O/T Peterson to focus on improved corner play

[HumanCockroach]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... iver-in-14

Smart move on his part and the Cards. He needs to work on becoming consistent ( which he isn't no matter what he, his agent or the sheeple that insist his greatness profess) Smart move by the young man, and the team. Has all the tools, but lacks consistency ( which IMHO is what separates "great" corner play, from "talented" corner play) we'll see if he dedicates himself to his craft, and becomes a true shut down corner ( and no, following guys around isn't it).

[Seahawks4Ever]

P. Peterson bragged today that he had demanded to be the highest paid DB in the NFL and got it. Well, he signed his deal AFTER Sherman signed his so it wasn't hard for the Cardinals to go higher than the next guy. In fact, since Sherm. signed his deal all of the next guys have said "pay me more the Sherman" and got their deal.

One thing and Richard's deal though is that our team because of their salary structure they were also able to give big money to Kam, E.T. and Maxwell (when it's his turn) keeping the LOB together.

P.P. gets all that money but that also means the Cards. will have to let other players go and that will make it harder to win a championship. Teams that give inordinate amounts of money to a few players will NOT win a championship so I don't want to he Peterson crying a few seasons from now that his team doesn't have enough talent.

That is, of course, the reason John Schneider is taking a hard line with Lynch.

[HumanCockroach]

Well I guess that whole "follow" thing only works when the second DB is mediocre. Revis no longer "follows" Peterson no longer returns punts or plays on offense, I wonder when that idiotic statement will dissapear? Deion didn't do it on superior units, Hayes, Haynes, Blount the list is full of DB'S considered shut down corners that didn't do that..... interesting to me to see the Pats attempt to copy Seattle in that regard..

[kalibane]

Well we'll have to see how they actually utilize Revis come regular season. He's not moving around the field right now but Belichek doesn't usually like to tip his hand so ...

But like you said it's such a bogus argument. As are most of the arguments against Sherman. I'd like to see just one person actually bring up Sherman's legitimate weakness, but I've never seen one of his critics mention it. They just glom onto some media spun narrative and hold onto it. And even if that media narrative changes they just change with it and pretend like their position never changed.

1. He doesn't follow the best WR. Deion was really the first guy to do this on a consistant basis. But when he was in San Fran for instance he didn't even do it consistantly. For the most part Eric Davis stayed on one side of the field and Deion stayed on the left side. Tim McDonald stayed down in the box and Merton Hanks played center field while shaded towards Davis. Sound familiar? Because Ray Rhodes was using a lot of the same concepts that Carroll only the "Leo" was called the "Elephant" in his scheme.

Once Deion started doing this it started becoming some kind of status symbol for CBs. But Woodson (Rod), Haynes, Hayes, Blount, Green etc. etc. None of these guys moved all over the field. They stayed on one side. Meanwhile DeAngelo Hall follows the best WR all over the field and he sucks.

2. Sherman is a Zone CB. This is the newest one people have latched onto even though in 2012 the same people were arguing that all Sherman could do is play physical bump and run man while suffering under the misconception that the Seahawks played almost an exclusive man defense because they lacked the football knowledge to recognize a basic three deep look even though it's a standard defense going back to Jr. High lvl football. They pretend now that the Seahawks protect their corners by playing zone which again shows fundamental lack of understanding of basic football concepts. First, the Seahawks play a mix of 3 deep zone and Man. Second the tape clearly illustrates that Sherman while not "bad" in zone coverage is far superior in straight man where he can play the man and then make the adjustment to the ball in the air. Third the corners are very much on an island when in the three deep zone as Earl Thomas is often responsible for picking up any TE's or slot receivers coming up the seam.

3. Which leads to he has Earl Thomas helping him over the top. As good as Earl Thomas is, the Seahawks play one high safety more than any team in the NFL. Patrick Peterson actually gets more "help" over the course of a season than Sherman does because they more often have two safeties in deep coverage on passing downs. Now take "help" as you want to take it... I see it the same way with Peterson as I do with Sherman. The safety is not assigned to help on Peterson's receiver so he's really not getting help over the top. The same applies to Sherman. Although the way Sherman's critics would have you believe it Thomas is constantly the angel on Sherman's shoulder while the Arizona safeties are just out there. Not to mention Revis had WAY more safety help over the top last year playing in that two deep zone. I mean if Earl Thomas is helping Sherman over the top how exactly did the Minnesota WR beat him deep on a double move for the 1 TD Sherman gave up? If Sherman had help over the top Earl Thomas would have beeen there right? I guess that was just the one time Sherman didn't have help over the top?

It's all smoke and mirrors. The way it was put best is that Sherman is the better football player right now but GMs say they would take Peterson over Sherman are saying so because Peterson is good (although inconsistant) but is an absolutely unique physical speciman. But you know that's just like saying in 2005 Michael Vick was a better QB than Matt Hasselbeck. Just like Peterson/Sherman most GMs would have taken Vick in a heartbeat over Hass given a choice because he was a physical freak even if he was inconsistant. That doesn't mean Vick was the better QB in that year. Same deal.

