Page 1 of 2

New faces in new places: Bailey tops our rankings

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 1:08 am
by 1niksder
New faces in new places: Bailey tops our rankings
Aug. 24, 2004
By Pete Prisco
SportsLine.com Senior Writer
Tell Pete your opinion!


Over the course of an entire season, you would think 10 interceptions would all but fall into a team's hands. Just 10. Not for a player -- an entire team.

The Denver Broncos had nine all of last season, which was good enough to tie them with Minnesota's Brian Russell and San Francisco's Tony Parrish for the league lead.

Yeah, that's sarcastic, but isn't nine interceptions for a playoff team embarrassing? Plus, who could forget Peyton Manning playing a game of two-touch with that secondary in the playoffs, carving it apart as if it was Jimmy and Bobby from the house down the street playing a game in his backyard.

And we wonder why Champ Bailey came to the Broncos in a trade?

Bailey has better cover skills than a stripper in a police raid.

Using the phrase shutdown corner has become commonplace around the NFL, especially in these pass-happy days, but Bailey earns it. He is that good, excelling at one of the four most-important positions on any team's roster, trailing only quarterback, defensive end and left tackle.

That made it easy for the Broncos to send running back Clinton Portis to the Redskins for Bailey in a blockbuster trade last spring -- and give him a seven-year, $63-million contract.

Portis is a great back, but corners with Bailey's ability are worth more than a back in the pecking order of player importance.

For that reason, Bailey is our top new face in a new place.

"I expect to have a major impact on our defense," Bailey said this summer. "Turn on the film, you have a player who can cover any receiver on the field at any time. They may say there are no shutdown corners, but I consider myself one."

So do we.

Bailey will allow the Broncos to do so many more things on defense. Give him a side of the field, and let him take it away, allowing zone coverage on the other side. That's a luxury that few defenses have. We'll call it the Deion Sanders cushion.

"I hope that's what they do with me," Bailey said. "I know I can make it easier for everybody else that way."


Bailey has 18 interceptions in his five-year career, but had just two last year. That's in part because teams don't throw at him. His skeptics, though, will say he didn't play well in 2003, a notion Bailey dismisses.

"The tape never lies," he said. "I know how I played."

He also knows he will play better. If he does, and teams challenge him, which they will do if they want to get the ball to their best receiver, then look for the Denver interception number to go up.

The passing yards given up also will go down, which is why Bailey's impact will be more than any other new face in a new place this year.

Now for the rest of the top 10 new faces:

2. Terrell Owens, WR, Eagles -- The thinking the past few years has been: Quarterback Donovan McNabb would really be something if he had a go-to receiver. He does now. Owens is a star player, no matter what comes out of his mouth. Owens will give McNabb his big-play receiver, a guy who can't be bullied by opposing defensive backs. Owens isn't a burner, but he's plenty fast enough to get down the field, and he will prove to be a heck of an addition for the Eagles, and especially for McNabb. No more excuses for Donovan and the Eagles.

3. Jevon Kearse, DE, Eagles -- If he's healthy, he's one of the best edge rushers in the game. That's a big if. Kearse has a foot problem that has limited his impact the past year, an injury that scared off some teams' quest to fortify their defensive line with him. So far, he has shown no lingering effects from it, but there is concern about whether he will hold up for the season. Word has it, he was moved from the right side to the left side in part because of the foot giving him some trouble. The Eagles need a guy who can come off the corner and get to the passer, which is what Kearse can do. He can give them 15 sacks, and he's also good chasing down plays from behind. He can be trouble in run defense when the play comes right at him, which is of real importance playing the left-end spot.

4. Clinton Portis, RB, Redskins -- We love the way this guy runs. In fact, there might be no better pure runner; not back -- runner. He glides through holes and has a great feel for the cutback. In Joe Gibbs' offense, he is the perfect fit. The counter play, a Gibbs' staple, was made for him. Portis will also get his share of receptions out of the backfield. A very good back isn't as valuable as a great corner, so the trade is best for Denver. But Portis is a heck of a player and will prove to be a favorite in D.C.

