Burns on film

[Litos]

BUZZ WRONG! Give me Timmons full contract amount, and let me pick the free agent who was out there for that year.

The other option is I think Timmons is worth a lot less than the Steelers offered, same as you. He might have taken 5-8 million less overall, and that is room to shop for a decent free agent.

I would have let Pouncey walk period. He's overrated, injury prone, and its proven we don't miss him much when he's out. Now, tell me the free agents out there for that year and I use the Pouncey contract money elsewhere.

In the end, you can weigh the value of Timmons and Pouncey vs. the two I would players I selected, then if possible admit my idea would be better. Of course, I have the benefit of hindsight. It's the foresight thinking on how the Steelers manage the salary cap that needs improvement.


PS: The Franchise money for an OL player these days is 13.1 million. If the Steelers give Decastro close to that amount, they are fools.

if you are concious of the hindsight factor then how would it be possible to do an exercise on the available FAs ? and why should I look for the list when you are the one disagreeing with the choices the Steelers made?
Again, timmons on a 8M/y contract would have been a solid signing, I still think Pouncey wasn't overpaid, the guy has been hurt twice on freak injuries, one was friendly fire for ***** sake. If healthy he's a top 5 candidate C every year.

So where are those albatross contracts the FO are making that are causing the team another ring?

 

[POP]

if you are concious of the hindsight factor then how would it be possible to do an exercise on the available FAs ? and why should I look for the list when you are the one disagreeing with the choices the Steelers made?
Again, timmons on a 8M/y contract would have been a solid signing, I still think Pouncey wasn't overpaid, the guy has been hurt twice on freak injuries, one was friendly fire for ***** sake. If healthy he's a top 5 candidate C every year.

So where are those albatross contracts the FO are making that are causing the team another ring?

Timmons is listed as the 2nd highest paid LB (including OLB) in the entire league. You can debate how much of the $15 mill is part of his signing bonus, etc. but fact is, his current cap figure is over $15 mill. I agree with Coach that that is outrageously high for a player of his caliber, and, like I said, I think he is better than the average fan does in here. I like him a lot. But $15 million is loco. I loath how the team acts like the federal govt. in constantly kicking the can down the road instead of toughening up and make the hard decisions instead of pushing the debt down the road. It is retarded. And piling on so much of the cap space at ILB and C is stupid. We desperately need upgrades at pass rush and CB. This team does indeed mismanage who gets paid how much. Paying Timmons more than all LBs except for one is moronic.

 

[Litos]

Timmons is listed as the 2nd highest paid LB (including OLB) in the entire league. You can debate how much of the $15 mill is part of his signing bonus, etc. but fact is, his current cap figure is over $15 mill. I agree with Coach that that is outrageously high for a player of his caliber, and, like I said, I think he is better than the average fan does in here. I like him a lot. But $15 million is loco. I loath how the team acts like the federal govt. in constantly kicking the can down the road instead of toughening up and make the hard decisions instead of pushing the debt down the road. It is retarded. And piling on so much of the cap space at ILB and C is stupid. We desperately need upgrades at pass rush and CB. This team does indeed mismanage who gets paid how much. Paying Timmons more than all LBs except for one is moronic.

yeah I'm glad this season they didn't restructure any contract, next season we'll start seeing the benefits of it. In fact it meant that Timmons wasn't extended so he's off the cap next season. Those are 15M to invest somewhere else like extend Bell, DeCastro, Brown and or get a new OLB to take over the Jarvis incident

 

[Tibs]

This is all I needed to read about Artie Burns to strengthen whatever positive feelings I've already had about the kid. To be the best, you go up against the best. So nice to see he's got his head screwed on right.

Artie Burns has welcome-to-NFL moment, courtesy of Antonio Brown
http://espn.go.com/blog/pittsburgh-...e-to-the-nfl-moment-courtesy-of-antonio-brown

Pittsburgh Steelers first-round cornerback Artie Burns was bound to cover Antonio Brown at some point in offseason workouts. He got his chance Thursday.

He went 1-for-2 on isolated matchups.

After Thursday's session, Burns detailed his work against Brown, including Brown's goal-line touchdown on a counter move and Burns' pass breakup on a deep ball attempt to Brown.

Burns showed his recovery speed on the deep ball. He saw Brown streaking, so "I had to open up and run" to cover the post. He dove into the passing lane to knock the ball away.

Early in practice, however, he wasn't so lucky.

"He got me," Burns said. "I had bit on the slant. He went back out. He scored on me."