[HumanCockroach]

I've often wondered about the Thomas excuse. Played the 3 DB set almost exclusively in HS. Either they are saying that Maxwell ( or Browner or Thurmond) is a better corner and doesn't need the help, or they are completely clueless. There is NO way for Thomas to provide help to both sides of the field on every play, none what so ever. Can't be done no matter how good his instincts or how fast the man is. No player can be everywhere, period. Sherman gets ZERO help deep down the sideline, the help only comes on a post into the middle of the field ( which as you pointed out EVERY db gets, including the HOF DB's , Peterson, Revis and any DB at any level all the way up. It is WHAT a free safety that plays "center field" is FOR for Christ's sake) some teams have to have two to provide that help, and the fact that ET can be the "one" guy back there is amazing, but it simply doesn't change the principal of his position.

I noticed the shift in argument as well, and now they are throwing in the amazing front seven , that until a few months ago, no one outside of Seattle could name. It's weak and pathetic IMHO.

[Futureite]

And I have noticed that whenever I note that a 7th rd backup LB hauled in 4 picks in limited action or Maxwell (another backup) swiped 4 balls in limited action there is no response.

I have also noticed that when Roddy White puts up big numbers per Sherman "they have to move him around and he can't beat good corners 1 on 1". His numbers are a product of a system. Almost verbatim.

When Sherman puts up big numbers they have nothing to do with the system. Then it's "men lie, wonen lie but numbers never lie". The argument always changes depending upon who it favors.

No one talked about Seattle's pass rush prior to 2013 because Cliff Avril and Michael Bennet weren't there. In fact, after Clemons went down they are giving up 30 to ATL in a playoff loss and the last 3 coming in the air in about :30. After a pass rush they are holding the best O in history to 0 points late in the 4th. Hmmmm, coincidence?

Look at the Sherman haters scrambling for a ridiculous excuse like the improved pass rush. Good FN god SMH. I understand defending a hometwon guy, but denying reality doesn't help the case.

[Futureite]

Well I guess that whole "follow" thing only works when the second DB is mediocre. Revis no longer "follows" Peterson no longer returns punts or plays on offense, I wonder when that idiotic statement will dissapear? Deion didn't do it on superior units, Hayes, Haynes, Blount the list is full of DB'S considered shut down corners that didn't do that..... interesting to me to see the Pats attempt to copy Seattle in that regard..

Unless of course the 49ers wanted to completely shutdown a WR. Then Deion follwed that receiver everywhere. And that WAS the entire reason they signed him; to stop one guy who they knew they'd see in the NFCCCG. No matter how you slice it or try to minimize it, the ability to follow and shutdown the best WR in the NFL is an invaluable skill that only a few corners in the NFL have.

[kalibane]

Roddy White has never had a big game against Sherman. These are the types of statements that show what an idiot you are. Roddy White's best game against the Seahawlks was 5 catches on 10 targets for 76 yards and a TD. 2 catches in 5 targets against Sherman. 47 yards came on one play where Sherman clipped White's heel and tripped to the turf. Sherman had 3 passes defended. Congratulations to Roddy White he had a step on Sherman on that play and in recovering Sherman tripped. It was one play. Every corner gets beat once in a while, even Deion Sanders. Oh yeah and Julio Jones only had 59 yards recieving that game. Your'e pointing to this as the shining example of Sherman's weakness but ignore how a lesser WR named Crabtree torched Peterson.

In 2012, the same year Roddy White put up those "big" 76 yards against the Seahawks, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick completed 87.5% of the passes they threw at Crabtree and gave up 3 TDs (more than Sherman gave up in 19 games last season). In the last 2 years Sherman has never been abused the way Peterson was by Crabtree, but some how you find two plays where Sherman got beat (as if these other guys in the debate never do) and call it homerism.

So while you are talking about ignoring points... Explain how Sherman giving up two catches and a TD on 7 targets to a 4 time pro-bowl, former All-Pro WR expsoses him but giving up 7 catches on 8 targets and 3 TDs to a guy who's never been to a single pro-bowl doesn't factor into your assessment of Peterson Somehow I'm guessing this gets ignored though.

No one is commenting on your LB having 4 picks statement because it means nothing. You know it means nothing so I don't know why you want to push this point. But since you insist. The LB you are talking about is of course Malcom Smith.

Malcom Smith only had 2 INTs during the regular season. He was hardly playing limited duty as he started 8 games and was taking more and more snaps away from Bruce Irvin as the season went on. Furthermore, he didn't have any INTs until week 16 and then he had 1 INT in each of the final two games. The first INT against the cardinals was tipped up in the air at the line of scrimmage. The second INT he was a good 7 yards away from the intended a WR. But Kellen Clemmons somehow managed to throw the ball so poorly that it sailed above the hands of a leaping 6'5" TE who was only 5 yards away and completely wide open. I'm sure your retort is that Smith had two more INTs in the playoffs/superbowl, but both of those INTs were also on tipped balls. In short the scheme and/or Malcolm Smith's coverage had absolutely nothing to do with him having a single one of those 4 Interceptions. He just happened to be in the area when a free ball was in the air.

