Jeremy Thompson

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm not ready to say this. Hunter was raw when he came to the Packers. I've seen improvement from him every year in the little time that he has played. He was a prototypical 3-4 OLB when he came into the league, and making him bulk up to play 4-3 DE was probably a stretch. Some can do it (KGB). Some don't. I think Hunter has a great deal of potential as a 3-4 OLB. Will he become a good one? I don't know, but you don't find many guys that are 6'4" 270 that run a 4.55 40 very often. Thompson is pretty fast, but 4.75 might not translate as well at 3-4 OLB.

Last summer you chastised me for criticizing Hunter as a DE. You offered Justin Tuck as his prototype. EDIT: wait a sec, you were saying that Hunter could be effective inside as a rush DT.

Face it Harvey, you have a man-crush on Hunter, and you are standing by your man.

[Patler]

Williams rarely if ever played DE in GB. He was signed by Cleveland specifically to be a 3-4 end. 3-4 ends are generally larger dudes.

Williams played a fair amount at DE his rookie year, backing up both KGB and Kampman. He was listed on the Packer roster as a "DT/DE" until his third season. When the talk was about replacing KGB as a starter in mid-2006, I thought it might be Williams rather than Jenkins who would do it because of his prior experience at DE with the Packers.

[Waldo]

Hunter is not good. He is fast in straight line speed, but isn't explosive, and just isn't a very good defender. He isn't a very instinctual football player and doesn't have a natural ability to get past OT's. He is a serviceable backup and good ST player.

Thompson is somewhat explosive and a fine athlete. He isn't very instinctive either, but has more potential than Hunter. Hunter doesn't have the really long arms and "bend" that Thompson has. Thompson has a fair amount of coverage experience.

I'm not ready to say this. Hunter was raw when he came to the Packers. I've seen improvement from him every year in the little time that he has played. He was a prototypical 3-4 OLB when he came into the league, and making him bulk up to play 4-3 DE was probably a stretch. Some can do it (KGB). Some don't. I think Hunter has a great deal of potential as a 3-4 OLB. Will he become a good one? I don't know, but you don't find many guys that are 6'4" 270 that run a 4.55 40 very often. Thompson is pretty fast, but 4.75 might not translate as well at 3-4 OLB.

3-4 OLB's are lineman mostly. They don't run 40's. Thompson has very good 10 yd splits and had a decent vertical jump (explosion), and outstanding side to side agility. And was a very good defender in college. Hunter ran a 4.55 when he was 250. He was noticeably slower in '08. Hunter may have been a protypical 3-4 OLB size-wise, but there is a reason every 3-4 team in the NFL passed on him 7 times. He wasn't this great secret that only GB knew about.

There is a good reason that Thompson was a projected 2nd-3rd round pick, and Hunter was a projected late round/UDFA, and that TT thought that Thompson was such a steal at the top of the 4th that he traded up for him for the first time in his career.

[Patler]

Thompson is somewhat explosive and a fine athlete. He isn't very instinctive either, but has more potential than Hunter. Hunter doesn't have the really long arms and "bend" that Thompson has. Thompson has a fair amount of coverage experience.

I agree with you here. Thompson looks much more hopeful than Hunter.

Probably a decisive training camp for Hunter this year. Things will either click for him and he will contribute more than just special teams, or he will be gone. He was an interesting prospect with very little experience. He played just one year in high school and sat out one year at Appalachian State. He showed enough natural talent I think for the Packers to invest a few seasons in developing him. Could remain as a special teams specialist I suppose, depending on how many decent special teamers they really have. There should be a lot who will contribute from scrimmage as well, making for less reason to keep a guy like Hunter unless he can be part of the rotation on defense.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Last summer you chastised me for criticizing Hunter as a DE. You offered Justin Tuck as his prototype. EDIT: wait a sec, you were saying that Hunter could be effective inside as a rush DT.

Face it Harvey, you have a man-crush on Hunter, and you are standing by your man.

I've been intrigued by Hunter's potential, but would you like to show me where I said he'd be similar to Justin Tuck? I also I didn't chastise you for criticizing "Hunter as a DE." We argued whether he could even play the DT position. I pointed out that Justin Tuck is a similar size and played DT for the Giants. You tried to come back with some weak argument that he wasn't a DT for the Giants. I think Hunter's still raw, but I think he's shown growth. When you draw up what you want a 3-4 OLB to look like, you'd draw up Hunter. I'm not even predicting he becomes a starter, but it wouldn't shock me if he ended up surprising some people. Hopefully, the new coaches will get the best out of him. I won't write him off until I see how he makes the transition.

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=13959&highlight=jason+hunter

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hunter may have been a protypical 3-4 OLB size-wise, but there is a reason every 3-4 team in the NFL passed on him 7 times. He wasn't this great secret that only GB knew about.

I don't buy this argument. KGB was similar to Hunter when he came out. Both were raw. How many teams passed on KGB? There's worse than a 50-50 shot that Thompson becomes a decent starter. There's worse than a 50-50 shot that Hunter becomes a decent starter. I'm not predicting either will become that. I just think both have a shot at fitting in this scheme. It wouldn't surprise me if one became a starter.

