LB Positions Up For Grabs

[Partial]

I don't think this has been posted or discussed, but this is an interesting article with quotes from WM on the LB corps.

Basically, he is saying all spots are up for grabs, and that they will re-evaluate which positions they think everyone should be playing.

Personally, I'm not sure what to make of it because I simply cannot believe a healthy Barnett doesn't have a place on this team. On the other hand, if they want to get Desmond Bishop on the field, that does seem like the most likely position.

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!

While our LB corps under achieved this year, I do like them a lot and think they are the deepest, most comparatively competitive unit on the Packers.

Here's the link.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/36914519.html

[vince]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?

[Zool]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?

Poops took way too many terrible angles on plays this year. Instead of stringing a back to the sidelines for help he would all too often commit the wrong way and leave a large cutback lane for big gains. If he was our best, that says alot about how shitty our LB's were this year.

[Fritz]

Maybe Poops was the best linebacker this year - the coaches do all that grading stuff, right? - but he's also just one of those players that doesn't appear to be - his gaffes (missing a tackle on Adrian Peterson that would've been a safety) just seem to stand out. He's just one of those kinds of guys.

[vince]

Agreed. Given Partial's unique ability to bestow the "it" factor upon football players, and his unwavering committment to such bestowments - even in the face of contradictory facts, combined with the way the statement was made, I was not clear if he may be questioning Moss's ability to accurately assess the linebacker play...

[prsnfoto]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?


It is funny because if that is true our GM is a complete failure giving 15 million a year to a group that at best is average. I don't find it funny I find it disgusting.

[Zool]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?


It is funny because if that is true our GM is a complete failure giving 15 million a year to a group that at best is average. I don't find it funny I find it disgusting.

We know what you think ya broken fucking record.

[HarveyWallbangers]

It isn't saying much. Barnett missed half of the year. Hawk was injured and didn't appear to be the same player. That would leave Chillar or Poppinga, and Chillar didn't play all that much. Hopefully, Poppinga and Chillar won't be fighting it out for best LB on the squad next year.

[Patler]

It isn't saying much. Barnett missed half of the year. Hawk was injured and didn't appear to be the same player. That would leave Chillar or Poppinga, and Chillar didn't play all that much. Hopefully, Poppinga and Chillar won't be fighting it out for best LB on the squad next year.

Even Chillar was injured, a shoulder as I recall, that they said just got worse and worse until he too was out for a week or so. Poppinga was the only one who was healthy most of the year.

[Freak Out]

Speaking of LBs.....who saw the Rosebowl last night? What did you think of the USC LBs? I missed the game.

[Lurker64]

Speaking of LBs.....who saw the Rosebowl last night? What did you think of the USC LBs? I missed the game.

Cushing is a very good player, but not a top ten pick. Maualuga was the same guy he's always been, and if you thought that was a good thing you'd be happy and if you were worried about the guy you had no reason to stop worrying. He's a hitter, a thumper, and a monster whose range, athleticism, and instincts are questionable.

[ND72]

Speaking of LBs.....who saw the Rosebowl last night? What did you think of the USC LBs? I missed the game.

Cushing is a very good player, but not a top ten pick. Maualuga was the same guy he's always been, and if you thought that was a good thing you'd be happy and if you were worried about the guy you had no reason to stop worrying. He's a hitter, a thumper, and a monster whose range, athleticism, and instincts are questionable.

I would say that is fair to say. I did read the Penn State OC say they tried to scheme away from Maualuga...which I don't know how you scheme away from a MLB, but ok. I think Luga would be a perfect SLB for us, Hawk, Barnett & LUga would be crazy fun.

I am still on the Taylor Mays bandwagon though. Todd McShay has both Luga & Mays going after we pick, and if that happened, I'd be upset (personal opinion).

