Tales of Mythology II
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 11:30 AM MDT
in Strictly My Opinion
98 comments
The Myth of the Short Cornerback
When the Broncos drafted Alphonso Smith with their first pick in the second round of the NFL Draft, a huge cry went up among the pundits. Smith? No! He's too short! Shorter cornerbacks are at too big of a disadvantage. The belief was that if a receiver is taller than the coverage guy, all the offense has to do is to have their quarterback throw the ball up out of the cornerback’s reach and they will have reception after reception. This is such a common representation that I started to fire up NFL Rewind and to look for instances when it was true. The more football I watched, the more I realized that it only infrequently happened. Receptions commonly occur when the receiver is in front of the cornerback (and height doesn't matter that that point) or when the quarterback places the ball perfectly out in front as both are running (in whatever direction) but I could count the receptions where the wide receiver snared a pass that was thrown over a shorter corner such that the receiver leaps for it perfectly on just one hand. If it didn't work with just one receiver (looking specifically at taller receivers vs. shorter CBs) or in one game, sure, but in game after game it was a rarity and in most it didn't happen at all. I started to wonder, 'Why?'
This article is not meant to argue that there are no advantages to having a somewhat taller corner. There are, certainly, in some situations, depending on the other skills or lack thereof on the part of the players. However, a trade-off is at play here. Taller corners are often, although not always, slightly less nimble than the smaller corners. In a position where the ability to get around a receiver and to flash in and out of his circle, nimble means more balls defended and less penalties incurred. Of course, the number-one skill of the NFL cornerback - which is the ability to never lose your confidence, according to former Broncos cornerback Charles Dimry (himself over 6 feet) - has nothing to do with size. Quickness, both in foot speed and in hand speed, along with balance, vertical leap, body control, vision, controlled aggression, and courage are all important factors regardless of height.
Is there, however, a good example of a cornerback whose height has permitted him to use his (unusual) quickness to extraordinary example? If you were thinking of Michael Haynes, Hall of Fame cornerback and punt returner, you were right on the money. In a career that included stints with the New England Patriots and the Los Angeles Raiders, Haynes managed to garner 46 interceptions during that time and gained 1,159 yards as a punt returner over the course of his career. He was the Patriots' first of three 1st-round picks (5th overall) in the 1976 NFL draft. Haynes was a true rarity, a 6'2" cornerback who was both fast and quick. Obviously - if you have a cornerback who has that kind of height and yet does not sacrifice any speed or quickness, he has a chance to be something truly special. Haynes was. But as I watched more and more games, I realized how much of a rarity he was.
As I watched the plays, still not seeing this link between the taller receiver and the high reception out of the smaller CB's reach, I realized that the answers to why it didn't happen were many, but they were also fairly simple. Obviously, most cornerbacks are quick, fast and nimble. Many of them – most of them, in fact (since it's a job requirement), have excellent leaping skills and excellent hand speed. That turned out to be one thing that really did matter. In one sense, their job is much easier than the wide receiver's. They don’t have to catch the football – Hoosierteacher has pointed out that it’s far more important to consistently bat the pass away than it is to intercept it, although interceptions are certainly appreciated. Passes defensed is a much more important number than interceptions, at the end of the day.
Colinski has been writing on the Magic Inch idea recently. To summarize (I hope), he's referring to the fact that if Smith was a fraction of an inch taller and was thus listed at 5'10", for example, few would have blinked at drafting him. Is that fraction-of-an-inch all important? My belief is that it's not, and there are several reasons that I feel this way. They are the same reasons that the height advantage seemed overplayed when watching film.
The first reason is this – all the cornerback has to do is to deflect the ball. While it's a very good thing to intercept a pass, defending all of them is an even bigger job. The CB can leap, and at the top of that leap just nudge it enough to change its trajectory out of the hands of the receiver. He can do so with a single hand – most of them do - while the receiver, in most cases, needs to be able to grasp the ball with both. Most cornerbacks are very skilled at leaping - new Bronco Alphonso Smith is justifiably famous for his 'hops' ability, and it should stand him in good stead.
I can give you a second reason, and you can test it for yourself. Try this sometime – Standing next to a tall wall, leap upwards with one hand and tap a wall at the top of your arc. Notice how high you can reach this way. Now – try to leap up and ‘grab’ just about 6 inches above that mark (the height you'd need to grab a football) with both hands. Rarely will you be able to do so. That’s another reason that the cornerback has a strong advantage. Again, tipping the ball at the top of his jump and tapping the ball is all that’s necessary for a cornerback to make a play.
There’s a third reason, and you can see this during the course of any football game. In order to catch a pass, you usually have to reach up or out and get your hands around the ball, control it and bring it down or at least into your body in order to keep control. Consider this – from the moment before the ball reaches your hands to the moment you control it against your body, the ball is vulnerable, and so are you. Your obligation as a wide receiver is to bring it down – in other words, to bring the ball right into the cornerbacks’ area of interest. While you, the receiver, are bringing the ball down and into your body, the cornerback has his opportunity to knock the ball away. Height no longer matters, because if the cornerback is taller than your waist, you’re working for him.
That's why Alphonso Smith forced 6 fumbles between '07 and '08. This short internet show at the 'fumbles' link starts off by noting that 5'9" corners are generally nickelbacks in the NFL but states specifically that Smith defies that stereotype. It shows his leaping ability, timing and ability to get between the ball and the receiver, with photos to explain why that's true. It should be required watching for MHR members and visitors - agree or not, you'll understand the draft pick much better when you see it.
Is there an exception among receivers? Interestingly, the sole exception who is frequently named by players and coaches alike is former Viking and current New England Patriot Randy Moss. At 6’4", he is about the same size as Brandon Marshall. In different books, both Mike Shanahan and former quarterback Phil Simms mentioned Moss as a very rare 'someone' who lets the quarterback play ‘playground football'. If you put it up, Moss seems to have a unique skill at bringing it down, protecting it and completing the reception. But, according to each of them (Simms and Shanahan) that’s a single exception, and there are a lot of passes thrown every Sunday. I'm sure that there are other such players in degree (and Brandon Marshall also comes to mind), who also have some of this skill, but Moss draws the most attention. It's worth noting that at 6'4", Marshall is a lot taller than any of the NFL corners. It's one of his advantages, but much shorter CBs still stymie him at times. It's really about the skill of the corner, and I haven't heard a soul claim that Smith lacks that.
The fourth reason that the size issue seems to be overstated is that throwing the pass in such a way as to throw over the up-stretched hands of the cornerback but not to overthrow the receiver at playing speed requires an unusual level of skill, even for an NFL quarterback. Is it impossible? No, of course not . But it’s very difficult and much more so to achieve at game speed with any kind of consistency. Watch a few games for yourself on TV or on NFL Rewind and see for yourself. The exception? The fade route in the corner of the end zone, which teams practice diligently. That does work, but it seems to work equally well against taller corners too; I'm honestly not sure that height is a big advantage there. It's mostly physics and geometry - if you can throw the ball over the cornerback and over the head of your receiver and if the receiver is behind the corner he may, if thing are perfect, be able to catch the ball before stepping out of bounds. That can happen to any corner of any height. Is reach a factor? Always - but generally not a conclusive one.
There is just one more reason that you don't see that high reception and it has more to do with safeties than cornerbacks although it can happen with either. Putting that pass in high is often referred to as 'laying the receiver out'. Sure, if all the factors line up and the pass is thrown perfectly, you can, in some situations, throw it over the cornerback, just exactly high enough to permit the WR to leap and catch it perfectly. But if that happens, you'd better pray that there isn't a safety helping out over the top and just begging for such a circumstance to permit him his moment of fame on SportsCenter as he sledgehammers the receiver's kidneys clear through the front of his uniform. Perfectly legal, very desirable, perfectly miserable for the receiver and probable cause for a 'chat' between quarterback and WR regarding why that's a very, very bad idea.
This myth has taken on a life of its own. Some players and coaches and most of the pundits will affirm that you need height to guard height. But in the harsh lights of the game itself, that rarely seems to matter. It might be interesting to keep an eye out for this during the coming preseason and regular season and to make note of examples both for and against.
As far as the question of this 'myth', if it is one, apparently no one has told the 5'8" Darrell Green about it. He's currently sitting in the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio. Perhaps we should go there and ask him about it.
17 recs |
98 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Wow
Very compelling. The difference in height needed to tip and height needed to catch makes all the different in my mind and destroys the myth. Body control and reach plus vertical leap are much more important. Great post.
by phondonkey on Jun 26, 2009 11:47 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Great article..
But I would like to add to that idea of agility and timing being far more important than raw height. I have grwon so tired of over the last few seasons seeing well defended passes completed only because the corner back would repeatedly fall, stumble or jump too early or too late allowing the pass to be completed instead of broken up like they were in position to do. Bly was the worst at this, but I saw it from Paymah and Foxworth as well.
To cover someone perfectly and then at the last moment be unable to make the play is extremely frustrating to watch. Two things about Smith that I find exciting are:
He is, by all reports, almost always in position AND makes the plays.
Two his reach more than compensates for his loss of that inch in his hieght. As you point out so well, that extra inch of reach will more than offset the height factor and allow him to make the play. The fact that he apparenlty knows well how to position himself and use that reach is exciting to think about.
by AlanC on Jun 26, 2009 11:48 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point, Alan
But I would like to add to that idea of agility and timing being far more important than raw height.
