Hawk and Barnett to switch positions

[SnakeLH2006]

EDIT: ---messed up the quotes..sorry, lol-- my post follows this one.

[SnakeLH2006]

True enough fella's... of course there should be 4 LB's on the field in most 3-4 nickel packages, I guess I'm just used to viewing the Packers LB's as so completely useless, that I instinctively replace them every chance I get.

As of now, they don't have the players to play a 3-4... everybody is extrapolating this player here, and that player there; but in every instance you have to go into a dream state to see those guys excelling in the new scheme.

These guys were scouted and drafted to play in that passive POS 4-3 scheme run by Bates and Sanders, and none of them were really worth a damn in that scheme. Simply put, the Packers have very little talent in the front 7, and what talent there is, is 4-3 talent.

Barring a massive infusion of talent in the front 7, I think the Packers will revert back to what they do (best) below average, and that is play a 4-3 most of the time... if the choice is disaster with miscast personnel trying to play a 3-4; or, below average results but not getting gashed every snap... expect a lot more 4-3, than 3-4.

Of course, if TT actually acknowledges reality, and swings for the fences in the draft and in FA at 3-4 personnel, maybe the outlook improves... but, I wouldn't hold my breath on betting that TT will do much to bring in a lot of personnel suited to the 3-4.

Just not feeling warm and fuzzy about how TT is going about this... the indecisive DC search, in which it was rumored that the Packers got stiffed armed, TT's statements about moving players and thinking they'll be fine in new roles, his penchant for ignoring needs at the top end of the draft...

Which would suprise you more??? If TT -

1) traded up and drafted Raji

or

2) traded down and took an offensive player

Of course we can all easily envision scenario #2... scenario #1 is a pipe dream.

Then again, Hawk and Barnett are both stud pass rushers, so no worries

I dunno man. I'm a big Barnett fan after the past 2 years, and a tepid wannabe fan of Hawk. But....Snake loved Hawk in college as he really looked the part pressuring the QB when asked and think he might excel in a pass-rush role. As far as Barnett, I doubt he's asked to blitz much, but may do well as he does make plays at times, and esp. with Kampy at OLB, I'm willing to state I 100% believe, barring injury, Kampy gets at least 10 sacks at OLB/hybrid DE this year. He's just to good. We'll be fine bro. We just need another stud (whether it be FA or Draft) in the front 7.

[wist43]

True enough fella's... of course there should be 4 LB's on the field in most 3-4 nickel packages, I guess I'm just used to viewing the Packers LB's as so completely useless, that I instinctively replace them every chance I get.

As of now, they don't have the players to play a 3-4... everybody is extrapolating this player here, and that player there; but in every instance you have to go into a dream state to see those guys excelling in the new scheme.

These guys were scouted and drafted to play in that passive POS 4-3 scheme run by Bates and Sanders, and none of them were really worth a damn in that scheme. Simply put, the Packers have very little talent in the front 7, and what talent there is, is 4-3 talent.

Barring a massive infusion of talent in the front 7, I think the Packers will revert back to what they do (best) below average, and that is play a 4-3 most of the time... if the choice is disaster with miscast personnel trying to play a 3-4; or, below average results but not getting gashed every snap... expect a lot more 4-3, than 3-4.

Of course, if TT actually acknowledges reality, and swings for the fences in the draft and in FA at 3-4 personnel, maybe the outlook improves... but, I wouldn't hold my breath on betting that TT will do much to bring in a lot of personnel suited to the 3-4.

Just not feeling warm and fuzzy about how TT is going about this... the indecisive DC search, in which it was rumored that the Packers got stiffed armed, TT's statements about moving players and thinking they'll be fine in new roles, his penchant for ignoring needs at the top end of the draft...

Which would suprise you more??? If TT -

1) traded up and drafted Raji

or

2) traded down and took an offensive player

Of course we can all easily envision scenario #2... scenario #1 is a pipe dream.

Then again, Hawk and Barnett are both stud pass rushers, so no worries

I dunno man. I'm a big Barnett fan after the past 2 years, and a tepid wannabe fan of Hawk. But....Snake loved Hawk in college as he really looked the part pressuring the QB when asked and think he might excel in a pass-rush role. As far as Barnett, I doubt he's asked to blitz much, but may do well as he does make plays at times, and esp. with Kampy at OLB, I'm willing to state I 100% believe, barring injury, Kampy gets at least 10 sacks at OLB/hybrid DE this year. He's just to good. We'll be fine bro. We just need another stud (whether it be FA or Draft) in the front 7.

