rotate linebackers

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/56450552.html

I'd like to see Barnett play just about half the snaps in the first quarter of the season. He's not going to be 100% until later in the season, and they have excellent backups in Chiller and Bishop.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I have a feeling that you're right. Barnett may start but he's not going to play all the time. They are going to bring him back gradually and not risk him longterm. I'd say that barring any physical setbacks, he'll be the full time man after the bye week.

[Waldo]

If he is medically cleared, there is no long term risk. If he is cleared 100%, there is absolutely no reason to bring him back slow. They already did that with the PUP and daily rehab, and week of non-contact. When he was cleared, he is full go. If h is up to speed in the D, I see no reason for him to come off the field unless he is struggling.

Chillar absolutely blows chunks against the run, the Arizona game was Robert Thomas level bad for him. Barnett can't get back fast enough. The NFCN will slaughter us if Chillar is starting at mack.

I figured out what his problem is. The guy has no football instincts. When he is in M2M coverage he looks great, when he is blitzing he looks great. When he is given a task that requires no thought, he looks great. When it comes to the run, reading the blocking, reading the back, anticipating holes and cuts, sifting through traffic, and coherent strategy, eek, he looks completely lost. In zone coverage, if he picks up the guy coming into his zone he looks great, the problem is half the time he is standing there clueless, missing the guy that came into his zone.

Hawk and the line are playing quite good, on Chillar's watch the 1's are giving up 5.1 YPC on the ground and have given up 3 explosive runs. Whenever there is an explosive run the mack is at least partially, if not fully at fault, especially with the line playing as good as they are. 3 in 60 total snaps (about a game) is totally unacceptable.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If he is medically cleared, there is no long term risk. If he is cleared 100%, there is absolutely no reason to bring him back slow.

He may be cleared medically, but guys coming off injury can't flip a switch and play at 100%. Look at how Ryan Grant struggled when he came back. Many other examples.

Ya, he has to play himself back into form, but I would have him split time for start of season.

[Fritz]

Can Bishop play that mack spot? If so, I wonder if this "we're being super cautious" has anything to do with the possibility that - my conspiracy theory of the day - the coaches secretly want to get Bishop on the field in certain situations but don't want to piss off Barnett?

This only works though if Bishop plays that spot.

[Partial]

"The boy is back! The boy is back!"

Barnett

[HarveyWallbangers]

Can Bishop play that mack spot? If so, I wonder if this "we're being super cautious" has anything to do with the possibility that - my conspiracy theory of the day - the coaches secretly want to get Bishop on the field in certain situations but don't want to piss off Barnett?

This only works though if Bishop plays that spot.

I think you are onto something.

[Scott Campbell]

Can Bishop play that mack spot? If so, I wonder if this "we're being super cautious" has anything to do with the possibility that - my conspiracy theory of the day - the coaches secretly want to get Bishop on the field in certain situations but don't want to piss off Barnett?

This only works though if Bishop plays that spot.

I think you are onto something.


Remember the hissy fit Barnett threw when it was suggested that Hawk as a Rookie might play middle linebacker?

[Waldo]

Can Bishop play that mack spot? If so, I wonder if this "we're being super cautious" has anything to do with the possibility that - my conspiracy theory of the day - the coaches secretly want to get Bishop on the field in certain situations but don't want to piss off Barnett?

This only works though if Bishop plays that spot.

I think you are onto something.


Remember the hissy fit Barnett threw when it was suggested that Hawk as a Rookie might play middle linebacker?

No, it was when it was suggested that Hodge play MLB and Barnett move to SLB to take Pops place as a part time player.

NVM that he was the poorest suited LB on the team to play SLB. But Bates said they do the same thing a year back so they do.

The fact that our reporters will go on these crusades with the linebackers is laughable and embarrassing. They are clueless when it comes to LB play, assignments, good play, and who is well suited for what, but they get some hint in their head and run hair brained story after story insulting our starters, pissing them off for no reason.

It's like someone clocked Brohm, found out that he was releasing the ball faster than Rodgers, so they start printing stories why Rodgers should be benched for Brohm.

[Waldo]

Can Bishop play that mack spot? If so, I wonder if this "we're being super cautious" has anything to do with the possibility that - my conspiracy theory of the day - the coaches secretly want to get Bishop on the field in certain situations but don't want to piss off Barnett?

This only works though if Bishop plays that spot.

It is where Bishop has been all summer.

I doubt we keep 3 Macks when none can play buck, but our starting buck can back up mack.

One of Barnett, Chillar, or Bishop has to go. There isn't enough roster space for all 3, since all 3 are single position linebackers.