That was intended as one of the points – thanks for making it better!
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also good point about the reach
I’de rather have a 5’9" CB with a long reach than a 5’10" CB with a short reach.
People can use statistics to prove anything, 87% of all people know that.
by c_style on Jun 26, 2009 4:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome
The Myth has overtaken! Thanks for pointing out what paid “experts” don’t. Keep it up!
"No matter how far a Jackass travels it will never come back a horse"
by SpaceCowboyInLG on Jun 26, 2009 12:00 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
My only criticism of Bear remains...
…that there is rarely much left to say or debate once he’s made his case.
Thanks, Bear.
I am an idiot walking a tightrope of fortune and fame
I am an acrobat swinging trapezes through circles of flame
If you've never stared off in the distance, then your life is a shame
and though I'll never forget your face,
sometimes i can't remember my name.
--Counting Crows, "Mrs. Potter's Lullaby"
by PredominantlyOrange on Jun 26, 2009 12:08 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
+1 PdO
"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
by KaptainKirk on Jun 26, 2009 2:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defending against the run?
While I don’t think his stature will be detrimental to his pass defense ability, I am somewhat worried about his ability to defend the run. I did not get a chance to see him play in college, so I don’t know if he can play the run at all. The 3-4 may help if teams try to target him in the running game (assuming he starts opposite Champ). I can envision the Chargers using 6’5" 230 lb Vincent Jackson blocking 190 lb Alphonso and trying to exploit that running stretch plays. Did teams try and run at Darrell Green routinely? I know Deion Sanders was atrocious against the run, but it seems to have not hurt the teams for whom he played. So maybe I am worrying over nothing.
Nicely done Bear! I enjoy reading your posts.
by DE_BroncoFan on Jun 26, 2009 12:20 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I think he'll be ok there.
From the link provided by BroncoBear…
Will come up and support the run…
23.5 tackles for loss, which means that he’s getting into the backfield and making the tackle when he gets there. Obviously that is over his entire college career, but I think it’s pretty good for a corner.
by solace on Jun 26, 2009 12:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smith V. Darius Butler
I was given pause by reports on Butler, whose ability in run support was questioned. I don’t know how valid this criticism was but the reports seemed well considered.
Oddly, from the attitudinal point of view, a Butler pick would have been much more popular with fans. Butler’s workout metrics and size — 5’10 — would have gone over well. And I don’t think he was a poor choice since he had notable supporters, such as Mayock. Moreover, there are those who’ve questioned Smith’s run support, but as you’ve noted above, solace, it’s hard to agree once one looks at his production.
I couldn’t find any flaws in Smith’s game during the pre-draft analysis period. As with many athletes, it was the combine’s results that prompted re-evaluations based on metric based rationales. And it wasn’t that Smith did poorly, but there was a slight shift in thinking on him because he lacked any outstanding physical metric that would justify using a high pick on him. He didn’t fall but others rose in the re-evaluation process.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 27, 2009 3:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any defensive player should be a good tackler. However....
That said, CBs are rarely the best at it. Not that they are “bad” at it, just not as good relative to the rest of the defense.
When looking for a good CB, I want him to be good at covering WRs above anything else. Bringing down a WR is easier than a RB (for several reasons I’ll add in a moment). Bailey is the rare superman that can do everything, and excel. I’m not at all worried about Smith. I don’t know how he does against the run, but he does HIS job very, very well. When a CB has to go after a RB, something bad has just happened to the defense’s play.
(Some of the reasons for it being rougher to tackle a RB: Tackling from the front instead of tackling a player catching a ball or in stride; momentum of a RB versus a WR who has other responsibilities [catching the ball, running the route, etc); RBs spend almost all of their time running with the ball in practice, while WRs spend much more time in passing drills; WRs are typicaly taller (easier to bring down); far more RBs are physical players than WRs; etc)
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jun 26, 2009 12:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Curiosly, Champ is one of the best tacklers
And that’s for ALL players, too. But it’s almost unfair to make comparisons to Bailey, since he does things that so few other players can do.
BTW — I’ve actually reconsidered the idea of a late career position switch to Safety for him because it might lessen the stress on his legs. It may not be an idea that you support in general, HT, but Champ’s leg problems in the last two years spurred the idea. There’s both good and bad reasons to support or not support the idea, but Bailey’s extraordinary abilities made this conjecture possible. And his picture perfect tackling form lead me to believe that tackling RBs might be easier for him than running with the faster WRs. I’d like to see Champ use his coverage ability as a FS, where he’d be freer in his coverage responsibilities and — hopefully — put less strain on his joints, tendons, etc.
Seeing Bailey on STs the last two years may have prompted this line of thinking. And I’d definitely like to take him off STs as we emphasize improving them. We can still improve without risking him.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 27, 2009 2:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with HT
If we are counting on Smith to make a lot of tackles on RB’s then we are getting killed anyway.
People can use statistics to prove anything, 87% of all people know that.
by c_style on Jun 26, 2009 4:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
One more factor with Smith
He may be an inch shorther than is “ideal” but he has arms that are slightly longer than is typical for his size. Overall, I’d say the hight issue is a wash.
"Don't feed the trolls. Remember to be polite. And please show self-restraint in comment length!" -Me, to myself, because I need constant reminding.
by Disco_Stu on Jun 26, 2009 12:31 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
+!
I was going to ask about that. The relevant stat shouldn’t be height, it should be reach. Unless you’re planning on deflecting passes with your head. Different position, but I still have nightmare images of “big” George Foster and his alligator arms.
by Chibronx on Jun 26, 2009 1:28 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great point, Stu!
I left that out of the final draft – thanks!
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 3:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
combine measurements
Smith comes in with a 31&½ inch arm, which can be compared to the other CBs’ measurements. It’s a fairly long wingspan for his size.
BTW — McBath comes in at 30&¾ and Bruton comes in at an impressive 34&¼. LINK
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 27, 2009 4:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Malcolm Jenkins
Sure. I’d rather have Malcolm Jenkins. But he’s 6’1" with a 32 1/2. Smith height 69" + 31 1/2 = 100 1/2. Jenkins 72" + 32 1/2 = 104 1/2. Smith ran a 4.52 and Jenkins a 4.55. Smith has bigger hands 9 3/4 than Jenkins 9 1/4. Smith jumped higher by a whole inch than Jenkins. Adjusting, extrapolating stats and adding intangibles and college performance, I think we got one hell of a promising pick. Jenkins (14) and Vontae Davis (25) were picked ahead of Smith (37), so we had the choice of Smith, Darius Butler (41), and Jairus Byrd (42). BTW, Vontae Davis 5’11 with 30 =101 and ran 4.49 with 9 1/4 hands.
by Endzone on Jun 27, 2009 5:18 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
metric misuse
The presence of metrics has led to their misuse in the evaluation process. The unenlightened layperson tends to view metrics as somehow meaningful in spite of not knowing their relevance. And there’s a tendency to exaggerate the importance of minute differences, probably because they’re presented as ordinal rankings. The use of quantitative data may invariably lead to this cognitive bias towards numerical data.
The correlation between where the CBs were drafted and how they performed at the combine is very loose. Some of the stellar combine performers were rewarded by being drafted higher than they would have sooner in the process, but the amount of movement is nearly always fairly slight. It’s usually players who are projected as late round picks who benefit the most, as they move into the middle of the draft by virtue of superior performances in combine drills.
— SEE STUDY: [ pdf ]
Combine drills & measurements are more like a diagnostic test than a metric of a purely causal relationship, which is what descriptions of athletic maneuvers imply. For instance, the 40yd. time is more useful than any other measure (for CBs), but if we adhered to it religiously we might have a tough time justifying Jenkins, or particularly Byrd (#42), whose 40yd. was around 4.68. The unspoken problem is that a few hundredths of second difference doesn’t, and shouldn’t, mean much. In absolute terms, there’s very little difference between many of the prospects, but two hundredths of a second difference became the basis for calling Smith “slow” and Vontae Davis fast.
Size doesn’t appear to dictate value for CBs either. The third round of the draft illustrates this perfectly as five of the CBs are either 5’9 or 5’10. The relationship between estimated ability (draft position used as a proxy measure for this) and size is just too weak to have much value.
What would be of more value is the results of the position drills, but, unfortunately, these are qualitative in form and therefore lack the objective-like appearance of numerical data.
It should be fairly obvious that Bruton is not our best coverage man at DB even though his performance on combine drills was exemplary and his physical measurements are too good to be true. The same can be said for Josh Barrett, but the point still evades some people. The use of drill metrics has become so pervasive that people discount production statistics (tackles, etc.) in favor of drill metrics, which are often only tenuously related to the task performed in games.
As aside — I’m sure glad the Nuggets didn’t make Ty Lawson run a 40 yard dash in order to justify drafting him and make him acceptable to some fans.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 27, 2009 8:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Metric Abuse
That’s kind of where I was going. The college production stats of Jenkins were impressive enough that I would take him over Smith. NOT BECAUSE OF HIS MEASURABLE PHYSICAL STATS. But Smith’s production stats are equally impressive to me. Maybe even more so because he has superior ball-hawking stats. The kind of stats that you can’t measure with a tape or a stopwatch.
Great pdf study. But it also falls short in that it says on page 40 that the #1 predictor of CB success is the 40-yard dash. As you say, “The use of quantitative data may invariably lead to this cognitive bias towards numerical data” even if the data is statistically meaningless aka “lying with statistics.”
