite QB doesn't make RB more important. IMO there's three constants that Superbowl champs have at least two of: elite QB, elite S, elite DL. When teams start winning Superbowls with elite CBs as the strength of their team, let me know.
The GB Packers don't have an elite safety, the Saints don't (neither did the Colts...whats his face was hurt), the Patriots don't, and the Giants certainly don't (in either of their SB match-ups). The Cardinals didn't/don't, the Bears didn't, the Seahawks...... all teams that have been to or won the Super Bowl lately. Which team had a top safety.... the Steelers.



The games changing Rav. It used to be pretty widely acknowledged that a top RB was a priority...not any more. Or a top TE was a luxury...not any more.
Yes.. its changing to a passing league all the way. So instead of the corner being LESS important, its becoming more and MORE important.


Which GMs and coaches are you referring to, Rav? The one in Philly? Or the one in PIT? Because they haven't exactly got equal results from their different philosophies re: CBs + Ss.
I do appologize for this, because I don't know who it was. Was on ESPN radio beofre and after the draft. The same talk you were saying has been discussed "over the last couple years" about Barber... someone mentioned about Woodson in Green Bay (which is really silly considering the season he had in GB when winning the Super Bowl). Woodson played some safety in college, so a reporter asked if he would be willing to move to safety...hence the reason for the discussion. But while they had coaches and GMs (ex-GMs as well) on the radio....they were asking if they would move Woodson to Safety at this point. The 100% consensus was "NOOOOOO. Not until he proves he is unable to be effective at the corner, because a top corner enables to do MORE for your defense than a safety does" (their words as close to accurate as I can get with admitting its not transcripted).


As for money, supply and demand are not the same as value. The athletic skill set required to cover an NFL WR man on man is so rare that supply can't meet demand. I'm not taking away the value an elite CB can have...but we've had one of the best all-time over the past decade or so, and some of the most embarrasingly bad defenses I've ever seen. Teams pay more for the rare skill set...but these teams don't win Superbowls. Troy P wins Superbowls, Champ hasn't. Rod Woodson won a Superbowl...after he moved to S. It's great to say it's widely acknowledged, and yet the best defensive mind of his era (Bellichik) considers CB such a high proirity he's twice had to use WRs in the position.
bc, come on. You are one of the better posters on this board but his is just ridiculous. How does Troy winning a Super Bowl suggest that he's more important than Champ to a defense??? How many Super Bowls has the Ravens won with their elite safety? How many "elite" safeties would you say there are in the NFL?? ONE that has won a Super Bowl.....and yet other teams are going to the Super Bowl without.

As far as your Supply and Demand "theory." Exactly. It's why corners are becoming more and more valuable to teams. WRs are getting bigger, the NFL is going to almost a 7-v-7 passing league type of style, and corners are at a PREMIUM in need right now.


The overvaluation of corners is a left-over residue of the 1990s. In today's NFL the S is more valuable, something not every GM and coach has yet figured out. If you really want to see which is more valuable, don't look at contract $$$'s that's the result of supply and demand on a specific skill set, look instead at Superbowl champions.
I already did, and p ointed out that the only team you have is the Steelers. You HONESTLY believe that the GMs and Coaches aren't as "up to date" as you two are in thinkign about whats MORE IMPORTANT to a defense??? THEY, those that have the top knowledge on how defenses work, aren't as "logical thinking" as the two of you are??? Reallllllllllllly........ ok/


Rod Woodson didn't have experience at S either when he moved.
Well, as already pointed out.... this is incorrect. But just because HE made the move... (and made the move after the team drafted a highly skilled corner....AND had knee injuries that limited his ability to play corner as effectively) does't mean you take a top corner from the corner position where they are the most effective for a defense.


yeah, not really interested in explaining logic 101 to you.
Dude.. if you want to get insulting...... then you SERIOUSLY need to take logics class. Your "logic" of explaining that Troy won a Super Bowl over Bailey.... just proved you don't know what "logic" is.



It's a new era in football...the era of the safety. A handful of teams are ahead of the curve and reaping the awards...just like the handful of teams that were ahead of the curve in going back to the 34 reaped the awards, or the handful of teams ahead of the curve re: zone blocking reaped the awards. Unless you have the DL of NYG, you can't be a great defense without at least one great safety...but you can with only average corners. That's the value I find important, not how much they get paid.
Wait.. so what is it.. the 3-4..the DL?? You just said that "unless" you were like the Giants.... who neither play the 34, nor have a great safety. So now that the 43 is winning defense, are teams that have a 43 "ahead of the curve?"

So unless you are the Giants (lets take out the example that doesn't work for you)....then you can't be a great defense without a great safety. But what does THAT statement have to do with ANYTHING about the discussion? The point is, a great corner does MORE for your defense (allowing you to do MORE things) than a safety does. That's coming from the very coaches that coach this game. That's the point of those that actually call plays and understand defenses and how they work together. Corners allow MORE flexibility to a defense than a safety does. THUS, back to the point, that you don't move Champ UNTIL he's not a top corner any longer. When he's not effective as corner, then you can used his depleted skill set at safety. Look at Rod Woodson. An injured corner that then moved to safety...became a very good safety.

