Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by joeymac49s:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by joeymac49s:
For all those people out there that are saying a good pass rusher (Von Miller/Rober Quinn) is much better then a shut down corner (Peterson/Prince) how well did it do for the pass rush specialist Pittsburgh Steelers?? Who lead the league in sacks. If your secondary is swiss cheese you have no chance. Which is why since day 1 I've been saying if Peterson or Prince are at #7 we have to take them over a pass rusher. Lets face it, the Steelers have Harrison at 10.5 sacks, Woodley at 10 sacks and Farrior at 6 sacks this year and they were non-existent during the Super Bowl. Peterson/Prince in 2-3 years will be shut down CB's. Its much harder to find one of those then a pass rusher.
Harrison and Woodley each had a sack in the game, whilst Frank Zombo had one for the Pack. And the play of the game came from Clay Matthews, another pass rusher who caused the fumble.
Harrison, Woodly, Farrior and Timmons. The Steelers biggest strength had 2 sacks and 8.5 tackles. Are you really trying to tell me they had a big impact on the game? The way the Packers played, by spreading them out (not to mention the Packers O-Line played their hearts out) took the LBs out of their comfort zone and they were able to pass the ball pretty much at will. Yes the game was a 6 point game but think about the 2 dropped TD's the Packers had. That game could have been a lot uglier.
Farrior and Timmons are ILB's. What we are talking about is pass rush vs cornerback.
It wasn't the Steelers day. Polamalu had little to no impact as well. It happens. It was also one game. The Steelers made it to their 3rd SuperBowl this decade without a shutdown corner, but with a strong pass rush and a great front 7.
Look at the Colts, no shutdown corners but a good pass rush.
The Giants beat an unbeaten Patriots team with pass rush and pressure, not with shutdown corners.
I could cite examples of teams that have great secondaries or have had them and how important that was to their success but each of those teams usually had a great blue chip pass rusher, or at least a couple of really solid pass rushers. We don't have that, nor have we in a long time.
Another example, the Dallas Cowboys of the 90's, they were a good team that became great when they added Charles Haley. He was a major cog in their wheel, and you can ask Jimmy Johnson who has stated that numerous times before.
A great pass rush makes your secondary look better than they are. A great secondary can't cover forever if you aren't getting pressure. Pass rush is not just about sacks either, it's about putting pressure on the QB, disrupting the timing and rhythm of the play. Don't get me wrong a great secondary is fierce and a great piece of a teams puzzle however the shut down corner is the 4th most important position on a football team, ranking behind QB, LT and Blue Chip Pass Rusher.
I think what i'm trying to say is Peterson/Prince are not going to be good CB's in a few years. They are going to be Revis-like. At least that's what I've seen and what the "experts" are saying. You say a great pass rush can make a secondary look good which I agree with however a great secondary can also make a pass rush better then what it is. Look at the jets. They call them coverage sacks, which btw they were saying both of the Steelers sacks were.
My whole point in this is our need as the San Francisco 49ers. Our weakest link on D was our secondary, now we might be without Clements. So you mean to tell me getting Von Miller will make our secondary better then last year? I don't agree with that. I believe if you have a chance to take an elite CB and it also happens to be a major need we can't pass it up. For every example you gave about a great pass rush winning I can give you an example of a great pass rush doing nothing. Case in point this year. The Dallas Cowboys had the sack leader and it didn't matter b/c their secondary was trash. Look at the 94 Niners, if i'm not mistaken we signed a player for 1 year and that player just so happened to be the defensive player of the year that year and we won our last Super Bowl. Deion Sanders, the original shut down corner. How come before he came we couldn't get over the hump and when he left we couldn't get back??
As for the teams you mentioned I agree the colts have a great pass rush but their secondary w/ Bob Sanders is no where near as bad as ours. Also, the year the Giants beat they Pats your right they did it with a pass rush but once again their secondary wasn't nearly as bad as ours. I agree 100% that a team needs a great pass rush but I don't think 1 player is going to fix our whole pass rush. I would bet with what we have right now b/c of the scheme we're going to run this year we'll get more pressure. The biggest problem is to run a Dom Capers like D (which they're saying is similiar to what we want to do) you have to have a Shut Down corner. Someone that can lock onto Reggie Wayne like Revis did this year in the playoffs and make all the other WR's step up and beat them. Which they couldn't do.
My biggest point honestly is if Peterson and Prince are going to be true "shut down" corners, that it's harder to find them then it is a great pass rusher. That's why if Fangio believes either one of them can be a lock down CB I think he has to take him. Peterson is almost a lock as a Revis-like CB and if Prince can prove his speed is as good as Peterson's then he's right there with him. Some people would even take Prince over Peterson IF he shows at the combine what I think he's going to. That's another think I like about Prince, he said he has nothing to hide and he willing to show the world how good he is and he will be participating in everything at the combine. He's not going to just run the 40 then wait til his pro day when he's on turf he's familiar with and players he's familiar with to try and impress people. He has a swagger about him a CB needs and I love that about him. Same thing Suh did last year, guess that's the Nebraska way...