Darrell Green vs. Deion Sanders vs. Rod Woodson (1 Viewer)

[jurb26]

Sanders, easily.

Haven't really heard any logical arguments for the others 2 yet. Green and Woodson were great, but Sanders took away half the field, who cares if he couldn't tackle, no one threw at him.

I'm trying to figure out how Green didn't take away half of the field. He, too, tended to be put 1:1 on the opponent's best WR for the first 15 years of his career.

Because Irvin ate green up.Name one rec who beat Deion.

Allready named two Viking players in previous post above. Every cornerback gets beaten.

Sanders got beat plenty of times by guys on a team he only every faced 2 or 3 times?

And Im sure by plenty of other WR. I don't watch every game the Cowboys 49ers or Falcons have played. I do watch every Viking game.

Nice backtrack. I know one of those games vs Dal was in 1999, a year in which Sanders battled injuries and Minn was one of the best offensive teams in the NFL. So, even if he did get beat by them then I'm sure he wasn't alone.Either way, your right all CBs get beat. It's part of the game. I happen to watch every Steeler game and I think Sanders was the better player. I disagree that Woodson was better in press. I don't even recall him using it much. I don't think Woodson was left out on an "island" nearly as often as Sanders was. Woodson was a great player, but IMO it is asinine to say he was as good in coverage as Sanders. I can buy the argument that he was a better overall football player if you want to include takling and blitzing. I just don't happen to personally feel that was a major issue when looking at Sanders as a player. He had a very special ability that superseded those things IMO.

 

[Tau837]

Im disapointed at how much you guys buy into the hype and showmanship of Sanders who was not a better football player than Woodson.All media hype and showmanship. That is the only thing Sanders had over Woodson....Based on the results of this pole people like to be entertained more than they understand and enjoy the game of football. Sanders was not even close to the same football player that Woodson was and it annoys me that people who watch the game as much as RN and others here supposedly do, do not understand the difference.

If only we could all understand the game of football as well as you can.

Woodson played cornerback at an elite level for at least a decade and shut down recievers just as well as Sanders did during that time. Difference being that Woodson offered more to a defense than just great coverage. He was so good at covering WR that the Steelers could blitz all the time and leave him on a island and QBs would avoid throwing to Woodsons side just like they avoided Sanders because Woodson would make them pay with INTs for TDs if they took the risk. See INT and TD stats above and tell me who was better. It was Woodson. Woodson also played great run support and would routinely blow up running plays to the point that teams would avoid running to his side because they could not get a WR or another player out there to block him. You cannot say this about Sanders. What do offenses do when they face difficult coverage from the defense? They use misdirection plays. Screens, traps, end arounds. Sanders would get blocked silly on plays like this all the time and never helped his defense out against plays like this. Running a screen to Woodsons side was just asking to lose yardage or worse a turnover.When teams were avoiding throwing to Woodsons side because of his coverage skills the defense could call a corner blitz and really give the offense problems. Woodson was outstanding executing this part of the game also. You cannot say this about Sanders....As a charecter guy and a leader for my team Woodson is clearly the better choice for my team than showboating distraction Sanders is. Woodsons insticnts and football knowledge were better than Sanders by far also. Woodson was a coach on the field who could call audibles and re-align the defense based on his pre-snap reads. Sanders never did this.

So why did Sanders get 6 All NFL selections at CB compared to Woodson's 4? Oh, let me guess... the media hype and showmanship.

Both were great return specialists. That is a push.

They were indeed both great returners, but it is not a push. Deion has a higher average on both punt returns and kick returns, and scored 9 TDs on 367 combined punt and kick returns, compared to Woodson's 4 TDs on 480 combined punt and kick returns.And, since you brought up something besides defense, let's note that Deion added 60/784/3 receiving in his career. Woodson didn't contribute on offense. Not a knock on Woodson, but a small plus for Deion.

I just dont see anything that Sanders offers that is better than what Woodson offers to me and my team.

It's been covered in this thread. You're not interested.

 

[Tau837]

I've been a Steeler fan all my life and Woodson was my favorite player growing up until Barry Sanders came along (both ending Woodson career with a sick juke and stealing the limelight from him). I wore 26 in football because of Woodson. I hated everything about the way Sanders acted when he played and the guy still gets on my nerves to this day. Despite all of this I can say and admit with near certainty from watching the 2 guys play that Sanders was better. I think the reality of the situation is that most people are not able or willing to put emotion aside in debates like this. I can understand if you choose a guy like Green because you want that longevity from the draft pick. Believe it or not there just are some guys who have come along in the NFL and deserved they "hype." LT, Sanders, Sayers, Moss, Rice, ect. Deon falls into that category of player if you ask me. I don't think I or anyone else has to like it, but we do have to accept it.

I happen to watch every Steeler game and I think Sanders was the better player. I disagree that Woodson was better in press. I don't even recall him using it much. I don't think Woodson was left out on an "island" nearly as often as Sanders was. Woodson was a great player, but IMO it is asinine to say he was as good in coverage as Sanders. I can buy the argument that he was a better overall football player if you want to include takling and blitzing. I just don't happen to personally feel that was a major issue when looking at Sanders as a player. He had a very special ability that superseded those things IMO.

Great posts.

 

[jurb26]

I just dont see anything that Sanders offers that is better than what Woodson offers to me and my team.

It's been covered in this thread. You're not interested.

Pretty much what I was getting at earlier.

 

[Tau837]

now that I think about it both Woodson and Sanders ended their careers as Ravens. I would have to say without a doubt that Woodson helped the Ravens in the twilight of his career a lot more than Sanders helped them. In fact I think Sanders was pretty much 3rd string when he played for them instead of a every down starter like Woodson was. Even though Woodson was an older player than Sanders was.

Sanders was retired and out of the NFL for 4 years before being talked back into coming back as a nickel back. It's apples and oranges. But still, I'll grant you that Woodson was better at ages 37 and 38 than Sanders was, no problem. Doesn't change which one had the better career.

 

[Biabreakable]

Sanders, easily.

Haven't really heard any logical arguments for the others 2 yet. Green and Woodson were great, but Sanders took away half the field, who cares if he couldn't tackle, no one threw at him.

I'm trying to figure out how Green didn't take away half of the field. He, too, tended to be put 1:1 on the opponent's best WR for the first 15 years of his career.

Because Irvin ate green up.Name one rec who beat Deion.

Allready named two Viking players in previous post above. Every cornerback gets beaten.

Sanders got beat plenty of times by guys on a team he only every faced 2 or 3 times?

And Im sure by plenty of other WR. I don't watch every game the Cowboys 49ers or Falcons have played. I do watch every Viking game.

Nice backtrack. I know one of those games vs Dal was in 1999, a year in which Sanders battled injuries and Minn was one of the best offensive teams in the NFL. So, even if he did get beat by them then I'm sure he wasn't alone.Either way, your right all CBs get beat. It's part of the game. I happen to watch every Steeler game and I think Sanders was the better player. I disagree that Woodson was better in press. I don't even recall him using it much. I don't think Woodson was left out on an "island" nearly as often as Sanders was. Woodson was a great player, but IMO it is asinine to say he was as good in coverage as Sanders. I can buy the argument that he was a better overall football player if you want to include takling and blitzing. I just don't happen to personally feel that was a major issue when looking at Sanders as a player. He had a very special ability that superseded those things IMO.

I don't see how my statement was a backtrack at all.Whenever I would see these players play I always thought that Woodson was the better player. Sanders certainly got a lot more reels on sports center than Woodson did but that does not change my opinion.

In the context of the original post RN is asking which corner is the best and who would you take for your team out of these 3. To me that is definitly Woodson.

 

[Raider Nation]

In the context of the original post RN is asking which corner is the best and who would you take for your team out of these 3. To me that is definitly Woodson.

The most knowledgeable football man I hear on a daily basis is Pat Kirwin, who can be heard every afternoon with Tim Ryan on Sirius NFL Radio. Kirwin didn't light the world on fire as GM of the Jets, granted, but he has so much football insight stored in his head, it's ridiculous. I am going to either call the show or e-mail him, and I'll hit him with the exact scenario I laid out in the first post. I'd be curious to see how a guy who was employed in the league at a high level would answer this hypothetical question. Will report back.

 

[Assani Fisher]

SandersWoodsonGreen

and I'm a Skins fan

 

[Assani Fisher]

Green may not have been as high as the other two on their best days but he was one of the best CB's in the game for a lot more games than either Woodson or Sanders.

This is not getting enough attention. Green was a first class shutdown corner for 15+ years, which is ludicrous. He was also as good as either Woodson or Sanders as a PR, though Gibbs and subsequent coaches were loathe to risk him back there that often. I certainly given Sanders the edge here on INT's and INT returns, but Green actually tackled, and I just can't get past how one-dimensional Sanders was on defense. On running plays his defenses were playing with 10 guys. I can't rate that first.