[Chef Zambini]

the giants haVE a tremendous front 4 who can attack the pass at the point of origin, the QB without having to use extra defenders to do so.
their DL is the strength of their defense, thats why he singles it out as a top defensive team. The other top defensive teams have a top notch SAFETY !
his point is the same as mine, having a top CORNER, even TWO top corners, like , say the jest or eagles, still does not solidify your defense as top tier because one or 2 cornersa can easily be gameplanned around with either a prominent run game, or by utilizing 'backs and especially TEs in your passing attack.

[Chef Zambini]

This is the most ignorant statements that you've made in the entire discussion.....and you have made a BUNCH of them.

When going AFTER the QB, you are not guarding the QB...thus he is NOT someone you have to "match up with" from the start of the snap. The QB is not going to block someone, thus, he is taken OUT of the count when considering how many blockers you have to PROTECT the QB. This may be hard for you to understand, but the QB doesn't count himself when at the LoS to be sure he has enough blockers so he won't be sacked.

I knew you were pretty basic when it came down to understanding defensive concepts, I just didn't realize you were this basic.this is simply a diversonary response. You change match-ups to blocking assignments, very clever,
but not the point
eligable receivers and defenders match-up, or they play zone, backs are assigned to LBs or safeties, look at your statement, its about blocking assignments, not the reality of 11 on 11, do teams playing a running QB ignore him in the head count.
nice try.

[Chef Zambini]

It's a dumb question, because every team lines up their best wide receiver on him.are you being serious with this comment?

[MOtorboat]

:sigh:

[MOtorboat]

are you being serious with this comment?

Yes.

Do you watch games?

[Chef Zambini]

It's a dumb question, because every team lines up their best wide receiver on him.so you are genuine when you say, offenses look into our secondary, locate champ and think it is in their best interest to deliberatly match up their own best redeiver with him!
thats what you just said and re-confirmed !
why woiuld an offense WANT champ on their BEST receiver?
why would they deliberatly facilitate that match-up?
again I doubt there is any rational answer to that question, so i am sure you will change the dialogue.

[Chef Zambini]

Yes.

Do you watch games?I record the broncos game and watchit at least twice. I have the ticket and watch other games as weell, too. I watch the red-zone channel thru-out the day. my football 'eperience transcends the broncos! maybe thats why I find it so easy to see alternaTIVES TO OUR OWN m.o.

[Chef Zambini]

... and I watch ore than games, I watch both the NFL channel and ESPN to leep up on trends and strategies employed by all the NFL teams.
I play fantasy football, its essential for me to gain insight into all teams.
I love football.
football is my favorite sport, the broncos are my favorite team, not just favorite football team.

[MOtorboat]

so you are genuine when you say, offenses look into our secondary, locate champ and think it is in their best interest to deliberatly match up their own best redeiver with him!
thats what you just said and re-confirmed !
why woiuld an offense WANT champ on their BEST receiver?
why would they deliberatly facilitate that match-up?
again I doubt there is any rational answer to that question, so i am sure you will change the dialogue.

Well then, since he's such a detriment to the team, I think they should cut him.

(They match up their best receiver with Bailey all the time. Not every time, but a lot of the time, based on their play call, and the Broncos match up Bailey with their best receivers many times, based on coverages called, so I don't know what your point is, exactly.)

[Timmy!]

Updated broncos depth chart according to zam:

Manning fs
Mcgahee fs
Decker ss
Thomas ss
Champ fs
Clady ss
Porter fs
Dumervil fs
Miller ss
Kuper fs
Williams fs
Adams cb
Prater k/ss

[Northman]

Updated broncos depth chart according to zam:

Manning fs
Mcgahee fs
Decker ss
Thomas ss
Champ fs
Clady ss
Porter fs
Dumervil fs
Miller ss
Kuper fs
Williams fs
Adams cb
Prater k/ss

:lol::lol::lol:

I seriously dont understand why you guys still go back and forth with him. They guy cant buy a clue.

[SR]

:lol::lol::lol:

I seriously dont understand why you guys still go back and forth with him. They guy cant buy a clue.

Maybe he can cook a clue

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Posted today 6-25-12 - ranked from 1 thru 29


We continue to do our positional rankings with a deep secondary group:

1. Champ Bailey, Denver: The future Hall of Famer continues to play at a high level.

rest - http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/45158/ranking-the-afc-west-defensive-backs

[Canmore]

On this point I can agree with Burger Bill.

[NorCalBronco7]

... and I watch ore than games, I watch both the NFL channel and ESPN to leep up on trends and strategies

NFL channel and ESPN. DAMN Ill never question you again.

[SR]

On this point I can agree with Burger Bill.

Mmmmm....hamburgers.

[bcbronc]

bravo, I applaud you for expressing your opinion and not being afraid to do so, even if it puts you on my side of the fense.

:lol:


article written 9-8-11



rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18827126


http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18827126



Bailey has spent most of his Denver career lined up at left cornerback. New Denver defensive coordinator Dennis Allen, a former defensive backs coach, is moving Bailey inside to the slot position when the Broncos are playing the nickel package — a position switch that will match Bailey with the opponent's hot receiver and make it more difficult for a quarterback to avoid Bailey.



okay, from this article Carol posted, we learn two things: Champ always lines up at LEFT cornerback, not following a #1 WR like some are claiming, and two, moving him more into the middle of the field makes it "more difficult for a QB to avoid Bailey". Both points for me and Zam. Also, when it says "hot receiver" they aren't meaning the wr who is on a hot streak, they mean the hot read vs blitzes...virtually never is the guy split wide going to be the hot read.

