Warming Up To Something Special: Why Artie Burns Was the Correct Choice

Hello fellow members of TheSteelersFans. AskQuestionsLater bringing you an in-depth comparison between William Jackson III and Artie Burns. For months leading up to the draft, many Steelers fans had wanted Willilam Jackson III and for good reason. He lines up with many of the virtues and criteria Pittsburgh corners are known to have. After Cincy obtained him before Pittsburgh could, many of us football fans expected the Steelers to trade down in the first round. Instead, they obtained a corner form Miami known as Artie Burns; a player who caused either excitement or irate resentment from the fanbase. Initially, I was confused, but now I see where Artie's merits lie down the road. To give my reasons as to why Artie was the correct choice, I will be comparing their combine performances, coaching continuity, and stats from their college days. Keep in mind for those of you who are not Steelers fans, this is, as always, an opinion. Feel free to disagree to your hearts content but I ask you be respectful about it. With that out of the way, let us get started.


Cover Corner vs. All-Around Corner:


William Jackson III was quite a name even before the NFL combine. His pass breakups and cover skills where definitely noted by many coaches even if he was a non-FBS player. The only question was his 40 time. To the amazement of many, a 4.37 was more than enough to catapult him up many teams draft-boards. That was not the only thing he answered at the combine either, as shown below:


Height: 6'0


Weight: 189


Arm Length: 31 1/4


Hands: 9 1/4


40 Yard: 4.37


10 Yard Split: 1.52


Board Jump: 116 inches


Vertical: N/A


Short Shuttle: 4.32 seconds


3 Cone: 6.86 seconds


Bench Press: 10




Here, observing the short shuttle and 3 cone, we can already tell that Jackson's bread and butter is his coverage skills; something that many Steelers fans coveted from a cornerback. A ballhawk by trade, he can be either deployed in the zone or man coverage scheme; maximizing his talents. However, his best schematic fit would be zone coverage.

"But how AskQuestionsLater? His Bench Press is 10; normally suggesting a strong corner. That being said, why is he better suited for zone based coverage and not man?"

To answer the bench press question, as I have stated multiple times, the bench press is not just an indicator of a players raw strength, but rather their endurance of their strength. Overall strength and functional strength are different factors that need more testing. Sadly, there really is not a combine drill for this, so tape is required. For answer the second question, in order to find how "physical" a corner is, his "jamming" ability must be divulged and analyzed on tape. For William Jackson III, while he does have the ability to jam, the amount of force he is using just to ensure the receiver gets off track is a bit concerning. This shows many scouts that, while his bench press scores are good, his functional strength is not. That being said, William Jackson III's maximum potential must be unlocked from a zone based heavy cover scheme so that his physicality with his jamming can increase over time. Asking him to jam early will yield to failure. Such a trait is why many Steelers fans clamored for considering that, again, a zone based cover scheme that was being ran would have made a "match made in heaven" for Jackson III. However, one caveat that was not discussed among many Steelers fans that, while it was the tactic used in 2015, the only reason it was used was the lack of talent in the secondary. Had Pittsburgh used a man based coverage scheme, Pittsburgh pass defense rank; especially in yard per catch allowed, would have skyrocketed. That being stated, while William Jackson III's zone skills would have assisted in the zone based coverage scheme, Butler was using the zone based philosophy as a contingency plan considering that he does not have "his players" to finalize his defense. In addition, before we get into the "put 'em in man then" approach, we have already discussed his lack of play strength; resulting in a weak punch to jam the opposing receiver and allowing the receiver to burn him easily (AJ Green being the most notorious to cover after the first 5 yards in the AFC North and one of the best in the NFL today). William Jackson III's strength's allow him to ballhawk, but from a distance. As such, Pittsburgh's new paradigm on cornerback's would not have aligned to this new philosophy.



