Predict the Opening Day Defensive Starters in 2009.....

[SnakeLH2006]

Now that we have our Defensive coaches in place (I'm happy with the moves), the next phase is the players that we will put forth on D.

Here's the Snake's take on our potential starters which will be better than 2008.

DE- Jenkins (beastman when healthy...provides good run support and above average motor for a big man rushing the pass)
NT- Pickett or Hayneworth (Pickett will do ok at NT, but a huge upgrade would be convincing Albert to take a long term as the face of the D)
DE- Terrell Suggs or 1st Round Pick (I see Kampy moving to LB and we really need a big body at 290 for this scheme)

OLB-Hawk (was very good at MLB, but I can see Greene pushing him as a passrusher, and he has yet to peak)
MLB- Barnett (very good, hope he is 100%)
MLB- Bishop (love this guy, great motor and intangibles...produced in preseason and in the few times he got a chance...big hitter,good size, has a chance to be an eye opener)
OLB- Kampy (I don't think he's yet a Harrison as was suggested in another thread, yet he was only 265 last year and could shed to 255 easily and be an asset in this 3-4 D)...Note: Bart Scott from the Ravens in FA would be an excellent pickup for $6 million for this D, and then push Hawk to MLB to beast up with Barnett and put Bishop on the bench as the top reserve.

CB- Still Al (proved me wrong as he was beasting in the past few games, yet I'd like to get Tramon more involved to spell the old coots at CB for a breather more)
SS- Bigby (hopefully he's healthy as I loved this cat sinced he stormed on the scene in 2007 and really showed his value in missing out most of 2008 for our secondary....big hitter, playmaker in bursts, passionate leader)
FS- Collins (most of us were wrong about this cat...became a ballhawk ala Sharper in 2008...great speed, and pickups in coverage...became a Pro-Bowler overnite...hopefully he can maintain that pace)
CB- Woodie (I have a woodie for Woodie as this dude is so damn passionate about football and makes plays every game. Reminds me of when I was a kid watching him at Michigan, as this guy really, really understands football and is well worth the price of admission to see him go to work. One of the top playmakers in football, without jeapordizing plays to get his own. Unshakable mentally. NOTE: Him and Al were reborn with each other feeding off each other, making them elite at a top positon)

Overall, I see no turnover in the secondary, yet we should have at least two new starters outside our team (prob. a draft pick and 1 FA, or maybe no draft pick and 2 FA's) in the 3-4 DL/LB mix. Haynesworth, Scott, or Suggs are hopefully targets, but could see us picking up Canty from Dallas at DE as well.

Bishop deserves to start at this point and would like to see Poppinga move to the bench for energy (spell LB starters).

Is this accurate as far as Defensive starter forecast, as this is what I see (and would like) happens?

I see good things (can't be worse than Vanilla Bob) and really like the experience and intensity of our new D coaches. We expect our O to do well regardless of O line with Arod and core of great skill positions on O....We have many of the D pieces in place but I do see a shuttling of the 3-4 players around and perhaps 2 players from outside our organization, as well as Bishop (hopefully) making headway into the starting 3-4 postitions.

[Gunakor]

Suggs wouldn't be a full time DE in a 3-4. He lines up at OLB most times in Baltimore's 3-4, and I'd expect he'd do the same here for us if he were signed. My guess is that job is Jolly's unless we bring in a 3-4 DE to fill the other spot.

DE - Jenkins
NT - Pickett or (pray) Raji
DE - Jolly

OLB - Suggs/Draft Pick/Chillar/Pop (this is the one position I can't see anyone on our roster to fill, maybe Chill or Pop can be serviceable)
ILB - Hawk
ILB - Barnett
OLB - Kampman

CBs - Harris/Woodson/Williams (nickel)/Lee (dime)
FS - Collins
SS - Bigby

[SnakeLH2006]

Suggs wouldn't be a full time DE in a 3-4. He lines up at OLB most times in Baltimore's 3-4, and I'd expect he'd do the same here for us if he were signed. My guess is that job is Jolly's unless we bring in a 3-4 DE to fill the other spot.

DE - Jenkins
NT - Pickett or (pray) Raji
DE - Jolly

OLB - Suggs/Draft Pick/Chillar/Pop (this is the one position I can't see anyone on our roster to fill, maybe Chill or Pop can be serviceable)
ILB - Hawk
ILB - Barnett
OLB - Kampman

CBs - Harris/Woodson/Williams (nickel)/Lee (dime)
FS - Collins
SS - Bigby

Yes. I agree Suggs is prob. a big LB in this D, but in no way should Chillar or Pop start at LB with experienced D coaches. Vanilla Bob didn't know what was going on though, really. To upgrade in 2009, neither one should (could) start, unless you are talking Suggs or Bart Scott. Chill and Popps are stopgaps and forgotten in a year.

As far as Jolly (I loved that guy in 2007 as he was out of nowhere) but really what did he do in 2008 other than codeine...



Big disappointment was Jolly (insert Yoda voice)...

I'd be pretty sad if our starting D included Jolly, Popps, or Chillar...don't see that as much of an upgrade (more of a downgrade) from 2008 in a 3-4. Bishop needs to play. Jolly, Popps, Chillar less...

[Gunakor]

Suggs wouldn't be a full time DE in a 3-4. He lines up at OLB most times in Baltimore's 3-4, and I'd expect he'd do the same here for us if he were signed. My guess is that job is Jolly's unless we bring in a 3-4 DE to fill the other spot.

DE - Jenkins
NT - Pickett or (pray) Raji
DE - Jolly

OLB - Suggs/Draft Pick/Chillar/Pop (this is the one position I can't see anyone on our roster to fill, maybe Chill or Pop can be serviceable)
ILB - Hawk
ILB - Barnett
OLB - Kampman

CBs - Harris/Woodson/Williams (nickel)/Lee (dime)
FS - Collins
SS - Bigby

Yes. I agree Suggs is prob. a big LB in this D, but no way Chillar or Pop should (will) start at LB with experienced D coaches. Vanilla Bob didn't know what was going on though, really. To upgrade neither one should (could) start, unless you are talking Suggs or Bar Scott. Chill and Popps are stopgaps and forgotten in a year.

As far as Jolly (I loved that guy in 2007 out of nowhere) but really what did he do in 2008 other than codeine...



Big disappointment was Jolly (insert Yoda voice)...

I'd be pretty sad if our starting D included Jolly, Popps, or Chillar...don't see that as much of an upgrade (more of a downgrade) from 2008 in a 3-4. Bishop needs to play. Jolly, Popps, Chillar less...

Jolly will be fine at DE in a 3-4. All he needs to do is fill gaps, he won't even need to worry about pressuring the QB. He's probably not a long term solution, but it's not one of the most important positions to fill this offseason.

Chillar could play OLB in a 3-4. He's the best LB currently on our roster in terms of getting to the QB. He's the only one who knows how to blitz effectively. And he's not horrible in coverage either, which is also a plus. I wouldn't be opposed to him starting the year at OLB if nobody better can be brought in.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Scott play ILB next to Lewis in Baltimore? If he were brought in, wouldn't it be more likely that Hawk stays outside opposite Kampy with Barnett and Scott inside? I honestly wouldn't be too disappointed if that happened, either.

[SnakeLH2006]

Suggs wouldn't be a full time DE in a 3-4. He lines up at OLB most times in Baltimore's 3-4, and I'd expect he'd do the same here for us if he were signed. My guess is that job is Jolly's unless we bring in a 3-4 DE to fill the other spot.

DE - Jenkins
NT - Pickett or (pray) Raji
DE - Jolly

OLB - Suggs/Draft Pick/Chillar/Pop (this is the one position I can't see anyone on our roster to fill, maybe Chill or Pop can be serviceable)
ILB - Hawk
ILB - Barnett
OLB - Kampman

CBs - Harris/Woodson/Williams (nickel)/Lee (dime)
FS - Collins
SS - Bigby

Yes. I agree Suggs is prob. a big LB in this D, but no way Chillar or Pop should (will) start at LB with experienced D coaches. Vanilla Bob didn't know what was going on though, really. To upgrade neither one should (could) start, unless you are talking Suggs or Bar Scott. Chill and Popps are stopgaps and forgotten in a year.