5. Antoine Winfield, CB, Vikings -- The Vikings have had trouble against the pass the past few seasons (see Arizona loss in the final game last year). Their corners have been a joke. Winfield isn't. He is a quality player who is good in coverage and can also tackle. The one knock on him is he doesn't play the ball well, which is why he doesn't have a lot of interceptions (six in his career). But he will help limit the big plays against the Minnesota defense, something that has hurt them in a big way the past few years.

6. Mark Brunell, QB, Redskins -- Gibbs wanted him, so he got him, even though he had a first-round pick on his roster in Patrick Ramsey. Brunell still has some good football left, and a slow start in camp should not be an indication of how he'll play in the season. He has never been a great practice player, but watch out in the regular season. With the weapons he has on offense, plus a mastermind in Gibbs, he will have a big year. Brunell still has three or four quality starting years left. Wait and see.

7. Corey Dillon, RB, Patriots -- Is Dillon the same back he was a few years ago? No way. Age takes a toll on backs, and Dillon will be 30 in October. He has a lot of hits on that body. He averaged 4.6 per carry in 2000, but has dropped to 3.9, 4.2 and 3.9 the past three years. He is still a major upgrade over Antowain Smith, last year's starter for the Super Bowl champs. Dillon is strong and has the speed to rip off a 30-yard run. Plus, he can handle a pounding as well as any back in the league. Just don't expect the Dillon of two years ago.

8. Adewale Ogunleye, DE, Bears -- The Bears badly needed help with their outside pass rush, and Ogunleye provides that. By trading receiver Marty Booker to Miami to get him, coach Lovie Smith now has a premier end to build his defense around. He is a quality pass rusher who also can play the run. The Bears stole him. Is Ogunleye another Richard Dent? In his dreams.

9. Ted Washington, DT, Raiders -- This huge man will anchor the nose position in the Raiders' new 3-4 scheme. Washington was a big (huge, actually) reason why the Patriots won the Super Bowl. The Raiders were gashed by the run last year, which won't happen with Washington's 350-plus pounds anchoring the middle. Any center that tries to move him without guard help will be asking for trouble. And guard help will free up the linebackers to make plays. The only concern with him is stamina, but that's the story for all big men.

10. Shawn Springs, CB, Redskins -- The Redskins traded Bailey, but by getting Springs via free agency they have a quality replacement. Springs is a former top-5 pick who was held back by injuries the past few years in Seattle. When he's healthy, which he is now, he has top cover ability. This might prove to be one of the better moves made by the Redskins on their defense in a long time.

Honorable mention: Jeff Garcia, QB, Browns; Robaire Smith, DE, Texans; Booker, WR, Dolphins; Warren Sapp, DT, Raiders; Keyshawn Johnson, WR, Cowboys; Ian Gold, LB, Bucs; Kurt Warner, QB, Giants; Grant Wistrom, DE, Seahawks.

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/7610760/1


Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:06 am
by skinsfaninroanoke
What this person seems willing to forget is that a top back that can control a game clock (a la 53 rushes in the Miami game leading to a whopping 41 minutes on the field for our offense) is as important as any cover corner...

That back will make the defense fresher, can score 2 or 3 times in a game and isn't usually all that affected by "cover corners"

Cover corners can stop one part of the field from being thrown to, but realistically will not shut down an entire field and will not score that often.

I know that people feel we paid too high a price but we got a lot of people with Champ's eventual salary and rumor had it from some people I talked to that the Skins let the second pick go to make up for what they knew they would HAVE to pay Portis on his new contract...

Just a few thoughts :)

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:11 am
by General Failure
Yes it is. And Denver has a better track record of finding that type of back than the Redskins do that type of corner.