This was actually an enormous advantage only Deon enabled his D's to have, not a liability like you and others are trying to sight it as. Deon is the only CB I have ever seen that could realistically line up on the opposing teams WR1 with no schematic help and not become a liability, rather a strength, in coverage. He allowed his defenses schematic advantages because of this. Sanders was rarely asked to do anything else. That ability was just that rare and in demand that there was no need to ask him to do anything else. That is what separates him form the crowd. Even the crowd of elite CBs IMO. I can't stand the guy, but this is just the reality.

Deion is the only true "shut down corner" ever imo.

 

[Assani Fisher]

Sanders, easily.

Haven't really heard any logical arguments for the others 2 yet. Green and Woodson were great, but Sanders took away half the field, who cares if he couldn't tackle, no one threw at him.

I'm trying to figure out how Green didn't take away half of the field. He, too, tended to be put 1:1 on the opponent's best WR for the first 15 years of his career.

It's called selective memory, I believe. If you were to keep the players the same, but flip flop the personalities of Sanders and Green, all the Deion fanboys in this thread would be talking about Green as the most dominant corner instead of Deion.

Also, no one is talking about Deion's days with the Falcons and after he left the Cowboys. I was a huge fan of Deion when he played with Atlanta, and he had several games during his career with the team where he was the sterotypical matchhead and beaten like a drum. And when Sanders and Green played together on the same team in 2000, Green was clearly a better cb the Deion. If that's not logical proof that Green was a better cb than Sanders, I don't know what is.

What's funny is that Green actually spent more time during his career matched up against opponents' #1 receivers than Sanders. For the majority of Green's career, he was matched up against the other teams #1 wr and followed him around the field wherever he lined up. For much of Sanders career, he was assigned to cover the receiver on one particular side of the field, and more often than not that wr was the other team's #2 for obvious reasons.

The only convincing argument that can made for taking Deion over Green is that he's much more marketable.

Most people in this thread hate Deion. I certainly don't think hes being overrated by "fanboys."

 

[renesauz]

Count me among those who can't stand his personality...but his talent was unrivaled at it's peak.

That said, there are legit reasons why somebody might prefer one of the other two, and I certainly couldn't fault them for that.

 

[Raider Nation]

Green may not have been as high as the other two on their best days but he was one of the best CB's in the game for a lot more games than either Woodson or Sanders.

This is not getting enough attention. Green was a first class shutdown corner for 15+ years, which is ludicrous. He was also as good as either Woodson or Sanders as a PR, though Gibbs and subsequent coaches were loathe to risk him back there that often. I certainly given Sanders the edge here on INT's and INT returns, but Green actually tackled, and I just can't get past how one-dimensional Sanders was on defense. On running plays his defenses were playing with 10 guys. I can't rate that first.

This was actually an enormous advantage only Deon enabled his D's to have, not a liability like you and others are trying to sight it as. Deon is the only CB I have ever seen that could realistically line up on the opposing teams WR1 with no schematic help and not become a liability, rather a strength, in coverage. He allowed his defenses schematic advantages because of this. Sanders was rarely asked to do anything else. That ability was just that rare and in demand that there was no need to ask him to do anything else. That is what separates him form the crowd. Even the crowd of elite CBs IMO. I can't stand the guy, but this is just the reality.

Deion is the only true "shut down corner" ever imo.

Unless you've been watching pro football since 1925 or you live in the NFL Films vault, that's a tough argument.I'm just sayin'...

 

[Jason Wood]

Great conversation

I voted Woodson, Sanders, Green; although I don't pretend to feel strongly about Woodson edging out Deion.

 

[ARW VISIONS]

If You Look At Rod Woodson He Has

862 Tackles

13.5 Sacks

71 Interception

1483 Interception Yards

12 Interception Touchdowns

155 Pass Deflections

12 Force Fumbles

137 Fumble Yards

1 Fumble Touchdown

2 Kick Returns

2 Punt Returns

4894 Kick Returns Yards

2362 Punt Returns Yards

Total - 17 Touchdowns / 8876 Yards / 83 Turnovers

If You Look At Deion Sanders He Has

387 Tackles

1 Sacks

53 Interception

1331 Interception Yards

9 Interception Touchdowns

80 Pass Deflections

8 Force Fumbles

15 Fumble Yards

1 Fumble Touchdown

3 Kick Returns

6 Punt Returns

3523 Kick Returns Yards

2199 Punt Returns Yards

Total - 19 Touchdowns / 7068 Yards / 61 Turnovers

Woodson has Deion beat in almost ever single category.

