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.
0 recs |
13
comments
Comments
haha
by MFAN on Mar 25, 2008 11:37 AM PDT 0 recs
Dude, welcome to my world.
by John Morgan on Mar 25, 2008 11:39 AM PDT 0 recs
Dear god...
by ningwers on
Mar 25, 2008 12:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Dear god
by ningwers on
Mar 25, 2008 12:10 PM PDT
up
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 0 recs
thanks
by Shrug on
Mar 25, 2008 2:43 PM PDT
up
0 recs
D. Branch
by clamslayer on Mar 25, 2008 9:18 PM PDT 0 recs
This is ESPN's take, with Branch @ 25
by clamslayer on
Mar 25, 2008 9:19 PM PDT
up
0 recs
B. Engram
by clamslayer on Mar 25, 2008 9:18 PM PDT 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
0 recs