The whole point of moving Champ to the slot in nickle was to get him more involved in the play, or to "make it more difficult for a QB to avoid" him. Pretty much exactly what Zam and I are arguing would be the benefit to moving him to safety.





Would you rather guard 10 guys, or 9? Talk about avoiding a question...

And as far as your "question," someone lines up against him on every play. That player is shut down. It doesn't matter if its the No. 2 or the No. 1 or the No. 3, he won't be effective during the play. So, frankly, it's a stupid, useless question.

So Cam Newton doesn't need to be accounted for? How about Big Ben? Mike Vick? Alex Smith? Tim Tebow (:lol:)? Aaron Rodgers? Point being, the mobile QB is the modern prototype...not run first necessarily, but still someone you have to account for in your defensive scheme. So often it is 11 on 11, and becoming more the norm than the exception in today's NFL.

As for someone being shut-down every play, that's just not the case anymore. Champ still has games where he can't be caught on, like vs Bowe (who was the QB again?). But he also has games where he gets 3-4 balls caught on him. Yes, he's still one of the best in the game, but he no longer erases whoever he lines up over (whoever the OC decides to split wide right, according to Carol's article).

On the other hand, put him over the top at FS and he can now potentially help on every guy on the field. So would you rather have Champ's talents covering one guy from one spot on the field (LCB) or make it so the QB doesn't know who or where Champ will be on any given play?


This is the most ignorant statements that you've made in the entire discussion.....and you have made a BUNCH of them.

When going AFTER the QB, you are not guarding the QB...thus he is NOT someone you have to "match up with" from the start of the snap. The QB is not going to block someone, thus, he is taken OUT of the count when considering how many blockers you have to PROTECT the QB. This may be hard for you to understand, but the QB doesn't count himself when at the LoS to be sure he has enough blockers so he won't be sacked.

I knew you were pretty basic when it came down to understanding defensive concepts, I just didn't realize you were this basic.

Apparently you missed all the "Tebow makes the defense play 11 on 11" banter. Yes there is still Manning, Brady and Rivers who aren't going to beat you with their legs, but guys like Aaron Rodgers and Andrew Luck WILL need to be accounted for in the defensive scheme.


Again, no one is saying that later on down the road this isn't a possibility. Its talking about NOW. We are saying that RIGHT NOW, thw way Champ is playing at THIS MOMENT in time, at THIS STAGE of his career.....he's MORE VALUABLE at corner than safety. Period. UNTIL he proves that he's not capable of playing better at corner, and unable to hold down that position... moving him is detrimental to the defense.

There's no real reason for me and you to discuss moving Champ right now, we more or less agree. The time isn't now (although I'm more open to it being now than you are), but in the next couple of years it might happen.


So the Steelers, Ravens, and Bucs didn't have great DL and LBs when they were great?????? WHAT makes them great, the defensive Line, the LBs, the DBs??? Combo?


Obviously it takes more than just one great player to be a great defence. Philly had 3 great CBs this season, and a great pass rusher, nothing at safety. I seemed to have missed the NYJ vs PHI Superbowl.

All I'm asking, find me one great defense where CB was their biggest strength. Shouldn't be too hard, considering the claim that CB is so important. I can find you great defenses where the CBs weren't great...but the safety(ies) were.


The evidence is clear to YOU becuase thats what you want to see. But DCs, GMs, and coaches highly disagree with you on that fact.


Do they? Does Bellichick? Ozzie Newsome? You keep saying this, but continue to ignore that the best defenses of the past decade have always had at least one great safety, except NYG and their 8 man deep DL.

I think it's you seeing what you want to see.


Yes he was, and he was known for SHUTTING DOWN WRs during those few years by locking them up. He was an absolute SHUT DOWN corner.


That's not my recollection, but maybe I'm remembering wrong. I certainly don't remember him being better than Champ...top 5 okay, but best in the league? Don't think so. I also don't remember NE running a ton of man coverage, but it was a few years ago. I do remember for a fact that the way they would beat Peyton Manning was disguising their zones and blitzes pre-snap...it's possible they then played a bunch of man coverage vs other teams, but I doubt it.


The last couple of years, but he hasn't been moved until THIS Point of his career........ you just made my point for me. They haven't moved him UNTIL he's not a top corner anymore, or isn't the best corner on the team any longer.

The bolded is the most important part imo. It's tough to move a guy when the talent drop behind him is so steep.



I'm sorry bc, but that doesn't really prove anything. Thats taken one single factor and looking for similarties. There was a player that was on the Bill's team during their 4 Super Bowl run, and then changed teams (after their 4th loss) to either the 49ers, or the Chargers (can't remember). The reason I remember at all, is because that team went to the Super Bowl the following season. So by logic I could say that HE was the reason that these teams went to the Super Bowl. After all, he did go to 5 in a row.


