which would you value more... a corner who could be physical and tackle or someone who could cover?
Why is the focus (Big Ten) on speed and covering skills when the PRIMARY focus should be about guys who are physical and can tackle well? Would you rather have a corner who runs a 4.4 who isn't physical or a guy who runs a 4.6 and is physical? Legitimate question. A corner who can play press man.
Maybe the solution is to have a corner who is a true speed cover corner and a guy who is a physical corner. Hard to find both of those traits in the same corner unless you are Ty Law.
Also, leaving off quickness/acceleration...how does .2 translate into covering a guy on a route within 15 yards. QB has to be pretty accurate to exploit that differential. I guess you can flip the issue and ask whether you'd rather have a wr who can run good routes, block, have good hands and cut well vs. a guy who has elite speed.
Reality Man
Why is the focus (Big Ten) on speed and covering skills when the PRIMARY focus should be about guys who are physical and can tackle well? Would you rather have a corner who runs a 4.4 who isn't physical or a guy who runs a 4.6 and is physical? Legitimate question. A corner who can play press man.
Maybe the solution is to have a corner who is a true speed cover corner and a guy who is a physical corner. Hard to find both of those traits in the same corner unless you are Ty Law.
Also, leaving off quickness/acceleration...how does .2 translate into covering a guy on a route within 15 yards. QB has to be pretty accurate to exploit that differential. I guess you can flip the issue and ask whether you'd rather have a wr who can run good routes, block, have good hands and cut well vs. a guy who has elite speed.
Reality Man