Zack Follett's Future

by The Maestro on Jun 23, 2009 11:34 AM EDT Comment 55 comments

I normally am against this sort of post. People like to fall in love with guys because of some ridiculous personality traits or what a guy did in college. However, that is exactly what I am about to do.

If Zack does not make the team, I think that there is something way off here. I believe that he will be snatched up by some other team, and his name will surface again in the NFL and haunt us. This is a guy that is somewhat limited from a physical standpoint, but has the heart of a.....dare I say....Lion. He wants to play and will work like a man possessed to make things happen. Let's look back in history a little at LBs that were physically limited, but made a huge impact Stephen Boyd, Spielman, Urlacher, etc. You get my point.

I am in no way trying to allude to Pro Bowls in Zack's future, but c'mon we have had our share of Boss Bailey's (see the post "Denver Cuts Boss Bailey") that are all flash. This is a guy who has no flash, just substance. Special teams maniac and maybe future killer in the LB corps.

He needs to be kept around instead of some of these pretty boys. This is supposed to be a team with a crazed attitude that is ready to bring on every down. Zack epitomizes this attitude. He seems like the exact type of guy that you want to have on the team and develop.

I also hate wasting draft picks!!

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride of Detroit's main writer, Sean, or the site in general. FanPosts are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable fans.

4 recs | Comment 55 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I Agree...

i like this kid as much as you do but the fact is that its gonna come down to roster spots….and thats limited by the number of linebackers they want to take into camp and the eventual 53 man season roster……

if we could take 8 linebackers who would you take?

mine would be :foote-sims-peterson-levy-follet-gatewood-dizon-spencer

but why not drop spencer or gatewood and pick up LB Derrick Brooks?hes a really good vet….has a good work ethic (good role model) and unlike Warren Sapps report i think of all 32 teams the LIONS would be eager to listen to any VET advice we could get

by phil_165 on Jun 23, 2009 11:43 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Correction I think you can only take 6-8 LB's into CAMP

and did we cut LB Curtis Gatewood?hes not on the roster?we currently have 9 LB’s on roster and if we go to 6 by defult 3 spots are gone (foote-sims-peterson) so that only leaves 3 spots to take for LB’s….
we have 3 rookie LB (follet,levy & dizon) and do we really want to go into camp with no VET experience??

as is we still have LB Darrnel Bing….LB Alex Lweis…LB Cody Spencer…. on the practice squad…..

I would like to pick up LB Derrick Brooks and put Bing/Lewis/Dizon on the practice squad

so it would be 1.foote2.sims3.peterson4.follet5.levy6.spencer 7.BROOKS

by phil_165 on Jun 23, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

go get brooks

Ifeel the same way as you do about this, I think that the lions would be a better all-around team if wehad a back-up with the skill-set that brooks has, sure he’s a little long in the tooth, but he would only be here a year or 2 and that would help the youngsters out greatly, Will he come to Motown as a back-up, In years past I would say NO, but with this regime it’s a different attitude and I think that if he wanted to come here he would be welcomed with open arms. My only concern is the salary cap. Our front office has spent a few dollars on the people that we brought and now I have to ask you all does anyone know how much money the lions still have left to spend??? I feel that Swartz and comp are going to wait on bringing in anyone else untill training camp starts and other teams start cutting there Vet’s and then I think you wll see at least 1 more move if not more, I personally think those moves are going to be on the D-line or maybe 1 more O-lineman.

by davis0169 on Jun 24, 2009 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

2 problems with Brooks

Does he want to be a back up? And how much cap space do the Lions have and how much $$ will he want?

And I would think Foot and Peterson bring a pretty good amount of Vet experience with them as it is.

by vanman on Jun 23, 2009 12:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

3 problems with Brooks.

What you said plus the Tampa Two was designed for him. He won’t fit our new scheme.

by NYLIONSFAN on Jul 2, 2009 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No to Brooks, keep Follett

I don’t think we really need Derrick Brooks. We already have successful veteran LB’s in Peterson and Foote, and they both have a few years (hopefully) of starter-level play left in the tank. Plus, while Brooks is (or was) the absolute ideal T2 WLB, we don’t run that system. And Sims would have a lock on that position anyway.

I think we go:
Sims, Foote, Peterson (starters)
Dizon, Levy, Follett (backups)

by n4ry4 on Jun 23, 2009 12:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Pretty Nice

Sims, Foote, Peterson (starters)
Dizon, Levy, Follett (backups)

Admit it…that is a top 15 LB corp…admit it!

by CapitolLions on Jun 23, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sounds Nice...

if only (DIZON) actually does something this year
if only (FLLETT) gets on the field and remebers the playbook
if only (LEVY) does good in transition from MLB to OLB and can pick up PASS coverage when Foote is resting :::remember they said FOOTE is only a 3 down LB

1 Vetran Backup wouldnt be all that bad to have

by phil_165 on Jun 23, 2009 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK....

okay thats fine i know its an old system and all but what happens when the injury bug comes upyes we have VET starters but if they get hurt we will throw in 3 rookiesand the way you picked your 6 linebackers would leave all 3 VET linebackers on the practice squad (Spencer,Lewis,Gatewood) and then another team can get them if they desire …i just like LB Brooks as insurance option and to Coach Up the Rookies ….i think we could get LB Brooks at the VET Min. money wise and he will outshine any of our Rookie LBS for a spot on the roster

by phil_165 on Jun 23, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

2 rookies

Dizon’s a second-year pro. I know there are some big IF’s with our three youngest LB’s, and if some of the veteran backups do earn spots ahead of them, that’s ok.

But we’re totally set at all three starting positions. We’re not asking the young guys to be starters—just backups at this point in time. It’s fine if there are some “if only”s with our backup players. I know they’ll have somewhat of a learning curve, especially in a rebuilding process under new coaches. Getting them onto the field to gain experience this year is the important thing.

by n4ry4 on Jun 23, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

They’re rookies that aren’t being asked to carry the load. Just watch how its done and get some time in when you can. And honestly, we don’t have a playoff team here this year. Things are looking up and it appears to be going in the right direction. But why risk losing a rookie with potential to the practice squad and possibly another team so we can get a guy thats gonna be a 1 year stop if we aren’t playoff bound? If we were still in the tampa 2 it might make sense since he ran that system (damn good too), but not in this system.

by vanman on Jun 23, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Those are pretty small backups

Levy is small for a MLB and Dizon has always been a tweener. I would prefer Spencer for his experience and bulk

We didn't lose the games, we just ran out of time -- Bobby Layne

by detpistons3 on Jun 23, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ernie sims

is ’’small’’ to

by beef99 on Jun 23, 2009 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Levy is as big as Foote

by JCruize on Jun 24, 2009 1:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and that's now (coming out of college). Levy will probably add weight

Most LB’s do.

Levy and Follett are both listed at 6’1" 236 on the Lions site.

After more conditioning and bulking up, I wouldn’t be surprised if both our rookies finished the season heavier than any of our starters (Sims 225, Peterson 240, Foote 239). Obviously they’ll need more than size, but at least size doesn’t appear to be a problem.

by n4ry4 on Jun 24, 2009 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Levy is really at 240lb now. The web sites have not update that. But when Killer did has training camp profile on Levy. Killer mention that he was up to 240lb. And remember Ray Lewis was 229lb coming out of Miami.

by JCruize on Jun 24, 2009 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

howdy Jcruise

that stuff right there is why I name you the Bishop yo seem to always have a nice stat or something good to say to make us all feel better.

by davis0169 on Jun 24, 2009 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess you been dubbed..

Cardinal Davis. God Bless.

by JCruize on Jun 24, 2009 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Problem with Follett is...

it’s simply going to come down to a numbers game and there is a good bet he gets caught up in it. Whether that is right or wrong is to be debated, but it comes down to bringing the best 53 into the season. I think Follett’s best chance is to prove himself as a special teams tackling machine. I think he could do it. But I think that’s his only chance. There are better linebackers on the team right now.

If they don’t bring him to the 53, we’ll lose him. No way he makes it to practice squad. Someone will snatch him up quick. That’s not saying that Detroit is wasting a pick… that’s just saying our LB corp is so much improved that we have to make tough decisions on who to keep.

All that said, they could easily like his upside and decide to keep him. If they do, he probably won’t see much time this year outside ST.

by DrewsLions on Jun 23, 2009 8:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

We'll get a better idea of his position when the pads come on

He’s a big hitter, we all know that. So, when training camp hits I suspect we will see how Follett will help this team. If he can show that he can target the ball carrier and get to him quickly and make the hit, I reckon the coaching staff will be impressed, leading to him holding a spot. My prediction is that we will have 7 LB’s on our roster so I’m expecting Peterson, Foote, Sims, Levy, Dizon, Follett & either Spencer or Lewis.

2009 = The start of the Lions Golden Age (We hope).

by Hyperion Ecta on Jun 23, 2009 8:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't like the idea of cutting a draft pick....even a seventh rounder.

I understand it is a numbers game and there are FA pick ups after the draft, but we traded down to get these ‘extra’ picks. Now the Lions may cut them?

My preference would be to keep the younger guys and phase out the vets unless there is a very large difference in ability. If its close, keep the kid.

by NorthLeft12 on Jun 24, 2009 8:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

My sentiments exactly

The Lions just drafted this kid, and they did so for a reason. I realize that they signed Foote after the draft, but Follet needs to stay here and get “coached up” while playing some on special teams. I really like this pick that late in the draft, and if we cut him, we’re sure to lose him.

by alleycat36m on Jun 27, 2009 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"has the heart of a.....dare I say....Lion." LOL GREAT STUFF

I don’t see why he wouldn’t make the team if he has the enthusiasm and work ethic people are saying he has.

by BtotheLT on Jun 24, 2009 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Heart is the one thing coaches can't teach.....

So take the heart, and develop everything else even if we have to sacrafice another positions roster spot, the players should be versatile enough to cover another position and if a player gets injured we can always sign off another teams practice squad if we don’t have that position on ours.And there’s always the waiver wire.

by Runnin' Rebel on Jun 24, 2009 1:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

didn't we have a DUCK

That made a huge quote about being a duck with the “heart of a lion”. How did that work out for us?? ?? ?? JOEY incase you don’t know who I was referin too. I’m not saying anything bad about Follett cause size does NOT matter as a LB. I have 1 name for you guys and that is ZACH THOMAS he is still small and still kicking ass in the NFL, as a LB it’s about being in the right position and knowing how to tackle something that no one on our D-fence knew how to do last year.

by davis0169 on Jun 24, 2009 7:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

1 more thought

wouldn’t you rather have a vet that can play at a high level and can tackle or would you want 1 of the rookies in there to give the starters a breather, And I’m just going on the premisis that if your going to go get a stop-gap player for a year or 2 why not him, at least as of right now. I’m not saying that others wont be out there after camps start but as of today, Go get him. Even if he only stands on the sidelines to just tell the young guns what they should be seeing out there you can never have enough Veteran talent at such a key position on the field.

by davis0169 on Jun 24, 2009 11:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

2 of our starting LBs are pretty old

So I htink it wise to have some young backups getting playing time so they can take over the starting position in a couple years.

by ATL Lion on Jun 26, 2009 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

old?

I think foote is 28 or 29 and Peterson is 31-32? This is old? 2 years ago the pats had 2 starters that were over 35 with Vrabel and Seau. Not mention I think they had Brushi too who is up there. I would not consider under 35 too old.

by shanndiggit on Jun 26, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

In football 31 is old

I would be surprised if Peterson was still playing 3 seasons from now. Foote is younger, but he is still 7 years older than a rookie. I’m just saying that we have vets on the field so it will be nice to have young guys behind them learnign the game and getting ready for their shot at starting.

Sure the Pats had old LBs, but they are the Pats and we are the Lions. And they are making a concerted effort to get younger at that position.

by ATL Lion on Jun 26, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let me clarify for you

In football, 31 is old… For a running back.

Any pro football player worth his salt (an adage I would definitely apply to both mentioned linebackers) can easily play well into their 30s, if not further. Defensive players, especially. When you’re doling out the carnage, and specifically not on the line, you have a lot more longevity in your career.

The 30 year mark is established by all these RB’s burning out past that point. Everyone makes a big deal over it, and they shouldn’t. I don’t think Peterson is going to stick around regardless, unless we have a great year, but both of these guys are playing another 5 years.

by Nate D. on Jun 27, 2009 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like your thought Nate

by davis0169 on Jun 27, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

by londonlion on Jun 28, 2009 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, 30 is old for a RB

While 30 is not lights out for a LB, how many LBs are there starting today that are over 35? Ray Lewis is 34 and had very little action in free agency. Derrick Brooks is 36 and no one wants to take him. And those 2 guys are the top 1% of LBs in the league. Peterson is a good player, but he has a reconstructed knee and is 32. I don’t think he will be playing at 35 let alone 37.

I am in no way disparaging our LBs. All I am saying is that we have Vets starting and we need to have some young guys backing them up for experience. We are not a better team in the long run if all our LBs are vets.

by ATL Lion on Jun 28, 2009 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with ATL

Inside linebackers seem to last longer in the NFL than outside LBs, but over thirty you will see a drop off in performance in most cases.

The Lions need to get younger over the next few years. I think the 2009 Lions will be one of the older teams in the league, just like they were the last few years. This is due to the failure of Millen’s draft picks. The Lions were forced to cover these duds with veterans. It caught up to us, now we need to turn it around.

by NorthLeft12 on Jun 29, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I totally agree guys

but what I was tring to say is IF we could get a player like Brooks to come here it would only be for a year or 2 at the most and to have a guy with that much knowlegde teaching our young guys it could only help us out in the long run greatly, but I still don’t see him coming here to play, especially now that we have Foote at the inside spot.

by davis0169 on Jun 29, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Problem with brooks

is he would be coming from the famed Tampa 2 defense. He himself would have to learn the new defensive system. And with Foote and Peterson. I think the Lions have some very good leaders there. Pro bowlers, Super Bowl champions. Bring Brooks in would have to leave a younger player off the roster.

by JCruize on Jun 29, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

didn't think about that Bishop

Great point! Now if we still had Marenera sauce it would make more sence.

by davis0169 on Jun 29, 2009 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

5 years ago

I would have crapped a gold brick had the Bucs released Brooks and we were not all over him…..

Now, while I can see where he might be good for depth, I can not honestly say that having him in Detroit would be a good idea. We have several young OLB’s who need to be able to learn and progress. While Brooks could help to groom them, we would have to cut a player to keep him, as the Bishop said. At this point, I have to agree with the Bishop that we can’t really afford to sign a guy like Brooks. Now, if you want to talk about signing some veteren CB’s and D-Linemen, and thereby cutting some of the fat in those areas, I would be all for that.

by KDawg on Jun 29, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would have

too believe there is a reason he hasn’t been signed. Probably doesn’t have much left in the tank. If you want someone to mentor the younger players make him ASST LB coach or something. He mentor and teach from the sidelines. We need those young LB’s for the future.

by shanndiggit on Jun 29, 2009 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am really on the fence

with this one. If he is signed. Okay. If not then Okay. I just doubt that he would have an impact on the roster. Plus Brooks might feel that he can still play at a high level. And would not be willing to come in as just depth help. I do agree with Dawg. Five years ago. I would be starting petitions to get him here

by JCruize on Jun 29, 2009 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let the cardinal bow to the Bishop

You couldn’t of been more right with that point about not running the tampa 2 anymore. Brooks has only been in that kind of system for what seems like eternity, tha is probably the only system he knows how to play in now. I totally take back wanting Brooks. I SEE THE LIGHT! lol guys :)

by davis0169 on Jun 30, 2009 1:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If not for the Peterson Trade

So Brooks has only played in a Tampa 2. Well, that system was essentially designed BECAUSE of Brooks and what he could do. That doesn’t mean he can’t play any other system. The guy is a great player.