Terrible comparison, and you know it. We're not talking about one random dude in some random position. We're talking about multiple teams, multiple schemes, multiple personnel, multiple head coaches and GMs....and finding a similarity in they almost always have a great S. Is it just coincidence that Manning's Colts only won it all the year Bob Saunders stayed healthy? Or that as great as Brady is, he hasn't been able to win it all since Rodney Harrison retired, and their Superbowl losses have been directly the result of their defense? How about Green Bay, Woodson got hurt in the Superbowl, they still won. Nick Collins misses last season and despite being a lot healthier on offense, they got beat early in the playoffs.


The GB Packers don't have an elite safety, the Saints don't (neither did the Colts...whats his face was hurt), the Patriots don't, and the Giants certainly don't (in either of their SB match-ups). The Cardinals didn't/don't, the Bears didn't, the Seahawks...... all teams that have been to or won the Super Bowl lately. Which team had a top safety.... the Steelers.

Nick Collins was All-pro the year they won the Superbowl...note, not pro-bowl but all-pro. That isn't elite?? New Orleans, Roman Harper went to the pro-bowl, Darren Sharper went to the pro-bowl AND was 1st team all-pro. Cardinals lost, Bears lost, Seahawks lost, NE lost without Harrison. Maybe you just don't pay enough attention to safeties because saying teams with all-pro and pro-bowl safeties didn't have great safety play the year they won is a bit silly.


Yes.. its changing to a passing league all the way. So instead of the corner being LESS important, its becoming more and MORE important.


We'll have to agree to disagree. If a team comes out with 4 good WRs you now need to have 4 equivalent CBs to cover them. Or you have 4 okay CBs and 2 great safeties and it becomes a lot easier. Easier to get 2 good something than 4 good something, you'd have to agree. Then factor in the changes to motion rules and contact rules that make playing corner harder than it used to be. Then factor in all the bunch formations and read-routes that are staples of today's NFL, and it becomes harder still.

Again, still waiting for one dominant defense that had CB as their biggest strength. How did Washington do when they had Champ, Green and Primetime? How about Miami a few years back when they consistently had one of the best CB tandems in the league? Philly this year? How about our defenses the last decade, with arguably one of the three greatest CBs since the 1980s on the team? If corner is so much more important, why doesn't having great corner(s) lead to having great defenses more consistently?

How many times have I heard how a corner without a pass rush is useless? You obviously need to have a minimum level of talent at corner, and having a great corner is going to make you better than having an okay corner, but you just don't see great defenses without at least one great safety no matter how good the corners are. You can discount that all you want in favour of some random personnel guy you heard on the radio, but I prefer starting with the best defenses/Superbowl winning defenses and see what they have in common. Guess what, it's not great corners.


I do appologize for this, because I don't know who it was. Was on ESPN radio beofre and after the draft. The same talk you were saying has been discussed "over the last couple years" about Barber... someone mentioned about Woodson in Green Bay (which is really silly considering the season he had in GB when winning the Super Bowl). Woodson played some safety in college, so a reporter asked if he would be willing to move to safety...hence the reason for the discussion. But while they had coaches and GMs (ex-GMs as well) on the radio....they were asking if they would move Woodson to Safety at this point. The 100% consensus was "NOOOOOO. Not until he proves he is unable to be effective at the corner, because a top corner enables to do MORE for your defense than a safety does" (their words as close to accurate as I can get with admitting its not transcripted).

And, of course, they already had a great safety in Nick Collins. Shocks me how underrated he is. Obviously having a great corner AND a great safety is better than just a great safety.

The defensive scheme of having your best cover man take out one guy, then work double coverages on the rest of the receiving threats is outdated imo. We've seen for the past 7 DC's or so how that just doesn't work, no matter how good your best cover guy is.



bc, come on. You are one of the better posters on this board but his is just ridiculous. How does Troy winning a Super Bowl suggest that he's more important than Champ to a defense??? How many Super Bowls has the Ravens won with their elite safety? How many "elite" safeties would you say there are in the NFL?? ONE that has won a Super Bowl.....and yet other teams are going to the Super Bowl without.

Okay, forget Troy winning the Superbowl....let's compare the defenses Champ has played on to the ones Troy or Reed have played on. Give me your five best defenses over the past decade and let's see how they stack up at corner vs safety. I can tell you a couple of the worst defenses I've ever seen were here during Shanny's last couple years...they had the best corner in the game at the time on them.


As far as your Supply and Demand "theory." Exactly. It's why corners are becoming more and more valuable to teams. WRs are getting bigger, the NFL is going to almost a 7-v-7 passing league type of style, and corners are at a PREMIUM in need right now.

which is why we're starting to see a shift to S being more important. It's becoming harder and harder to find multiple CBs that can handle 1on1 coverage against the complex passing offenses of today's game...why spend like PHI did on CB when you can spend less on great safeties and get better results?



I already did, and p ointed out that the only team you have is the Steelers. You HONESTLY believe that the GMs and Coaches aren't as "up to date" as you two are in thinkign about whats MORE IMPORTANT to a defense??? THEY, those that have the top knowledge on how defenses work, aren't as "logical thinking" as the two of you are??? Reallllllllllllly........ ok/


Sorry rav, all you pointed out is that you don't recognize great safeties when you see them.

I'm glad Matt Millen and Andy Reid agree with you...but I don't agree with them so it's moot.