As far as Jolly (I loved that guy in 2007 out of nowhere) but really what did he do in 2008 other than codeine...



Big disappointment was Jolly (insert Yoda voice)...

I'd be pretty sad if our starting D included Jolly, Popps, or Chillar...don't see that as much of an upgrade (more of a downgrade) from 2008 in a 3-4. Bishop needs to play. Jolly, Popps, Chillar less...

Jolly will be fine at DE in a 3-4. All he needs to do is fill gaps, he won't even need to worry about pressuring the QB. He's probably not a long term solution, but it's not one of the most important positions to fill this offseason.

Chillar could play OLB in a 3-4. He's the best LB currently on our roster in terms of getting to the QB. He's the only one who knows how to blitz effectively. And he's not horrible in coverage either, which is also a plus. I wouldn't be opposed to him starting the year at OLB if nobody better can be brought in.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Scott play ILB next to Lewis in Baltimore? If he were brought in, wouldn't it be more likely that Hawk stays outside opposite Kampy with Barnett and Scott inside? I honestly wouldn't be too disappointed if that happened, either.

Yeah, Scott has played both ILB and OLB in his short career, and you are right he would most likely be ILB and Hawk to OLB.

Not sold on Jolly after 2008 and his off-field stuff, as an upgrade is definitely needed as he is prob. the default DE right now, but doubt it happens after FA and the draft.

As far as Chillar, he's a solid player, but if he's our best pass-rushing LB, we definitely (will do) need to upgrade the LB position for our 3-4. I see Bishop as a force in 2009, as he played very well in preseason and in spurts rushing the QB, disrupting passing lanes, and stuffing the RB despite his 4.8 40 speed in college. Big time guys make big time plays. He's been good when given the chance and I see guys like Greene giving him the chance.

Either way, my projections were not current roster but with FA and draft picks...I don't see Chillar or Jolly starting as I said we will (should have) 2 new starters in the 3-4 "outside" our organization by opening day. If Chillar and Jolly start we won't be better than in 2008 as Chillar is maxed out and older...and Jolly has alot to prove after 2008.

[Gunakor]

As far as Chillar, he's a solid player, but if he's our best pass-rushing LB, we definitely (will do) need to upgrade the LB position for our 3-4.

Agreed, but having Hawk gives us a bit of flexibility. Hawk can play ILB or OLB in a 3-4, so we only really need one LB and it doesn't matter where he plays. Bring in Suggs, and Hawk can play ILB. Bring in Scott, and Hawk can play OLB. Any FA LB's and Chillar is demoted to second string. And Pop might actually be cut.

Either way, I don't really see Bishop starting. It's either gonna be Barnett and Hawk inside, or Barnett and a FA. Bishop will probably and should be retained as their primary backup, but won't be the starter. If he's starting that means we a) haven't brought in a new LB at all, and b) have suffered an injury to one of the guys who already have been starting for us such as Barnett or Hawk.

[SnakeLH2006]

As far as Chillar, he's a solid player, but if he's our best pass-rushing LB, we definitely (will do) need to upgrade the LB position for our 3-4.

Agreed, but having Hawk gives us a bit of flexibility. Hawk can play ILB or OLB in a 3-4, so we only really need one LB and it doesn't matter where he plays. Bring in Suggs, and Hawk can play ILB. Bring in Scott, and Hawk can play OLB. Any FA LB's and Chillar is demoted to second string. And Pop might actually be cut.

Either way, I don't really see Bishop starting. It's either gonna be Barnett and Hawk inside, or Barnett and a FA. Bishop will probably and should be retained as their primary backup, but won't be the starter. If he's starting that means we a) haven't brought in a new LB at all, and b) have suffered an injury to one of the guys who already have been starting for us such as Barnett or Hawk.

