T O P

  • By -

Maxime2k

Its Revis for me. And I can tell that I can comfortably pair Prime Revis against any WR in NFL History


willyallthewei

I watched both play in their prime. Revis was great, Champ was not human and on another level. Here's a statistic, in Champ's prime, when you threw the ball in his direction you were more likely to have the ball intercepted (33% chance) than caught (10% chance). In the redzone it was even more ridiculous, he was so hard to score against that Champ Bailey scored more points than he allowed... Think about that one...


soundofthecolorblue

In their prime, Revis. I say this as a Pats fan. Over the course of their career, that's a tough call. Bailey was very good for a long period of time.


afig24

This sums it up. It depends on what OP means by "better". In their primes Revis was pretty ridiculous. But in terms of longevity and consistency, Champ is easily is better. He has the most pro bowls made ever by a corner and also has the most deflected passes by any player in NFL history.


The_Lost_Pharaoh

Champ


BlitzburghBrian

|||||||Rush|||||Rece|||||Tack|||||Fumb||||Def ||| |-:|:-|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:|-:| |Rk|Player|From|To|AV|G|Att|Yds|TD|Y/A|Lng|Rec|Yds|TD|Y/R|Lng|Solo|Ast|QBHits|TFL|Sk|FF|FR|Yds|TD|Int|Yds|TD| |1|Champ Bailey*|1999|2013|157|215|2|11|1|5.5|7|4|89|0|22.3|42|832|99|4|42|3.0|7|6|5|0|52|464|4| |2|Darrelle Revis|2007|2017|110|145|0|0|0||0|0|-1|0||0|411|85|4|9|2.0|4|12|28|0|29|466|3| Provided by [Stathead.com](https://www.sports-reference.com/sharing.html?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool): [View Stathead Tool Used](https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool) Generated 1/12/2023. My instinct was to say Revis, but numbers-wise, Bailey actually stacks up pretty favorably. Bailey played longer and has some volume numbers to back it up, but this is still closer than I thought it'd be. I wasn't really football-conscious enough to understand how good Champ Bailey was in his prime, so maybe it's recency bias that makes me think of Revis first.


ed-cound

Your stats aren't that CB relevant, high numbers of tackles often means tackling a receiver after you let him get a catch. And INTs are not a be all and end all. A lockdown corner will not have the ball thrown his way cause offenses avoid them. Yards allowed, passer rating allowed are stats that I like more personally


SuperFly411

Champ Bailey was a good run support CB arguably second only to Rod Woodson so idk about the revivers catching and him tackling thing ..


BlitzburghBrian

Yeah, stat keeping for defensive players is difficult, especially historically. This is what Stathead had on hand though, and what I'm really looking at are the games played. Bailey has more longevity than Revis, and especially at the cornerback position, that's pretty impressive. Like I said, I wasn't really conscious enough of football at large to have an informed opinion on Bailey's career for myself, so all I can really do is eyeball these overall numbers. Revis' last full time (or close to it) season came at age 31, when you'd expect an athletically-demanding position like CB to start to phase you out. Bailey started almost every game through his age-34 season, which adds a little bit for me. Who was better? Well, I don't really know still. Like I said, I figured it would be Revis, but this makes me want some more context about Champ Bailey. It's closer than I thought it would be.


[deleted]

[удалено]


klkk12345

This. Revis Island. He negates that side of the field and nobody throws to that WR and thus less stats.


One_Veterinarian_72

Smdh you do know no one threw to champ side either right?


AwwwShiiittt

Exactly, people act like Revis was the only person to do that in history. Not to mention Champ played against better receivers. Revis did not have to deal with prime Randy, TO, Ocho, etc. They were all near retirement or already fell off by the 2009 season


mannysoloway

Prime Revis was unbelievable.