Training Camp 2008

[Ballboy]

Lets get off the Brett topic and talk about TC2008. Lets make a few assumptions here and move on:

1) Brett won't be back.
2) Grant will be signed.

With that out of the way, what positions most interest you?

What roster spots are up for grabs?

Any surprise cuts?

I have three postions that really interest me. The first is TE.....Lee is good but I have high hopes for Jermichael Finley. I think he will be able to stretch the field more and add speed to the position. Tory Humphrey has been around, but just never seems to put it all together

FS/S should be great. Here I see Collins as maybe a late preseason trade as Bigby and Rouse may take over. Culver is a good backup and who knows how much longer Woodson & Harris will last at CB. Rouse played well at times last year being a ballhawk, but his man on man coverage skills still need work.

OL - changes could be in the making. The tackle & center positions are set, but the battle for guard could be interesting. I am a big fan of having the same OL from year to year, but in a few games last year our guards were very weak.

Any thoughts to the battles in camp this year?

Who here on Packerrats will be in charge of downloading pics for those poor souls like me that can't make it to camp?

[oregonpackfan]

The WR positions interest me as this is the deepest field the Packers have had in years. While the established starters' position appear secure, the question will be: "Who gets cut and/or put on the practice squad?"

[Joemailman]

Barbre was getting as much time with the first unit as Colledge at LG, so that is a battle. It may come down to who is more consistent, as that has been Colledge's downfall.

Chillar will probably win the starting job from Poppinga, but that should be an interesting battle. Poppinga will need to show much improvement in pass coverage to keep the job.

Aaron Rouse showed ballhawk skills when he filled in for Nick Collins last year at FS. I suspect they will stick with Collins, but you never know if Rouse has a great preseason.

Tramon Wiliams should have the upper hand at Nickle as Patrick Lee is still learning. I think Bush is in trouble unless Will Blackmon can't make it physically.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Chillar will probably win the starting job from Poppinga, but that should be an interesting battle. Poppinga will need to show much improvement in pass coverage to keep the job. .

I think Poppinga has already shown that improvement and will hold on to the starting job.

Every team needs a starter-quality 4th linebacker, I don't read too much into the Chillar acquisition.

[Freak Out]

I think this could be the year Collins loses his starting job and the OL battles will be interesting. Jackson looks like he could push Grant a bit if he stays healthy and Grant shows up.

[Gunakor]

I'm ready for the Aaron Rodgers era to begin. I'm anxious to see if his success in limited action last season will carry over on a permanent basis this season.

[Gunakor]

Chillar will probably win the starting job from Poppinga, but that should be an interesting battle. Poppinga will need to show much improvement in pass coverage to keep the job. .

I think Poppinga has already shown that improvement and will hold on to the starting job.

Every team needs a starter-quality 4th linebacker, I don't read too much into the Chillar acquisition.

I've been hearing about Green Bay playing with a 3-4 defense in MC and OTA's. I'm not entirely opposed to it, with Corey Williams having been traded to Cleveland. Reports are that the 3-4 would consist of Kampman, Pickett, and Jenkins across the line, with Poppinga and Hawk as the OLB's and Barnett and Chillar as the ILB's. I'm not sure if Bob Sanders is the guy we'd want coaching a 3-4, but if he's capable then that is a scary good defensive personell package. I've always thought a 3-4 was a better package anyway, as it is more difficult to run against and creates more confusion for the OL on blitzes.

[Joemailman]

I don't think they were talking about the 3-4 being the base package. Just something they would use from time to time. Kampman isn't really a 3-4 end, but could probably handle the job on a limited basis.

[The Leaper]

Every team needs a starter-quality 4th linebacker, I don't read too much into the Chillar acquisition.

I agree. It seems the largest positive that Chillar possesses is his ability to play any LB position. We had nothing behind our top 3 last year...now we have a guy we can plug in anywhere when needed.

[Gunakor]

I don't think they were talking about the 3-4 being the base package. Just something they would use from time to time. Kampman isn't really a 3-4 end, but could probably handle the job on a limited basis.

No he's not. But it would allow Hawk or Poppinga an opportunity at a double digit sack season. That would appease all of those people bashing Hawk for not being a playmaker. Chillar is versatile enough to play ILB as well as he's played OLB in St. Louis. Again, it all depends on the ability of Bob Sanders to coach them up on it. I don't know if he can.

[Ballboy]

I'm ready for the Aaron Rodgers era to begin. I'm anxious to see if his success in limited action last season will carry over on a permanent basis this season.

I as well am interested to see. "Matta Batta Cola" a radio person on the SCORE670 claims that Aaron wouldn't have 400 passing in his first 5 games....of course this is coming from a Chicago based station - funny how the reporters bag on Packers QB situation when they have one of the biggest messes at that position.


Agreed about the 3-4 defense - it came out in OTA's that it may be used in special situations throughout the year, it gives the LB more blitzing chances.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I've always thought a 3-4 was a better package anyway, as it is more difficult to run against and creates more confusion for the OL on blitzes.

A 3-4 isn't necessarily harder to run against. Actually, I'd say that the 4-3 is stouter against the run--although the 3-4 causes confusion. To me, a 3-4 defense is likely to cause more turnovers, but it's easier to gouge it for big chunks of yardage on the ground. You need the right personnel to make it work. Cleveland (#29), New England (#28), and Jets (#21) all ranked poorly in yards/rush. San Diego (#16), Pittsburgh (#14), Dallas (#13), and Arizona (#11) were all middle of the pack in yards/rush. The only 3-4 team that I can think of that was really good against the run was Baltimore. They were #1 in yards/rush. Of course, they have two of the best run stuffing DL in the NFL in Haloti Ngata and Kelly Gregg. They'd probably be good against the run no matter what defensive formation they played.

[Sparkey]

Look for Barbre to win the LG spot in camp and Colledge being moved to backup LT where he will eventually replace Clifton at some point.

[Guiness]

A 3-4 isn't necessarily harder to run against. Actually, I'd say that the 4-3 is stouter against the run--although the 3-4 causes confusion. To me, a 3-4 defense is likely to cause more turnovers, but it's easier to gouge it for big chunks of yardage on the ground. You need the right personnel to make it work. Cleveland (#29), New England (#28), and Jets (#21) all ranked poorly in yards/rush. San Diego (#16), Pittsburgh (#14), Dallas (#13), and Arizona (#11) were all middle of the pack in yards/rush. The only 3-4 team that I can think of that was really good against the run was Baltimore. They were #1 in yards/rush. Of course, they have two of the best run stuffing DL in the NFL in Haloti Ngata and Kelly Gregg. They'd probably be good against the run no matter what defensive formation they played.

Not to mention Ray Lewis...

I would also tend to think 3-4 as a base should be easier to run against for consistent yardage (i.e. 4yrd/carry) because of the numbers mismatch in the trenches, 5OL on 3DL...

[The Shadow]

Look for Barbre to win the LG spot in camp and Colledge being moved to backup LT where he will eventually replace Clifton at some point.

Agree.