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:12 am
by skinsfaninroanoke
you did read the part about Springs? sounds like we may have gotten another of those "kinds" of corners :)

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:15 am
by cvillehog
General Failure wrote:Yes it is. And Denver has a better track record of finding that type of back than the Redskins do that type of corner.


Maybe I am misreading your post, but I don't see how you can say the Redskins don't have a history of finding good corners. Do you have any facts to back that up?

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:16 am
by General Failure
He's so far down the list I completely missed him the first time. Oops! :)

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:19 am
by General Failure
cvillehog wrote:
General Failure wrote:Yes it is. And Denver has a better track record of finding that type of back than the Redskins do that type of corner.


Maybe I am misreading your post, but I don't see how you can say the Redskins don't have a history of finding good corners. Do you have any facts to back that up?


I'm saying recent history. In the past few years the Redskins have drafted one corner of that quality while the Broncos have had RB after RB run well for them.

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:24 am
by cvillehog
General Failure wrote:
cvillehog wrote:
General Failure wrote:Yes it is. And Denver has a better track record of finding that type of back than the Redskins do that type of corner.


Maybe I am misreading your post, but I don't see how you can say the Redskins don't have a history of finding good corners. Do you have any facts to back that up?


I'm saying recent history. In the past few years the Redskins have drafted one corner of that quality while the Broncos have had RB after RB run well for them.


The Broncos certainly have an excellent history of finding running backs. But, even the Skins's recent history of finding corners is what I would consider above average.

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:24 am
by BringThePain!
General Failure wrote:I'm saying recent history. In the past few years the Redskins have drafted one corner of that quality while the Broncos have had RB after RB run well for them.


I'm not understanding your point... denver's needed those RB... for some reason or the other they had to keep switching.... Bailey was healthy and stayed the whole time.... if TD was healthy and stayed the whole time... we wouldn't know they produced RB after RB.... just like we can't know if we could have gotten CB after quality CB....

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:26 am
by skinsfaninroanoke
Green, Smoot, Bailey, Springs, Harris, Brown?

I don't know - nice list to me :)

Better than 2 2nd year guys who have 2 ints between them GF ::grin::

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:31 am
by BringThePain!
skinsfaninroanoke wrote:Green, Smoot, Bailey, Springs, Harris, Brown?

I don't know - nice list to me :)

Better than 2 2nd year guys who have 2 ints between them GF ::grin::


Unfotunatly or Fortunatly, you forgot Neon Peion in that list too....

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:33 am
by Redskin Stouff
Hawg Dawg, you're right that is a very nice list! I don't think we're going to miss Bailey at all this year. He was beat consistently last year. He better hope Denver has a superior pass rush!

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:37 am
by Deadskins
And don't forget Ade Jimoh! :puke:

ROTFALMAO

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:39 am
by General Failure
skinsfaninroanoke wrote:Green, Smoot, Bailey, Springs, Harris, Brown?

I don't know - nice list to me :)

Better than 2 2nd year guys who have 2 ints between them GF ::grin::


You really want to call Green a recent draft pick? :shock:

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:40 am
by skinsfaninroanoke
well - adding the three safeties - Bowen Ohalete and Taylor - and don't forget that Bowen and Iffy had 6 picks and 2 ff between them... with the tandem of Bowen and Taylor, with Smoot and Springs, I think we have a relatively secure secondary - especially with the LB playing more downhill this year

aggression in the front 7 will make the secondary better

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:44 am
by General Failure
skinsfaninroanoke wrote:aggression in the front 7 will make the secondary better


I have the same belief for the Eagles secondary, but people keep insisting Brown and Shepard suck. :)

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:01 am
by skinsfaninroanoke
I didn't say they suck - I just think the Eagles are risking a lot on 2 relatively untried faces...

I wouldn't call Green a recent pick, but then again, with him in there we were afforded the luxury of not having the best picks for the secondary

Denver didn't have that luxury with backs due to the injury bug that seemed to hit them... and they certainly couldn't pick a DB to save their souls... who? Deltha O' Neal? please ::grin::

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:12 am
by cvillehog
That's a good point, Rich. You wouldn't say that the Colts suck at drafting QBs just because Manning has been their guy and they haven't had to test their backups. At the same time, just because the Eagles backups had to step in when McNabb got injured in the past doesn't mean the Eagles are better at drafting QBs than Indy.

