TheFatboi

Ranking the nfc south’s linebackers.

55 posts in this topic

8 hours ago, vel said:

But this place kept saying we're ridiculously thin at LB....

We are. Best in the NFC South doesn't mean we're deep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

We are. Best in the NFC South doesn't mean we're deep.

We aren't thin. There is some fantasy on here about LB corps. We literally have a top five MLB, a very good SLB, both of which play +70% of snaps, a promising WLB, and versatile depth. 

I'd like to know who you think has a deep LB corps the Falcons should mimic. 

Draftnut57, gazoo and NeonDeion like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, vel said:

We aren't thin. There is some fantasy on here about LB corps. We literally have a top five MLB, a very good SLB, both of which play +70% of snaps, a promising WLB, and versatile depth. 

I'd like to know who you think has a deep LB corps the Falcons should mimic. 

I'd take any Lb corps that doesn't have Duke Riley filling in after injury

Pacific_Falcon likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, vel said:

We aren't thin. There is some fantasy on here about LB corps. We literally have a top five MLB, a very good SLB, both of which play +70% of snaps, a promising WLB, and versatile depth. 

I'd like to know who you think has a deep LB corps the Falcons should mimic. 

And we were absolutely gashed over the middle when Debo went down. We very much need solid depth at MLB.

Ovie_Lover likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

I'd take any Lb corps that doesn't have Duke Riley filling in after injury

Cute. 

So if Duke doesn't make the roster, suddenly we're deeper? 

NeonDeion and gazoo like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vel said:

Cute. 

So if Duke doesn't make the roster, suddenly we're deeper? 

We're better off. 

Or we could just sign someone better. Could have traded for Lee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, stizz said:

And we were absolutely gashed over the middle when Debo went down. We very much need solid depth at MLB.

That's like complaining about losing Luke Kuechly. There is no replacement for a top five player at their position. That's what I don't get about the complaint. If you had a player capable of fully filling in for Debo, would you really have him on the bench? 

NeonDeion likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Yo_Lover said:

We're better off. 

Or we could just sign someone better. Could have traded for Lee.

Nope. That's not the question. Would that make us deeper. Your response was basically "We aren't that deep because Duke is on the team". 

You can't find many teams much deeper at LB. 

Draftnut57 and NeonDeion like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, vel said:

That's like complaining about losing Luke Kuechly. There is no replacement for a top five player at their position. That's what I don't get about the complaint. If you had a player capable of fully filling in for Debo, would you really have him on the bench? 

Not necessarily. It's WHO we replaced him with. For reasons beyond everyone, Duke was given a free ride for two straight preseasons where DQ for some reason thought he was above playing with the third stringers. His awful angles and lack of tackling showed up very early. If we had just an average MLB taking Debo's snaps in the first half of last year, we win against CIN and NO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, stizz said:

Not necessarily. It's WHO we replaced him with. For reasons beyond everyone, Duke was given a free ride for two straight preseasons where DQ for some reason thought he was above playing with the third stringers. His awful angles and lack of tackling showed up very early. If we had just an average MLB taking Debo's snaps in the first half of last year, we win against CIN and NO. 

Again, who do you replace a top five MLB with? Who in the NFL has an adequate back up that could replace Debo? That's what I'm asking.

Duke wasn't given a free ride for two seasons. He literally lost his spot on the DC to a rookie in his second year. What are you talking about. You're complaining about preseason snaps. 

Again, the drop off between Debo and other starting MLBs is substantial, so saying we aren't deep because we don't have a Debo caliber back up is baseless. 

NeonDeion and Smiler11 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vel said:

Again, who do you replace a top five MLB with? Who in the NFL has an adequate back up that could replace Debo? 

Duke wasn't given a free ride for two seasons. He literally lost his spot on the DC to a rookie in his second year. What are you talking about. 

Again, the drop off between Debo and other starting MLBs is substantial, so saying we aren't deep because we don't have a Debo caliber back up is baseless. 

If Foye or Ish starts those games we probably win. Duke was handed a starters position in 2017 after doing nothing in preseason and **** the bed. Same with 2018. It wasn't until he were gashed over and over before changes were made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, stizz said:

If Foye or Ish starts those games we probably win. Duke was handed a starters position in 2017 after doing nothing in preseason and **** the bed. Same with 2018. It wasn't until he were gashed over and over before changes were made.

So your gripe with the "depth" at LB is solely that Duke is on the roster right now. If Duke doesn't make the roster, do the Falcons have a deeper LB corps? 

Again, my question was about the depth at LB, not a bltch session about Duke. 