Well, as already pointed out.... this is incorrect. But just because HE made the move... (and made the move after the team drafted a highly skilled corner....AND had knee injuries that limited his ability to play corner as effectively) does't mean you take a top corner from the corner position where they are the most effective for a defense.

yup, the Champ-era Bronco's defenses really solidify your position.



Dude.. if you want to get insulting...... then you SERIOUSLY need to take logics class. Your "logic" of explaining that Troy won a Super Bowl over Bailey.... just proved you don't know what "logic" is.

Sorry, didn't mean to get insulting. I figured you had thicker skin that that.

And I have taken a few logic courses, did pretty well in them as well.

The logic is this:

the goal is to win the Superbowl
teams that win the Superbowl almost always have great safety play (although there is always exceptions in sports)
teams with corner being the strongest part of their defence never win Superbowls (unless someone has an example otherwise)
therefore, a great safety has more impact on winning a Superbowl than a great corner does.



Wait.. so what is it.. the 3-4..the DL?? You just said that "unless" you were like the Giants.... who neither play the 34, nor have a great safety. So now that the 43 is winning defense, are teams that have a 43 "ahead of the curve?"

You misread my point. Not long ago, zero teams played the 34. Then a few started and were able to get players that fit the system easier because less teams were after those players. Same with zone blocking, Shanny was able to get perfect OL for his system later in the draft because they didn't tend to appeal to most teams. Now, if I'm correct, you will see the same thing with CB and safety...teams still stuck in the old system (need a lock down corner) will overpay to acquire them, while teams prioritizing safety will be able to get them for cheaper.

Look at this last draft, Dallas gave up a bunch to move up for the top rated corner while TB was able to move back, pick up additional assets, and still get the top rated safety in the draft class. In five years or so, we can bump this thread (assuming it's not still going on :lol: ) and see which move was more astute. If I'm right, picking up extra picks and getting a top safety is a much smarter move than giving up extra picks to get a top corner. You're necessarily taking the other position (or else you don't really feel corner is the more important position).


So unless you are the Giants (lets take out the example that doesn't work for you)....then you can't be a great defense without a great safety. But what does THAT statement have to do with ANYTHING about the discussion? The point is, a great corner does MORE for your defense (allowing you to do MORE things) than a safety does. That's coming from the very coaches that coach this game. That's the point of those that actually call plays and understand defenses and how they work together. Corners allow MORE flexibility to a defense than a safety does. THUS, back to the point, that you don't move Champ UNTIL he's not a top corner any longer. When he's not effective as corner, then you can used his depleted skill set at safety. Look at Rod Woodson. An injured corner that then moved to safety...became a very good safety.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't accept your fallacy of appealing to authority. Just because some guy on the radio said it, doesn't make it so. Unless you are trying to say it is consensus among coaches that corner is the more important position, but that would be a ridiculous assertion on your part seeing as the best defenses of the past decade haven't been built from the corners in, but from the middle out.

Obviously a safety doesn't need the same level of speed, agility, acceleration, body control that a corner does because he's not trying to stick to an incredibly talented athlete man on man. But with the number of corners needed to cover all the WRs, the dominance of today's TEs, and the offensive schemes doing so many tricks to create space, we'll see a shift from man coverage to zone...and we'll see a shift from corners being prioritized to safety.

I appreciate your posts and your thoughts on this rav, but we'll just have to agree to disagree. I am a defensive coordinator, obviously Canadian high-school isn't the same as the NFL, but still. And I do read about defensive philosophies a lot, go to coaching seminars, talk to other coaches and try to pick up as much knowledge as I can on the game, especially on defenses. When I watch the game on TV, I also tend to focus on the defensive side of the ball over the offensive. Now I'm not making the claim that I'm some expert and everyone should just bow down at my knowledge. But there is a lot of thought and study put into my position, not just some comment I heard on a radio (not trying to be insulting).

You don't agree, and that's fine. There is no one right way to play football...if there was everyone would be doing it...so there's no reason we have to see things the same way. It was an interesting discussion, but I don't really have much more to say on the topic. Other than welcome to the era of the safety!:D

[Chef Zambini]

:lol








okay, from this article Carol posted, we learn two things: Champ always lines up at LEFT cornerback, not following a #1 WR like some are claiming, and two, moving him more into the middle of the field makes it "more difficult for a QB to avoid Bailey". Both points for me and Zam. Also, when it says "hot receiver" they aren't meaning the wr who is on a hot streak, they mean the hot read vs blitzes...virtually never is the guy split wide going to be the hot read.

The whole point of moving Champ to the slot in nickle was to get him more involved in the play, or to "make it more difficult for a QB to avoid" him. Pretty much exactly what Zam and I are arguing would be the benefit to moving him to safety.




So Cam Newton doesn't need to be accounted for? How about Big Ben? Mike Vick? Alex Smith? Tim Tebow (:lol:)? Aaron Rodgers? Point being, the mobile QB is the modern prototype...not run first necessarily, but still someone you have to account for in your defensive scheme. So often it is 11 on 11, and becoming more the norm than the exception in today's NFL.