As for Maxwell. 1. He's kind of good. 2. opposing QBs assumed they could just pick on him because he was 4th on the depth chart. Consequently they challenged him on some jump ball type throws that they never would have thrown at established NFL corners. 3. He was targeted all the time because people only threw at Sherman a shade above two times per game. Browner played in the same scheme and only managed 4 INTs in over the last two years. Go figure, I guess the scheme doesn't really create INTs like you said.

As usual you are just as offbase as you can be so why don't you tell us again about Quinton Patton and AJ Jenkins prowess as WRs and how Golden Tate is no better than Manningham while you're at it please.

[HumanCockroach]

I'll just go ahead and trust "my eyes" when judging DB talent. Peterson has a ton of it, but doesn't consistently perform at the level he needs to ( hence the WHOLE purpose of them having him focus on this aspect of his game). I'll just simply trust my experience, over someone who obviously has a bias, and has never been IN the ring, or on the field in any compacity has in fact never been anything but a fan, at any level.

You clearly can't get past your bias, and so your "facts" turn into claims of homerism and lies. Enjoy all of that, but I'm simply done debating actual skill with someone, that knows nothing about it, or is so incredibly biased they are unable to SEE it do to the hate clouding their vision.

If Sanders "moved sometimes" big f-ing deal, so has Sherman ( or did you skip the first game last season against the Niners?)it means NOTHING, and pretty much every DB enshrined currently knows it as well.

[c_hawkbob]

And I have noticed that whenever I note that a 7th rd backup LB hauled in 4 picks in limited action or Maxwell (another backup) swiped 4 balls in limited action there is no response.

I have also noticed that when Roddy White puts up big numbers per Sherman "they have to move him around and he can't beat good corners 1 on 1". His numbers are a product of a system. Almost verbatim.

When Sherman puts up big numbers they have nothing to do with the system. Then it's "men lie, wonen lie but numbers never lie". The argument always changes depending upon who it favors.

No one talked about Seattle's pass rush prior to 2013 because Cliff Avril and Michael Bennet weren't there. In fact, after Clemons went down they are giving up 30 to ATL in a playoff loss and the last 3 coming in the air in about :30. After a pass rush they are holding the best O in history to 0 points late in the 4th. Hmmmm, coincidence?

Look at the Sherman haters scrambling for a ridiculous excuse like the improved pass rush. Good FN god SMH. I understand defending a hometwon guy, but denying reality doesn't help the case.

No one is commenting on your 'LB having 4 picks' statement because we know damn well it's pointed out with the sole purpose of further justifying your myopic hatred of Richard Sherman. We love Malcolm around here just fine, the problem is with you, not him.

Oh and please take note that at least two interceptions by Seahawks other than Sherman were from Sherman tips right to them, something you never comment on. Your bias against Sherman is greater than ours for him.

[HumanCockroach]

Future, SMDH. Sherman was a first team ALL PRO prior to either arrival. What a moronic, stupid thing to claim.It is akin to someone claiming Willis,Bowman, and Smith are average, because of the D-line. Only an IDIOT or FOOL would try to make that excuse.

[Agent 86]

Roddy White has never had a big game against Sherman. These are the types of statements that show what an idiot you are. Roddy White's best game against the Seahawlks was 5 catches on 10 targets for 76 yards and a TD. 2 catches in 5 targets against Sherman. 47 yards came on one play where Sherman clipped White's heel and tripped to the turf. Sherman had 3 passes defended. Congratulations to Roddy White he had a step on Sherman on that play and in recovering Sherman tripped. It was one play. Every corner gets beat once in a while, even Deion Sanders. Oh yeah and Julio Jones only had 59 yards recieving that game. Your'e pointing to this as the shining example of Sherman's weakness but ignore how a lesser WR named Crabtree torched Peterson.

In 2012, the same year Roddy White put up those "big" 76 yards against the Seahawks, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick completed 87.5% of the passes they threw at Crabtree and gave up 3 TDs (more than Sherman gave up in 19 games last season). In the last 2 years Sherman has never been abused the way Peterson was by Crabtree, but some how you find two plays where Sherman got beat (as if these other guys in the debate never do) and call it homerism.

So while you are talking about ignoring points... Explain how Sherman giving up two catches and a TD on 7 targets to a 4 time pro-bowl, former All-Pro WR expsoses him but giving up 7 catches on 8 targets and 3 TDs to a guy who's never been to a single pro-bowl doesn't factor into your assessment of Peterson Somehow I'm guessing this gets ignored though.

No one is commenting on your LB having 4 picks statement because it means nothing. You know it means nothing so I don't know why you want to push this point. But since you insist. The LB you are talking about is of course Malcom Smith.