Now, let us discuss Artie Burns. Myself included, I noted the potential that Artie had before the draft began. "Height-Weight-Speed" player. Loads of potential yet to be tapped; possibly the highest in the class. He just needs to refine... well... everything." As I had predicted, many of the "expert" analysts agreed as did some Steelers fans. "Please... do not... pick him.... anyone.. but him..." was the moniker of many Steeler fans; expected at the time. I was still waiting for his combine to get a better read on him. I have to admit, Burns' combine surprised me. I was expecting him to run in the 4.5 range, possesses a sub 6.9 3 cone and have a 4.4. short shuttle. Not quite. He performed better than I thought. Let us take a look:

Height: 6 feet


Weight: 193 lbs.


Arm Length: 33 1/4 arms


Hands: 9 1/2 inches


40 time: 4.46


10 yard split: 1.56


Broad Jump: 124 inches*


Bench Press: 7*


Short Shuttle: 4.3 seconds*


3 Cone: 6.96 seconds*


Vertical: 33* (original was 31 1/4)


* = All indicate Pro Day



After seeing his athleticism at the combine, I could officially call the throwback "Height-Weight-Speed" player who, not surprisingly, has loads of potential. His ceiling was comparable to Jalen Ramsey himself in my opinion. While Jalen trumps Artie in many categories, they are not as far off in terms of athleticism as some think. Yes his 40 time (4.41 vs. 4.46), 10 yard split (1.56 vs. 1.51) 3 cone (6.94 vs. 6.96), short shuttle (4.18 vs. 4.3), and broad jump (124 vs. 136) are better, but not by much. The only things that Ramsey beats Burns soundly is the bench press (14 vs. 7) and the vertical jump (41 1/2 vs. 33). As for their height, length and weight, Ramsey is 6'1, 209 with a 33 3/8 arm length while Burns is 6 even and 193 with an arm length of 33 1/4 arm length; a 1 inch. height, a 0.125 arm length difference. Again, the only noticeable difference would be weight; a 16 pound difference. After noticing this, I was more surprised to the point of shocked at comparing these numbers. Granted, while his physical attributes where comparable to Ramsey, his tape... was not. Ramsey, while better suited towards being a safety (at least I believe), Burns does not hold too much of a candle to him. Then again, leading the ACC with 6 interceptions is definitely something Artie can hold his head up high. Like Ramsey, he can bait quarterback's to making bad throws. That, coupled with his length, make him a player who's immense potential has yet to be properly tapped and controlled. However, his comparison was towards William Jackson III, so with that, let us continue on.


Now, outside of the marginal bench press, 3 cone and 10 yard split, the only thing that Jackson has Burns beat soundly is the 40 yard dash. While speed is important for a corner-back, there are also transition based speed and recovery speed. Both Jackson and Burns perform well in transition, so that comparison is negligible considering Jackson obtains a slight edge. However, for the recovery speed, while Jackson does showcase superior speed, Burns is the better recovery player. Yes, Jackson's speed is greater, but that is straight line speed. Both are not well in back pedaling, but Artie's length allows him to recover better; mitigating the disadvantage in straight line speed. As such, Artie's combine performance shows that he is the superior athlete than William Jackson III. In addition, this also coincides with the facet that the Steelers have valued athletes greater than "prototype" players. However, even if we are not including these athletic tests, there is one great component that separates players William Jackson III and Artie Burns; continuity.




Coaching Creates The Steps To Achieve. Continuity Equates Towards Success:



Tom Herman (Houston Cougars) and Al Golden( Miami "The U" Hurricanes) are the pinnacle of the antipodean difference for this discussions sake. In fact, these two are as antipodean as you can get if you are a Steelers fan (outside the fact that the Steelers and Bengals are possibly no.1). Tom Herman's first year as a Houston Cougars coach can be easily described as successful. 13-1 and one bowl win under his belt usually mean good things are in store for those types of people. As for Al Golden, even .500 winning percentage at 59-59 and 0-3 in bowl games is often considered bad. Even though both of these coaches are coaching in different leagues (FBS vs. FCS will always be a hot commodity to debate), the goal should remain the same; build a team with the best talent around the nation, teach them the fundamentals of the college/NFL level, mold them towards your philosophies, train and nurture said talent, and compete. No that difficult now is it? .... Well.. for a coach in a part of the nation that consistently puts out talent better than any other state (sorry Pennsylvania), this was an issue. For four straight years, Al simply could not put it together. After the 2015 season, Al is no longer a head coach and "Hermy" can look forward towards better things in the future.