As for someone being shut-down every play, that's just not the case anymore. Champ still has games where he can't be caught on, like vs Bowe (who was the QB again?). But he also has games where he gets 3-4 balls caught on him. Yes, he's still one of the best in the game, but he no longer erases whoever he lines up over (whoever the OC decides to split wide right, according to Carol's article).

On the other hand, put him over the top at FS and he can now potentially help on every guy on the field. So would you rather have Champ's talents covering one guy from one spot on the field (LCB) or make it so the QB doesn't know who or where Champ will be on any given play?



Apparently you missed all the "Tebow makes the defense play 11 on 11" banter. Yes there is still Manning, Brady and Rivers who aren't going to beat you with their legs, but guys like Aaron Rodgers and Andrew Luck WILL need to be accounted for in the defensive scheme.



There's no real reason for me and you to discuss moving Champ right now, we more or less agree. The time isn't now (although I'm more open to it being now than you are), but in the next couple of years it might happen.



Obviously it takes more than just one great player to be a great defence. Philly had 3 great CBs this season, and a great pass rusher, nothing at safety. I seemed to have missed the NYJ vs PHI Superbowl.

All I'm asking, find me one great defense where CB was their biggest strength. Shouldn't be too hard, considering the claim that CB is so important. I can find you great defenses where the CBs weren't great...but the safety(ies) were.



Do they? Does Bellichick? Ozzie Newsome? You keep saying this, but continue to ignore that the best defenses of the past decade have always had at least one great safety, except NYG and their 8 man deep DL.

I think it's you seeing what you want to see.



That's not my recollection, but maybe I'm remembering wrong. I certainly don't remember him being better than Champ...top 5 okay, but best in the league? Don't think so. I also don't remember NE running a ton of man coverage, but it was a few years ago. I do remember for a fact that the way they would beat Peyton Manning was disguising their zones and blitzes pre-snap...it's possible they then played a bunch of man coverage vs other teams, but I doubt it.



The bolded is the most important part imo. It's tough to move a guy when the talent drop behind him is so steep.




Terrible comparison, and you know it. We're not talking about one random dude in some random position. We're talking about multiple teams, multiple schemes, multiple personnel, multiple head coaches and GMs....and finding a similarity in they almost always have a great S. Is it just coincidence that Manning's Colts only won it all the year Bob Saunders stayed healthy? Or that as great as Brady is, he hasn't been able to win it all since Rodney Harrison retired, and their Superbowl losses have been directly the result of their defense? How about Green Bay, Woodson got hurt in the Superbowl, they still won. Nick Collins misses last season and despite being a lot healthier on offense, they got beat early in the playoffs.



Nick Collins was All-pro the year they won the Superbowl...note, not pro-bowl but all-pro. That isn't elite?? New Orleans, Roman Harper went to the pro-bowl, Darren Sharper went to the pro-bowl AND was 1st team all-pro. Cardinals lost, Bears lost, Seahawks lost, NE lost without Harrison. Maybe you just don't pay enough attention to safeties because saying teams with all-pro and pro-bowl safeties didn't have great safety play the year they won is a bit silly.



We'll have to agree to disagree. If a team comes out with 4 good WRs you now need to have 4 equivalent CBs to cover them. Or you have 4 okay CBs and 2 great safeties and it becomes a lot easier. Easier to get 2 good something than 4 good something, you'd have to agree. Then factor in the changes to motion rules and contact rules that make playing corner harder than it used to be. Then factor in all the bunch formations and read-routes that are staples of today's NFL, and it becomes harder still.

Again, still waiting for one dominant defense that had CB as their biggest strength. How did Washington do when they had Champ, Green and Primetime? How about Miami a few years back when they consistently had one of the best CB tandems in the league? Philly this year? How about our defenses the last decade, with arguably one of the three greatest CBs since the 1980s on the team? If corner is so much more important, why doesn't having great corner(s) lead to having great defenses more consistently?

How many times have I heard how a corner without a pass rush is useless? You obviously need to have a minimum level of talent at corner, and having a great corner is going to make you better than having an okay corner, but you just don't see great defenses without at least one great safety no matter how good the corners are. You can discount that all you want in favour of some random personnel guy you heard on the radio, but I prefer starting with the best defenses/Superbowl winning defenses and see what they have in common. Guess what, it's not great corners.



And, of course, they already had a great safety in Nick Collins. Shocks me how underrated he is. Obviously having a great corner AND a great safety is better than just a great safety.

The defensive scheme of having your best cover man take out one guy, then work double coverages on the rest of the receiving threats is outdated imo. We've seen for the past 7 DC's or so how that just doesn't work, no matter how good your best cover guy is.




Okay, forget Troy winning the Superbowl....let's compare the defenses Champ has played on to the ones Troy or Reed have played on. Give me your five best defenses over the past decade and let's see how they stack up at corner vs safety. I can tell you a couple of the worst defenses I've ever seen were here during Shanny's last couple years...they had the best corner in the game at the time on them.



which is why we're starting to see a shift to S being more important. It's becoming harder and harder to find multiple CBs that can handle 1on1 coverage against the complex passing offenses of today's game...why spend like PHI did on CB when you can spend less on great safeties and get better results?




Sorry rav, all you pointed out is that you don't recognize great safeties when you see them.

I'm glad Matt Millen and Andy Reid agree with you...but I don't agree with them so it's moot.



yup, the Champ-era Bronco's defenses really solidify your position.