I threw these measurables in because of the thread post by Disco_Stu. Draft picking and player selection, while helped with technical analysis, is more of an art than a science.
by Endzone on Jun 27, 2009 9:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I may be the Bear, but when it comes to draft data and metrics
It’s Colinski with the claws, my friend. lol
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 27, 2009 11:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
ON STATS
Jenkins did very well in the 3-cone and short shuttle, which are both predictive of success at CB, but his 40 time scared teams looking to draft him in the top ten — which is a different argument. Teams are leery about drafting certain positions in the top ten because of the average salary for those positions.
There’s two things going on — one, positional demand; and two, positional impact. M. McGuire of WF has done a fairly good treatment of this subject.
There’s no sense in locking in a high paying contract for a player when a better player can obtained through free agency at a lower price. The question is: is this player special? Is he unique at his position?
The consideration of positional impact asks whether any player at a certain position is worth paying top ten money. For instance, the best Center in the draft is never going to be able to influence a game the way a really good pass rusher could.
The funny thing is that McGuire considers CB to be a position that’s emerging as a “hot position,” i.e, an impact position (apparently). But it still requires that a CB has truly exceptional talent to warrant picking him in the top ten. Jenkins was the best CB in the draft but he failed to pass the ‘elite’ threshold.
Oddly, it was a version of this “elite” argument that was used against Alphonso Smith, but it was used invalidly. The argument against him went: you don’t draft a non-elite CB with a top ten pick, and the pick we used would/could have become that next year. But it’s NOT next year, and he isn’t paid an elite salary so the logic doesn’t apply. Moreover, we can’t argue that it’s never worth trading away a future pick any more than we can argue that it’s never worth buying on interest. The unstated attitude underlying this logic is that we’re in decline and shouldn’t try too hard to improve this season. It’s a variant of the “you should intentionally go in the tank for a number of years and you’ll eventually emerge because of all the high draft picks you’ll merit.” Considering that we acquired all (except the 5th) of these picks for Cutler, why not use them now and replace what we lost? Apparently our failure is in believing we can win.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 28, 2009 1:23 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
THis discussion wouldn't be complete without some mention
of the heavily distorted timing that appears to have taken place at this year’s combine. Differences within the class itself seem safe, but comparisons outside of this class may be erroneous.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jun 28, 2009 2:50 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Elite Argument and The Trade
I know it was discussed in Pierre Coghill’s post “How To Judge ‘The Trade’”, but here’s my take for what it’s worth.
Chicago got Cutler & a 5th rounder (WR Johnny Knox)
Denver got two 1st rounders (2009 + 2010), and a 2009 3rd rounder plus Kyle Orton.
- We used this year’s Bears’ pick on Robert Ayers (18).
- We have not yet used the Bears’ pick in 2010. We traded OUR draft pick to Seattle for their 2nd round pick and used it on Alphonso Smith (37). So part of the deal is still to be decided even though we probably would not have traded our own 1st round pick next year if we did not still have a 1st round pick next year. Seattle’s use of our traded 1st round pick next year is more relevant to valuing our acquisition of A. Smith.
- We used the 3rd round pick by packaging it with our own 3rd round pick for 1-2nd and 1-4th. The 2nd was used for Richard Quinn and the 4th for David Bruton. In my view, half of the Chicago trade can be attributed to each player.
- Plus Orton! He may turn out to be the best piece of the deal.
I agree that we might not have taken Moreno at 12 if we had not received the Bears’ #18 but I think there is still a high likelihood that we would have.
Alphonso Smith – I would rather have a 1st round talent with a 2nd round pick, even if not “elite” level, on the team this year than another unproven rookie next year to be drafted at an unknown place in the draft. Heck, I’d always like to get a 1st round talent with a 2nd round pick! Especially if I can get him for less money than a 1st rounder. 1st round salaries are a liability.
I cheered for the team when I heard we did not trade the Bears’ pick but our own pick next year to Seattle. That’s because we are going to win more games than Chicago! Gutsy call and an “in your face” defiance of the naysayers who believe the team is “in decline.”
These players will be under the microscope and compared to Cutler/Knox:
Orton, Moreno, Ayers, A. Smith, Quinn, and Bruton PLUS next years’ 1st round pick. I hope Cutler, Knox and Chicago do well because I KNOW we are going to do extremely well. I’d hate to have to say that Chicago got screwed ;)
Now it’s up to Alphonso to prove on the field that he is in fact an elite player. Not because of the draft but because he demands that level of play from himself.
by Endzone on Jun 28, 2009 11:50 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
additional thoughts on team building (long post warning)
The context in which ‘the trade’ was made will color the perception of it until enough time has passed. Fans won’t begin to forget until they see the new players in action and new loyalties are created.
One of the intriguing things that I uncovered in my re-reading of MM’s draftology is the emergence of CB as an impact position. And it’s pertinent to consider how we viewed the task of rebuilding/retooling the Broncos heading into this offseason.
CB wasn’t a high priority on many fans’ lists but it’s clearly a priority now that we’ve had time to reflect on our needs, away from the draft’s ‘Christmas buying frenzy’ that’s conducive to impulse shopping and not rational decisions. My own draft wish list gradually shifted from the Shanahan era/4-3 priorities to ones that sometimes looked very different.
Like many people, I started out wanting a DL or two along with a MLB and a Safety (or two). CB entered the list along the way, along with OLB, which became a shift from the inside (i.e., MLB → OLB) to the outside. I still clung to the wish for an ILB but it gravitated down the list until I settled for hoping for Brinkley in the 5th — a fairly low priority. Safety remained a priority throughout the regime change as did OL, which was as much a desire to address the running game as a need in itself. RB was on my list but I usually argued against a high pick, mostly because we could only add a limited amount of “impact” players since we only a had a few high picks — or at least we did.
EVERYTHING CHANGED
Having more picks changed our priorities. What was initially frivolous desires became realistic and sensible moves. And moreover, this was for the best. We didn’t have the draft picks to seriously address rebuilding before the Cutler trade. We could do a lot — certainly — but not enough to shift the team culture in more than an incremental way. It would have been a start but it would have only reminded people of how much was left undone.
SETTING THE NEW FOUNDATION
Grafting a few pieces upon the old foundation might have partly worked, and combined with the new scheme it may have taken hold, especially with some of the younger players who, at best, were emerging stars, and at worst, had yet to be integrated into our team. Many of the pieces were already here but their emergence was partly blocked by the pressure to perform today, a pressure that often favors veterans and stymies the development of younger players.
This year’s draft was only unsuccessful if viewed from a perspective that sees only deficits. And the desire to fill those deficits leads to unrealistic expectations about the impact of rookie defensive lineman. Supposedly, if we’d only drafted many more DLs then we would have had a successful draft. The problem with that belief is that they weren’t there (a fairly ugly and inconvenient fact), but also there’s a problem with starting rookie DLs, as in there aren’t many who can. Few rookie DLs become a force on defense in their rookie year, so what the pundits were expecting us to do was accept our ‘obvious’ mediocrity and lie dormant for a while, and this also explains why the Smith trade made so little sense to the punditocracy. Why trade a high future pick if you’re planning to lose? And, especially, why trade your own future pick when there’s a chance that you’ll lose badly?
What they, the MSM, knew about us was that we were a bad team. And we were only getting worse, and the Cutler imbroglio proved this and only the self deluded homers, drunk on the own Kool-aid and in denial, could miss what the pundits could see clearly from afar.
Oddly, it’s not as if subject of team building is new. We’ve discussed the problem previously in the context of what went wrong earlier in this decade, during the ‘draft drought.’ This is the period when we basically stopped adding talent through the draft. In essence, we stopped growing, and it was only a matter of time till the existing talent retired or left. That finally happened, somewhat suddenly, in 2006.
Successful franchises are constantly rebuilding and planning ahead. Our plan in the middle of this decade was to acquire ex-Cleveland Browns and shore up pieces of a team whose nucleus included players such as Wilson or Pryce. Once that nucleus was gone there was almost nothing left and we slumped into mediocrity. What’s amazing is not how bad we were but how good, as nothing about those teams suggests a real plan for improvement.
What we lacked for so many years — up until the 2006 draft — was an influx of new talent. What’s remarkable about where we are today is how much talent we’ve added in s short period of time. What we were missing earlier in the decade we now have in spades. Just look at the youth on our roster:
OFFENSE
QB – Orton, Simms (both are young yet experienced) – Brandstater (1st yr.)
RB – Torain (2nd yr.), Moreno (1st yr.)
FB – Hillis (2nd yr.)
WR – Royal (2nd yr.), McKinley (1st yr.)
TE – Quinn (1st yr.)
OT – Clady (2nd yr., pro-bowler), Harris (3rd yr.), Polumbus (2nd yr.)
G/C – Lichtensteiger (2nd yr.), Olsen (1st yr.), Schlueter (1st yr.)
DEFENSE
DE – Powell (2nd yr.), (?) McBean (3rd yr.)
NT – Thomas (3rd yr.)
OLB – Moss (3rd yr.), Crowder (3rd yr.), Ayers (1st yr.)
ILB – Woodyard (2nd yr.), Larsen (2nd yr.)
CB – Harris (2nd yr.), Smith (1st yr.)
S – Barrett (2nd yr.), McBath (1st yr.), Bruton (1st yr.)
What’s noticeable here is how many young players are on our roster. With a few exceptions, we could field a team (for a inter-squad scrimmage, perhaps) that’s composed entirely of 1st and 2nd yr. players. And that prospect might be scary considering how well young teams do, but now take a look at our veterans.
OFFENSE
QB — already mentioned
RB — Buckhalter, Jordan
WR — Marshall, Stokley, Gaffney
TE – Graham, Scheffler
G/C – Hamilton, Kuper, Wiegmann
DEFENSE
DE – Peterson, Clemons
NT – Fields
OLB – Dumervil, Reid
ILB – Williams, Davis
CB – Bailey, Goodman
S – Dawkins, Hill
This is not a complete listing but I’m trying to make a point. We’ve already added an enormous amount of youth to the roster, so it could even be argued that we started rebuilding a few years ago — even though we may not have seen it that way. Unlike the early ‘zeros,’ we’re flush with young talent and many of them have already proved themselves (to a substantial degree; not speculative) but there’s a nucleus of veteran talent to form the armature around which we can build.
I argued that the failure to retool our team in the early zeros was a critical error. It may not have been intentional but we stopped growing from within. This is a team with an enormous potential for growth, and they’ll be growing together. This point is crucial because the idea of a nucleus (IMO) is the continuity of playing together over a period of years, which allows for a synergism to develop.
We often speak of individual development as if it’s independent of the forces that shape it, but football is a team game and players develop together. No matter what, many of these players will be playing together for years to come, and the success of one player is often due to the effort a teammate who’s playing alongside him. It’s a growth process that can take years to unfold, and these players are going to play together long enough to make that success happen.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 28, 2009 8:20 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Great work Bear.
Some cream cheese and a bagel to go with the salmon!
I love reading anything about defensive backs, and I think your treatment of the height issue is dead on. Height is nice, but a player’s record is much more important. Like you, I don’t think height is a big advantage for the position (I’m 6’ 41/2", and even I don’t buy into tall being that big of a trait for DBs).
I never considered height when conducting tryouts. For CB, speed and agility were important, self discipline was important, and experience was a big plus (but not required). I did look at build in some positions, but really not at CB. What made tryouts the most interesting was fighting with the OC over who got which of the players. The OC I worked with for most of my years did trend towards taller receivers, so we didn’t fight much there. I wanted smart guys at SAF, fast guys at CB, big uglies on the line, and well rounded players at LB (with a lean towards speed).
Our tallest kids seemed to end up at TE more often than not, but I’m not sure if that was by design.
Again, great work, and rec’d!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jun 26, 2009 12:50 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, HT
I’m not Jewish, but I’ll never turn down a bagel and cream cheese, with and without salmon (especially Nova!)
I found that I had to cut a heck of a lot of info from this – it was turning into a tome rather than an article. There were issues of press coverage, man coverage, zone coverage, off coverage, etc, etc…I think that the upshot of it all was this – some smart professorial fella around here made note in an article on cornerbacking way back last year that the geometry of the position is such that keeping proper position and technique in defending cancels a great deal of the advantages of the receiver. The more I thought, diagrammed and wrote, the more that just sort of summed it all up, so I’m going to leave it at that!
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 3:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Green 4.25 40 yard dash, A. Smith 4.60 40 Yard dash, there is your difference
I have been harping on this for the simple fact that there are two things you cannot teach, height and speed. You make some excellent points, but I think the biggest thing that gets lost is that Smith will struggle (IMO) because of size and speed, he can’t body up WR and he won’t be able to keep up with them.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun" - Ash from Army of Darkness
"H.I., you're young and you got your health, what you want with a job?" - Evelle from Raising Arizona
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz from Repoman
by Broncoman on Jun 26, 2009 12:52 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
That's the highest Smith time I've seen.
He’s basically a 4.5 guy. Not a blazer, but unless you’re Champ Bailey or a handful of others, you’re rarely asked to run all over the field with a guy. The critics of his size and straight line speed forget that the ‘shutdown’ corner is a rare…and some say dying…breed. As I understand the Nolan scheme, the corners will play a lot of off man coverage, which Smith excelled at in college because of his technique, instincts, quickness and very dangerous hands.
If he’s asked to run all day with. say, Santonio Holmes, he’ll struggle…just like 98% of the CB’s in the NFL. But when it comes to the evolution of the spread offense, he’s just a year or two ahead of what will become the norm.
I am an idiot walking a tightrope of fortune and fame
I am an acrobat swinging trapezes through circles of flame
If you've never stared off in the distance, then your life is a shame
and though I'll never forget your face,
sometimes i can't remember my name.
--Counting Crows, "Mrs. Potter's Lullaby"
by PredominantlyOrange on Jun 26, 2009 1:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right on the time, PO
It’s more than that, too. We talked this nearly to death around the draft, but it keeps rising from the grave – in-line 40 speeds without equipment has little bearing on playing speed or ability. Can it matter? Yes. Does it matter depends on a ton of factors that are easy to ignore if your only point is that X guy ran the 40 faster than Y guy.
Here’s something to put this in perspective: “Smith is a great playmaker at the corner position. He has the potential to change games when on the field. Beyond his excellent ball skills Smith has shown to be a complete player with his ability to blitz and play the run. His lack of size and top end speed make him an ideal zone coverage corner, and with his instincts and playmaking ability he will be able to play the long side of the field in that scheme and be left out on an island at times. (From ”http://www.newerascouting.com/profiler/viewprofile.php?id=208 " >Newerascouting.com) In other words, he’s a natural boundary corner. A lot of the issue of ‘speed’ ignores the role of the corner in zone coverage. The free safety should be providing help over the top, as I understand this, and Smith, if this is about him (My point really isn’t, although he’s a good example of the reason height isn’t as big a deal as it’s being made into), should probably be in a cover 2 scheme or cover 3 formation.
By the way, I’d respectfully suggest that you look over all of the scouting reports on Smith that I listed in his Tales article. It covers so much of this that I’d just as soon not get too far into it all without just noting that it’s been covered. Remember – he’s only about 5’9.5 inches but 193 lb and plays incredibly strong, hence all of the run stopping and tackles for loss. His ability to hit in press coverage is also going to be very important.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 3:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
A little follow-up
I think this may fall under the “body position – agility” angle, but one of the primary skills required to play corner at a high level is the ability to “find the ball”. Having played corner in college, I know how tough this is – and it’s way different with helmets and shoulder pads on. It can appear that you have perfect position and have done everything right, but you have to know the ball’s coming and will likely have less than a second to react. The only other contrast to add (I’m not the first to dredge up one of these names here) is Lenny Walls vs. DWill. Nice post again BB!
It's "just" football
by Donkhead on Jun 26, 2009 3:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
good points Bear & PO
You make it believable that he could play in the NFL.
That’s it though.
Size is ALWAYS a plus. Weighed vs athletic ability, it can be offset but all things else equal… please.
I think also, that you should have concentrated your film watching in the endzone where smaller defenders are consistently beat out by an accurate throw to a taller WR (who in this league are getting more and more athletic)
And finally SPEED. It takes a LOT of ability to cover a guy who’s flat out faster than you! Here’s to hoping he has it!
by Whidbey Bronco on Jun 27, 2009 7:50 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I saw 4.56
The issue comes with makeup spped, the problem is that any team with a brain is going to line up their fastest guy against him and send him on a fly route and force the safety to commit to help him over the top and basically create a great big void underneath until it forces Smith close to the line and then they will go over the top. The point is that you are right in that there is a rarity in 4.35 guys at the CB, but that those guys generally can make up for a lack in height due to their spped and quickness, A. Smith may be technically very well schooled, but if you can’t keep up with a WR then technique matters not.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun" - Ash from Army of Darkness
"H.I., you're young and you got your health, what you want with a job?" - Evelle from Raising Arizona
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz from Repoman
by Broncoman on Jun 27, 2009 2:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd probably be with you...
…on the size/speed issue with Smith, but if you look at trends, with what offenses are doing now, and with the type of players in college right now, the trend is away from the Malcom Jenkins type and towards the Alphonso Smith type. The reason, IMO, is because the small, intinctive, quick corner is the better defensive weapon against the spread, which has taken basically taken over the college game. Its the direction the NFL is going, too.. Our frame of reference is the AFC West and variations of the WCO. We see Brandon Marshall, Dewayne Bowe, Javon Walker, Vincent Jackson, etc and forget that the NFL landscape as a whole went in a different direction. Chicago plans to live and die on Devin Hester, Welker in NE, Percy Harvin has all intrigued, etc, etc, etc.
That’s my philosophy on Smith in a general sense.
In a more specific sense, I’d like to point out that the only place his speed has ever been questioned is on a stop watch. Read every precombine report on the guy and he gets a positive for his ability to carry guys down the field. There’s combine speed and game speed, and with Smith they are clearly different.
I am an idiot walking a tightrope of fortune and fame
I am an acrobat swinging trapezes through circles of flame
If you've never stared off in the distance, then your life is a shame
and though I'll never forget your face,
sometimes i can't remember my name.
--Counting Crows, "Mrs. Potter's Lullaby"
by PredominantlyOrange on Jun 27, 2009 3:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alphonso Smith ran a 4.51 at the combine...
so I’m going to have to disagree with your assessment that he has 4.6 speed. Especially when you consider it is electronically timed. His time is only 5 one hundreth slower than the fastest CB at the combine (4.46 was the top time) and was within the top 15 CBs for the 40 yard time. He is certainly fastest enough to play the position at a very high level in the NFL. Also as PO and Bear said quickness and agility certainly a better indicator than straight line speed.
by DBronx777 on Jun 26, 2009 4:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
Game, set, match.