Now, how does this even begin to seep into the "William Jackson III vs. Artie Burns" debate. Continuity. Now, Jackson was a JUCO (Junior College) transfer from Trinity Valley community college in his sophomore year (2014) before enrolling to Houston in his freshman year (2013). In addition, Houston's coach at the time was Tony Levine; a coach who really let the Houston faithful down. As for Artie Burns, Al Golden was pretty much all he knew. However, while coaches are supposed to make the player better, it is often the player that has to make himself better. For Jackson, focusing on football was simple. For Artie... things would not pan out as well. Even if he is considered a world class hurdler, having his mother gone, father incarcerated and the sole bearer of two brothers, Artie's challenges were nigh-impossible dealing with so many tasks. This ultimately caused a rift that would end up hurting his overall collegiate performance in the gridiron sport; leaving many "experts" such as Mike Mayock and Matt Miller to hand out a Round 2 grade. Charlie Casserly of NFL.com, however, saw something in him that I clearly did not. As for William Jackson III, football for him involved no such rifts or distractions; culminating into a fine collegiate career. Even with Tony Levine's tenure, Houston's continuity was sufficient enough for Jackson III to increase his abilities. Al Golden's coaching ability was not sufficient and this ultimately led vacancy thanks in part to Golden's myopia.



Now, before we continue, let us take a trip back in 2015, where many Steelers fans debated Bud Dupree vs. Shane Ray. Dupree's constant coaching refinements was a major reason for his lack of polish in comparison to Shane Ray. What fans could not debate, was his athletic ability; such type of talent being compared to the "transcendent" Jadeveon Clowney and even exceeding it with Dupree's record breaking explosive power calculations by the WALDO formula. Had Dupree had the same amount of continuity among a refining staff, he would have been a surefire top 5 pick As stated before, Dupree is the most explosive player since 2005; among the best since the formula was calculated. Dupree was not also the superior athletic talent, his athletic talent made him more versatile than Ray; culminating into the 22nd selection in the draft. That being said, let us get back to Artie vs. Jackson.



Artie's lack of continuity damaged his chances to ultimately unlock his full potential while Jackson's abilities, while still needing refinement, are close to complete. In addition, while Jackson would have been the safer pick considering he is has the better "floor" of the two, Burns possessed the greater "ceiling". Going back to the Dupree vs. Ray debate as well as Pittsburgh's philosophy of drafting players, Tomlin values the "ceiling" players greater than the "floor" players. Even in the event that William Jackson III were still on the board, Tomlin would have still gone to Artie Burns due towards his immense potential. Now, for those who want to claim a good rebuttal, yes, William Jackson III may have been the better pick given Pittsburgh's current situation with Big Ben as anyone but him knows how long he has; giving further statement that Jackson being the "floor" player would have yielded better results. However, as discussed in the "Cover vs. All Around" section, Jackson's current style of play would not mesh with what Butler has drawn up and you cannot teach intangibles such as height, weight, or length. This yields further precedence that, not only with Artie's intangibles, his tangibles and play-style matched up with what Tomlin was looking for. Even accounting for this, there is one final section to dissect; stats.




Stats Tell More Than You Believe:



When discussing upon making a selection in the first round, a players resume must be adequate in order to justify the pick. Both Artie and William Jackson III have resume's that are worthy of their selections. Before I start with William's, let us begin with Arite's considering his circumstances he had to overcome. In addition, this is career stats. As such, keep this in mind as this will be important.


