NFL Names 2010s All-Decade Teams

[Jakuvious]

5 hours ago, iknowcool said:

Maybe I'm underrating him, but I find it hard to believe Mathieu was 1 of the 8 best DBs in the last decade.  I'd have certainly thought Harrison Smith would make it over him, for example.

I'm guessing they used the FLEX position on offense and the DB position on defense as an attempt to reward versatility at those positions. Otherwise I don't really see the justification for Sproles or for Mathieu. Unless Mathieu is just recency bias. If he had played his whole career with as much impact as what he had last year, he'd be a lock. That just isn't the case though.

[Norm]

7 minutes ago, mse326 said:

The problem in this day in age when some LB are meant to do that you can't just exclude them for that. Maybe we should change positions but as it is this how it needs to be done. And a pass rusher of his caliber is more valuable than a protypical LB

Exactly, you might find someone and say yeah he's a better "LB" in the 10s, but are you going to take him over Jones? Probably not. But then I guess I could start saying that about CBs or whatever, but Jones clearly belongs somewhere on this is my point.

[Jakuvious]

4 hours ago, Starless said:

Even having retired 6 years ago, Willis had a much bigger impact on the game in the 2010s than any of those players. 

I might argue Derrick Johnson over Willis. Willis had 4 years of great play, DJ had about 6. Maybe 7.

[RamblinMan99]

Too many RBs.  

You don't need 4 RBs on the team. 

Get rid of Marshawn Lynch.  

He wasn't that good.  

He had one great run play, and everybody overhyped him after that.  

[RamblinMan99]

5 hours ago, PatriotsWin! said:

How was Gronk not unanimous! 

Maybe because he's not that bright.  

[Bucketheadsdad]

5 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

They really should have separated LT and RT. But it wouldn't be a list without yet another Mitchell Schwartz snub.

 

As a Browns fan, I am actually glad that Mitchell Schwartz isn't on the list.  

It would suck to have 3 All Decade O-linemen on the list, and have fans of the other 31 teams ask, "How the hell couldn't they get out of their own way, and get themselves into the playoffs?"

[Apparition]

1 hour ago, RandyMossIsBoss said:

Which DT are you putting over him? 5x pro bowl, 4x all-pro. Key cog on one of the league's best run defenses since 2016.

Honestly, I'd move Campbell to DT and give the vacated DE spot to Wake. I know Campbell has played just as much outside as inside, but I definitely view him more as a DI.

[AkronsWitness]

45 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

I'm guessing they used the FLEX position on offense and the DB position on defense as an attempt to reward versatility at those positions. Otherwise I don't really see the justification for Sproles or for Mathieu. Unless Mathieu is just recency bias. If he had played his whole career with as much impact as what he had last year, he'd be a lock. That just isn't the case though.

How Mathieu made it on the list over Talib I found really strange. I know people knock him for his character, but Talib has been fantastic for a longer period.

[Calvert28]

52 minutes ago, BlaqOptic said:

I did. You've still yet to make a valid argument other than your guy was a Cowboy.

Lol and when did I say he should get in because he's a Cowboy?

You are a well known Cowboy hater anyways. You basically held an argument against him that because he was drafted in 2013 and Mack in 2009 that Mack should get the next cause he's been doing it longer. Like wtf? Funny how you didn't hold that same argument against Calvin Johnson since he only played 5 years this decade.

[Kip Smithers]

Really? An argument about Centers smh.

[Jakuvious]

26 minutes ago, AkronsWitness said:

How Mathieu made it on the list over Talib I found really strange. I know people knock him for his character, but Talib has been fantastic for a longer period.

That's why I feel like it had to be a versatility nod. You could argue Talib or Gilmore at CB. Smith or Chancellor at S. It feels like he got picked for a flex role because he's that kind of player, a flex, not because he has had a better decade than others.

Edit: And I think that has to be how some saw it, because that's the only way I can see Sproles even getting a single vote on offense, as well. Dude had 6600 yards of offense and 40 offensive TDs in that timespan. 38 other players had more yards and more TDs in that same timeframe. No reason he belongs there unless they're giving massive versatility points or something.

[AkronsWitness]

1 minute ago, Jakuvious said:

That's why I feel like it had to be a versatility nod. You could argue Talib or Gilmore at CB. Smith or Chancellor at S. It feels like he got picked for a flex role because he's that kind of player, a flex, not because he has had a better decade than others.

I get that but Talib is also extremely versatile. He obviously plays outside against #1s but he also shifts inside and plays against TEs because of his size. He played Olsen and Gronk in man coverage during the playoffs a few years ago and I know they also put him on Kelce a bunch. I mean how many CBs can do that on a regular basis.

[Jakuvious]

Just now, AkronsWitness said:

I get that but Talib is also extremely versatile. He obviously plays outside against #1s but he also shifts inside and plays against TEs because of his size. He played Olsen and Gronk in man coverage during the playoffs a few years ago and I know they also put him on Kelce a bunch. I mean how many CBs can do that on a regular basis.

I'm not arguing it's right, I'm just saying that's the only rationale I can imagine the voters followed. Talib can maybe play inside and outside, but Mathieu has played deep safety, box safety, NB, and CB in his time in the league. It's the only rationale I could see them using, is seeing the DB position as a flex position, like the flex spot on offense that they gave to Sproles for some reason.

[jrry32]

How did Frank Gore make it? He was a top 4 HB for maybe one year during the decade.

[jrry32]

6 hours ago, BlaqOptic said:

To me, they absolutely butchered the trenches… Got A LOT wrong…

Andrew Witworth and Jason Peter’s resumes are virtually identical on paper right down to the amount of sacks and pressures allowed and All-Pro nominations. The major difference is Peters has 5 more Pro Bowls. Don’t see how Peters makes first team and Witworth doesn’t even make the team while Joe Staley does?!

Logan Mankins making it over the likes of DeCastro and Sitton is absolutely 100% egregious!

The lack of Cameron Wake is an absolute embarrassment and the inclusion of Chandler Jones as a Linebacker as opposed to a Defensive End is a joke considering he’s spent more time at the latter. 

I have no idea how Fletcher Cox made the team. A lot of guys with 0 or 1 All-Pros making the All-Decade team.

P-Willy is a Hall of Famer, IMO. However, he only played 5 seasons this decade, the last one was cut short due to the injury and the year prior he was a shell of himself due to the feet issues. Bowman was better THIS decade than Willis was and played longer in this decade.

 

Whitworth getting left off is criminal. Dude is arguably better than Staley now, and he's old as hell. In their primes, Whitworth was easily the better OT.