Linebacker play - Barnett the greater evil

[wist43]

I posted this in the Poppinga thread, but thought it would get lost in the shuffle - dead horse and all.


-----------------------------------------------------------



After going over the tape (quickly, not indepth) here is what I saw - I would add that I missed taping some of it - not much, but I did miss some.

Poppinga was decent in coverage. He had the interfence call, but that was for short yardage.

Poppinga's good plays, i.e. tight coverage, solid run defense, good support, etc...

Qtr Time Play
1 11:55 Got outside quickly, forced the play, made the tackle
9:22 Very good zone drop, tackled WR
2 6:34 Penalty on Harris, but Popp had good cvg on Jones
3 5:33 Came off backside to make tackle at LOS
4 8:09 Barnett and Popp both attacked LOS, tackle for no gain
4 ???? Good coverage... Woodson burned on play


Popp's bad plays:
Qtr Time Play
1 6:26 Pass interference, short yardage
1 5:40 Lost contain, resulted in approx 12 yd gain
4 7:05 Not bad coverage, got good jam/trail position, but got beat

Of course, he wasn't on the field in the nickel or dime, and they played nickel a lot.

Poppinga did not play poorly. 3 negative plays, none of which were earth shattering.

------------------------------

Barnett on the other hand, for what he's being asked to do, was generally a liability. He made a few plays here and there, but down in and down, he's going to get your defense beat.

By my count, Barnett had:
8 bad plays, and 3 good plays.

The rest were a wash... Barnett really is one of the most unistinctive LB'ers I've ever seen. Has a ton of ability, but just not a very good player. Long term, he needs to be replaced.

------------------

Hawk was pretty invisibile for the most part:
3 good plays, 1 bad.

------------------

As I've said before, it's difficult to evaluate the Packers defense b/c there tends to be a lot of confusion and blown assignments... How much blame to you assess to the player, and how much to the coaching staff???

At this point, I think you have to assign most of the blame for the dismal performance to the coaching staff. It's their job to put players in positions to make plays, and they're not doing that.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I posted this in the other thread. I don't want it to get lost.


Wist,

You've lost your mind. Any analysis that says Poppinga played decent, Barnett was poor, and Hawk was invisible is analysis that I can't take serously. Wonder what you'll say when the coaches bench Poppinga for Taylor.

[Deputy Nutz]

I was very unimpressed once again with Barnett, the nice thing about Poppinga is that he is getting slightly better each week.

I am not sold on this defensive coaching staff, but at the same time, you play the system and if the players are skillfull and talented then they can play any system or scheme and they are going to be fine.

Hawk did not have a great first half, then again no one did on defense. Hawk did have 8 tackles and came through in the fourth quarter.

[wist43]

Harv,

Here are some of Barnett's negative plays by my evaluation:

1st qtr, 13:54 - didn't recognize screen, slow to react, don't remember yardage allowed.

1st qtr 12:40 - again didn't get out on screen, missed tackle, Poppinga came over and made tackle.

1st qtr, 2:05 - attacked the run about as hard as a goose feather pillow, slow to react, and ran himself into being cleanly blocked by the center - out in space no less - 9 yd run.

2nd qtr, 7:11 - poor presnap alignment, didn't get out on flare pass in the flat.

3rd qtr, 12:57 - poor positioning, cleanly blocked out of play

3rd qtr, ???? - didn't fill hole - no suprise here, the guy simply doesn't play downhill.

3rd qtr, 3:29 - overran play resulting in TD

4th qtr, 3:02 - didn't respond to flare pass, took passive angle thereby allowing the OL to get into him, wasn't involved in tackle.

I'm sure the list could be longer, but I only looked at the tape very quickly, and as I mentioned, I missed taping some of it.

[RashanGary]

Nice Wist...

Some day I'll have the time to go through all of this. Makes me think TT mgiht be moving forward without Barnett. I wouldn't be surprised.

Never know, we might draft posluszney.

[Partial]

Nice Wist...

Some day I'll have the time to go through all of this. Makes me think TT mgiht be moving forward without Barnett. I wouldn't be surprised.

Never know, we might draft posluszney.

Won't happen.

[wist43]

I agree with Partial, it won't happen.

They're in love with guy - why is beyond me. The best we can hope for is for them to let him walk when his contract is up... but, I don't think they'll do that either.

Sadly, I expect they'll make a hard push to resign him.

--------------

Reduntancy aside, I thought I'd throw this in from the other thread to buttress my argument....

Out of 32 starting MLB's in the league, PFW didn't even have him rated in the top 25 in 2005... In 2006 they had him rated 20th - I think that's being generous.

I'm not the only one who sees it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re-read your PFW. I have their magazine in my hands right now. They have Barnett ranked 20th among all ILBs in the league (that counts the the 3/4 teams). That puts him in the top 1/2 of starting ILBs. That's about as low as you'll see him ranked. Trust me most scouting services have Barnett ranked closer to my view than your view.

Former scout, Scott Wright, ranks Barnett 13th among all ILBs in the league. That puts him in the top 1/3 of starting LBs in the league.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/features/topnflplayers.html

ESPN Insider has him rated as the 25th best LB in the NFL--which puts him in the top 1/4 of starting LBs in the NFL.

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/features/scouting?position=30

[mraynrand]

I was at the game. What you might not be able to see is that the secondary looked like a Chinese fire drill with all the shifts that Martz had in there. Barnett was trying to get guys in the right spot. I saw every play your referring to Wist. I thought Barnett had a fair to good game. The play he got killed on was the dump off play in the flat. Still, if you watch a lot of other teams, you won't see many of them sending a lineman out to specifically block the MLB on a flare pass to a RB - typically, the RB is a dump off pass in the WCO. Martz has used the pulling lineman on that play more than other coordinators, ans he obviously was specifically game planning for Barnett. So you have a lineman dedicated to blocking Barnett. No matter how good your MLB is, if you have a lineman and a RB going after the guy, they will win that battle most of the time. And check again Wist on those plays to see how the scheme moved the corner and SLB out of there to isolate Barnett. Give Martz some credit - he's probably one of the best O coordinators in the NFL.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I see Barnett as aggressive, he's always close to the ball.

To me, he looks every bit as talented as Hawk, and a similar player.

[Bretsky]

I see Barnett as aggressive, he's always close to the ball.

To me, he looks every bit as talented as Hawk, and a similar player.


Good Points HH; Green Bay has two long term solutions at LB right now, and those are Barnett and Hawk. A very good combo. Both can play the run and the pass. Poppinga is improving but that is not hard to do when going off his first game. I'm still skeptical about him, but time will tell.

B

[Tony Oday]

:beat:

Good God Pop SUCKS face it you were wrong on this guy he is a terrible LB thus far.

Barnett is a talent that needs to take on a block on screens a little better but he is the QB of our Defense and I promise you that every OC out there gameplans around him not to him.

[Mazzin]

Love em!

[Bossman641]

:beat:

Good God Pop SUCKS face it you were wrong on this guy he is a terrible LB thus far.

Barnett is a talent that needs to take on a block on screens a little better but he is the QB of our Defense and I promise you that every OC out there gameplans around him not to him.

Amen

[run pMc]

Actually, I think Barnett is a decent LB. Don't think he's Pro Bowl caliber, but he's average to above-average.
From what I've seen/heard, he is fast, very athletic, and a hard worker. That said, he has some weaknesses.

I'm also not convinced he should be the MLB. I'd like to see TT resign Barnett and move him outside...but not for crazy money. GB's LB depth could use another refresher this offseason; losing Taylor might not be too bad, but if Barnett walks it becomes serious.

[Bretsky]

I was at the game. What you might not be able to see is that the secondary looked like a Chinese fire drill with all the shifts that Martz had in there. Barnett was trying to get guys in the right spot. I saw every play your referring to Wist. I thought Barnett had a fair to good game. The play he got killed on was the dump off play in the flat. Still, if you watch a lot of other teams, you won't see many of them sending a lineman out to specifically block the MLB on a flare pass to a RB - typically, the RB is a dump off pass in the WCO. Martz has used the pulling lineman on that play more than other coordinators, ans he obviously was specifically game planning for Barnett. So you have a lineman dedicated to blocking Barnett. No matter how good your MLB is, if you have a lineman and a RB going after the guy, they will win that battle most of the time. And check again Wist on those plays to see how the scheme moved the corner and SLB out of there to isolate Barnett. Give Martz some credit - he's probably one of the best O coordinators in the NFL.

All three games have been the Chinese Fire Drill; the secondary looked very unprepared/chaotic against the Bears as well.

Unfortunately from the sounds of it things do not seem to be improving.

[wist43]

I'm not saying Popp is better than Barnett - Popp is what he is, and he can be an effective LB in the NFL if they use him properly. His strengths are filling the hole, holding the point, penetrating the backfield, and rushing the passer - for some unfathomable reason, the Packers think he's a cornerback.

As for Barnett, and I agree it's beating a dead horse, he's such a liability - it just jumps off the screen. Yes, he's around the ball - 10 yds down the field - and the reason it's 10 yds down the field is b/c he has no has no instincts for the game, is slow to react, takes poor angles, and is generally passive in all aspects of the game.

Rather than just shooting off unsubstantiated invectives, I've given specific examples and times in the game to go back and look at Barnett's performance.

[Bossman641]

Poppinga is still a linebacker though. You are so enamored with his abilities in the run game that you seem willing to completely disregard how poor he is in coverage.

I have no idea why they have him lining up on WR's. That is just poor scheming, unless his job is simply to bump the receiver and force him to go one way. Still, he has to be able to cover average TE's like Campbell.

Can Wist, or anyone else with a tape of the game, check out a specific play for me? It happened at the end of the 1st quarter, right before the TD bomb to Williams. The Lions had a 3rd and 1 and play actioned, Campbell snuck out to the left away from pursuit and ran a short route underneath, and there was nobody anywhere near him. The play went for like 25 yards. Can somebody with a copy of the game check out that play and try and figure out who was supposed to stay with the TE and what happened? Thanks

[wist43]

I see Barnett as aggressive, he's always close to the ball.

To me, he looks every bit as talented as Hawk, and a similar player.

I guess we have different definitions of the word "aggressive".

To me, an "aggressive" LB attacks the hole and stuffs the ball carrier w/in a yard or two either way of the LOS. An "aggressive" LB also diagnoses flares and screens quickly and gets up field to blow the play up before the linemen gets out front and the RB can cut accordingly. Barnett doesn't have the instincts to diagnose plays quickly enough to do that.

In both the running and passing game, Barnett tends to drift to get in front of the play as opposed to playing downhill and attacking the ball carrier. As a result, Barnett tends to get blocked too easily out in front of passes to the RB's in the flat, and he tends to give up yds between the tackles after contact. His patented "drag down" tackle technique doesn't help.

Hodge on the other hand is "aggressive" IMO. He attacks the LOS, diagnoses plays instantly (running plays at least), gets good penetration, and more often than not, blows up the ball carrier.

When's the last time anybody went "oooohhhh and aaaaaahhhhh" b/c Barnett blew up a RB in the hole. It doesn't happen.

Barnett is a very, very, very, passive player... he gets himself in front of plays, and in front of blockers, but that only serves to buy time until help arrives. Sometimes that's all that can be done on a given play, and containment might be the best that action, but Barnett plays like that every play - which is why he is continually "making plays" 5-10 yds down the field.

As I said, I've given some specific examples in this past game... go back and look at the tape.

[wist43]

Poppinga is still a linebacker though. You are so enamored with his abilities in the run game that you seem unwilling to completely disregard how poor he is in coverage.

I have no idea why they have him lining up on WR's. That is just poor scheming, unless his job is simply to bump the receiver and force him to go one way. Still, he has to be able to cover average TE's like Campbell.

Can Wist, or anyone else with a tape of the game, check out a specific play for me? It happened at the end of the 1st quarter, right before the TD bomb to Williams. The Lions had a 3rd and 1 and play actioned, Campbell snuck out to the left away from pursuit and ran a short route underneath, and there was nobody anywhere near him. The play went for like 25 yards. Can somebody with a copy of the game check out that play and try and figure out who was supposed to stay with the TE and what happened? Thanks

I know which play you're talking about... I just glossed over it b/c the defense was so out of position on the play that it was difficult to tell who had what responsibility. The coaching staff was completely unprepared for that play.

The coaching and scheme aren't doing a good job of making use of the talents of the individual players.

From what I've seen so far, Sanders appears to be in way over his head... and that makes evaluation of individual players difficult b/c of the overall confusion that reigns.

[Partial]

At the very least, I can respect this because you did a detailed tape analysis.

[mraynrand]

Just out of curiosity, Wist, how many times have you done the same analysis of the MLB on the other team? I spent some time last season or 2004, looking at what the other MLB was doing compared with Barnett - on tape - and also looking at MLBs in other live games. What I found was that a lot of other MLBs were getting caught in traffic and not getting to plays. Some other MLBs, especially those in the 3-4 (actually ILBs), looked better because they had help (ILBs in the 3-4 aren't asked to do what Barnett does of course). Barnett's weaknesses are false steps and a tendancy to play the position like a FS instead of a LB, but he really does get to runners and string a lot of plays out, where other MLBs don't get out of traffic, and don't get to the edges. In general, opposing offenses seem to game plan for him, like they do for Urlacher - they typically pull a guard (or a center in the case of Detroit) just to seal Barnett. In summary, I don't think the guy is a pro bowl talent, but he's better than maybe 1/3 of the guys playing his position.

[wist43]

Thanks Partial...

I know everybody hates my take on Barnett, but I haven't come by my opinion of Barnett without studying.

I don't mind debate and disagreement, what's frustrating is trying to debate with people who only watched the game live, and only remember the occassional good or bad play.

[Partial]

Thanks Partial...

I know everybody hates my take on Barnett, but I haven't come by my opinion of Barnett without studying.

I don't mind debate and disagreement, what's frustrating is trying to debate with people who only watched the game live, and only remember the occassional good or bad play.

I agree. I try to stay out of it since I don't have a vcr here at school. One element of barnett I feel you overlook is he has tremendous speed which:
a. allows him to compensate for taking a late/uninstinctive first step
b. teams gameplan away from him because of his speed

With Hodge in the middle, he may not even get to the runner on the screen despite a more sound first step.

[oregonpackfan]

Wist,

As the self-designated leader of the "Barnett-Is-The-Worst-Linebacker-To-Ever-Play-For-The-Packers" Camp, it is amazing how you scapegoat him for the Packers' defensive woes. If the Packers would just cut him or trade him to another team for a 7th round draft choice, the Packers will suddenly be the best defensive unit in the NFL.

Oh yeah, let's go over the catch phrases, your camp uses about Barnett. They include: "Takes poor angles," "Can't fight off blockers." "Makes few tackles behind the Line of Scrimmage," "Lacks instinct," "Lacks aggression," "Makes most of his tackles 7 yards beyond the Line of Scrimmage," Did I forget any?

Let's see:

1. Shall we get rid of the guy who has been the leading tackler for the team the past 3 years?

2. Shall we get rid of the guy who set the team record for tackles in a season?

3. Shall we get rid of the guy who is still on the learning curve for MLB in his fourth season because: a. he NEVER played MLB in college, b. has had 4 different defensive coordinators in his 4 years as a pro?

4. Shall we get ride of a guy who has tremendous quickness as a MLB?

To get rid of Barnett is a very poor recommendation, IMO.

OPF

[wist43]

Wist,

As the self-designated leader of the "Barnett-Is-The-Worst-Linebacker-To-Ever-Play-For-The-Packers" Camp, it is amazing how you scapegoat him for the Packers' defensive woes. If the Packers would just cut him or trade him to another team for a 7th round draft choice, the Packers will suddenly be the best defensive unit in the NFL.

Oh yeah, let's go over the catch phrases, your camp uses about Barnett. They include: "Takes poor angles," "Can't fight off blockers." "Makes few tackles behind the Line of Scrimmage," "Lacks instinct," "Lacks aggression," "Makes most of his tackles 7 yards beyond the Line of Scrimmage," Did I forget any?

OPF

Oregon, I think those "catch phrases" capture the essence of Nick Barnett beautifully.

[Homer Jay]

Are you honestly telling us you can determine how good a player is by watching and re watching the tv game tape? Half the time you can't even see the player you are trying to grade. Without seeing the coaches tapes it is awfully tough to know exactly what happened on any given play. We see the start of every play and the end of every play. Without seeing exactly what happens in between we are left to guess. I enjoy reading every one's opinions, but at least admit that we get about 1/2 the story from what we see on tv.

[Partial]

Are you honestly telling us you can determine how good a player is by watching and re watching the tv game tape? Half the time you can't even see the player you are trying to grade. Without seeing the coaches tapes it is awfully tough to know exactly what happened on any given play. We see the start of every play and the end of every play. Without seeing exactly what happens in between we are left to guess. I enjoy reading every one's opinions, but at least admit that we get about 1/2 the story from what we see on tv.

It sure would be nice to get footage like madden the video game. They tried that in the XFL though, and the fans did not like watching the game that way.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Are you honestly telling us you can determine how good a player is by watching and re watching the tv game tape? Half the time you can't even see the player you are trying to grade. Without seeing the coaches tapes it is awfully tough to know exactly what happened on any given play. We see the start of every play and the end of every play. Without seeing exactly what happens in between we are left to guess. I enjoy reading every one's opinions, but at least admit that we get about 1/2 the story from what we see on tv.

That was a shot at me--even though I often rewatch the broadcast on the NFL Channel. I don't think it takes a scout to see that Barnett is better than Poppinga. To suggest otherwise is absurd, IMHO.