Good job.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jun 27, 2009 7:08 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
He ran a 4.51 at the combine and a 4.56 at his pro day
Not what I call blistering, that 5 one hundreths makes a ton of difference in the NFL. Normally I am not that big of a 40 yard guy, except for CB and WR where I think it is a good indicator. And the problem being if he was say 6’ 0" and ran that then I probably won’t be as concerened since he could at least physically muscle the opponent out of the way, but when you have to go against the top guys that can run a 4.45 and have a 4 to 8 inch height advantage, then all the quickness in the world will not help you.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun" - Ash from Army of Darkness
"H.I., you're young and you got your health, what you want with a job?" - Evelle from Raising Arizona
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz from Repoman
by Broncoman on Jun 27, 2009 2:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smith didn't run the 40 at his pro day
There are different times recorded during the combine, and an average of these times is often used but it depends on who’s doing the math, since methods of calculating the times vary (oddly). There are also unofficial (so to speak) and official times (or at least those on the the official NFL site). There are also hand timed results. And to add to the confusion, there was a problem with batches of electronic times, that may have been related to the hand timed nature of the starter for the electronic times.
The time you’ve cited is used on WalterFootball but it’s not what’s listed on the official NFL site. And several sources agree (DraftScout & F.F.Toolbox) that he did not run at his pro day.
Scott Wright, another NIC attendee, lists Smith’s time as 4.52. The official NFL site lists it as 4.51. It’s typical to see slight differences.
It should be noted that the times that Mark McGuire lists are nearly all slower for the CB group than what the official site lists. For instance, Darius Butler, who the NFL site lists as leading the CB group by running a 4.46, is listed as running 4.53, a scant 3 hundredths of a second faster than Smith in MM’s listing. The fastest CB in his listing is Vontae Davis, at 4.49, which is still too slow for the position according to some people.
It would be best to take these times with a grain of salt and look at the differences between players (of the same group, since timing problems were not uniform across different groups). Most pro day results dramatically improved on the Combine’s 40 times, but Smith elected to stay with his original time.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 28, 2009 2:41 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
should have kept reading
figures that you would have mentioned the timing issues! Ignore my above comment.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jun 28, 2009 2:53 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
has anyone else noticed....
that the times many people have listed don’t agree? I like to use the official NFL site and Scott Wright’s Draft Countdown, because the differences between the two are slight and vary consistently.
There’s actually a real big problem regarding how times are figured, that I posted on long ago but I’ll have to dig to find that post.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 28, 2009 3:19 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow...some math from a ditz...be ready to laugh
okay…so…like the two numbers seem kinda way small…to me anyway…i mean…like Green is 4.25 sec to get to 40 yards, and smith takes 4.6 sec to get there)…kinda way small time.
so…still having no clue as to what that means, i did some way ditzy simple math thingies…and here’s what i came up with
Time Green Smith Difference
1 sec – 09.4 yards – 08.7 yards – 0.7 yards
2 sec – 18.8 yards – 17.4 yards – 1.4 yards
3 sec – 28.2 yards – 26.1 yards – 2.1 yards
4 sec – 37.6 yards – 34.8 yards – 2.8 yards
5 sec – 47.0 yards – 43.5 yards – 3.5 yards
6 sec – 56.4 yards – 52.2 yards – 4.2 yards
7 sec – 65.8 yards – 60.9 yards – 4.9 yards
so…what does that all mean…wow…starts to look like Green is gonna…like…totally pull away from Smith…and then i started thinking bout all the stuff people teach on MHR
(1) Doesnt a quarterback like throw in less than five seconds mostly…so that’s gonna be 3.5 yards
(2) Doesnt the receiver start a little way away from the cornerback…like…say 3 yards back…so the 3.5 becomes 0.5 yards
(3) Doesnt the cornerback…like have to turn around cuz he cant be like champ and run backwards all the time…so he is gonna start kinda slow…and i got no clue how long that takes.
(4) And doesnt the cornerback…like…try to hit the receiver in the first part of the play to slow him down…and does that really work?
soooooo…i guess…if Smith is like got really fluid hips (sorta sounds like a girl thing lol) and is like way quick at running as fast as he can…and can slow the receiver down…then…omg…can he really do all those things?
help?
MHR...and proud of it!
by MHRsGirl on Jun 26, 2009 7:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know who loved this more
My wife or me. LOL
by Ponderosa on Jun 26, 2009 9:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do you think the NFL's emphasis on downfield contact impacts cornerback Size
great post Bear, reminds me of a theory that’s been rolling around my head for a little while. Let me know what you think
Before the NFL decided to make downfield contact a point of emphasis, large CB’s were becoming more and more common (ie. Lenny Walls). Lots of pundits predicted that Walls was a harbinger of a new generation of 6’+ CB’s, but that hasn’t happened. my theory is that the new rules favor a smaller, more agile CB. Previously, a larger, stronger CB might have been able to muscle the WR sufficiently to keep up with an otherwise faster WR, or at least to break up the offensive timing. Now a CB is required to keep in position on a WR while allowing him to run almost completely free. The WR is likely to be in perfect stride when the ball is passed, so the CB is going to need to break on the ball perfectly to defend the pass. All this requires speed, agility, and (very important in my opinion) the timing to break up a pass without getting called for interference. So the new rules may actually favor smaller, more athletic CB’s over larger, stronger CB’s.
Belief is accepting something because you’ve been convinced to do so, whether you like it or not. Faith is accepting something because you want to accept it.
by Hercules Rockefeller on Jun 26, 2009 1:25 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
you know, that's a very reasonable theory
I can’t say yes or no right off – no time yet to research it. However – I’d love to see some workups on this done and published under FanPosts – you’ve got the basis for a corker! Go for it!
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 10:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great, Doc
I love this kind of close observation and analysis. It’s almost meditative.
by Chibronx on Jun 26, 2009 1:30 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Darrell Green
Good article and interesting that you mention Darrell Green. I remember the year he was drafted towards the end of the first round and if I recall correctly, the Redskins grabbed him one pick before Denver, really upsetting the Bronco draft war room.
So, if Smith is that good, then using that 1st round choice was a good idea.
Time will tell.
by Baltimore Bronco on Jun 26, 2009 2:07 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Gotta say, BB, that's placing the bar pretty high
Smith isn’t going to play the way Green did – has even better leaping but less speed, great hand speed but probably not as much as Green and yet slightly more weight and is very strong for size. I’ll be happy if he just becomes a good #1 or #2 corner. Did you see what #3 corners were getting as FAs this year? If we can keep him in the on-field rotation for upper 2nd round money, that by itself might be worth it. Lots of things to balance, but I take your point.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 3:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
What matters to me is that he's shown he's a player
Give me a player with his intangibles and innate knack of making plays over the numbers anytime. On my hockey teams growing up size could be countered by speed and quickness. Hard shots could be matched by more acurrate ones. There’s lots of templates to make a football player desirable, his just isn’t one MSM values.
by Ponderosa on Jun 26, 2009 3:18 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not worried about his height
and BB you did a great job illustrating why that is an over-rated concern (great job and rec’d). I’m extremely impressed with A. Smith’s college production, but the thing that most impresses me is his character. He is smart and motivated, those are things you just can not teach a player to be. All his pressers and interviews just blew me away.
There certainly is a lot of controversy surrounding the pick, but a theme I constantly hear from the MSM is that every starting player in our secondary is over 30 years old. I think that is a valid point and to that point McD and X made the strategic decision to draft 3 defensive backs (2 in the 2nd round) to inject some youth at the position. While some may not have seen CB as a major need, it’s clear that the strategic direction of this team is to build youth behind savy veterans and prepare for the possibility of injuries in the secondary. To me that is just smart football…
by DBronx777 on Jun 26, 2009 4:25 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Interceptions vs. Deflections
Great article. When you mentioned that a cornerback doesn’t have to intercept the ball but simply deflect the ball, it made me wonder why the League doesn’t track deflections? It would seem the deflection, while not as important, effects the game just as much in preventing a play from being successful.
Im sure the team must honor and count deflections, but I haven’t seen those stats published.
by sfboggsz on Jun 26, 2009 4:28 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I believe they put it under passes defensed
Could be wrong, though. Anyone?
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 5:13 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Abbreviations
DEFENSE
G Games Played
S Games Started
UT Unassisted Tackles
A Assisted Tackles
TT Total Tackles
S-Yds. Sacks and Yards Lost
I-Yds. Interceptions and Yards Gained
PD Passes Defensed
FF Forced Fumbles
FR Fumbles Recovered
TD-Int. Touchdowns on an Interception
TD-FR Touchdowns on a Fumble Recovery
S Safeties
Pts. Points Scored
by Endzone on Jun 26, 2009 5:27 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Great Writeup Doc
You got me curious about the size of some of our old corners so I jumped on the NFL.com site to check their listed height & weight.
Alphonso Smith 5-9 193
Darrent Williams 5-8, 188
Dominique Foxworth 5-11 180
Champ Bailey 6-0 192
Dre Bly 5-10 188
Andre Goodman 5-10 190
Karl Paymah 6-0 195
Jack Williams 5-9 186
Lenny Walls 6-4 194
Kelly Herndon 5-10 180
Deltha O’Neal 5-11 194
Apart from Lenny Walls theres not much variation and hes not in the league anymore, it also seemed the taller they were (apart from Champ) the more average their cover skills (yes Lenny & Karl im looking at you..)
