Burns vs Bosa

[Toomers]

5 minutes ago, NAS said:

Good thing he will play as an OLB edge in a 3-4. I hope people realize he will have 15 sacks a year easily and will be able to play the run from a position of strength 

 
 

Did he get bit by a radioactive spider in the off-season? 

[NAS]

2 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 
 

Did he get bit by a radioactive spider in the off-season? 

Tell me you don’t know football

[joemac]

2 hours ago, NAS said:

Honestly I was surprised there isn’t a bigger gap.  If Burns played for 49ers, Cowboys or Steelers he would be considered “elite”.  His sack numbers could have been bigger if he finished them (how many times did we see him just fail to wrap up).  I think his best days are ahead of him and we need to pay him. 

If Burns could finish 50% more when he gets to the QB he’d have 20 sacks a year. 

[NAS]

2 minutes ago, joemac said:

If Burns could finish 50% more when he gets to the QB he’d have 20 sacks a year. 

Exactly!

[joemac]

6 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 
 

Did he get bit by a radioactive spider in the off-season? 

It’s true though. He’s going to be a menace as a stand up edge in the 3/4. It will put him in his natural athletic position to at least be average in the run game. 

[Toomers]

4 minutes ago, NAS said:

Tell me you don’t know football

Dont have to tell you. It’s all on here. This is just the latest in a long line of mistakes made with money. And I warned against all of them. How about you? 
 

It’s not as good as your…..

 

        ….defense, but it will do

[Saca312]

Let Burns walk and watch this defense turn into a bottom 25 overnight lol.

We get it. Burns isn't Bosa, that much is obvious. Realizing that this defense literally would not function without burns is also something to note. 

Whatever contract he gets, it's worthwhile at this point from a team impact value standpoint. Not a single defender on this team is better than him.

Otherwise it'll be amusing to see just how bad this defense will look without him, because it'll certainly be a tragic comedy.

Does Burns have his issues I'd hope he fixes after a big payday? Very much so, and I hope to see him take a step up in a theoretical system that suits him better.

Just know that good DEs don't grow on trees, and 31 other teams would kill to have Burns on their roster.

Edited September 6, 2023 by Saca312

[KSpan]

26 minutes ago, NAS said:

Good thing he will play as an OLB edge in a 3-4. I hope people realize he will have 15 sacks a year easily and will be able to play the run from a position of strength 

Except unless they're running a 3-3-5 nickel or something like that, which seems unlikely, majority of the time he'll be playing the same sub-package end position he's been in his whole career.

[Toomers]

6 minutes ago, joemac said:

It’s true though. He’s going to be a menace as a stand up edge in the 3/4. It will put him in his natural athletic position to at least be average in the run game. 

If you don’t think he is going to be challenged just because of 3-4, you’re going to be severely disappointed. Teams find weakness. 

[CamWhoaaCam]

1 minute ago, Saca312 said:

Let Burns walk and watch this defense turn into a bottom 25 overnight lol.

We get it. Burns isn't Bosa, that much is obvious. Realizing that this defense literally would not function without burns is also something to note. 

Whatever contract he gets, it's worthwhile at this point from a team impact value standpoint. Not a single defender is better than him.

Otherwise it'll be amusing to see just how bad this defense will look without him, because it'll certainly be bad.

Does Burns have his issues I'd hope he fixes after a big payday? Very much so, and I hope to see him take a step up in a theoretical system that suits him better.

Just know that good DEs don't grow on trees, and 31 other teams would kill to have Burns on their roster.

We saw it in preseason. The defense had zero pass rush without Burns.

 

I think now that the Bosa deal is done that gives us an idea on what we can offer Burns. Surely he's not getting the Bosa deal. I always thought 28-30mil per year was reasonable with maybe 100 mil guaranteed. Hopefully a deal gets done before Sunday. Maybe Burns has a few sacks jacked from his new deal.

[CRA]

 

15 minutes ago, Saca312 said:

Realizing that this defense literally would not function without burns is also something to note. .

We saw the defense without Burns last year 

we held our opponent to their lowest point total we held anyone to all year.  7 points. 

and if you win scoring 10 points, that’s your defense getting you the win.  So it can and did function minus Burns last year. 

Granted your clearly want Burns.  But 120 million guaranteed is 120 million guaranteed. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

28 minutes ago, Saca312 said:

Just know that good DEs don't grow on trees, and 31 other teams would kill to have Burns on their roster.

31 teams kill to have Burns. Yes. 31 teams pay him 30m a year, for a below average run defender, hoping he'll take over a game defensively, and maybe 15 sacks. Nope

[CRA]

12 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

31 teams kill to have Burns. Yes. 31 teams pay him 30m a year, for a below average run defender, hoping he'll take over a game defensively, and maybe 15 sacks. Nope

31 teams ain’t paying him 120+ guaranteed. 

Not as a pass rush specialist.  You would need to be dominant run defender too with the pass rush game for 31 teams to hit the 120+ club.  

one guy at 100+ is a weak run defender.   And it’s the Browns.  Who do dumb things.  See Watson.  And their entire history. 
 

 

[Toomers]

16 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

31 teams kill to have Burns. Yes. 31 teams pay him 30m a year, for a below average run defender, hoping he'll take over a game defensively, and maybe 15 sacks. Nope

The Steelers contingent would like to pass. They already have backup edge players.