[bobblehead]

Agreed. Given Partial's unique ability to bestow the "it" factor upon football players, and his unwavering committment to such bestowments - even in the face of contradictory facts, combined with the way the statement was made, I was not clear if he may be questioning Moss's ability to accurately assess the linebacker play...

yet he yeilded to the wisdom of the 4 scouts who ranked arod #19 :shock:

[b bulldog]

I'm a luga fan, 6'2", 260 lbs, 4.5/40. The guy is a beast and at his size, can be an every down LB.

[Lurker64]

I would say that is fair to say. I did read the Penn State OC say they tried to scheme away from Maualuga...which I don't know how you scheme away from a MLB, but ok. I think Luga would be a perfect SLB for us, Hawk, Barnett & LUga would be crazy fun.

I am still on the Taylor Mays bandwagon though. Todd McShay has both Luga & Mays going after we pick, and if that happened, I'd be upset (personal opinion).

I think though, that if we assume a) Green Bay will take a LB at 9 (a stretch) and b) No LB will be taken 1-8 (again, a stretch), Aaron Curry is a better pick for us than Maualuga. Both have comparable production this year, while Curry played on a weaker defense. Maualuga's natural position is Mike, and we suspect he can play Sam. Curry's natural position is Sam, and we suspect (and he says) he can play Mike or Will.

While Curry loses to Maualuga in terms of "intimidation factor", I'd have to say that he wins on terms of athleticism and instincts.

Neither of us are pro scouts, but personally I'd much rather have Hawk, Barnett, Curry than Hawk, Mauauluga, Barnett. What if it turns out that Rey can't play SLB at the NFL level?

[b bulldog]

Rey would be our Mike if we take him

[b bulldog]

260 MIKE BACKER THAT CAN RUN AND LOVE TO HIT WOULD BE GREAT FOR OUR D

[bobblehead]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?

Poops took way too many terrible angles on plays this year. Instead of stringing a back to the sidelines for help he would all too often commit the wrong way and leave a large cutback lane for big gains. If he was our best, that says alot about how shitty our LB's were this year.

I don't think this is a fair assessment. I can't say for sure, but I think in our D the sam is actually SUPPOSED to force the RB back to the pressure. If the backside pursuit wasn't there you can't pin it on poppinga.

Remember MM saying that part of our problem on D was that some guys were trying to do too much instead of sticking to their assignments? Well, if Popp tries to force the action and make a tackle, but gets sealed a runner might go for 50 and that would be on him.

I'm a fan of how they are using Pop now. Run down LB, passing down DE. I think if they work on him in the offseason it could be a boon for us. He is sort of a tweener after all and also pretty damn good on special teams.

[texaspackerbacker]

The silver lining in the cloud of injuries often is increased depth. The Packers hopefully will get Barnett back full strength; Hawk should be healthy, and the other three should all be starter quality and interchangeable.

I'm not advocating a switch to the 3-4, but the argument that we don't have the LBs for it doen't hold water.

[Lurker64]

I'm not advocating a switch to the 3-4, but the argument that we don't have the LBs for it doen't hold water.

That was never the argument against switching to the 3-4. The argument against the 3-4 for us is that we don't have the DL for it. 3-4 puts more pressure on your DL than the 4-3 does, and we all know how much the DL dominated this year...

[vince]

The silver lining in the cloud of injuries often is increased depth. The Packers hopefully will get Barnett back full strength; Hawk should be healthy, and the other three should all be starter quality and interchangeable.

I'm not advocating a switch to the 3-4, but the argument that we don't have the LBs for it doen't hold water.
I hope so too Tex, but I question whether Barnett will be "full strength" at all next year. He'll likely be favoring the knee, be at least a tad tentative and over-protective againt people going after it, and be a tad slower next year. I'd say it'll likely take all of next year for him to get back to full-contact football strength the year after next...

[Partial]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?

Poppinga is a journeyman player. I'm not sure if its funny or sad :(

To me, Poppinga is a one dimensional player. He's getting a lot better against the run, though. I'd like to see them keep him for intensity, but he's not a starter imo.