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:21 am
by BringThePain!
cvillehog wrote:That's a good point, Rich. You wouldn't say that the Colts suck at drafting QBs just because Manning has been their guy and they haven't had to test their backups. At the same time, just because the Eagles backups had to step in when McNabb got injured in the past doesn't mean the Eagles are better at drafting QBs than Indy.


Dude's... I made this point 10 posts ago!!!.... Just goes to show nobody listen's to me around here.... I'm calling my mom and she's gonna talk to all your mother's about this... [-(

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:21 am
by General Failure
No, but you could say there's a proven track record. :)

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:22 am
by General Failure
BringThePain! wrote:
cvillehog wrote:That's a good point, Rich. You wouldn't say that the Colts suck at drafting QBs just because Manning has been their guy and they haven't had to test their backups. At the same time, just because the Eagles backups had to step in when McNabb got injured in the past doesn't mean the Eagles are better at drafting QBs than Indy.


Dude's... I made this point 10 posts ago!!!.... Just goes to show nobody listen's to me around here.... I'm calling my mom and she's gonna talk to all your mother's about this... [-(


What's an about? :)

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:28 am
by cvillehog
BringThePain! wrote:
cvillehog wrote:That's a good point, Rich. You wouldn't say that the Colts suck at drafting QBs just because Manning has been their guy and they haven't had to test their backups. At the same time, just because the Eagles backups had to step in when McNabb got injured in the past doesn't mean the Eagles are better at drafting QBs than Indy.


Dude's... I made this point 10 posts ago!!!.... Just goes to show nobody listen's to me around here.... I'm calling my mom and she's gonna talk to all your mother's about this... [-(


Yes, sorry, I didn't mean to discount the fact that you first brought up this point. Mea Culpa.

It's still a good point, though.

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:32 am
by BringThePain!
General Failure wrote:
BringThePain! wrote:
cvillehog wrote:That's a good point, Rich. You wouldn't say that the Colts suck at drafting QBs just because Manning has been their guy and they haven't had to test their backups. At the same time, just because the Eagles backups had to step in when McNabb got injured in the past doesn't mean the Eagles are better at drafting QBs than Indy.


Dude's... I made this point 10 posts ago!!!.... Just goes to show nobody listen's to me around here.... I'm calling my mom and she's gonna talk to all your mother's about this... [-(


What's an about? :)


:hmm:

Yes, sorry, I didn't mean to discount the fact that you first brought up this point. Mea Culpa.

It's still a good point, though.


Sorry dude.... there's no getting out of it this time... Prepare for a lecture from tu Madre... :twisted:

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:35 am
by cvillehog
BringThePain! wrote:
General Failure wrote:
BringThePain! wrote:
cvillehog wrote:That's a good point, Rich. You wouldn't say that the Colts suck at drafting QBs just because Manning has been their guy and they haven't had to test their backups. At the same time, just because the Eagles backups had to step in when McNabb got injured in the past doesn't mean the Eagles are better at drafting QBs than Indy.


Dude's... I made this point 10 posts ago!!!.... Just goes to show nobody listen's to me around here.... I'm calling my mom and she's gonna talk to all your mother's about this... [-(


What's an about? :)


:hmm:


You used the possesive form of "mother's" when you meant to use the plural "mothers." GF was just being "punny." ;)

BringThePain! wrote:
Yes, sorry, I didn't mean to discount the fact that you first brought up this point. Mea Culpa.

It's still a good point, though.


Sorry dude.... there's no getting out of it this time... Prepare for a lecture from tu Madre... :twisted:


:shock: :P :lol:

Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:36 am
by skinsfaninroanoke
listen to what? were you talking?

::grin::