Robert Thomas

[b bulldog]

Thomas was just let go by the Packers

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Wow, way to give up Chris Johnson for a guy you eventually cut after 1 year, thompson. And people are angry Sherman traded for R Kal Trulack.

[RashanGary]

Mediocrity is no longer accepted.....I'm sure the message is loud and clear in that locker room.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Johnson only lasted in St. Louis for one year. Garbage for garbage.

[OS PA]

Link to Chris Johnsons NFL Stats (http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/553388)

[HarveyWallbangers]

Link to Chris Johnsons NFL Stats (http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/553388)

Damn is Johnson ugly. Dude looks like a NT in that picture.

[GBRulz]

http://www.linuxbench.org/Posting.html

[GoPackGo]

http://www.linuxbench.org/Posting.html
lol

[GoPackGo]

http://www3.telus.net/planetkevin/files/ForumPics/gay_thread.jpg

[GBRulz]

LOL

[Patler]

Wow, way to give up Chris Johnson for a guy you eventually cut after 1 year, thompson. And people are angry Sherman traded for R Kal Trulack.

Both teams had decided to cut their respective players. Each admitted as much last year. Instead they made a trade, because each needed a warm body at the other position. GB needed a linebacker, they needed a DB.

Johnson was a goner from GB anyway.

[KYPack]

I know the Rams and the Pack were just trading busts, but it did surprise me that Thomas played so much for us. Guy started a number of games.

Thus ends the Chris Johnson era.

Thomas' dad was also a #1 pick for the Bears & also a bust.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Wow, way to give up Chris Johnson for a guy you eventually cut after 1 year, thompson. And people are angry Sherman traded for R Kal Trulack.

Both teams had decided to cut their respective players. Each admitted as much last year. Instead they made a trade, because each needed a warm body at the other position. GB needed a linebacker, they needed a DB.

Johnson was a goner from GB anyway.

Johnson wouldve make a great S had thompson not traded him. That and returns kicks.

[RashanGary]

Johnson was pretty stiff in the hips. He would make a better saftey than CB but no matter where he plays he'll suck. The Packers have their sights set higher than Chris Johnson.

[Fritz]

Tank, surely you can't believe that Chris Johnson was the missing piece of the puzzle for the Packers' defensive backfield. But then again, maybe you can believe that.

Maybe you should start investigating TT's ties to Al-Qaeda, too.

[wist43]

Thomas outplayed Barnett when they were on the field together last year... Granted, that's not saying much; but, IMO, Thomas played Okay when he was on the field. Problem was, he wasn't on the field much, same as when he was in St Louis.

As for Johnson, I've always liked him. He caught some bad breaks with the injuries, but in terms of talent and potential, he's much better than either Horton or Hawkins... Hawkins wasn't even ready to step on the field last year - I definitely would have kept Johnson over Hawkins last year.

[Partial]

Johnson was pretty stiff in the hips. He would make a better saftey than CB but no matter where he plays he'll suck. The Packers have their sights set higher than Chris Johnson.

Wasn't it you that said last year during training camp that Hawkins was the best prospect at corner since Deion? I am pretty confident that was you. Anyway, I don't think how stiff his hips are will matter very much. This kid was gonna be a gamer until he blew out his knee. As you do recall, much like the massive Hawkins orgasm everyone had last year, Chris Johnson produced a similiarly titilating and unfulfilling orgasm the training camp before.

Chris Johnson is just cool as hell. He has 4.18 tattoed in his legs for his fastest 40 time ever.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Thomas outplayed Barnett when they were on the field together last year... Granted, that's not saying much; but, IMO, Thomas played Okay when he was on the field. Problem was, he wasn't on the field much, same as when he was in St Louis.

That's the wist we know and love. You have to be blind to think Thomas was better than Barnett last year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Chris Johnson produced a similiarly titilating and unfulfilling orgasm the training camp before.

Actually, Johnson impressed in 2003. Then he got injured. Then he was injured again in 2004. In 2005 he came back, but had lost quite a bit on that speed--which made his potential a lot less intriguing.

