Is Champ truly the G.O.A.T. Corner? (2 Viewers)

[Denver Obsession]

So, as I'm waiting (not very patiently) for Training Camp to start I got bored and attempted to go back through the history of Cornerbacks to see how Champ Bailey compares with the Greatest Of All Time.

Can we honestly claim that Champ is the G.O.A.T. (greatest of all time) for his position?

Let me know what you think... or if I missed some one that we should consider.

Connor Byrne over at realfootball365.com just listed off his top Defenders for 2007. He has Champ Bailey listed at #2, right behind Charger LB Shawne Merriman. While I, personally, think Champ owns the top spot without question, it really is hard to compare apples to oranges (or in this case CB’s to LB’s).

So, if it’s difficult to say Champ is the best over-all Defender playing today, what about saying he’s the best corner to EVER play the game?

Can we honestly claim that he’ is the G.O.A.T. (greatest of all time) for his position?

Many ‘experts’ will quickly say that it is impossible to compare modern cornerbacks with their ancestors of fifty years ago. They will point out two major issues. One, that modern stats were not kept back in the olden days, therefore you can’t compare like statistics. Secondly, they will point out that SO many rules have changed between tackling and contact allowed, that no comparison can be made to modern players.

Both of these are reasonable. But this is the OFF-SEASON people… and we don’t have anything better to do (unless you want to read other article on Mike Vick?). So, now that I’ve mentioned the general foolishness of this post, lets have some historic fun!

Line Break

The first comparison everyone throws out there is Deion Sanders (oh, what a surprise). I think I should quickly run over this one so we can move on to more exciting (but somewhat older) corners of yesteryear…

Deion Sanders recorded 429 tackles, 123 passes defended and 53 interceptions over his 14 year career. He also won two Super Bowl rings. He was a remarkable athlete, but his cover skills were alway better than this tackling. Luckly, we have modern stats for Deion, so we can easily compare the two.

Deion Sanders (by his 8th year) — Tackles=282, Passes Defended=83, Interceptions=34

Champ Bailey (by his 8th year)– Tackles=493, Passes Defended=138, Interceptions=39

Deion Sanders has been credited with the statement “You show me a corner that can tackle, and I’ll show you one that can’t cover.” To this I present CHAMP BAILEY! He has already passed Neon Deion’s TOTAL career tackles and passes defended numbers and is on pace to beat his total interception numbers. Deion may be the only NFL player to also play in a World Series, but when it comes to pure cornerbacks, Champ has him beat hands down. Champ is the complete package — tackling & covering.

Line Break

OK, now for some contenders from past generations. I had to limit my list to ‘pure’ corners (not defensive backs which include safeties). The records for career interceptions fall to some of histories best Safeties, but we’re talking right now about CORNERBACKS. The following men have more than excelled at this position — they have redefined it in their time. Almost all of them are in the Hall of Fame and their accomplishments are staggering….

First, I must make a Raider’s disclaimer, as many of them will ask why Lester Haynes isn’t on this list. To be honest, I just don’t think he is in the same class as the other men I have listed. He is best known for getting Stickum banned in 1981. And while Sticky Finger Lester Haynes did record 13 interceptions that year, the year after its ban it dropped to 3 (and he totaled only 14 more intercepts in his last six year of his career). In fact, Champ has equaled his total number of career interceptions in his first eight years. And while Lester does have a Super Bowl ring, his numbers just aren’t comparable to these other men.

Broncos Logo We’ll start with another man that Champ actually played with at Washington. A man that played 20 years at the corner position. That’s right, Darrell Green. From 1983 until 2002, Green amassed 54 interceptions and 8 TD’s. He spent all 20 years with the Redskins and owns Super Bowl rings from #22 & #26. However, if you compare them at year eight of Green’s career, Champ’s 39 interceptions overshadow Green’s 24. Now, just for fun, let’s project what would happen if Champ were to go another 12 seasons at his current pace — he would have nearly 100 interceptions! We can only hope Champ plays until he’s 42!

Broncos Logo Next in my list would be Mike Haynes. Haynes attended nine Pro Bowls over his 14 season career. He ended his career with 46 interceptions, four TD’s and a Super Bowl ring (Raiders SB#18) — no wonder he’s in the Hall of Fame. Of course, at year eight in Hayne’s career Champ has him by 10 interceptions and several TD’s. Champ needs a ring and a couple more Pro Bowls, but things look good for Champ vs Haynes.

Broncos Logo Denver’s closest thing to a challenger would be Hall of Famer Willie Brown. (OK, he played most of his career in Oakland.. but his first three years were with the orange & blue). Brown intercepted 54 passes and scored two touchdowns. His biggest steal, however, came in Super Bowl XI, when he returned an interception 75 yards for the clinching touchdown. Again, at year eight Champ has Brown by 7 interceptions and a few TD’s. He only needs 18 more interceptions and a ring or two to pass Brown, but that should be obtainable.

Broncos Logo Another Hall of Famer, Richard Lane (better known as **** “Night Train” Lane) was a true beast. He blew onto the NFL scene in 1952 with a rookie record 14 interceptions. By the time his 14 year career was done, he had racked up 68 interceptions, 1207 yards and five TDs. He was named to seven Pro Bowls, but never won a Super Bowl ring. Night Train vs Champ would be a great match up (or fantasy team tandem), but Champ plays in a different era than Lane. Lane was a ball hawk, but that was before Pass Interference become what it is today. Lane was also considered a great open field tackler at the time, but tackling from the neck and head were legal then. Even so, at year eight Night Train had racked up 47 interceptions (8 better than Champ so far). And while Champ has tighter rules to deal with, if Champ plays another 6 years (matching Lane’s career), he will match his 68 interceptions. And if Champ can added a ring or two, that would allow him to pass the old Night Train.