Brown, who returned to Pittsburgh late this week after the Dancing with the Stars finale, had faked inside, then flared toward the corner of the end zone.

On the deep ball, Burns said he could have intercepted the pass and taken it the other way if he made a move earlier. Ben Roethlisberger missed Thursday's session, so backups Landry Jones and Bruce Gradkowski were throwing the ball most of the time. The ball was a little underthrown, but Burns made an aggressive play on it.

Burns said he had watched enough film to know Brown's speed was no joke, so he didn't underestimate it.

"You can't panic," Burns said about covering a top-flight receiver like Brown. "You always have to stay cool no matter what situation you're in. He came up on me fast. I just have to trust my eyes, trust my training. To be out here covering him, it helps my level of game rise up."

Burns, the 25th overall pick in last month's draft, played press man coverage at Miami to us his height (6-foot) and long arms. The Steelers can use him in press, but the construction of the defense requires him to play zone coverage and hold his backpedal longer downfield.

The style of play suits Burns, he said, adding the game isn't too fast for him.

"I'm getting adjusted to it," Burns said. "Now I'm learning technique, getting the scheme down, and now I have to master my craft."

Oh yeah, Burns wants to earn a starting job.

"I just want to be the best I can be," Burns said. "I want to start. That's what I'm working toward. I want to be the best in my class."

 

[ark steel]

if you are concious of the hindsight factor then how would it be possible to do an exercise on the available FAs ? and why should I look for the list when you are the one disagreeing with the choices the Steelers made?
Again, timmons on a 8M/y contract would have been a solid signing, I still think Pouncey wasn't overpaid, the guy has been hurt twice on freak injuries, one was friendly fire for ***** sake. If healthy he's a top 5 candidate C every year.

So where are those albatross contracts the FO are making that are causing the team another ring?

Anyone that thinks Timmons isn't worth at least $7m-$8m is incorrect, IMO.

 

[Coach]

Timmons is listed as the 2nd highest paid LB (including OLB) in the entire league. You can debate how much of the $15 mill is part of his signing bonus, etc. but fact is, his current cap figure is over $15 mill. I agree with Coach that that is outrageously high for a player of his caliber, and, like I said, I think he is better than the average fan does in here. I like him a lot. But $15 million is loco. I loath how the team acts like the federal govt. in constantly kicking the can down the road instead of toughening up and make the hard decisions instead of pushing the debt down the road. It is retarded. And piling on so much of the cap space at ILB and C is stupid. We desperately need upgrades at pass rush and CB. This team does indeed mismanage who gets paid how much. Paying Timmons more than all LBs except for one is moronic.

Yep. They are paying him like he's LT...from the 1980's and 1990's. Timmons is not that good. He's a very good, not great player. It seems like Litos agrees he's over paid a little, but on Poucney he's lost at sea. Pouncey is injury prone, has had too many off the field issues where his judement is questionable, and was replaced by a joruneyman 2x.

Man would like to have used his deal on a quality DB or pass rusher that free agency year. Its all about winning a super bowl, and DB's and pass rushers are what is needed.

 

[bermudasteel]

If there is ONE place on earth, where opinions and predictions are the general rule and not the exception, it's on Internet message boards.

It always blows my mind that some people think opinions and predictions are inappropriate on message boards. That would be like telling callers on radio talk shows to not give their opinions. It's that crazy.

Everyone can have an opinion - you're right - it's those pesky facts (actually speculation) that constantly gets highlighted here...

Isnt Burns the guy who's been supporting his 2 brothers while playing football in his junior year? That would indicate a pretty good work ethic.

Oh boy, Ark is using logic again. We've been warned about using common sense 'round these parts...

But we don't need him to start right away. We can ease him in. Cockrell can hold it down til Burns is ready

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to antdrewjosh again.

 

[bermudasteel]

Let's steer the conversation back to "Burns on film", please...

Here's a suggestion, Coach - how about you go back and look at Richard Sherman's tape, in college?

Do me a favor and watch this. Now, while Richard Sherman was no first round draft pick (he was selected in the 5th) "one never know what a little NFL coaching" can do to improve ANY PLAYER's game...

 

[Coach]

Bermuda,

I'd rather judge Burns vs another 1st or 2nd round pick, not vs a 5th round pick on film. Sherman looks like a 5th round pick on that film. If Burns was taken in round 2 or 3, I'd have fewer issues with the pick.

Above is says Burns was 1-2 on targets with a TD given up with either Landry Jones or Brad throwing the ball. Not a good debut.