Chillar makes 6x more money than Bishop.

That is my clue as to who is gone.

Bishop just fits the scheme better. He is an aggressive tonesetter. Chillar is the most laid back linebacker I've ever seen. It's like he plays stoned.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I doubt we keep 3 Macks when none can play buck, but our starting buck can back up mack.

3-4 teams have kept 9-10 LBs, so I wouldn't write off Bishop or Chillar just yet. I guess it would depend on what kind of offers they'd get for those guys, but I wouldn't be surprised if they kept all three.

[Lurker64]

I doubt we keep 3 Macks when none can play buck, but our starting buck can back up mack.

Since the Buck is primarily a banger spot, couldn't Bishop potentially excel at it if he develops pro-linebacker instincts? He's certainly physical enough.

Admittedly, I have not seen Bishop play buck at all, and the worst thing that can possibly happen for a Buck is for him to guess which gap to hit and guess wrong, but Bishop is a banger...

[Partial]

I doubt we keep 3 Macks when none can play buck, but our starting buck can back up mack.

3-4 teams have kept 9-10 LBs, so I wouldn't write off Bishop or Chillar just yet. I guess it would depend on what kind of offers they'd get for those guys, but I wouldn't be surprised if they kept all three.

In my opinion, there is a 0% chance that any one of those guys is gone unless someone offers a Roy Williams type trade for one. It will have to be quite the package to move either one. They're the two best linebackers at their respective skill (Chillar in coverage, Bishop at blitzing). These guys are going to get a lot more playing time than most think in my opinion.

Also, I personally think they're going to keep some of these guys on a short leash. If Barnett or Hawk slips up, I definitely see them yanking them and going with the backups for a bit.

No doubt in my mind that Bishop could play either inside backer. Not so sure about Chillar.

Barnett
Chillar
Bishop

Hawk

Kampman
Thompson

Matthews
Poppinga

That's only 8. They're going to keep 9-10.

If I had to guess the others that they keep... I'd guess Jones and Danny Lasangna. I think that in the likely event that Jenkins gets injured and Harell is IR'd, they will have some flexibility to play 4-3 front with Kampman playing with hand on the ground.

My hope is they account for depth on the DL, as I'm sure Harrell is going to get IR'd and Jenkins is an injury waiting to happen. They're going to keep 6 most likely. All are likely to be active, but there is little depth for when Jenkins goes down. I think there is a good chance Raji gets hurt too as he missed so much of camp.

[Lurker64]

I'm pretty sure Lansanah is making the roster, as he has played well as the backup buck (and really nobody else has), while Spencer Havner will probably make the roster as a three way player so you might count him, also they like both Brad Jones and Obiozor and will definitely keep one and might keep both.

So in theory we could go:

Buck: Hawk, Lansanah
Mack: Barnett, Bishop
LOLB: Kampman, Thompson, Obiozor
ROLB: Poppinga, Matthews, Jones

For their 10 LBs, keeping Spencer Havner as a TE who could play ILB in a pinch. Pick your least favorite of Jones and Obiozor to cut if you only want nine. 3-4 teams running this defense tend to keep have more depth at OLB than ILB.

[Partial]

I will reiterate again: There is a 0% chance that they cut Chillar. They won't trade him either unless offered a kings ransomn.

I think his contract is up after next year. Bishop's too. They'll pay one. Think of this year as an audition.

[pbmax]

No doubt in my mind that Bishop could play either inside backer. Not so sure about Chillar.

The coaches do not seem to agree as they have not played either player at Buck.

Off the top of my head, the only guy who will see game time at a position he has not played in camp/exhibition season is Colledge if Clifton gets hurt mid game. Outside chance of Woodson at safety if the bottom falls out health-wise for the safeties.

[Waldo]

I will reiterate again: There is a 0% chance that they cut Chillar. They won't trade him either unless offered a kings ransomn.

I think his contract is up after next year. Bishop's too. They'll pay one. Think of this year as an audition.

Chillar sucks dude.

What does he do that Killswitch doesn't do?

Neither Chillar nor Pops is starting material, both are likely gone after this year.

What do you call a LB that can cover great but isn't any good agaisnt the run?

A strong safety.

[Partial]

I will reiterate again: There is a 0% chance that they cut Chillar. They won't trade him either unless offered a kings ransomn.

I think his contract is up after next year. Bishop's too. They'll pay one. Think of this year as an audition.

Chillar sucks dude.

What does he do that Killswitch doesn't do?

Prove it. How does he suck? He is excellent in coverage. Coaches are saying he is the best LB on the team, having the best camp of any defensive player, etc. They also said he was the best LB on the team last year.