Broncos Logo But without a doubt, I would have to say that Champ’s biggest challenger for G.O.A.T. Cornerback would be Pittsburgh Steeler legend and current Hall of Famer, Mel Blount. From 1970 until 1983, Blount terrorized wideouts. He was 6′2″ and 205 lbs of pure ball-hawking madness. He not only appeared in five pro bowls, but also won four Super Bowls (#9, #10, #13 & #14). In his 14 seasons he totaled 57 interceptions, 13 fumble recoveries and scored a total of four TDs. Most impressively, Blount’s harassment of his receivers single-handedly forced the NFL to adopt the Pass Interference Penalty (originally nicked named the ‘Melblount’ rule). With four World Championship rings, and more interceptions than Prime Time, Blunt is the man to beat if you want this title. At year eight in Blount’s career, Champ does have a slight edge (by only 3 interceptions), but the real challenge that Blount creates is not statical. Blount won FOUR rings and changed the game. Mark my words, this will be Champ’s biggest rival for the G.O.A.T. title.

Line Break

In summary, I think Champ has the skills, talent, intelligence, drive (and is on the right team) to top all of these guys. He has already shown the world eight awesome years of dominance. If he can maintain that level of play for the next few years and play wisely into his 13-14 year in the league, there will be no other corner in the history of football that could rival him.

And I, for one, am truly excited that we have the honor of having Champ play in a Denver uniform and I can’t wait to see what he accomplishes in 2007 and beyond!

 

[BigSteelThrill]

No. Or did you totally remove the 2005 AFCC from your memory banks.

And while everyone has a bad day, that was a shot at the Superbowl. His biggest stage/game to date.

He's not Blount or Lane or Green or Sanders or even Walls.

 

[Jene Bramel]

So, as I'm waiting (not very patiently) for Training Camp to start I got bored and attempted to go back through the history of Cornerbacks to see how Champ Bailey compares with the Greatest Of All Time.

Can we honestly claim that Champ is the G.O.A.T. (greatest of all time) for his position?

Let me know what you think... or if I missed some one that we should consider.

Champ sure is getting a lot of play this offseason. In my opinion, Champ has been a little inconsistent over the course of his career to be termed the greatest ever right now. A couple more seasons like 2006 and he has a better case.

I think you hit the big four in your blog post. Mel Blount, Deion Sanders, Michael Haynes and **** Lane are the cream of the crop for me. Willie Brown is in the mix. I'm not so sure about Darrell Green, although his longevity and consistency make for a good argument.

I'm partial to Blount myself. He was more intimidating than Champ and every bit as good in both phases of the game. He likely would have been a HOF no matter what his surrounding cast looked like.

 

[Denver Obsession]

No. Or did you totally remove the 2005 AFCC from your memory banks.And while everyone has a bad day, that was a shot at the Superbowl. His biggest stage/game to date.He's not Blount or Lane or Green or Sanders or even Walls.

While I think you're dismissing Champ too quickly, I agree that he needs to finish his career, win a few rings and have an impact on the game (or at least his position) before he can truly be considered the GOAT cornerback. I think my post was simply comparing how well he's done on that path through his first eight years. And in that regard... he's done pretty well.

 

[menobrown]

I think Deion is the greatest cover corner of all time and Rod Woodson the best all around corner.

 

[CrossEyed]

I think Deion is the greatest cover corner of all time and Rod Woodson the best all around corner.

Woodson was a great corner. However, having watched the majority of his career while he was in Pittsburgh and also having watched Mel Blount's career, I think I'd have to put Blount ahead of him. Blount literally changed the game. He was so dominating that they changed the rules.

 

[Denver Obsession]

I think Deion is the greatest cover corner of all time and Rod Woodson the best all around corner.

We'll see. Right now Champ is on pace to break Deion's interception numbers although he'll need a few more TD's to top Prime Time.I didn't mention Woodson, as he played both CB and Safety. There were several really great defensive backs that played both (or were a safety used like a CB), but I had limited my list to pure corners. I don't disagree with you on Woodson being considered a top defensive back to ever play the game... I just don't know about crowning him at the CB position.

 

[Denver Obsession]

Blount literally changed the game. He was so dominating that they changed the rules.

Yeah, I'm not so much a history buff when it comes to the NFL, but when I was looking around for the very best, Blount name came up SO often I was amazed. And when I began looking at his career... well, it's impressive what he did as a player for that position.I agree... he's tops.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

 

[waylander]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

 

[Lord Lucan]

Deion Sanders (by his 8th year) — Tackles=282, Passes Defended=83, Interceptions=34Champ Bailey (by his 8th year)– Tackles=493, Passes Defended=138, Interceptions=39Deion Sanders has been credited with the statement “You show me a corner that can tackle, and I’ll show you one that can’t cover.” To this I present CHAMP BAILEY! He has already passed Neon Deion’s TOTAL career tackles and passes defended numbers and is on pace to beat his total interception numbers. Deion may be the only NFL player to also play in a World Series, but when it comes to pure cornerbacks, Champ has him beat hands down. Champ is the complete package — tackling & covering.

There is no way you judge a CB by the number of tackles he makes. Sure, Deion wasn't that interested in hitting people, but the main reason he racked up so few tackles was that opposing QBs generally avoided throwing his way, and when they did, Sanders usually made sure there was no completion, so no tackle to be made. The same goes for interceptions - it's hard to make a pick when the ball always goes to the other side of the field.

 

[Tau837]

The problem I have with this post is that all the comparisons are statistical and Super Bowl rings. I watched a lot of games with Deion, Darrell Green, Rod Woodson, and Champ, and I think Champ is last on that list of corners. I didn't have the opportunity to watch Lane, Brown, Haynes, or Blount in their primes, but I doubt Champ measures up to them. I think fans, including those on this board, tend to overrate players that are currently playing, and that is exactly what all the recent Champ hype is about. He is great, and most likely a HOF CB... but that's where it ends for now.

 

[Tau837]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

I think fans, including those on this board, tend to overrate players that are currently playing

Really? I'd think the opposite is true....one of those "don't realize just how good they are until they're gone" kind of deals.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

I think there'd be little argument that Deion is the best cover corner of all time. There is something to be said for a corner that had a physical presence, though, especially in run support.The Deion vs Blount debate is a good one.

 

[waylander]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

I think there'd be little argument that Deion is the best cover corner of all time. There is something to be said for a corner that had a physical presence, though, especially in run support.The Deion vs Blount debate is a good one.

I recognize the point you are making about him possibly being the greatest cover corner, but when it comes down to it, what corner would you want on your team: The best cover, run supporting, or balanced? I'd have to go with cover.

 

[Tau837]

I think fans, including those on this board, tend to overrate players that are currently playing

Really? I'd think the opposite is true....one of those "don't realize just how good they are until they're gone" kind of deals.

We see this a lot in the offseason around here, when we get a dozen threads asking if different players are HOFers and in most cases they aren't. Yet there are always people arguing for them in every one of those threads.

 

[Tau837]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

I think there'd be little argument that Deion is the best cover corner of all time. There is something to be said for a corner that had a physical presence, though, especially in run support.The Deion vs Blount debate is a good one.

I recognize the point you are making about him possibly being the greatest cover corner, but when it comes down to it, what corner would you want on your team: The best cover, run supporting, or balanced? I'd have to go with cover.

Exactly. For a CB, cover >>>>>>>>>>>>> tackling.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Deion Sanders (by his 8th year) — Tackles=282, Passes Defended=83, Interceptions=34

Champ Bailey (by his 8th year)– Tackles=493, Passes Defended=138, Interceptions=39

Deion Sanders has been credited with the statement “You show me a corner that can tackle, and I’ll show you one that can’t cover.” To this I present CHAMP BAILEY! He has already passed Neon Deion’s TOTAL career tackles and passes defended numbers and is on pace to beat his total interception numbers. Deion may be the only NFL player to also play in a World Series, but when it comes to pure cornerbacks, Champ has him beat hands down. Champ is the complete package — tackling & covering.

There is no way you judge a CB by the number of tackles he makes. Sure, Deion wasn't that interested in hitting people, but the main reason he racked up so few tackles was that opposing QBs generally avoided throwing his way, and when they did, Sanders usually made sure there was no completion, so no tackle to be made. The same goes for interceptions - it's hard to make a pick when the ball always goes to the other side of the field.

 

[phthalatemagic]

He's not even in the conversation.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

I think there'd be little argument that Deion is the best cover corner of all time. There is something to be said for a corner that had a physical presence, though, especially in run support.The Deion vs Blount debate is a good one.

I recognize the point you are making about him possibly being the greatest cover corner, but when it comes down to it, what corner would you want on your team: The best cover, run supporting, or balanced? I'd have to go with cover.

Exactly. For a CB, cover >>>>>>>>>>>>> tackling.

It's not that simple for me.When the cover skills are close, I'll take the balanced corner. Say what you will about Blount being allowed to play a very physical bump and run game during his era, most would argue that he was a very successful cover corner. Both he and Sanders disrupted the passing game of opposing offenses. And I'm not saying that Deion should be dismissed because he couldn't or wouldn't tackle. Those two are my top two of all time; I think it's extremely difficult to choose between them.

 

[duaneok66]

You draft a corner to COVER, not tackle . . .

the title is silly,

Sanders> Bailey hands down . . .

 

[LAUNCH]

Deion is a much more dominant player. Champ is definitely the best corner in the game today, but he doesn't have the game changing ability that Deion had. Sanders had to bait QB's into thinking their WR was open so that he could use his amazing makeup speed to blaze to the ball. He also had the ability to energize a game in a way that few players ever have. When Deion made a play on the ball the entire stadium took notice because they wanted to see what he could do and how he would do it. He could take it to the house every time he touched the ball and he an uncanny way of making huge plays when it really mattered.

LAUNCH

P.S. If Ben Watson had been chasing Deion there would have been no thought of doing anything other than going to the sideline and grabbing a Gatorade while he watched the replay on the jumbotron.

 

[menobrown]

I think Deion is the greatest cover corner of all time and Rod Woodson the best all around corner.

Woodson was a great corner. However, having watched the majority of his career while he was in Pittsburgh and also having watched Mel Blount's career, I think I'd have to put Blount ahead of him. Blount literally changed the game. He was so dominating that they changed the rules.

This is one of the reasons it's difficult to compare era's. In Blount's days a guy like Deion would not have been as valuable when you could make contact with a WR the length of the field. IMO Blount would not have been so dominant in this era. This is why I labeled Woodson the best all around. Not only could he cover and tackle, but he has the speed to play in today's game and if he played in Blounts error he'd have been able to be one of the more physical CB's to ever play. IMO Woodson is a complete corner who would have been great in any era.I'm a Steeler and back when Woodson and Deion were in their prime I asked myself who would I rather have. I hate it but the answer is Deion. As has been mentioned you want you corners to cover and no one has ever covered like Deion, I've never seen another corner shut down an entire area of the field like Deion. When you have one guy who can take out a WR or part of a field it really would free the rest of the defense to blitz and take chances.

 

[Denver Obsession]

when it comes down to it, what corner would you want on your team: The best cover, run supporting, or balanced? I'd have to go with cover.

I disagree. I want it ALL. Cover, run support, open field tackling, etc. If you want to make a solid argument for Deion it has to involve % of TD's per touch. Right now, that would be the only thing you can statically point to that Deion probably has over Champ (or others). I agree he was a constant threat and that's what makes him one of the great ones. I don't think he wins over Blount or Night Train, but if you were calling for Best Cover Cornerback, you'd have a better time arguing the point.

