Cox or Cully?

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Cully. Brock returns healthy and gets his LCB spot back from Cox. Cully gets to stay at RCB where he performed really well in his 1st year as a full-time starter.

This. I think Cully has improved a lot and still has some upside. With Dontae showing promise we may have our future corner tandem right there. I haven't forgotten about Brock either, I am still very much a fan of his. I just like the size and upside of a Cully/Johnson tandem. I'm not suggesting we go that route next year, but a few years down the road I think they can come up big for us.

its cox by a mile. cully is a knucklehead who can go potato at any moment. would try to keep both though

Cox

Cully has the measureables but cox has been versatile in moving to slot. My other reason is the eye test. Just watching the player, I like cox's humility. Cox makes a play and he reacts with intensity while cully is quick to over celebrate. Cox also tracks the ball better IMO and may be able to high point better despite size.

Cuxy

BOTH cully is a good cb. a very good one.

Both

Originally posted by jbeale49:
Cox

Cully has the measureables but cox has been versatile in moving to slot. My other reason is the eye test. Just watching the player, I like cox's humility. Cox makes a play and he reacts with intensity while cully is quick to over celebrate. Cox also tracks the ball better IMO and may be able to high point better despite size.

People are forgetting Cully is still relatively raw he missed an entire year with an ACL injury right as he was coming on. and now he's picked up where he left off and improved. he's still getting better and better.

if they cost the same ill take culliver

If the price tag is reasonable and comparable, Cully all the way. He s younger and has greater upside.

Cox hands down. He is always in position to make a play even when some catches the ball with him covering he is in position to make a play but is just outsized. Still rarely happens.

Cully is extremely overrated. He had a decent rookie season but was exposed in the playoffs and especially in the superbowl. Ever since then has constantly and consistently given up big plays, gets faked to easily, gets out of position, and can't track the ball in the air if his life depended on it.

Were prefer to keep both but if they're asking for the same money keep Cox and ditch Cully. Cully is really good 3rd string corner, and average or perhaps an ever so slightly above average 2nd string corner.

Is Cully going to face a suspension for hit and run/brass knuckle shenanigans from last off-season? Until I know we are going to have him for the whole year my vote goes to Cox.

Originally posted by jonesadrian:

People are forgetting Cully is still relatively raw he missed an entire year with an ACL injury right as he was coming on. and now he's picked up where he left off and improved. he's still getting better and better.

He has come along. We didn't see him lose guys over the top this year.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L2AwRAjweF8

Originally posted by Southpaw79:
Is Cully going to face a suspension for hit and run/brass knuckle shenanigans from last off-season? Until I know we are going to have him for the whole year my vote goes to Cox.

have you heard anything since ?

Originally posted by Kali49er:
Cox hands down. He is always in position to make a play even when some catches the ball with him covering he is in position to make a play but is just outsized. Still rarely happens.

Cully is extremely overrated. He had a decent rookie season but was exposed in the playoffs and especially in the superbowl. Ever since then has constantly and consistently given up big plays, gets faked to easily, gets out of position, and can't track the ball in the air if his life depended on it.

Were prefer to keep both but if they're asking for the same money keep Cox and ditch Cully. Cully is really good 3rd string corner, and average or perhaps an ever so slightly above average 2nd string corner.

the eye test and stats both prove this to be wrong.
after he got his sea legs he was a rock on that side of the field.

I thought that Culliver was bigger and younger than Cox, so I compared the tapes;

Culliver - 6'0, 199, 4 years pro, born 1987
Cox - 6'0, 190, 4 years pro, born 1988

No difference, I lean toward Cox, he makes more plays and should come at a reduced rate.