Malcom Smith only had 2 INTs during the regular season. He was hardly playing limited duty as he started 8 games and was taking more and more snaps away from Bruce Irvin as the season went on. Furthermore, he didn't have any INTs until week 16 and then he had 1 INT in each of the final two games. The first INT against the cardinals was tipped up in the air at the line of scrimmage. The second INT he was a good 7 yards away from the intended a WR. But Kellen Clemmons somehow managed to throw the ball so poorly that it sailed above the hands of a leaping 6'5" TE who was only 5 yards away and completely wide open. I'm sure your retort is that Smith had two more INTs in the playoffs/superbowl, but both of those INTs were also on tipped balls. In short the scheme and/or Malcolm Smith's coverage had absolutely nothing to do with him having a single one of those 4 Interceptions. He just happened to be in the area when a free ball was in the air.

As for Maxwell. 1. He's kind of good. 2. opposing QBs assumed they could just pick on him because he was 4th on the depth chart. Consequently they challenged him on some jump ball type throws that they never would have thrown at established NFL corners. 3. He was targeted all the time because people only threw at Sherman a shade above two times per game. Browner played in the same scheme and only managed 4 INTs in over the last two years. Go figure, I guess the scheme doesn't really create INTs like you said.

As usual you are just as offbase as you can be so why don't you tell us again about Quinton Patton and AJ Jenkins prowess as WRs and how Golden Tate is no better than Manningham while you're at it please.

LOL...LOL....oh man, I usually stay out of the Future debates cause this guy is pure comic relief, but when he gets owned like this post from Kali, well, I just love it. HCR has also schooled him numerous times. And many others.

Richard Sherman is so far up this guy's arse, it is not even debatable anymore. Talk about being in someone's kitchen full time!

I'll say it again Future, it all changed on December 23, 2012, the moment Bam Bam laid out V.Davis. You look at your posts prior to that, and everyone thought you were a great guy, you often complimented the Hawks because they were inferior to a strong 49'ers team to that point for a few seasons. It might as well have been you wearing that white #85 jersey, cause that hit effected you as much as it did Vernon Davis. That hit changed the tide of this rivalry. All of sudden, BAM!!! The Seahawks had arrived as an equal foe. And we took the next step last season the 49'ers couldn't, even though they came oh so close.

Well done Kali, well done man.

[mykc14]

Roddy White has never had a big game against Sherman. These are the types of statements that show what an idiot you are. Roddy White's best game against the Seahawlks was 5 catches on 10 targets for 76 yards and a TD. 2 catches in 5 targets against Sherman. 47 yards came on one play where Sherman clipped White's heel and tripped to the turf. Sherman had 3 passes defended. Congratulations to Roddy White he had a step on Sherman on that play and in recovering Sherman tripped. It was one play. Every corner gets beat once in a while, even Deion Sanders. Oh yeah and Julio Jones only had 59 yards recieving that game. Your'e pointing to this as the shining example of Sherman's weakness but ignore how a lesser WR named Crabtree torched Peterson.

In 2012, the same year Roddy White put up those "big" 76 yards against the Seahawks, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick completed 87.5% of the passes they threw at Crabtree and gave up 3 TDs (more than Sherman gave up in 19 games last season). In the last 2 years Sherman has never been abused the way Peterson was by Crabtree, but some how you find two plays where Sherman got beat (as if these other guys in the debate never do) and call it homerism.

So while you are talking about ignoring points... Explain how Sherman giving up two catches and a TD on 7 targets to a 4 time pro-bowl, former All-Pro WR expsoses him but giving up 7 catches on 8 targets and 3 TDs to a guy who's never been to a single pro-bowl doesn't factor into your assessment of Peterson Somehow I'm guessing this gets ignored though.

No one is commenting on your LB having 4 picks statement because it means nothing. You know it means nothing so I don't know why you want to push this point. But since you insist. The LB you are talking about is of course Malcom Smith.

Malcom Smith only had 2 INTs during the regular season. He was hardly playing limited duty as he started 8 games and was taking more and more snaps away from Bruce Irvin as the season went on. Furthermore, he didn't have any INTs until week 16 and then he had 1 INT in each of the final two games. The first INT against the cardinals was tipped up in the air at the line of scrimmage. The second INT he was a good 7 yards away from the intended a WR. But Kellen Clemmons somehow managed to throw the ball so poorly that it sailed above the hands of a leaping 6'5" TE who was only 5 yards away and completely wide open. I'm sure your retort is that Smith had two more INTs in the playoffs/superbowl, but both of those INTs were also on tipped balls. In short the scheme and/or Malcolm Smith's coverage had absolutely nothing to do with him having a single one of those 4 Interceptions. He just happened to be in the area when a free ball was in the air.

As for Maxwell. 1. He's kind of good. 2. opposing QBs assumed they could just pick on him because he was 4th on the depth chart. Consequently they challenged him on some jump ball type throws that they never would have thrown at established NFL corners. 3. He was targeted all the time because people only threw at Sherman a shade above two times per game. Browner played in the same scheme and only managed 4 INTs in over the last two years. Go figure, I guess the scheme doesn't really create INTs like you said.

As usual you are just as offbase as you can be so why don't you tell us again about Quinton Patton and AJ Jenkins prowess as WRs and how Golden Tate is no better than Manningham while you're at it please.