Good conversation thus far indeed.

Hawk, Barnett and most likely Kampy will be LB's as that much is agreed. If no one is brought in at LB is where we disagree. Bishop has been very surprising and and up-and-coming player IMO and would be disappointed if Chill or Pops started ahead of him in 2009 esp. if we don't get a top notch FA or 1st rounder to take that spot. I don't see Chillar and Pop (we've seen enough of them to know they are stopgaps at best) keeping a new spot on LB from Bishop. He's a beast and does things (makes big plays) I've never seen Chillar or Pops EVER do with many more snaps and plays to do it. That's Snake's take. Start Bishop or bring in someone (FA or 1st, 2nd rounder) to do it better. Bishop is made to be a big LB to stop the run and do some pass rush in a 3-4. That system is tailer-made for him.

[Gunakor]

As far as Chillar, he's a solid player, but if he's our best pass-rushing LB, we definitely (will do) need to upgrade the LB position for our 3-4.

Agreed, but having Hawk gives us a bit of flexibility. Hawk can play ILB or OLB in a 3-4, so we only really need one LB and it doesn't matter where he plays. Bring in Suggs, and Hawk can play ILB. Bring in Scott, and Hawk can play OLB. Any FA LB's and Chillar is demoted to second string. And Pop might actually be cut.

Either way, I don't really see Bishop starting. It's either gonna be Barnett and Hawk inside, or Barnett and a FA. Bishop will probably and should be retained as their primary backup, but won't be the starter. If he's starting that means we a) haven't brought in a new LB at all, and b) have suffered an injury to one of the guys who already have been starting for us such as Barnett or Hawk.

Good conversation thus far indeed.

Hawk, Barnett and most likely Kampy will be LB's as that much is agreed. If no one is brought in at LB is where we disagree. Bishop has been very surprising and and up-and-coming player IMO and would be disappointed if Chill or Pops started ahead of him in 2009 esp. if we don't get a top notch FA or 1st rounder to take that spot. I don't see Chillar and Pop (we've seen enough of them to know they are stopgaps at best) keeping a new spot on LB from Bishop. He's a beast and does things (makes big plays) I've never seen Chillar or Pops EVER do with many more snaps and plays to do it. That's Snake's take. Start Bishop or bring in someone (FA or 1st, 2nd rounder) to do it better. Bishop is made to be a big LB to stop the run and do some pass rush in a 3-4. That system is tailer-made for him.

But Chill and Pops wouldn't be starting ahead of Bishop. Bishop is an ILB. Chill or Pops would be starting at OLB. Maybe they keep Hawk at OLB and start Bishop next to Barnett at ILB, but that would be a poor decision IMO.

Were you thinking of Bishop at OLB? I think he could be effective rushing the passer from the OLB position, but we saw last season what a liability he is in coverage. Even if all he has to do is cover the RB in the flat, he's inviting disaster when playing coverage. I think his strength is playing the run, so ILB seems a better fit for him. And I don't think he'll be starting there, because even if we don't pick up a new LB they'll likely just move Hawk inside regardless. I'll take Chill over Bishop at OLB any day of the week, twice on Sunday.

[texaspackerbacker]

I could see Kampman playing either DE or OLB, or rotating depending on the situation. I also would go with him at OLB in the base D.

There's always going to be a rotation, but the starters as I see it will be:

Pickett NT, Jenkins and Jolly at DE

Barnett and Hawk ILB, Kampman and Popinga at OLB

Woodson, Harris, Collins, and Bigby at DB.

I don't see us signing Haynesworth; I don't see us signing Peppers; And I doubt we get Suggs either. I also don't think the #1 draft pick will be a front seven D player--more likely OT or Corner.

Nobody seems to have any love for Montgomery; I see him as a serviceable backup for either DE spot. I think either Cole or Harrell could do fine rotating with Pickett at NT--As was stated in the other thread, Cole seems to get a lot more respect around the league than from fans at home.

