future of LB's...

[Pack_Attack88]

PackersUpdate just put up a new article that Barnett wants major green!! My question is, if the Packers are willing to pay him what he wants, would you all rather have Barnett or have TT go out and spend that kind of jack on Lance Briggs and then let Barnett walk??

I figure if TT is gonna end up spending the money anyways, I want Lance Briggs instead and let Barnett go after next season...

Does anyone know how old Briggs is?? And imagine next season with Briggs, Barnett, and Hawk as our LB's!! WoW!!!!!

[Partial]

I'd give it to Briggs. He's more physical. I'd put Hawk in the middle and Briggs on the weak side.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Briggs will get more than Barnett, and he likely won't be available. How about both of them? I'm not sold on Poppinga.

[Partial]

Briggs will get more than Barnett, and he likely won't be available. How about both of them? I'm not sold on Poppinga.

Is it a good idea to tie that much money up into that position?

[Bretsky]

Briggs will get more than Barnett, and he likely won't be available. How about both of them? I'm not sold on Poppinga.


AMEN; the only think I've ever loved about Brady was his last name.

Regarding the other stuff, we should have been working on a contract with Barnett for a long time now. TT needs to get it done.

The odds of Briggs coming to GB are not likely so TT needs to open up his wallet with this one.

[wist43]

No comparison between Briggs and Barnett...

Let Barnett walk, move Hawk to the middle, and look to fill the weakside...

[Bretsky]

No comparison between Briggs and Barnett...

Let Barnett walk, move Hawk to the middle, and look to fill the weakside...


Then we have two spots to fill; be honest with yourself and look around your Barnett hatred.

He was hands down our second best LB last year; no doubt about that.

I'd surely take Briggs over Barnett; but I don't want to give him away and take my chances.

[Zool]

Hawk, Briggs and Barnett would get roughly $15mil /year combined I would guess. Thats an awful lot of money tied up in LB's. If that happens, we better switch to a 3-4 and keep Pops as the rush end.

[MJZiggy]

You can also take a look at the defensive performance from before Barnett broke his hand to after. The D was significantly better when he was healthy.

[ND72]

Ok, for all of you to know, Hawk is NOT a MLB. He's not. People say he played MLB in college, but he didn't. Anthony Schlegel was OSU's MLB. Barnett proved his worth in the Seattle game when he didn't play. Hodge is no where ready to play at the NFL level, and Barnett had a very solid year, and can still improve a lot based on our TEAM improvement. Do you invest in both Barnett and Briggs, yes. Why? cause we have money, and the cap will go up every year to help us with it. You people are crazy if you think we need to drop Barnett.

[red]

You can also take a look at the defensive performance from before Barnett broke his hand to after. The D was significantly better when he was healthy.

thats true ziggy

he was playing great before the injury, he definatley looked like he stepped it up a notch this year

[Lurker64]

I think we should sign Barnett and Briggs so as to corner the market on linebackers. If nobody else has linebackers, it will make the ZBS more effective. People will be running formations like five linemen and six defensive backs, it will be chaos!

[prsnfoto]

I don't think most people think Barnett sucks cept Wist :lol: but he is only alittle above average thats my problem he wants Urlacher or Ray Lewis money not worth it, 5 million max. One other note he was not that strong this year he gave up the most plays over twenty yards other than Manuel and he was doing it before he broke his hand. That is a major red flag on this team that stat should 99% of the time be led by a corner we had a safety and LB leading, not good.

[GoPack06]

Briggs is still real young, i think he's 26. Briggs is gonna be one of the top paid Lb's in football. I'd love to have him, but i like our current Lb's and would rather spend money on our db's and safties.


I also like the fact that Barnett has missed like 2 games since being drafted. He's a solid player, id like to see a contract extension for 5 years.