LOL...LOL....oh man, I usually stay out of the Future debates cause this guy is pure comic relief, but when he gets owned like this post from Kali, well, I just love it. HCR has also schooled him numerous times. And many others.

Richard Sherman is so far up this guy's arse, it is not even debatable anymore. Talk about being in someone's kitchen full time!

I'll say it again Future, it all changed on December 23, 2012, the moment Bam Bam laid out V.Davis. You look at your posts prior to that, and everyone thought you were a great guy, you often complimented the Hawks because they were inferior to a strong 49'ers team to that point for a few seasons. It might as well have been you wearing that white #85 jersey, cause that hit effected you as much as it did Vernon Davis. That hit changed the tide of this rivalry. All of sudden, BAM!!! The Seahawks had arrived as an equal foe. And we took the next step last season the 49'ers couldn't, even though they came oh so close.

Well done Kali, well done man.

IMO future's posts really started to turn that season, but I noticed it a little earlier. I remember my view of him changed with Tate's Hail Mary TD against the Packers. He claimed it was THE WORST CALL IN NFL HISTORY! If that didn't show his true colors I don't know what did. I mean I understand attempting to argue that it should have been an INT or something like that, but to call it the worst call in NFL history is pure homerism at its best. I mean I know he is a fan of a franchise who usually gets the benefit of the doubt on calls, but come on. Even if you felt it was a pretty obvious INT at least there was some room for debate. There have been plenty of historically bad calls where there was no room for debate, like the Testaverde helmet TD. Everybody knows the ball didn't cross the line, his helmet did, there is no debate. The call was clearly wrong without debate so a logical person would have to conclude it was a worse call than Tate's TD, but not future the objective 'football fan' posting on our beloved forum. His objectiveness allows him to see that Tate's TD is the worst call in NFL history, LMAO! Ahh future your true colors came out at that point to me. Also, I don't blame you for being a homer, I just think it is funny that you actually think you are objective when you post crap like that.

[HumanCockroach]

Yeah, right then the tide shifted, to the point of unsubstantiated lies ( like the Wilson claim he "deserved ROTY" crapola) to the claim that Seattle never supported their basketball ( like I guess according to him Sac does) to other random and trite silliness that borders on retarded. Basically, Future is a front runner, after that, slipped into the troll zone, while claiming an unbiased or objective view the entire time. LMAO. I can admit I pull for the Hawks, but blatantly going on another teams forum to explain how they are all wrong and homers? Nah, no reason to do that garbage, and by definition a "troll" whether he likes the term, or others on this forum agree with that assessment is irrelevant, he is indeed that.

[Futureite]

Roddy White has never had a big game against Sherman. These are the types of statements that show what an idiot you are. Roddy White's best game against the Seahawlks was 5 catches on 10 targets for 76 yards and a TD. 2 catches in 5 targets against Sherman. 47 yards came on one play where Sherman clipped White's heel and tripped to the turf. Sherman had 3 passes defended. Congratulations to Roddy White he had a step on Sherman on that play and in recovering Sherman tripped. It was one play. Every corner gets beat once in a while, even Deion Sanders. Oh yeah and Julio Jones only had 59 yards recieving that game. Your'e pointing to this as the shining example of Sherman's weakness but ignore how a lesser WR named Crabtree torched Peterson.

In 2012, the same year Roddy White put up those "big" 76 yards against the Seahawks, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick completed 87.5% of the passes they threw at Crabtree and gave up 3 TDs (more than Sherman gave up in 19 games last season). In the last 2 years Sherman has never been abused the way Peterson was by Crabtree, but some how you find two plays where Sherman got beat (as if these other guys in the debate never do) and call it homerism.

So while you are talking about ignoring points... Explain how Sherman giving up two catches and a TD on 7 targets to a 4 time pro-bowl, former All-Pro WR expsoses him but giving up 7 catches on 8 targets and 3 TDs to a guy who's never been to a single pro-bowl doesn't factor into your assessment of Peterson Somehow I'm guessing this gets ignored though.

No one is commenting on your LB having 4 picks statement because it means nothing. You know it means nothing so I don't know why you want to push this point. But since you insist. The LB you are talking about is of course Malcom Smith.

Malcom Smith only had 2 INTs during the regular season. He was hardly playing limited duty as he started 8 games and was taking more and more snaps away from Bruce Irvin as the season went on. Furthermore, he didn't have any INTs until week 16 and then he had 1 INT in each of the final two games. The first INT against the cardinals was tipped up in the air at the line of scrimmage. The second INT he was a good 7 yards away from the intended a WR. But Kellen Clemmons somehow managed to throw the ball so poorly that it sailed above the hands of a leaping 6'5" TE who was only 5 yards away and completely wide open. I'm sure your retort is that Smith had two more INTs in the playoffs/superbowl, but both of those INTs were also on tipped balls. In short the scheme and/or Malcolm Smith's coverage had absolutely nothing to do with him having a single one of those 4 Interceptions. He just happened to be in the area when a free ball was in the air.

