Terrence McGee (1 Viewer)

[BearsFan]

One more for Jene (for now) since McGees not currently ranked in your top 60 DBs.

Here's a case for McGee being higher. Pls tell me what's wrong with the picture I paint.

Statlines:

2004 BUF 16 71 16 2 0 1 3 15 114 15 8

2005 BUF 15 60 13 0 1 1 4 15 102 33 0

2006 BUF 15 64 13 0 1 1 0 11 86 70 0

He's averaged 79 tackles (65 solos) over the past 3 years
He inherits the weak-side CB#1 spot in a favorable Cover-2 scheme w/Clements leaving so he'll be active in run support. BUF will likely be playing from behind >50% of the time this year, so he should get ample tackle opportunities in run support.
Since he'll be covering the opposing team's #1 WR predominantly, he'll have to prove he can cover or he'll be constantly be targeted. Since he's been a playmaker in the past, I see his PDs/INTs increasing and, since he'll likely get beaten some initially, he'll get additional tackles chasing the plays from behind.
He'll likely still have KR responsibility as well.Given these points, why would he not approach #s (and ranking) similar to other Cover-2 CB1s like Winfield, Tillman, Barber, etc.?

 

[Jene Bramel]

One more for Jene (for now) since McGees not currently ranked in your top 60 DBs.

Here's a case for McGee being higher. Pls tell me what's wrong with the picture I paint.

Statlines:

2004 BUF 16 71 16 2 0 1 3 15 114 15 8

2005 BUF 15 60 13 0 1 1 4 15 102 33 0

2006 BUF 15 64 13 0 1 1 0 11 86 70 0

He's averaged 79 tackles (65 solos) over the past 3 years
He inherits the weak-side CB#1 spot in a favorable Cover-2 scheme w/Clements leaving so he'll be active in run support. BUF will likely be playing from behind >50% of the time this year, so he should get ample tackle opportunities in run support.
Since he'll be covering the opposing team's #1 WR predominantly, he'll have to prove he can cover or he'll be constantly be targeted. Since he's been a playmaker in the past, I see his PDs/INTs increasing and, since he'll likely get beaten some initially, he'll get additional tackles chasing the plays from behind.
He'll likely still have KR responsibility as well.Given these points, why would he not approach #s (and ranking) similar to other Cover-2 CB1s like Winfield, Tillman, Barber, etc.?

Thanks for keeping me honest, BearsFan. It's appreciated.This is another small oversight on my part. McGee was ticketed for inclusion in this latest update and missed. Originally I had him just outside my top 60, with three primary concerns.

1. His cover stats fell way off last year from an average of close to four interceptions and 15 passes defended in 2004-05 to zero interceptions and 11 passes defended in 2006.

2. His tackle stats didn't improve at all despite being in a more tackle friendly scheme.

3. The Bills look to start journeyman Kiwaukee Thomas at the other corner.

Are 1 and 2 because he needed time to adjust to the zone coverage scheme and was limited by an ankle injury or will he struggle in a Cover-2 scheme due to a lack of zone coverage instincts and so-so run support ability? Those are probably questions Aaron can answer better than I can.

Some additional clarifications:

The RCB isn't necessarily the best option in the Tampa-2. More ballcarriers get funneled to the weak side by design, but that doesn't necessarily put the RCB in position to make more plays. For the most part, you still need to be a solid run supporting CB to take advantage of the potentially increased opportunity. For example, of the two best IDP Tampa-2 corners, Barber plays on the right or in the slot, Tillman on the left.

Most teams don't have their corners shadow a wide receiver and, since it's primarily a zone scheme, McGee may not spend as much time lined up against the opposing team's best receiver as you'd think. And I don't take the KR/PR value into account in our rankings, although McGee clearly has much better value in those leagues that do.

Still, there's no way I'd take Asomugha ahead of McGee. And you're right in that the story could just as easily read that the ankle was a bigger issue than the scheme change, so he's worth taking a chance on.

For those of you reading these today, feel free to call me (us) out if you don't like/understand what you see. Most times, I'll defend the rankings. Other times, particularly at the bottom of the list, oversights and cut-and-paste issues as things change each week may be the reason for a funky ranking. Or I could just be an idiot. All things are possible.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

For those of you reading these today, feel free to call me (us) out if you don't like/understand what you see. Most times, I'll defend the rankings. Other times, particularly at the bottom of the list, oversights and cut-and-paste issues as things change each week may be the reason for a funky ranking. Or I could just be an idiot. All things are possible.

100% agree. Especially about the "I could just be an idiot" part (me, not the good doctor)