 

[Enforcer]

If You Look At Rod Woodson He Has862 Tackles13.5 Sacks71 Interception1483 Interception Yards12 Interception Touchdowns155 Pass Deflections12 Force Fumbles137 Fumble Yards1 Fumble Touchdown2 Kick Returns2 Punt Returns4894 Kick Returns Yards2362 Punt Returns YardsTotal - 17 Touchdowns / 8876 Yards / 83 TurnoversIf You Look At Deion Sanders He Has387 Tackles1 Sacks53 Interception1331 Interception Yards9 Interception Touchdowns80 Pass Deflections8 Force Fumbles15 Fumble Yards1 Fumble Touchdown3 Kick Returns6 Punt Returns3523 Kick Returns Yards2199 Punt Returns YardsTotal - 19 Touchdowns / 7068 Yards / 61 TurnoversWoodson has Deion beat in almost ever single category.

How about the stat for "passes thrown his way" or perhaps "passes not thrown his way because the other team was afraid"? Its all relative.Also, 23 of Woodson's interceptions came after he switched to playing safety.

 

[Tau837]

If You Look At Rod Woodson He Has862 Tackles13.5 Sacks71 Interception1483 Interception Yards12 Interception Touchdowns155 Pass Deflections12 Force Fumbles137 Fumble Yards1 Fumble Touchdown2 Kick Returns2 Punt Returns4894 Kick Returns Yards2362 Punt Returns YardsTotal - 17 Touchdowns / 8876 Yards / 83 TurnoversIf You Look At Deion Sanders He Has387 Tackles1 Sacks53 Interception1331 Interception Yards9 Interception Touchdowns80 Pass Deflections8 Force Fumbles15 Fumble Yards1 Fumble Touchdown3 Kick Returns6 Punt Returns3523 Kick Returns Yards2199 Punt Returns YardsTotal - 19 Touchdowns / 7068 Yards / 61 TurnoversWoodson has Deion beat in almost ever single category.

Woodson played a lot more games and split time in his career between CB and S; those things contribute somewhat to these totals. See posts 82 and 85.

 

[Tau837]

In the context of the original post RN is asking which corner is the best and who would you take for your team out of these 3. To me that is definitly Woodson.

The most knowledgeable football man I hear on a daily basis is Pat Kirwin, who can be heard every afternoon with Tim Ryan on Sirius NFL Radio. Kirwin didn't light the world on fire as GM of the Jets, granted, but he has so much football insight stored in his head, it's ridiculous. I am going to either call the show or e-mail him, and I'll hit him with the exact scenario I laid out in the first post. I'd be curious to see how a guy who was employed in the league at a high level would answer this hypothetical question. Will report back.

 

[JTM]

Forget about stats...for +/- seven (7) straight years Primetime was the best player on the field on either team come Sunday, and regardless of their greatness you just can't say that about the other guys.

 

[ARW VISIONS]

Forget about stats...for +/- seven (7) straight years Primetime was the best player on the field on either team come Sunday, and regardless of their greatness you just can't say that about the other guys.

LOL! He was scared to hit anyone! So that made him one of the worst football players on the field. He was a panzy, and a cry baby pre-madaonna. Woodson would have knocked his head off. Football IMHO is about being tough above all.

 

[LHUCKS]

Forget about stats...for +/- seven (7) straight years Primetime was the best player on the field on either team come Sunday, and regardless of their greatness you just can't say that about the other guys.

This is correct.SandersWoodsonGreen

 

[Steady Mooobin]

Forget about stats...for +/- seven (7) straight years Primetime was the best player on the field on either team come Sunday, and regardless of their greatness you just can't say that about the other guys.

LOL! He was scared to hit anyone! So that made him one of the worst football players on the field. He was a panzy, and a cry baby pre-madaonna. Woodson would have knocked his head off. Football IMHO is about being tough above all.

It wasn't that he couldn't hit, it was just not the smartest thing for him to be doing. Look, I can't lie and say he shouldn't get knocked down a half a notch because he wasn't the most willing hitter. At the same time he didn't just get into the fetal position every time he went one on one. I saw him in person, crush Stephen Davis in the backfield one on one, not an easy task.

 

[yetiknight]

As long as I have watched football there have been three defensive players that took over games like nobody else in football. LT, Reggie White, and Deion Sanders were on a different tier from the rest of the league. They dominated in spite of the gameplanning. For Taylor and White they would double and triple team. For Primetime they would tear up the playbook for the week. It isn't about the stats.