As for Maxwell. 1. He's kind of good. 2. opposing QBs assumed they could just pick on him because he was 4th on the depth chart. Consequently they challenged him on some jump ball type throws that they never would have thrown at established NFL corners. 3. He was targeted all the time because people only threw at Sherman a shade above two times per game. Browner played in the same scheme and only managed 4 INTs in over the last two years. Go figure, I guess the scheme doesn't really create INTs like you said.

As usual you are just as offbase as you can be so why don't you tell us again about Quinton Patton and AJ Jenkins prowess as WRs and how Golden Tate is no better than Manningham while you're at it please.

2 things that are funny;

1, I never said White outperformed Sherman. You consistently misquote me and then believe you lambasted me. I have no idea what goes on in your head when you read. What I posted is that Sherman criticized White for being a "system player" who cannot beat man coverage, which is the same critique that Sherman receives as a defender. Do you need me to use a different combination of words or are you going to draw your own conclusions again.

2, who posted about SF's LBs? Again, the point is tbat Sherman consistently bolsters every one of his arguments by posting his INT total. My point is that even bit role players like Malcolm Smith are racking up ints on your D. And yes when you factor in the postseason Smith posted 4. Are you claiming Sherman has never picked a tipped ball? Was he playing man FN D when he jumped the route on Shaub in the flat? Didn't he rack up 3 or 4 in garbage play in the 58-0 gane V the Cards? When you make rudiculous hyperbole statements such as "stats don't lie", someone like me is going to begin analyzing them.

So in sum, yes Roddy White is a system player. His allpro stats mean nothing. In Sherman's case, his allpro stats prive, well, he's an allpro. You FN homer, have it both ways .

[Futureite]

Roddy White has never had a big game against Sherman. These are the types of statements that show what an idiot you are. Roddy White's best game against the Seahawlks was 5 catches on 10 targets for 76 yards and a TD. 2 catches in 5 targets against Sherman. 47 yards came on one play where Sherman clipped White's heel and tripped to the turf. Sherman had 3 passes defended. Congratulations to Roddy White he had a step on Sherman on that play and in recovering Sherman tripped. It was one play. Every corner gets beat once in a while, even Deion Sanders. Oh yeah and Julio Jones only had 59 yards recieving that game. Your'e pointing to this as the shining example of Sherman's weakness but ignore how a lesser WR named Crabtree torched Peterson.

In 2012, the same year Roddy White put up those "big" 76 yards against the Seahawks, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick completed 87.5% of the passes they threw at Crabtree and gave up 3 TDs (more than Sherman gave up in 19 games last season). In the last 2 years Sherman has never been abused the way Peterson was by Crabtree, but some how you find two plays where Sherman got beat (as if these other guys in the debate never do) and call it homerism.

So while you are talking about ignoring points... Explain how Sherman giving up two catches and a TD on 7 targets to a 4 time pro-bowl, former All-Pro WR expsoses him but giving up 7 catches on 8 targets and 3 TDs to a guy who's never been to a single pro-bowl doesn't factor into your assessment of Peterson Somehow I'm guessing this gets ignored though.

No one is commenting on your LB having 4 picks statement because it means nothing. You know it means nothing so I don't know why you want to push this point. But since you insist. The LB you are talking about is of course Malcom Smith.

Malcom Smith only had 2 INTs during the regular season. He was hardly playing limited duty as he started 8 games and was taking more and more snaps away from Bruce Irvin as the season went on. Furthermore, he didn't have any INTs until week 16 and then he had 1 INT in each of the final two games. The first INT against the cardinals was tipped up in the air at the line of scrimmage. The second INT he was a good 7 yards away from the intended a WR. But Kellen Clemmons somehow managed to throw the ball so poorly that it sailed above the hands of a leaping 6'5" TE who was only 5 yards away and completely wide open. I'm sure your retort is that Smith had two more INTs in the playoffs/superbowl, but both of those INTs were also on tipped balls. In short the scheme and/or Malcolm Smith's coverage had absolutely nothing to do with him having a single one of those 4 Interceptions. He just happened to be in the area when a free ball was in the air.

As for Maxwell. 1. He's kind of good. 2. opposing QBs assumed they could just pick on him because he was 4th on the depth chart. Consequently they challenged him on some jump ball type throws that they never would have thrown at established NFL corners. 3. He was targeted all the time because people only threw at Sherman a shade above two times per game. Browner played in the same scheme and only managed 4 INTs in over the last two years. Go figure, I guess the scheme doesn't really create INTs like you said.

As usual you are just as offbase as you can be so why don't you tell us again about Quinton Patton and AJ Jenkins prowess as WRs and how Golden Tate is no better than Manningham while you're at it please.

LOL...LOL....oh man, I usually stay out of the Future debates cause this guy is pure comic relief, but when he gets owned like this post from Kali, well, I just love it. HCR has also schooled him numerous times. And many others.

Richard Sherman is so far up this guy's arse, it is not even debatable anymore. Talk about being in someone's kitchen full time!

