Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Cromartie says Sherman not best CB unless he covers best receiver all the time


amfootball

Recommended Posts

https://soundcloud.com/siriusxmnfl/cromartie-on-sherman-go-play-in-a-defense-without-2-all-pro-safeties

 

Interesting interview from Antonio Cro on who the best CBs are in the game. Says Sherman is not the best until he covers the best receivers in the game every game. Also notes he has two all pro safeties behind him.

 

Personally, I don't like this assumption at all. Revis did not cover the best receiver on every team last year and struggled mightily the first four games of the season until Browner came in. Then he was lit up by Steve Smith in the post-season. Overall I think Revis is a better corner but Sherman is not far behind. And Cro's take that Revis is a better student of the game than Sherman is laughable. Sherman puts in the time too and knows how to play his guy just as well as Revis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...player taking up for his teammate as the best....shocking! I think Sherman is right there with Revis....if the Seahawks needed him to move he could. Due to their defense it isn't necessary and qbs don't even look to his side because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...player taking up for his teammate as the best....shocking! I think Sherman is right there with Revis....if the Seahawks needed him to move he could. Due to their defense it isn't necessary and qbs don't even look to his side because of it.

 

The Seahawks don't even play man coverage most of the time. They don't move Sherman because his man coverage isn't the strength of their defense. 

 

To me, there's no question that Revis is better, and it's not just because he can follow a #1 all over the field. There's that, but also the fact that he plays every form of man coverage imaginable, and does them all well. He might have a bad game here and there, but that's not common, nor is it exclusive to him (I remember Sherman getting toasted by TY Hilton). As a matter of fact, when a corner is asked to play man coverage, he's more likely to give up a few yards here and there, yet, Revis' coverage numbers rival Sherman's in every way, despite playing more difficult coverages 95% of the time.

 

Vontae is better. Chris Harris is better. Jimmy Smith is better. Revis is the best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cro never mentioned Vontae which seems odd but it may be because he is not one of the highest paid CBs yet. Also, I don't believe Vontae follows the best receiver around either??

He's not asked to do it but he shuts everyone down regardless, he's even kept Gronk from scoring 1 on 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I would strongly disagree but I remember having this convo back when the Pats were trying to resign Revis and I thought you were saying then how good Sherman was. Maybe I was mistaken.

 

You're probably thinking of someone else. Sherman is very good, but has come to be very overrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're probably thinking of someone else. Sherman is very good, but has come to be very overrated.

So you overrate him just based on the scheme he works in? He played very strong vs both Rodgers and Brady last year in the post-season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you overrate him just based on the scheme he works in? He played very strong vs both Rodgers and Brady last year in the post-season.

I don't think it's just scheme.  I think he had one really good year and opened his mouth a lot, so he gets more attention.  He looked pretty beatable in a handful of games last year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

I don't often disagree but I do here. I don't care if the guy plays mostly zone etc...he does his job better than anyone else at his position imo over the past several years and makes big plays (turnovers). Revis tried playing in Tampa in zone defense and it didn't work well. I do think Revis is the best at his position but Sherman is very very close imo. I think all the people you mentioned Vontae and Harris etc are both up and coming but Sherman is more established. Many teams don't WANT to play man defense...so I don't care which the corner plays....what matters is that he plays it elite and does his job. I think Sherman has proven himself enough. A couple years ago I was skeptical...but after the last couple years of play...he is legit. I don't think he is over-rated and I don't think the QBs deciding not to go after him says he is over-rated either. Rodgers refused to throw his way in the first game...and then when he decided he needed to attack him he throws an int in the endzone. Guy just makes big plays...and does a dang good job. Can't go wrong with either...and while I think Revis is going to be on the decline in the next few years...Sherman is only getting better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't often disagree but I do here. I don't care if the guy plays mostly zone etc...he does his job better than anyone else at his position imo over the past several years and makes big plays (turnovers). Revis tried playing in Tampa in zone defense and it didn't work well. I do think Revis is the best at his position but Sherman is very very close imo. I think all the people you mentioned Vontae and Harris etc are both up and coming but Sherman is more established. Many teams don't WANT to play man defense...so I don't care which the corner plays....what matters is that he plays it elite and does his job. I think Sherman has proven himself enough. A couple years ago I was skeptical...but after the last couple years of play...he is legit. I don't think he is over-rated and I don't think the QBs deciding not to go after him says he is over-rated either. Rodgers refused to throw his way in the first game...and then when he decided he needed to attack him he throws an int in the endzone. Guy just makes big plays...and does a dang good job. Can't go wrong with either...and while I think Revis is going to be on the decline in the next few years...Sherman is only getting better.

