Warner v. Dawkins = Mismatch... in Warner's favor?

by anuj on Jan 12, 2009 6:43 PM EST Comment 9 comments

Jason Whitlock of Foxsports.com is a great writer in my opinion. Yeah, he can play the race card a little too much, and yeah, he is REALLY superegoistic. But, the dude has a point now and then. Not this time.

This dude actually thinks that Warner has the advantage going up against Brian Dawkins.

8. Kurt Warner vs. Brian Dawkins is a mismatch ... in Warner's favor. Dawkins is a wonderful leader. He's still good in run support. But when you watch him play the pass in January, you see why the Eagles are reluctant to give the 35-year-old a new contract. Warner is willing to hold the ball and take a hit in order to get the ball down field to his receivers. Warner's courage is going to bite Dawkins in the ass. You can get deep on Dawkins, and you can make plays down the seam on Dawkins. His recovery speed just isn't there. Plaxico Burress would've scored three times on Sunday, and the Giants would've run for 300 yards. With Plax on the field, Jim Johnson would've had to line Dawkins up at the goal line regardless of field position or down and distance.

This guy is a complete idiot in my opinion for this topic. While Dawkins may not have hit youth or speed, the experience that he brings to the table helps him pick the right routes, better angles, and solid reads. My pick to win... no comment. See you guys Monday after the game.

Poll

Which player has the advantage going into the NFC Title Game?

Brian Dawkins

30 votes

Kurt Warner

6 votes

I don't want to pick because I might jinx the Eagles chances

32 votes

68 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Who cares? It’s not Dawkins sole responsibility to cover receivers. IF Kurt can get the ball off before someone sacks him and IF it’s not intercepted by Asante and IF the receiver happens to catch it, Dawkins is gonna knock the shit out of them.

Destroyer of Subject Lines :3™

by yomjoseki on Jan 12, 2009 6:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

“It’s not Dawkins sole responsibility to cover receivers.”

My thought exactly. It’s not a one-on-one matchup in any way, shape or form. It’s not even just the DBs vs. the WRs, it’s about getting pressure on Kurt’s statue and not forcing the DBs to cover too long, because clearly they’ll get open some.

Free safeties often help on the multiple-receiver side, play over-the-top coverage in conjunction with a corner jam, or have inside/underneath help in zones. Sometimes they roam free and pick up for dudes who get beat, which is why they look like they’re covering guys on TV.

In other words, Whitlock does not really have a point this time. It’s not like having single coverage on a rookie CB to the single-reciever side.

by D3Keith on Jan 12, 2009 7:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and I didn’t read this the first time:

Plaxico Burress would’ve scored three times on Sunday, and the Giants would’ve run for 300 yards. With Plax on the field, Jim Johnson would’ve had to line Dawkins up at the goal line regardless of field position or down and distance.

Haha, holy shit. That’s funny. Yeah, the mere presence of Plaxico Burress wouldn’t have made Eli throw better than he did yesterday (approximately at the same level of a sixth grade girl).

Destroyer of Subject Lines :3™

by yomjoseki on Jan 12, 2009 6:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

lol, exactly

it is idiotic writers like that that piss me off

Who wants to play Leapfrog with Trent?

by anuj on Jan 12, 2009 6:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh. Having read that part just now, it’s clear he’s not really being serious.

At best he’s trying to get a rise, at worst he meant to go back and edit that before publishing :)

Who cares?

by D3Keith on Jan 12, 2009 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Eagles obviously didn't win

the Giants lost.

Fuck you, just give us credit for once

"This world extends way beyond this little field of dreams we're dancing in and I want to see that world"

by exitfare on Jan 12, 2009 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

In Whitlock's defense...

…Dawkins definitely isn’t the middle of the field force he once was…but I don’t see him consistently getting to beat to the point where it warrants saying that Warner is going to exploit him. I don’t see that. And if so, why couldn’t he do it early this season?

by ajay on Jan 12, 2009 7:04 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

whitlock lol

i cant stand witlock and im black he needs to shut the hell up.
If anybody in the NFL thinks dawk cant ball TRY HIM thats all i gatta say

like he said "he is like MICHEAL JACKSON before he went crazy he will be there "

by FLAeagle on Jan 12, 2009 8:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Warner turns it over under pressure

Check out these regular season stats:
D-Mac has 90 ints and 73 fumbles and 4303 passing attempts
Warner has 114 ints and 91 fumbles and 3557 passing attempts
While I can’t find what percentage of fumbles were on pass plays, lets, for argument’s sake, lets say they all were.

McNabb- 1 fumble/int per 26 attempts
Warner- 1 fumble/int per 17 attempts

McNabb- 32 attempts per game 1.2 fumble/int per game
Warner-32 attempts per game 1.8 fumble/int per game

That .6 fumble is going to be the difference! (this is why I hate stats!!!)

I bleed green and I piss silver and blue

by oldasquick on Jan 12, 2009 10:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs