Packers want Adalius Thomas

[red]

from pft.com

PACK ANGLING FOR ADALIUS

Regardless of whether the Green Bay Packers eventually make an effort to trade for Raiders receiver Randy Moss, the more immediate objective for the Favre Franchise is to land Ravens linebacker Adalius Thomas.

Thomas, a sixth-round pick in 2000, will hit the open market unless the Ravens slap the franchise tag on him. And, as we're told, one of the first teams to ring his phone will be the Packers. Per a source with knowledge of the situation, Thomas is the clear-cut top target for the Packers in free agency.

The Pack plan to make Thomas, a hybrid linebacker/defensive end in the Baltimore defense, into a full-time defensive end. And that could be very bad news for current Packers defensive end Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila, whose star has faded in the years since he was regarded as an up-and-coming sack master. KGB fell behind Cullen Jenkins on the depth chart in 2006, and Gbaja-Biamila's $5 million salary for 2007 could cause him to fall off of the roster entirely.

If the Ravens plan to use the franchise tag on Thomas, they'll need to have the cap room to do it. And that could ensure the release of running back Jamal Lewis, who re-signed with the team as an unrestricted free agent in 2006 and who is owed a $5 million roster bonus next month, and a $5 million salary in 2007.

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

i'm not sure what i think of this. he'd be a small de, just like the guy he would be replacing. plus the guys is suppose to be very good in coverage.

why not nab him for the SAM?

first i've heard of this though

it would be interesting, and an upgrade somewhere, i think :?

edit: ok i just saw in another thread that he's 6'2, 276. i guess he's not small at all

[Partial]

Load of crap. No way.

[Bossman641]

Thomas is a beast. He plays about 5 positions. I like it.

[PlantPage55]

They sound pretty sure of themselves...hmmm...

I hope it happens - he is a B-E-A-S-T

[SD GB fan]

i dont buy it. the ravens use him in so many ways that i dont think adalius thomas will "fit" on other teams. i havent seen enough of him to tell if he can be successful in a particular position but i know he has success because the other talents in BAL makes thomas the X factor.

[SD GB fan]

but if we do somehow get him without overspending, i wont complain. he is a great talent but id rather take a shot with the cheaper cullen jenkins

[packers11]

but if we do somehow get him without overspending, i wont complain. he is a great talent but id rather take a shot with the cheaper cullen jenkins

Thomas mainly plays lb right next to Ray Lewis... :lol:

[Joemailman]

I think right now Thomas may be a better player than Lewis. Ray ain't what he used to be. I don't know if TT would make this move given the money involved. If he does, does that mean the Jenkins is back at DT, and KGB is gone?

[packers11]

I think right now Thomas may be a better player than Lewis. Ray ain't what he used to be. I don't know if TT would make this move given the money involved. If he does, does that mean the Jenkins is back at DT, and KGB is gone?


# 96 Adalius Thomas
Position: OLB
Height: 6-2
Weight: 270

I know ive seen him at the end some times, BUT am i missing something??? HE mainly PLAYS LB... Am I wrong???

[red]

well, he might fit in great for us. last year we did have a lot of times where our d-linemen were trying to cover wr's. he can actually do that

[PlantPage55]

No, but he can play ANYWHERE. I'm sure if we got him, we would utilize him in many ways. We would be foolish not to.

[motife]

he scored a TD in the Pro Bowl, running back a Marc Bulger fumble :

Adalius Donquail Thomas (born July 18, 1977 in Equality, Alabama) is a starting Outside Linebacker for the Baltimore Ravens.

College career
Adalius Thomas attended the University of Southern Mississippi, where he was a prolific defensive player. In college he wore #97. In the 1998-99 season, Thomas was a First Team All-American and tied for Defensive Player of the Year. Thomas was also the MVP of the 1999 Liberty Bowl. The 2000 Senior Bowl was Thomas's final college game.

Professional career
Adalius Thomas was predicted as a third round draft pick in the 2000 NFL Draft. However, Thomas was not drafted until the sixth round (pick 186) by the Baltimore Ravens, for whom he wears #96. Many NFL scouts were shocked by his late drafting.

Nonetheless, Thomas was slow to make an impact for the Ravens great defense. Competing with two outstanding defenders in Peter Boulware and Michael McCrary, he made 89 tackles in his first three years.

However, in the 2003 season Thomas' superb special teams play was noticed and he received his first Pro Bowl nod as a starter on special teams. He registered 34 tackles (23 of them on special teams) 8 passes defended, 4 sacks and a forced fumble.

Until the 2004 season, he remained a back-up linebacker. Beside that fact, he began to shine despite the adversity and was put into games more frequently. In that season, he amassed 72 tackles, 4 forced fumbles, 5 passes defended, an interception and 8 sacks.

Thomas's finest year to date came in the 2005 season. With Peter Boulware relegated to a strict pass-rusher, Thomas was named the starting Left Outside Linebacker. He accumulated 84 total tackles and 9 sacks, his prowess on the field was soon felt. In the absence of Ray Lewis, Thomas had to step up as the leader of the Ravens Squad. In the '05 season, Thomas became the first ever player to play 5 defensive positions (DE, OLB, MLB, Safety, and CB) in not one game, but three.

Despite leading the league in defensive touchdowns (3), Thomas did not receive any votes for defensive player of the year in 2005, as well as not being voted for the Pro Bowl. Thomas finally got recognition in 2006, where he helped a Ravens defense that was ranked #1 overall, and finished 13-3 getting the #2 seed in the playoffs (ultimately losing to the Colts). He also earned his 2nd Pro Bowl bid to the 2007 Pro Bowl. In the game he returned a Marc Bulger fumble for a touchdown.

Player Stats
Thomas is 6'2", 276 lbs. A 6 year pro, Adalius has recorded 288 tackles and 27.5 sacks.

[PackerPro42]

Don't get me wrong, Thomas is a great player. But if the Packers are planning to use him as a DE then I don't want him. As and OLB then I absolutely want him. However, I would much rather see them get Briggs if they're going to get an OLB.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I doubt Briggs will be available. Chicago has plenty of cap room to franchise him. I'm not sure how Baltimore is sitting in regards to the cap.

[motife]

the 3 Pro Bowl AFC OLB's were Terrell Suggs (Balt), Shawn Merriman (SD), and Adalius Thomas (Balt) all 3-4 pass rush type LB's.

could Adalius Thomas make it to the Pro Bowl as a 4-3 DE?

is he an upgrade over KGB or Cullen Jenkins? Jenkins said he prefers to play DT.

is he better than Aaron Kampman?

size wise, you don't find many DE's much over 270 lbs. nowadays. Most are 6-3, 6-4, but Dwight Freeney is 6-1.

[BlueBrewer]

Ok so lets say that they actually let him hit the market, which I highly doubt will happen, but there are about 31 other GMs that would be willing to pay more that TT will. A talent like Thomas will be in high demand, with the raised cap numbers look for the bidding to be rediculous enough for Teddy to shy away.

[Partial]

I think right now Thomas may be a better player than Lewis. Ray ain't what he used to be. I don't know if TT would make this move given the money involved. If he does, does that mean the Jenkins is back at DT, and KGB is gone?

Bart Scott is the best player on that defense.

[motife]

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2006/09/17/PH2006091700381.jpghttp://images.nfl.com/photos/img7724698.jpghttp://images.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/_photos/2003-08-16-inside-vick2.jpg

http://www2.indystar.com/library/factfiles/sports/football/indpls_colts/2001_season/img/ravenfumble.jpghttp://ravenatic20.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/game15d.jpg

http://ravenatic20.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/game3d.jpg.w300h211.jpghttp://xe0.xanga.com/262d533175532106108939/z75068237.jpg

http://photos.signonsandiego.com/gallery1.5/albums/030922bal/JBsdBaltA209388x11.sized.jpg

[ny10804]

I could get used to this --> link (http://youtube.com/watch?v=3U0D5hlOvMo)

[RashanGary]

He's a beast. I Like him better than Briggs.

Him, Hawk and Poppinga would be DOMINATE as the starting 3. We can then let Barnett go and get a pick for him as a compensitory 3rd rounder next year.

[Partial]

Why wouldn't we keep all three and have the best linebacking corps in the league?

[RashanGary]

If Barnett wants 40, I'd pay Thomas 50 and let Barnett go.

[RashanGary]

Why wouldn't we keep all three and have the best linebacking corps in the league?

Because I'd rather have Poppinga than Barnett for the $$ and for what Poppinga brings

[motife]

I think right now Thomas may be a better player than Lewis. Ray ain't what he used to be. I don't know if TT would make this move given the money involved. If he does, does that mean the Jenkins is back at DT, and KGB is gone?

Bart Scott is the best player on that defense.

LDE Trevor Pryce, 13 sacks, 47 tackles
NT Kelly Gregg, 3.5 sacks, 61 tackles, 3 FR
RDE Haloti Ngata, 1 sack, 31 tackles, 1 int
LOLB Terrell Suggs, 9.5 sacks, 64 tackles, 3 FR, *Pro Bowl
LILB Bart Scott 9.5 sacks, 103 tackles, 2 int * Pro Bowl (injury, replaced Al Wilson)
RILB Ray Lewis, 5 sacks, 103 tackles, 2 int, 1 FR
ROLB Adalius Thomas, 11 sacks, 83 tackles, 1 int, 1 FR, 1 TD * Pro Bowl
LCB Chris McAlister, 47 tackles, 6 int, 2 FR, 2 TD's * Pro Bowl
FS Ed Reed, 59 tackles, 5 int, 1 FR, 1 TD * Pro Bowl
SS Dawan Landry, 3 sacks, 69 tackles, 5 int, 1 TD
RCB Samari Rolle, 1 sack, 52 tackles, 3 int

[RashanGary]

Hawk can be a difference maker. Thomas is a difference maker. Say what you will about Poppinga but he is more brutal and impactfull than Barnett. I'd like to see us pay Thomas whatever it takes and we'll get a compensitory by letting Barnett go next season.

[SD GB fan]

LDE Trevor Pryce, 13 sacks, 47 tackles
NT Kelly Gregg, 3.5 sacks, 61 tackles, 3 FR
RDE Haloti Ngata, 1 sack, 31 tackles, 1 int
LOLB Terrell Suggs, 9.5 sacks, 64 tackles, 3 FR, *Pro Bowl
LILB Bart Scott 9.5 sacks, 103 tackles, 2 int * Pro Bowl (injury, replaced Al Wilson)
RILB Ray Lewis, 5 sacks, 103 tackles, 2 int, 1 FR
ROLB Adalius Thomas, 11 sacks, 83 tackles, 1 int, 1 FR, 1 TD * Pro Bowl
LCB Chris McAlister, 47 tackles, 6 int, 2 FR, 2 TD's * Pro Bowl
FS Ed Reed, 59 tackles, 5 int, 1 FR, 1 TD * Pro Bowl
SS Dawan Landry, 3 sacks, 69 tackles, 5 int, 1 TD
RCB Samari Rolle, 1 sack, 52 tackles, 3 int

now thats a loaded D. :worship:

[packers11]

Hawk can be a difference maker. Thomas is a difference maker. Say what you will about Poppinga but he is more brutal and impactfull than Barnett. I'd like to see us pay Thomas whatever it takes and we'll get a compensitory by letting Barnett go next season.

Do we watch the same game??? Barnett makes plays and is 25 (entering his prime)... Poppinga is far away were Barnett is right now... :crazy:

[motife]

quotes from Bruce Smith column..

A.J. Hawk describing Brady Poppinga:

"Brady's great." "Everything about him tells you how intense he is and what he brings to the table. He's a guy that loves the game. You love to have him on your team. Brady's also a lot better athlete than some people even know. He's so big and he's so fast and he can run and he can hit and he can cover people."

Hawk also said he appreciated that the coaching staff stayed with Poppinga even though he was being criticized for early deficiencies in pass coverage:

"It was good to see them not give up on him." "It gives you confidence in the coaches to know that they have your back. I also think the coverage stuff was blown out of proportion with Brady.

Shifting to MLB Nick Barnett for a moment:

Surrounded with talented players on either side of him for the first time in his Professional career, the 25-year-old Barnett has been freed up to make more big plays. Nick was on a tear prior to breaking his hand - he had two sacks, two interceptions and nine defended passes in the first nine games, and that was before the young guys started to get their legs underneath themselves.

A.J. does not hesitate to give love and respect to his teammate:

"Nick does everything." "He's so underrated. Some linebackers are fast and they can run sideline to sideline, but they might lack the physical part of the game. Others might not step up to the hole and hit fullbacks when they need to. Nick's a guy that does it all. He's one of the best cover linebackers in the league and he runs down people because he's so fast. What I have a lot of respect for is that he also steps up and hits people. There's not a part of his game that's lacking."

It's been many years since the Packers had starting linebackers with this much talent and potential. TT did a great job putting these guys together; his challenge now is keeping them together for the long haul.

"When you have guys that can run and play (at linebacker), you don't have to do so much situational stuff for those guys," Thompson said. "Each one brings something a little different: Brady certainly has pass-rush skills. Hawk and Barnett have the ability to play all over the field and in coverage, so that helps us."

This trio has the POTENTIAL to rank among the best in Packer history.

Here is what the young guys themselves weigh in on this important issue of staying together as a unit:

Nick Barnett says:

"This is the most consistent group (of linebackers) I've been a part of." "We've had a lot of talented linebackers come through here, but A.J. has been consistent since he's been here and Brady as well. You know what to expect out of those guys. You can just go out and play football. "That's what it's about." "When you've got three guys that can run to the ball, if I make a mistake, A.J. can cover it up. If he overruns it, I'm there to help him, and the same with Brady. You've got to have guys running to the ball and covering up for each other. It's starting to grow on the field, and we're starting to get in a groove." “…we're starting to establish our identity." "I think definitely, if they keep us all together, we could be something special."
A.J. says:

"We'd love to stay together," "I know that's hard in the NFL today, but it's something everyone here would love to see happen."
Perhaps the the best assessment can be found in the sage words of future Hall of Fame QB Brett Favre:

"A.J., what a great pick for us." "Nick has been a rock there and has continued to get better. To say Brady's high-strung is an understatement. Guys like that bring energy to the team."

