I was waiting for this. I knew it was coming. Despite what our eyes have screamed at us throughout the 2008 season, it finally happened: Someone (in this case, John McClain) has put forth the argument that Jacques Reeves isn't an utter failure at CB. I appreciate McClain running the numbers, as statistics can generally be counted on to tell the tale. But it's ludicrous to argue that Reeves is a better CB and/or having a better season than Aaron Ross, Asante Samuel, Marcus Trufant, Ike Taylor, Ronde Barber, and the like. A couple of reasons why:
-Your Houston Texans are currently giving up 129.1 rushing yards per game (ranked 23rd in the NFL). When teams are successfully running the ball, they simply don't need to throw as much. Passing is a much riskier proposition than running the ball. Why put it in the air if you don't have to? Thus, any attempt to use the metrics cited by McClain (targets, completions, yards surrendered, touchdowns surrendered) as proof of greatness or mediocrity should be taken with a pint of salt.
-For the majority of the season, the Texans have started Petey Faggins opposite Reeves. This just in: Petey may be the only DB in the league worse than Jacques Reeves. Seems to me that opposing QBs can go to either side with impunity, thus reducing the number of times Reeves would be picked on if he had a serviceable CB opposite him.
-Finally, and most importantly, your eyes don't lie. Throughout the season, we've seen how bad Jacques Reeves is at his job. Again, he can usually stay stride-for-stride with any WR in the NFL. Yet as a general rule, Reeves still refuses to get his hands up and/or turn his head. Typically, it looks as if he has no idea where the ball is. I'll begrudgingly admit that Reeves has gotten better in the past two weeks about getting his hands up, but it's not like he could have ever gotten any worse. Jacques Reeves still has a bullseye on his back.
Am I nuts? Or has McClain made his case? Let it fly in the Comments below.