Sorry, didn't mean to get insulting. I figured you had thicker skin that that.

And I have taken a few logic courses, did pretty well in them as well.

The logic is this:

the goal is to win the Superbowl
teams that win the Superbowl almost always have great safety play (although there is always exceptions in sports)
teams with corner being the strongest part of their defence never win Superbowls (unless someone has an example otherwise)
therefore, a great safety has more impact on winning a Superbowl than a great corner does.




You misread my point. Not long ago, zero teams played the 34. Then a few started and were able to get players that fit the system easier because less teams were after those players. Same with zone blocking, Shanny was able to get perfect OL for his system later in the draft because they didn't tend to appeal to most teams. Now, if I'm correct, you will see the same thing with CB and safety...teams still stuck in the old system (need a lock down corner) will overpay to acquire them, while teams prioritizing safety will be able to get them for cheaper.

Look at this last draft, Dallas gave up a bunch to move up for the top rated corner while TB was able to move back, pick up additional assets, and still get the top rated safety in the draft class. In five years or so, we can bump this thread (assuming it's not still going on :lol: ) and see which move was more astute. If I'm right, picking up extra picks and getting a top safety is a much smarter move than giving up extra picks to get a top corner. You're necessarily taking the other position (or else you don't really feel corner is the more important position).



I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't accept your fallacy of appealing to authority. Just because some guy on the radio said it, doesn't make it so. Unless you are trying to say it is consensus among coaches that corner is the more important position, but that would be a ridiculous assertion on your part seeing as the best defenses of the past decade haven't been built from the corners in, but from the middle out.

Obviously a safety doesn't need the same level of speed, agility, acceleration, body control that a corner does because he's not trying to stick to an incredibly talented athlete man on man. But with the number of corners needed to cover all the WRs, the dominance of today's TEs, and the offensive schemes doing so many tricks to create space, we'll see a shift from man coverage to zone...and we'll see a shift from corners being prioritized to safety.

I appreciate your posts and your thoughts on this rav, but we'll just have to agree to disagree. I am a defensive coordinator, obviously Canadian high-school isn't the same as the NFL, but still. And I do read about defensive philosophies a lot, go to coaching seminars, talk to other coaches and try to pick up as much knowledge as I can on the game, especially on defenses. When I watch the game on TV, I also tend to focus on the defensive side of the ball over the offensive. Now I'm not making the claim that I'm some expert and everyone should just bow down at my knowledge. But there is a lot of thought and study put into my position, not just some comment I heard on a radio (not trying to be insulting).

You don't agree, and that's fine. There is no one right way to play football...if there was everyone would be doing it...so there's no reason we have to see things the same way. It was an interesting discussion, but I don't really have much more to say on the topic. Other than welcome to the era of the safety!:D:I owe you a beer! if you were a woman, I would kiss you !

[bcbronc]

:I owe you a beer! if you were a woman, I would kiss you !

enuf beer and it wouldn't matter. er...never mind.

[Chef Zambini]

with my 2k post I would like to applaude BC bronco for his efforts and most recent post!
You have justified every minute i have spent here at this forum ! Thank-you !

[SR]

:I owe you a beer! if you were a woman, I would kiss you !

As if there wasn't already enough shit to have to sift through in this thread you go and quote that novel of a post

[Nomad]

As if there wasn't already enough shit to have to sift through in this thread you go and quote that novel of a post

Is there anything good in here....all I know is Bailey is a kickass, classy player and he can be a BRONCO until he can run anymore.

[SR]

Is there anything good in here....all I know is Bailey is a kickass, classy player and he can be a BRONCO until he can run anymore.

You're not missing anything

[Timmy!]

Oh for ****s sake.

[Northman]

So i took a dump today.

[MOtorboat]

So i took a dump today.

Everything come out OK?

[Northman]

Everything come out OK?

I dont know, i was a bit constipated with some Zamboni Pasta.

[MOtorboat]

I dont know, i was a bit constipated with some Zamboni Pasta.

I hate those. You might get the squirts later. Hope that doesn't happen in the middle of the night for you.

[SR]

I hate those. You might get the squirts later. Hope that doesn't happen in the middle of the night for you.

I really like your new avatar. Is that the 10 time Pro Bowl safety the Broncos have?

[MOtorboat]

I really like your new avatar. Is that the 10 time Pro Bowl safety the Broncos have?

That's Champ Bailey, the cornerback, perplexed by the idiocy in this thread.

[Northman]

No, im pretty sure thats our safety MO. You been drinking again?

[BroncoWave]

this is simply a diversonary response. You change match-ups to blocking assignments, very clever,
but not the point
eligable receivers and defenders match-up, or they play zone, backs are assigned to LBs or safeties, look at your statement, its about blocking assignments, not the reality of 11 on 11, do teams playing a running QB ignore him in the head count.
nice try.

This may be your best point in this thread and it's still a weak one. The only starting QBs in the league athletic enough to require a spy are Vick, Newton, and RG3. Given that we could never face more than two of those per season as they are all in the NFC, I think we'll be fine.

[Timmy!]