And just so no one thinks I disrespected our outstanding rookie, here is what Poppinga had to say about his brother LB A.J. Hawk:

"Oh, he's off the wall, man," "He puts up a front, but underneath it all he's a crazy little man (little only in comparison to Brady). The hair flying in the wind. . . he looks like a blond Superman, flying around out there." "He's been under the pressure cooker.” "He's handled it beautifully. He's gotten better. All of us have gotten better. That's what adversity will do to people who are willing to face it head on. It will make you better, and you will be able to improve."

[Bretsky]

I still have doubts about Poppinga

[SD GB fan]

I still have doubts about Poppinga

apparently so does madden, hes only rated 78 :(

seriously, i think he had his moments but i think hes only servicable at this point. hopefully he will continue to develop as last year was his "rookie" year.

[PackerPro42]

Hawk can be a difference maker. Thomas is a difference maker. Say what you will about Poppinga but he is more brutal and impactfull than Barnett. I'd like to see us pay Thomas whatever it takes and we'll get a compensitory by letting Barnett go next season.

Do we watch the same game??? Barnett makes plays and is 25 (entering his prime)... Poppinga is far away were Barnett is right now... :crazy:

And considering the fact that Poppinga plays OLB and Barnett plays MLB, it would seem useless to have three OLB on the team and no ILB. I'm sorry but releasing Barnett so we can keep Poppinga would be a huge mistake.

[RashanGary]

Barnett is not a difference maker. I stand by that. I consider him and Poppinga very similar players as far as total talent. Barnett is stronger in teh pass, Poppinga is stronger in teh run and has shown alot of improvement in the pass. When it comes to paying for an impact player; I'd pay Thomas and let Barnett go becuase I think there is a big gap in the two as far as on field impact goes.

[retailguy]

Barnett is not a difference maker. I stand by that. I consider him and Poppinga very similar players as far as total talent. Barnett is stronger in teh pass, Poppinga is stronger in teh run and has shown alot of improvement in the pass. When it comes to paying for an impact player; I'd pay Thomas and let Barnett go becuase I think there is a big gap in the two as far as on field impact goes.


Don't forget that the Ravens play a 3 - 4. The packers play a 4 - 3.

Packers want Thomas for a DE. They are not looking to replace Barnett. They have already started contract proposals with him. It will get done....

[HarveyWallbangers]

Bart Scott is the best player on that defense.

He's probably the best LB on that defense.

[b bulldog]

This site also has us drafting Demarcus Tyler, the DT from NC St in the first round. They also mention that Smith will be tagged by the bengals.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Say what you will about Poppinga but he is more brutal and impactfull than Barnett. I'd like to see us pay Thomas whatever it takes and we'll get a compensitory by letting Barnett go next season.

Poppinga isn't half the player Barnett is. We'll likely end up well below the cap again, so who cares about salary. Do people realize Poppinga is actually two years older than Barnett?

[b bulldog]

Personally, I don't mind barnett or Poppinga. I think you can win with both or both can miss the big tackle in the open field. Both should get better.

[RashanGary]

Personally, I don't mind barnett or Poppinga. I think you can win with both or both can miss the big tackle in the open field. Both should get better.

Barnett wants to get paid like the best in the biz. That is the biggest difference IMO.

[b bulldog]

If the rumour about Thomas is correct, KGB will be traded or cut and Jenkins will get a high tender with the hope that somebody snatches him so we can get high compensation. Can't see the Pack paying these two, who put together will be in the $10 mil per year area to play DE. Jenkins can play inside but is better off the edge from what I saw. This may make them want to make a play for a DT.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Barnett wants to get paid like the best in the biz. That is the biggest difference IMO.

From the way it sounds he wants about the same as LBs that have signed recently with similar credentials. Slightly more than E.J. Henderson. Sounds fair.

[b bulldog]

bARNETT HASN'T EVEN MADE IT TO THE PRO BOWL yet. He isn't a difference maker imo. He is better than a guy but not a stud. I would never break the bank on him.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I have serious doubts about whether Thompson will go after Thomas. He just doesn't seem to fit our scheme. He's a rush OLB in a 3-4.

[b bulldog]

Henderson had his best year this year and if Nick wants his $$, the market will get him that.

[b bulldog]

My guess is that the Pats will be all over him.

[b bulldog]

In order for the Ravens to keep him they will have to clear some cap space. This will probably get him to the open market.

[HarveyWallbangers]

My guess is that the Pats will be all over him.

That's a good bet. What other 3-4 teams have money and need a LB? Cleveland? Pittsburgh?

[RashanGary]

Thomas could play every down in GB or damn near. ON run downs he's a LB. On pass downs he's a DE and because DE's use so much enerty he should sit 5 - 10 % of the plays. I wouldn't rule him out of GB because of that.

[Bretsky]

Barnett wants to get paid like the best in the biz. That is the biggest difference IMO.

From the way it sounds he wants about the same as LBs that have signed recently with similar credentials. Slightly more than E.J. Henderson. Sounds fair.

If that is true it's completely fair; Barnett is a better player than EJ Henderson

[Joemailman]

I think Patrick Kerney of Atlanta would be a more natural fit for the Packers. However, I know he missed half the season with Atlanta. Anybody know what his injury status is? I've always thought he was a great player.

[Partial]

I think you keep your own. Pay Jenkins and Barnett. They're young, hard workers. Keep 'em in the G and G. Above average vets are priceless on a good team. New England won a super bowl with an all-pro and a slew of above average vets.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Anyone else see the rumor about trading KGB for Tatum Bell? Saw it on nfldraftcountdown, think someone on packerchatters started it, wonder if it's even a thought.

[vince]

I'd be all for the Pack going after Thomas, but this reaks of smokescreen, which TT has proven to be perfectly capable of.

Thomas will be the #1 target of a host of teams who play a 3-4 defense -that have ample room under the cap.

TT isn't the type that runs such a loose ship that someone "in the know" would let the media in on free agent targets two weeks before signing season, thereby upping the ante required to get the guy signed. Thankfully, TT's the type that would do just the opposite...

My guess is that we are targeting a DE, but it ain't Thomas. This is a planned leak to get the focus off someone else who the Pack wants to sign.

Thomas would be great, but I'm not holding any hope on this one.

[wist43]

Like a lot of you guys, I don't know that Thomas would be a good fit for Green Bay's scheme...

He's a monster in the Baltimore's 3-4, but would be miscast as either a full time end, or a full time LB... which is all the Packers can offer.

Patrick Kearney would be a better fit as a full time end, but that would only make sense if he checked out medically...

At this point, as far as an upgrade at DE, I'd throw a low/mid level contact at Jenkins.

Someone mentioned Tatum Bell for KGB??? Don't know why Denver would even consider doing that deal...

[KYPack]

I can't say if Thomas fits our scheme or not.

I can say the guy is an amazing player. On one series, Thomas played 3 positions. 1st down, DE with his hand down. 2nd Down, SLB standing up. 3rd down, Strong safety.

When most DC's scheme this way, they use the big guy at SS and just blitz him for the mis-match. Not Rex Ryan, he had Thomas go into coverage. The big guy can really play all these different spots.

I don't think you sign Thomas as a RDE. You sign him AND Jenkins and use the big guy's versatility. Thomas creates a lot of mismatches.

Bart Scott wasn't the best player on the Ravens defense last season. Terrell Suggs and Trevor Pryce had career years for the birds last season.

[prsnfoto]

If Barnett only wants similar money to Henderson 5 years 25 mil. I will eat your hat Harvey and I would also sign him I think he wants 6 and 40-45 then you let him walk into the sunset and never look back he hasn't even made a fricking ProBowl. Thomas is a beast and I don't care if we play 4-3,3-4 2-6,6-2 whatever he would be a huge pickup.

[wist43]

Thomas offers a defensive coordinator like Rex Ryan opportunities to create mismatches b/c they play a very flexible, multi-faceted defense that utilizes a lot of presnap audibles and movement... and Rex Ryan designs his game plans in such a way to take advantage of the talents of a guy like Thomas.

Green Bay offers none of that... Thomas would be asked to defeat the LT, down in and down out, with no subterfuge, no presnap confusion... just line up and beat the guy.

At 6'2", 270lbs, Thomas can't do that down in and down out... Does anyone really think that Bob Sanders would have the ability, let alone the inclination, to use Thomas to the max of his ability???

Thomas is a perfect example of the type of player that would be disqualified from playing in the scheme the Packers run... if a defensive scheme can't use a guy like Thomas, then the scheme is junk.

Unless Green Bay made changes to their scheme, signing Thomas would be a waste.

[motife]

Adalius Thomas went to the Pro Bowl 3 years ago as a Special Teams headhunter. Anybody that can do that has a huge level of intensity.

I think if anything, that's what would intrigue any team.

Sizewise, as I said before, most DE's are not much over 270 nowadays, except Richard Seymour maybe. A typical DE is 6-3, 6-4 and 270.

If you want a pressure defense, he'd definitely be a piece of the puzzle.

Moneywise, don't DE's make more than OLB's? It's at least a wash.

[PackerPro42]

As good as Thomas is, if he's going to play DE I don't want him. I think that the DE position is pretty well set for next year and I don't think there is a need to pick up a high profile DE in FA in order to fill a non-need. If he's willing to fill the OLB position then by all means. The only thing I question is his ability to adapt to a 4-3 defense as a OLB or DE. I just don't think that picking up Thomas is a wise way to spend our money.

[Partial]

If Barnett only wants similar money to Henderson 5 years 25 mil. I will eat your hat Harvey and I would also sign him I think he wants 6 and 40-45 then you let him walk into the sunset and never look back he hasn't even made a fricking ProBowl. Thomas is a beast and I don't care if we play 4-3,3-4 2-6,6-2 whatever he would be a huge pickup.

Why does everyone think he wants top dollar? Nothing has led me to believe he wants anything more than fair market value, but in a longer contract.

I see no reason not to resign Barnett. He seems like the type of guy who would step his game up with a contract, ala Kampman.

[Partial]

As good as Thomas is, if he's going to play DE I don't want him. I think that the DE position is pretty well set for next year and I don't think there is a need to pick up a high profile DE in FA in order to fill a non-need. If he's willing to fill the OLB position then by all means. The only thing I question is his ability to adapt to a 4-3 defense as a OLB or DE. I just don't think that picking up Thomas is a wise way to spend our money.

They need playmakers period. Perhaps they'll play him at OLB and have the best linebacking corps in the league. Remember, in this scheme the WLB and SLB play almost the identical position.

[red]

i want proof that barnett wants top money. so many people know for a fact that he wants top LB money

so there must be proof

so i want to see a quote where nick barnett himself says that he wants huge money

[motife]

if we're going by the PFT report, it says Thomas would play with his hand down at DE, ala KGB.

I'd say hopefully, like Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney.

based on TT's approach to the draft, he seems to be looking for intensity at any position, regardless of need.

[motife]

sorry.. one more time. i love these.

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2006/09/17/PH2006091700381.jpghttp://images.nfl.com/photos/img7724698.jpghttp://images.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/_photos/2003-08-16-inside-vick2.jpg

http://www2.indystar.com/library/factfiles/sports/football/indpls_colts/2001_season/img/ravenfumble.jpghttp://ravenatic20.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/game15d.jpg

http://ravenatic20.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/game3d.jpg.w300h211.jpghttp://xe0.xanga.com/262d533175532106108939/z75068237.jpg

http://photos.signonsandiego.com/gallery1.5/albums/030922bal/JBsdBaltA209388x11.sized.jpg

[Cheesehead Craig]

My guess is that the Pats will be all over him.

That's a good bet. What other 3-4 teams have money and need a LB? Cleveland? Pittsburgh?
I think the Jets would be interested as well and have the cash. They run a 3-4 and he would be a monster there as well.

[wist43]

As good as Thomas is, if he's going to play DE I don't want him. I think that the DE position is pretty well set for next year and I don't think there is a need to pick up a high profile DE in FA in order to fill a non-need. If he's willing to fill the OLB position then by all means. The only thing I question is his ability to adapt to a 4-3 defense as a OLB or DE. I just don't think that picking up Thomas is a wise way to spend our money.

They need playmakers period. Perhaps they'll play him at OLB and have the best linebacking corps in the league. Remember, in this scheme the WLB and SLB play almost the identical position.

I would be more agreeable to bringing in Thomas as a LB; but, again, would they get big $$$ value out of Thomas as a LB???

Thomas's greatest attribute is his pass rush/penetration ability... Green Bay does very little with their LB's in terms of pass rush/penetration. The Packers blitz infrequently (by design), and when they do blitz, it's telegraphed and easy to pick up - do they really want to spend big bucks on a position where the guy is just going to be called on to make tackles 5 yds down the field???

Just playing devils advocate here... like I said, I'd love to have Thomas, but I fear the Packers scheme would neuter him, and ultimately he would be a waste of money - and from his standpoint, it would be a waste of his talent.

I don't know why he would even consider coming to a team that runs the scheme the Packers run.

[red]

i'm also guessing this is a smoke screen

but either way, i does kind of show TT is going to be a player early in FA, and not take another vacation

[vince]

My guess is that the Pats will be all over him.

That's a good bet. What other 3-4 teams have money and need a LB? Cleveland? Pittsburgh?
I think the Jets would be interested as well and have the cash. They run a 3-4 and he would be a monster there as well.
San Fran also - and they have more room under the cap than any team in the league.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If Barnett only wants similar money to Henderson 5 years 25 mil.

I didn't say he wanted that. I said his agent is looking into a deal for a little more than that. However, the landscape will change once Briggs gets his new deal. His agent will be looking at something in between what Briggs and Henderson make. What I'm saying is that $6M/year is not QB money anymore. Any decent QB will make at least $8M/year. Brees got that last year, and nobody (probably not even New Orleans) thought he was a All-Pro QB. If a guy like Marc Bulger were on the market now, he'd get WELL OVER $10M/year. To say he wants QB money is an overstatement based on salaries from a couple of years ago.

[rbaloha1]

My guess is the following:

AT is being signed to replace Poppinga

Cullen Jenkins will be resigned.

KGB will only be resigned for the NFL minimum

In passing situation, CJ moves to the inside and AT moves to an outside rusher

[motife]

regarding Middle Linebackers, my impression was they don't get OLB money.

[red]

My guess is the following:

AT is being signed to replace Poppinga

Cullen Jenkins will be resigned.