Typically, I agree with what you say, but this one is just loco given the strong feelings that MM has for Chillar. He is the only linebacker singled out for having such a great camp as far as I know.

Chillar and Bishop are locks unless a trade would bring a kings ransom. While unlikely, it could happen since they have been dynamite in camp.

[Partial]

No doubt in my mind that Bishop could play either inside backer. Not so sure about Chillar.

The coaches do not seem to agree as they have not played either player at Buck.

Off the top of my head, the only guy who will see game time at a position he has not played in camp/exhibition season is Colledge if Clifton gets hurt mid game. Outside chance of Woodson at safety if the bottom falls out health-wise for the safeties.

I'm pretty sure I've seen Bishop and Chillar on the field at the sametime this PS. Have you? Maybe I'm seeing things.

[Fritz]

Saying stuff like "zero percent chance" and "it's a lock" is the kind of stuff that gets threads bumped...

Danger, Will Robinson. Danger.

[KYPack]

Hey, hold the phone here, boys.

Hawk is the starting Buck LB
Chillar is the Mack

Bishop is Hawk's back-up at Buck
Barnett is Chillar's back-up 'til he gets right.

The 3's at inside backer are Havner at Mack and Lansanha at buck.

Where anybody got Bishop is a Mack is beyond me.

Chillar has played brilliantly at Mack. Yes, he knows all the run fits and is usually there. Sometimes he's made the tackle against the run, but it is a weakness are for him. He has really been perfect in pass D. They move him all over and he has the best grasp of this 3-4 of any of the ILB's so far.

They ain't cutting or trading Chillar. I'm sure Dom & the boys would like to see him fill a little better, but he's their best ILB right now. When Barnett gets healthy, I think he will get his job back.


Bishop is a great fill guy, he still misses some assignments in cover, but he is one great LB prospect and will play a lot more this season.

[Waldo]

Hey, hold the phone here, boys.

Hawk is the starting Buck LB
Chillar is the Mack

Bishop is Hawk's back-up at Buck
Barnett is Chillar's back-up 'til he gets right.

The 3's at inside backer are Havner at Mack and Lansanha at buck.

Where anybody got Bishop is a Mack is beyond me.

Chillar has played brilliantly at Mack. Yes, he knows all the run fits and is usually there. Sometimes he's made the tackle against the run, but it is a weakness are for him. He has really been perfect in pass D. They move him all over and he has the best grasp of this 3-4 of any of the ILB's so far.

They ain't cutting or trading Chillar. I'm sure Dom & the boys would like to see him fill a little better, but he's their best ILB right now. When Barnett gets healthy, I think he will get his job back.


Bishop is a great fill guy, he still misses some assignments in cover, but he is one great LB prospect and will play a lot more this season.

Bishop has not taken one snap at buck in a game, and he hasn't been playing there in camp. By the time Barnett was cleared, shaking up the depth chart, competitive practices were over.

You guys are kidding yourself if you think that Chillar has been our best LB. Maybe in practice, but all I know is what his game tape looks like (I've watched every play many times, over and over in slow mo), and his game tape ain't pretty.

[rbaloha1]

I will reiterate again: There is a 0% chance that they cut Chillar. They won't trade him either unless offered a kings ransomn.

I think his contract is up after next year. Bishop's too. They'll pay one. Think of this year as an audition.

Chillar sucks dude.

What does he do that Killswitch doesn't do?

Prove it. How does he suck? He is excellent in coverage. Coaches are saying he is the best LB on the team, having the best camp of any defensive player, etc. They also said he was the best LB on the team last year.

Typically, I agree with what you say, but this one is just loco given the strong feelings that MM has for Chillar. He is the only linebacker singled out for having such a great camp as far as I know.

Chillar and Bishop are locks unless a trade would bring a kings ransom. While unlikely, it could happen since they have been dynamite in camp.

Agreed. Chillar is playing well and is okay against the run. All the lbs play based on the scheme.

[Fritz]

Hey, hold the phone here, boys.

Hawk is the starting Buck LB
Chillar is the Mack

Bishop is Hawk's back-up at Buck
Barnett is Chillar's back-up 'til he gets right.

The 3's at inside backer are Havner at Mack and Lansanha at buck.

Where anybody got Bishop is a Mack is beyond me.

Chillar has played brilliantly at Mack. Yes, he knows all the run fits and is usually there. Sometimes he's made the tackle against the run, but it is a weakness are for him. He has really been perfect in pass D. They move him all over and he has the best grasp of this 3-4 of any of the ILB's so far.