While Brown is a great player, he's really not blazing fast. A better description would be very quick and elusive. I'm still unsure if Burns can cover one on one in man vs players like Wheaton or Coates on deep go routes. This is something that really can not be coached. You either have the speed or you don't. On flim Burns' man often get past him deep, but its hard to say if its due to lack of speed or lack of awarness. If Coates and Wheaton can beat Burns deep in man go routes, lots of players in the NFL can and I'd raise the chances of him being a bust. Conversely, if Burns can stay with these guys in the open field, I'd up his chances of developing into a good corner. Fingers crossed here. My best guess is he's boarderline here, and will need to play smart and not give up a step or two because he lacks the recovery speed.

A 4.46 is what he ran at the combine

Speaking of routes, I kind of like this link, breaking down the route three.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2016841-nfl-101-breaking-down-the-basics-of-the-route-tree

Based on what I've seen, Burns has big time problems with routes 2,3,4 and needs some work on 7 and 8 as he looses too much yardage on the cuts.

He's good vs 1, 5, 6 and 9 ( fade routes ). He's best at bad, or slow velocity throws coming in his area when he sees the QB release the ball. Here he's outstaning, which makes me wonder if Free Saftey might be his best spot as the action in many cases will be in front of him.

 

[ark steel]

I think the point that Berm is trying to make is not to compare a 1st round pick to a 5th round pick. it is pointing out that Sherman is considered one of the best in the league and this is what he looked like in college. If he looked like Burns in college and, clearly, got better, why can't Burns? Burns has a desire to succeed and extra motivation. What about Burns makes you think he CAN'T get better? Must be Tomlin's ****** coaching?

 

[deljzc]

Coach,

Once again you are confusing Burns' evaluation with WHERE we drafted him. If we traded back to pick #32 and taken Burns are you happier? If we took someone else and picked Burns at #58 would you be happier still?

But in both of those situations, expectations for Burns to contribute would still be pretty damn high.

I'm completely in agreement with you that taking Burns at pick #25 was an overkill of resources and a reach pushed by need Tombert failed to plan ahead or address prior to this season. If you want to debate that with yourself, I'm sure you'll find a lot of support. You also have a lot of agreement with most of the pre-draft community.

Mayock listed Burns #47 overall
NFL Draft Scout listed Burns #66 overall
Sports Illustrated listed Burns #71st overall
Mel Kiper had Burns #30th overall
SCOUTS, INC. had Burns #31 overall

We get it. We reached. We reached because we haven't planned ahead at the position as well as we should have.

But the continued question marks you pose about his college tape seems a bit petty. I don't know what you expect people to say. About half here agree we should have traded back. About 75% agree we reached on the pick. The draft community agrees with your evaluation of Burns as a #40-#60 overall player (if you are arguing he's worse than that, go right ahead).

So here we are. You have your mock on record. I have mine. The Steelers did something different. Won't be the first or last time that will happen.

 

[Coach]

I think the point that Berm is trying to make is not to compare a 1st round pick to a 5th round pick. it is pointing out that Sherman is considered one of the best in the league and this is what he looked like in college. If he looked like Burns in college and, clearly, got better, why can't Burns? Burns has a desire to succeed and extra motivation. What about Burns makes you think he CAN'T get better? Must be Tomlin's ****** coaching?

Bermuda is playing gotcha.

Matching the player with your scheme matters a lot and Sherman is a rare example of a 5th round corner that became an elite level player. yes, there are always exceptions of great improvements. I'd allwys bet agianst it, and win 95+% of the time.

Sherman is a physical get your hand on the WR within the first 5 yards, screw up the timing of the release, and short to medium cover type of corner ( with great size, jumping ability and ball skills ) , who when given a good pass rush and safety help is a weapon. He wasn't used that way in college, and NFL star status or not if he was in Cleveland would not sniff a pro bowl.

Burns is a square peg playing on a defense that likes round holes. We play more zone that anyone, and our CB's need to react quickly to defend comebacks, slants. Burns struggles greatly here on film. So I think we reached a bit, and picked a guy who isn't suited for how we play on defense.

In a mismatch of skillsets and scheme, the Steelers take Burns with the hope that they can develop his 6-foot plus frame into a dependable player. The problem here, much like the Apple pick to the Giants, is that the Steelers played more zone coverage than any team in the league last year and that’s where Burns has his struggles. His +2.8 coverage grade ranked 42nd in the draft class, and though he does show skills as a man coverage cornerback, but his overall game remains raw. If Pittsburgh plans on altering their scheme to play more man coverage, this pick makes more sense, but at this point, it’s an example of a cornerback’s size and speed moving him up a draft board at the expense of his on-field play. - Pro football focus

I had a man crush on Jackson III.