It was also interesting to see that of all of those listed Alphonso is the (4th) heaviest which has to help even against a larger reciever for being able to muscle for position on the ball.
Sorry about the format I couldn’t get the stats to line up.
Great write once again Bear.
by Scotto on Jun 26, 2009 5:49 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Great as always Bear!
I particularly like your point about once the WR starts to pull the ball in he is working for the CB at this point. Great point. Timing seems like the most important skill for a CB after reading this. It’s so simple but it never really ocured to me before. Imagine running at a full sprint watching a WR trying to sneak a peak at the QB and mean while trying to time your jump with how you match up with the WR you are covering. Now that is talent.
by ThorpeBroncosfan on Jun 26, 2009 5:58 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
As I said on Draft Day, I love Alphonso Smith
He plays much faster than he times, he likes to hit and has excellent tackling technique, and most rarely and importantly, he can catch. He will consistently be among the NFL’s interception leaders once he fully figures out what he is doing (which shouldn’t take too long, because he’s very smart.)
Remember the story of the final exam riding on the dart throw. That’s the kind of guy I want with the game on the line.
Doc, great piece as always, and rec’d
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Jun 26, 2009 6:08 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Smith will be fine
The 40 yard times were mentioned. Do the WR’s really run there routes at their top 40 time every play while making their cuts and so forth? I dont think so, but I could be wrong.
by bronclover4ever on Jun 26, 2009 9:12 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
bc4e - You're not :-)
BTW, thanks, Ted. You know, 1 inch and 13 lb heavier and Smith would be a heck of a safety. He loves to hit, as you say, his tackling technique is great (catch me, I’m fainting – Oh, sorry, yeah, a bit big for that…) and that’s as rare as hen’s teeth in this league and he’s smart, football smart, hard working, confident and incredibly talented. If he only had some character…..oh, he does, doesn’t he? Hmmm – guess getting him for 2nd round wages might be a nice thing after all.
But you know, while Smith’s case was the initial interest, that quickly gave way to the basic questions of the issue. That usually happens to me. The story becomes the study of the question, not the concern about the individual. I mentioned that I had to cut a lot of geometry charts and stats – even I wouldn’t have read all that, but everything still came out the same. Sure, with the right arm length, hand size, foot speed and agility, height is nice. However, since there are so few like that, you have to look at the issues that do matter and see how the fellow plays the danged game. The more film I watched, the less the issue of height seemed to matter In Real Game Situations. The rest is just bar talk.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 10:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not that I focused on it
But I saw VJ, Gates and Floyd (all about 6’5") grab a bunch of jump balls last season. With that much height in the receiving corps, height mismatches came up more often. I don’t dispute your main points, but think perhaps it is slightly overstated. Speed, height and instincts, I think you want at least two of those at corner. Here are my top three corners:
Asomugha, 6’2"
Charles Woodson, 6’1"
Corey Webster, 6’
In watching the highlights of Smith, he clearly has great hands and to some extent his height seemed to make QB’s miss him waiting in the weeds; he lays a good hit on too. I’ve seen at least two articles that say he struggled against tall receivers, but no details. He does look to have a great jump.
My big question is why cb with a first rounder? Denver needs to upgrade their defensive front 7 in the worst way, they had four first round choices between this draft and next and have now used two on other positions. The Pittsburgh Steelers hammered us in the regular season with backup corners, one was sitting on his couch the Sunday before. If your front seven bring heat, you can get by with average corners, but even great corners aren’t going to stand up if you can’t rush the QB.
"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman
by Brian (DaBolts) on Jun 27, 2009 11:57 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Champ
You left out Champ? OK, he’s 6"
Any discussion of CB’s has to factor in safeties. Our CB’s didn’t get any help last year from our safeties (and coaches). When a “jump ball” pass to a WR is above the reach of the CB it is the safeties’ job to make the WR fumble or at least make him think twice about trying that kind of play again. Height makes no difference when a “flat ball” pass is thrown.
JeffG’s comment below regarding Darrent Williams…I remember a few of those plays, but I thought he was NOT in a good cover position. Same thing with Dre Bly last year. The safeties were not playing well (and coaches) and so the CB’s were left hanging 10 yards off the WR because they had to lend support to the safeties. It was a tribute to their play abilities that they were able to get close to the WR by the time the ball got there. Adding to the frustration was the selection of DT personnel and Nate Webster leading to a non-existent pass rush and being bullied by opposing OL’s. The team released Engelberger, Ekuban, Robertson, and Webster, Winborn, Boss Bailey, Manuel and McCree, Paymah and Dre Bly.
by Endzone on Jun 27, 2009 12:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same thing with Dre Bly last year. The safeties were not playing well (and coaches) and so the CB’s were left hanging 10 yards off the WR because they had to lend support to the safeties.
Your safeties were sorely lacking, that I won’t dispute and I like the guys the Broncos went out and got at safety for next season. But one of the teams I saw get hurt with jump balls was Indianapolis. Tim Jennings at 5’8" had all kinds of trouble and then melted down in OT with the two penalties; the Colts safeties are good, Bob Sanders is great. None of which is to say that Alphonso won’t pan out, but it will be harder for him.
"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman
by Brian (DaBolts) on Jun 27, 2009 7:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
here's what struck me when looking at the Safeties
I was looking around the league when we were in the FA market.
Polamalu – 5’10
Sanders – 5’8
Reed – 5’11
Dawkins – 6’0
Looking at some of the Safeties in the draft we find;
Louis Delmas – 5’11-⅜
Patrick Chung – 5’11-¼
Rashad. Johnson – 5’11-¼
Jairus Byrd – 5’10-⅛
I’m not saying there’s a spurious connection between size and ability, but I was struck by how many important Safeties, both in the NFL and in the draft, were not ‘big’ players. Many of these newer breed of Safety seem to have more coverage responsibilities — or at least that’s my impression — so It’s not surprising that their somatotype has changed to reflect the way they’re now being used.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 27, 2009 10:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jairus
It is interesting to me that Jairus played CB in college. The Bills immediately announced they would move him to safety.
Colinski, you rock! I look forward to your always well reasoned posts!
From Wikipedia:
Safeties are the last line of defense, and are thus expected to be sure tacklers. In fact, many safeties rank among the hardest hitters in football history. As professional and college football have become more focused on the passing game, safeties have become more involved in covering receivers.
Similarly to offensive skill players, the cornerback position demands exceptional speed and agility. A cornerback’s skillset typically requires proficiency in reading the quarterback, backpedaling, executing single and zone coverage, disrupting pass routes, shedding blockers, and tackling. The chief responsibility of the cornerback is to implement his coverage skills and tackling abilities to defend against the forward pass.
by Endzone on Jun 27, 2009 11:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Da Bolts...good points on CB...
But lets not get into Drafting strategy.
If you have been following the number of posts here you would have seen that this drafting of Smith was in keeping perfectly with the strategy that Denver were following…it had nothing to do with front 7, as that was not the strategy.
There was no REAL value anywhere along the D line in the first 2 rounds, or even very good value the whole draft.
D Line was addressed in CFA.
The Broncos drafted on philosphy, culture and character with BPA at the fore of that.
Peace.
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Jun 27, 2009 3:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK
I haven’t followed all the discussions on Bronco draft strategy, but Orakpo and Ayers this draft, then two more first rounders in the next (2010 is reputed to be deep) and I think the Broncos would have laid the foundation for a fearsome unit. I’m not saying a great CB doesn’t make a great addition to any team, but the front seven are really in every play. As it is Doom has real talent despite the down year, but in the 3-4 I’m wondering if he is really going to be able to drop into coverage if they put him at OLB.
"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman
by Brian (DaBolts) on Jun 27, 2009 7:11 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
This might help – HT’s analysis of the draft and why they went that way. Doom will probably spend more time at rush linebacker, but your point on coverage is one that we are also looking for in training camp.
As far as Orakpo/Ayers – yes, there are those who like that thought. My feeling is that those two are similar, although Ayers is much more versatile (and he did play standing up at times in college, played well that way and liked doing so). Since we’re moving to a 3-4/3-4 hybrid and are deeper at LB right now, they probably ran that scenario and didn’t like it. I know that a lot of scouts aren’t convinced at Orakpo’s ability to play against better talent, too, although I have no idea if that came into it.
I was one who was in favor of the Moreno pick – you’re just jealous because SD wanted him at 16 ;-) Besides, fella – easy for you to day, sitting on Tomlinson, Sproles and now Johnson…lol. We really did need to gain youth and ability at RB – from what we hear, Hillis is going to be placed in several slots and the others besides the oft-injured Torain are older and are coming off of injuries themselves.
So, it looks like they’re betting that Bingham can make the step up to DE? I am one who liked the English pick, by the way. Tough young man, very talented and it gave them insurance against Merriman not being all the way back or contract issues with him next year. I’m stunned, btw, that the Chiefs are thinking that Mike Goff is their answer at guard. Sure, but what’s the question?…
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 27, 2009 7:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ayers
Was who I wanted with exactly your reasoning on English; I have to say English threw me totally off. The more I learn about him, the better I understand the pick, and those OLB’s make or break the 3-4. I’m a little worried that the competition level he faced might have played a factor in how well he did, I’d also like to see just a skosh more speed. One thing I like is in his highlights, he is all business. Even after making crushing plays, he is methodically lining up for the next down. The Chargers could stand more of that.
You’re right, the Broncos may well have sniped AJs first pick in Moreno, and a clock burner is a godsend to a defense; LT certainly did that for the Bolts in the rebuilding years. Moreno seems to have all the tools, I was worried he might be just a bit slow too. Jeeze, I think I’m turning into Al Davis in my old age. Ayers was the Bronco pick I really liked; that and your Safety signings were perfect. That said, HT has forgotten more football than I know, so maybe I’m overly pessimistic about the Broncos, he certainly is enthusiastic.
So, it looks like they’re betting that Bingham can make the step up to DE?
I want to see Cesaire there, but they will probably end up splitting time. Vaughn Martin will probably see some downs too; now I love that pick. He will take a few years to develop but he is smart, athletic and mean. I’m hoping to see him in short yardage out of the backfield too.
I’m stunned, btw, that the Chiefs are thinking that Mike Goff is their answer at guard. Sure, but what’s the question?
I know, right? We couldn’t run right at all, and the right fell down on pass coverage a lot. Clary may or may not be part of the problem, but Goff absolutely was. Goff would be a great backup and provide veteran leadership, I just don’t see him as as a starter anymore. I couldn’t believe they traded Gonzalez either, he consistently tore the Chargers secondary apart. I’m dying for the pre-season to start.
"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman
by Brian (DaBolts) on Jun 27, 2009 9:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
Jeeze, I think I’m turning into Al Davis in my old age
I dunno Brian – are you having fantasies about monochromatic leisure suits, public tirades and changing wives every season? If so, you could consult your friendly mental health professional……
Yes, they aren’t going to give it to Jacques unless he really takes it in TC. You had to love the Martin pick – I have no idea if the guy will mature into playing at this level but if anyone ever had a shot (and deserved one) it’s him. Besides – how often do you get a player big enough to need his own area code? Fella’s immense.
No matter what they’re telling people, Scott Pioli knows that he’s toast this year and probably next and he’s working on getting players for the year after that. If you wanted a shot at the division even next year you need Gonzales, or to have the next Gonzales on the bench and I haven’t heard a soul yabbering that one. As far as the Broncos this year – I’m not worried one way or the other. For the first time in several years I’m happy with the direction that the team is going in. I prefer the schemes, as far as we know that. Lots of the Broncos players are not only fired, no one is talking to them which explains a frightening lot about last season. We are building this strange thing called a ‘defense’ and they’ve realized that special teams isn’t the same as ‘special class’ which is also admirable.
I liked our draft quite a bit and FA went as well as it could. Will we be better? Absolutely. The competition this years might be higher for all concerned. Although teams often change greatly year to year, AFC North/NFC East is not a tiptoe through the tulips. Given the situation, I’m not that worries about the standings this year – I want to see us become competitive each week. If we do, we’ll win our share and continue to develop. If not – the peasants will be out with torches and pitchforks, and I love a parade…….AJ mostly stood pat this off-season. I’m also gazing with interest at whether you folks can hold serve. Gonna be a great season. Nice to talk to you again, my friend.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 27, 2009 11:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
For the first time in several years I’m happy with the direction that the team is going in.
That’s a good feeling; I remember Butler that way.
Nice to talk to you again, my friend.
Same here!
"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman
by Brian (DaBolts) on Jun 28, 2009 10:08 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thans Da Bolts...great posts and nice having you here....thanks for the info!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Jun 28, 2009 6:17 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks!
"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman
by Brian (DaBolts) on Jun 28, 2009 10:09 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Over the last two years
Denver hasn’t been able to stop anybody whether they brought pressure or not. The ‘coverage’ sack might as well be a unicorn around these parts. Interceptions have been more rare than Sasquatch sightings. The Broncos started a CB last year that couldn’t even make the Chargers last year.
In otherwords, the whole front seven thing simplified things nicely for those that wanted to believe that we were a Brian Orakpo away from the promised land. The fact is, the secondary was just the next scapegoat. Thank god McD took a closer look.
I am an idiot walking a tightrope of fortune and fame
I am an acrobat swinging trapezes through circles of flame
If you've never stared off in the distance, then your life is a shame
and though I'll never forget your face,
sometimes i can't remember my name.
--Counting Crows, "Mrs. Potter's Lullaby"
by PredominantlyOrange on Jun 27, 2009 3:28 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice job broncobear
Good analysis and I hope Smith steps up big for us. I just hope we can get some kind of pass rush to help our DB’s out. I know we are going through changes on defense so I don’t expect a whole lot, but some pressure would be nice.
GO BRONCOS IN 2009 AND BEYOND!!
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Jun 26, 2009 11:06 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
You bet, weazel
The intereaction of the two areas of play is well documented and I share your concerns. I’ve recently been reading some information put together by CoastalBronco that tends to convince me that the DL, while poor, didn’t do quite the terrible job that’s been blamed on them. I know – I’m having trouble agreeing, but the stats are pretty interesting.
That being the case, where was the biggest problem? Sure – getting to the QB. I’m in the camp that saw the fact that those we cut in the offseason can’t even get offers from other teams and the bizarre decisions (again) on scheme to be two sides of the same puzzle – as has been commented on, our defensive players were sort of the second class citizens of Broncos Nation. I believe that ‘improvement’ is a pretty low bar here, but that proper use of players like Moss (I read some of his scouting reports recently and just wondered – what on earth were the Broncos doing trading up for a fair 3-4 OLB?) and Doom as well as Woodyard and a few others will have a beneficial effect, as will having a better DL scheme and coach. Nunnely is an impressive guy and I’m hoping that he and Nolan will work well together.
We do have some very good options for a change. Now to put them to work! Thanks for the comment, weasel – always a pleasure to read yours.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 26, 2009 11:50 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The same could be said for Crowder too Doc!.....why did the a 4-3 team take him.
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Jun 27, 2009 5:33 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the response
and I see what you are saying. We have dealt with Shanahan taking guys other teams don’t want and now McD and the staff are reversing that. The more I look at it, it is quite funny that nobody wants the players we dump. Hopefully with the change some of our players will be able to put their skills to better use than what we had before.
GO BRONCOS IN 2009 AND BEYOND!!
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Jun 27, 2009 9:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
definitely rec'd
CB is my favorite position to watch, very nice read
"Have you ever heard of the emancipation proclamation?"
- "I don't listen to hip-hop"
"Born like this / Into this"
by BroncoJoe311 on Jun 26, 2009 11:25 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Although not nearly at the same level as NFL
I played corner and a “valve safety” in high school. All valve safety is (by coaches definition) is being the third safety in desperate situations.
Anyways, back to the corner game. I played corner from 7th grade through senior year and I’m only 5’9". I was only 5’8" in high school and I never EVER had a problem playing against tall recievers. Like I said, it was high school level, and I didn’t go up against Randy Moss. However, in the state regionals we played Notre Dame High School out of LA I believe, and their number 2 receiver (I covered weak side) was 6’5". He was also the starting center for the basketball team in the spring. Anyways, I matched up to him all day long although my coaches were concerned that the 9 inch difference would cause him to walk on me all day. The only time he caught passes was when he would cut a slant pattern up the middle and was able to squeeze in between the safeties. That’s the ONLY time he caught a pass. When it came to the attempt at catching the high ball, he got leveled a few times by our awesome free safety.
So my point here is this: As long as you have safeties that can cover your behind in the event that a 6’4" Randy Moss is going over your highest reach, you’re going to be just fine. Those safeties do love to hit don’t they?
Peyton Hillis is also referred to in early Greek mythology by his other names such as Zeus or Poseidon.
by Joe Medina on Jun 27, 2009 12:41 AM MDT reply actions 1 recs
rec'd comment
Awesome personal story Cali. I love to hear stories about what happened with members who played some HS ball.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jun 27, 2009 7:00 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I am a High School DB coach (emphasis on safeties). In our league, we have a lot of receivers over 6’2" (our 3 starting receivers are 6’2", 6’4" and 6’4"). My CB’s are both about 5’9" and my safeties are both about 6’. What I tell my CB’s when we play a taller receiver is to get in there face and make them work; take them out of their comfort zone. If you get beat, you have over the top help. I tell my safeties that playing a tall receiver is a dream come true – if they try to throw the ball over the corner (jump ball), my safeties are taught to run through the receivers chest and knock him into the bleachers. We had some GREAT knockout blows delivered by my safeties against tall receivers last season. We had a motto . . . “Catch at your own risk!”
"The men who have done big things are those who are not afraid to attempt big things, who were not afraid to risk failure in order to gain success."
- B.C Forbes
by HSFBCoach on Jun 27, 2009 9:42 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks a bunch HT.
And it should be known, because upon reading that comment over, I realize I sound incredibly arrogant.
He didn’t catch balls off me because I was that good, he didn’t catch balls of me because I made sure he didn’t have a chance to get that thing secured after the initial contact with the ball.
In a strange way, I loved being the underdog in that way because the first time that 6 foot plus wideout tries to show off, I would level him as hard as possible. I love being in the “sweet spot” where I’m not RIGHT on him, but I’m not 5 yards out either. That sweet spot right in between when I can get a nice shoulder to his gut if he makes the catch midair. 9 times out of 10, a receiver that takes a haymaker mid-air is NOT going to keep that ball.
Peyton Hillis is also referred to in early Greek mythology by his other names such as Zeus or Poseidon.
by Joe Medina on Jun 28, 2009 1:10 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
small and slow is good?!
uh uh. the league, like the world, is going bigger, stronger, faster. a really good small (and/or slow) athlete is a rare find in any pro sport but jockeying (is that a sport?). i hope we found the rare one, but his size and speed shouldn’t be sugar coated—it’s not a plus at all.
by oxmouth on Jun 27, 2009 1:12 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
There's nothing to sugar coat
Being one of three players this decade to achieve what he has in the last level he played in doesn’t require any sugar coating. He isn’t slow, as the discussion showed, and the entire point of the article – which I don’t know if you read – is that the degree of his height has not bearing that I can find in actual evidence. If you have other evidence, please – join the discussion.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 27, 2009 2:02 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
okay.
I did mean to be part of the discussion and I did read your article. In any case, what I’m saying is that no, you don’t need height to guard height but it certainly helps. The average height of CBs in the HOF is over 6’0" and that’s skewed down quite a bit by Green at 5’8". There’s more good DBs at 5’11" plus than there are under 5’10" and there’s reason for that.
Anyway, if what you’re saying is that CB height is preferable but not necessary, I agree and will hereby stand down duly reprimanded.
by oxmouth on Jun 27, 2009 4:45 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that IS what Bear is saying.
I said something like that in one of my comments as well.
Height IS a good thing, but it is a plus, not a central neccessity. There are other factors for a CB that should be much more important. For some reason, a lot of folks beleive that height is one of the required assets for a CB. It helps, just not as much as folks would seem to think.
I don’t think that you and Bear are far apart, if at all.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jun 27, 2009 7:05 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed.
i think it’s kind of two sides of the same coin kind of deal. the strange thing is that i’ll look at bear’s article and agree with it, then look at it again and not really agree at all somehow. either bear’s article is magical or it’s just another victory for my dying brain cells. probably a little of both…
by oxmouth on Jun 27, 2009 9:13 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll go for magical ;-)
I apparently can start and argument without saying anything – and that’s Magic!
lol. We’re not apart at all. There’s nothing to sugar coat because all of the above arguments against Smith keep dealing with a mythical situation. If you just look at production – his is danged near unreal. When the arguments get into a statistical measure of who is in the hall – but ignore the simple fact that some guys at his height or smaller are just incredible good – you lose me on the Smith argument.
When you get into an endzone argument – that’s fair, sort of. I’ve watched a ton of film and most of the ‘jump ball’ reception were high throws NOT to avoid the corner, but to get over the stack at the line. Are there a few of the JB receptions that avoided the corner? Yes – very few, and every one of them had to pull down the ball into the cornerback’s area of interest, as noted above. Otherwise, you’re into the geometry of the arc over all players onto an endzone corner fade route. I’ve seen the geometry (it’s not my field and I had to acquiesce to the guy who showed me) and that 1/2 inch that would have made folks happy with Smith was of very little concern.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 27, 2009 4:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
at this point
it only makes sense to change your name to “magic bear”. (this, to me, is preferable to the other option of “dead brain cell oxmouth”. yours would seem a lot smoother… and less insulting to me. :-)
i hope you’re right on smith. i’m excited to see if all the danged near unreal production boy can make it work in the nfl, with all the big (and fast) boys.
and just to clarify, i wasn’t one of those who wanted the extra 1/2 inch on smith. i was the one hoping for an extra 2 to 2 1/2". see, i’m not one of those ignorints…
by oxmouth on Jun 28, 2009 10:41 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've been a defender of the Smith pick
…because from a football sense, based on where the Broncos had him graded, it was almost a no brainer.
His production in college is unquestionable; and nearly every scout believes he can make the transition to a top-flight pro corner, worthy of a round one pick.
Still, re: height, anecdotally, I can recall a number of occasions where Darrent Williams was out jumped for receptions by taller receivers — even though he was in good cover position.
Whether the extra inch Smith has on Williams — or the lack of that magic inch that separates him from corners that don’t have the “height concern” attached to their scouting reports — will make a difference is, for me, still a concern.
I think his ball hawking, vision, intelligence, heart, and quicks will make him a fine NFL corner; but because I have memories of Williams getting out-fought for jump balls, I’m worried, nevertheless.
Bear: when you were doing your research, did you go back and look at Williams’ games? Because maybe my memory is faulty — and it’s my lingering doubts on the issue of height projecting vivid images of things that never happened.
by JeffG on Jun 27, 2009 11:05 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love D Will...
But Smith is in a different class in my opinion.
I loved D Will for his ST role, but he should have NEVER been a starting CB. He would have been a good nickel, but his reading of play was pretty shoddy.
He was strictly a reactionary player (go watch how Manning and Wayne torched him…..D Will had no idea what was going on and struggled to anticipate plays) as Smith reads play REALLY well and is an opportunistic player who anticipates plays well.
RIP D Will!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Jun 27, 2009 3:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't have that film available
But I wish that I did, if only to enjoy watching that very fine young man
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 27, 2009 4:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alphonzo Smith's vertical height won't be a problem,
certainly as you mentioned bear, his ability to flip the hips in motion, and jump high enough to bat the ball down. That’s basically what it’s all about.
We see great wide receivers who have eye/brain coordination, estimating the trajectory and speed of the ball, and distance of travel, while making a decision of which direction to juke the defender, all in one moments time. That is very hard to do and makes some of the players very special. Great post bear.
by bfree2bronc on Jun 27, 2009 7:21 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Tanier on Smith & short CBs
Just thought this was relevant.
Broncos, No. 37
Alphonso Smith, CB, Wake Forest
In Short: A tiny big-play machine.
Positives: Quickness, ball skills, return ability, instincts.
Negatives: Height, overconfidence.
Smith’s production in 2007 and 2008: 15 interceptions, six forced fumbles, three sacks, a blocked punt, and three touchdowns. It’s surprising that Smith lasted until the second round; give the new Broncos braintrust credit for trading up to grab him. They need to get younger, deeper, and better in the secondary, and Smith can make an immediate impact, both as a cover corner and a return man.
Smith is only 5-foot-9, and his height no doubt scared a few teams off. He’ll lose a few jump balls, but height is an overrated attribute in a cornerback. Smith’s quick hips, good footwork, and (most importantly) instincts in zone coverage will make him a player.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 27, 2009 4:21 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Good find Colinski
and really though, how many times throughout the season does a 5’9" CB need to go as high as possible to reach the height of his receiver? Aside from that, even Randy Moss won’t get up to his full jump height when he’s mid-stride.
Peyton Hillis is also referred to in early Greek mythology by his other names such as Zeus or Poseidon.
by Joe Medina on Jun 28, 2009 1:12 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Height, Overconfidence?
Thank you, may I have another?
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jun 28, 2009 2:58 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Height
It is with height as it is with all measurables, all else being equal, having more is better. If we had two identical CBs in every way, except one could run a 4.35 40 yard but the other runs a 4.55 then the 4.35 guy is going to be ranked higher, the same with height, a 6’1 CB will be ranked higher than an identical 5’9 CB.
How much should be put into these measurables is debatable, are you willing to settle for someone with a little less long speed to get better cover skills, how important is jumping and fluid hips, how important is hand-eye coordination compared to arm length.
Champ Bailey can for all intents and purposes be used as the blue print, he is lightning fast over longer distances, has hips made entirely from water, his hand eye coordination and instincts are second to none, he can jump and take off with anyone in football and his size is taken directly from a defensive coordinators wet dreams. Alphonso Smith clearly isn’t as fast on long routes as Bailey and he gives up as much as 4 inches at the finger tips when stretched vertically compared to Champ Bailey, however most of his other skills and measurables compare quite well to Champ.
The other problem shorter players can have is that they have a harder time packing on weight because their frame can’t necesarily support a lot of weight without losing balance or agility. Because of his build Smith doesn’t have this problem which means he won’t be a liability on tackles after the catch or against the run since he has the weight of a taller cornerback and can use his size to get good leverage and a low center of gravity.
Smith should work very well in zone where he can face the QB more than in man coverage and in a system that would allow him to peek into the backfield and take the underneath position with safety cover over the top. This should play to his ball skills and would minimize the detriment of his size as he can time his jumps better when he sees the ball coming rather than reacting to the WR.
by gyldenlove on Jun 29, 2009 3:55 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
good point
The other problem shorter players can have is that they have a harder time packing on weight because their frame can’t necessarily support a lot of weight without losing balance or agility. Because of his build Smith doesn’t have this problem which means he won’t be a liability on tackles after the catch or against the run since he has the weight of a taller cornerback and can use his size to get good leverage and a low center of gravity.
yes, there’s a lot of to said for a guy with his build and his speed (we may never know exactly what that is – The timing at the Combine this year was horrible – everyone didn’t simultaneously get slower) and add on to that the fact that he does have unusually long arms, big hands and great leaping ability.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 29, 2009 4:43 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Way late but...
its already been said by everyone before…
1) Yes, all else being equal faster and taller is better… but not if its a trade off for cover skills, etc. Smith is perfectly capable of being fine, if the things he does well (ball skills, agility, etc.) are better than those for other guys that are taller/faster.
2) Great work as always BBear… thanks again for putting the article and research together.
by cjfarls on Jul 1, 2009 1:31 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