They ain't cutting or trading Chillar. I'm sure Dom & the boys would like to see him fill a little better, but he's their best ILB right now. When Barnett gets healthy, I think he will get his job back.


Bishop is a great fill guy, he still misses some assignments in cover, but he is one great LB prospect and will play a lot more this season.

Bishop has not taken one snap at buck in a game, and he hasn't been playing there in camp. By the time Barnett was cleared, shaking up the depth chart, competitive practices were over.

You guys are kidding yourself if you think that Chillar has been our best LB. Maybe in practice, but all I know is what his game tape looks like (I've watched every play many times, over and over in slow mo), and his game tape ain't pretty.

Wow. This is like Frazier/Ali. Cool.

[BobDobbs]

Just from watching how the coaches are playing Chillar it has never occurred to me that they will cut him. They've got him and Barnett running in the nickel now and he's been in the mix all camp.

Also, they way they've talked about creating situations to utilize Bishop's skills he's definitely on the team. I've been assuming that Lasagna is gone, but maybe they keep five ILB. Maybe they even keep ten overall if they have some core special teamers as back ups.

There was an interesting quote from Raji in this article:

http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/56446587.html

"Coach 'Trgo' let me know we're only going to be traveling five (defensive linemen) this season," said Raji, referring to defensive line coach Mike Trgovac. "I'm going to have to be playing a little bit of both."(DE and NT)

When I first read this I thought that doesn't sound good for either Wynn or Montgomery, they must want to keep 10 LBs. But who knows. It may mean that they keep 6 DL, but will only dress five on game day. [/b]

[Partial]

Bishop has not taken one snap at buck in a game, and he hasn't been playing there in camp. By the time Barnett was cleared, shaking up the depth chart, competitive practices were over.

You guys are kidding yourself if you think that Chillar has been our best LB. Maybe in practice, but all I know is what his game tape looks like (I've watched every play many times, over and over in slow mo), and his game tape ain't pretty.

Yet the coaches disagree with you. No offense Waldo, you're an alright guy, but I'm going to trust MM over you on this one.

[Lurker64]

Bishop has not taken one snap at buck in a game, and he hasn't been playing there in camp. By the time Barnett was cleared, shaking up the depth chart, competitive practices were over.

You guys are kidding yourself if you think that Chillar has been our best LB. Maybe in practice, but all I know is what his game tape looks like (I've watched every play many times, over and over in slow mo), and his game tape ain't pretty.

Yet the coaches disagree with you. No offense Waldo, you're an alright guy, but I'm going to trust MM over you on this one.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but do the depth charts printed at this time of year actually meaningful? I mean, as I understand it, most coaches resent having to put out preseason depth charts and only do so because it is mandated by the NFL.

Also, isn't "Who MM actually plays" a better indicator of what McCarthy thinks than the depth chart? I mean, if Bishop actually were the #2 buck, he would have taken more snaps there than Lansanah right?

[Partial]

and thats a fair assessment, but like I said, I sweat I have seen more than my fair share of Bishop and Chillar on the field together. I'm sure we'd have seen even more if Barnett was around.

Bottom line, the inside positions are a lot more similar than what you're making them out to be. Capers isn't some JAG who isn't going to find a way to maximize talent.

Case in point: He played Jenkins at ROLB in the first pre-season game, with Poppinga at RDE the entire time the first team D was on the field.

[Waldo]

and thats a fair assessment, but like I said, I sweat I have seen more than my fair share of Bishop and Chillar on the field together. I'm sure we'd have seen even more if Barnett was around.

Bottom line, the inside positions are a lot more similar than what you're making them out to be. Capers isn't some JAG who isn't going to find a way to maximize talent.

Case in point: He played Jenkins at ROLB in the first pre-season game, with Poppinga at RDE the entire time the first team D was on the field.

When? I have every PS game on tape and have watched them a few times. I never saw it. Against who and what point in the game?

He never played Jenkins at OLB. He may have lined him up like a OLB for a wacky play (that is normal, he has done that with Raji and Jolly too, with Kamp at 3 tech in a 2 pt), but Pops has never played hands down 5 tech, and he has not run that for any more than a single play, definitely not multiples in a row. (Maybe Pops was hands down in GL vs Cle, I saw Jones there with the 2's at GL end on the Wells GL run vs Ari).

Are you actually watching the Packers, or just making this stuff up?

If Chillar was playing so great, why did Barnett immediately get his job back with the 1's?

Edit - I'm rewatching the Browns game right now, not seeing what you're talking about. Pops is at OLB, Jenkins is at 5 tech.