Solo Tackles: 65

Assist Tackles: 28

Total Tackles: 93

Tackles For Loss: 3.0

No. of Yards Lost: 14

Sacks: 2.0

Interceptions: 7

Interception Yards: 37

Interception Yard Average: 5.3

Defensive Touchdowns: 0

Pass Deflections: 14

Fumble Recoveries: 1

Forced Fumbles 1



As stated in the title, stats do not always tell the whole story themselves, but are more revealing once you start the tape. As shown above, Burns does not shy away from contact. His solo tackles indicate that Burns is not afraid of going one against one in an open field. In addition, his ability to finish tackles is not too bad either. As for the most important stats, Artie's numbers are good.. but not great. While his 7 interceptions are awe-inspiring, six of those came when he was a junior. Take those away, and he really has one; something that is ominously approaching Mackensie Alexander level. As ability to be a "ball seeking missile" is in question as well with just one forced fumble and one recovery. Granted, seldom do corner's have such an ability so it is not a complete knock. Overall though, grading out his "body of work", Artie's skillset is well rounded. Nothing his overly topping any other statistic. Now, let us look at William Jackson III:


Solo Tackles: 84

Assist Tackles: 31

Total Tackles: 115

Sacks: 0

Tackles For Loss: 3

No. of Yards Lost:12

Forced Fumble: 2

Fumble Recoveries: 3

Pass Deflections: 40

Interceptions: 8

Interception Yards: 211

Defensive Touchdowns: 2



Unlike Artie's, Williams' has the edge in the stat. department. Everything here trumps what Artie's stat sheet provides. Accounting for the key stats, Jackson has the edge in his cover abilities. Even if we are to shave off those 23 pass deflections, that is still a superior number than Artie's. In addition, his ability to create impact plays as a cover corner are also evident; FCS or otherwise. Two defensive touchdowns and 211 yards are nothing to scoff at. In terms of the better cover corner, Jackson's abilities on tape and in the stat sheet do reflect this.

However, as I stated before, stats only tell so much unless tape is being analyzed. While Jackson's stat sheet is impressive, much of these tackles he had were often in pass coverage; not run support. While he does have three tackles for loss, like Artie's, two of them were assisted. All of Artie's three were unassisted; further compounding William's absence of physicality. This is even more apparent in running screens (something he is going to see... a lot.. from the NFL: AFC North teams no less). Artie's willingness to make tackles on such plays should not be undervalued. This is when we run into the phrase "Plays and intangibles like this never show on the stat sheet." Screens are often used for either a quick strike, a fake-out, or a long hand off. If a corner is willing to attempt to negate the play or even slow it down, its chances of success decrease. Going back towards their respective play-styles; something this is also not always displayed, while Jackson's tackle total is higher, take a look at his assists and compare them to Artie's ( 31 vs. 28). Dedication and determination are two qualities that, once again, neither Mike Tomlin nor Marvin Lewis are able to teach. As such, having a player that possess both with physical talents to boot, is something that is tangible in the indirect sense.


"If that is the case AskQuestionsLater, then why did Marvin Lewis not select Artie Burns?"


That answer is simple. Out of the two, William Jackson III has the better chances of starting than Artie even though his technique is still in need of refinement. Dre Kirpatrick, Adam Jones, and Darqueze Dennard are all available, but Dre had a bad year, who knows how well Adam's level of play can go, and Darqueze is coming off an injury (Steelers fans can actually relate to this considering the Steelers themselves are in a similar predicament). Artie would have taken longer even though Marvin knew that Artie was the more athletic of the two. In addition, having the likes of Antonio Brown stomping in your division along with arguably the best; if not the best collection of Wide Receiving talent in the NFL means you are going to need some serious help. That out of the way, let us get back to the discussion and proceed to wrap this up.


Tomlin already knew that Artie would be a project. However, Artie's athletic talent is seldom seen at the position Pittsburgh drafted; a cornerback no less. In addition, during the draft, Tomin was on the phone even before William Jackson III got selected; further confirming that Arite was the pick to begin with; further stated by steelersdepot.com and further proven by Stephen J. Nesbitt:


"It turns out, Pittsburgh was on the phone with a cornerback while the Bengals were on the clock. But that cornerback was Burns, not Jackson."