 

[Tau837]

when it comes down to it, what corner would you want on your team: The best cover, run supporting, or balanced? I'd have to go with cover.

I disagree. I want it ALL. Cover, run support, open field tackling, etc. If you want to make a solid argument for Deion it has to involve % of TD's per touch. Right now, that would be the only thing you can statically point to that Deion probably has over Champ (or others). I agree he was a constant threat and that's what makes him one of the great ones. I don't think he wins over Blount or Night Train, but if you were calling for Best Cover Cornerback, you'd have a better time arguing the point.

The problem with your analysis is that you are requiring statistical evidence. There is no statistic that measures the impact Deion had, as he was able to take a half of the field with no help, giving his defensive coordinator unparalleled freedom to devote help elsewhere, like blitzing or double covering someone else. I get the feeling you need to watch more games and worry less about statistics.I agree that it is hard to compare Deion to Blount and Lane (and others of different eras) because of rule changes, among other reasons. But it is easy to compare him to Champ, the original question here, and know that Deion was head and shoulders better.

 

[LHUCKS]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

 

[lawrence phillips]

Bailey had his best season last year and perhaps one of the best ever by a corner (that I've seen at least). He has been a little inconsistent over his career, I'd put Blount, Sanders and Green ahead of him at this point. To say that he's nowhere near as dominant though is a little overboard. He certainly belongs in the conversation.

 

[cacksman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMzlLjs6i9g

 

[pgreenfan]

I think Deion was actually a better tackler than given credit for, he wasn't a big hitter but he was smart in that he would shoot for the legs and made a decent number of tackles (or at least I thought so).

 

[veto87]

I think Deion is the greatest cover corner of all time and Rod Woodson the best all around corner.

right on there and these are 2 from the last 10 years.

 

[Saints-Man]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

This is repeated so much that it has been accepted as fact. It is simply not true. First of all, Sanders mainly played weak side corner(I am under the impression that Bailey plays strong-side corner). Most of the time, he was matched up against the #2 WR. When he was with Atlanta, do you recall him playing on Jerry Rice? No. Rice was usually the Z flanker position, which is usually on the strong side.Sanders'(due to his outstanding speed, accelleration and athletic ability) strength was that he took away the deep portion of his side of the field, allowing the safety to cheat more to the middle of the field.. Sanders was quite ordinary at playing the mid-range routes, the ins and outs. He liked to take chances allowing a good QB/WR combo to take advantage of this all day.I was a Saints season ticket holder at the time. I saw Deion play once a year. The Saints did throw at him, and often with success. However, that success was not the deep ball that looks bad on the highlight reel. But Sanders could be beat(and was a bit ordinary) on the possession type, move the chains types of routes. Sanders was more flash than substance. He was a very good cornerback, but not great IMO. But to the casual fan, what they remember was him returning interceptions and kicks(besides possibly Sayers, he was maybe the greatest kick returner ever) for TDs. And, due to his strengths, he did not get beat on deep balls very often, so he avoided the negative publicity. However, he only had a partial game and was not the overall cornerbacks that the other players were. Teams ran at him, and threw the mid-range routes at him with success.

 

[Saints-Man]

The problem I have with this post is that all the comparisons are statistical and Super Bowl rings. I watched a lot of games with Deion, Darrell Green, Rod Woodson, and Champ, and I think Champ is last on that list of corners. I didn't have the opportunity to watch Lane, Brown, Haynes, or Blount in their primes, but I doubt Champ measures up to them. I think fans, including those on this board, tend to overrate players that are currently playing, and that is exactly what all the recent Champ hype is about. He is great, and most likely a HOF CB... but that's where it ends for now.

I think Deion benefits from this as well. Most people on this board(30's and 40's) watched a lot of football during Sanders' career. He is overrated compared to the great cornerbacks of years past.

 

[Saints-Man]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

I think there'd be little argument that Deion is the best cover corner of all time. There is something to be said for a corner that had a physical presence, though, especially in run support.The Deion vs Blount debate is a good one.

If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

 

[Tau837]

Deion Sanders shut down half the field when he played. He was so great that nobody threw to his side of the field. Even if Bailey has more INT's than Sanders, he is nowhere near as dominant.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well. Stats dont tell the full story when it comes to Deion. I would like to see stats of how many targets Deion's receivers got compared to Champs, and then the percentage of completions, passes defended and interceptions.

I think there'd be little argument that Deion is the best cover corner of all time. There is something to be said for a corner that had a physical presence, though, especially in run support.The Deion vs Blount debate is a good one.

If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

This is misleading. Deion was often used not to cover a specific reciever, but rather to cover a specific side of the field. If the offense chose not to send its WR1 to that side, then Deion didn't cover him. That doesn't imply Deion wasn't great, it is more a reflection of the fact that the other team chose not to put its WR1 against Deion.

 

[Tau837]

The problem I have with this post is that all the comparisons are statistical and Super Bowl rings. I watched a lot of games with Deion, Darrell Green, Rod Woodson, and Champ, and I think Champ is last on that list of corners. I didn't have the opportunity to watch Lane, Brown, Haynes, or Blount in their primes, but I doubt Champ measures up to them. I think fans, including those on this board, tend to overrate players that are currently playing, and that is exactly what all the recent Champ hype is about. He is great, and most likely a HOF CB... but that's where it ends for now.

I think Deion benefits from this as well. Most people on this board(30's and 40's) watched a lot of football during Sanders' career. He is overrated compared to the great cornerbacks of years past.

OK, so it sounds like you are at least conceding that Deion is not overrated compared to corners of his own or later generations. Is that right? This thread was about Champ... are you agreeing that Deion was better than Champ?

