Could they have gotten this any more wrong?
From ESPN's rankings on WRs for the 2008 season.
"61. Nate Burleson
Seattle Seahawks
Burleson has No. 2 WR skills, but because of his lack of speed, you'd rather have him as your third receiver. He fits the system in Seattle thanks to his ability to read coverages and his fluid, nimble route-running skills. He is not very dangerous after the catch and is not a great blocker."
Fluid routes? Lack of speed? Not very dangerous after the catch?
Maybe my idea of what Burleson brings to the table is completely backwards.
A place to bury strangers.
0 recs |
13 comments
Comments
haha
by MFAN on Mar 25, 2008 11:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dude, welcome to my world.
by John Morgan on Mar 25, 2008 11:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dear god...
by ningwers on Mar 25, 2008 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'll be honest
are you guys saying though that burleson is actually is actually a fast, crappy route runner who is dangerous after the catch and a great blocker?
BTW, i just noticied this:
Shrug? Oh, he just does the lousy footers now.
nice job shrug.
by stlcardinalsfang on Mar 25, 2008 11:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not a great blocker.
by John Morgan on Mar 25, 2008 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
D. Branch
by clamslayer on Mar 25, 2008 9:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is ESPN's take, with Branch @ 25
by clamslayer on Mar 25, 2008 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
B. Engram
by clamslayer on Mar 25, 2008 9:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is ESPN's take on Engram @ 31
2/3's not that awful is it?
by clamslayer on Mar 25, 2008 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