NeonDeion likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vel said:

So your gripe with the "depth" at LB is solely that Duke is on the roster right now. If Duke doesn't make the roster, do the Falcons have a deeper LB corps? 

Again, my question was about the depth at LB, not a bltch session about Duke. 

Is he a part of the depth yes or no? Put on your thinking hat for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, stizz said:

Is he a part of the depth yes or no? Put on your thinking hat for me.

Nope. You answer the question, because your post was:

25 minutes ago, stizz said:

And we were absolutely gashed over the middle when Debo went down. We very much need solid depth at MLB.

I asked who you would have replaced Debo with, and what teams have Debo caliber backups, and why they would have them on the bench. You went on a rant about Duke and if we had played other LBs on the roster over Duke, we would have won. So that tells me you don't have an issue with the depth other than Duke, your issue is with Duke. 

There is no depth for a top five MLB. Might as well complain about our QB depth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, vel said:

Nope. That's not the question. Would that make us deeper. Your response was basically "We aren't that deep because Duke is on the team". 

You can't find many teams much deeper at LB. 

Yeah it'll make our depth better. So yes deeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

Yeah it'll make our depth better. So yes deeper.

So we're literally "not deep" at LB because of one player? Lol that's stupid. Plain and simple. 

58 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

We are. Best in the NFC South doesn't mean we're deep.

gazoo and Smiler11 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, Duke could be the 6th LB and never see a snap on defense, but we aren't deep because he's on the roster. Yet, if they cut Duke for a UDFA rookie like Tre Crawford, we're deep? Come on yall. 

I'm not arguing any more. Find me 5 teams with better LB situations. Until then, it's just bltching. 

NeonDeion likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, vel said:

So we're literally "not deep" at LB because of one player? Lol that's stupid. Plain and simple. 

How? The fall off from anyone to Duke Riley is insane. He's terrible. Carter or Grace should get a shot over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vel said:

Basically, Duke could be the 6th LB and never see a snap on defense, but we aren't deep because he's on the roster. Yet, if they cut Duke for a UDFA rookie like Tre Crawford, we're deep? Come on yall. 

I'm not arguing any more. Find me 5 teams with better LB situations. Until then, it's just bltching. 

He's not the 6th guy tho. Don't put words in my mouth.

He's the first one up after the 3 starters. dumb***.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

How? The fall off from anyone to Duke Riley is insane. He's terrible. Carter or Grace should get a shot over him.

And who says they aren't? I mean go back and look at the games from last year. Carter and Foye were playing more than Duke. Duke got heavy snaps early and then was sent to the bench. Just like Jordan Richards in favor of Neasman. 

gazoo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

He's not the 6th guy tho. Don't put words in my mouth.

He's the first one up after the 3 starters. dumb***.

Read:

21 minutes ago, vel said:

Basically, Duke could be the 6th LB and never see a snap on defense, but we aren't deep because he's on the roster. Yet, if they cut Duke for a UDFA rookie like Tre Crawford, we're deep?

I didn't put words in your mouth. I gave a hypothetical. You just couldn't refute. 

gazoo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, vel said:

And who says they aren't? I mean go back and look at the games from last year. Carter and Foye were playing more than Duke. Duke got heavy snaps early and then was sent to the bench. Just like Jordan Richards in favor of Neasman. 

Duke got more than Carter. Read what I said, he shouldn't be next up behind FOYE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vel said:

So we're literally "not deep" at LB because of one player? Lol that's stupid. Plain and simple. 

be careful vel, trying to teach yo Lover the finer points of NFL football is like trying to teach a pot roast algebra. NOTHING is going to get through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2019 at 11:55 PM, NeonDeion said:

I mean if he put Car LBs above us I wouldn’t disagree. But anyone above our wr core in the entire league is plain stupid 

Julio - HOFer

Free - Pro-bowler

Hoop - Pro-bowler 

Ridley - Future Pro-bowl (possible All-Pro)

Sanu - one of the best #2 in the league 

Agree with your rankings except for Sanu,,, He is  THE BEST #2 ,, not one of the best ....  :tiphat:

NeonDeion likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Yo_Lover said:

Duke got more than Carter. Read what I said, he shouldn't be next up behind FOYE. 

I think I'm the one that's been doing the reading...

13 hours ago, vel said:

Duke got heavy snaps early and then was sent to the bench.

So once again, your point is that our LB group isn't deep solely because Duke is involved. Even though we have literal proof showing he was benched and not even a key part of the defense by the end of the season. He played 17 defensive snaps the last month of the season, 15 of which came in a blowout win vs Arizona. Duke played more special teams snaps than any LB on the roster, showing where they see his value. But go ahead. 

gazoo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now