 

[Raider Nation]

In the context of the original post RN is asking which corner is the best and who would you take for your team out of these 3. To me that is definitly Woodson.

The most knowledgeable football man I hear on a daily basis is Pat Kirwin, who can be heard every afternoon with Tim Ryan on Sirius NFL Radio. Kirwin didn't light the world on fire as GM of the Jets, granted, but he has so much football insight stored in his head, it's ridiculous. I am going to either call the show or e-mail him, and I'll hit him with the exact scenario I laid out in the first post. I'd be curious to see how a guy who was employed in the league at a high level would answer this hypothetical question. Will report back.

Mea culpa. I completely forgot.I just sent him the question with a link to the thread. If we're lucky, maybe he'll post his reply here. If not, I'll copy what he writes if he replies. They are on a camp tour at the moment, so I won't hold my breath. His email address is footballmentor@aol.com, FWIW.

 

[JTM]

Forget about stats...for +/- seven (7) straight years Primetime was the best player on the field on either team come Sunday, and regardless of their greatness you just can't say that about the other guys.

LOL! He was scared to hit anyone! So that made him one of the worst football players on the field. He was a panzy, and a cry baby pre-madaonna. Woodson would have knocked his head off. Football IMHO is about being tough above all.

Because that hard-hitting corner is all you hear about come draft day--really?!? LOL!!! I believe the cover-corner is much more highly coveted, and a cover-corner with big play ability goes first every time.If you have lots of tackles as a CB, then you're probably letting too many guys catch the ball. Deion has less stats because teams spent less time testing his side of the field--FACT. He was truly a shut-down corner for several years in a row, and performed at the highest level in the biggest of games--FACT. It's all preference and what kind of talent is around your guy, but all things being equal give me the seven (7) years of Deion in his prime over any CB that played in his era. Woodson and Green were both bad-###e$ and had more quality years of service, but they were never as good as Deion was in his prime. I don't see how that can even be argued. I think the argument is serviceable longevity at very high level versus absolute dominance at your position for a shorter period of time. I choose the latter...

 

[Steady Mooobin]

Forget about stats...for +/- seven (7) straight years Primetime was the best player on the field on either team come Sunday, and regardless of their greatness you just can't say that about the other guys.

LOL! He was scared to hit anyone! So that made him one of the worst football players on the field. He was a panzy, and a cry baby pre-madaonna. Woodson would have knocked his head off. Football IMHO is about being tough above all.

Because that hard-hitting corner is all you hear about come draft day--really?!? LOL!!! I believe the cover-corner is much more highly coveted, and a cover-corner with big play ability goes first every time.If you have lots of tackles as a CB, then you're probably letting too many guys catch the ball. Deion has less stats because teams spent less time testing his side of the field--FACT. He was truly a shut-down corner for several years in a row, and performed at the highest level in the biggest of games--FACT. It's all preference and what kind of talent is around your guy, but all things being equal give me the seven (7) years of Deion in his prime over any CB that played in his era. Woodson and Green were both bad-###e$ and had more quality years of service, but they were never as good as Deion was in his prime. I don't see how that can even be argued. I think the argument is serviceable longevity at very high level versus absolute dominance at your position for a shorter period of time. I choose the latter...

Very

 

[JTM]

Ask yourself this: Could you replace one with the other and get better results? We're talking about these three (3) guys because so few players could do what they did, but could Woodson and Green do what Deion did? Put Deion in PIT or WAS and he does what those guys did and then some...with the sole exception of Woodson's ability to help against the occasional outside run from the CB position. Call me crazy, but I'll use a pick or two to draft a DE and/or OLB to contribute to that facet of the game--don't let that guy catch balls, PERIOD, and Deion was the best.

 

[Tau837]

All very good posts, JTM.

 

[ARW VISIONS]

I just think that Woodson is a better football player. I would draft him first. His skill set, attitude and flexibilty make him a better choice for me. I'll just take a guy who can tackle, cover and has a good demeanor over Deion. Running and tackling first... Deion second.

 

[BigRed]

LMAO @ Sanders walking away w/this. His coverage skills are routinely overrated and he was a primping preening wuss that hit like a silk scarf (on those rare occasions he even bothered).

 

[Irish]

LMAO @ Sanders walking away w/this. His coverage skills are routinely overrated and he was a primping preening wuss that hit like a silk scarf (on those rare occasions he even bothered).

 

[LHUCKS]

LMAO @ Sanders walking away w/this.