Luck or Wilson? Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm asking your opinion. It's related.

Who is better?? I think both are great! Overall I think Luck is the better player. That said if he replaced Wilson on the Seahawks could he have done any better than Wilson has in winning a SB and finishing ohh so close to winning a second....probably not. Wilson takes care of the ball better....is a better scrambler...has a wonderful touch on deep passes....Luck reads defenses and has a more talented arm. I think Luck is and will be the better player as he has less limitations with his size and strength and he is progressing faster due to the offense we run. I do think Wilson could be just as potent if his offense was set up to be. I see him being very much like Drew Brees with more mobility....its just the offense is so limited with its receivers. Both are clutch qbs. 

 

I think I get what your saying...and I agree that Revis has more tools and is asked to do more than Sherman but I believe Sherman could play more man and follow a guy if they had to have that. Everything about the guy translates to him being able to cover period....and Seattle does play some man. I just think the difference is relatively small...and of course a guy that is Revis's teammate is going to be biased....but these guys both are head and shoulders above the rest of the league that past several years....and its impossible to argue with Shermans ability to cause turnovers....he has more than any other corner over  the past several years. Sometimes a players are scheme fits....and Sherman definately is...I think Revis is more versatile at this point probably and thus I'd say he wins by a hair...but man its hard to argue with Shermans production on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is better?? I think both are great! Overall I think Luck is the better player. That said if he replaced Wilson on the Seahawks could he have done any better than Wilson has in winning a SB and finishing ohh so close to winning a second....probably not. Wilson takes care of the ball better....is a better scrambler...has a wonderful touch on deep passes....Luck reads defenses and has a more talented arm. I think Luck is and will be the better player as he has less limitations with his size and strength and he is progressing faster due to the offense we run. I do think Wilson could be just as potent if his offense was set up to be. I see him being very much like Drew Brees with more mobility....its just the offense is so limited with its receivers. Both are clutch qbs. 

 

I think I get what your saying...and I agree that Revis has more tools and is asked to do more than Sherman but I believe Sherman could play more man and follow a guy if they had to have that. Everything about the guy translates to him being able to cover period....and Seattle does play some man. I just think the difference is relatively small...and of course a guy that is Revis's teammate is going to be biased....but these guys both are head and shoulders above the rest of the league that past several years....and its impossible to argue with Shermans ability to cause turnovers....he has more than any other corner over  the past several years. Sometimes a players are scheme fits....and Sherman definately is...I think Revis is more versatile at this point probably and thus I'd say he wins by a hair...but man its hard to argue with Shermans production on the field.

 

Wilson has just as strong an arm as Luck, is sometimes more accurate, runs/scrambles better, throws on the run better, makes big plays, has a higher passer rating, is more efficient, before last season had more TD passes, has fewer interceptions, etc. Yet the general consensus is Luck > Wilson, primarily because he's asked to do more in a more complex offense, and he doesn't have as strong a team to rely on, yet the Colts still win a lot of games, with Luck as the prime catalyst.

 

That illustrates why I care about what kind of defense a corner plays in, what his role is, and how difficult his assignment is. There's no question that man coverage is more difficult than zone coverage. And no one would deny that it's more difficult to shadow a #1 WR than it is to stay on one side of the field. Revis plays every coverage -- zone, man, off man, press -- from every cornerback spot on the field -- LCB, RCB, strong nickel, weak nickel -- and does them all well. His job is much harder, and he still excels at it. A true lockdown corner.

