A cornerback quandary

blackhawk · 03-03-2005, 07:09 AM

RAND: A cornerback quandary
Mar 03, 2005, 5:23:39 AM by Jonathan Rand

Some around the NFL will tell you that the Chiefs would be wasting their time spending a lot of money to acquire a marquee cornerback. This is an interesting argument, though it’s also unconvincing.

Cornerbacks were the primary losers in last season’s decision to have officials strictly enforce the illegal contact rule. No longer could a cornerback use his hands on a receiver more than five yards past the line of scrimmage. Illegal contact penalties increased dramatically and playing cornerback became even more difficult than usual.

Some even claim that the enforcement of illegal contact negates the abilities of the NFL’s top cornerbacks. According to ESPN.com, “The Colts won’t spend big money on their secondary because they believe the shutdown cornerback is extinct.”

Those who agree could cite the Patriots’ success despite an injury-riddled secondary. Randall Gay and Asante Samuel, both young backups, started at cornerback in the Super Bowl victory over the Eagles.

The Chiefs are pursuing top-notch cornerbacks, anyway, during the free agency period, which started Wednesday. As well they should.

If illegal contact calls truly bring all cornerbacks together, then why did Eric Warfield perform so much better at left cornerback than Dexter McCleon, William Bartee or Julian Battle on the right side? Why did opponents prefer throwing away from Warfield? They obviously didn’t believe that all Chiefs cornerbacks were equally vulnerable.

As for the Patriots’ success despite a patchwork secondary, their four linebackers formed the heart of their defense. If you can get enough pressure and coverage out of your front seven, you can get by with inexperienced cornerbacks.

The current cornerback quandary is nothing new. It’s just one more battle in the war against defense that the NFL has been waging since the late 1970s. Offense sells tickets and TV contracts, which is why major rules changes often try to diminish defense.

Starting in the late 1970s, the league changed blocking and illegal contact rules to open up the passing game. More recent rules have tried to protect the quarterback. Consequently, we’ve seen unprecedented passing production. We’ve also seen some pass-happy teams with horrible defenses make the playoffs.

But have NFL teams decided it’s a waste of time building strong defenses? Not as long as defense still wins championships. It would be just as foolish for teams to believe they can grab guys off the street and put them at cornerback.

You would think that at some point, NFL defenses would be legislated into submission. But defensive coordinators are a crafty bunch. Many, in fact, are regular Houdinis. You can handcuff them, chain them, put them in a box and throw them in the ocean and 30 minutes later they’ll be back on the dock.

These defensive coordinators keep coming up with zone blitzes, creative play calling, specialized substitutions and other wrinkles that keep the offenses honest. Then the league goes looking for stronger handcuffs or a deeper ocean.

And what would happen to the Chiefs, or any other team, if all of a sudden the officials are told to become more lenient toward illegal contact? This could prove disastrous to a club that assumed it could get by with one or two marginal cornerbacks.

Don’t expect the Chiefs to make that mistake.

03-03-2005, 07:09 AM	Topic Starter
blackhawk Registered User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: walk town Casino cash: $10004900	A cornerback quandary RAND: A cornerback quandary Mar 03, 2005, 5:23:39 AM by Jonathan Rand Some around the NFL will tell you that the Chiefs would be wasting their time spending a lot of money to acquire a marquee cornerback. This is an interesting argument, though it’s also unconvincing. Cornerbacks were the primary losers in last season’s decision to have officials strictly enforce the illegal contact rule. No longer could a cornerback use his hands on a receiver more than five yards past the line of scrimmage. Illegal contact penalties increased dramatically and playing cornerback became even more difficult than usual. Some even claim that the enforcement of illegal contact negates the abilities of the NFL’s top cornerbacks. According to ESPN.com, “The Colts won’t spend big money on their secondary because they believe the shutdown cornerback is extinct.” Those who agree could cite the Patriots’ success despite an injury-riddled secondary. Randall Gay and Asante Samuel, both young backups, started at cornerback in the Super Bowl victory over the Eagles. The Chiefs are pursuing top-notch cornerbacks, anyway, during the free agency period, which started Wednesday. As well they should. If illegal contact calls truly bring all cornerbacks together, then why did Eric Warfield perform so much better at left cornerback than Dexter McCleon, William Bartee or Julian Battle on the right side? Why did opponents prefer throwing away from Warfield? They obviously didn’t believe that all Chiefs cornerbacks were equally vulnerable. As for the Patriots’ success despite a patchwork secondary, their four linebackers formed the heart of their defense. If you can get enough pressure and coverage out of your front seven, you can get by with inexperienced cornerbacks. The current cornerback quandary is nothing new. It’s just one more battle in the war against defense that the NFL has been waging since the late 1970s. Offense sells tickets and TV contracts, which is why major rules changes often try to diminish defense. Starting in the late 1970s, the league changed blocking and illegal contact rules to open up the passing game. More recent rules have tried to protect the quarterback. Consequently, we’ve seen unprecedented passing production. We’ve also seen some pass-happy teams with horrible defenses make the playoffs. But have NFL teams decided it’s a waste of time building strong defenses? Not as long as defense still wins championships. It would be just as foolish for teams to believe they can grab guys off the street and put them at cornerback. You would think that at some point, NFL defenses would be legislated into submission. But defensive coordinators are a crafty bunch. Many, in fact, are regular Houdinis. You can handcuff them, chain them, put them in a box and throw them in the ocean and 30 minutes later they’ll be back on the dock. These defensive coordinators keep coming up with zone blitzes, creative play calling, specialized substitutions and other wrinkles that keep the offenses honest. Then the league goes looking for stronger handcuffs or a deeper ocean. And what would happen to the Chiefs, or any other team, if all of a sudden the officials are told to become more lenient toward illegal contact? This could prove disastrous to a club that assumed it could get by with one or two marginal cornerbacks. Don’t expect the Chiefs to make that mistake.
Posts: 345