Essentially though, one question that both Steelers and Bengals fans alike can ask together; "Was our pick the right choice?" There currently is no guarantee who was right or wrong. We will have to look at this three years from now to determine. However, for me, as it stands currently, while Jackson is the better cover corner, Artie will turn out to be the superior corner overall.


That does it for my thoughts of Artie Burns and why that, if William Jackson III were still on the board, Artie still would have been the pick. What are your feelings on Artie? Do you think he will make an impact sooner than later considering Pittsburgh's secondary endeavors? What do you expect from him next year if things pan out well this one?



Thanks again for reading and hope you enjoy! Until next time everyone take care. Also, rem

 

I say both. That's why I love the pick. We can have it all.

 

Ah. I see. However, would you be able to pick between ceiling and floor? Keep in mind that having both usually comes in the top 5; something that is even a 50/50 then.

 

I'm happy with Burns ceiling over plug and play as a rule - I get people are worried about Ben's window, but we need to be preparing for the longhaul as well - but I would be more confident if we'd seen some potential realised in our recent DB draft history.

 

Burns will be the starter by year's end (playoff time). No worries.

 

intelligence and drive to become the best has to put the floor high. coming from a major program has already shown capability. where he takes it from here will determine his ceiling.

 

This guy bears the brunt of taking care of his family. Father in jail; Mother no longer with us. With his two younger brothers looking up to him. You want to bet against a man with that type of burden on him? When he talks, he talks with a seriousness that I personally wouldn't bet against. I think he becomes a fine cornerback in this league. He has no choice. At least, that's how he sees it.

 

I see where you want to go, but Shamarko doesn't have it from the neck up. Being a safety is about proper play diagnosis and taking proper angles; not being out of proper position.

Burns IS intelligent and has all the physical tools in a position he's played for a while. What's not to like?

Elvis, I wasn't the one who went out and drafted a safety in the second round. That was Colbert & Tomlin who did that. Their drafting of a safety in the second round tells you what they think of Shamarko.

Don't shoot the messenger.

 

What does any of this have to do with being a good football player, or a good plumber or a good doctor or etc.

Almost seems to be a burden to his success, kind of like the people in my office that must leave at 3:30 every day to pick their kids up regardless if the job is done or not.

Just sayin...

 

Wow... Well, here's the point Griswald:

He has a lot depending on him. If you hear his interviews, pretty intelligent guy. So all that put together should mean a guy who works hard at his craft and should succeed. If you have the intelligence, work ethic and talent..why shouldn't he succeed?

 

I say we had a successful draft, just watch. Our defense will be good this year.

 

I'm with you but it seems we have some doubting danny's around here. Gzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Their getting after my ass like Kurt Russell got after them boys in Tomestone. LOL.

 

Where did you get this interception comparison:


Quote Askquestion} While his 7 interceptions are awe-inspiring,six of those came when he was a junior. Take those away, and he really has one; something that is ominously approaching Mackensie Alexander level.


Burns had 6 INTs in 2015 when he was a junior last year, Alexander didnt have a single pick his last 2 years: Burns had 1 pick his freshman year 2013 and none as a sophmore in 2014 but he had 6 as a junior in 2015 his last year in college, he smoked alexander in that catogory:

 

interested in your comment...

 

Tomlin and Colbert showed everyone what they thought of Alexander..not that much.

 

comparison should be with Jackson 3 when talking interceptions, not alexander, thats all: It's silly to say burns had 7 ints but if you take 6 away thats not so good, but it is what it is, burns had 6 picks last year, you cant take them away...

 

Indeed you are correct. Much of Burns' impact was in his junior year; 6 takeaways total. However, I believe you misunderstood what I stated regarding his production not including his junior year approaching Makensie Alexander level's.