Bishop would seem to be the obvious top backup at ILB unless he does so well that he wins and OLB spot. Nobody has mentioned Hunter or Thompson either. Both seem to be very well suited to be OLBs in the 3-4. As was said, Chillar also seems better suited for 3-4 than 4-3. There should be plenty of PT for all of these guys in rotation, and I see no reason why all of them shouldn't do a good job.

Woodson obviously starts at Corner; Harris or Williams, whichever wins out and starts, the other will be out there a lot. Same thing for Rouse as a backup at Safety.

I could see the Packers using the 2-4-5 that Pittsburgh used in the SB in some passing situations, in an extreme case, going with Jenkins and Kampman as the only down linemen and Thompson and Hunter at OLB.

There's plenty of talent currently on the roster to have depth and a lot of variations. I wouldn't be surprised if Thompson and McCarthy had this 3-4 thing in mind a year ago when they picked up Chillar and drafted Jamie Thompson.

[vince]

I could see Kampman playing either DE or OLB, or rotating depending on the situation. I also would go with him at OLB in the base D.

There's always going to be a rotation, but the starters as I see it will be:

Pickett NT, Jenkins and Jolly at DE

Barnett and Hawk ILB, Kampman and Popinga at OLB

Woodson, Harris, Collins, and Bigby at DB.

I don't see us signing Haynesworth; I don't see us signing Peppers; And I doubt we get Suggs either. I also don't think the #1 draft pick will be a front seven D player--more likely OT or Corner.

Nobody seems to have any love for Montgomery; I see him as a serviceable backup for either DE spot. I think either Cole or Harrell could do fine rotating with Pickett at NT--As was stated in the other thread, Cole seems to get a lot more respect around the league than from fans at home.

Bishop would seem to be the obvious top backup at ILB unless he does so well that he wins and OLB spot. Nobody has mentioned Hunter or Thompson either. Both seem to be very well suited to be OLBs in the 3-4. As was said, Chillar also seems better suited for 3-4 than 4-3. There should be plenty of PT for all of these guys in rotation, and I see no reason why all of them shouldn't do a good job.

Woodson obviously starts at Corner; Harris or Williams, whichever wins out and starts, the other will be out there a lot. Same thing for Rouse as a backup at Safety.

I could see the Packers using the 2-4-5 that Pittsburgh used in the SB in some passing situations, in an extreme case, going with Jenkins and Kampman as the only down linemen and Thompson and Hunter at OLB.

There's plenty of talent currently on the roster to have depth and a lot of variations. I wouldn't be surprised if Thompson and McCarthy had this 3-4 thing in mind a year ago when they picked up Chillar and drafted Jamie Thompson.

IMO, that's pretty close Tex. There tends to be polarization of opinion in forums such as this and we tend to focus on the areas of disagreement vs. agreement. I know I'm guilty of that. It often comes down to points of emphasis. That said, there are a couple areas where I think the Packers can improve over what you're stating here, but in general I agree with your assessment.

I do think the Packers have an opportunity to upgrade the positions currently occupied by Cole and Montgomery. Cole, while AT BEST a serviceable back-up (we agree), is not someone I think Packer fans want playing significant minutes. And if Pickett were to go down for the year, our defense would immediately be handicapped in stopping power running games if Cole is his back-up.

Montgomery may too be a serviceable backup (we agree) - at best. But if Jenkins were to go down again this year, then so again would our defense if Monty is his replacement. I'm not saying Monty is a bad player. I just think that, at 270 lbs. and overmatched in the running game against Tackles and double-teams, he is not suited to the different requirements of the 3-4 DE position. He's serviceable as a contain DE, but not when responsible for plugging holes - particularly at his current size.

Weak spots get isolated and abused in this game, thereby taking entire teams down with them. I believe that the more those two play, the less success the defense, and the entire team, will ultimately have.

[vince]

I also think Harrell should slim down a bit and would be much more effective at DE in the 3-4 than at NT. He was drafted at about 300 I believe, and was told to bulk up, which could be part of his back problem. I don't know if he'll ever become fully healthy with his back, as those tend to recur with big guys, but I remain hopeful and believe that his best shot will be at DE - not NT. He has the physical ability to be successful there if healthy IMO.