[rbaloha1]

Thompson is a good athlete who played tentative and was hurt. Flashed ability.

IMO a good olb candidate.

[Lurker64]

Hunter may have been a protypical 3-4 OLB size-wise, but there is a reason every 3-4 team in the NFL passed on him 7 times. He wasn't this great secret that only GB knew about.

There are, however, a variety of reasons that teams pass on players in the draft. A lot of the time it's just "there is better value at that pick for us" repeated over and over again, but guys fall due to a combination of "we think you have limited upside" and "we think you need a lot of work." Some guys who will need quite a bit of work, but have considerable upside if that all goes well, fall quite low in the draft. It's not insane to think that Hunter might be able to capitalize on his physical ability in this system. He probably wasn't a great secret, but we probably weren't the only team that said "Kid has upside, but needs work, we'll see if he's still there late."

It's also far from insane that Hunter will show considerable improvement when he's asked to play in a position that's more natural for his personal physical ability.

But yeah, it's a reach to pencil him in as a starter. It's just important to observe that we have a bunch of guys to try at rush OLB, and we just don't have very many 3-4 DEs at all.

[HarveyWallbangers]

But yeah, it's a reach to pencil him in as a starter. It's just important to observe that we have a bunch of guys to try at rush OLB, and we just don't have very many 3-4 DEs at all.

Agreed. I also don't know what we have at 3-4 ILB. I'd like to think Hawk could do it. Poppinga and Chillar seem better on the outside. I have no idea on Barnett. We also need another 3-4 NT. I agree with you though: I see 3-4 DE as our most obvious need. Jenkins fits. Kampman may fit there or 3-4 OLB. We don't really have anybody else that we can count on.

[Patler]

This is going to make training camp and preseason games much more interesting than usual. It also means the "starters" might play a bit more on defense in each game than they do in normal years.

The most physical linebacker that played last year was Desmond Bishop. Could this be a system that he fits well at one of the two ILB spots? Time will tell. I'm not on his bandwagon yet, but there will be 7 spots up for "assignment" in the new alignment. Who will fit where is going to be interesting.

[Waldo]

Bishop overpursues (like all college MLB's). He's a guy that will make plays in the backfield and be physical at the line, but if the RB bounces outside and heads for the corner, Bishop won't be stopping him. Barnett is the only LB on the team that is any good at preventing the back from turning the corner on the strong side (Hawk can on the weak side, but his initial reaction is too slow for the strong side, he has WLB instincts).

[rbaloha1]

[quote="Patler"

The most physical linebacker that played last year was Desmond Bishop. Could this be a system that he fits well at one of the two ILB spots? Time will tell. I'm not on his bandwagon yet, but there will be 7 spots up for "assignment" in the new alignment. Who will fit where is going to be interesting.[/quote]

Bishop has a chance to be a very good ilb. Physical with big play ability. Hawk may also benefit from the scheme as ilb.

[Patler]

Bishop overpursues (like all college MLB's). He's a guy that will make plays in the backfield and be physical at the line, but if the RB bounces outside and heads for the corner, Bishop won't be stopping him. Barnett is the only LB on the team that is any good at preventing the back from turning the corner on the strong side (Hawk can on the weak side, but his initial reaction is too slow for the strong side, he has WLB instincts).

I don't think we have seen enough of Bishop to know for sure. Hesitancy comes from unfamiliarity as much as from physical shortcomings. Bishop looked much different this season than last. If he can make similar strides in recognition this year he could enter into the mix. I know, I know, he absolutely froze a couple times this year and gave up big plays because of it, but everyone makes mistakes!

[Partial]

Hunter is not good. He is fast in straight line speed, but isn't explosive, and just isn't a very good defender. He isn't a very instinctual football player and doesn't have a natural ability to get past OT's. He is a serviceable backup and good ST player.

Thompson is somewhat explosive and a fine athlete. He isn't very instinctive either, but has more potential than Hunter. Hunter doesn't have the really long arms and "bend" that Thompson has. Thompson has a fair amount of coverage experience.

I'm not ready to say this. Hunter was raw when he came to the Packers. I've seen improvement from him every year in the little time that he has played. He was a prototypical 3-4 OLB when he came into the league, and making him bulk up to play 4-3 DE was probably a stretch. Some can do it (KGB). Some don't. I think Hunter has a great deal of potential as a 3-4 OLB. Will he become a good one? I don't know, but you don't find many guys that are 6'4" 270 that run a 4.55 40 very often. Thompson is pretty fast, but 4.75 might not translate as well at 3-4 OLB.

Not only that, but to argue a guy that size running a 40 that fast isn't explosive is crazy. What does he jog the first ten yards and then kick it into high gear? Guy is flying for 40 yards any way you slice it.

[Waldo]

Two examples - Jordy Nelson and James Jones

(40, 20, 10, vert)

Jordy: 4.49, 2.64, 1.57, 31"
Jones: 4.54, 2.65, 1.54, 34"

James is more explosive and quicker off the line, and can cut and accelerate faster, but has a slow top gear. Jordy has a much higher top gear but is a little slow off the line and in and out of breaks.

Jones would be a better (more explosive) pass rusher than Jordy all other things being equal, yet Jordy ran the faster 40. This effect is big time magnified for lineman.