KGB will only be resigned for the NFL minimum

In passing situation, CJ moves to the inside and AT moves to an outside rusher

kgb's contract is not up for renegotiations.

[esoxx]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

[PackerPro42]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

You're right. If you put a bunch of all stars on a team, you could probably have Gary Coleman as the coach because scheme means absolutely nothing. You're speaking like a true madden player, scheme is the reason that the Patriots won 4 super bowls. If you look at their roster, they didn't have outstanding talent. Building a super star team has nothing to do with all star players. Sure it helps, but what a GM looks for is people that can fit their system the best and that are able to be the most productive in the scheme that they run. If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.

[PackerPro42]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

You're right. If you put a bunch of all stars on a team, you could probably have Gary Coleman as the coach because scheme means absolutely nothing. You're speaking like a true madden player, scheme is the reason that the Patriots won 3 super bowls. If you look at their roster, they didn't have outstanding talent. Building a winning team has nothing to do with all star players. Sure it helps, but what a GM looks for is people that can fit their system the best and that are able to be the most productive in the scheme that they run. If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.

[retailguy]

If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.


Sounds like the Redskins, 'cept for the bankrupt part. :wink:

[wist43]

In this case, scheme means everything...

Generally speaking, the Packers scheme is very limiting in the types of players you can bring in to play it... to me, Thomas/Merriman types have no place in this scheme - their talent would be wasted, and the big $$$ contract it would take to lure them would be wasted.

Thomas simply doesn't fit... at this point, the Packers would be much better off signing Jenkins to a 3-4 year extension... he fits the bill much better than does Thomas.

Like I said, I couldn't fathom why Thomas, or any 3-4 hybrid type of player would even consider a 4-3 team that runs a scheme like what the Packers run...

[Merlin]

Why wouldn't we keep all three and have the best linebacking corps in the league?

Because I'd rather have Poppinga than Barnett for the $$ and for what Poppinga brings

Back away from the crack pipe...

[Merlin]

Barnett is not a difference maker. I stand by that. I consider him and Poppinga very similar players as far as total talent. Barnett is stronger in teh pass, Poppinga is stronger in teh run and has shown alot of improvement in the pass. When it comes to paying for an impact player; I'd pay Thomas and let Barnett go becuase I think there is a big gap in the two as far as on field impact goes.

WOW......not a big impact player? You mean a negative impact player like Popinga? Barnett is a leader on the field, Popinga better against the run? When? After Barnett has the guy wrapped up and Popinga finally gets there?

WHAT TEAM WHERE YOU WATCHING??

[Packnut]

Just to echo a couple of earlier posts, scheme in the NFL means EVERYTHING. Way to many believe talent is the over-riding factor, but the Patriots have proven beyond ANY reasonable doubt that you get players who fit your scheme.

I would dis-agree though that he does'nt fit our scheme. For what-ever the reason, Sanders at times believes in putting his OLB on the slot or 4th WR. I hate this passs coverage scheme but if Sanders is intent on running it, then Thomas fits the bill. I'm not a Poppinga backer like most are here so I would be giddy with joy if TT got Thomas to replace Popp.

[esoxx]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

You're right. If you put a bunch of all stars on a team, you could probably have Gary Coleman as the coach because scheme means absolutely nothing. You're speaking like a true madden player, scheme is the reason that the Patriots won 4 super bowls. If you look at their roster, they didn't have outstanding talent. Building a super star team has nothing to do with all star players. Sure it helps, but what a GM looks for is people that can fit their system the best and that are able to be the most productive in the scheme that they run. If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.

You couldn't have misrepresented my post anymore if you had tried. But I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing with someone who thinks the Patriots "won 4 super bowls."

Tell Tom Brady, Richard Seymour, Tedy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison, Adam Vinatieri, Deon Branch, among others they're not talented. I doubt if Joey Harrington was QB they make a Super Bowl. Yeah, they have talent.

If you think scheme is the main thing that wins and you only need to plug in players that fit, then why did Belichick flop in Cleveland so badly? Surely his scheme and philosophies were similar back then. Maybe b/c he had an aging Bernie Kosar, Mike Tomczak and an erractic Vinny Testarverde as his starting QB's. In other words, talent. And at the most important position.

The NFL is a copycat league. If it's just the "Belichick scheme" it would be emulated and by theory it should be just as successful elsewhere.

No, the Patriots should be lauded as much for their player personnel moves and acquisitions as much as anything. But somehow that's always overlooked and a simple-minded "scheme" reason is asserted for such success. Puh-lease.

[prsnfoto]

If Barnett only wants similar money to Henderson 5 years 25 mil. I will eat your hat Harvey and I would also sign him I think he wants 6 and 40-45 then you let him walk into the sunset and never look back he hasn't even made a fricking ProBowl. Thomas is a beast and I don't care if we play 4-3,3-4 2-6,6-2 whatever he would be a huge pickup.

Why does everyone think he wants top dollar? Nothing has led me to believe he wants anything more than fair market value, but in a longer contract.

I see no reason not to resign Barnett. He seems like the type of guy who would step his game up with a contract, ala Kampman.

Because his agent has said they are closely watching the Briggs situation and feels Nick should get similar type money,it was either on here or JSO last week in an article you are right Nick did not say anything. Briggs is going to get huge money, if we offered Barnett 6 million a year right now I would bet he will turn it down. Why all the Barnett love I realize you guys haven't seen a great LB in GB for awhile but Barnett is only above average I am a little more generous than Wist he probably has him C-.

[PackerPro42]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

You're right. If you put a bunch of all stars on a team, you could probably have Gary Coleman as the coach because scheme means absolutely nothing. You're speaking like a true madden player, scheme is the reason that the Patriots won 4 super bowls. If you look at their roster, they didn't have outstanding talent. Building a super star team has nothing to do with all star players. Sure it helps, but what a GM looks for is people that can fit their system the best and that are able to be the most productive in the scheme that they run. If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.

You couldn't have misrepresented my post anymore if you had tried. But I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing with someone who thinks the Patriots "won 4 super bowls."

Tell Tom Brady, Richard Seymour, Tedy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison, Adam Vinatieri, Deon Branch, among others they're not talented. I doubt if Joey Harrington was QB they make a Super Bowl. Yeah, they have talent.

If you think scheme is the main thing that wins and you only need to plug in players that fit, then why did Belichick flop in Cleveland so badly? Surely his scheme and philosophies were similar back then. Maybe b/c he had an aging Bernie Kosar, Mike Tomczak and an erractic Vinny Testarverde as his starting QB's. In other words, talent. And at the most important position.

The NFL is a copycat league. If it's just the "Belichick scheme" it would be emulated and by theory it should be just as successful elsewhere.

No, the Patriots should be lauded as much for their player personnel moves and acquisitions as much as anything. But somehow that's always overlooked and a simple-minded "scheme" reason is asserted for such success. Puh-lease.

Congratulations on contradicting what you were trying to support. As I stated before, the scheme and correct players make a successful team, not all star talent. Yes, Bellicheck did flop in Cleveland, but the players did not fit his system well so they did not produce. However, Cleveland's D-Line is a prime example of scheme making a difference. While they did not produce in Cleveland, they went to a different schemed defense in Denver and produced huge numbers. And the Patriots Deon Branch is another example of the scheme making a huge difference as well as David Givens. Both produced extremely well in New England, but when Givens went to Tennessee and Branch went to Seattle, their production went way down. Thus supporting my theory that you don't need all star talent, but rather players that fit the scheme. Puh-lease.

[Packnut]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

You're right. If you put a bunch of all stars on a team, you could probably have Gary Coleman as the coach because scheme means absolutely nothing. You're speaking like a true madden player, scheme is the reason that the Patriots won 4 super bowls. If you look at their roster, they didn't have outstanding talent. Building a super star team has nothing to do with all star players. Sure it helps, but what a GM looks for is people that can fit their system the best and that are able to be the most productive in the scheme that they run. If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.

You couldn't have misrepresented my post anymore if you had tried. But I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing with someone who thinks the Patriots "won 4 super bowls."

Tell Tom Brady, Richard Seymour, Tedy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison, Adam Vinatieri, Deon Branch, among others they're not talented. I doubt if Joey Harrington was QB they make a Super Bowl. Yeah, they have talent.

If you think scheme is the main thing that wins and you only need to plug in players that fit, then why did Belichick flop in Cleveland so badly? Surely his scheme and philosophies were similar back then. Maybe b/c he had an aging Bernie Kosar, Mike Tomczak and an erractic Vinny Testarverde as his starting QB's. In other words, talent. And at the most important position.

The NFL is a copycat league. If it's just the "Belichick scheme" it would be emulated and by theory it should be just as successful elsewhere.

No, the Patriots should be lauded as much for their player personnel moves and acquisitions as much as anything. But somehow that's always overlooked and a simple-minded "scheme" reason is asserted for such success. Puh-lease.


It's not just the scheme, it's having the players who FIT the scheme you run. To say BB ran the same schemes in Cleveland as he does now is not really true. Like any coach, he tinkers and makes changes. What the Pats do better than anyone else is get the most out of their players with-in the scheme that they run.

Look at Branch. He did'nt tear it up in Seattle did he? Look at Garcia. Put him in a non WC offense and the guy sucks. If schemes are not important like you claim, then why are there certain coaches who always seem to have success every year even when the players change?

Take the Philly defensive coordinator. He runs the best blitzing schemes the league has ever seen and he does it every year no matter who the players are.

[wist43]

Barnett isn't even close to Briggs or Thomas...

That said, all three are very different players... Briggs is a solid all around LB, and Thomas is a hybrid that can be disruptive on all three levels - Barnett, on the other hand, has far more negatives (we've fought this one to death) than the other two do...

Regardless of system/scheme, Barnett has the least amount of value among the three... I don't think even the most ardent Barnett supporters would argue against that.

[prsnfoto]

Barnett is not a difference maker. I stand by that. I consider him and Poppinga very similar players as far as total talent. Barnett is stronger in teh pass, Poppinga is stronger in teh run and has shown alot of improvement in the pass. When it comes to paying for an impact player; I'd pay Thomas and let Barnett go becuase I think there is a big gap in the two as far as on field impact goes.

WOW......not a big impact player? You mean a negative impact player like Popinga? Barnett is a leader on the field, Popinga better against the run? When? After Barnett has the guy wrapped up and Popinga finally gets there?

WHAT TEAM WHERE YOU WATCHING??


Actually after his first two games Poops was solid, Barnett gave up the second most plays of over 20 yds after Manual,that is not a stat you want a LB in the lead,some of it can of course be attributed to the fact the Packers pretty much never played dime last year Dendy did OK and the coaches thought it better to leave Hawk and Barnett out rather than another CB. If they address this and Barnett is still sucking in coverage my grade of above average will be way too kind. You guys look at tackles way too much even I could probably get 8-10 tackles a game if KGB was in front of me, he is nothing but a blanket the runners have too shove aside to get to the next level, put Barnett or Hawk behind Kampman and their tackles are less than half what they get now.

[Zool]

I know its crazy...but isn't it possible that you need both talent and scheme to win a Superbowl? I know, lets argue about it.

[PackerPro42]

I know its crazy...but isn't it possible that you need both talent and scheme to win a Superbowl? I know, lets argue about it.

Yes, you need talent that fits your scheme, not all super stars will work in the Packers system. You need to find people with the right balance of talent and experience that fit your system perfectly. But it's not soley on talent. Like I said before, a super star team doesn't win championships, and that holds true to any sport. Just look at the U.S.A basketball team in the past olympics.

[esoxx]

I don't believe any of these offseason player acquistion rumors. Makes for interesting conversation but rarely come to fruition.

IF it were true it would be great. Worrying about where he's going to play is missing the point. You're adding another Pro Bowl talent to your defense. You win with talent, not scheme. Thomas would make an impact and you want more of those type of players versus JAGs. The more blue chips you have, the better your chances to win.

Sounds simple but sometimes people get so bogged down in peripheral thoughts they can't see the forest through the trees.

You're right. If you put a bunch of all stars on a team, you could probably have Gary Coleman as the coach because scheme means absolutely nothing. You're speaking like a true madden player, scheme is the reason that the Patriots won 4 super bowls. If you look at their roster, they didn't have outstanding talent. Building a super star team has nothing to do with all star players. Sure it helps, but what a GM looks for is people that can fit their system the best and that are able to be the most productive in the scheme that they run. If you just go throw all your money on "all star" players that don't fit you system, you'll go bankrupt and never have a successful team.

You couldn't have misrepresented my post anymore if you had tried. But I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing with someone who thinks the Patriots "won 4 super bowls."

Tell Tom Brady, Richard Seymour, Tedy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison, Adam Vinatieri, Deon Branch, among others they're not talented. I doubt if Joey Harrington was QB they make a Super Bowl. Yeah, they have talent.

If you think scheme is the main thing that wins and you only need to plug in players that fit, then why did Belichick flop in Cleveland so badly? Surely his scheme and philosophies were similar back then. Maybe b/c he had an aging Bernie Kosar, Mike Tomczak and an erractic Vinny Testarverde as his starting QB's. In other words, talent. And at the most important position.

The NFL is a copycat league. If it's just the "Belichick scheme" it would be emulated and by theory it should be just as successful elsewhere.

No, the Patriots should be lauded as much for their player personnel moves and acquisitions as much as anything. But somehow that's always overlooked and a simple-minded "scheme" reason is asserted for such success. Puh-lease.

Congratulations on contradicting what you were trying to support. As I stated before, the scheme and correct players make a successful team, not all star talent. Yes, Bellicheck did flop in Cleveland, but the players did not fit his system well so they did not produce. However, Cleveland's D-Line is a prime example of scheme making a difference. While they did not produce in Cleveland, they went to a different schemed defense in Denver and produced huge numbers. And the Patriots Deon Branch is another example of the scheme making a huge difference as well as David Givens. Both produced extremely well in New England, but when Givens went to Tennessee and Branch went to Seattle, their production went way down. Thus supporting my theory that you don't need all star talent, but rather players that fit the scheme. Puh-lease.

Congratulations on being mentally challenged. I contradicted nothing at all.

Oh so Belichick flopped in Cleveland b/c he just didn't have the "correct players"? How do you know the players didn't fit the scheme. Do you even know how many years he was at Cleveland? Judging by the vomit you just spewed you have no idea. He was there five seasons, and yet he couldn't find players to fit his scheme during that whole time. Ah, it must have been tough to do in the '90's.