 

[Saints-Man]

The problem I have with this post is that all the comparisons are statistical and Super Bowl rings. I watched a lot of games with Deion, Darrell Green, Rod Woodson, and Champ, and I think Champ is last on that list of corners. I didn't have the opportunity to watch Lane, Brown, Haynes, or Blount in their primes, but I doubt Champ measures up to them. I think fans, including those on this board, tend to overrate players that are currently playing, and that is exactly what all the recent Champ hype is about. He is great, and most likely a HOF CB... but that's where it ends for now.

I think Deion benefits from this as well. Most people on this board(30's and 40's) watched a lot of football during Sanders' career. He is overrated compared to the great cornerbacks of years past.

OK, so it sounds like you are at least conceding that Deion is not overrated compared to corners of his own or later generations. Is that right? This thread was about Champ... are you agreeing that Deion was better than Champ?

I have not seen Champ in person or have seen film breakdown of him like I did Deion. I really don't have an opinion on that.

 

[Saints-Man]

...If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

This is misleading. Deion was often used not to cover a specific reciever, but rather to cover a specific side of the field. If the offense chose not to send its WR1 to that side, then Deion didn't cover him. That doesn't imply Deion wasn't great, it is more a reflection of the fact that the other team chose not to put its WR1 against Deion.

Think about that. If you were a defensive coach, and you had the GREATEST cover corner of all time(certainly not my contention, but others), why would you NOT use him to take out a team like the 49ers greatest weapon in Jerry Rice??? Also, you are making the contention that the offense determined who the defense assigned. The defensive coaches make those decisions, not the opposing teams' offense. If the offensive team determined those assignments, then Walsh would have lined up Rice against an opposing defense's slowest lineman. Think about that. That is why I contend this claim is self-propagating bs. No one person can cover a 'specific side of the field'. Send one receiver deep, one short. He has to cover one of them. Get real people...this is a 3 dimensional game of real life football, not a 2 dimensional video game. Unless you are Superman(I mean the real Superman)....you can't cover a ' specific side of the field'. It is not physically possible. However, people keep repeating this until it is accepted as a truism... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'.... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World". You hear something over and over you just accept it as fact. It is just hype.

 

[Tau837]

...If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

This is misleading. Deion was often used not to cover a specific reciever, but rather to cover a specific side of the field. If the offense chose not to send its WR1 to that side, then Deion didn't cover him. That doesn't imply Deion wasn't great, it is more a reflection of the fact that the other team chose not to put its WR1 against Deion.

Think about that. If you were a defensive coach, and you had the GREATEST cover corner of all time(certainly not my contention, but others), why would you NOT use him to take out a team like the 49ers greatest weapon in Jerry Rice??? Also, you are making the contention that the offense determined who the defense assigned. The defensive coaches make those decisions, not the opposing teams' offense. If the offensive team determined those assignments, then Walsh would have lined up Rice against an opposing defense's slowest lineman. Think about that. That is why I contend this claim is self-propagating bs. No one person can cover a 'specific side of the field'. Send one receiver deep, one short. He has to cover one of them. Get real people...this is a 3 dimensional game of real life football, not a 2 dimensional video game. Unless you are Superman(I mean the real Superman)....you can't cover a ' specific side of the field'. It is not physically possible. However, people keep repeating this until it is accepted as a truism... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'.... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World". You hear something over and over you just accept it as fact. It is just hype.

You are wrong. The defense decided that Deion would line up on the left side (for example). That enabled the defense to know that help would be available on the right side. It was up to the offense who lined up against him on the left side. It isn't just hype.Yes, agree that if the offense lined up 2 recievers on Deion's side that he couldn't cover both himself and would in that case have another DB on his side. Duh.Did you watch any of the games in Deion's prime? Doesn't sound like it.

 

[Tau837]

Something from another thread on this:

You have this completely backwards. Deion was a game changing defensive player. For much of his career, he covered one side of the field and allowed the defensive help to go elsewhere. If he didn't cover Irvin or Rice in a given game, it was because their teams chose not to line them up on Deion's side, not because Deion or his coaches didn't choose to have him cover those guys.

Great point. Here's an example from a 1995 regular season game:

-- Offensive coordinator Marc Trestman, who has taken more heat than he has deserved, used Rice imaginatively. Trestman devised an offensive game plan that often lined Rice up in the slot instead of his usual spot outside, and put him in position to work against a linebacker or safety instead of Deion Sanders.

Rice made all five of his catches against players who won't earn in their entire careers the $13 million bonus Sanders received just for signing with Dallas. Trestman figured the Cowboys would stick with their normal defense instead of putting Sanders on Rice all the time, and he was right. And you thought one of the reasons Deion was getting all that money was to cover Rice.

``You wouldn't understand,'' said Dallas coach Barry Switzer. ``It'd take too long to show you. We couldn't have (Sanders) on Rice because of the coverages we were playing. It would mess everything up.'' Oh, and that 81-yard touchdown pass on the second play of the game -- when Rice was covered by linebacker Darrin Smith -- that didn't mess anything up?

``You start to move Jerry around, and it screws up their whole defense,'' said Grbac.

 

[Saints-Man]

...If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

This is misleading. Deion was often used not to cover a specific reciever, but rather to cover a specific side of the field. If the offense chose not to send its WR1 to that side, then Deion didn't cover him. That doesn't imply Deion wasn't great, it is more a reflection of the fact that the other team chose not to put its WR1 against Deion.