I think Chillar was probably the best. I really like what I saw from him. He's athletic. Plus he kind of looks like madtown (a little bit).

[Partial]

Poppinga, the best LB this year? LOL!
What about this statement is so funny to you?


It is funny because if that is true our GM is a complete failure giving 15 million a year to a group that at best is average. I don't find it funny I find it disgusting.

Failure? Barnett is a pro bowl quality player when healthy. Hawk has shown a ton of potential. It was a down year. I'm still HIGH on the group, especially with the Chillar being a relative steal at his price.

[Partial]

Agreed. Given Partial's unique ability to bestow the "it" factor upon football players, and his unwavering committment to such bestowments - even in the face of contradictory facts, combined with the way the statement was made, I was not clear if he may be questioning Moss's ability to accurately assess the linebacker play...

yet he yeilded to the wisdom of the 4 scouts who ranked arod #19 :shock:

Alright, to both of you, that is a load of BS. Cut the shit, alright?

Historically, I have shown a solid record of stating who I think will be a good player, and who won't. The IT factor is something you can easily see in quarterbacks. It all goes back to a discussion I had with Nutz at the original PR game. I'm not going to go into details because they're unnecessary, but the point is some quarterbacks have a unique ability to lead/win, and others just have the physical tools. It's like comparing Donovan McNabb to Jeff George. Physically, George has the stronger, more accurate arm, and McNabb is horrendously unaccurate imo, but McNabb is a winner, something George never was.

Any questions? Now cut the shit. It's the offseason. Leave the prejudice behind.

[Partial]

I'm a luga fan, 6'2", 260 lbs, 4.5/40. The guy is a beast and at his size, can be an every down LB.

Yep. I'm not sure where Lurker is seeing questionable athleticism and range, because both of those things appear to be strengths of the beast.

This guy is hands down the best LB in the draft. I'm surprised he's only 260. He's thick.

[vince]

Poppinga is a journeyman player. I'm not sure if its funny or sad :(

To me, Poppinga is a one dimensional player. He's getting a lot better against the run, though. I'd like to see them keep him for intensity, but he's not a starter imo.

I think Chillar was probably the best. I really like what I saw from him. He's athletic. Plus he kind of looks like madtown (a little bit).
So the Packers LB Coach and Assistant Head Coach said that Poppinga had the best year among the linebackers... yet you are a better assessor of Packer linebacker play than he is? That's pretty amazing.

[Partial]

Poppinga is a journeyman player. I'm not sure if its funny or sad :(

To me, Poppinga is a one dimensional player. He's getting a lot better against the run, though. I'd like to see them keep him for intensity, but he's not a starter imo.

I think Chillar was probably the best. I really like what I saw from him. He's athletic. Plus he kind of looks like madtown (a little bit).
So the Packers LB Coach and Assistant Head Coach said that Poppinga had the best year among the linebackers... yet you are a better assessor of Packer linebacker play than he is? That's pretty amazing.

That's why I said IMO. We can all have one of those, you know.

[Lurker64]

Yep. I'm not sure where Lurker is seeing questionable athleticism and range, because both of those things appear to be strengths of the beast.

Never trust USC's 40 times, they're almost always innacurate. I'm waiting for the combine to see how fast he is. In terms of how fast he plays, there are those who play faster (Curry). Also, just watching him play, you notice that his change of direction skills are limited as his hips are pretty stiff.

Seriously, get the tape of the USC Oregon State game, he regularly bit on fakes and was unable to get back in position, and frequently caught out of position in that game. You can attribute some of this to "having a bad game", but a decent NFL team is going to be able to exploit these things a lot better than Oregon State would.

But is he "slow", "uninstinctive", and "unathletic"? No. I'm just saying there are questions here that will need to be addressed positively or negatively by scouting up until the draft. I'm not really against Maualuga, consider me a skeptic instead of a believer.