But really, this is my favorite part of your ridiculous post:

"Yes, Bellicheck did flop in Cleveland, but the players did not fit his system well so they did not produce. However, Cleveland's D-Line is a prime example of scheme making a difference. While they did not produce in Cleveland, they went to a different schemed defense in Denver and produced huge numbers."

Hate to break it to you but those D-line players never played under Belichick in Cleveland. They only missed him by five or six years. Pretty close actually. :roll:

Oh, and how about those "huge numbers" those players put up in Denver. Can you cite them or are you just making things up? How about Gerad Warren? He's an improved player but in his entire career (five seasons) he only has 19.5 sacks and 169 tackles. I'm in awe of those huge numbers.

Should we compare Courtney Browns "huge numbers" with Denver next? You don't even want to know.

And I haven't played Madden since '96. :mrgreen:

[esoxx]

You're right Zool. My initial post wasn't meant to stimulate an argument of this nature. But when someone misrepresents what you said so badly, you need to defend yourself too.

But he has a grudge with me b/c I'm not on board his Marshawn Lynch whack-fest. So be it.

Now let's get back to discussing those four Super Bowls NE won.

Actually I'm done with this.

[PackerPro42]

I meant to type 3 super bowls in four years. But I posted that very quickly without reading it over. And I don't hate you because you don't like Marshawn Lynch, I was simply replying to what you posted. You can ask anybody in here, and they'll say they perceived your post the same way I did. I believe you stated that, "talent wins championships not scheme." After reading that I don't believe I took your post out of context at all.

And as for the cleveland D-Line, I was not refering to the players that Bellicheck coached, I just posted them as an example because they were the first thing to come to mind after talking about cleveland.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Barnett isn't even close to Briggs or Thomas...

That said, all three are very different players... Briggs is a solid all around LB, and Thomas is a hybrid that can be disruptive on all three levels - Barnett, on the other hand, has far more negatives (we've fought this one to death) than the other two do...

Regardless of system/scheme, Barnett has the least amount of value among the three... I don't think even the most ardent Barnett supporters would argue against that.
I like Barnett and agree with your post Wist. Compared to Briggs and Thomas, Barnett comes in third. I still however feel that he is a very good LB and maybe with not having to learn a new system for a year, he'll have a chance to get closer to their level.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I can agree with Barnett being behind Briggs (definitely) and Thomas (probably depends on the scheme). Somebody trying to insinuate Poppinga is close to Barnett is a joke. Barnett is closer to Briggs than Poppinga is to Barnett.

[Packnut]

I know its crazy...but isn't it possible that you need both talent and scheme to win a Superbowl? I know, lets argue about it.


Well, ya need a good QB, just ask the Bears! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Because his agent has said they are closely watching the Briggs situation and feels Nick should get similar type money,it was either on here or JSO last week in an article you are right Nick did not say anything. Briggs is going to get huge money, if we offered Barnett 6 million a year right now I would bet he will turn it down. Why all the Barnett love I realize you guys haven't seen a great LB in GB for awhile but Barnett is only above average I am a little more generous than Wist he probably has him C-.

Maybe you should read this again. As far as his agent saying that he may get a Briggs type offer next year when he's a FA is agent speak. That's what they are paid to do. He didn't say he'd ask for Briggs money this year. Even an agent knows they'd have to give up money to get an agreement a year in advance. Sounds like you are reading into more than it is. The quote about Barnett surely wanting a better deal is also the reporters comments... not his agent. I'm sure he'll want more, but at this point we don't know how much more. I'd guess not much more than that.


"We have common starting ground in that they'd like to have Nick for the long haul, and he'd like to be there for the long haul," Price said Tuesday. "That's pretty much all we've established at this point. There's an incredible starting position, and after talking to Andrew Brandt, we both feel good about working together to get this done."

Part of the market for linebackers was set late last year, when Minnesota's E.J. Henderson signed a five-year, $25 million deal in December that included a $10 million signing bonus. Barnett surely will want a better deal.

The questions are, how much better, and how close to the more lucrative deal Briggs probably will sign this offseason?

Briggs, 26, has become one of the NFL's top linebackers and was selected for his second Pro Bowl this season. He'll be a free agent on March 2, but the Bears are trying to sign him to a long-term deal before then, and if they can't, they're expected to use their franchise tag on him. That would guarantee Briggs a $7.2 million salary this year, though the Bears would try to reach a long-term agreement sometime in the offseason.

Barnett, who turns 26 in May, doesn't have Briggs' credentials — he hasn't been to a Pro Bowl — but he's one of the Packers' best young players and a core member of the defense. He's also proven to be durable. In four seasons as their middle linebacker, he has missed only one game. Last season, he broke his hand against New England on Nov. 19, then sat out the following week at Seattle before playing the rest of the season wearing a cast.

With the salary cap going up about $7 million this year to about $109 million, salaries for core players will continue to escalate. Barnett will have to weigh his desire to get paid similarly to Briggs against the risk of sustaining an injury, whether he could get a Briggs-type deal in free agency next year and whether the Packers might use their franchise tag on him. It's difficult to know how much guaranteed money Briggs will get if and when he signs a long-term deal, but a decent guess is the $15 million range.

"If things pan out and everybody gets a good look at the lay of the land and what free agency could bring for a guy like Lance Briggs this year," Price said, "then we'll probably be able to say, 'Look, if we got to this point next year you could make a pretty good argument Nick is going to get Lance Briggs money.'"

[RashanGary]

"If things pan out and everybody gets a good look at the lay of the land and what free agency could bring for a guy like Lance Briggs this year," Price said, "then we'll probably be able to say, 'Look, if we got to this point next year you could make a pretty good argument Nick is going to get Lance Briggs money.'"

LMAO...

This guy wants Briggs money. Just say "NO!!" TT. Just say "NO!!"

[retailguy]

IYou can ask anybody in here, and they'll say they perceived your post the same way I did. I believe you stated that, "talent wins championships not scheme."


I'm anybody and I don't agree with you or your perception.

Bellicheck was a DISASTER in Cleveland. I remember. Talent wins, but only wins big when accompanied by scheme. Scheme doesn't do anything without talent. Ask any coach who failed and got fired. You think they all have "bad" schemes? You can't be serious.

[motife]

Cliff Christl said it's Tom Brady that made the difference that won the Super Bowls. Belichick couldn't win in Cleveland, nor in New England with Drew Bledsoe.

Imagine the Packers without Reggie White.

[falco]

But he has a grudge with me b/c I'm not on board his Marshawn Lynch whack-fest. So be it.

Esoxx, I guess you are the new ballhawk. Look out!

[pbmax]

I think wist is right about the scheme. Adalius T isn't being sought after by the Packers (if at all) to play a hybrid LB/safety or in coverage.

If there is interest, its with him as RDE instead of KGB and Jenkins. I believe he would be an improvement over either. Jenkins distinguished himself this year at DE by not being KGB and stoutness against the run. But he isn't a long term answer at the primary pass rush position.

I disagree with wist over the chances for his success. Charles Haley and Jason Taylor have both succeeded in this D as undersized DEs whose best trait was their pass rush.

He may not be either of those players (and I haven't seen him play hand down DE much) but he is better than what we have.

That leaves me with the question about the source of the report, likely the agent or someone affiliated with the player. The Packers aren't blabbing about this.

[PackerPro42]

But he has a grudge with me b/c I'm not on board his Marshawn Lynch whack-fest. So be it.

Esoxx, I guess you are the new ballhawk. Look out!

Actually I don't dislike either of the guys. We just have different opinions and I enjoy debating what ever it may be. In this instance it's about whether scheme is the main part of a successful team or if all star talent is. In all reality it's a combination of both, but I do that the scheme is the most important part in determining what players a GM seeks out. In the Thomas scenario, whether he has talent or not, I believe he's purely a 3-4 player which supports my theory of the schemes being the most important. I'm not down grading his opinion at all, but this debate does seem to be a little harsh.

[BallHawk]

But he has a grudge with me b/c I'm not on board his Marshawn Lynch whack-fest. So be it.

Esoxx, I guess you are the new ballhawk. Look out!

Welcome to the club Esoxx! If you haven't noticed, it's a growing one. I predict by draft day we should have over 10 members!

[BallHawk]

I'm not down grading his opinion at all, but this debate does seem to be a little harsh.

Yeah, ridiculing someones opinion and being cocky and arrogant totally is NOT downgrading one's opinion. :roll:

[PackerPro42]

You're the one trying to instigate an argument right now and I really don't want to get into one. Like I stated before, I don't dislike either of you guys and enjoy the many debates we go through. And I believe that I get along well with everyone on this forum, even you two, regardless of our opinions.

[BallHawk]

You're the one trying to instigate an argument right now and I really don't want to get into one. Like I stated before, I don't dislike either of you guys and enjoy the many debates we go through. And I believe that I get along well with everyone on this forum, even you two, regardless of our opinions.

I don't care if you differ from my opinion, but you have to be the most cocky and arrogant person on this forum. If someone disagrees with your opinion you ridicule them and belittle them and that is why some people don't get along with you. I know I've said this before, but you just don't listen.

[PackerPro42]

I feel that you are the most bull headed and biggest smart ass on the forum. Maybe not to everyone, but to me you definitely are. This may be the same way you interpret me because of our feud that started on the Chad Jackson thread when you continuously down graded what I said and backed me into a corner. When you do that, someone is likely to come out with their fists up. Now I don't really care what you think about me as a person, but I don't like when you continuously contradict what I have to say regardless of what it is it. That kind of irritates me. I don't like fighting with you over this but it's come to a point where it can't go on. I haven't picked a fight with you since the Chad Jackson thread and I think it's time for you to back off of me a little bit as I will do to you.

And as for the not listening part, I don't really agree with that at all. I've carried on numerous discussions with people that have not resulted in any arguments. If I disagree with you, I will state why I disagree, but I mean nothing by it. If anything else develops from it then so be it.

And as for the people that don't get a log with me, the only two that are arguing with me are you and the newly acquired esoxx. For the most part, most people agree with me and for those who don't the state why and do it in a collective manner. I don't like getting into fights with anybody, but it seems that you are constantly looking to get into arguments with me.

[BallHawk]

You have selective memory, my friend. Go back to the Chad Jackson thread, actually read it. I didn't once downgrade your opinion. Hell, I didn't even talk to you until page 5.

This is a great forum and we have real quality people here. People that are courteous, polite, and respectful. You are none of those. You are dismissive, arrogant, and disgracious. I really try to listen to everyone's opinion and respond to them, respectfully. I try to ignore you, because, quite frankly, it makes this forum more enjoyable for me, but I can't. You're egotistical need to downplay everyone who disagrees with you makes it too hard for me to ignore. You're extremely immature and childish in that way. Perhaps I'm being childish right now, but I've just had enough. I've had enough of you and your constant bullshit. You offer some insight, but that is until someone disagrees and you regress to your normal ways. You are the only person I don't get along with. The one person who really pisses me off. Take a look at what you post and it's not hard to see why.

[Bretsky]

Rather than polluting a thread can you guys either

1. Take this BS to PM
2. Stop communicating or referring to each other's posts in any way, form, or matter
3. Be nice to each other


I like you both but every time you get after each other you both turn into jerks

[BallHawk]

Rather than polluting a thread can you guys either

1. Take this BS to PM
2. Stop communicating or referring to each other's posts in any way, form, or matter
3. Be nice to each other


I like you both but every time you get after each other you both turn into jerks

Bretsky is correct, I do turn into an ass when I do this, and I apologize to everybody that I irritate by this back and forth argument. I just can't help it, though. That sounds cheap, I know, but I can't. I really can't along with him because of his arrogance. And I'm certainly not going to limit by participating in this forum because of him.

[Bretsky]

Rather than polluting a thread can you guys either

1. Take this BS to PM
2. Stop communicating or referring to each other's posts in any way, form, or matter
3. Be nice to each other


I like you both but every time you get after each other you both turn into jerks

Bretsky is correct, I do turn into an ass when I do this, and I apologize to everybody that I irritate by this back and forth argument. I just can't help it, though. That sounds cheap, I know, but I can't. I really can't along with him because of his arrogance. And I'm certainly not going to limit by participating in this forum because of him.


Personally I like both of you as posters; and both of you can certainly rise above this stuff if you choose.


Cheers,
B

[motife]

yes, let's be nice to each other. :glug:

to cheer us up, here's a nice song featuring the Trailer Park Boys. those who haven't seen the show, from Canada, are really missing out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6ULrj8tBPs

[Partial]

I'm not down grading his opinion at all, but this debate does seem to be a little harsh.

Yeah, ridiculing someones opinion and being cocky and arrogant totally is NOT downgrading one's opinion. :roll:

Yes but that is a cocky bitch way of responding. Knock it off, you two fight like brother and sister.

[GrnBay007]

Time for a group hug! :P :wink:

[BallHawk]

I'm not down grading his opinion at all, but this debate does seem to be a little harsh.

Yeah, ridiculing someones opinion and being cocky and arrogant totally is NOT downgrading one's opinion. :roll:

Yes but that is a cocky bitch way of responding. Knock it off, you two fight like brother and sister.

Your right, and once again I apologize for the constant arguing. Hopefully I'll find a solution, eventually.

[Bretsky]

Time for a group hug! :P :wink:

Yes, get all the girls together so it's a happier hug. Guys don't do group hugs :lol:

[KYPack]

Time for a group hug! :P :wink:

Yeah, double OH,

It 's time for the group hug or get out the old fire hose and hose both of 'em down!

[Bretsky]

Time for a group hug! :P :wink:

Yes, get all the girls together so it's a happier hug. Guys don't do group hugs :lol:

[red]

ahhh

this thread brings back good ole memories for me, what about you retailguy?

[Packers4Glory]

how far Hodge has fallen on this board.

I love Nick B. at MLB. He is fast and I feel extremely underrated. At this point w/ Brady and Hodge I'm not for picking up any high priced FA for LB..that would be a waste of money considering we have far bigger needs on offense and defensively in the secondary.

So unless he replaces KGB who is traded for a pick or ?? this would be wasted $ when there are bigger weakness to fill other than LB which is the strength of our defense.

OUr starting LB trio is really good IMO and will get better. I'm amazed at how people want to give up on Brady when I thought he was playing really well the last half of the season..his first season as a starter and coming off a serious injury the yr prior.

