PDA

View Full Version : Cortez Allen



flippy
11-14-2011, 09:29 PM
Could we try him out at FS?

Ever time I see him get a chance to make a play, he does. He's physical. He's fast. He's a natural football player and I have this suspicion he could be the best player on our D in time.

I think he'd be a perfect FS.

D Rock
11-14-2011, 09:36 PM
I'd like to see him stay at CB and lock down a top spot there for the next 10 years instead.

7 UP
11-14-2011, 09:53 PM
I love the fact that he is getting some pt right now. When we get into the playoffs we are going to need all the DBS we can get. This experience now will be huge should we see the Packers again.

Chavezz
11-14-2011, 10:05 PM
I'd try B Mac at FS. Good speed and size for FS.

Shoe
11-14-2011, 10:59 PM
Why would you take a guy with corner skills, on a team that needs good corners, and move him to Safety? We have Ike, who is already on the wrong side of 30. We have... Gay. And we have McFadden... Keenan Lewis shows some promise, as just a solid #2 type corner (e.g. a Deshea Townsend type). We need corners!

I am encouraged that this young kid is getting playing time in dime. I even hold out hope that he actually emerges even more than he already has. Lord KNOWS we will need him when we play:
a) the Cheats*
b) the Packers

hawaiiansteel
11-14-2011, 11:13 PM
I would rather keep Cortez Allen at CB and draft a FS early in next year's draft.

Mister Pittsburgh
11-14-2011, 11:35 PM
If a free or strong safety was the best on our board come our pick, I would be happy. If it is a SS, could Troy move to FS?

Oviedo
11-15-2011, 05:09 AM
I've often heard the "move Troy to FS" suggestion, but I'm not sure that Troy has the coverage skills to be a good FS. That is what we lack right now. Troy is an incredible athlete but coverage has never been his strong point. Clark is a big hitter but he can't cover a bed with a blanket and makes too many bad decisions.

I agree with the sentiment that they should keep Allen at CB. CB is is a far more valuable position and let him and Curtis Brown develop there and one of them replace Gay opposite Taylor. I agree that Keenan Lewis is likely no better than a back up.

phillyesq
11-15-2011, 12:29 PM
I would rather keep Cortez Allen at CB and draft a FS early in next year's draft.

I agree completely. The comparison for Allen when he was drafted was Ike Taylor -- both were raw and extremely good athletes. Allen developed faster than Taylor, and his ceiling as a corner remains high.

Keep Allen at CB, continue developing Brown, retain Gay and Lewis, and draft a FS, and suddenly the second goes from a perrenial weakness to a potential strength.

flippy
11-15-2011, 03:44 PM
I'm all for keeping Cortez at CB. Just want the kid on the field any way possible.

I also like the idea of seeing if BMac can play FS. He plays the ball better than Clark and is as sure a tackler as we have for a DB. And I like his effort on ST, shows he has character.

I'm not big on Gay/Lewis starting across from Ike. I'd like to see Cortez get some game time. He seems like he can handle some big WRs/receiving TEs for us. And it'd be nice to see him get a little experience so he can contribute on this year's title run.

SidSmythe
11-15-2011, 07:27 PM
I think Troy would be a great FS.
Clark makes a lot of tackles against the run.
Troy isn't the greatest man 2 man cover guy either. If we ever had a SS who was a solid cover guy and good in run support, I think Troy would be best at FS

RuthlessBurgher
11-16-2011, 05:22 PM
I'm all for keeping Cortez at CB. Just want the kid on the field any way possible.

I also like the idea of seeing if BMac can play FS. He plays the ball better than Clark and is as sure a tackler as we have for a DB. And I like his effort on ST, shows he has character.

I'm not big on Gay/Lewis starting across from Ike. I'd like to see Cortez get some game time. He seems like he can handle some big WRs/receiving TEs for us. And it'd be nice to see him get a little experience so he can contribute on this year's title run.

Like the rookie version of Bryant McFadden down the stretch against the Colts in the divisonal playoff game on the road to SBXL?

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/10365/McFadden_Defends.jpg

WindyCitySteel
11-16-2011, 06:03 PM
They just need to coach up Clark to play the ball and not the receiver's head.

Shawn
11-20-2011, 02:39 PM
Troy has above average cover skills but that isn't his strength. Moving Troy to FS is like neutering your stud bull. He creates havoc...thats what he does. Take that away from him and he becomes very average.

skyhawk
11-20-2011, 07:27 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Pahn711
11-20-2011, 08:32 PM
Could we try him out at FS?

Ever time I see him get a chance to make a play, he does. He's physical. He's fast. He's a natural football player and I have this suspicion he could be the best player on our D in time.

I think he'd be a perfect FS.

:roll: Yeah lets replace one of our best tacklers with a rookie who provides valuable depth where it is really needed.

Captain Lemming
11-20-2011, 08:34 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Pahn711
11-20-2011, 08:42 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

skyhawk
11-20-2011, 08:45 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

Thank you.

And it was a GOOD tackle and a good legal hit.

Pahn711
11-20-2011, 08:47 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

Thank you.

And it was a GOOD tackle and a good legal hit.

Yes, let me rephrase that, one bad CALL.

skyhawk
11-20-2011, 08:54 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

Thank you.

And it was a GOOD tackle and a good legal hit.

Yes, let me rephrase that, one bad CALL.

I knew what you meant ;) :tt2

BradshawsHairdresser
11-20-2011, 09:57 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

Thank you.

And it was a GOOD tackle and a good legal hit.

$$$$
If that wasn't a good tackle, I don't know what is...Tomlin even showed it to the team as an example of a good tackle.

Captain Lemming
11-21-2011, 08:21 PM
Why all the hate for the hardest hitting FS in the game?

Ummmm', because the only value of that in today's NFL is 15 yards and a 1st down for the other team. Not very helpful if the goal is WINNING games.

Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

42 tackles means our linebackers aren't doing well.
It is no shock that 3 out of four top tacklers being in the secondary comes during a season when we have had nearly every member of the front seven injured or out of position.

Clark would never lead this team in tackles if the linebackers had a typical season.

Clark is a fine tackler, no doubt. My point is that "being the hardest hitter" (the comment I responded to) is of NO VALUE in todays NFL. All it does is put the spotlight on you whenever you make on of those "big hits".

Argue all you like about how legit the call was. When "Ryan Clark" reputed big hitter launched himself do not tell me you did not instantly worry that the flag was coming.

That is my point. Being known as a big hitter is no longer an asset.

A guy who is a sound tackler who can cover is what you want in todays NFL.

You are correct Clark is a great hitter. What does that contribute to winning games? That rep hurts us.

Pahn711
11-21-2011, 09:39 PM
Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

42 tackles means our linebackers aren't doing well.
It is no shock that 3 out of four top tacklers being in the secondary comes during a season when we have had nearly every member of the front seven injured or out of position.

Clark would never lead this team in tackles if the linebackers had a typical season.

You can't blame that on Clark, he is doing his job, even if the linebackers aren't (which I don't necessarily agree with anyways, but for the sake of argument).



Clark is a fine tackler, no doubt. My point is that "being the hardest hitter" (the comment I responded to) is of NO VALUE in todays NFL. All it does is put the spotlight on you whenever you make on of those "big hits".

You are right about the hardest hitter argument, but that goes along with being a solid tackler. If the linebackers aren't doing their job as you say, then we definitely DO need that. Considering Clark hasn't been penalized that much this year, I'm willing to take the good with the bad.



A guy who is a sound tackler who can cover is what you want in todays NFL.


The secondary as a whole has been pretty solid this year, has it not? So Clark can't cover now either?

Captain Lemming
11-23-2011, 01:51 AM
Hes got 42 solo tackles and an interception this year, you are gonna condemn him over one bad tackle?

42 tackles means our linebackers aren't doing well.
It is no shock that 3 out of four top tacklers being in the secondary comes during a season when we have had nearly every member of the front seven injured or out of position.

Clark would never lead this team in tackles if the linebackers had a typical season.

You can't blame that on Clark, he is doing his job, even if the linebackers aren't (which I don't necessarily agree with anyways, but for the sake of argument).

I am not "blaming" Clark, just sayin his having a so many tackles THIS SEASON is partly because the front seven havent been what they have typically been. RBs have ripped more long runs (especially early on) forcing our secondary to make more tackles



Clark is a fine tackler, no doubt. My point is that "being the hardest hitter" (the comment I responded to) is of NO VALUE in todays NFL. All it does is put the spotlight on you whenever you make on of those "big hits".


You are right about the hardest hitter argument, but that goes along with being a solid tackler. If the linebackers aren't doing their job as you say, then we definitely DO need that. Considering Clark hasn't been penalized that much this year, I'm willing to take the good with the bad.

AGAIN the comment I responded to was NOT about Clark being a sure tackler (which is great) it was the comment about him being the hardest hitter. THAT is of no value. Chris Hope was every bit the sure tackler that Clark is. Hope was nowhere near the hitter. Being a hard hitter makes no difference anymore.



A guy who is a sound tackler who can cover is what you want in todays NFL.



The secondary as a whole has been pretty solid this year, has it not? So Clark can't cover now either?

NOW? Now you ask? Clark has NEVER been special in coverage.

He doesnt make many plays on the ball, he lets guys catch and makes the sure tackle.

Clark can tackle. He is limited as a cover guy. That is a fact.

Clark biggest skill in coverage is that he can separate the receiver from the ball. Exactly what we saw in the penalty play is vintage Ryan Clark.

ANOTHER reason Clark has so many tackles is that his guys are targeted often.

Pahn711
11-23-2011, 11:52 PM
Clark is a fine tackler, no doubt. My point is that "being the hardest hitter" (the comment I responded to) is of NO VALUE in todays NFL. All it does is put the spotlight on you whenever you make on of those "big hits".

How many penalties have the Steelers incurred due to Clark's "hardest hitter" motto? I don't know the number, but that probably means not enough to condemn him for. You can say you want him replaced due to his coverage skills all you want, but thats not the argument you chose. Its ridiculous to cite his tackling style as the primary reason to go with a rookie corner at free safety.



NOW? Now you ask? Clark has NEVER been special in coverage.

He doesnt make many plays on the ball, he lets guys catch and makes the sure tackle.

Clark can tackle. He is limited as a cover guy. That is a fact.

Clark biggest skill in coverage is that he can separate the receiver from the ball. Exactly what we saw in the penalty play is vintage Ryan Clark.

ANOTHER reason Clark has so many tackles is that his guys are targeted often.

I don't think you understand the role of a free safety, or have the statistics to back that claim up. Free safeties are the last line of defense. They don't go man-to-man coverage at the line of scrimmage. They often stay deep and provide double coverage support for the corner covering the other teams' best receiver or the receiver who beats a corner deep. Heck, there are plenty of times they don't choose where to go til they read the quarterback after the snap.

Of course Clark gets more tackles. He tackles running backs who the linebackers miss at the line of scrimmage or wide receivers who beat the corner defending them. By that count, more often than not, his tackles are a result of another defender not doing their job.

Captain Lemming
11-25-2011, 04:03 AM
How many penalties have the Steelers incurred due to Clark's "hardest hitter" motto? I don't know the number, but that probably means not enough to condemn him for. You can say you want him replaced due to his coverage skills all you want, but thats not the argument you chose. Its ridiculous to cite his tackling style as the primary reason to go with a rookie corner at free safety.

First, despite the title of the thread "I" never suggested starting Cortez. I reponded to the specific statement "why no love for the hardest hitting fs."

My SOLE point is that being the Hardest hitting fs holds no value in todays NFL.

I am not saying he does it every game or that he is killing us with penalties. My point is that when he DOES make a big hit it only hurts us. So what value does this ability have? Having the rep as a big hitter is a bad thing in todays NFL. You are the victim of questionable penalties as a result.


I don't think you understand the role of a free safety, or have the statistics to back that claim up. Free safeties are the last line of defense. They don't go man-to-man coverage at the line of scrimmage. They often stay deep and provide double coverage support for the corner covering the other teams' best receiver or the receiver who beats a corner deep. Heck, there are plenty of times they don't choose where to go til they read the quarterback after the snap.

Oh plueese. Thank you for the "education" . I'm not saying he is at the line of scrimmage lined across a wideout. :roll:

There are times in every game where he winds up on a receiver. He aint great at that part of the game.

Let us talk about the very scenario you describe. For example, in the same Raven game, everybody blames Gay for the last TD. But Gay had to trust deep help on this receiver who is faster than he is. THAT was Clark.

Clark ALREADY in deep coverage, in the very role you describe, cannot get over in time (too slow) and takes a weird angle, clears out his own teamate (Gay) in the process. Gay looks at him like "what the".

You think I dont know free safety? Fine, listen to the former receiver put the responsibility on Clark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIvTi5y6 ... re=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIvTi5y61kk&feature=related)


Of course Clark gets more tackles. He tackles running backs who the linebackers miss at the line of scrimmage or wide receivers who beat the corner defending them. By that count, more often than not, his tackles are a result of another defender not doing their job.

So he gets tackles that the linebackers miss? That makes sense. Oh wait I SAID THAT!

I have a suggestion. If you are going to essentially regurgitate what I've said in this very thread more than once to "teach" me what I just said, just cut and paste. Its easier. :)

That part about receiver? The corner not doing his job? No it is HIS JOB to make the play. If he made more plays on the ball, or had the speed to arrive to do that, and QBs feared that ability he would get less tackles, but that would be a good thing.

Back to my original point, I dont care how many tackles he has, the fact that no one fears him in coverage and weak LB play earlier in the season figures into that.

That free safety in purple. Yeah, he knows that

Pahn711
11-25-2011, 12:37 PM
I am not saying he does it every game or that he is killing us with penalties.

The point of your original post was that he wasn't helping the team win with his penalties, so if you aren't saying that, why did you say it in the first place?

You just vindicated my response, that those penalties don't happen enough for it to be a legitimate argument against Clark.



Oh plueese. Thank you for the "education" . I'm not saying he is at the line of scrimmage lined across a wideout. :roll:

There are times in every game where he winds up on a receiver. He aint great at that part of the game.

Once again, you are backtracking from what you said before. You said that teams "target" Clark. By your definition, that would mean every receiver who goes deep is targeting Clark. Considering he can't cover multiple receivers when they go deep, thats a ridiculous statement on your part.

Quarterbacks can't always read what the free safety is gonna do once the ball snaps. So if he is not lining up on a particular receiver, to say they are "targeting" him is not demonstrating to me an understanding of the role of a free safety.



So he gets tackles that the linebackers miss? That makes sense. Oh wait I SAID THAT!

I have a suggestion. If you are going to essentially regurgitate what I've said in this very thread more than once to "teach" me what I just said, just cut and paste. Its easier. :)


I "regurgitated" your logic because I thought if I used your own argument you wouldn't disagree with it. :lol:

You said Clark had so many tackles because his coverage skills were poor. Apparently we both agree thats not always the case.