[KYPack]

Thomas outplayed Barnett when they were on the field together last year... Granted, that's not saying much; but, IMO, Thomas played Okay when he was on the field. Problem was, he wasn't on the field much, same as when he was in St Louis.

As for Johnson, I've always liked him. He caught some bad breaks with the injuries, but in terms of talent and potential, he's much better than either Horton or Hawkins... Hawkins wasn't even ready to step on the field last year - I definitely would have kept Johnson over Hawkins last year.

1 Great to have you on the Forum

2. I know you are the President of the Nick Barnett haters club.

But......... C'MON. Thomas didn't outplay anybody last season, let alone Barnett. Thomas had 30 solos, Barnett 92. Thomas had no sacks, no fumbles ( he did have 1 pick, that I totally don't remember)

Barnett made plays and was covering the field, Thomas played like he was trapped in a phone booth.

Hawkins vs Johnson?

I can see your point. I really don't see either one of 'em as regular corners in the league. Johnson can do some other things on ST and you might want to go with him. I think the fact that they could get something for Johnson caused 'em to make the move.

Hawkins is the greenest corner I've ever seen. He is a mess in his technique and lacks basic cover skills. If he doesn't make vast strides this year, he's gonzo.

[wist43]

Rather than disparage Barnett, I'm feeling much more optimistic about the direction of the team after this draft.

For the LB's, I'd rather focus on the positives. Yes, I will always see Barnett as the weak link, but with the addition of Hawk and Hodge, I think they have enough talent to cover for Barnett's deficiencies... Hopefully Barnett will play out his contract, and will be gone in a couple of years - a fella can only hope.

As I said though... the positives??? I really like both Hawk and Hodge; and, Hodge, IMO, is vastly underrated. I love tough, physical, collision players... that's Hodge.

[wist43]

Thomas outplayed Barnett when they were on the field together last year... Granted, that's not saying much; but, IMO, Thomas played Okay when he was on the field. Problem was, he wasn't on the field much, same as when he was in St Louis.

That's the wist we know and love. You have to be blind to think Thomas was better than Barnett last year.

Harvey, you know I'm not "blind", and you know I know football... It actually baffles me why people actually think that Barnett is a good player. I've spent an inordinate, my wife would argue an unhealthy, amount of time watching game tape of Barnett - just to make sure what I was seeing and thinking about the guy was correct.

Yes, he puts up huge tackle numbers, but when you watch the guy down in and down out, he's not a very good football player... absolutely no instincts for the game. Good coaching helped him last year, but still that only made him average... I want better than that.

IMO, we got much better at the LB position with the addition of Hawk and Hodge. I'm sure they'll help me forget that Barnett is even on the field.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If you watched Thomas and other LBs as much as Barnett, I'm sure you'll see even more deficient play. What don't you think the coaches get that you do? We've had 4 different coordinators who felt Barnett was starting material.

[esoxx]

"Yes, he puts up huge tackle numbers, but when you watch the guy down in and down out, he's not a very good football player... absolutely no instincts for the game."



If Barnett had "absolutely no instincts for the game" he would not be in the league, much less the starting lineup. See Torrance Marshall.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm shocked, I thought Thomas was a decent player. Certainly worthy of a backup spot. Maybe they found some whacky tobacccy in his locker.

Is there any chance at all that Hawk would play MLB?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm shocked, I thought Thomas was a decent player. Certainly worthy of a backup spot. Maybe they found some whacky tobacccy in his locker.

Is there any chance at all that Hawk would play MLB?

Doesn't sound like it.

[Travbrew]

Wait just a minute here. I'm getting the feeling that Tank just doesn't care for TT very much. Am I right?
Would this explain his man-crush with Shermie?

[Partial]

I am thinking that Hodge will start from day one. Hodge, Hawk and Barnett.

[Patler]

Robert Thomas was pretty bad in pass coverage. As I recall, one of the knocks on him out of St Louis last year was his ability or willingness to play with little injuries. He missed a lot of games for GB. If they are trying to establish a "tougher" mentallity on D, maybe they liked some of the younger guys better.

He won't be missed.

[HarveyWallbangers]

All of the outside LBs were poor in pass coverage last year. I thought that was one of the bigger weaknesses on the defense. Hopefully, that can be shored up with Hawk, Taylor, and Hodge--and the two young guys (Poppinga and Manning) being more experienced.

[wist43]

Who can say what coaches see in some guys... In Barnett's case they've invested a 1st round pick. They're not going to let a 1st rounder rot on the bench... besides, Barnett can play a little, he stays healthy (he should, he's never involved in any collisions), he works hard, he has good speed, etc.

You do bring up an interesting point though... what do they see that I, or we, don't??? Maybe you, or someone could explain what they saw in Jamaal Reynolds??? or BJ Sander, or Antwan Edwards, or John Michaels, or Fred Vinson, etc... The list of Packer high draft pick busts is exhaustive. The second they drafted Reynolds I knew is was a bad pick. What did they see that I didn't???

If you like a LB that can't take on and shed, can't hold the point of attack, gets washed away in traffic, isn't a hitter, takes bad angles, and can't blitz - then Barnett is your man.

Give me a LB like Hawk or Hodge any day... no comparison between those two and Barnett. The very fact that the Packers drafted those two gives me some hope that maybe, just maybe they can get this defense turned around.

[Partial]

Great to have you here wist.

I am pleased that TT is turning our powderpuff squad into a group of men. Hodge hits like a mofo and Hawk will also be a very solid player. Good stuff if you ask me.

[wist43]

Good to see ya partial...

I really like Hodge too... I don't see how they can keep him off the field. Even if they have to play him out of position, he needs to be on the field.

Manuel and Collins are both physical hitters, and now Hawk and Hodge make the second level of the defense much tougher as well...

I'm actually encouraged with the direction the defense is moving... now, if they only had a pass rush???

[Patler]

You do bring up an interesting point though... what do they see that I, or we, don't??? Maybe you, or someone could explain what they saw in Jamaal Reynolds??? or BJ Sander, or Antwan Edwards, or John Michaels, or Fred Vinson, etc... The list of Packer high draft pick busts is exhaustive. The second they drafted Reynolds I knew is was a bad pick. What did they see that I didn't???


Many of the guys you mentioned never really played much, so in answer to your question, in Reynolds case the coaches saw nothing, in Vinson's, Edward's and Michels' cases they probably saw hoped for potential. They never saw performance, because these guys were all quickly replaced. Sander is still somewhat questionable yet.

You really can't compare the coaches treatment toward and use of Barnett to these other guys. They have come to depend on Barnett much more than they ever did with the guys you listed.

[mraynrand]

I think tonight I'll fly to Vail and drink eggnog with Bob Thomas.

[wist43]

My point Shamrock, would be that they, the Packers scouts and coaches, saw enough in those guys to make them all very high draft picks...

Those of us out here in armchairland, scratched our heads and wondered what in the heck they were seeing that we weren't... It's not rocket science.

Enough of the grousing, however; I really like the draft, and am now optimitic enough about the upcoming season that I may upgrade my prediction for the season all the way up to 7-9 or 8-8.

As I've been saying, best case scenario would be for the Packers to be back to being competitive again by 2008... I think this draft gets us heading that direction.

[RashanGary]

I it takes a certain type of finesse player to man up on TE's in the pass game. Barnett is the only LB the Packers have that could be great in that area. I really hope they move Barnett to the strong side because that is where he is best suited. He needs to be covering TE's and eating up blocks on the outside.

Hodge is good enough that he should start and his only position is the middle. I really think Barnett is going to have to move outside. I hope so anyway.

[Partial]

I it takes a certain type of finesse player to man up on TE's in the pass game. Barnett is the only LB the Packers have that could be great in that area. I really hope they move Barnett to the strong side because that is where he is best suited. He needs to be covering TE's and eating up blocks on the outside.