[BallHawk]

I tend to agree with you, P4G. I don't think we've given up in Hodge, not by any means, he's just very raw and not ready to be a starting Linebacker. Also, and this will have to be decided if we sign Adaleius Thomas, whether he will play DE or LB. Regardless, it's good to have someone with a lot of flexibility, so he can fit our needs throughout the season.

[wist43]

I tend to agree with you, P4G. I don't think we've given up in Hodge, not by any means, he's just very raw and not ready to be a starting Linebacker. Also, and this will have to be decided if we sign Adaleius Thomas, whether he will play DE or LB. Regardless, it's good to have someone with a lot of flexibility, so he can fit our needs throughout the season.

I'm still high on Hodge... I was suprised when they picked him, b/c on the surface he didn't seem to be a good fit for the scheme, and I think that has born itself out over his rookie season...

The Packers ask too much of their LB's in coverage, IMO... Hodge is a downhill, tackling, hitting machine - coverage is his achilles heel; and, Green Bay's preference at just about every position is to have players that are strong in coverage - they'd put 11 corners on the field every play if they could.

I've touted Hodge from b/4 last years draft, but I'm not really surprised that he's gotten lost in Green Bay's scheme.

He'll likely amount to nothing in Green Bay, and hopefully move on to a team that has a scheme that will take advantage of his strenths.

[Patler]

I have some doubts about Hodge being suitable as a long-term starter in any NFL scheme. NFL middle linebackers seem to to be of two types. Today, most seem to be oversize safeties who can run well and are quick. Others are undersized defensive lineman who can plug a hole, shrug off a blocking fullback and not surrender ground to offensive linemen. The really good middle linebackers excel as one type and are better than average as the other type.

I'm not sure where Hodge fits in. Clearly he does not have the speed or quickness like many linebackers of the first type. I don't think we should confuse his hard hits with the physical presence of linebackers of the second type. As I recall, in the Seattle game he was blocked easily, and physically dominated somewhat regularly. I'm certainly not ready to give up on him, technique means much more at the pro level than it does in college. Perhaps with improved technique he will improve in both areas of play.

He could end up being one of those players who makes good solid hard hits but is too infrequently in position to make a tackle and will never be anything more than a backup. His apparent lack of performance on special teams is a concern, as backup linebackers typically have to be solid special teams performers to have a lengthy career..

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm tend to agree with you patler. It's convenient to really talk up a guy, and then excuse his deficiencies on the Packers scheme. I don't know if he has the speed to play in any scheme.

[wist43]

You can't just dismiss a players suitability for a given scheme... that very subject has made up the core of debate over Thomas.

Thomas is a great player in the Ravens 3-4 scheme... he'd be just another miscast guy in the Packers POS scheme.

Hodge is a lights out hitter, has great instincts, is a solid wrap up tackler, and is tough as nails... he's got a place in the NFL - it's just not going to be in GB.

Beyond that, Hodge is what he is - a 2-down MLB... If Jerimiah Trotter can survive and excel at the NFL level as a 2-down MLB, Hodge should be able to as well.

But, just like Hodge, Trotter would have no place on the Packers roster either... just by way of scheme, there are an awful lot of good football players that the Packers couldn't, or wouldn't, even consider bringing in.

By way of example I would put Trotter, Thomas, Merriman, Rodney Harrison, etc... as examples of guys that have no place on the Packers roster - given their scheme.

[MJZiggy]

So there's never been a player that's adapted to a new scheme? Never happened in the history of football?

[packiowa]

I also found Hodge's lack of ST production especially disturbing. On the other hand, in that Seattle game Hodge had a couple things working against him. He played against a great rb, he had a quality, athletic center on his butt all game long, and the weather was sloppy which makes for more missed tackles than normal. Wait a second, was I talking about Hodge or Urlacher in the Superbowl. I can't remember.

[red]

I also found Hodge's lack of ST production especially disturbing.

i'll third that

and its not like our ST's were all world, we had all kinds of scrubs on coverage

[Patler]

Hodge is a lights out hitter, has great instincts, is a solid wrap up tackler, and is tough as nails... he's got a place in the NFL - it's just not going to be in GB.

Beyond that, Hodge is what he is - a 2-down MLB... If Jerimiah Trotter can survive and excel at the NFL level as a 2-down MLB, Hodge should be able to as well.


You are doing exactly what I think is wrong, equating Hodge's hard hits to Trotter's strong physical presence at middle linebacker. Trotter has been successful because he can clog up running lanes, throw fullbacks aside and stop linemen in their tracks, giving the back no where to run. I have seen nothing to suggest that Hodge can do the same, especially at 30-40 pounds lighter than Trotter. Against Seattle, Hodge was blown out of the way, opening huge running lanes. He had neither the physical presence to stand up to the blocks, nor the quickness to avoid a block or recover from it.

As one of the columnists wrote, Hodge played perhaps the worst game a middle linebacker has played for the Packers in anyone's memory. He has a long way to go to reverse that.

[BallHawk]

.By way of example I would put Trotter, Thomas, Merriman, Rodney Harrison, etc... as examples of guys that have no place on the Packers roster - given their scheme.
So you're saying that, hypothetically, if Shawn Merriman was traded to the Packers, he'd be absolute garbage and he'd never make a Pro Bowl again?

[wist43]

So there's never been a player that's adapted to a new scheme? Never happened in the history of football?

By way of example, Corey Williams is a servicable 4-3 tackle... and I'd imagine would be a servicable 3-4 end; Joey Porter is the type of LB that could play just about anywhere; Mike Wahle is G that could play in just about any scheme... etc. Of course there are players that can play in different schemes, and adapt their games...

That said, and this goes back to the Thomas debate, where would the Packers play him in their scheme???

As a full time end??? A lot of us would argue that b/c Green Bay's scheme is very predicable and static, he'd be matched up with the OT virutally every snap, and he'd wear down over the course of the season.

As an early down LB, with his hand on the ground in passing situations??? I would argue this is a much more plausible scenario, but in Green Bay's very, very static defense - Thomas would essentially become a stationary target, and hence the presnap movement and confusion that now works to his advantage in Baltimore is gone...

The same schematic concerns could just as easily be raised with a great player like Shawn Merriman... Great player, bad fit for the Packers predictable/passive scheme.

Scheme matters... Green Bay's defensive scheme calls for a specific type of player at just about every position. Merriman, Thomas, Hodge, et al... don't fit the scheme.

[wist43]

.By way of example I would put Trotter, Thomas, Merriman, Rodney Harrison, etc... as examples of guys that have no place on the Packers roster - given their scheme.
So you're saying that, hypothetically, if Shawn Merriman was traded to the Packers, he'd be absolute garbage and he'd never make a Pro Bowl again?

Merriman is a great player, but where would you play him???

At LB??? The Packers rarely blitz, and generally ask their LB's to read and flow... hell, the Packers don't even ask their LB's to shoot gaps and get penetration. Merriman would be all but neutered at LB in the Packers scheme.

At end??? The Packers ask their DE's to get up field and defeat the OT - play after play... is Merriman a full time end??? I don't think so.

A player like Merriman would never be "garbage", but the Packers scheme certainly would limit his ability to be disruptive.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If the Packers had Merriman, I'm sure they'd blitz more. Not only that he can play DE in the Packers scheme on passing downs because they don't need big DEs (thus, the reason Kampman has lost 10-15 pounds the last couple of years) and they'd line their guys way outside. Merriman can fit any scheme. Hodge doesn't, and I'm not even sure he's good enough for a scheme that fits him perfectly. Patler makes a good point about the difference between Trotter (in his prime, he's a shell of himself at this point) and Hodge.

[wist43]

Hodge is a lights out hitter, has great instincts, is a solid wrap up tackler, and is tough as nails... he's got a place in the NFL - it's just not going to be in GB.

Beyond that, Hodge is what he is - a 2-down MLB... If Jerimiah Trotter can survive and excel at the NFL level as a 2-down MLB, Hodge should be able to as well.


You are doing exactly what I think is wrong, equating Hodge's hard hits to Trotter's strong physical presence at middle linebacker. Trotter has been successful because he can clog up running lanes, throw fullbacks aside and stop linemen in their tracks, giving the back no where to run. I have seen nothing to suggest that Hodge can do the same, especially at 30-40 pounds lighter than Trotter. Against Seattle, Hodge was blown out of the way, opening huge running lanes. He had neither the physical presence to stand up to the blocks, nor the quickness to avoid a block or recover from it.

As one of the columnists wrote, Hodge played perhaps the worst game a middle linebacker has played for the Packers in anyone's memory. He has a long way to go to reverse that.

Trotter and Hodge are dissimilar players, I just used Trotter as an example b/c he is strictly a 2-down LB. I don't have the Seattle game on tape anymore - wish I did.

As things stand now, I'm content with their current lineup of Hawk, Barnett, and Poppinga. Ultimately, I'd like to see Barnett replaced, but I don't think that's going to happen, and he did play at least average last year...

The fact that Hawk was playing at a pretty high level by seasons end is encouraging.

[wist43]

If the Packers had Merriman, I'm sure they'd blitz more. Not only that he can play DE in the Packers scheme on passing downs because they don't need big DEs (thus, the reason Kampman has lost 10-15 pounds the last couple of years) and they'd line their guys way outside. Merriman can fit any scheme. Hodge doesn't, and I'm not even sure he's good enough for a scheme that fits him perfectly. Patler makes a good point about the difference between Trotter (in his prime, he's a shell of himself at this point) and Hodge.

I agreed with Patlers comments on Hodge/Trotter...

Don't agree with you about Merriman though... I think just about any team, with just about any scheme would find a way to make him effective - except the Packers, and the POS scheme they run.

There is absolutely no subterfuge to this defense... the DE's get up the field, the DT's two-gap more often than not in an attempt to protect the LB's, and the LB's sit back and flow to the ball - pretty vanilla stuff.

Merriman's talent would be wasted in the Green Bay's scheme, just as I think Thomas's would... unless of course Sanders suddenly sprouted a brain, and decided to get more creative - doubt that will happen though.

[Patler]

I would not be surprised to see all new backup linebackers next season. Neither White nor Taylor are under contract. I doubt that Taylor has any interest in returning. He expected to see more playing time than he got. White seems to know and understand that his role is special teams, based on a couple interviews last season. He and TT have some hsitory together, so he could be re-signed. I would not be at all surprised to see Hodge replaced by a draft pick this year. On the other hand, I also won't be surprised if he is given another year to prove himself. That group needs a decent, reliable, versatile even if unspectacular sub. (I think I just described Ben Taylor, absent his injury history!)

[SkinBasket]

Barnett is not a difference maker. I stand by that. I consider him and Poppinga very similar players as far as total talent. Barnett is stronger in teh pass, Poppinga is stronger in teh run and has shown alot of improvement in the pass. When it comes to paying for an impact player; I'd pay Thomas and let Barnett go becuase I think there is a big gap in the two as far as on field impact goes.

WOW......not a big impact player? You mean a negative impact player like Popinga? Barnett is a leader on the field, Popinga better against the run? When? After Barnett has the guy wrapped up and Popinga finally gets there?

WHAT TEAM WHERE YOU WATCHING??


Actually after his first two games Poops was solid, Barnett gave up the second most plays of over 20 yds after Manual,that is not a stat you want a LB in the lead,some of it can of course be attributed to the fact the Packers pretty much never played dime last year Dendy did OK and the coaches thought it better to leave Hawk and Barnett out rather than another CB. If they address this and Barnett is still sucking in coverage my grade of above average will be way too kind. You guys look at tackles way too much even I could probably get 8-10 tackles a game if KGB was in front of me, he is nothing but a blanket the runners have too shove aside to get to the next level, put Barnett or Hawk behind Kampman and their tackles are less than half what they get now.

Poppinga was "solid" after the first two games? Dendy did "OK?" Barnett and Poppinga are the same talent-wise?

WTF people. If you're just going to start making shit up, at least try to include some semblance of reality in your nonsense. I mean, thanks for the laughs and everything, but either you fellas didn't actually watch the games last season or you have very very poor memories.

[Packnut]

Barnett is not a difference maker. I stand by that. I consider him and Poppinga very similar players as far as total talent. Barnett is stronger in teh pass, Poppinga is stronger in teh run and has shown alot of improvement in the pass. When it comes to paying for an impact player; I'd pay Thomas and let Barnett go becuase I think there is a big gap in the two as far as on field impact goes.

WOW......not a big impact player? You mean a negative impact player like Popinga? Barnett is a leader on the field, Popinga better against the run? When? After Barnett has the guy wrapped up and Popinga finally gets there?

WHAT TEAM WHERE YOU WATCHING??

Some things that people post just make ya scratch your head and say WTF. Dendy blew so many plays that I lost count. Poppinga was all hype and no play. Just because he came back from a serious injury and he has the heart of a lion, people think he played better than he did cause that is what they want to see. He made no earth shattering plays. He was learning on the job.

That said, I'm looking forward to some serious improvement in his play this season. I think he'll come through.


Actually after his first two games Poops was solid, Barnett gave up the second most plays of over 20 yds after Manual,that is not a stat you want a LB in the lead,some of it can of course be attributed to the fact the Packers pretty much never played dime last year Dendy did OK and the coaches thought it better to leave Hawk and Barnett out rather than another CB. If they address this and Barnett is still sucking in coverage my grade of above average will be way too kind. You guys look at tackles way too much even I could probably get 8-10 tackles a game if KGB was in front of me, he is nothing but a blanket the runners have too shove aside to get to the next level, put Barnett or Hawk behind Kampman and their tackles are less than half what they get now.

Poppinga was "solid" after the first two games? Dendy did "OK?" Barnett and Poppinga are the same talent-wise?

WTF people. If you're just going to start making shit up, at least try to include some semblance of reality in your nonsense. I mean, thanks for the laughs and everything, but either you fellas didn't actually watch the games last season or you have very very poor memories.

[pbmax]

Kampman somehow managed to play DE on the power side at 274. And there have been many who have weighted that and been effective (McGinest, Haley, Taylor). He is at least 20 lbs heavier than KGB. He played DE in college.

He might suffer at DE compared to his current OLB role as his skills may be better suited to playing and attacking in space. But wearing down won't be the hurdle to succeeding at DE.


... That said, and this goes back to the Thomas debate, where would the Packers play him in their scheme???

As a full time end??? A lot of us would argue that b/c Green Bay's scheme is very predicable and static, he'd be matched up with the OT virutally every snap, and he'd wear down over the course of the season ....

[wist43]

Kampman somehow managed to play DE on the power side at 274. And there have been many who have weighted that and been effective (McGinest, Haley, Taylor). He is at least 20 lbs heavier than KGB. He played DE in college.

He might suffer at DE compared to his current OLB role as his skills may be better suited to playing and attacking in space. But wearing down won't be the hurdle to succeeding at DE.


... That said, and this goes back to the Thomas debate, where would the Packers play him in their scheme???

As a full time end??? A lot of us would argue that b/c Green Bay's scheme is very predicable and static, he'd be matched up with the OT virutally every snap, and he'd wear down over the course of the season ....

Maybe he can do it, and maybe he can't... if the Packers signed him they would necessarily ask him to play a style of football, that heretofor, he has yet to play at the NFL level. Point in fact, is that Thomas has never played DE, down in and down out.

All of the presnap movement and subterfuge employed by the Ravens has worked to his advantage... in Green Bay, it's just straight up beat the tackle - down, after down, after down, after down... The Tackles always know who's coming, they know where they're going to lineup, and given all that predictability, breakdowns in opposing blocking schemes are rare... making it all the more difficult for the DE to be successful.

In order for this scheme to be successful, it needs two Pro Bowl calibur DE's... the Packers don't have that (Kampman played pretty well last year, but I don't consider him to be a pro bowl calibur player), and acquiring them is both difficult and expensive.

If they were to sign Thomas, I sure as hell hope he can play DE full time, otherwise he'd be wasted signing. Like I've said though, I don't know why he'd even consider coming to a team like the Packers - in a 3-4 he's a monster. In a 4-3 he's - who knows????

[SkinBasket]

In order for this scheme to be successful, it needs two Pro Bowl calibur DE's... the Packers don't have that (Kampman played pretty well last year, but I don't consider him to be a pro bowl calibur player), and acquiring them is both difficult and expensive.

I don't mean to bust your balls on a tangential point here, but could you maybe explain why you don't think Kampman is a ProBowl caliber player? He went to the Pro Bowl, didn't he? Doesn't that in and of itself make one a Pro Bowl caliber player? Especially given he isn't exactly one of those guys that gets in year in and year out simply because of the name on his jersey.

[MJZiggy]

Exactly how many sacks would Kampman have to accumulate in a season to be considered Pro Bowl caliber? He's a damn good DE and never stops trying to improve no matter how good he gets.

[SkinBasket]

Exactly how many sacks would Kampman have to accumulate in a season to be considered Pro Bowl caliber? He's a damn good DE and never stops trying to improve no matter how good he gets.

I think for some he just needs to get real, real tan. Until then he's obviously just an overachiever. Try-hard kind of guy, you know? :roll:

[Patler]

Exactly how many sacks would Kampman have to accumulate in a season to be considered Pro Bowl caliber? He's a damn good DE and never stops trying to improve no matter how good he gets.

There are 299 defensive linemen of all types, ends, tackles, whatever you want to call them who were tracked statistically by the NFL Of the 299 defensive linemen, Kampman was:

#1 in sacks
#1 in combined tackles and assisted tackles
#2 in tackles
#3 in assisted tackles
#4 in solo tackles

Since that is among ALL linemen, I think he deserves to be considered one of the 6 or so best ends.

[Oscar]

Very well done Patler. A point well made.

[wist43]

Wow... you guys need to get a room when it comes to Kampman!!!

I like Kampman, always have, but to say he's one of the 5 or 6 best DL in all of football is insane...

Hell, teams thought absolutely nothing of blocking him with a TE... it happened all the time - and not just on plays away from him... they'd assign a TE to him straight up in pass blocking. Granted, he would defeat that block a good amount of the time, and I think offensive coordinators stopped doing it as much as the season wore on, but still... that's a pretty disrespectful slap in the face for any DE to take.

Furthermore, while Kampman may have made the pro bowl, I don't consider him a pro bowl calibur player, i.e. a difference maker. Just as Chicago made the SB, I don't consider them a SB calibur team.

[4and12to12and4]

Wow... you guys need to get a room when it comes to Kampman!!!

I like Kampman, always have, but to say he's one of the 5 or 6 best DL in all of football is insane...

Hell, teams thought absolutely nothing of blocking him with a TE... it happened all the time - and not just on plays away from him... they'd assign a TE to him straight up in pass blocking. Granted, he would defeat that block a good amount of the time, and I think offensive coordinators stopped doing as much as the season wore on, but still... that's a pretty disrespectful slap in the face for any DE to take.

Furthermore, while Kampman may have made the pro bowl, I don't consider him a pro bowl calibur player, i.e. a difference maker. Just as Chicago made the SB, I don't consider them a SB calibur team.

You obvoiusly didn't watch the Pro Bowl, Kaampman only registered 4 tackles, but he was beating his guy all game long putting pressure on AFC QB's. I TVO'd the game just to solely watch his performance and was not expecting much of him against the big boys he'd be facing, but Peyton kept him in almost the entire game and he REALLY held his own!! In fact, he was the reason for a sack in the first half, (can't remember who got the sack), but he pressured the QB to move deep into the pocket right into the arms of the other end (it might have been Johnson). But, watching him, he was running around all over the place filling gaps, he even caught LT from behind 7 yards past the line of scrimmage after he broke through the line and saved a big run, LT probably had to make one or two db's miss for a TD, but Aaron dove from an angle that wasn't easy to make the tackle and wrapped him up. It was very impressive. I gained a ton of respect for him after watching him in Hawaii. For some reason, maybe because he doesn't look big enough for the position, I keep thinking he's becoming overrated, but, he simply has got more strength than he looks like, and has GREAT instincts. He's the real deal, and I agree he is in the top ten in the league. I mean, 15.5 sacks doesn't just "accidentally happen. He's a very cerebral player.

[wist43]

Look, Kampman is a nice player... you can win with guys like Kampman in your starting lineup; but, don't mistake him for a difference maker.

At the end of the day, he's a "lunch pail" guy...

Does any team, in their preparations for Green Bay say, "we have to account for Kampman"??? Of course not... he's not a difference maker.

Do teams, in their prep for San Diego say, "we have to account for Merriman"??? Of course they do... b/c he's a true difference maker.

The only difference maker on Green Bay's roster is Brett Favre. In his prime, you could've added Ahman Green to that list; Donald Driver is getting close; and, Hawk can maybe get there - but that's it.

Kampman is what he is - a nice player, that if taken lightly can make an opponent pay; but he certainly doesn't strike fear in the hearts of opposing OC's and ROT's... he's not a difference maker.

[Scott Campbell]

Do teams, in their prep for San Diego say, "we have to account for Merriman"??? Of course they do... b/c he's a true difference maker.


I think teams have to account for Merriman's personal Chemist.

[BallHawk]

Donald Driver w/o question is there. Kampman is undeniably a guy you have to plan for.

[SkinBasket]

At the end of the day, he's a "lunch pail" guy...

In other words, he is white.

What the fuck more do you want out of a DE? Did you decide to just ingore the stats Patler posted? Did you even watch GBs games this year? I don't think you did after reading your assertation that Kampman was solely going up against TEs. What you seemed to miss was Kampman beating the OL he was matched against BEFORE getting to the TE double.

To hell with it. Either you're trying to provoke a response from the people who know what the hell they're talking about, or you're playing the part of the bafoon for kicks. Then again, maybe you ain't playin'.

[Patler]

I like Kampman, always have, but to say he's one of the 5 or 6 best DL in all of football is insane...

Hell, teams thought absolutely nothing of blocking him with a TE... it happened all the time - and not just on plays away from him... they'd assign a TE to him straight up in pass blocking. Granted, he would defeat that block a good amount of the time, and I think offensive coordinators stopped doing it as much as the season wore on, but still... that's a pretty disrespectful slap in the face for any DE to take.


First, I did not say he was one of the 5 or 6 best DL in all of football. I compared him statistically to all lineman, but specifically said he was one of the six or so best ends.

It really doesn't matter who they tried to block Kampman with, the fact is they were not successful. Further, I dispute your assertion that blocking him with a TE "happened all the time". I think it was the Vikings who tried it and Kampman abused them for it. I will admit, there was a time in the middle of the season when Kampman did not do well against a few fairly pedestrian tackles he went up against, but that was only a couple weeks. PLayers have ups and downs, they all do.

I'm not sure what you think a pro-bowl player is. He is not necessarily a future HOFer. He is simply one of the best at his position that year. If Kampman is not "pro-bowl calibre" then you should be able to name 8 or 10 DEs who are, to make it clear that he is not. Who were they in the 2006 season?

[wist43]

At the end of the day, he's a "lunch pail" guy...

In other words, he is white.

What the fuck more do you want out of a DE? Did you decide to just ingore the stats Patler posted? Did you even watch GBs games this year? I don't think you did after reading your assertation that Kampman was solely going up against TEs. What you seemed to miss was Kampman beating the OL he was matched against BEFORE getting to the TE double.

To hell with it. Either you're trying to provoke a response from the people who know what the hell they're talking about, or you're playing the part of the bafoon for kicks. Then again, maybe you ain't playin'.

Mr. Basket,

I don't have to try to "provoke" a response from the regulars... we're usually at loggerheads when it comes to the talent level of the Packers - I accuse them of seeing the team thru G&G glasses, and they accuse me of being hard headed and acidic by nature... all of which are generally true, lol.

That said, I can assure you I understand the game... in fact, I considered coaching as a career, and I still study the game as a hobby.

Stats generally mean nothing w/o context... Barnett defenders prattle on endlessly about tackle stats, but they mean nothing if they're consistently coming 10 yds downfield, or as the result of being the closest defender when a ball carrier goes out of bounds. Game changing plays??? Tackles for loss??? Forced Fumbles??? Sacks???... Barnett is sadly lacking.

Barnett... tackles, yes - game changing plays, no - difference maker, no.

Same case with Kampman - although I like Kampman a hell of a lot more than I like Barnett.

Kampman gets his numbers from hustle. He rarely beats an OT around the corner, and he rarely is able to bull rush an OT straight back to the QB... He gets his sacks as the result of good coverage and the QB having to hold the ball... beyond that, he benefits from having KGB on the other side - where KGB, even if he doesn't consistently do it, is able to flush the QB over to Kampman's side b/c he's a fairly consistent upfield rusher.

I just got done watching the first 2 1/2 quarters of the 1st Detroit game... and just as I mentioned, the offensive game plan of the Lions called for Kampman to be blocked by the TE, straight up, in a normal 5 step drop... There was another instance in which Kampman was double teamed by two TE's, and a handful (3 or 4) of times in which he was chipped by the back. Every other snap he was singled up on Jonathon Scott, a rookie OT, and Scott handled him pretty easily.

As I said, I think offensive coordinators stopped trying to block him with a TE as the season wore on; but still, nothing much really changed - Kampman still wasn't bowling anybody over. He just hustled, worked hard, and put the QB, or ball carrier on the ground when he had the opportunity.

Like I said, I like Kampman and always have... he's just never going to be a difference maker.

[wist43]

I like Kampman, always have, but to say he's one of the 5 or 6 best DL in all of football is insane...

Hell, teams thought absolutely nothing of blocking him with a TE... it happened all the time - and not just on plays away from him... they'd assign a TE to him straight up in pass blocking. Granted, he would defeat that block a good amount of the time, and I think offensive coordinators stopped doing it as much as the season wore on, but still... that's a pretty disrespectful slap in the face for any DE to take.


First, I did not say he was one of the 5 or 6 best DL in all of football. I compared him statistically to all lineman, but specifically said he was one of the six or so best ends.

It really doesn't matter who they tried to block Kampman with, the fact is they were not successful. Further, I dispute your assertion that blocking him with a TE "happened all the time". I think it was the Vikings who tried it and Kampman abused them for it. I will admit, there was a time in the middle of the season when Kampman did not do well against a few fairly pedestrian tackles he went up against, but that was only a couple weeks. PLayers have ups and downs, they all do.

I'm not sure what you think a pro-bowl player is. He is not necessarily a future HOFer. He is simply one of the best at his position that year. If Kampman is not "pro-bowl calibre" then you should be able to name 8 or 10 DEs who are, to make it clear that he is not. Who were they in the 2006 season?

Patler,

I did notice that after I posted you had, in fact, said only DE's as opposed to all defensive linemen - so you're assertion is only slightly less "insane", lol.

To me, a pro bowler is someone who is a difference maker... just as I would argue that Chicago, or any NFC team for that matter, wasn't worthy of being a SB team, I would also argue that certain players aren't worthy of being considered pro bowlers, even though they've been voted into the game.

I mean somebody has to go, right??? Just as a team from the NFC was pigeon holed into the SB. Does anyone really think that Chicago was better than San Diego, New England, or Baltimore???

I guess when I refer to a "pro bowl calibur player", I'm referring to difference maker... Flash, hype, showboating... means nothing to me.

Had to do an edit... sucked in my bowling league tonight, so I drowned my sorrows with a couple of beers - too many!!!!

"Who else could go for some flap jacks"???!!!! .... Drunk guy from "Groundhog Day"... Sounds pretty good about now!!!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Who were the 6 difference making DEs who were better this year?

[SkinBasket]

Mr. Basket,

I don't have to try to "provoke" a response from the regulars... we're usually at loggerheads when it comes to the talent level of the Packers - I accuse them of seeing the team thru G&G glasses, and they accuse me of being hard headed and acidic by nature... all of which are generally true, lol.

That said, I can assure you I understand the game... in fact, I considered coaching as a career, and I still study the game as a hobby.

Stats generally mean nothing w/o context... Barnett defenders prattle on endlessly about tackle stats, but they mean nothing if they're consistently coming 10 yds downfield, or as the result of being the closest defender when a ball carrier goes out of bounds. Game changing plays??? Tackles for loss??? Forced Fumbles??? Sacks???... Barnett is sadly lacking.

Barnett... tackles, yes - game changing plays, no - difference maker, no.

Same case with Kampman - although I like Kampman a hell of a lot more than I like Barnett.

Kampman gets his numbers from hustle. He rarely beats an OT around the corner, and he rarely is able to bull rush an OT straight back to the QB... He gets his sacks as the result of good coverage and the QB having to hold the ball... beyond that, he benefits from having KGB on the other side - where KGB, even if he doesn't consistently do it, is able to flush the QB over to Kampman's side b/c he's a fairly consistent upfield rusher.

I just got done watching the first 2 1/2 quarters of the 1st Detroit game... and just as I mentioned, the offensive game plan of the Lions called for Kampman to be blocked by the TE, straight up, in a normal 5 step drop... There was another instance in which Kampman was double teamed by two TE's, and a handful (3 or 4) of times in which he was chipped by the back. Every other snap he was singled up on Jonathon Scott, a rookie OT, and Scott handled him pretty easily.

As I said, I think offensive coordinators stopped trying to block him with a TE as the season wore on; but still, nothing much really changed - Kampman still wasn't bowling anybody over. He just hustled, worked hard, and put the QB, or ball carrier on the ground when he had the opportunity.

Like I said, I like Kampman and always have... he's just never going to be a difference maker.

Well I considered a career fisting myself, so I consider myself just as qualified to judge a DE who has ability and produces results versus someone who simply runs in circles and gets lucky enough every now and again to run into the QB.

I guess once he paints himself a darker color and changes his name to D'Arongelo Kamp'mon, you'll be convinced that his production isn't just the result of a confused, hard working, untalented whitey running around in circles waiting for the superleet KGB to chase the terrified QB into the cracker's grasp. Then again, maybe not.

[wist43]

Mr. Basket,

I don't have to try to "provoke" a response from the regulars... we're usually at loggerheads when it comes to the talent level of the Packers - I accuse them of seeing the team thru G&G glasses, and they accuse me of being hard headed and acidic by nature... all of which are generally true, lol.

That said, I can assure you I understand the game... in fact, I considered coaching as a career, and I still study the game as a hobby.

Stats generally mean nothing w/o context... Barnett defenders prattle on endlessly about tackle stats, but they mean nothing if they're consistently coming 10 yds downfield, or as the result of being the closest defender when a ball carrier goes out of bounds. Game changing plays??? Tackles for loss??? Forced Fumbles??? Sacks???... Barnett is sadly lacking.

Barnett... tackles, yes - game changing plays, no - difference maker, no.

Same case with Kampman - although I like Kampman a hell of a lot more than I like Barnett.

Kampman gets his numbers from hustle. He rarely beats an OT around the corner, and he rarely is able to bull rush an OT straight back to the QB... He gets his sacks as the result of good coverage and the QB having to hold the ball... beyond that, he benefits from having KGB on the other side - where KGB, even if he doesn't consistently do it, is able to flush the QB over to Kampman's side b/c he's a fairly consistent upfield rusher.

I just got done watching the first 2 1/2 quarters of the 1st Detroit game... and just as I mentioned, the offensive game plan of the Lions called for Kampman to be blocked by the TE, straight up, in a normal 5 step drop... There was another instance in which Kampman was double teamed by two TE's, and a handful (3 or 4) of times in which he was chipped by the back. Every other snap he was singled up on Jonathon Scott, a rookie OT, and Scott handled him pretty easily.

As I said, I think offensive coordinators stopped trying to block him with a TE as the season wore on; but still, nothing much really changed - Kampman still wasn't bowling anybody over. He just hustled, worked hard, and put the QB, or ball carrier on the ground when he had the opportunity.

Like I said, I like Kampman and always have... he's just never going to be a difference maker.

Well I considered a career fisting myself, so I consider myself just as qualified to judge a DE who has ability and produces results versus someone who simply runs in circles and gets lucky enough every now and again to run into the QB.

I guess once he paints himself a darker color and changes his name to D'Arongelo Kamp'mon, you'll be convinced that his production isn't just the result of a confused, hard working, untalented whitey running around in circles waiting for the superleet KGB to chase the terrified QB into the cracker's grasp. Then again, maybe not.

Mr. Basket,

Might I be the first to congratulate you, and encourage you, in your self "fisting" endeavours...

[wist43]

Who were the 6 difference making DEs who were better this year?

Harvey,

I'll admit that I haven't studied the question... but to me, the question is, "is a guy even worthy of being voted to the pro bowl".

Like I said, in my view, you could have a year in which no position player is worthy of being voted in... but, of course, someone has to get voted in.

Just as someone from the NFC has to play in the SB... doesn't mean they're worthy of the honor. At no time did I consider Chicago a SB calibur team.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Kind of hard to argue with the production of leading all NFL DL in sacks and tackles (according to Yahoo stats--not homeristic stats done by the Packers). Maybe he had some sacks against TEs and took advantage of some bad OTs at times, but not most of the time. That kind of production is rarely found. Most DEs are one-dimensional.

To me, this wreaks of a guy who has pigeon-holed a player and can't see his improvement (kind of like Barnett the last two years).

[wist43]

Kind of hard to argue with the production of leading all NFL DL in sacks and tackles (according to Yahoo stats--not homeristic stats done by the Packers). Maybe he had some sacks against TEs and took advantage of some bad OTs at times, but not most of the time. That kind of production is rarely found. Most DEs are one-dimensional.

To me, this wreaks of a guy who has pigeon-holed a player and can't see his improvement (kind of like Barnett the last two years).

Harvey,

I see Kampman's improvement, and was, depending on price, all for resigning him... If you go back and look at my posts dated around the time Kampman resigned - you'll find this to be the case.

That said, I do, in fact, see Kampman as a good, productive player, but not a difference maker.

You bring up Barnett, but I don't even remotely equate the two... I really like Kampman, can't stand Barnett...

Shockingly, to you and everyone else on here I suppose, would be that I would consider Barnett to have a ton more talent and upside than Kampman... I dog Barnett b/c I think he's an idiot who doesn't have the first clue about how to play the game...

That said, Kampman will always be a much more productive player than Barnett... As I've said, I like Kampman, always have... just don't consider him to be a pro bowl calibur player, i.e. a difference maker.

[Partial]

Mr. Basket,

I don't have to try to "provoke" a response from the regulars... we're usually at loggerheads when it comes to the talent level of the Packers - I accuse them of seeing the team thru G&G glasses, and they accuse me of being hard headed and acidic by nature... all of which are generally true, lol.

That said, I can assure you I understand the game... in fact, I considered coaching as a career, and I still study the game as a hobby.

Stats generally mean nothing w/o context... Barnett defenders prattle on endlessly about tackle stats, but they mean nothing if they're consistently coming 10 yds downfield, or as the result of being the closest defender when a ball carrier goes out of bounds. Game changing plays??? Tackles for loss??? Forced Fumbles??? Sacks???... Barnett is sadly lacking.

Barnett... tackles, yes - game changing plays, no - difference maker, no.

Same case with Kampman - although I like Kampman a hell of a lot more than I like Barnett.

Kampman gets his numbers from hustle. He rarely beats an OT around the corner, and he rarely is able to bull rush an OT straight back to the QB... He gets his sacks as the result of good coverage and the QB having to hold the ball... beyond that, he benefits from having KGB on the other side - where KGB, even if he doesn't consistently do it, is able to flush the QB over to Kampman's side b/c he's a fairly consistent upfield rusher.

I just got done watching the first 2 1/2 quarters of the 1st Detroit game... and just as I mentioned, the offensive game plan of the Lions called for Kampman to be blocked by the TE, straight up, in a normal 5 step drop... There was another instance in which Kampman was double teamed by two TE's, and a handful (3 or 4) of times in which he was chipped by the back. Every other snap he was singled up on Jonathon Scott, a rookie OT, and Scott handled him pretty easily.

As I said, I think offensive coordinators stopped trying to block him with a TE as the season wore on; but still, nothing much really changed - Kampman still wasn't bowling anybody over. He just hustled, worked hard, and put the QB, or ball carrier on the ground when he had the opportunity.

Like I said, I like Kampman and always have... he's just never going to be a difference maker.

Well I considered a career fisting myself, so I consider myself just as qualified to judge a DE who has ability and produces results versus someone who simply runs in circles and gets lucky enough every now and again to run into the QB.

I guess once he paints himself a darker color and changes his name to D'Arongelo Kamp'mon, you'll be convinced that his production isn't just the result of a confused, hard working, untalented whitey running around in circles waiting for the superleet KGB to chase the terrified QB into the cracker's grasp. Then again, maybe not.

That's really dumb to assume racism. I am sure Wist would admit many of the top Playmakers are white, including Urlacher and Branning. Yes, I combined Tom Brady and Peyton Manning into the super-ultimate weapon.

[Partial]

I can see the point that he isn't a premiere DE. He's not in the Reggie White league. We can all admit this. By all accounts though, as Wist is saying, he is an incredibly solid player that any team would love to have and can live with. Does he dictate how the offense gameplans on every play like a Reggie White would, probably not. But, he certainly makes the most out of every opportunity he gets.

[SD GB fan]

success is relative. kampman is probowl worthy. even if every other DE in the league are all pansies, he is still considered "pro bowl" worthy because he made it based on his relative performances. now, as of right now, no one will say he is a future of HOFer or your "difference maker" so to speak. that is because you are judging kampman relative to reggie white and other greats. you may even be judging kampman against julius peppers and jason taylor. those guys are all-pros year in and year out. this is the breakout year for kampman. he doesnt have consistency on a yearly basis yet but hes still young and he does MAKE A DIFFERENCE. a packer team without him would be a different team. just like how the team without barnett was pretty ineffective against the run. if kampman wasnt in the game, you bet the other team would try to run to the replacement's side.

[Packers4Glory]

Kamp is one of the top 5 DE in the entire game right now. period. to argue anything else is purely retarded. You could see it coming a yr ago, and this yr he moved right into the elite. Anyone that ignores the production he has put out and tries to label him a "lunch and pale" type player is a fuck'n retard who looks completely ignorant arguing he isn't one of the best in the lg right now.

[SkinBasket]

That's really dumb to assume racism. I am sure Wist would admit many of the top Playmakers are white, including Urlacher and Branning. Yes, I combined Tom Brady and Peyton Manning into the super-ultimate weapon.

Well, call me dumb, then, but I'm still waiting for what else separates him from other players who post the same kind of numbers but who are "difference makers" or "worthy" of going to the Pro Bowl other than skin color. Apparently it isn't production. It's not stats. Maybe it's because he isn't labeled an "Playmaker" in Madden? Or maybe it's how many commercials you do?

I'm not saying its necessarily racism. It could just as well be general ignorance or a penchant for repeating the idiotic ramblings of people like Stephan A Smith.

[motife]

it would be fun to have an all white Pro Bowl team play an all black squad.

except the white team wouldn't have any cornerbacks, safeties (maybe one), wide receivers or running backs.

they used to call the Celtics "South Africa's team" when they had Larry Bird, Kevin Mchale, and Danny Ainge all starting.

[wist43]

I could care less about race, racism, or any other sociological measure...

When someone brings it up, I can only conclude they have a weak argument and aren't able support it, or they're racist themselves, or they're some twenty year old twit that thinks they're becoming "enlightened" by listening intently to "Professor Left Wing"...

As for stats - people use stats to buttress their arguments, and that's certainly a valid thing to do. I, do it too... but, in general, I don't get caught up in numbers too much.

Barnett defenders love to prattle on about his tackle stats - somebody had to make the tackles - even if they were 10 yds down field, usually as a result of Barnett jumping out of his gap, or not getting off a block, or taking a bad angle, etc, etc, etc...

Now last year, was probably his best year - yet he finished 2nd on the team in tackles to Hawk (if I'm not mistaken - I didn't look it up, just remember hearing it)... his 2nd year, he had 8 billion tackles and was atrocious, his 3rd year he had 26 billion tackles, but was even worse... obviously, stats don't tell the whole story.

In Kampman's case, I would argue that his 15.5 sacks were a statistical anomaly on the high side... I could see Kampman being a consistent 8-12 sack/yr guy... which is nothing to sneeze at. Kampman is a nice player, I'm glad we have him, but I like I said, I don't mistake him for being a difference maker.

[Zool]

Professor Left Wing is my mentor.

[Partial]

That's really dumb to assume racism. I am sure Wist would admit many of the top Playmakers are white, including Urlacher and Branning. Yes, I combined Tom Brady and Peyton Manning into the super-ultimate weapon.

Well, call me dumb, then, but I'm still waiting for what else separates him from other players who post the same kind of numbers but who are "difference makers" or "worthy" of going to the Pro Bowl other than skin color. Apparently it isn't production. It's not stats. Maybe it's because he isn't labeled an "Playmaker" in Madden? Or maybe it's how many commercials you do?

I'm not saying its necessarily racism. It could just as well be general ignorance or a penchant for repeating the idiotic ramblings of people like Stephan A Smith.

It's general ignorance perhaps. I don't see it as a matter of race.

I think the following ends are better:
Jason Taylor
Alex Brown
Richard Seymore
Ty Warren
John Abraham
Michael Strahan
Julius Peppers

[woodbuck27]

WOW ! Reading this thread almost wore me out.

Testosterone anyone?

Easy to see it's the offseason. :)

[SkinBasket]

I could care less about race, racism, or any other sociological measure...

In Kampman's case, I would argue that his 15.5 sacks were a statistical anomaly on the high side... I could see Kampman being a consistent 8-12 sack/yr guy... which is nothing to sneeze at. Kampman is a nice player, I'm glad we have him, but I like I said, I don't mistake him for being a difference maker.

You're still avoiding explaining why you feel he's not a "difference maker" or even what the hell a "difference maker" is in your mind. Is a pro bowl player with league leading numbers despite playing on what can only generously be described as an average D Line only a "difference maker" if he sells Chunky Soup?

All you say is that he's just not one because you think he's not as good as his numbers and honors make him out to be for some indeterminable reason other than you just think so. You'll have to excuse me if that isn't very convincing.

So please, do enlighten me. What is a "difference maker" and what, exactly, does Kampman lack that excludes him from this mysterious group?

[woodbuck27]

We saw Aaron Kampman step it up again last season (Re: his numbers) but we must consider this weighed against the lesser talented teams we faced in 2006 Vs previous seasons.

Our schedule will be tougher in 2007 and will give us a better measure of his progress.

Having said that.

I am pleased with Aaron Kampman's play year to year and feel he is one of OUR bona fide stars.

Arguments of a players star status and making the Pro Bowl are weakened, as the selections to a Pro Bowl are often as much a popularity poll as genuine merit.

[MJZiggy]

In Kampman's case, I would argue that his 15.5 sacks were a statistical anomaly on the high side... I could see Kampman being a consistent 8-12 sack/yr guy... which is nothing to sneeze at. Kampman is a nice player, I'm glad we have him, but I like I said, I don't mistake him for being a difference maker.

I don't understand why you would think that. If anything he had less incentive this past season to perform as he already has the big contract. He has consistently shown improvement throughout his career so what makes you believe he cannot maintain his improvement? There is as much, if not more, to indicate that he will than he won't.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think the following ends are better:
Jason Taylor
Alex Brown
Richard Seymore
Ty Warren
John Abraham
Michael Strahan
Julius Peppers

I'd easily take Kampman over Brown and Warren. Seymour is more of a DT to me. He would be in our scheme. Abraham can't stay healthy. Neither can Strahan, and he's 35 or 36 years old.

I don't think wist is racist, but I can see the Basket's point in a way. Groups get pigeon-holed. Kampman is more than just a try hard guy, but he'll always be known as that. The white guys are thought to be the unathletic, try hard guy. Generally, that may be true. It's hard to change that image, but you have to analyze each guy individually.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't understand why you would think that. If anything he had less incentive this past season to perform as he already has the big contract. He has consistently shown improvement throughout his career so what makes you believe he cannot maintain his improvement? There is as much, if not more, to indicate that he will than he won't.

Very few guys get 15 sacks year in and year out. Not even Strahan. So, when Kampman gets 10-12 sacks next year, wist can claim he's right.

[Partial]

I could care less about race, racism, or any other sociological measure...

In Kampman's case, I would argue that his 15.5 sacks were a statistical anomaly on the high side... I could see Kampman being a consistent 8-12 sack/yr guy... which is nothing to sneeze at. Kampman is a nice player, I'm glad we have him, but I like I said, I don't mistake him for being a difference maker.

You're still avoiding explaining why you feel he's not a "difference maker" or even what the hell a "difference maker" is in your mind. Is a pro bowl player with league leading numbers despite playing on what can only generously be described as an average D Line only a "difference maker" if he sells Chunky Soup?

All you say is that he's just not one because you think he's not as good as his numbers and honors make him out to be for some indeterminable reason other than you just think so. You'll have to excuse me if that isn't very convincing.

So please, do enlighten me. What is a "difference maker" and what, exactly, does Kampman lack that excludes him from this mysterious group?

DPOY candidates are playmakers. There, explanation done.

[wist43]

By your guys reckoning, Reggie White would not have been a difference maker in the years in which his sack totals were down...

A difference maker at DE has to, first and foremost, be able to consistently get the edge - Kampman can't do that.

Of course, being a "one trick pony" isn't enough... a difference maker has to be able to bull rush and redirect effectively. Kampman is a good bull rusher, and his redirect is ok - not great, but ok.

Against the run, Kampman is as good as anyone in the league - he's very stout at the point, disengages well, and gets down the line well... like I said, as good as anyone in the league.

Overall, Kampman is a very good DE... just not an elite DE.

To answer your question about what is a difference maker - at the DE position, a difference maker is going to be a guy that has all of the above mentioned abilities in spades. OC's have to game plan for them, throwing double and triple teams at him... and even then, we still expect the guy to put up double digit sack numbers.

Beyond that, a difference maker is going to make everyone around him better b/c of the extra attention he is receiving... Sean Jones never saw a double team his entire time in Green Bay, b/c OC's had to be concerned with Reggie White.

Kampman is infrequently double teamed or even chipped for that matter, and OC's really don't have to do anything special to plan for him. He's a nice player that can't be ignored, but he's certainly not a difference maker in the mold of Reggie White, or Michael Strahan, or Bruce Smith, or Julius Peppers.

Franchise DE's are just as hard to come by as are franchise QB's.

[esoxx]

I think the following ends are better:
Jason Taylor
Alex Brown
Richard Seymore
Ty Warren
John Abraham
Michael Strahan
Julius Peppers


Odd to not see Dwight Freeney on this list. I'd also put Burgess on it from Oakland. Cole from Philly is a guy to keep an eye on too. I agree with HW on the guys I wouldn't take over Kampman.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

By your guys reckoning, Reggie White would not have been a difference maker in the years in which his sack totals were down...

A difference maker at DE has to, first and foremost, be able to consistently get the edge - Kampman can't do that.

Of course, being a "one trick pony" isn't enough... a difference maker has to be able to bull rush and redirect effectively. Kampman is a good bull rusher, and his redirect is ok - not great, but ok.

Against the run, Kampman is as good as anyone in the league - he's very stout at the point, disengages well, and gets down the line well... like I said, as good as anyone in the league.

Overall, Kampman is a very good DE... just not an elite DE.

To answer your question about what is a difference maker - at the DE position, a difference maker is going to be a guy that has all of the above mentioned abilities in spades. OC's have to game plan for them, throwing double and triple teams at him... and even then, we still expect the guy to put up double digit sack numbers.

Beyond that, a difference maker is going to make everyone around him better b/c of the extra attention he is receiving... Sean Jones never saw a double team his entire time in Green Bay, b/c OC's had to be concerned with Reggie White.

Kampman is infrequently double teamed or even chipped for that matter, and OC's really don't have to do anything special to plan for him. He's a nice player that can't be ignored, but he's certainly not a difference maker in the mold of Reggie White, or Michael Strahan, or Bruce Smith, or Julius Peppers.

Franchise DE's are just as hard to come by as are franchise QB's.

I agree. Kampman is very good and I love the way he plays, but he's not a top 5 DE in the league.

[esoxx]

Franchise DE's are just as hard to come by as are franchise QB's.

Yeah, but you seem to be moving the standards now. You started out saying Kamp wasn't Pro Bowl caliber this year despite his stellar play (backed up by stats of all things). Now we're getting comparisons to the games all time greats in Reggie White and Bruce Smith. No kidding Kampman doesn't measure up to them in terms of impact. I don't think anyone is under any illusion that Kamp is a Franchise DE. The beef seems to be your original asserstion he wasn't Pro-Bowl worthy this year.

That's where the shit began to hit the fan.

[SkinBasket]

Franchise DE's are just as hard to come by as are franchise QB's.

Yeah, but you seem to be moving the standards now. You started out saying Kamp wasn't Pro Bowl caliber this year despite his stellar play (backed up by stats of all things). Now we're getting comparisons to the games all time greats in Reggie White and Bruce Smith. No kidding Kampman doesn't measure up to them in terms of impact. I don't think anyone is under any illusion that Kamp is a Franchise DE. The beef seems to be your original asserstion he wasn't Pro-Bowl worthy this year.

That's where the shit began to hit the fan.

Well said esoxx.

So unless a player fits into this god-like mold for a DE that you've created, they are unworthy of pro-bowl honors and they must simply be overachieving to get the numbers he did? Seems to me you have a problem with HOW he produces results instead of the results themselves. Correct me if I assume too much, but you seem to be asserting that unless a player goes about "making a difference" - which I can only assume means producing favorable results which help his team win, in a very particular way, he isn't actually making the difference one would believe he is making.

In other words, yes, he's getting the sacks and the tackles, and (despite your claim otherwise), drawing double teams, but since he doesn't do it in a particular fashion, or as the result of outstanding strength and technique, then it doesn't matter, or it matters less?

[wist43]

I guess I have a higher standard of what a pro bowler should be... but, since the pro bowl is relative to the pool of players you can draw from, my higher standard can't apply.

I choose to give as honest an evaluation of a player as I can... most fans can't stand to hear anything negative, or realistic about their team or its players.

Myself, I have a hard time being critical of Favre... that same sentiment seems to extend, for some fans, to every player on the team.

Homerism is one thing, Texism is another thing altogether.

[prsnfoto]

If playing half a season Strahan's your man he sucks as of late the last great thing he did was not trip on his way to Brett to beat the season sack record. What is funny is I totally agree with Wist's judging of Kampman and that is exactly why I would take him over all but a few. Even Reggie as great as he was took several games off from getting a sack but could somehow get three when "God " told him too just at the right time. I know I will be struck by lightning for saying this but Reggie and Gilbert being dinged up in the second SB cost us that game the line as a whole could'nt have stopped Noah Herron. I will take Kampman's consistency and outstanding run stopping ability anyday of the week and I'm hoping Jenkins or A. Thomas can do the same on the otherside. Bye,Bye KGB.

[SkinBasket]

I guess I have a higher standard of what a pro bowler should be... but, since the pro bowl is relative to the pool of players you can draw from, my higher standard can't apply.

Well I guess once they call it the wist Bowl, then you can talk about players not being Wist Bowl worthy. Of course the Wist Bowl may be somewhat boring with no players on the field since 4 DEs from the last 15 years meet your criteria.


I choose to give as honest an evaluation of a player as I can... most fans can't stand to hear anything negative, or realistic about their team or its players.

Myself, I have a hard time being critical of Favre... that same sentiment seems to extend, for some fans, to every player on the team.

Homerism is one thing, Texism is another thing altogether.

Evaluating a player is one thing. Dismissing his production as "abnormal" because he's not Reggie White or Bruce Smith is another, especially when you have yet to explain why it is that a Pepper sack is somehow more important, or more "game changing" than a Kampman sack. Or why a player who performs better in any given season is somehow less worthy of a pro bowl bid than a "superstar" who couldn't meet that production.

[Partial]

I guess I have a higher standard of what a pro bowler should be... but, since the pro bowl is relative to the pool of players you can draw from, my higher standard can't apply.

Well I guess once they call it the wist Bowl, then you can talk about players not being Wist Bowl worthy. Of course the Wist Bowl may be somewhat boring with no players on the field since 4 DEs from the last 15 years meet your criteria.


I choose to give as honest an evaluation of a player as I can... most fans can't stand to hear anything negative, or realistic about their team or its players.

Myself, I have a hard time being critical of Favre... that same sentiment seems to extend, for some fans, to every player on the team.

Homerism is one thing, Texism is another thing altogether.

Evaluating a player is one thing. Dismissing his production as "abnormal" because he's not Reggie White or Bruce Smith is another, especially when you have yet to explain why it is that a Pepper sack is somehow more important, or more "game changing" than a Kampman sack. Or why a player who performs better in any given season is somehow less worthy of a pro bowl bid than a "superstar" who couldn't meet that production.

'cause Sacks don't tell the whole story. Peppers collaspses the pocket and always has a second defender on him. That isn't true for Kampman. Moral of the story right there.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Peppers is probably the best DE in the NFL, and one of the most talented in history. Comparing him to Kampman is a little unfair.

[Partial]

I agree, he was looking for a "playmaker" premiere player compared to a pro-bowler, though.

[pbmax]

Heard over the weekend on ESPN from John Clayton that the leading contenders for Thomas are San Fran and Cleveland (both with 3-4 Ds I believe). No mention of Green Bay. Also expressed sentiment that even though Thomas has told people he isn't getting tagged, some in org want to retain him with tender.

So Conventional Wisdom, and Clayton is as conventional as it gets, says no way. PFT, out on a limb with an agent (likely), says maybe. We'll see.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Ravens have announced they won't be tagging Thomas.

[MTPackerfan]

apparently has said he wants to play in warm weather also

There's warm weather in Green Bay isn't there, at least in August nad September.

:lol:

[VermontPackFan]

apparently has said he wants to play in warm weather also

There's warm weather in Green Bay isn't there, at least in August nad September.

:lol:

With all this hype about global warming, we could even say October.

[The Shadow]

Peppers is probably the best DE in the NFL, and one of the most talented in history.

That last part is an awfully surprising (shocking?) (unbelievable?) (stunning?) (amazing?) assertion....

[pbmax]

We'll find out quickly if the rumor had any validity, I suspect. If you are going to get this guy into GB at a different position, you need to give him what he wants and quickly, no shopping around.

I can't see TT doing this, although I think its a lot more likely than trading a draft pick for Moss.

[SD GB fan]

if we get him as our DE, it would make our dline better definitely. but i dont see why TT would pay him DE money when hes a LB...also, i think he is getting pretty old, so id rather stick with jenkins and see how he develops.

[woodbuck27]

The Ravens have announced they won't be tagging Thomas.

I'm going to put this down here.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/BAL/10015279

Ravens won't tag LB Thomas

NFL.com wire reports

BALTIMORE (Feb. 22, 2007) -- The Baltimore Ravens decided against designating Pro Bowl linebacker Adalius Thomas its franchise player, a move that will enable the seven-year veteran to become an unrestricted free agent.

The Ravens haven't given up on the possibility of retaining Thomas, who ranked third on the team with 106 tackles. But they were unwilling to pay him the average salary of the top five linebackers in the league.

"Our hope is that we can re-sign him," general manager Ozzie Newsome said. "Our plan is to compete at a championship level in 2007 and beyond."

Signing Thomas would have sent the Ravens near the ceiling of their salary cap, and Newsome was unwilling to restrict his spending -- and his ability to improve other positions -- to retain the 29-year-old linebacker.

The Ravens should receive plenty of competition in their bid to secure Thomas, who had a career-high 11 sacks in 2006.

"I would think A.D. would be at the top of most teams' lists," said Thomas' agent, Bus Cook. "A.D. would like to stay in Baltimore, but ... it's a business. That's the way it goes."

The 6-foot-2, 270-pound Thomas was drafted in the sixth round out of Southern Mississippi. He starred as a special-teams player early in his career, making the Pro Bowl in 2003, before becoming a regular on defense in 2004.

Thomas is one of 10 Ravens who can become unrestricted free agents March 2. The others are: DT Aubrayo Franklin; DE Jarret Johnson; LB Tim Johnson; RBs Ovie Mughelli, Musa Smith and Nick Luchey; OT Tony Pashos; DB Gerome Sapp; and WR Alex Bannister.

In other news, the Ravens disclosed the contract extension signed by head coach Brian Billick last month was for four years (through the 2010 season).

The team originally refused to reveal the duration of the contract, but decided to announce the length of the extension after published reports indicated the coach received one additional season.


AP NEWS
The Associated Press News Service

Copyright 2007, The Associated Press, All Rights Reserved

[BooHoo]

Do we really need to spend FA dollars on another LB? I know the man is good but shouldn't we be spending dollars at positions were we have more need? Just a thought. :?: