Jump to content

With So Many Young Guys, Clayborn Expendable


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Knight of God said:

Lol!!! I am intrigued by Larkin, but why cut Clayborn for Larkin.

I don't even think we have to. I think Hageman might not make it after 2 weeks, but we could ignore what they do with him and just go with 10 other DL to start the year.

It's between Zimmer and Larkin, IMO. Only exception is if we value someone else as the '53rd'...depends  on Hageman in part...if we keep him and only carry 9 DL total and first 2 weeks just 9 with him on the Exempt List...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ergo Proxy said:

I don't even think we have to. I think Hageman might not make it after 2 weeks, but we could ignore what they do with him and just go with 10 other DL to start the year.

It's between Zimmer and Larkin, IMO. Only exception is if we value someone else as the '53rd'...depends  on Hageman in part...if we keep him and only carry 9 DL total and first 2 weeks just 9 with him on the Exempt List...

I will take Larkin over Zimmer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Knight of God said:

Lol!!! I am intrigued by Larkin, but why cut Clayborn for Larkin.

Here is part of the response I wrote in the other thread......

Lots of posters like AC, I do too.  But reality tends to be faced on facts, and the fact is....we can win without AC.   Here's why:

In 2016, the Falcons won a few reg season games plus two playoff games without Clayborn.   Maybe AC would have made a difference in the SB, but our Dline talent then was a lot thinner than it is now.

AC has always been the kind of high-effort big-motor low-production type player coaches love.... but can't count on to consistently make game-changing plays.  In that respect AC is a more athletic, more productive version of Kroy Biermann.  Both players are good in a rotation, but they are replaceable.

Clayborn last played for NE.  Belichick is the most astute evaluator of veteran talent there is, plus he knows how to get the most out of that talent.   Yet BB made no effort to keep AC even though AC could be had for less than 2 million per..  If BB thought AC could help NE win, AC would still be in NE right now.

When we signed AC, he had been available for awhile already.  Our FO was still forming its roster.   We have signed -tons- of talent since then, especially at DE.   Not counting Hageman we have seven DEs plus five DTs.  Other than AC we have two 30-plus year old vets, so the 'veteran leadership' is covered. 

Put Durant Miles on the PS... release AC, that gives us ten D linemen.  Chances are AC would be available to be re-signed if DQ wants to.   Because most NFL teams are in no hurry to sign 31 yr old DE's who don't sack the QB very often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ergo Proxy said:

I don't even think we have to. I think Hageman might not make it after 2 weeks, but we could ignore what they do with him and just go with 10 other DL to start the year.

It's between Zimmer and Larkin, IMO. Only exception is if we value someone else as the '53rd'...depends  on Hageman in part...if we keep him and only carry 9 DL total and first 2 weeks just 9 with him on the Exempt List...

 

12 hours ago, falcons007 said:

I will take Larkin over Zimmer. 

 

12 hours ago, Fiddlin John's Ghost said:

Same here, and it aint even close.

I think we need to keep Larkin AND Zimmer.  Because we need some guys who can play on ST's.  Something I don't think AC does anymore, if he ever did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, egoprime II said:

Here is part of the response I wrote in the other thread......

Lots of posters like AC, I do too.  But reality tends to be faced on facts, and the fact is....we can win without AC.   Here's why:

In 2016, the Falcons won a few reg season games plus two playoff games without Clayborn.   Maybe AC would have made a difference in the SB, but our Dline talent then was a lot thinner than it is now.

AC has always been the kind of high-effort big-motor low-production type player coaches love.... but can't count on to consistently make game-changing plays.  In that respect AC is a more athletic, more productive version of Kroy Biermann.  Both players are good in a rotation, but they are replaceable.

Clayborn last played for NE.  Belichick is the most astute evaluator of veteran talent there is, plus he knows how to get the most out of that talent.   Yet BB made no effort to keep AC even though AC could be had for less than 2 million per..  If BB thought AC could help NE win, AC would still be in NE right now.

When we signed AC, he had been available for awhile already.  Our FO was still forming its roster.   We have signed -tons- of talent since then, especially at DE.   Not counting Hageman we have seven DEs plus five DTs.  Other than AC we have two 30-plus year old vets, so the 'veteran leadership' is covered. 

Put Durant Miles on the PS... release AC, that gives us ten D linemen.  Chances are AC would be available to be re-signed if DQ wants to.   Because most NFL teams are in no hurry to sign 31 yr old DE's who don't sack the QB very often.

1) Clayborn might not make obvious"stand out" game changing plays or get a ton of sacks but he's almost always ranked highly among DEs in pressures per snap, especially in the 4th Q. I believe he lead the league last season in pressures per snap. Pressures can be game changing. 

2) As for why BB let him walk? From what I've gathered it seemed like Clayborn struggled to set the edge last season, something that is an absolute must and a primary focus at DE in Bill's system. Its surprising that Clayborn struggled to do so as he's always been a good edge setter throughout his career. Even if that part of his game is gone, his ability to generate pressure as a backup is an extremely valuable piece to have. 

Edited by Bobby.Digital
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bobby.Digital said:

1) Clayborn might not make obvious"stand out" game changing plays or get a ton of sacks but he's almost always ranked highly among DEs in pressures per snap, especially in the 4th Q. I believe he lead the league last season in pressures per snap. Pressures can be game changing. 

2) As for why BB let him walk? From what I've gathered it seemed like Clayborn struggled to set the edge last season, something that is an absolute must and a primary focus at DE in Bill's system. Its surprising that Clayborn struggled to do so as he's always been a good edge setter throughout his career. Even if that part of his game is gone, his ability to generate pressure as a backup is an extremely valuable piece to have. 

Agree with you, and most years DE's are so hard to find you take em where you find em.  Not so this year, for the Falcons anyway.   I like Larkin because he rushes off the edge and can play OLB in a 3-4 config, which is what we kinda-sorta play.  I want to keep Zimmer because we could use five DTs plus Zimmer and Larkin can play STs.

I won't be unhappy if AC is on our team, but I will understand if he is let go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, egoprime II said:

Agree with you, and most years DE's are so hard to find you take em where you find em.  Not so this year, for the Falcons anyway.   I like Larkin because he rushes off the edge and can play OLB in a 3-4 config, which is what we kinda-sorta play.  I want to keep Zimmer because we could use five DTs plus Zimmer and Larkin can play STs.

I won't be unhappy if AC is on our team, but I will understand if he is let go.

What does Zimmer do on special teams that no one else can do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, egoprime II said:

Agree with you, and most years DE's are so hard to find you take em where you find em.  Not so this year, for the Falcons anyway.   I like Larkin because he rushes off the edge and can play OLB in a 3-4 config, which is what we kinda-sorta play.  I want to keep Zimmer because we could use five DTs plus Zimmer and Larkin can play STs.

I won't be unhappy if AC is on our team, but I will understand if he is let go.

I understand where you're coming from. I really like our young Dline talent as well. However with us being Superbowl contenders, I just can't let go of the sure thing in Clayborn. If we were rebuilding than sure, but his reliability and fantastic pressure rate is something we need. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bobby.Digital said:

I understand where you're coming from. I really like our young Dline talent as well. However with us being Superbowl contenders, I just can't let go of the sure thing in Clayborn. If we were rebuilding than sure, but his reliability and fantastic pressure rate is something we need. 

If AC is in the final 53, and he very well might be....I won't be sad about it.

In fact whatever happens us Falcons fans benefit, because the team should be the best one we have had in awhile, including 2016.

That's worth rooting for right there....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, egoprime II said:

Here is part of the response I wrote in the other thread......

Lots of posters like AC, I do too.  But reality tends to be faced on facts, and the fact is....we can win without AC.   Here's why:

In 2016, the Falcons won a few reg season games plus two playoff games without Clayborn.   Maybe AC would have made a difference in the SB, but our Dline talent then was a lot thinner than it is now.

AC has always been the kind of high-effort big-motor low-production type player coaches love.... but can't count on to consistently make game-changing plays.  In that respect AC is a more athletic, more productive version of Kroy Biermann.  Both players are good in a rotation, but they are replaceable.

Clayborn last played for NE.  Belichick is the most astute evaluator of veteran talent there is, plus he knows how to get the most out of that talent.   Yet BB made no effort to keep AC even though AC could be had for less than 2 million per..  If BB thought AC could help NE win, AC would still be in NE right now.

When we signed AC, he had been available for awhile already.  Our FO was still forming its roster.   We have signed -tons- of talent since then, especially at DE.   Not counting Hageman we have seven DEs plus five DTs.  Other than AC we have two 30-plus year old vets, so the 'veteran leadership' is covered. 

Put Durant Miles on the PS... release AC, that gives us ten D linemen.  Chances are AC would be available to be re-signed if DQ wants to.   Because most NFL teams are in no hurry to sign 31 yr old DE's who don't sack the QB very often.

Well, good answer. I have no counter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, egoprime II said:

Here is part of the response I wrote in the other thread......

Lots of posters like AC, I do too.  But reality tends to be faced on facts, and the fact is....we can win without AC.   Here's why:

In 2016, the Falcons won a few reg season games plus two playoff games without Clayborn.   Maybe AC would have made a difference in the SB, but our Dline talent then was a lot thinner than it is now.

AC has always been the kind of high-effort big-motor low-production type player coaches love.... but can't count on to consistently make game-changing plays.  In that respect AC is a more athletic, more productive version of Kroy Biermann.  Both players are good in a rotation, but they are replaceable.

Clayborn last played for NE.  Belichick is the most astute evaluator of veteran talent there is, plus he knows how to get the most out of that talent.   Yet BB made no effort to keep AC even though AC could be had for less than 2 million per..  If BB thought AC could help NE win, AC would still be in NE right now.

When we signed AC, he had been available for awhile already.  Our FO was still forming its roster.   We have signed -tons- of talent since then, especially at DE.   Not counting Hageman we have seven DEs plus five DTs.  Other than AC we have two 30-plus year old vets, so the 'veteran leadership' is covered. 

Put Durant Miles on the PS... release AC, that gives us ten D linemen.  Chances are AC would be available to be re-signed if DQ wants to.   Because most NFL teams are in no hurry to sign 31 yr old DE's who don't sack the QB very often.

DE depends on how he’s being used. In a 3-4 the DE is not gonna sack the qb a lot because the rush comes from the OLB’s. Belichik only keeps his core players. Like we do. AC was a rental. Had nothing to do with AC from a pure talent standpoint. His experience can’t be replaced and he still gets pressure. It’s not always about SACKING the qb. It’s mjre about relentless pressure and making him uncomfortable and move and try and force him to throw errant passes that turn into turnovers. You can sack a qb on 2nd down and he convert a 1st down on 3rd and 16. But if there’s constant pressure on him he’ll be forced to throw quick to a short route that’s doesn’t get to the sticks. In which Clayborn does that. He makes the qb get rid of the ball quick. And if you didn’t see how clay looked in pre season then you missed a lot. He was explosive, powerful and sacked the qb. Oh yea and I think AC makes a difference in the SB if he played because that would’ve been one more player coming at Brady that you’d have to block. That would’ve freed up freeney more. Grady more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...