[Partial]

and thats a fair assessment, but like I said, I sweat I have seen more than my fair share of Bishop and Chillar on the field together. I'm sure we'd have seen even more if Barnett was around.

Bottom line, the inside positions are a lot more similar than what you're making them out to be. Capers isn't some JAG who isn't going to find a way to maximize talent.

Case in point: He played Jenkins at ROLB in the first pre-season game, with Poppinga at RDE the entire time the first team D was on the field.

When? I have every PS game on tape and have watched them a few times. I never saw it. Against who and what point in the game?

He never played Jenkins at OLB. He may have lined him up like a OLB for a wacky play (that is normal, he has done that with Raji and Jolly too, with Kamp at 3 tech in a 2 pt), but Pops has never played hands down 5 tech, and he has not run that for any more than a single play, definitely not multiples in a row. (Maybe Pops was hands down in GL vs Cle, I saw Jones there with the 2's at GL end on the Wells GL run vs Ari).

Are you actually watching the Packers, or just making this stuff up?

If Chillar was playing so great, why did Barnett immediately get his job back with the 1's?

Like I saiad, I'm not positive I've seen them play together but I'm pretty sure I have.

I'm watching Pack, reading articles, etc. Bedard even made reference to Jenkins lining up at ROLB.

Barnett: $$$. Why have they not committed to starting him on opening week if he's good to go?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

and thats a fair assessment, but like I said, I sweat I have seen more than my fair share of Bishop and Chillar on the field together. I'm sure we'd have seen even more if Barnett was around.

Bottom line, the inside positions are a lot more similar than what you're making them out to be. Capers isn't some JAG who isn't going to find a way to maximize talent.

Case in point: He played Jenkins at ROLB in the first pre-season game, with Poppinga at RDE the entire time the first team D was on the field.

When? I have every PS game on tape and have watched them a few times. I never saw it. Against who and what point in the game?

He never played Jenkins at OLB. He may have lined him up like a OLB for a wacky play (that is normal, he has done that with Raji and Jolly too, with Kamp at 3 tech in a 2 pt), but Pops has never played hands down 5 tech, and he has not run that for any more than a single play, definitely not multiples in a row. (Maybe Pops was hands down in GL vs Cle, I saw Jones there with the 2's at GL end on the Wells GL run vs Ari).

Are you actually watching the Packers, or just making this stuff up?

If Chillar was playing so great, why did Barnett immediately get his job back with the 1's?

Like I saiad, I'm not positive I've seen them play together but I'm pretty sure I have.

I'm watching Pack, reading articles, etc. Bedard even made reference to Jenkins lining up at ROLB.

Barnett: $$$. Why have they not committed to starting him on opening week if he's good to go?

P,

Stop digging. This is going to end badly for you.

1. I don't know, but i believe waldo is the kind of freak that is actually watching game tape multiple times..so i think you are mistaken. Feel good about your life that you aren't watching game tape and can rely on uber football nerd waldo to do it for you. It is like being a manager!
2. Jenkins. Waldo..well, not he is right, but Jenkins hasn't "played" that position. And not the entire time. That is just wrong.
3. Chillar just ain't that good, my opinion.Neither is Bish. But, to each his own.
4. Barnett. $s are a weak excuse. The pack is gonna play the best player. As for why?....who knows. Maybe they want to be sure he is healthy and ready for the rigors...whatever, just because they haven't said doesn't mean he won't or that your scenario is right. Just basic logic.

But, i will agree with you that Dom will work to get talent on the field and maximize diff players skills.

[Deputy Nutz]

Bishop has not taken one snap at buck in a game, and he hasn't been playing there in camp. By the time Barnett was cleared, shaking up the depth chart, competitive practices were over.

You guys are kidding yourself if you think that Chillar has been our best LB. Maybe in practice, but all I know is what his game tape looks like (I've watched every play many times, over and over in slow mo), and his game tape ain't pretty.

Yet the coaches disagree with you. No offense Waldo, you're an alright guy, but I'm going to trust MM over you on this one.

If Chillar doesn't get touched he can make the play outside on the edge, but he gets chipped, just a little bit forget it. I watch the two inside backers and although Chillar can blitz a little, and play in coverage, to me he is just a guy.

Bishop, I think he is a pre season pro bowler. I mean I hope they find a place for him, a package or something where they can use him on occasion, but he can't play a whole series. He will get eaten alive in coverage, and even in the running game, he still doesn't pick up his responsibilities.

Hawk, really needs to stop think and start reacting, too fucking robotic.

Barnett, there is the big "?". Nobody knows how he is going to play