I'll say it again Future, it all changed on December 23, 2012, the moment Bam Bam laid out V.Davis. You look at your posts prior to that, and everyone thought you were a great guy, you often complimented the Hawks because they were inferior to a strong 49'ers team to that point for a few seasons. It might as well have been you wearing that white #85 jersey, cause that hit effected you as much as it did Vernon Davis. That hit changed the tide of this rivalry. All of sudden, BAM!!! The Seahawks had arrived as an equal foe. And we took the next step last season the 49'ers couldn't, even though they came oh so close.

Well done Kali, well done man.

Eh, I have made plenty of complimentary and unbiased posts here. A few even in recent weeks. The nature of blogging is that people tend to ignore the positive though. Probably human nature for most things.

Cause and effect; you see a correlation of my posts to Dec 23 2012. I see a correlation between Dec 23 2012 and the obnixious taunting of an entire fanbase. Perfect example is your post, above. Great hit by Kam. Worth repeating for going on 2 yrs or equating to owning a player? One hit, on an unprotected player in a game that ended up meaning nothing. VD is bigger, stronger and more explisive than Kam. He made a name for himself blocking D-Ends. Pretty sure in any one on one drill they'd be at worst evenly matched.

Lol you tell me who has changed. Blowing dumb things up to be more than they are, just to taunt. Honestly, I truly do not hate anyone or take this all that seriously. One thing I love about sports is that we can get all emotionally involved and riled up, but at the end of the day nothing is really at stake. I have no I'll will towards anyone here, even Kal .

[Futureite]

I will add this: there was no real rivalry prior to 2012. I went up to Seattle for thst 2011 game and I'm sorry, that level of hate was not held down here. Just wasn't folks. Your radio guys were all geeked up, people made comments to me. You could feel it. There was nothing evenly remotely close to that here for the Hawks.

So when that 2012 game went down a lot of your fanbase used it as an oportunity to stoke this whole thing uo. Endless taunting, DVDs, nonstop s*** talking. You whooped us and used it as the fuel to get what you wanted.

Well now you finally got it. Don't complain now that I or anyone else changed. I think you wanted the entire country to notice - not just the Bay Area - and congrats, they do all hate you now.

I have dealt with it for yrs as a Niner fan. Now it's your turn. Sometimes I guess you don't know what you want until it is yours!

PS I will be watching Hawks closely tonight.

[RiverDog]

I will add this: there was no real rivalry prior to 2012. I went up to Seattle for thst 2011 game and I'm sorry, that level of hate was not held down here. Just wasn't folks. Your radio guys were all geeked up, people made comments to me. You could feel it. There was nothing evenly remotely close to that here for the Hawks.

So when that 2012 game went down a lot of your fanbase used it as an oportunity to stoke this whole thing uo. Endless taunting, DVDs, nonstop s*** talking. You whooped us and used it as the fuel to get what you wanted.

Well now you finally got it. Don't complain now that I or anyone else changed. I think you wanted the entire country to notice - not just the Bay Area - and congrats, they do all hate you now.

I have dealt with it for yrs as a Niner fan. Now it's your turn. Sometimes I guess you don't know what you want until it is yours!

PS I will be watching Hawks closely tonight.

You might want to check out the graphic Makena posted about the most hated team in the country. Looks to me like the Niners are a lot more hated than are the Hawks.

[kalibane]

Let's see... Ignore a direct question (in bold even) after crowing about other people not addressing one of his statement? Check. Try to shift the argument to yet another completely unrelated tangent? Check. Throw out another ridiculous statement that blows up in his face? Check.

Your inference that Malcolm Smith got 4 interceptions was completely debunked. All of them came on jump balls which floated to his area by complete coincidence. And actually yes of Richard Sherman's 20 career interceptions I can confirm that at the minimum 18 of them were not tipped, the other 2 (from 2011) unknown. So your point is?

[mykc14]

Actually, here is a question for you future: Do you still think Golden Tate's Hail Mary is the worst call in NFL history? Just something I have been wondering lately. Do you still want to stand by that claim or can you finally admit that you were wrong.

[RiverDog]

Actually, here is a question for you future: Do you still think Golden Tate's Hail Mary is the worst call in NFL history? Just something I have been wondering lately. Do you still want to stand by that claim or can you finally admit that you were wrong.

I'll answer that. No, it was not. The worst call in NFL history was the Vinny Testeverde "I thought the helmet was the ball" touchdown. No doubt about it.

[HumanCockroach]

Roddy White has never had a big game against Sherman. These are the types of statements that show what an idiot you are. Roddy White's best game against the Seahawlks was 5 catches on 10 targets for 76 yards and a TD. 2 catches in 5 targets against Sherman. 47 yards came on one play where Sherman clipped White's heel and tripped to the turf. Sherman had 3 passes defended. Congratulations to Roddy White he had a step on Sherman on that play and in recovering Sherman tripped. It was one play. Every corner gets beat once in a while, even Deion Sanders. Oh yeah and Julio Jones only had 59 yards recieving that game. Your'e pointing to this as the shining example of Sherman's weakness but ignore how a lesser WR named Crabtree torched Peterson.