 

Sherman plays mostly zone coverage. It's a bump/press zone at times, which is where his size is a major benefit, but it's mostly zone. He doesn't track receivers across the hash marks during a play; he hands them off to another defender. He doesn't have to follow good receivers from one spot to the other to the next, he just covers whoever the offense sends his way, whether it's the best receiver or the worst. An outside release by a receiver frees Sherman to ride the receiver into the sideline (which is why he gets beat so handily by Reggie here: http://bloguin.com/coltsauthority/wp-content/uploads/sites/70/2013/12/Week5WayneRoutea.gif);an inside release frees Sherman to take away outside breaking routes, and to keep his eyes on the QB so he can break on passes underneath, which is partly why he gets so many interceptions. It's an easier assignment 95% of the time, even when he's lined up against the #1 WR.

 

Every corner benefits from a good pass rush, but last season, Seattle's pass rush was undoubtedly better than New England's, and certainly better than Tampa's 2013 pass rush. And more importantly, when a corner plays coverages that allow him to key on the QB's eyes, he's more likely to be able to contest and intercept passes. It's an aggressive shell scheme, fueled by a great pass rush. Sherman is a ball hawk with great ball skills and hands (former college receiver), great size and excellent instincts, so this scheme plays right into his strengths. I am not knocking him for it; he does it very well. But it's easier, and he (generally) has more help. There's a reason all his picks are outside the numbers.

 

And when Sherman is asked to play man coverage, or even just turn and run with a receiver who got off the line on him, he doesn't do such a great job of it. (just a sample)

http://giant.gfycat.com/JampackedAgonizingAntelopegroundsquirrel.gif

http://giant.gfycat.com/OilyQuickCurlew.gif

http://i.imgur.com/ITGPR.gif

https://usatthebiglead.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/odell-beckham-jr-beat-richard-sherman-b.gif?w=1000

 

This all factors in. Just like Wilson's job as Seattle's QB is generally easier than Luck's, and he has more help than Luck, and that factors in. The only thing Sherman beats Revis at is getting picks, and I think that's primarily a factor of the defense he's in. Again, not knocking him. I just think the assignment Revis has (and Davis, Smith and Harris, for that matter) is more difficult than Sherman's, and he does it just as well, and sometimes better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing is for sure....  Sherman has done a GREAT job at getting his name in the spotlight.  His play would undeniably put him in the top 10 CBs of the league but running his mouth has gotten him in the spotlight.  He went to Stanford, he is not stupid.  He intentionally built the reputation he has and has claimed to be the best since he entered the league.  He put himself in the conversation with Revis with his mouth.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cro never mentioned Vontae which seems odd but it may be because he is not one of the highest paid CBs yet. Also, I don't believe Vontae follows the best receiver around either??

 

That's because Vontae is a silent assassin.  Which is perfect.

 

Vontae will move around.  Nobody "follows the best receiver", that's a pretty big misconception.  People do situationally, but that's about it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wilson has just as strong an arm as Luck, is sometimes more accurate, runs/scrambles better, throws on the run better, makes big plays, has a higher passer rating, is more efficient, before last season had more TD passes, has fewer interceptions, etc. Yet the general consensus is Luck > Wilson, primarily because he's asked to do more in a more complex offense, and he doesn't have as strong a team to rely on, yet the Colts still win a lot of games, with Luck as the prime catalyst.

 

That illustrates why I care about what kind of defense a corner plays in, what his role is, and how difficult his assignment is. There's no question that man coverage is more difficult than zone coverage. And no one would deny that it's more difficult to shadow a #1 WR than it is to stay on one side of the field. Revis plays every coverage -- zone, man, off man, press -- from every cornerback spot on the field -- LCB, RCB, strong nickel, weak nickel -- and does them all well. His job is much harder, and he still excels at it. A true lockdown corner.

