Bottom Line - Kampman is going to have trouble as 3-4 olb

[CaptainKickass]

I've been a 3-4 cheerleader for years.

Wow -

I knew that switching from the 4-3 to the 3-4 meant that changes in the organization went very deep.

But I never knew that you were a cheerleader Wist. And furthermore - I never knew that cheerleaders in general are evaluated in a fashion that makes them more suitable to one style of defense versus another.

So now the Packers gotta go find cheerleaders from another WI college that plays the 3-4, just because we changed our style of defense?

I mean WOW.

.

[rbaloha1]

Does Kamp suck on the football field? I think that his athleticism has translated quite well. It's amazing how in one season Hawk goes from being the statistically best coverage LB in the NFL (he was in '07) to an absolute scrub. Gotta love the short memory of fans.

Again, Kampy is on of the best as a 4-3 end. However using stats to make the assertion that this translates to being an impact 3-4 olb is a huge stretch.

Please post Bishop's drill stats.

I shall go with the comments of the Director of Football Operations for the Steelers and Chewy's remarks.

You can pick apart Waldo's position by discounting the facts and explanations, but can you provide any support for your own?

[sharpe1027]

I shall go with the comments of the Director of Football Operations for the Steelers and Chewy's remarks.

I shall counter with:
Tony Brackens
Don Capers
Mike McCarthy
Kevin Greene and
The Director of Football Operations for the Steelers who seems to found success with a another guy who had questionable coverage skills in Harrison.

[rbaloha1]

I shall go with the comments of the Director of Football Operations for the Steelers and Chewy's remarks.

I shall counter with:
Tony Brackens
Don Capers
Mike McCarthy
Kevin Greene and
The Director of Football Operations for the Steelers who seems to found success with a another guy who had questionable coverage skills in Harrison.

I expect all Packer officials to expect Kampman to perform well. What are they supposed to say?

Lets hope it works out and Kampy remains an all pro.

[sheepshead]

There are a few guys I wouldn't bet against, Aaron Kampman's one.

[sharpe1027]

I expect all Packer officials to expect Kampman to perform well. What are they supposed to say?

Lets hope it works out and Kampy remains an all pro.

Agreed, but I threw in Brackens as a one example of what Capers has done in the past.

I also read the quotes by Kevin Colbert and the statement about it being tough for a player like Kampman was right next to his statement about how Harrison came in with similar questions about his ability.

I personally don't give much stock in Chewy's knowledge of Caper's 3-4 defense, but that is just my opinion.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Lets hope it works out and Kampy remains an all pro.

Well, he wasn't an All-Pro last year. Not even a Pro Bowler. I think a lot depends on the guys around him. You know what you'll get, but if there's nobody else to rush the passer, he isn't going to look good--whether it's as a 4-3 DE or 3-4 OLB.

[rbaloha1]

I expect all Packer officials to expect Kampman to perform well. What are they supposed to say?

Lets hope it works out and Kampy remains an all pro.

Agreed, but I threw in Brackens as a one example of what Capers has done in the past.

I also read the quotes by Kevin Colbert and the statement about it being tough for a player like Kampman was right next to his statement about how Harrison came in with similar questions about his ability.

I personally don't give much stock in Chewy's knowledge of Caper's 3-4 defense, but that is just my opinion.

Brackens was much more athletic and physically stronger than AK.

[Lurker64]

Brackens was much more athletic and physically stronger than AK.

Please provide evidence. It is apparent from Kampman's combine numbers that he is an exceptional athlete, do you have anything more about this than "gut feeling"?

[wist43]

He'll be a fish out of water... I've been a 3-4 cheerleader for years, but the way the Packers are going about it all but ensures they will be running a 4-3 much more often than a 3-4.

Since they're stating publicly that they intend to run a "hybrid", and to use whatever base defense works best for a given opponent/situation... it won't take long for them to figure out that Kampman can't play LB, and Harrell can't play DE, and that Barnett is even worse as a 3-4 LB, than he was as a 4-3 LB, etc...

Add that, the fact that TT is unlikely to make much of an effort to target 3-4 players in FA, and that he will always, and only, take his BPA in the draft... it is unlikely that there will be much help arriving in the off season to facilitate the changeover...

Ergo... 2, 3 games into the season... i expect that 3-4/hybrid will be looking like a very familiar 4-3.

Sure, or he will do just fine. The difference between my position and yours is that I don't pretend to know the answer. What I *think* is that Kampman will be able make a lot of plays at OLB and will probably also make a lot of mistakes, especially early. Hopefully, the good plays outweigh the bad. Why do I think that? A good question. Thanks for asking.