[wist43]

Are you honestly telling us you can determine how good a player is by watching and re watching the tv game tape? Half the time you can't even see the player you are trying to grade. Without seeing the coaches tapes it is awfully tough to know exactly what happened on any given play. We see the start of every play and the end of every play. Without seeing exactly what happens in between we are left to guess. I enjoy reading every one's opinions, but at least admit that we get about 1/2 the story from what we see on tv.

You can get a good handle on the front seven, and OL play... You have a valid point if you're trying to evaluate DB's.

About the only thing you miss with the TV view wrt to evaluating LB's is what responsibilities they may have in underneath coverage and in passing lanes. On that level, an excuse could possibly be made for Barnett not getting out in the flat, but I really didn't see anything on tape that would support that... I took it into consideration when I was looking at Barnett.

[mraynrand]

Wist,

you say you want a discussion with someone who has seen and reviewed the tape, yet you don't answer direct questions from someone who actually has. Where I disagree with you is that I think Barnett does a very good job getting to the edges of the field. I think he gets blocked too easily or often, and I agree that he takes false steps, but will you answer my question? Have you watched other MLBs for comparison? On tape?

That's probably my pet peeve about Packer critics - many seemingly don't make comparisons around the league, and just cherry pick comparisons to better players. Are you in this group? Which MLBs would you rather have? Which would you have stay with their teams? I'm not really calling you out here - just interested to know specifically which MLBs you think are better or worse.

[wist43]

Wist,

you say you want a discussion with someone who has seen and reviewed the tape, yet you don't answer direct questions from someone who actually has. Where I disagree with you is that I think Barnett does a very good job getting to the edges of the field. I think he gets blocked too easily or often, and I agree that he takes false steps, but will you answer my question? Have you watched other MLBs for comparison? On tape?

That's probably my pet peeve about Packer critics - many seemingly don't make comparisons around the league, and just cherry pick comparisons to better players. Are you in this group? Which MLBs would you rather have? Which would you have stay with their teams? I'm not really calling you out here - just interested to know specifically which MLBs you think are better or worse.

To tell you the truth, I haven't even thought about who would be better in there... I'm resigned to the fact that Barnett is our MLB - and probably will be for years to come.

As for other MLB's? I'll have to give that one some thought, and I'll put together a list for ya (I'm at work right now). Al Wilson comes to mind, but I'm not even sure he's still in the middle. Systems are also a consideration for the type of LB I'd prefer... I'm partial to the 3-4, so to a certain extent, comparisons of the LB's I really like is almost "apples and oranges".

I don't watch nearly as much football as I used to... Now a days, I watch the Packer game in its entirety, and only catch other games in passing. When I was younger I would watch football from noon to 11pm (had a great girlfriend back in those days who gave me Sundays "off"). Got too many other things going on these days. Messing around on here is one of my petter distractions.

[Homer Jay]

[quote=Homer Jay]Are you honestly telling us you can determine how good a player is by watching and re watching the tv game tape? Half the time you can't even see the player you are trying to grade. Without seeing the coaches tapes it is awfully tough to know exactly what happened on any given play. We see the start of every play and the end of every play. Without seeing exactly what happens in between we are left to guess. I enjoy reading every one's opinions, but at least admit that we get about 1/2 the story from what we see on tv.

That was a shot at me--even though I often rewatch the broadcast on the NFL Channel. I don't think it takes a scout to see that Barnett is better than Poppinga. To suggest otherwise is absurd, IMHO.[/quote


It wasn't a shot at anybody. Personally, I like Barnett. I too tape and watch the games over. My point is there is no way you can know exactly what happened on a play from most of the angles we get to see on tv. We get to see the snap of the ball and what happens when the ball reaches a spot on the field, not what happened inbetween.

[HarveyWallbangers]

It wasn't a shot at anybody. Personally, I like Barnett. I too tape and watch the games over. My point is there is no way you can know exactly what happened on a play from most of the angles we get to see on tv. We get to see the snap of the ball and what happens when the ball reaches a spot on the field, not what happened inbetween.

I agree with you. I'm saying wist's original comment was a shot at me--which is fine.

[Homer Jay]

Mea Culpa.

[mraynrand]

We get to see the snap of the ball and what happens when the ball reaches a spot on the field, not what happened inbetween.

This is true. I was at the game and had my first chance to see the effect Martz' schemes have on the secondary. All his shifts, trying to set up mismatches can befuddle a defense. The secondary probably ran more before the snap than after. Like I said above, it was like watching a Chinese fire drill (is that no longer PC?). Still, Detroit is not awash with offensive talent...

BTW, did anyone else pick up on the battle between Donte Curry (55) and Hunter (57)? They were beating the tar out of each other and jawing on every ST play. That was fun to watch.