Today, broncos new defensive coordinator zambini rolled out his new 0-0-11 defense to mixed results. "This defense is designed to maximize the effectiveness of everyone on the field. Nobody can be decoyed and everybody is free to run around and make plays" said the coach when asked why the hell there were 11 safteys on the field as he stirred his "shanny is the devil" chili. "Every player ever would do better at saftey, so we are going to have 11 of them. Its genius."

[MOtorboat]

Today, broncos new defensive coordinator zambini rolled out his new 0-0-11 defense to mixed results. "This defense is designed to maximize the effectiveness of everyone on the field. Nobody can be decoyed and everybody is free to run around and make plays" said the coach when asked why the hell there were 11 safteys on the field as he stirred his "shanny is the devil" chili. "Every player ever would do better at saftey, so we are going to have 11 of them. Its genius."

It probably will go down as the S11, or the SS.

[BroncoWave]

Hey, he knows what he's talking about MO. He watches ESPN and NFLN, AND he plays fantasy football!

[NorCalBronco7]

A top corners more valuable in the NFL than a top saftey. Corners are payed more in general, too.

http://www.spotrac.com/top-salaries/nfl/safety/

[Denver Native (Carol)]

It probably will go down as the S11, or the SS.

Or, more than likely the BS.

[Chef Zambini]

A top corners more valuable in the NFL than a top saftey. Corners are payed more in general, too.

http://www.spotrac.com/top-salaries/nfl/safety/thanks for posting this! its easy to see the $$$ motivation for champ to insist on staying at corner. it is also quite easy to go down the list of top 5 safeties and see thAT THEY are all on the TOP defensive teams of the NFL. whereas you look at the top corners 1-10 and these guys are on medicre to idlle of the raod defenses.
it would apppera that regardless of whats in their bank account, a top SAFETY has a greater impact on the TEAM defense !
I also could not help but notice that revis is NOT amongst the top 10 corners in PAY so trying to suggest that salary is an indication of VALUE is suffering from a huge hole of reality !

[MOtorboat]

LOL.

I love how zam twisted that to fit his pre-conceived opinion. That was priceless.

[Northman]

LOL.

I love how zam twisted that to fit his pre-conceived opinion. That was priceless.

He would be great in politics.

[Ravage!!!]

The top 5 corners on the list have a higher salary than the top safety, and THIS is just the "base" salary. Revis just signed a contract not long ago that gave him a big signing bonus, thus lowering the 'base' salary cost. The ninth corner on the 'base' salary list makes more than the 5th highest 'base' salary earner at safety.

It shows that coaches and GMs put a MUCh higher value on corner than they do safety, which is again why you do NOT put a top corner at safety. Simple.

[Ravage!!!]

He would be great in politics.

No he wouldn't. He would get clobbered in every debate he participated in.

[Ravage!!!]

this is simply a diversonary response. You change match-ups to blocking assignments, very clever,
but not the point
eligable receivers and defenders match-up, or they play zone, backs are assigned to LBs or safeties, look at your statement, its about blocking assignments, not the reality of 11 on 11, do teams playing a running QB ignore him in the head count.
nice try.

Seriously Zam, do some homework please.

[Ravage!!!]

I've been thinking. Von can be blocked, and/or avoided. He's a waste if the QB rolls away from him, or they put two blockers to his side of the field. So I think we need to move him to NT. PUt him in the middle where he can go to BOTH sides of the ball. NT can be one of the most important positions on any strong defense, and we need one. I'm confident that Von Miller has the athleticism to play NT, and feel he can be faster than most centers.... thus... causing some real havoc in the middle of the field while not simply being "hidden" to one side of the field.

[SR]

Well hell, if you're going to move him to NT, you might as well move him to FS.

[Ravage!!!]

Well hell, if you're going to move him to NT, you might as well move him to FS.

I can't, Champ is being moved there

[SR]

I can't, Champ is being moved there

Is SS still open? Von could do that too. Then we could move Doom to FSSS.

[Simple Jaded]

Bailey critics should check out that Joyner dude on ESPN, he wrote an article about how his metrics prove that Champ Bailey basically sucks. Of course this is the same dude who came up with metrics that prove that Colt McCoy is a better QB than Joe Flacco not long after writing an article about how Flacco is as good as Phylis Rivers.

So, McCoy > Rivers/Flacco = Bailey sucks. Sweet metrics.......

[SR]

So I'm watching the NFL Top 100 from Wednesday and they're talking about Megatron. They showed a clip of him torching Champ. I noticed two things: Champ was lined up on the defensive right in man coverage on the line of scrimmage and the announcers mentioned Champ as one of the best ever.

[Cugel]

shanahan told portis agent to find him a deal, thats all shanny did ! portis and champ had the same agent! the agent made that deal! shannys indifference to runningbacks is all he tendered to that deal.

"Indifference to RBs"? RBs are lucky to last 6 years in the NFL due to the pounding.

Portis had a pretty good career. 10 seasons, averaging 992 yards a season. He had 6 seasons over 1,200 yards. But, Champ Bailey is a MUCH greater impact player. He's going to play for around 16 years and go to Canton. Portis was good but not great and will never be in the Hall of Fame.

Shanahan knew that with the ZBS he could plug in a RB and do just fine. The year after the trade Rueben Droughns rushed for 1,200 yards. Yes, I had almost forgotten Reuben Droughns.