I was being facetious

My goal is to play championship calibur defense... can't say what TT and MM's goals are. They're to the point now where keeping their jobs has to be in the back of their minds; hence, the hiring of Capers, and the implementation of a hybrid.

If they were going to make a full blown committment to a 3-4, i.e. tear down what they have, and start from scratch... that is a massive rebuilding job... TT and MM don't have enough time to see that process thru, they would be fired before it came to fruition; hence, they hire Capers, and hedge their bets on a "hybrid"... which, as I've stated, I believe will morph right back into the POS 4-3 they ran last year.

They may be hedging their bets b/c their backs are against the wall... but in the end they are setting themselves up for more mediocrity.

[KYPack]

Everyone, including the media seems to think of Capers is a 3-4 coach. Capers has had eight Top 10 NFL defenses, including the #1 defense in the league with Coughlin in Jacksonville which was a 4-3.

Dom believes in stopping the run, bringing pressure and taking his guys and putting 'em in position to make plays. He'll put in some 4-3, some 3-4, hell he may even run some of that 1-6-4 that Bellichik runs in Boston. Don will get his guys playing intense defense and installing schemes that excentuate his guys strengths.

He won't run the same scheme over and over and try and shoe-horn his players into it.

Like our previous commander did during his tenure

[BZnDallas]

True enough fella's... of course there should be 4 LB's on the field in most 3-4 nickel packages, I guess I'm just used to viewing the Packers LB's as so completely useless, that I instinctively replace them every chance I get.

As of now, they don't have the players to play a 3-4... everybody is extrapolating this player here, and that player there; but in every instance you have to go into a dream state to see those guys excelling in the new scheme.

These guys were scouted and drafted to play in that passive POS 4-3 scheme run by Bates and Sanders, and none of them were really worth a damn in that scheme. Simply put, the Packers have very little talent in the front 7, and what talent there is, is 4-3 talent.

Barring a massive infusion of talent in the front 7, I think the Packers will revert back to what they do (best) below average, and that is play a 4-3 most of the time... if the choice is disaster with miscast personnel trying to play a 3-4; or, below average results but not getting gashed every snap... expect a lot more 4-3, than 3-4.

Of course, if TT actually acknowledges reality, and swings for the fences in the draft and in FA at 3-4 personnel, maybe the outlook improves... but, I wouldn't hold my breath on betting that TT will do much to bring in a lot of personnel suited to the 3-4.

Just not feeling warm and fuzzy about how TT is going about this... the indecisive DC search, in which it was rumored that the Packers got stiffed armed, TT's statements about moving players and thinking they'll be fine in new roles, his penchant for ignoring needs at the top end of the draft...

Which would suprise you more??? If TT -

1) traded up and drafted Raji

or

2) traded down and took an offensive player

Of course we can all easily envision scenario #2... scenario #1 is a pipe dream.

Then again, Hawk and Barnett are both stud pass rushers, so no worries

I dunno man. I'm a big Barnett fan after the past 2 years, and a tepid wannabe fan of Hawk. But....Snake loved Hawk in college as he really looked the part pressuring the QB when asked and think he might excel in a pass-rush role. As far as Barnett, I doubt he's asked to blitz much, but may do well as he does make plays at times, and esp. with Kampy at OLB, I'm willing to state I 100% believe, barring injury, Kampy gets at least 10 sacks at OLB/hybrid DE this year. He's just to good. We'll be fine bro. We just need another stud (whether it be FA or Draft) in the front 7.

I was being facetious

My goal is to play championship calibur defense... can't say what TT and MM's goals are. They're to the point now where keeping their jobs has to be in the back of their minds; hence, the hiring of Capers, and the implementation of a hybrid.

If they were going to make a full blown committment to a 3-4, i.e. tear down what they have, and start from scratch... that is a massive rebuilding job... TT and MM don't have enough time to see that process thru, they would be fired before it came to fruition; hence, they hire Capers, and hedge their bets on a "hybrid"... which, as I've stated, I believe will morph right back into the POS 4-3 they ran last year.

They may be hedging their bets b/c their backs are against the wall... but in the end they are setting themselves up for more mediocrity.

can you explain to me how you think Dom Capers is going to run the same scheme as Vanilla Bob??? not all 4-3 schemes are the same... (even if they had to revert back to the 4-3, which you proclaim every chance you get) Dom Capers defensives have been known to be more aggresive...

how about something new wist... i normally like the input you have for the packers even though i don't always agree... but the doom and gloom is getting old... just my opinion, no offense (lol, or in some cases no defense, haha)

[Packnut]

D

Don't know what defense some were watching last season, but for those of us like wist who prefer to live in REALITY, our LB's totally SUCKED. I have no clue how anyone can deny the stats. We could'nt stop the run PERIOD. That is not "opinion" but fact.

The injury excuse for Hawk is nothing more than wishful thinking. He says he was'nt injured the last half of the season. I would think he would know that better than ANYONE else. The track record of LB's out of Ohio St speaks for itself. This guy in 3 seasons has not played like a #5 pick. In fact, Diggs was a better LB when he was here than Hawk has been so far.

Our LB's are slow and un-athletic. It's the reason they suck in coverage. It's the reason they can't stop the run. I understand watching a play keeps our eyes glued to the ball, but if you pay attention to the replay and concentrate on where our LB's are when the play ends, you'd see most of the time they are'nt even in a position to make the play.

Our LB's are terrible at shedding blocks. How many times do you have to see Hawk or Popp getting washed out of the play by an offensive lineman to realize this? The ONLY way these guys are gonna make ANY impact is if we have a Haynsworth type NT. Pickett is that type- IF he's only on the field for half of the plays. That leaves us one NT short.

Now we have seen highly touted rookie D lineman come in and struggle so even if Teddy pulls off a miracle and drafts for need, the draft gives little if any help this season. The reality is that the odds are stacked against us having any kind of a championship caliber defense for at least a few years.

If we win,it will be the offense who carries us. May-be Rodgers takes the next step and learns how to win. May-be MM finally gets his head out of his ass and realizes musical chairs on the O-line is a recipe for futility. At least when it comes to the offense, a small amount of green and gold kool-aid can stimulate how good this offense can be, but when it comes to our D, the only way to get excited is spiking that kool-aid with lot's and lot's of booze.......

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: D

Our LB's are slow and un-athletic.

Funny.

[sharpe1027]

As of now, they don't have the players to play a 3-4... everybody is extrapolating this player here, and that player there; but in every instance you have to go into a dream state to see those guys excelling in the new scheme.

Nice dig at everyone's contribution to this discussion. Ass.

These guys were scouted and drafted to play in that passive POS 4-3 scheme run by Bates and Sanders, and none of them were really worth a damn in that scheme. Simply put, the Packers have very little talent in the front 7, and what talent there is, is 4-3 talent.

3-4 talent vs. 4-3 talent is not baseball talent vs. soccer talent.

Barring a massive infusion of talent in the front 7, I think the Packers will revert back to what they do (best) below average, and that is play a 4-3 most of the time... if the choice is disaster with miscast personnel trying to play a 3-4; or, below average results but not getting gashed every snap... expect a lot more 4-3, than 3-4.

Meh, they will use what works best. I don't really care which they run "more".

Of course, if TT actually acknowledges my personally constructed and always end of the world reality, and swings for the fences in the draft and in FA at 3-4 personnel, maybe the outlook improves... but, I wouldn't hold my breath on betting that TT will do much to bring in a lot of personnel suited to the 3-4.

Fixed.

Just not feeling warm and fuzzy about how TT is going about this... the indecisive DC search, in which it was rumored that the Packers got stiffed armed, TT's statements about moving players and thinking they'll be fine in new roles, his penchant for ignoring needs at the top end of the draft...

Ignoring needs? You mean ignoring the media and fan's perception of needs? Then sure. Otherwise, it seems every high pick ended up being a need, although some haven't panned out.

Which would suprise you more??? If TT -

1) traded up and drafted Raji

or

2) traded down and took an offensive player

Of course we can all easily envision scenario #2... scenario #1 is a pipe dream.

Then again, Hawk and Barnett are both stud pass rushers, so no worries

How many times has he traded down in the first round? How many trades occur each year in the first round? Not very realistic to expect our GM to do hardly any other GM does.

[wist43]

Okay guys... I succumb to your polyanna ways, and now see the Packers defenders for the vaunted and feared group that they are

I've been negative on the Packers these past years b/c, quite simply, they are not doing the things necessary to win championships. For me, it's that simple.

Were our players all world beaters... Sanders would still have a job, and we'd be talking about another Lombardi trophy adorning our trophy case...

But,

contrary to most of you guys who sip way too much Kool-Aid... I looked at the product on the field last year - and it sucked.

Point blank guys... the defense sucked last year; and with the exception of that aberrational year two years ago when every player on the defensive side of the ball stayed healthy, AND had a career year, they have in general sucked on defense for years...

It may be upsetting for you Kool-Aid drinkers to hear the truth... but there it is...

You guys are trying to put lipstick on a pig... I want the pig to be pretty too... just not seein it

[wist43]

True enough fella's... of course there should be 4 LB's on the field in most 3-4 nickel packages, I guess I'm just used to viewing the Packers LB's as so completely useless, that I instinctively replace them every chance I get.

As of now, they don't have the players to play a 3-4... everybody is extrapolating this player here, and that player there; but in every instance you have to go into a dream state to see those guys excelling in the new scheme.

These guys were scouted and drafted to play in that passive POS 4-3 scheme run by Bates and Sanders, and none of them were really worth a damn in that scheme. Simply put, the Packers have very little talent in the front 7, and what talent there is, is 4-3 talent.

Barring a massive infusion of talent in the front 7, I think the Packers will revert back to what they do (best) below average, and that is play a 4-3 most of the time... if the choice is disaster with miscast personnel trying to play a 3-4; or, below average results but not getting gashed every snap... expect a lot more 4-3, than 3-4.

Of course, if TT actually acknowledges reality, and swings for the fences in the draft and in FA at 3-4 personnel, maybe the outlook improves... but, I wouldn't hold my breath on betting that TT will do much to bring in a lot of personnel suited to the 3-4.

Just not feeling warm and fuzzy about how TT is going about this... the indecisive DC search, in which it was rumored that the Packers got stiffed armed, TT's statements about moving players and thinking they'll be fine in new roles, his penchant for ignoring needs at the top end of the draft...

Which would suprise you more??? If TT -

1) traded up and drafted Raji

or

2) traded down and took an offensive player

Of course we can all easily envision scenario #2... scenario #1 is a pipe dream.

Then again, Hawk and Barnett are both stud pass rushers, so no worries

I dunno man. I'm a big Barnett fan after the past 2 years, and a tepid wannabe fan of Hawk. But....Snake loved Hawk in college as he really looked the part pressuring the QB when asked and think he might excel in a pass-rush role. As far as Barnett, I doubt he's asked to blitz much, but may do well as he does make plays at times, and esp. with Kampy at OLB, I'm willing to state I 100% believe, barring injury, Kampy gets at least 10 sacks at OLB/hybrid DE this year. He's just to good. We'll be fine bro. We just need another stud (whether it be FA or Draft) in the front 7.

I was being facetious

My goal is to play championship calibur defense... can't say what TT and MM's goals are. They're to the point now where keeping their jobs has to be in the back of their minds; hence, the hiring of Capers, and the implementation of a hybrid.

If they were going to make a full blown committment to a 3-4, i.e. tear down what they have, and start from scratch... that is a massive rebuilding job... TT and MM don't have enough time to see that process thru, they would be fired before it came to fruition; hence, they hire Capers, and hedge their bets on a "hybrid"... which, as I've stated, I believe will morph right back into the POS 4-3 they ran last year.

They may be hedging their bets b/c their backs are against the wall... but in the end they are setting themselves up for more mediocrity.

can you explain to me how you think Dom Capers is going to run the same scheme as Vanilla Bob??? not all 4-3 schemes are the same... (even if they had to revert back to the 4-3, which you proclaim every chance you get) Dom Capers defensives have been known to be more aggresive...

how about something new wist... i normally like the input you have for the packers even though i don't always agree... but the doom and gloom is getting old... just my opinion, no offense (lol, or in some cases no defense, haha)

I don't think they will run the same scheme as Sanders, but I do think they will, by necessity, have to run more 4-3 than 3-4... and that 4-3 will likely have to be fairly passive.

They are completely lacking in blitzers from the LB position, if they can't generate pressure with their LB's from a 3-4, and history has shown the LB'ers they currently have couldn't generate pressure out of any alignment... they by necessity will have to play more 4-3, and they will probably be unwilling to blitz much out of it simply b/c they don't have the personnel to get home, i.e. they don't have the talent...

Sound familiar???


Sanders sucked and deserved to be fired, but that doesn't mean the Packers disaster of a defense is entirely his fault... TT hasn't given the defensive side of the ball much talent to work with.

[Guiness]

Everyone, including the media seems to think of Capers is a 3-4 coach. Capers has had eight Top 10 NFL defenses, including the #1 defense in the league with Coughlin in Jacksonville which was a 4-3.

Dom believes in stopping the run, bringing pressure and taking his guys and putting 'em in position to make plays. He'll put in some 4-3, some 3-4, hell he may even run some of that 1-6-4 that Bellichik runs in Boston. Don will get his guys playing intense defense and installing schemes that excentuate his guys strengths.

He won't run the same scheme over and over and try and shoe-horn his players into it.

Like our previous commander did during his tenure

1-6-4, eh? I really need to watch more NE games. Whether on not Bellichik is an ass, he does more things that make me gasp than any other coach. Ever see him trot out the 0-4-7 quarter package?

[Joemailman]

Capers is a solid coordinator who will improve this defense. How much remains to be seen. I would question just how good the defense has to be for the Packers to be a top NFC contender. Arizona made it to the Super Bowl this year with the league's #28 defense. Giants made it to the Super Bowl and won it the year before with the league's #17 defense. The Packers lost 7 games this year in which they led in the 4th quarter. If they had just gone 4-3 in those games (not an outlandish expectation), they would have been in the playoffs. Who knows what might have happened? If Capers can get Hawk and Barnett beck to playing at their 2007 levels (Again, not an outlandish expectation), this defense should be very respectable. Which, given the talent the Packers have on offense, might be good enough.

[sharpe1027]

Okay guys... I succumb to your polyanna ways, and now see the Packers defenders for the vaunted and feared group that they are

I've been negative on the Packers these past years b/c, quite simply, they are not doing the things necessary to win championships. For me, it's that simple.

Were our players all world beaters... Sanders would still have a job, and we'd be talking about another Lombardi trophy adorning our trophy case...

But,

contrary to most of you guys who sip way to much Kool-Aid... I looked at the product on the field last year - and it sucked.

Point blank guys... the defense sucked last year; and with the exception of that aberrational year two years ago when every player on the defensive side of the ball stayed healthy, AND and a career year, they have in general sucked on defense for years...

It may be upsetting for you Kool-Aid drinkers to hear the truth... but there it is...

You guys are trying to put lipstick on a pig... I want the pig to be pretty too... just not seein it

I think I understand where you are coming from. To be fair, I don't recall anyone saying that the Packers were vaunted and feared or that they were all world beaters.

The disagreement was whether or not the LBs were "completely useless",and whether it was even conceivable (not a "dreamstate") that some of the players might excel in the 3-4, and whether the 3-4 will be a "disaster". All of those are from your words, just so that you understand why I reacted the way I did.

[texaspackerbacker]

The world according to wist:

"Were our players all world beaters... Sanders would still have a job, and we'd be talking about another Lombardi trophy adorning our trophy case...

But,

contrary to most of you guys who sip way to much Kool-Aid... I looked at the product on the field last year - and it sucked."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can actually agree with you on this--to some extent.

The thing is--and the reason I opposed getting rid of Sanders--is that the piss poor defensive product on the field in '08 was a result of the bad luck of INJURIES. The decent quality defense we saw in '07 is the more accurate barometer of the Packer talent level.

That being said, I'm getting psyched up to see better performance even than in '07 from a Capers-run defense. While Sanders wasn't near as bad as the detractors claim, Capers likely is a lot smarter and more creative.

Not only that, but the pleasant side effect of all those injuries on defense last season is that some quality players emerged, giving the Packers excellent depth this season--even from the 3-4 perspective.

[Fritz]

I just realized this....Tex's optimism is inversely proportional to Wist's pessimism.

They're the opposite sides of the same coin.

cool.