His review

24. Cincinnati Bengals: William Jackson III | Grade: A
An excellent pick by the Bengals, we may be talking about William Jackson as the best pure cornerback in the draft a few years from now. He’s intriguing because his +17.3 coverage grade ranked second in the nation, but he still has room to improve his technique both in press coverage and in zone. Throw in his 6-foot frame, sub-4.4 speed and excellent movement skills and Jackson has all of the tools to improve on his already-impressive production. Jackson flashes the downfield ball skills to become a playmaker in both a man or zone scheme and the Bengals may have gotten one of the steals of the draft.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/draft-2016-nfl-draft-pick-by-pick-grades-and-analysis-of-round-1-2/

 

[deljzc]

You just said Burns is good when he sees the QB release the ball! What do you think zone corners do? In your previous post you said he might be a better safety!!!

Christ Coach, you are all over the place.

What is really starting to bother me with your soap box analysis of all things Burns is your "mock" of the Steelers' draft is even MORE of a reach than what the Steelers actually did. You are on record stating you'd have traded back to #32 and picked Xavier Howard.

Howard was ranked #78 by Mayock
Howard was ranked #75 by NFL Draft Scout
Howard was ranked #54 by Mel Kiper
Howard was ranked #80 by Sports Illustrated

Even your beloved PFF had Howard ranked #80 overall.

I haven't seen ONE list from any reputable draft website that listed Howard as a superior prospect to Burns or Howard even CLOSE to a first round grade yet you are so confident in your film study you wanted to pick him #32 overall. And that is somehow so much superior a choice to the Steelers taking Burns 7 spots higher.

I don't get it. Howard is by far the bigger reach, even with the extra 3rd round pick in your back pocket.

 

[ark steel]

Burns is a square peg playing on a defense that likes round holes. We play more zone that anyone, and our CB's need to react quickly to defend comebacks, slants. Burns struggles greatly here on film. So I think we reached a bit, and picked a guy who isn't suited for how we play on defense.

People keep saying this over and over and over. However, with the personnel we had, we had no option but to play more zone. Maybe, just maybe, Burns strength of being able to play more man allows us to change from being stuck playing more zone than everyone else?

I'm not challenging that it is rare for a 5th round pick to become elite. It is, probably, rareish for a 5th round pick to even become a good starter, for that matter. Maybe it means that Sherman was more talented than everyone suspected and that he was drafted well behind where he should have been.

I (and others) posted here that there were some mocks that had us take Burns in the first. I think one of those even had us doing so with Jackson III still on the board. I think there are several of us who believe that if we don't take Burns in the 1st, he doesn't make it out of the first. While, maybe, somewhat of a reach, a giant reach it is not. Jackson III was not on the board. So, regardless of how good he is/will be it is irrelevant how much better he is than Burns. I think Burns is an safe pick and, while, maybe, less of a ceiling (or excitement?) than some others, is far less of a bust prospect. They picked, I believe, someone who will give us solid service for years to come and will be good enough to move us from the bottom of the pack for pass defense.

Unlike Del, I don't think they reached because they failed to plan ahead or address it before this season. The picks of Grant, Golson and pick up of Boykin and Cockrelly is clear enough evidence to me that they tried to address the problem. Everyone assumed Boykin would work out, but Boykin didn't work out and we have to see with Golson and Grant. If Golson ends up being hurt all the time, we have problems. If he can play, the team is better, IMO.

 

[deljzc]

People keep saying this over and over and over. However, with the personnel we had, we had no option but to play more zone. Maybe, just maybe, Burns strength of being able to play more man allows us to change from being stuck playing more zone than everyone else?

I'm not challenging that it is rare for a 5th round pick to become elite. It is, probably, rareish for a 5th round pick to even become a good starter, for that matter. Maybe it means that Sherman was more talented than everyone suspected and that he was drafted well behind where he should have been.

I (and others) posted here that there were some mocks that had us take Burns in the first. I think one of those even had us doing so with Jackson III still on the board. I think there are several of us who believe that if we don't take Burns in the 1st, he doesn't make it out of the first. While, maybe, somewhat of a reach, a giant reach it is not. Jackson III was not on the board. So, regardless of how good he is/will be it is irrelevant how much better he is than Burns. I think Burns is an safe pick and, while, maybe, less of a ceiling (or excitement?) than some others, is far less of a bust prospect. They picked, I believe, someone who will give us solid service for years to come and will be good enough to move us from the bottom of the pack for pass defense.

Unlike Del, I don't think they reached because they failed to plan ahead or address it before this season. The picks of Grant, Golson and pick up of Boykin and Cockrelly is clear enough evidence to me that they tried to address the problem. Everyone assumed Boykin would work out, but Boykin didn't work out and we have to see with Golson and Grant. If Golson ends up being hurt all the time, we have problems. If he can play, the team is better, IMO.

A 4th round pick (Grant), a 5th round trade (Boykin) and an undrafted or minimum FA (Cockrell) are not "fixing the problem". And yes, Golson was but even with him we needed immediate and tire help in the secondary (Golson is definitely going to contribute this season).

The future of the secondary should have been on the radar since 2011. Everyone here knew it. Our starters had three 30-year olds from 2011 to 2013. Throwing late round draft picks wasn't going to work (that only works here for WR's).

I'm not backing down from my belief the reconstruction of the secondary started WAY too late and that our failure to invest in the position before Golson greatly contributed to our selection of Burns. If anything I think it prevented us from trading back, which based on ALL the talent on the board, was the far greater use of our #25 pick resource.

 

[diver]

A 4th round pick (Grant), a 5th round trade (Boykin) and an undrafted or minimum FA (Cockrell) are not "fixing the problem". And yes, Golson was but even with him we needed immediate and tire help in the secondary (Golson is definitely going to contribute this season).

The future of the secondary should have been on the radar since 2011. Everyone here knew it. Our starters had three 30-year olds from 2011 to 2013. Throwing late round draft picks wasn't going to work (that only works here for WR's).

I'm not backing down from my belief the reconstruction of the secondary started WAY too late and that our failure to invest in the position before Golson greatly contributed to our selection of Burns. If anything I think it prevented us from trading back, which based on ALL the talent on the board, was the far greater use of our #25 pick resource.

Again, I do not take issue with your knowledge of college talent nor would argue with you on that. I take issue with the "they didn't plan ahead since 2011." We all know the Steelers will not spend the huge money it takes to get a top corner in FA. To say otherwise is just talking nonsense. Therefore, they would be reliant on the draft. With the exception of Jarvis Jones, who would have you had the Steelers pass over to draft DB help since 2011? I am not talking later round crap, either. Teams just get **** lucky there, as the Seahawks did with Sherman. If they knew he would be that great, the would have drafted him a hell of a lot earlier.

I think it is important that if you advance the idea that they did not plan ahead, you should provide the plan they should have followed. Hey maybe I will see your point. It will take a lot of convincing though to tell me they should have taken someone other than Cam Heyward or Marcus Gilbert. David Decastro. LeVeon Bell. Ryan Shazier.

 

[deljzc]

I'm not a huge fan of Shazier.

There were trade back opportunities in that draft as well and I thought we forced (and ran to the podium once again) a player that Tomlin fell in love with as a runner-hitter linebacker. In 2014 I had us trading back and taking Brandon Roby and picking up a potential 3rd and 4th rounder.

I'm not a big fan of Gilbert either but that was a long time ago and that has solidified that position fairly well, but I sort of consider RT one of the easiest spots to fill on the entire roster and think there are RT and RG to be had on the cheap in almost every draft class and free agency period (I agree with you we are not talking about premier Free Agents for this team). I think back in 2011 I wanted Devon House in the 2nd round that year. He just signed a $6 million/year contract in free agency.

We even had a long debate on here about 2013 when we selected Jarvis Jones over Xavier Rhodes and Desmond Trufant. And 2012 there were some good cornerback talents available over Mike Adams (Trumaine Johnson and Casey Heyward)

There were plenty of opportunities. And plenty of opportunities that had both VALUE and NEED in the secondary.

I'm not sure I think Burns checks off both those boxes in my opinion and that bothers me.

 

[diver]

I'm not a huge fan of Shazier.

There were trade back opportunities in that draft as well and I thought we forced (and ran to the podium once again) a player that Tomlin fell in love with as a runner-hitter linebacker. In 2014 I had us trading back and taking Brandon Roby and picking up a potential 3rd and 4th rounder.

I'm not a big fan of Gilbert either but that was a long time ago and that has solidified that position fairly well, but I sort of consider RT one of the easiest spots to fill on the entire roster and think there are RT and RG to be had on the cheap in almost every draft class and free agency period (I agree with you we are not talking about premier Free Agents for this team). I think back in 2011 I wanted Devon House in the 2nd round that year. He just signed a $6 million/year contract in free agency.

We even had a long debate on here about 2013 when we selected Jarvis Jones over Xavier Rhodes and Desmond Trufant. And 2012 there were some good cornerback talents available over Mike Adams (Trumaine Johnson and Casey Heyward)

There were plenty of opportunities. And plenty of opportunities that had both VALUE and NEED in the secondary.

I'm not sure I think Burns checks off both those boxes in my opinion and that bothers me.

The Jarvis Jones year had I been picking, I would have taken Eifert. Miller was coming off the ACL and getting older. I actually thought that was a more pressing issue.

As per CBs, I will admit, it has taken me a while to get on board with taking one high. I have had to watch the Steelers not defend anyone. I always felt with the rules enforcement, it was kind of a waste. I see the error of that thinking. If maybe they can get a few guys who can hold coverage just a bit longer, maybe the rush is more effective.

I think Gilbert has become a really nice player, and reliable. I hated the Jones pick, and can understand taking a corner there. You make a good case.

 

[ark steel]

A 4th round pick (Grant), a 5th round trade (Boykin) and an undrafted or minimum FA (Cockrell) are not "fixing the problem". And yes, Golson was but even with him we needed immediate and tire help in the secondary (Golson is definitely going to contribute this season).

The future of the secondary should have been on the radar since 2011. Everyone here knew it. Our starters had three 30-year olds from 2011 to 2013. Throwing late round draft picks wasn't going to work (that only works here for WR's).

I'm not backing down from my belief the reconstruction of the secondary started WAY too late and that our failure to invest in the position before Golson greatly contributed to our selection of Burns. If anything I think it prevented us from trading back, which based on ALL the talent on the board, was the far greater use of our #25 pick resource.

The Boykin trade was a 5th rounder, but that doesn't mean he was/is a 5th round talent. I don't think there was anyone here that thought so. ****, some people here are still pining.

While I agree on trading back some years, the ofers have to be there. This year, as soon as the 1st round was done, we heard rumors of trade offers coming our way. Prior years you didn't hear that, in the same way. Just because you want to, doesn't mean you can.

 

[obxsteeler]

There are always "opportunities" for any position. Sure everyone noted in 2013 there were 2 cb's taken ahead of Jones-Milner at 9 and Haydon at 12. Both joined Jones on the non tenderd list. Guess we could have traded up a #1 and #2 to get one of them and lost Bell. Easy to make some of these in retrospect. And where some on the Board hated Jones I think a number of the scouting services thought it was a great pick. Same people who are now ripping the Burns pick.

 

[bermudasteel]

It's only May 28th...

How long is off-season??? Oh Lawd, I can't take it anymore...

 

[slashsteel]

The Boykin trade was a 5th rounder, but that doesn't mean he was/is a 5th round talent. I don't think there was anyone here that thought so. ****, some people here are still pining.

While I agree on trading back some years, the ofers have to be there. This year, as soon as the 1st round was done, we heard rumors of trade offers coming our way. Prior years you didn't hear that, in the same way. Just because you want to, doesn't mean you can.

thing of it is some can say we needed this or that...thing is the Steelers had a lot of needs and you can't get that all the time in one draft.

 

[F83]

when is burns gonna sign, how much could william jackson holding cincy ransom for with the new rookie cap, seems the problem is from picks 19-28 all unsigned.

 

[wig]

John Madden is alive and well...

Comparing Burns to Thomas...

as DB's they both are physical players who can run fast.

(All we need is a "WAP")

On Burn's ability to make plays...

when he sees the ball in the air and Burns is close to where the point of delivery happens he can make a QB pay.

(Well THAT's good to know).

 

[Coach]

It's only May 28th...

How long is off-season??? Oh Lawd, I can't take it anymore...

Warning, I will finish up the series once steeler depot loads in Burns last 4-5 games.

Burns kind of reminds me of Chad Scott. Scott had decent ball skills and size but lacked the speed and quickness to defend the middle to deeper passes. I would Say Scott was better off as a #2 corner type. As our #1 corner, I wasn't a fan

I'm still unsure about Burns speed in pads to cover deep. If could be bad technique and his football IQ that cost him in deep coverage, but one thing is clear, he lacks the rare catch-up speed to erase his mistakes.