I would be all over him now, except we got Peterson and Foote. There really isn’t room for the guy. That said, I would be stoked if we offered him the LB coach position. The guy is a special talent at LB and has knowledge of the position that would benefit some of our younger players. Imagine if Follet knew where the play was going to happen and who to throw his body at. Imagine if his knowledge of the game was at the same level as his physical attributes.

by ATL Lion on Jun 30, 2009 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

now were are on to something

I’m not sure if he hasn’t signed with anyone yet due to no one wanting him cause of age or if it’s a money issue or choice C: he’s waiting because of his age to sign with a team so that he does not have to go too all of the OTA’s and madatory mini-camps ect. ect. ect. what ever the reason’s maybe if his playing days are done I would love to see this guy as a coach, with that said I still think he would go to chicago with Lovie and Marinera sauce.

by davis0169 on Jun 30, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If

Marinelli was HC he would already be in a Bears uniform. For some reason that guy just wanted players from TB.

by shanndiggit on Jun 30, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

I agree Shan….:o)

If Brooks is willing to be a LB coach, then I would be happy to have him on our sidelines. I have a feeling though, that he still feels like he can play. He is probably right too. However as a player, I agree with ATL that we no longer have room for a player in his position. I seriously hope we are searching for DT’s, DE’s, and CB’s still.

by KDawg on Jun 30, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

by shanndiggit on Jul 1, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i like ur thought DAVIS0169

i as well do want a backup VET LB/CB since reading the article about how the LIONS have the most rookie cap space it also said that we may not have enough money to sign all 10 draft picks anyways so why not pick up a VET like Brooks since we cant get all the rookies……we have to send some draft picks to the practice squad and take our chances if another team takes them….i mean its not like teams are Eagle Eyeing our Squad in the first place so why the big fuss….yes we might lose someone but its gonna happen

by phil_165 on Jun 25, 2009 10:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

thank you phil

I wish I could give you a better feeling on our lions but I’m such a over the top kind of guy when it comes to our Lions that sometimes I get the blinders on and need theses guys to keep me in place as you probably already know.

by davis0169 on Jun 28, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dont know if its been mentioned yet

But another undersized LB…. Ray Lewis

Obviously no comparison, but it bears mentioning

by Nate D. on Jun 26, 2009 1:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

we could probably do an 'all decade team' of undersized LB's

by phil_165 on Jun 26, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

heck yeah

And I also would like to see our rookies play don’t miss understand me, but in this day and age we can’t count on all 3 of our LB’s staying healthy for an entire year, it just doesn’t happen; for any team; and IF we could get a guy like Brooks to come here I think if 1 of the starters did go down we would’nt be forced to put in someone who had no experience, and if they didn’t get hurt Hey even better but the odds are someone would, Does anyone really think Brooks will come to Detroit to be a back up thou? I think he will sign with the Bears before the lions only cause Marinera sauce and lovie are both there and he will probably be more comfortable playing in the same scheme that he’s played for most of his career, just seems logical. And you are def right about Lewis being undersized when he came out that is and he has to be in the top 5 all-time undersized LBS to play the game, assuming that we are talking about when he came out. And ATL lion I beleave that our LB’s are in there prime years if you think about it. In 2 to 3 years from now; assuming that peterson and Foote stay with us that long; by the time they are ready to start declining in stature all of our young LB’s will have there NFL bodies and would be ready to step right in.

by davis0169 on Jun 27, 2009 2:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

raw talent

is what i love. you can’t coach it, you can’t teach it. either you wake up with it or you don’t. the rest of it is coachable…technique, recognition, system, placement, etc. for any of that coaching to work there has to be the physical tools. if there is talent, no matter how raw, it can be developed…it is just a matter of how much time & patience there is. i believe that was the knock on mr urlacher

by londonlion on Jun 27, 2009 9:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1 on Urlacher

Mel Kiper and his junkies didn’t know if he was going to be a LB or a safety coming outta school cause of his size.

by davis0169 on Jun 27, 2009 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

another thought

this is a rebuilding team with new coaches, if we have vet leadership in a position group ie LB core, then we should have younger guys learning behind them.

if there is an injury to one of our starters its not like it will kill our superbowl asperations. let the youngsters in and see what they can do.

I hope we are competetive, I hope we can even make the playoffs but if not thats ok, my expectations will be higher next year

"If your not with us...
you're with the terrorists!!"

by alpha lion on Jun 27, 2009 8:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Urlacher limited physically?

he is 6 foot 4, 260 lbs and can still run a 4.49 40 time (2005). I think you might be just a little bit confused. During the 2000 NFL Draft everyone called him the “Freak” of the draft because he was so physicall gifted. Also the lions will probably cut Follett, or put him on the practice squad.

If you want to crown em...

by JohnnyTruant on Jul 6, 2009 10:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs