Kids? Gtfohwtbs, I am probably older than you
. I don't need to give a reason as to why I think he's better than the players you listed. By you listing Ronde over Troy exemplifies you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Lynch & Dawkins, really? Troy out tackled and had more picks in a 5 year span than Dawkins had in the entire decade. The same can be said about Lynch. Let us not forget either that Troy has played a significant role in the Steelers wining their last 2 Superbowls, while Ronde was a secondary piece when Tampa Bay's LB core was the heart and soul of their D when they won the Super Bowl. Lynch and Dawkins are great players, don't get me wrong, but I am taking Polamalu over anyone you mentioned because he is younger and he is better.
See you took that quite literally
"Kids,"people, take your pick.
You don't need to give reasoning?? Really...as this debate develops I can personally guarantee you that numerous people on this board consider Polamaluoverrated and maybe even undeserving of being on this list. Moreover, "I don't know what the hell I'm talking about?" This amuses meconsidering I'm positive my football knowledge trumps yours by a landslide
But back to the argument at hand...
Exhibit A: You discredit Ronde's contribution to Tampa's SB victory which makes you a hypocrite. Why? Because Troy Polamalu quite possibly more thananyone else benefits from the great defensive system he plays in (Pittsburgh and LeBeau) as well as the strong supporting cast he's had from day one(Hampton, Farrior, Harrison, Woodley, etc.). If Ronde benefits from the Tampa-2, then Polamalu is largely a product of LeBeau's scheme and the playersaround him that allow Troy the opportunities to make the plays that inflate his stats, which you were so kind to point out.
And Ronde was playing just as well without Warren Sapp and an aging Derrick Brooks...so much for that argument. He's notorious for being one of the bestplaymakers in the league regardless of who he plays with. Can't say the same for Troy.
Exhibit B: You mention those statistics as if that defines the Polamalu/Dawkins comparison all together, which you will learnit doesn't. Quite convenient on your end may I add. But let me humor you and make the actual comparison:
Polamalu - 88 games played, 327 tackles, 7 FF, 3 FR, 17 INT, 5 Pro Bowls, and twice was All-Pro first team
Dawkins (2000-on) - 124 games played, 506 tackles, 25 FF, 11 FR, 22 INT, 6 Pro Bowls, and was All-Pro first team FOURtimes
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Troy actually DID NOT "out-tackle" Dawkins in that span. Nor did he havemore INT in a five year span than Dawkins in the entire decade as you so eloquently put. So where did you get that from?
So in conclusion: Dawkins has more tackles, FF, FR, INT, Pro Bowls, and All-Pro first teams...um that's every relevantcategory. Also curious as to why you left out FF, FR, Pro Bowls, and All-Pro first teams to begin with. You wanted to play the stats game and not only did youprovide inaccurate information, but you were proven wrong at your own game - the very basis of your argument and defense for Troy Polamalu.
For some reason you completely disgregard the category of impact on the game of football. Brian Dawkins and John Lynch are both known as big hitters who havebeen excellent leaders throughout their long NFL careers. Their impact game-to-game should be counted just as much as any stats. Dawkins and Lynch wereintimidating and feared by receivers going over the middle of the field. Furthermore, their reputations on the field as hitters/leaders changed the course ofgames for their teams any way you look at it. Now let me ask you: is Troy the leader of that Pittsburgh defense? No. What's his reputation as a defensivefootball player? Not really known as a hitter with those whopping shoe-string tackles. Playmaker is very arguable but go ahead and make that argument if youcan. Do opposing teams fear Polamalu's presence or alter their gameplans as a result?? Didn't think so.
"The same can be said about Lynch." I see you have little to say or argue about John Lynch in comparison to Polamalu. Whether you make a claim ordefend a point, you need credible and legitimate support/evidence to strengthen your position. Assertions DOES NOT serve as evidence.
Ok, I'm not saying Troy Polamalu isn't a good player because clearly he is. However, my arugment is that he's overrated and doesn't belong onthis list. In my opinion, Dawkins and Ronde are both more deserving and if I had more time I'd argue John Lynch's case as well.
Exhibit C: Who cares if Polamalu is younger? What's the relevance in that?? This list is ESPN's opinion on the top 25 players of this decade and whatthey've accomplished TO DATE. It seems you are closing your argument by implying what Troy will do in the future, which is mere speculation and holds noweight whatsoever in this debate.
NTers time and time again baffle me with their inability to remain objective and unbiased. The minute their favorite team or player is criticized, they leap indefense with little evidence or support. So out of curiousity, what NFL team are you a fan of First Born?