As you stated, Mackensie had zero takeaways in two years, but Burns has only one if we are not accounting for his junior year. As such, when I stated that is production without his junior totals was ominously approaching Makensie Alexander's level, I mean that, while Artie displayed the ability to attack the ball in his freshman year, his sophomore year was what I was getting at. In addition, their production values are similar; bringing a further dynamic as to wondering why Artie's numbers matched Makensie's within that same span of two years.

 

Understood. As you wish, a complete breakdown of William Jackson III's year by year INT's:



Freshman: 1 INT


Sophomore: 2 INT


Junior: 5 INT




Now comes Artie Burns:


Freshman: 1 INT


Sophomore: 0 INT


Junior: 6 INT


To address your first rebuttal, you are right, I should have accounted for William's first before going into anyone else's. The reason I chose Makensie first however is that I was going to then compare William's numbers to Artie's in their sophomore season. The issue is that my thread would have been too long for that to happen. In addition, as you desired, please take a look at their sophomore stats based on takeaways alone. Jackson's two outpace Artie's zero; something Artie does indeed share with Makensie considering their sophomore stats. are exact in this regard. As such, it was appropriate to compare Mackensie to Artie before going onward to William Jackson III due to this anomaly.



For your second rebuttal, I understand it entirely. To say those six takeaways were without effort would be unfair to Artie; same goes for the 23 pass deflections for Jackson III in one season. However, when looking at a draft prospect, we must determine the amount of success they had over a period of time as opposed to one breakout year. For example, Gerod Holliman posted 14 INT's but only had that one productive season under his belt. Granted, Gerod did not even have to endure the emotional turmoil that Artie did, but production wise, much of Artie's takeaways did come in one year. This is often something that will almost always be discussed among the GM's, coaches and scouts unless there are some extremely rare cases of a player's tangibles and intangibles that match up towards the hype that player received. Very seldom do these players fall to the bottom of the 1st round; a loaded class at that position being the exception (i.e. Bud Dupree).



Essentially Diamond, what me and you are debating about is no different than the poll shown above my thread. These debates always will come up in draft war rooms and very seldom will that franchise know the right answer until three to five years down the road. As I stated, Tomlin already knew what he was going to receive in Artie; Marvin Lewis for Jackson III the same. The key for both is nurturing them properly to reach their maximum potential. As such, as I stated, while Jackson III currently is the safer pick (hence why he is considered the "floor" prospect out of the two) I believe that due to Artie's immense potential he could be the better player (hence why he is considered the "ceiling" prospect).

 

Said assessment is yet another issue us fans will always run with in every draft. There will always be a category of players who has limitless amounts of one but severely lacking in two, a player who possess a good amount two of the three but is not so well with one, and a player who has all three but are average. Usually, option two yields the highest batting percentage if factoring in work intelligence and talent. Work Ethic is easily the most notorious intangible to hunt down due to each draft prospect's training regimens, characteristic tendencies, and performance on tape; all three becoming more and more difficult now considering the talent level for next year's class that, while deep, currently does not appear to have that many dedicated work horses not name Leonard Fournette, Trevone Bokyin or Jalen Tabor.

 

as soon as he signs his contract he will have enough money to support his brothers. maybe that's all he wants. who knows?

 

Id almost always go with the higher ceiling. You gotta go with the guy you think will be the better football player in their prime. Rookie contributions should never really be a consideration. Some guys are good enough to play right away, but most 21-22 year old kids aren't mature enough in their craft to beat out men in their prime who have been doing this for a half decade or more.

I guess it all depends. Sometimes a kid is too big of a project to know how he will turn out, sometimes the higher floor guy has a high floor because he is just that good... I think high ceiling is the most important, but there are factors that can change that stance for a certain player.

 

Goes in keeping with what I posted elsewhere:

Draft for highest long term expected value.

 

alexander had some really fine horses up front rushing the passer and still no int's. burns didn't have that same pass rush personnel up front. thats why i wasn't as high on alexander. it should have helped him out more and it didn't. i'm happy with the burns pick and on down the line. we will see how it all turns out. we can only go up on defense. we are young also people must remember.