[Joemailman]

NT Pickett

DE Jenkins

DE Jolly, or Harrell if Jolly is sentenced or suspended.

SOLB Kampman

ILB Barnett

ILB Hawk

WOLB Jeremy Thompson

SS Bigby

FS Collins

CB Woodson

CB Harris

[Pugger]

I'm hoping our new D coaches and scheme will be a god send to Hawk.

[texaspackerbacker]

I could see Kampman playing either DE or OLB, or rotating depending on the situation. I also would go with him at OLB in the base D.

There's always going to be a rotation, but the starters as I see it will be:

Pickett NT, Jenkins and Jolly at DE

Barnett and Hawk ILB, Kampman and Popinga at OLB

Woodson, Harris, Collins, and Bigby at DB.

I don't see us signing Haynesworth; I don't see us signing Peppers; And I doubt we get Suggs either. I also don't think the #1 draft pick will be a front seven D player--more likely OT or Corner.

Nobody seems to have any love for Montgomery; I see him as a serviceable backup for either DE spot. I think either Cole or Harrell could do fine rotating with Pickett at NT--As was stated in the other thread, Cole seems to get a lot more respect around the league than from fans at home.

Bishop would seem to be the obvious top backup at ILB unless he does so well that he wins and OLB spot. Nobody has mentioned Hunter or Thompson either. Both seem to be very well suited to be OLBs in the 3-4. As was said, Chillar also seems better suited for 3-4 than 4-3. There should be plenty of PT for all of these guys in rotation, and I see no reason why all of them shouldn't do a good job.

Woodson obviously starts at Corner; Harris or Williams, whichever wins out and starts, the other will be out there a lot. Same thing for Rouse as a backup at Safety.

I could see the Packers using the 2-4-5 that Pittsburgh used in the SB in some passing situations, in an extreme case, going with Jenkins and Kampman as the only down linemen and Thompson and Hunter at OLB.

There's plenty of talent currently on the roster to have depth and a lot of variations. I wouldn't be surprised if Thompson and McCarthy had this 3-4 thing in mind a year ago when they picked up Chillar and drafted Jamie Thompson.

IMO, that's pretty close Tex. There tends to be polarization of opinion in forums such as this and we tend to focus on the areas of disagreement vs. agreement. I know I'm guilty of that. It often comes down to points of emphasis. That said, there are a couple areas where I think the Packers can improve over what you're stating here, but in general I agree with your assessment.

I do think the Packers have an opportunity to upgrade the positions currently occupied by Cole and Montgomery. Cole, while AT BEST a serviceable back-up (we agree), is not someone I think Packer fans want playing significant minutes. And if Pickett were to go down for the year, our defense would immediately be handicapped in stopping power running games if Cole is his back-up.

Montgomery may too be a serviceable backup (we agree) - at best. But if Jenkins were to go down again this year, then so again would our defense if Monty is his replacement. I'm not saying Monty is a bad player. I just think that, at 270 lbs. and overmatched in the running game against Tackles and double-teams, he is not suited to the different requirements of the 3-4 DE position. He's serviceable as a contain DE, but not when responsible for plugging holes - particularly at his current size.

Weak spots get isolated and abused in this game, thereby taking entire teams down with them. I believe that the more those two play, the less success the defense, and the entire team, will ultimately have.

I don't have much disagreement. I do think Montgomery hasn't been and won't be if need be, as bad as people think. You're right about opponents attacking a weak spot, but that's one thing the 3-4 sort of compensates for. In pass rushing, no matter how few or how many going in, they never know where it's coming from. And on run plays, you have not one, but two quality ILBs clustering at the possible line weakness. (Maybe "cluster" isn't the best word to use).

[ND72]

DE - Jenkins
DT - Pickett/ Draft Pick
DE - Jolly

OLB - Bishop/ Draft pick
MLB - Hawk
MLB - Barnett
OLB - Kampy

CB - Al
CB - Chuck
FS - Collins
SS - Bigby/Rouse