Hodge is good enough that he should start and his only position is the middle. I really think Barnett is going to have to move outside. I hope so anyway.

For once we agree. I think Barnett should be the Sam for a year atleast. Hawk will probably initially struggle in pass coverage since they'll be more complex. Hawk is probably faster and better suited to cover the tight ends, but with his immense skill set I think he is better suited for the weak-side so he can blitz and flatten players.

I predict Hodge will start from day 1 in the middle in camp. He is smart and will be the hard nosed player we needed at Mike since Koonce left :cool:

That dude is nasty. He killed a man in front of their own mama for a ten speed, i've heard.

[RashanGary]

We agree on things Partial.....My opinions on football players are changing on what is expected out of a player. I think I was a little too caught up with athletes...At teh end of the day, football players like Palomalu and Ward are some of the biggest differences in the league. Athletes almost never fulfill thier potential....Ed Reed is not a great athlete..Acctually when you look around most of the stars in the league arn't the most tremendous atheletes...I think I was a little wrong on a few things....

[Patler]

Wist, my comment was in reply to your statement that Barnett was a first round pick, so they weren't about to let him rot on the bench. Actually, they have let some first rounders rot. They haven't done that with Barnett. They apparently see value in having him on the field. I think you are much too critical of him, for whatever reason, but I also know your opinion won't change!

I like some aspects of this years draft, but right now I am more interested in seeing if the 2005 class makes a step forward. Can Coston play? Will Underwood be able to contribute? (The guy can hit.) Will Poppinga recover, and can his intensity become infectious? What really does Montgomery have to offer? If these guys pan out, the turn-around would get a huge boost.

[Partial]

agreed with previous 2 posts

[wist43]

I agree, there is a lot of potential there... Poppinga was my favorite pick from last year. The severity of his injury is definitely a set back.

Coston, Underwood, and Montgomery??? It's anybody's guess... a year in the system, another year for their bodies and minds to mature, hopefully two of those guys will step up and contribute regularly from scrimmage, not just ST.

[Partial]

I have a hunch it may take a while longer for Coston and White. Both of those guys are projects. Hopefully they can get some playing time this year, but I don't foresee them being anything special this year. Maybe in the future though.

[RashanGary]

I agree...I'm starting to wonder about Coston and Hawkins...Pysically both of them have it but they have just not proven to be football players to this point.....

[Partial]

I think they are going to ride the roster for another year or two. They're prospects they wanted to develop because they were raw. I think they'll pan out in the end. OLineman generally just take time.

[Guiness]

Your right Shamrock.

Our success this year has a lot more to do with how the '05 class progresses than how the 06 class does. Sure, the '06 class will contribute, but beyond Hawk probably not much more than on ST. How the sophmores do is more important.

[Partial]

I bet Hawk, Hodge and College all have solid frosh years ala Nick Collins last year. I bet they all are penciled in as starters today.

[Iron Mike]

I predict Hodge will start from day 1 in the middle in camp. He is smart and will be the hard nosed player we needed at Mike since Koonce left :cool:


C'mon have you forgotten that ONE good game Bernardo Harris had against Minnesota??? :razz:

[RashanGary]

Jennings is going to contribute too....He's better than Murphy IMO and Murphy started to turn it on last year.


I like Hawk, Colledge, Jennings, Hodge and Rodgers/Blackmon as PR/KR...Then many of those other guys and some of these will be hella good special teamers....They got a lot better. I couldn't have imagined it would go this well....We don't know yet but my initial reaction is WOW

[KYPack]

I agree, there is a lot of potential there... Poppinga was my favorite pick from last year. The severity of his injury is definitely a set back.

Coston, Underwood, and Montgomery??? It's anybody's guess... a year in the system, another year for their bodies and minds to mature, hopefully two of those guys will step up and contribute regularly from scrimmage, not just ST.

The linebackers had 4.5 sacks last year. Poppinga had two of 'em. I think he was playing stand up DE in a two point stance, but if you don't like his enthusiasm, you don't like football.

Hope his knee heals, it was a bad one as I recall.