[Zool]

I think we should sign Barnett and Briggs so as to corner the market on linebackers. If nobody else has linebackers, it will make the ZBS more effective. People will be running formations like five linemen and six defensive backs, it will be chaos!I like how you think Lurker. This is a solid course of action.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't think most people think Barnett sucks cept Wist :lol: but he is only alittle above average thats my problem he wants Urlacher or Ray Lewis money not worth it, 5 million max. One other note he was not that strong this year he gave up the most plays over twenty yards other than Manuel and he was doing it before he broke his hand. That is a major red flag on this team that stat should 99% of the time be led by a corner we had a safety and LB leading, not good.

I doubt he wants Urlacher or Ray Lewis money. I'm thinking he wants something closer to E.J. Henderson or Daryl Smith money. Maybe Urlacher and Lewis signed new contracts years ago before the cap really went up, and they are underpaid. However, you have to base what you'll pay a player based on the current market.

[Partial]

Ok, for all of you to know, Hawk is NOT a MLB. He's not. People say he played MLB in college, but he didn't. Anthony Schlegel was OSU's MLB. Barnett proved his worth in the Seattle game when he didn't play. Hodge is no where ready to play at the NFL level, and Barnett had a very solid year, and can still improve a lot based on our TEAM improvement. Do you invest in both Barnett and Briggs, yes. Why? cause we have money, and the cap will go up every year to help us with it. You people are crazy if you think we need to drop Barnett.

What do you think of Briggs? Is he overhyped and overrated because he plays next to Urlacher, or is he really a baller?

[Partial]

I think we should sign Barnett and Briggs so as to corner the market on linebackers. If nobody else has linebackers, it will make the ZBS more effective. People will be running formations like five linemen and six defensive backs, it will be chaos!

Lets sign 'em all!! :D

[wist43]

Barnett was OK this year... even a little above average - shocking that I would admit that, huh???

When I did watch him this year, I was shocked when he actually took the proper angle, or didn't abandon his gap responsibility... made me wonder if they were trotting an imposter out there - I'm sure it's due more to his smelling a new contract than anything else. The guy is a punk, and punks only tend to step up when money is on the line - witness Cleditus Hunt.

Still hate the guy, and would just as soon throw money at someone else... no comparison between Briggs and Barnett - Briggs is a far better player.

[Fritz]

Wist, the depths of your dislike know no bounds. From the accounts I have read, Barnett is a pretty upstanding guy. A punk? Whoa.

I say pay the guy. Then look for another linebacker in the draft who can, in a year or so, compete with Poppinga for the starting strong side job.

See if Hodge will grow up and learn to be an NFL player next year.

Sign Lance Briggs if it becomes a possibility and if the Pack has the cap space (that is, if TT doesn't use the cap money elsewhere and if Briggs even becomes available) - to a more front loaded deal.

[wist43]

Fritz, I did say he played okay... or did you miss that part???

Will never like the guy... samarai celebrations when they're getting blown out??? I'm sure Reggie White would have smacked him down and put an end to that crap in a hurry. Wouldn't want a guy like that for a teammate, and I don't want him on my team as a fan.

Like I said, will never like the guy - but, he did play to at least an average level last year... I've erased most of the losses, however, (still have the Jet game on tape) so all I have left on tape are the wins where they played fairly well.

[Patler]

On list after list, reputable and not reputable, ranking middle linebackers Barnett finishes in the top 10. Usually somewhere around #8. You don't just throw that kind of mlb away without a replacement. Hodge has to make an astronomical turnaround after his dismal display against Seatttle to be considered a viable alternative. The Packers have no one else. Losing Barnett would negate the gains made this year in the linebacker group, unless they draft or sign someone of equal ability.