In 2012, the same year Roddy White put up those "big" 76 yards against the Seahawks, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick completed 87.5% of the passes they threw at Crabtree and gave up 3 TDs (more than Sherman gave up in 19 games last season). In the last 2 years Sherman has never been abused the way Peterson was by Crabtree, but some how you find two plays where Sherman got beat (as if these other guys in the debate never do) and call it homerism.

So while you are talking about ignoring points... Explain how Sherman giving up two catches and a TD on 7 targets to a 4 time pro-bowl, former All-Pro WR expsoses him but giving up 7 catches on 8 targets and 3 TDs to a guy who's never been to a single pro-bowl doesn't factor into your assessment of Peterson Somehow I'm guessing this gets ignored though.

No one is commenting on your LB having 4 picks statement because it means nothing. You know it means nothing so I don't know why you want to push this point. But since you insist. The LB you are talking about is of course Malcom Smith.

Malcom Smith only had 2 INTs during the regular season. He was hardly playing limited duty as he started 8 games and was taking more and more snaps away from Bruce Irvin as the season went on. Furthermore, he didn't have any INTs until week 16 and then he had 1 INT in each of the final two games. The first INT against the cardinals was tipped up in the air at the line of scrimmage. The second INT he was a good 7 yards away from the intended a WR. But Kellen Clemmons somehow managed to throw the ball so poorly that it sailed above the hands of a leaping 6'5" TE who was only 5 yards away and completely wide open. I'm sure your retort is that Smith had two more INTs in the playoffs/superbowl, but both of those INTs were also on tipped balls. In short the scheme and/or Malcolm Smith's coverage had absolutely nothing to do with him having a single one of those 4 Interceptions. He just happened to be in the area when a free ball was in the air.

As for Maxwell. 1. He's kind of good. 2. opposing QBs assumed they could just pick on him because he was 4th on the depth chart. Consequently they challenged him on some jump ball type throws that they never would have thrown at established NFL corners. 3. He was targeted all the time because people only threw at Sherman a shade above two times per game. Browner played in the same scheme and only managed 4 INTs in over the last two years. Go figure, I guess the scheme doesn't really create INTs like you said.

As usual you are just as offbase as you can be so why don't you tell us again about Quinton Patton and AJ Jenkins prowess as WRs and how Golden Tate is no better than Manningham while you're at it please.

LOL...LOL....oh man, I usually stay out of the Future debates cause this guy is pure comic relief, but when he gets owned like this post from Kali, well, I just love it. HCR has also schooled him numerous times. And many others.

Richard Sherman is so far up this guy's arse, it is not even debatable anymore. Talk about being in someone's kitchen full time!

I'll say it again Future, it all changed on December 23, 2012, the moment Bam Bam laid out V.Davis. You look at your posts prior to that, and everyone thought you were a great guy, you often complimented the Hawks because they were inferior to a strong 49'ers team to that point for a few seasons. It might as well have been you wearing that white #85 jersey, cause that hit effected you as much as it did Vernon Davis. That hit changed the tide of this rivalry. All of sudden, BAM!!! The Seahawks had arrived as an equal foe. And we took the next step last season the 49'ers couldn't, even though they came oh so close.

Well done Kali, well done man.

Eh, I have made plenty of complimentary and unbiased posts here. A few even in recent weeks. The nature of blogging is that people tend to ignore the positive though. Probably human nature for most things.

Cause and effect; you see a correlation of my posts to Dec 23 2012. I see a correlation between Dec 23 2012 and the obnixious taunting of an entire fanbase. Perfect example is your post, above. Great hit by Kam. Worth repeating for going on 2 yrs or equating to owning a player? One hit, on an unprotected player in a game that ended up meaning nothing. VD is bigger, stronger and more explisive than Kam. He made a name for himself blocking D-Ends. Pretty sure in any one on one drill they'd be at worst evenly matched.

Lol you tell me who has changed. Blowing dumb things up to be more than they are, just to taunt. Honestly, I truly do not hate anyone or take this all that seriously. One thing I love about sports is that we can get all emotionally involved and riled up, but at the end of the day nothing is really at stake. I have no I'll will towards anyone here, even Kal .

Well to be fair Kam does that to Vernon pretty much each and every game, but what ever, keep professing how they changed that day, the truth is, they changed when we said it did. Plenty of people know it ( even you somewhere down deep hidden under all those insecurities) but don't pretend to make this some sort of homer crap defense. This is a Seattle board ( which has been pointed out HUNDREDS of times) if you are looking for people to DISCUSS football with, you could do a hell of a lot worse than here, but that ISN'T what you're doing, you are INTENTIONALLY trashing players, and fans here, on OUR board ( and yeah big guy, this is a board MADE by a Hawks fan, FOR Hawks fans, SUPPORTED by Hawks fans) this is OUR yard, and we aren't going to pretend like it doesn't bother us when a random troll pops a squat, and drops a deuce in it, repeatedly.