 

Sherman plays mostly zone coverage. It's a bump/press zone at times, which is where his size is a major benefit, but it's mostly zone. He doesn't track receivers across the hash marks during a play; he hands them off to another defender. He doesn't have to follow good receivers from one spot to the other to the next, he just covers whoever the offense sends his way, whether it's the best receiver or the worst. An outside release by a receiver frees Sherman to ride the receiver into the sideline (which is why he gets beat so handily by Reggie here: http://bloguin.com/coltsauthority/wp-content/uploads/sites/70/2013/12/Week5WayneRoutea.gif);an inside release frees Sherman to take away outside breaking routes, and to keep his eyes on the QB so he can break on passes underneath, which is partly why he gets so many interceptions. It's an easier assignment 95% of the time, even when he's lined up against the #1 WR.

 

Every corner benefits from a good pass rush, but last season, Seattle's pass rush was undoubtedly better than New England's, and certainly better than Tampa's 2013 pass rush. And more importantly, when a corner plays coverages that allow him to key on the QB's eyes, he's more likely to be able to contest and intercept passes. It's an aggressive shell scheme, fueled by a great pass rush. Sherman is a ball hawk with great ball skills and hands (former college receiver), great size and excellent instincts, so this scheme plays right into his strengths. I am not knocking him for it; he does it very well. But it's easier, and he (generally) has more help. There's a reason all his picks are outside the numbers.

 

And when Sherman is asked to play man coverage, or even just turn and run with a receiver who got off the line on him, he doesn't do such a great job of it. (just a sample)

http://giant.gfycat.com/JampackedAgonizingAntelopegroundsquirrel.gif

http://giant.gfycat.com/OilyQuickCurlew.gif

http://i.imgur.com/ITGPR.gif

https://usatthebiglead.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/odell-beckham-jr-beat-richard-sherman-b.gif?w=1000

 

This all factors in. Just like Wilson's job as Seattle's QB is generally easier than Luck's, and he has more help than Luck, and that factors in. The only thing Sherman beats Revis at is getting picks, and I think that's primarily a factor of the defense he's in. Again, not knocking him. I just think the assignment Revis has (and Davis, Smith and Harris, for that matter) is more difficult than Sherman's, and he does it just as well, and sometimes better.

 

If I may, I must applaud you for the clearest explanation for the argument.  I will be borrowing this :).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I would strongly disagree but I remember having this convo back when the Pats were trying to resign Revis and I thought you were saying then how good Sherman was. Maybe I was mistaken.

 

To me it isn't even close.  Sherman is not the focus of that defense.  He is an accessory.  Many other corners play more complex roles and perform better.  Sherman has literally everything going for him.  He isn't asked to move, he has one of the best range Safeties since Ed Reed, he has excellent pass rush and plays in one of the easiest schemes to cover corner deficiencies.  He plays his role extremely well, but that is as far as I'll go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it isn't even close.  Sherman is not the focus of that defense.  He is an accessory.  Many other corners play more complex roles and perform better.  Sherman has literally everything going for him.  He isn't asked to move, he has one of the best range Safeties since Ed Reed, he has excellent pass rush and plays in one of the easiest schemes to cover corner deficiencies.  He plays his role extremely well, but that is as far as I'll go.

You say that yet Aaron Rodgers twice would not throw his way and when he did in the playoffs he got picked. He would not even challenge him when he injured his shoulder.

 

I get the thought that Sherman is not asked to do what the other top corners do but for my money right now, I would take him second only to Revis. He is a ball hawk and brings a physicality that is great to any secondary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say that yet Aaron Rodgers twice would not throw his way and when he did in the playoffs he got picked. He would not even challenge him when he injured his shoulder.

 

I get the thought that Sherman is not asked to do what the other top corners do but for my money right now, I would take him second only to Revis. He is a ball hawk and brings a physicality that is great to any secondary.

 

I'm struggling to see the point... Aaron Rogers isn't scared of Sherman... He is scared of the pass rush and zone which demands a perfect pass.  Regardless if Sherman is there or not...  even more so with a bum shoulder...

 

To say that Rogers on 2 occasions didn't throw Sherman's way validates that he is the threat of the defense doesn't really add up.  Especially when most likely the 2 occasions you speak of (don't know which occasions you are referring to) had probably been effected by the pass rush and S coverage and not the "supposed" incredible play of Sherman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm struggling to see the point... Aaron Rogers isn't scared of Sherman... He is scared of the pass rush and zone which demands a perfect pass.  Regardless if Sherman is there or not...  even more so with a bum shoulder...

 

To say that Rogers on 2 occasions didn't throw Sherman's way validates that he is the threat of the defense doesn't really add up.  Especially when most likely the 2 occasions you speak of (don't know which occasions you are referring to) had probably been effected by the pass rush and S coverage and not the "supposed" incredible play of Sherman.

I am not sure I follow. A CB is doing his job the best when the QB does not even target him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. What else is new? :)

 

Especially with a vet QB who gets rid of the ball quickly, like Rodgers, it's about pre-snap reads, play design, hot routes, etc. A significant part of the time, the QB doesn't even look to both sides of the field once he gets the ball. The QB throws to the area that he expects to be open, and it's up to the receiver to create separation from the corner. That's why good QBs are given credit for "throwing a guy open." 

 

This is even more true when playing a heavy zone team like the Seahawks. This idea that Sherman is locking receivers down and QBs won't throw at him is wrong. That was Revis a couple years ago. That was Nnamdi Asomugha in 2008. It's not Sherman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially with a vet QB who gets rid of the ball quickly, like Rodgers, it's about pre-snap reads, play design, hot routes, etc. A significant part of the time, the QB doesn't even look to both sides of the field once he gets the ball. The QB throws to the area that he expects to be open, and it's up to the receiver to create separation from the corner. That's why good QBs are given credit for "throwing a guy open." 

 

This is even more true when playing a heavy zone team like the Seahawks. This idea that Sherman is locking receivers down and QBs won't throw at him is wrong. That was Revis a couple years ago. That was Nnamdi Asomugha in 2008. It's not Sherman.

I think it is more based on game plan and going through progressions. It was clear from the first game last year that GB intentionally lined up their third best receiver on Sherman and had Nelson try to work over Maxwell. It did not work as any time you don't target half the field the defense wins. The playoff game had more short routes that Rogers at times just plain missed or his receivers were not able to get open. But suffice to say Sherman had a big say in both games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is more based on game plan and going through progressions. It was clear from the first game last year that GB intentionally lined up their third best receiver on Sherman and had Nelson try to work over Maxwell. It did not work as any time you don't target half the field the defense wins. The playoff game had more short routes that Rogers at times just plain missed or his receivers were not able to get open. But suffice to say Sherman had a big say in both games.

 

A bad gameplan doesn't mean the corner had a great game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bad gameplan doesn't mean the corner had a great game.

They did not think the game plan was bad when they devised it to intentionally stay away from Sherman's side of the field. But great players make coaches devise ill fated plans sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did not think the game plan was bad when they devised it to intentionally stay away from Sherman's side of the field. But great players make coaches devise ill fated plans sometimes.

 

Obviously they didn't think it was a bad gameplan at the time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have used it. They certainly didn't in the rematch.

 

It's as simple as picking on the weaker corner, which happens all the time. It doesn't mean that Sherman's man was never open, or that his coverage was so excellent that they could never go to his side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously they didn't think it was a bad gameplan at the time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have used it. They certainly didn't in the rematch.

 

It's as simple as picking on the weaker corner, which happens all the time. It doesn't mean that Sherman's man was never open, or that his coverage was so excellent that they could never go to his side. 

I never said that Sherman's man was never open but Rodgers never threw his way, never even tried him, not once.

 

And with the new game plan in the post-season game, he tossed him a pick in the end zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...