Think about that. If you were a defensive coach, and you had the GREATEST cover corner of all time(certainly not my contention, but others), why would you NOT use him to take out a team like the 49ers greatest weapon in Jerry Rice??? Also, you are making the contention that the offense determined who the defense assigned. The defensive coaches make those decisions, not the opposing teams' offense. If the offensive team determined those assignments, then Walsh would have lined up Rice against an opposing defense's slowest lineman. Think about that. That is why I contend this claim is self-propagating bs. No one person can cover a 'specific side of the field'. Send one receiver deep, one short. He has to cover one of them. Get real people...this is a 3 dimensional game of real life football, not a 2 dimensional video game. Unless you are Superman(I mean the real Superman)....you can't cover a ' specific side of the field'. It is not physically possible. However, people keep repeating this until it is accepted as a truism... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'.... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World". You hear something over and over you just accept it as fact. It is just hype.

You are wrong. The defense decided that Deion would line up on the left side (for example). That enabled the defense to know that help would be available on the right side. It was up to the offense who lined up against him on the left side. It isn't just hype.Yes, agree that if the offense lined up 2 recievers on Deion's side that he couldn't cover both himself and would in that case have another DB on his side. Duh.Did you watch any of the games in Deion's prime? Doesn't sound like it.

Yes, I posted previously that I attended games in Deion's prime. Being a volunteer coach, I didn't just follow the ball. Did you ever attend games in Deion's prime and study him? Or are you saying this from a vantage point of watching the national feed on Sunday and taking game day commentator's word as gospel?

 

[BlackHole]

...If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

This is misleading. Deion was often used not to cover a specific reciever, but rather to cover a specific side of the field. If the offense chose not to send its WR1 to that side, then Deion didn't cover him. That doesn't imply Deion wasn't great, it is more a reflection of the fact that the other team chose not to put its WR1 against Deion.

Think about that. If you were a defensive coach, and you had the GREATEST cover corner of all time(certainly not my contention, but others), why would you NOT use him to take out a team like the 49ers greatest weapon in Jerry Rice??? Also, you are making the contention that the offense determined who the defense assigned. The defensive coaches make those decisions, not the opposing teams' offense. If the offensive team determined those assignments, then Walsh would have lined up Rice against an opposing defense's slowest lineman. Think about that. That is why I contend this claim is self-propagating bs. No one person can cover a 'specific side of the field'. Send one receiver deep, one short. He has to cover one of them. Get real people...this is a 3 dimensional game of real life football, not a 2 dimensional video game. Unless you are Superman(I mean the real Superman)....you can't cover a ' specific side of the field'. It is not physically possible. However, people keep repeating this until it is accepted as a truism... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'.... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World". You hear something over and over you just accept it as fact. It is just hype.

You are wrong. The defense decided that Deion would line up on the left side (for example). That enabled the defense to know that help would be available on the right side. It was up to the offense who lined up against him on the left side. It isn't just hype.Yes, agree that if the offense lined up 2 recievers on Deion's side that he couldn't cover both himself and would in that case have another DB on his side. Duh.Did you watch any of the games in Deion's prime? Doesn't sound like it.

Yes, I posted previously that I attended games in Deion's prime. Being a volunteer coach, I didn't just follow the ball. Did you ever attend games in Deion's prime and study him? Or are you saying this from a vantage point of watching the national feed on Sunday and taking game day commentator's word as gospel?

I only saw him play in person twice (once as a 49'er once as a Cowboy). I do watch the field outside of where the ball is (shoot, I watch the sidelines as much as I can). Deion did not cut the field in half, as is what is always said, but Deion did cut 1/3 of the field off, no matter who lined up where he was, period. The importance to what that means to a defensive scheme is incredible.I do believe that Champ is very similair in respect to how he pretty much comes close to accomplishing the same thing, with the rules that go against a defensive back compared to Deion's day. But, the new rules really would not have applied to Deion's game anyways, so Deion is the gold standard. Champ is awesome, but I'd take Deion and Woodson before Champ. I'd take Haynes, not Lester, but Haynes somewhere right after Champ. Lester, top 10-15, but not in this conversation in my opinion.

 

[Saints-Man]

Something from another thread on this:

You have this completely backwards. Deion was a game changing defensive player. For much of his career, he covered one side of the field and allowed the defensive help to go elsewhere. If he didn't cover Irvin or Rice in a given game, it was because their teams chose not to line them up on Deion's side, not because Deion or his coaches didn't choose to have him cover those guys.

Great point. Here's an example from a 1995 regular season game:

-- Offensive coordinator Marc Trestman, who has taken more heat than he has deserved, used Rice imaginatively. Trestman devised an offensive game plan that often lined Rice up in the slot instead of his usual spot outside, and put him in position to work against a linebacker or safety instead of Deion Sanders.

Rice made all five of his catches against players who won't earn in their entire careers the $13 million bonus Sanders received just for signing with Dallas. Trestman figured the Cowboys would stick with their normal defense instead of putting Sanders on Rice all the time, and he was right. And you thought one of the reasons Deion was getting all that money was to cover Rice.

``You wouldn't understand,'' said Dallas coach Barry Switzer. ``It'd take too long to show you. We couldn't have (Sanders) on Rice because of the coverages we were playing. It would mess everything up.'' Oh, and that 81-yard touchdown pass on the second play of the game -- when Rice was covered by linebacker Darrin Smith -- that didn't mess anything up?

``You start to move Jerry around, and it screws up their whole defense,'' said Grbac.

None of this mentions how many passes were thrown Deion's way or not or in the overall scheme how he played. Also, do you realize that you are citing a game in which Deion's team lost 45-14? The fact that the Cowboys' coaching staff could not make adjustments is not proof that Sanders actually took away 'an entire side of the field'? In a defensive effort that yielded 45 points and Rice(their best weapon) caught only 5 passes (for 161 yards) and 1 TD, it sounded like the entire Dallas defense stunk up the joint. Also...it is circular logic. The argument here is that Sanders supposedly was the greatest cover corner of all time. If so, take out one of the other teams' weapons. However, as the quotes from the Cowboy coaching staff points out, that is not how the defense is designed. Don't you think it is because they want to play to Deion's strengths(superior speed that doesn't give up the long ball) than actually designing a defense where he has to play a more complete game?

Let's take this analogy to a different defensive player. One that I think ACTUALLY was a game changing player, Lawrence Taylor. He was so talented that the Giants did a lot of different things with him. He was not limited. He could support the run, cover(he was a very good zone coverage LB), and most noticeably rush the passer. LT dictated to the offense, not the other way around. The fact that Sanders had some talents(take away a DEEP portion of the field) did not make him a great CB. It made him a very good CB with one part of his game that was VERY STRONG, even GREAT, and his coaches used his strengths to help design the defense(which is what any good coach does).

Also, watching Deion, I think he was the greatest kick returner to ever play the game. The only player (in legend) that might approach him is Gale Sayers.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Opposing QBs were in FEAR of throwing to Deion's side of the field. While Bailey is a great CB in his own right, he doesn't invoke that same level of fear, nor does he shut down half the field when he plays like Sanders did.

 

[jurb26]

Something from another thread on this:

You have this completely backwards. Deion was a game changing defensive player. For much of his career, he covered one side of the field and allowed the defensive help to go elsewhere. If he didn't cover Irvin or Rice in a given game, it was because their teams chose not to line them up on Deion's side, not because Deion or his coaches didn't choose to have him cover those guys.

Great point. Here's an example from a 1995 regular season game:

-- Offensive coordinator Marc Trestman, who has taken more heat than he has deserved, used Rice imaginatively. Trestman devised an offensive game plan that often lined Rice up in the slot instead of his usual spot outside, and put him in position to work against a linebacker or safety instead of Deion Sanders.

Rice made all five of his catches against players who won't earn in their entire careers the $13 million bonus Sanders received just for signing with Dallas. Trestman figured the Cowboys would stick with their normal defense instead of putting Sanders on Rice all the time, and he was right. And you thought one of the reasons Deion was getting all that money was to cover Rice.

``You wouldn't understand,'' said Dallas coach Barry Switzer. ``It'd take too long to show you. We couldn't have (Sanders) on Rice because of the coverages we were playing. It would mess everything up.'' Oh, and that 81-yard touchdown pass on the second play of the game -- when Rice was covered by linebacker Darrin Smith -- that didn't mess anything up?

``You start to move Jerry around, and it screws up their whole defense,'' said Grbac.

None of this mentions how many passes were thrown Deion's way or not or in the overall scheme how he played. Also, do you realize that you are citing a game in which Deion's team lost 45-14? The fact that the Cowboys' coaching staff could not make adjustments is not proof that Sanders actually took away 'an entire side of the field'? In a defensive effort that yielded 45 points and Rice(their best weapon) caught only 5 passes (for 161 yards) and 1 TD, it sounded like the entire Dallas defense stunk up the joint. Also...it is circular logic. The argument here is that Sanders supposedly was the greatest cover corner of all time. If so, take out one of the other teams' weapons. However, as the quotes from the Cowboy coaching staff points out, that is not how the defense is designed. Don't you think it is because they want to play to Deion's strengths(superior speed that doesn't give up the long ball) than actually designing a defense where he has to play a more complete game?

Let's take this analogy to a different defensive player. One that I think ACTUALLY was a game changing player, Lawrence Taylor. He was so talented that the Giants did a lot of different things with him. He was not limited. He could support the run, cover(he was a very good zone coverage LB), and most noticeably rush the passer. LT dictated to the offense, not the other way around. The fact that Sanders had some talents(take away a DEEP portion of the field) did not make him a great CB. It made him a very good CB with one part of his game that was VERY STRONG, even GREAT, and his coaches used his strengths to help design the defense(which is what any good coach does).

Also, watching Deion, I think he was the greatest kick returner to ever play the game. The only player (in legend) that might approach him is Gale Sayers.

Wow, you are trying to compare scheming for a LB to scheming for a CB. Thats so wrong/flawed I don't even think it's worth entering this debate.

 

[jurb26]

My lord has the Champ love gotten out of control this off-season. Greatest of all time player? Thats actually laughable at this point of his career. If Champ is greatest of all time, then so is T. Davis.

 

[dparker713]

Opposing QBs were in FEAR of throwing to Deion's side of the field. While Bailey is a great CB in his own right, he doesn't invoke that same level of fear, nor does he shut down half the field when he plays like Sanders did.

You might want to take a look at Bailey's numbers from last year. I think he intercepted something like 25% of the targets. Thats insane. Admittedly, last year was by far his best, but he was every bit the coverage force Deion ever was last year, and he played run support. So much of the problem with evaluating Deion is the insane hype he received, and continues to receive. And while he would take away a deep half, that isnt the same as a half of the field. He really should have just been a free safety, thats how he played the game anyway.

 

[Tau837]

Something from another thread on this:

You have this completely backwards. Deion was a game changing defensive player. For much of his career, he covered one side of the field and allowed the defensive help to go elsewhere. If he didn't cover Irvin or Rice in a given game, it was because their teams chose not to line them up on Deion's side, not because Deion or his coaches didn't choose to have him cover those guys.

Great point. Here's an example from a 1995 regular season game:

-- Offensive coordinator Marc Trestman, who has taken more heat than he has deserved, used Rice imaginatively. Trestman devised an offensive game plan that often lined Rice up in the slot instead of his usual spot outside, and put him in position to work against a linebacker or safety instead of Deion Sanders.

Rice made all five of his catches against players who won't earn in their entire careers the $13 million bonus Sanders received just for signing with Dallas. Trestman figured the Cowboys would stick with their normal defense instead of putting Sanders on Rice all the time, and he was right. And you thought one of the reasons Deion was getting all that money was to cover Rice.

``You wouldn't understand,'' said Dallas coach Barry Switzer. ``It'd take too long to show you. We couldn't have (Sanders) on Rice because of the coverages we were playing. It would mess everything up.'' Oh, and that 81-yard touchdown pass on the second play of the game -- when Rice was covered by linebacker Darrin Smith -- that didn't mess anything up?

``You start to move Jerry around, and it screws up their whole defense,'' said Grbac.

None of this mentions how many passes were thrown Deion's way or not or in the overall scheme how he played. Also, do you realize that you are citing a game in which Deion's team lost 45-14? The fact that the Cowboys' coaching staff could not make adjustments is not proof that Sanders actually took away 'an entire side of the field'? In a defensive effort that yielded 45 points and Rice(their best weapon) caught only 5 passes (for 161 yards) and 1 TD, it sounded like the entire Dallas defense stunk up the joint. Also...it is circular logic. The argument here is that Sanders supposedly was the greatest cover corner of all time. If so, take out one of the other teams' weapons. However, as the quotes from the Cowboy coaching staff points out, that is not how the defense is designed. Don't you think it is because they want to play to Deion's strengths(superior speed that doesn't give up the long ball) than actually designing a defense where he has to play a more complete game?

Let's take this analogy to a different defensive player. One that I think ACTUALLY was a game changing player, Lawrence Taylor. He was so talented that the Giants did a lot of different things with him. He was not limited. He could support the run, cover(he was a very good zone coverage LB), and most noticeably rush the passer. LT dictated to the offense, not the other way around. The fact that Sanders had some talents(take away a DEEP portion of the field) did not make him a great CB. It made him a very good CB with one part of his game that was VERY STRONG, even GREAT, and his coaches used his strengths to help design the defense(which is what any good coach does).

Also, watching Deion, I think he was the greatest kick returner to ever play the game. The only player (in legend) that might approach him is Gale Sayers.

I didn't actually cite the game, MarshallRob did. The original post was in response to someone knocking Deion by saying he wasn't matched up on Rice and Irvin, so he achieved his success by covering #2 WRs. I was saying that he covered a side of the field, rather than a particular WR, because of what that enabled the defensive coordinator to do with his scheme... and if Rice or Irvin didn't go to his side, that was the choice of the other team.Agree with you regarding his returning abilities.

 

[Tau837]

...If you limit the discussion to the long ball, then you have a better case for Deion. If you take into account the full range of routes, Sanders starts to fade. If he was the greatest, why wouldn't he be assigned to Rice (when Sanders was in Atlanta)?

This is misleading. Deion was often used not to cover a specific reciever, but rather to cover a specific side of the field. If the offense chose not to send its WR1 to that side, then Deion didn't cover him. That doesn't imply Deion wasn't great, it is more a reflection of the fact that the other team chose not to put its WR1 against Deion.

Think about that. If you were a defensive coach, and you had the GREATEST cover corner of all time(certainly not my contention, but others), why would you NOT use him to take out a team like the 49ers greatest weapon in Jerry Rice??? Also, you are making the contention that the offense determined who the defense assigned. The defensive coaches make those decisions, not the opposing teams' offense. If the offensive team determined those assignments, then Walsh would have lined up Rice against an opposing defense's slowest lineman. Think about that. That is why I contend this claim is self-propagating bs. No one person can cover a 'specific side of the field'. Send one receiver deep, one short. He has to cover one of them. Get real people...this is a 3 dimensional game of real life football, not a 2 dimensional video game. Unless you are Superman(I mean the real Superman)....you can't cover a ' specific side of the field'. It is not physically possible. However, people keep repeating this until it is accepted as a truism... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'.... Deion covered ' specific side of the field'... This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World". You hear something over and over you just accept it as fact. It is just hype.

You are wrong. The defense decided that Deion would line up on the left side (for example). That enabled the defense to know that help would be available on the right side. It was up to the offense who lined up against him on the left side. It isn't just hype.Yes, agree that if the offense lined up 2 recievers on Deion's side that he couldn't cover both himself and would in that case have another DB on his side. Duh.Did you watch any of the games in Deion's prime? Doesn't sound like it.

Yes, I posted previously that I attended games in Deion's prime. Being a volunteer coach, I didn't just follow the ball. Did you ever attend games in Deion's prime and study him? Or are you saying this from a vantage point of watching the national feed on Sunday and taking game day commentator's word as gospel?

I only saw him play in person twice (once as a 49'er once as a Cowboy). I do watch the field outside of where the ball is (shoot, I watch the sidelines as much as I can). Deion did not cut the field in half, as is what is always said, but Deion did cut 1/3 of the field off, no matter who lined up where he was, period. The importance to what that means to a defensive scheme is incredible.I do believe that Champ is very similair in respect to how he pretty much comes close to accomplishing the same thing, with the rules that go against a defensive back compared to Deion's day. But, the new rules really would not have applied to Deion's game anyways, so Deion is the gold standard. Champ is awesome, but I'd take Deion and Woodson before Champ. I'd take Haynes, not Lester, but Haynes somewhere right after Champ. Lester, top 10-15, but not in this conversation in my opinion.

 

[Tau837]

To those who think Deion was significantly overrated, are you aware that he was Defensive Player of the Year in 1994? Since 1971, when the award started, only 4 CBs have won DPOY - Blount, Hayes, Woodson, and Sanders each won once. Were the voters wrong to select him?

And what about All Pro selections? Deion was All Pro 6 times as a CB (and 2 other times as a kick returner). Were the voters wrong? How many other CBs have as many selections? Are there any? (I don't know the answer and can't find a reliable internet source with total selections.) Deion played at the same time as Woodson and Darrell Green and still earned those 6 selections. Champ has only made it 3 times, despite the fact that his contemporaries at CB are relatively weaker.