There are lots of teams that would be happy to have Barnett playing for them. Last year (2005) I charted Barnett's tackles and Urlachers tackles, based on the info on the NFL.com game sheets. Barnett made about the same percentage of his tackles for 0, 1, 2 or 3 yard gains as Urlacher did, Barnett was even a bit better, as I recall.. Urlacher had a few more tackles for loss than Barnett did. That's what I see as the big difference between them, making the big play. Urlacher does, Barnett not so much.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

On list after list, reputable and not reputable, ranking middle linebackers Barnett finishes in the top 10. Usually somewhere around #8. You don't just throw that kind of mlb away without a replacement. Hodge has to make an astronomical turnaround after his dismal display against Seatttle to be considered a viable alternative. The Packers have no one else. Losing Barnett would negate the gains made this year in the linebacker group, unless they draft or sign someone of equal ability.

There are lots of teams that would be happy to have Barnett playing for them. Last year (2005) I charted Barnett's tackles and Urlachers tackles, based on the info on the NFL.com game sheets. Barnett made about the same percentage of his tackles for 0, 1, 2 or 3 yard gains as Urlacher did, Barnett was even a bit better, as I recall.. Urlacher had a few more tackles for loss than Barnett did. That's what I see as the big difference between them, making the big play. Urlacher does, Barnett not so much.

I actually agree with Wist and Palter. I agree with Wist in that I hate how Barnett celebrates with his little dance when were getting blow away. That shows me that he cares more about his individual performance then the performance of the whole team. I agree with Palter, however, in that I do believe that Barnett is in the top 10 in MLB in the league and that you can't just let a guy like that walk. And with the cap going up each year, you can't get many good players in free agency anymore. So if you let Barnett go, it's just another guy you have to replace in the draft, and even more time before we become competitive again.

[Patler]

Barnett's celebration is absolutely one of the worst I have ever seen, in any sport. As to when he does it, sadly it seems that the score doesn't matter for most pro athletes anymore. They celebrate a moderately successful play even when they are getting their butts kicked. Barnett is no different than many others. I hate all the contrived celebrates. I didn't even like the "gravedigger" celebration. To choreographed for me. I like only the spontaneous exhibitions of excitement.

As I recall, Barnett had no celebration routine as a rookie, and came up with one only when he was asked to be more of an "emotional" leader. He said he thought a "celebration" would help. He had an equally bad one for a short time before his current one. His do not look sincere in the slightest, and should be stopped.

[BobDobbs]

I think that Briggs is a better, more forceful player than Barnett is. I don't think that you can necessarily switch out one for the other. Briggs plays on the weakside which is where we have AJ Hawk right now. If we bring in Briggs do we put Aj over the tight end? Or if we sign Briggs do we put him in the middle?
That is the main problem as I see it where do you play the guys? If you just sign people without regard for how they fit your system you end up with the Redskins. I would be happy to see Briggs as a Packer. He can bring blitz and blow up running plays big time. Can he cover? That was a huge problem with the linebacking core and Barnett in particular. A lot of big plays over the middle.
I think Briggs and Barnett are roughly the same age. They both came in the same draft along with EJ Henderson, Boss Bailey, and I think Hunter Hillenmeyer. Pretty good LB draft for the NFC North.
Ultimately, I think if the Bears don't sign Briggs before free agency begins, then there will be a major bidding war. Barnett still is under contract, so we will be able to negotiate him down because we are the only bidder.

[wist43]

I've never seen a ranking list that even had Barnett on it, let alone in the top 10...

Two years ago, PFW ranked the top 24 MLB's and Barnett wasn't even on the list...

Now I'll grant you that he played better this past year, but he still blew an awful lot of assignments and tackles...

Even allowing that he may have figured out how to take a proper angle - he still hits with the force of a gnat, can't get off blocks, and until he proves it to me for more than 1 year, I'll still contend he doesn't have the instincts of the average cheerleader.

Don't like him, never will.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I've never seen a ranking list that even had Barnett on it, let alone in the top 10...

Two years ago, PFW ranked the top 24 MLB's and Barnett wasn't even on the list...

Now I'll grant you that he played better this past year, but he still blew an awful lot of assignments and tackles...

Even allowing that he may have figured out how to take a proper angle - he still hits with the force of a gnat, can't get off blocks, and until he proves it to me for more than 1 year, I'll still contend he doesn't have the instincts of the average cheerleader.

Don't like him, never will.

The last quote says it all.

PFW has had him about #20 the last two years for ILBs (not just MLBs). Since a lot of teams are running the 3-4 defense, that puts him in the top half of starting ILBs--according to PFW. I imagine he'll jump up a few spots this offseason. Guys that stick around and prove they are starting quality tend to get bumped in the ratings as they get into their prime.

Personally, I don't care about the celebration. I used to hate that stuff, but now 1/2 the guys in the league do it, so what are you going to do? I got over it. Compared to the celebrations of today, I kind of like the samarai.

[Patler]

The lists on which Barnett is low are the fantasy football rankings which put a premium on turnovers and TDs. Scout, GM and NFL analysts almost always have him in the top 10 of middle linebackers. I posted several of them last year in the off season, on which ever board we all frequented then (JSO, CE, this one, whatever it was!) That was also when I posted Barnett's 2005 tackles by yardage gained on the play, to dispel the argument that all his tackles are well downfield.

I'm not a huge Barnett fan, but he is good enough to keep unless and until an all-pro comes to GB.

[hoosier]

Does anyone know how old Briggs is?? And imagine next season with Briggs, Barnett, and Hawk as our LB's!! WoW!!!!!

Isn't Brigss a weak-side LB in Chicago? Could he be moved easily to strong side?

[ny10804]

My take on Barnett, if he never got injured, we'd be in the playoffs (Seattle). I'd think TT would wait to the middle of next year to resign him. As for Briggs, I'd be more interested in Adalius Thomas from the Ravens -- he is the best SSLB in the game, and can effectively rush the passer at DE. We could cut KGB after June 1st.

Idk though, I don't get the impression TT would throw money around like this.

[Patler]

As for Briggs, I'd be more interested in Adalius Thomas from the Ravens -- he is the best SSLB in the game, and can effectively rush the passer at DE. We could cut KGB after June 1st.


That is what the Packers need, a linebacker that can just take the TE out of the game. A guy like Wayne Simmons was for a couple years. The TE never even got off the line of scrimmage when he got into them. Now we try to "cover" the TE, instead of physically dominating him. For the most part it has not worked, other than Na'il Diggs in his first couple years. But he lost it when they tried to move him to the weakside, and never got it back.

[The Shadow]

Personally, I'd rather have Briggs than Barnett.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Personally, I'd rather have Briggs than Barnett.

I don't think anybody had a differing opinion.

[ND72]

Ok, for all of you to know, Hawk is NOT a MLB. He's not. People say he played MLB in college, but he didn't. Anthony Schlegel was OSU's MLB. Barnett proved his worth in the Seattle game when he didn't play. Hodge is no where ready to play at the NFL level, and Barnett had a very solid year, and can still improve a lot based on our TEAM improvement. Do you invest in both Barnett and Briggs, yes. Why? cause we have money, and the cap will go up every year to help us with it. You people are crazy if you think we need to drop Barnett.

What do you think of Briggs? Is he overhyped and overrated because he plays next to Urlacher, or is he really a baller?


I personally like Briggs a lot. Many sports writers have said he's a product of the system,a nd he'd only fit in a cover 2 defense, or a "Dungy" type defense....I donno, I don't buy it. If you have Barnett and Hawk with him, HELLO. Our LB's would be set for years to come, and I think Briggs would be the oldest one at 26 years old or so.

[KYPack]

Ok, for all of you to know, Hawk is NOT a MLB. He's not. People say he played MLB in college, but he didn't. Anthony Schlegel was OSU's MLB. Barnett proved his worth in the Seattle game when he didn't play. Hodge is no where ready to play at the NFL level, and Barnett had a very solid year, and can still improve a lot based on our TEAM improvement. Do you invest in both Barnett and Briggs, yes. Why? cause we have money, and the cap will go up every year to help us with it. You people are crazy if you think we need to drop Barnett.

What do you think of Briggs? Is he overhyped and overrated because he plays next to Urlacher, or is he really a baller?


I personally like Briggs a lot. Many sports writers have said he's a product of the system,a nd he'd only fit in a cover 2 defense, or a "Dungy" type defense....I donno, I don't buy it. If you have Barnett and Hawk with him, HELLO. Our LB's would be set for years to come, and I think Briggs would be the oldest one at 26 years old or so.

Ya know ND, I think we are "evolving" into the Tampa 2. I watched the Bear D & they deploy the DLine and Backers in very similar fashion to our base scheme. If we played our safeties over the top and backed the corners up a little, the two covers would be identical.

I,too like Briggs. He is not a Mike. I think we keep our LB bunch intact. Popp improved a ton during the season (he had to ) and Barnett is a solid player. Hawk's a baby superstar. We'll keep 'em together and have a great group in the coming seasons

[Bretsky]

I have no problem signing Briggs. And he is a great player with our w/o Urlacher. I have no problem investing that type of money in a dominating defense. Why ? Because we have plenty of money to do it.

No way we cut loose of Barnett either; we don't have anybody competent to replace him, and it's nuts to think we can just bank on signing somebody or drafting somebody as good or better.

Same as Kampman last year; you sign him because it would be idiotic to lose him.

TT, go do your job and make it work.

B

[red]

i would like briggs, not only do you help our d out a lot, but you hurt the top dogs d's and strike a blow to your top rival

and we have more then enough money to do this

[Bretsky]

i would like briggs, not only do you help our d out a lot, but you hurt the top dogs d's and strike a blow to your top rival

and we have more then enough money to do this


To get Briggs, we'll have to encourage our GM not to go vacationing the first week of free agency :wink:

[red]

i would like briggs, not only do you help our d out a lot, but you hurt the top dogs d's and strike a blow to your top rival

and we have more then enough money to do this


To get Briggs, we'll have to encourage our GM not to go vacationing the first week of free agency :wink:

can we form a human chain around Lambeau, and keep him in there until he does something?

[MJZiggy]

Umm...it's January. In Wisconsin. Who wants to set the betting for how long it takes them to freeze to death?

[red]

Umm...it's January. In Wisconsin. Who wants to set the betting for how long it takes them to freeze to death?

hey, its a sacrifice for the team we love and worship

when one link of the chain falls, another one will come out of the heated shanty placed at 30 yard intervals to fill the void

if enough of us fall, he might be forced to do something

no one said this would be easy, but with enough packer pride, and enough booze, we can make it work

we might be able to get miller involved with this and supply with the fluids to keep going

[SD GB fan]

barnett improved this season because we actually had other capable backers who swarm to the ball. for a few seasons, barnett seemed like the only LB out there and thats why his tackles are really high. but he also had to cover a lot more ground, probably causing him to take bad angles. you can also argue that barnett didnt have to learn yet another scheme (donatell, slowik, bates, sanders [same as bates]). but that said, he is a solid starter but not quite playmaking, pro bowl level yet.

as for adalius thomas, im not sure how much we can use him. the ravens used him in so many ways because the rest of their defense has crazy talent to adjust. iunno if thomas is the SLB backer we are looking for in our scheme.

[esoxx]

I see the Bears franchising Briggs.

[KYPack]

barnett improved this season because we actually had other capable backers who swarm to the ball. for a few seasons, barnett seemed like the only LB out there and thats why his tackles are really high. but he also had to cover a lot more ground, probably causing him to take bad angles. you can also argue that barnett didnt have to learn yet another scheme (donatell, slowik, bates, sanders [same as bates]). but that said, he is a solid starter but not quite playmaking, pro bowl level yet.

as for adalius thomas, im not sure how much we can use him. the ravens used him in so many ways because the rest of their defense has crazy talent to adjust. iunno if thomas is the SLB backer we are looking for in our scheme.

You must see a lot of AFC, too

Thomas plays a wild card for the Ravens. Last season I saw him play 5 positions on D in the same game. Once I saw him make the first play at RDE. They put in another end and Thomas dropped back as a safety for the next down, then he was the weak side LB on 3rd down.

It's tought to know if he'd be that good at any one spot.

Seems like Rex ryan got the most out him as the rover dude.

[wist43]

If Barnett can play the way he played this year, I could see giving him a mid-level contract... but, he's going to be looking to break the bank, and some idiot GM out there will oblige - hopefully it's not TT.

As for where PFW weekly had him ranked, yes they had him at #20 for MLB's last year... can't find my '05 and '04 editions - I know they're around here somewhere - if HW says they had him at #20 in '05 I'll accept that simply b/c I can't find my issue - but, it had to have been '04 then that he wasn't even on the list.

As I remember the write up on him in the team portion of that issue was scathing... that said, allowing for growth in a players game, I still don't see Barnett as being much better than an average player - and certainly not worth throwing a big contract at.

[wist43]

barnett improved this season because we actually had other capable backers who swarm to the ball. for a few seasons, barnett seemed like the only LB out there and thats why his tackles are really high. but he also had to cover a lot more ground, probably causing him to take bad angles. you can also argue that barnett didnt have to learn yet another scheme (donatell, slowik, bates, sanders [same as bates]). but that said, he is a solid starter but not quite playmaking, pro bowl level yet.

as for adalius thomas, im not sure how much we can use him. the ravens used him in so many ways because the rest of their defense has crazy talent to adjust. iunno if thomas is the SLB backer we are looking for in our scheme.

You must see a lot of AFC, too

Thomas plays a wild card for the Ravens. Last season I saw him play 5 positions on D in the same game. Once I saw him make the first play at RDE. They put in another end and Thomas dropped back as a safety for the next down, then he was the weak side LB on 3rd down.

It's tought to know if he'd be that good at any one spot.

Seems like Rex ryan got the most out him as the rover dude.

Thomas and Merriman are two prime examples of the advantages of the 3-4... Neither one of them would have a place in Green Bay's passive scheme.

What does it say about a defensive system when animals like those two guys would be so out of place as to be rendered useless??? I hate the scheme the Packers run - it's far too passive and predictable.

Good offenses will continue to torch em... too many of you guys think they're really on to something based soley on the last 4 games - 4 games against 4 of the worst offenses in the league... or at least against teams that had mailed it in.

The Jets running up 8,000 yds and scoring 6 billion pts in the 1st half is a much better indicator of what the Packers defense is all about.

[MJZiggy]

Then who's gonna replace him?

[Noodle]

That is what the Packers need, a linebacker that can just take the TE out of the game. A guy like Wayne Simmons was for a couple years. The TE never even got off the line of scrimmage when he got into them. Now we try to "cover" the TE, instead of physically dominating him. For the most part it has not worked, other than Na'il Diggs in his first couple years. But he lost it when they tried to move him to the weakside, and never got it back.

Man do I agree with this. Covering a TE who gets clean off the line is a bitch. They've got the whole friggin field to work with. You have to be an amazing stud to do it. Instead of hoping your Sam can run with the guy (fat chance), it's much better to get a guy who will just smack the SOB early and often, knock off the TE timing, and keep him from running in space.

You have to get guys to fit your scheme. I don't see how Briggs does that. We'd have 3 Wills. It'd be a waste to move Hawk to Sam, Barnett has shown he can do the job at Mike, so what'll do with Briggs? Waste his talents at Sam? No way. I say look for a proven badass Sam instead.

I'm for keeping our set, maybe getting

[Partial]

I think I agree with Noodle.

[Fritz]

Wist, I do note that you said Barnett played okay, and I commend you. My early response was more about the notion of Barnett as "punk." I, like you, do not like the celebrations when the team is getting whipped, but that doesn't qualify someone as "punk" in my book. To me, "punk" is more like Michael Vick or T.O., guys who are in it solely for themselves. Or like a Cletidus Hunt who worked just hard enough to get the big contract, then slacked.

I like Barnett enough to believe he ought to be given an extension. If you're looking to replace a linebacker, make it Poppinga.

And hey all, how about we not get mad at TT for not signing Briggs before the guy even becomes available. Tony Gonzalez, anyone?

[Merlin]

Enough is enough. Barnett is a solid MLB. Letting him go for a "younger" Briggs? Bringing in an OLB to replace a solid MLB? The stats don't lie, I will put Barnett up against ANY MLB and he will come out just fine. He is in the top 10 if not top 5. Barnett is a 4 year veteran who had to go through 4 different defensive schemes. Not many MLB's go through that ON THE SAME TEAM! Yet no one is better in coverage then he is. He is agressive as Urlacher and the REASON Urlacher get's a few more big plays is because he plays behind a BETTER DEFENSIVE LINE. Barnett had a broken hand the last 4 games of the season and STILL played well. Had our defensive line played that well the first 8 games and Barnett not been injured I guarantee he would have as many big plays as Urlacher. The only reason Urlacher get's all the hype is because he was on some very bad Bears teams and he was the only bright spot on defense. RING ANY BELLS??? Barnett is worth it, Briggs is not. Why? Packers DL vs Bears DL 2006.

[red]

barnetts good, and i think we should keep him, but he's nowhere near all world like you're trying to make him out to be. and i don't think he comes close to urlacher.

if i had my choice between nick and urlacher, that might be the easiest choice i would ever have to make in my life. urlacher brings so much more to the table

i hate the bears, but i love the way that guy plays

[Fritz]

barnetts good, and i think we should keep him, but he's nowhere near all world like you're trying to make him out to be. and i don't think he comes close to urlacher.

if i had my choice between nick and urlacher, that might be the easiest choice i would ever have to make in my life. urlacher brings so much more to the table

i hate the bears, but i love the way that guy plays

I don't know. If you had to choose between Hillary Clinton and Heidi Klum, wouldn't that be the easiest choice you'd ever have to make in your life?

[Bretsky]

barnetts good, and i think we should keep him, but he's nowhere near all world like you're trying to make him out to be. and i don't think he comes close to urlacher.

if i had my choice between nick and urlacher, that might be the easiest choice i would ever have to make in my life. urlacher brings so much more to the table

i hate the bears, but i love the way that guy plays

I don't know. If you had to choose between Hillary Clinton and Heidi Klum, wouldn't that be the easiest choice you'd ever have to make in your life?

Neither ? :wink:

[red]

barnetts good, and i think we should keep him, but he's nowhere near all world like you're trying to make him out to be. and i don't think he comes close to urlacher.

if i had my choice between nick and urlacher, that might be the easiest choice i would ever have to make in my life. urlacher brings so much more to the table

i hate the bears, but i love the way that guy plays

I don't know. If you had to choose between Hillary Clinton and Heidi Klum, wouldn't that be the easiest choice you'd ever have to make in your life?

well thats a little tuff

you can't overlook the fact that hillary is loaded, and has big time connections. nothiing wrong with a sugar momma

[Cheesehead Craig]

I like Barnett and much like how Merlin said, the DL of the Pack needs to improve to let our LBs do more. Back in the Camelot days of the Pack when we had White and Jones at DE and Gilbert and Dotson at DT, our LB suddenly could play better behind one of the best DL in the game. I think that the action of moving Jenkins to DE is going to go a long way towards making the DL, hence the LB, better.

I'm not going to get involved in a Barnett vs Briggs debate. They play in different schemes and have different supporting casts. Too many outside variables to make a valid comparison of one vs the other.

That said, I believe Briggs to be the superior pass rusher and blitzer. That may be a good portion of the argument that some would rather have Briggs than Barnett.