1) Kampman has a distinct advantage of having already played LB for a good chunk of his life.
2) His measurable are solid.
3) He is a smart player.
4) He is a dedicated worker and good technician.
5) He has a proven coaching staff behind him.
6.) He put on weight for the DE position and is still not that huge, making me think he can play lighter if need be.
7) Other OLBers have made the transition from DE with less experience, if any, in coverage.
6) I prefer to be hopeful that the Packers can be good, rather than always assume they will fail.

Why do you *think* he will be a fish out of water? What facts and reasoned conclusions do you have?

I think Kampman will be productive... he is a good football player. I just think you are taking a pro bowl calibur DE, a natural with his hand on the ground IMO. He is a 4-3 end IMO, and best suited there.

[mraynrand]

Google isn't that hard to use.

Bishop ran a 4.81 40 and 4.65 shuttle. And can't cover to save his life, nor can he catch a RB trying to turn the corner, hence Hawk started all year at MLB after Barnett went down. Bishop is a 2 down LB, just like Hodge was.

Didn't need Google - just needed to watch his first play after Barnett went down - all his deficiencies on display in one single play....uuuuugly!

[rbaloha1]

Google isn't that hard to use.

Bishop ran a 4.81 40 and 4.65 shuttle. And can't cover to save his life, nor can he catch a RB trying to turn the corner, hence Hawk started all year at MLB after Barnett went down. Bishop is a 2 down LB, just like Hodge was.

Didn't need Google - just needed to watch his first play after Barnett went down - all his deficiencies on display in one single play....uuuuugly!

Based on playing time how many impact plays did Bishop make versus Hawk? Who called out Hawk for the lack of impact plays despite all these great shuttle and cone numbers?

[Lurker64]

Based on playing time how many impact plays did Bishop make versus Hawk? Who called out Hawk for the lack of impact plays despite all these great shuttle and cone numbers?

Bishop is a guy who will make 1 impact play and then fail to catch an RB on the corner 9 out of 10 times. Hawk is a guy who will make 10 out of 10 plays, though none of them will be spectacular. He's assignment sure, a great tackler, he can cover, and he doesn't make mistakes.

The 2-down MLB who blows a guy up every once in a while and sometimes has a ball tipped into his hands (Hodge, Bishop, Maualuga) will always receive much more admiration from fans than he deserves.

The solid, dependable WLB who does exactly what is asked of him every time in a MLB-centric defense is always going to get much less admiration than he deserves.

Bishop's just a guy you're happy to have as a backup and for goal-line situations. He's a character guy with some leadership ability who is a good special teamer and worth keeping around. He'll never start in this league though.

[Waldo]

Often by putting yourself in position to not give up a play, you take yourself out of position to make an impact play. Overpursuit.....jumping routes.....exciting, exciting stuff. But not as difficult as perfect pursuit and good coverage.

Barnett by far has the best pursuit of any defender. He instantly breaks on where a play is going when it shows itself to be going that way, and not a second too soon (unlike Bishop and Hodge, who break early and make a few "big plays" because of it (never mind the torchings)). Hawk is a half step slow, then again that is the WLB in him coming out, that I'm pretty sure was coached into him by Sanders because he didn't play like that in college.

[rbaloha1]

The issue is Coach Moss called out Hawk for his lack of impact plays (forced fumbles, interceptions, fumble recoveries, tfl, sacks, etc.). This is an important component of how the Packers evaluate linebackers.

Hawk was called the safest pick in the draft. Drafted to be an Urlacher type player making impact plays. IMO Hawk has failed in this aspect and is another example of a combine stat guy (although he was somewhat productive in an overrated big 10. sorry badger fans). Hawk is a disappointment and should not be resigned.

Bishop had coverage issues when first playing. Gradually improved with more playing time and practice reps. The guy first plays were fresh off the bench and with very little regular season playing time.

Against the Texans in one half, Bishop had almost as many impact plays Hawk had for the season. Thus Coach Moss called out Hawk for his lack of impact plays which hurts the team. Imagine Hawk with some impact plays like the secondary. Maybe a few games go the Packers way.

Bishop is a pleasant surprise. Nice gains from season 1 to season 2 as TT mentioned. Does not have Hawk's athleticism but much better lb instincts. If Bishop is provided the reps and playing opportunities Bishop outperforms Hawk.

Enough of the Hawk apologists. The guy plays hard but shall never be clsoe to the hype.