It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:21 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:51 pm
Posts: 974
Ice wrote:
Joe Haden was a top 10 pick, and he's a finished, polished product. Burns wasn't, and isn't. He does, however, have plenty of ceiling left.


Wasn't Woodson a top 10 pick as well? When was the last time the Steelers had the ability to draft a corner in the top 10? I get wanting one of those guys but a lot of the can't miss guys are drafted higher than we have been drafting. That's why it's so important to hit on any big FA signing and be opportunistic with trades.

Speaking of DBs, wouldn't you think guys would call out Mitchel when they see him celebrating tackles 15 yards down the field when they're watching tape? I want that guy gone so bad. How many years left on his deal?

_________________
Howard Griffith had to resort to chop-blocking him during the 1997 AFC Championship Game. An incredulous Kirkland asked “Why do you have to use cheap tactics like chop-blocking?” Griffith replied by asking, “Why do you have to be a 300-pound linebacker?”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:14 pm
Posts: 1261
I want Mitchell gone like yesterday. I think he has delivered more big hits on his own defensive teammates then he ever has on the opposition. I was hoping for so much more from him when he was signed from Carolina, but he has disappointed me as well.

He is currently in the 4th year of his 5 year deal, he also has restructured his contract to help the team. This season he counts $8.1 million against the cap. Next season, the last of his contract he will count another $8.1 million.

They can cut him after the season and save $6 million but still be left with $2.2 million of a hit on the salary cap because they still have the last of that pro rated restructured bonus to account for.

I hope they do move on from him, that $6 million could come in handy and Ryan Shazier is going to get paid handsomely as the game's top ILB.

In terms of Burns, yes I hate his tackling and play against the run, but really it takes a backseat to his play in pass coverage. Just think he has regressed from his rookie year.

Last year in just over 800 snaps he had 13 passes defensed and 3 INTs AND 65 tackles.

This year Burns already has 60% of the snaps that he played last season, almost 500 and yet he has just 6 passes defensed and 0 INTs and 25 tackles. The production is just way down from last season, he has not progressed like he should, but his attitude and demeanor on the field really pisses me off at times. Some of the strangest plays against the run I have ever seen, having brain farts in coverage against KC when they were trying to make a comeback.

Everyone is hoping that Bryant gets on track with this Bye week but for me I want people to help Burns remove his head from his ass and get him back to the form he showed late in his rookie year.

_________________
The Steelers have a greater chance of finding a Unicorn, or a Sasquatch, or the Loch Ness Monster than they do in finding another great 3-4 OLB.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 8892
Pretty sure Mitchell is gone after this year....as mentioned, they have Shazier's contract to deal with, who knows what happens with Bell, PLUS you have Haden making $10M

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 10:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 1685
bradshaw2ben wrote:
Zeke5123 wrote:
Burns has been fine. For years, we complain that the Steelers prioritize CBs run defense prowess over pass defense. Now, we are bitching the corner doesn't play the run well enough? BS.

Burns has been beat a few times the last few weeks. I've also seen him making some nice closing plays throughout the year. He hasn't made the leap I'd hope but he is playing fine. There is some strong recency bias going on here.

I ask: did you look at the stats I posted above and still think he's doing okay?


Yeah. Just not sure how predictive or useful those particular stats are -- especially given sample size.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 10:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:22 am
Posts: 89
SteelerChef wrote:
If a good to better CB can hang on while being dragged til the calvary gets there thats pretty good

There's nothing good about that. It just makes getting a first down that much easier.

Artie so far has looked more like an athletic than football smart.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 12:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:08 pm
Posts: 470
Rocky Mtn Stiller wrote:
Ice wrote:
Joe Haden was a top 10 pick, and he's a finished, polished product. Burns wasn't, and isn't. He does, however, have plenty of ceiling left.


Agreed.

Some of you are making the Dick LeBeau argument for keeping Burns on the bench until he's 30.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 2:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:23 pm
Posts: 2537
I don't know if I'm on board with Burns playing the right side exclusively. I feel like offenses can dictate matchup knowing where the CB's are lining up every snap. This could also limit film study with individual receivers tendencies, making it more difficult to jump routes.

Then again it's resulted in pretty good pass D, aside from the Lions game...when they scored 0 touchdowns. So yeah, take I can live with poor run support between the 20's, I guess.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:45 am
Posts: 100
Can the CBs play man coverage against Brady? It would be nice if they played it some to make it effective. Brady is like a dog at a pig roast when he sees those 10 yard cushions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 11:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:17 pm
Posts: 1349
Seems to me, he's out of position in the run game, leading to poor tackling angles.

_________________
KC wrote:
I got nothin.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Artie "Wiffs" Burns
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:50 pm
Posts: 3517
Scunge wrote:
I am disappointed in Burns this year. I expected a big jump from his rookie year to year two. I don't see it.

Everybody was so down on Ross Cockrell, calling him soft, can't play the run, not physical enough and yet Burns is playing softer than Cockrell ever did. Just don't understand it. And it isn't like he is this shut down CB who you can say hey, we drafted him to be a stud coverage guy. Where are the INTs? The broken up passes? Seems like QBs are targeting him more because Haden is that CB that we want Burns to be, they avoid Haden and throw more at Burns.

When we played Cincy and I got my first chance to watch William Jackson the 3rd, it was eye opening. So, that is what a first round CB is supposed to perform like, tight coverage, playing the catch point, knocking the football out of Antonio Brown's hands. Yes! What we have in Burns in nowhere close to that, and may never be.

I don't know what this season would have been like without Mike Hilton and Joe Haden. If we had gone into this season with Burns, Cockrell and Gay as our trio, we might be lucky to be 4-4.

If people are honest, the two weakest performers on defense are which two players? For me that is Burns and Mitchell. They are the two biggest weaknesses that teams exploit and it isn't even close. One we spent a first round pick on and the other we signed to a 5 year $25 million contract. Not really getting a good return on those investments.


Colbert’s fault? Reach?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group