Linebackers on final 53

[texaspackerbacker]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Packers keep just five LBs last season--Bishop and White plus the starters?

I sure can't see them keeping seven, and ideally, not even six this season. Bishop, to me, seems to be the best of the bunch. I have always been negative about Hodge, but he played well against the Bengals, looked faster than I thought he was. I'd keep him over White and Chillar. White may be good on Special Teams, but he looked awful from scrimmage. And Chillar seemed to me to be the weakest link--very poor against the run.

Keeping just five LBs would allow for keeping an extra O Lineman or Wide Receiver, where there is talent that IMO would be more beneficial to keep.

[vince]

They had 6 on last year's roster, including Havner in addition to those you mentioned Tex.

Edit: After saying that, I went back to verify and while I thought he was on the roster last season, I can only find him on the practice squad... I think he was on the roster at some point, but perhaps he wasn't...

[Scott Campbell]

Maybe we'll be able to hide somebody on PUP.

While the group is considered strong overall, I still believe Popp to be pretty weak for a starter. Depth is important, but starters need to be studs.

[Patler]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Packers keep just five LBs last season--Bishop and White plus the starters?

I sure can't see them keeping seven, and ideally, not even six this season. Bishop, to me, seems to be the best of the bunch. I have always been negative about Hodge, but he played well against the Bengals, looked faster than I thought he was. I'd keep him over White and Chillar. White may be good on Special Teams, but he looked awful from scrimmage. And Chillar seemed to me to be the weakest link--very poor against the run.

Keeping just five LBs would allow for keeping an extra O Lineman or Wide Receiver, where there is talent that IMO would be more beneficial to keep.

Yes, they kept only 5 last year, but some years have kept 6. I always find it interesting how the 53 man roster gets divided up by positions.

2x positions = 44
kicker, punter snapper = 47
3rd RB, 3rd QB, 5th WR, 3rd TE, 9th DL, 5th CB = 53

If you want 10 or more DL, 11 or more OL, 10 or more DBs you have to cut somewhere else. Going with just 2 QBs was kind of nice, making way for another contributor.

[Patler]

They had 6 on last year's roster, including Havner in addition to those you mentioned Tex.

Havner was on the practice squad (All year???). He was sort of their backup plan in case of injuries.

[imscott72]

Hodge is gone IMO. I really like him but with his knees and injury history I just dont see him sticking.

I like Hodge too, but it might be time to sell high on him. If he continues to have a great camp maybe we can trade him for a pick.

[cpk1994]

Hodge is gone IMO. I really like him but with his knees and injury history I just dont see him sticking.

I like Hodge too, but it might be time to sell high on him. If he continues to have a great camp maybe we can trade him for a pick.

Im not sure anyone would take him with his injury history.

[imscott72]

Of course, the problem is that everyone's keeping an eye on this position, and knows one of the two - Hodge or White - will be axed. So why trade away a pick if you can get a guy freed?

Because then you get in a bidding war with other interested teams.

[Scott Campbell]

Going with just 2 QBs was kind of nice, making way for another contributor.

Could it be less risky to expose Flynn on the practice squad than releasing a good LB?

[imscott72]

Hodge is gone IMO. I really like him but with his knees and injury history I just dont see him sticking.

I like Hodge too, but it might be time to sell high on him. If he continues to have a great camp maybe we can trade him for a pick.

Im not sure anyone would take him with his injury history.

Oh I think a desperate team in desperate need of a LB would throw a low pick at us if he continues to have a great camp.

[cpk1994]

Hodge is gone IMO. I really like him but with his knees and injury history I just dont see him sticking.

I like Hodge too, but it might be time to sell high on him. If he continues to have a great camp maybe we can trade him for a pick.

Im not sure anyone would take him with his injury history.

Oh I think a desperate team in desperate need of a LB would throw a low pick at us if he continues to have a great camp.

True, I suppose someone would throw a 6th or 7th for him.

[imscott72]

Going with just 2 QBs was kind of nice, making way for another contributor.

Could it be less risky to expose Flynn on the practice squad than releasing a good LB?

why would we put our #2 QB on the practice squad? I know we've only seen him in one game, but barring a signing of a vet QB, I'd want Flynn over Brohm as Arod's backup if the season started this week.

[Patler]

Going with just 2 QBs was kind of nice, making way for another contributor.

Could it be less risky to expose Flynn on the practice squad than releasing a good LB?

I think they will try to get Flynn on the practice squad. I also think they will look long and hard at the experienced QBs released by other teams, and might have 3 without Flynn.

[Scott Campbell]

If you want 10 or more DL, 11 or more OL, 10 or more DBs you have to cut somewhere else. Going with just 2 QBs was kind of nice, making way for another contributor.

Ok, so I'm back to the PUP list.

[Zool]

I think we better give Brohm and Flynn a couple more look-sees before we declare one or the other.