Nick Barnett calls out team

[sharpe1027]

LOL, yet everyone would bitch and moan when Favre tried to play GM.

Funny stuff. Barnett was out of line questioning his management publicly in my opinion.

Did you even read what he said? Unbelievable.

"I think we need one more solid d-line man I think we have some pretty good options for olb but knowing ted I think he wants to sure it up."

[HarveyWallbangers]

LOL, yet everyone would bitch and moan when Favre tried to play GM.

Funny stuff. Barnett was out of line questioning his management publicly in my opinion.

Not me. I used to defend Brett when all he did was express his opinion on the team, and what it needed. I didn't like the stuff that came later.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Does smacktalkie do anything but try to stir the pot? It's not much calling out, when you read the rest of his quotes:

Asked why he felt the team needed help there, Barnett wrote: "I think we need one more solid d-line man I think we have some pretty good options for olb but knowing ted I think he wants to sure it up."

"We have Jenkins on the outside, Pickett on the inside; we'll have Jolly with whatever happens with his situation. But the years that we've been very good on defense, we've had good depth on the defensive line with some good quality. We have some young guys coming up, but it's always good to have that very good depth at d-line."

Does Barnett think Thompson, who was never close to signing free-agent 3-4 ends Chris Canty or Igor Olshansky, has done enough?

"I think he's done some good things by keeping guys on the team," Barnett said. "I think he's going to do some good things in the draft. Ted's style is not to overpay. He kind of does a good job of keeping guys on the team that he likes and in the draft we'll see what happens."

He's kind of the "anti-harv". When I see you post an article, I know for sure it's got nothing negative in it. When he posts something, I can always assume it has a negative somewhere.

Sure. Like the "Hawk and Barnett to switch positions," "Julius Peppers trade compensation," "Justin Harrel at DE," or "Pack on lookout for DE," all negative postings that I've put out there.

If you want negative out of me I can do that. That's easy when a team goes from 13-3 to 6-10........ with only one significant personelle move.

[wist43]

Defensive Linemen??? We don't need no stinking Defensive Linemen...

So says ted

[Gunakor]

Does smacktalkie do anything but try to stir the pot? It's not much calling out, when you read the rest of his quotes:

Asked why he felt the team needed help there, Barnett wrote: "I think we need one more solid d-line man I think we have some pretty good options for olb but knowing ted I think he wants to sure it up."

"We have Jenkins on the outside, Pickett on the inside; we'll have Jolly with whatever happens with his situation. But the years that we've been very good on defense, we've had good depth on the defensive line with some good quality. We have some young guys coming up, but it's always good to have that very good depth at d-line."

Does Barnett think Thompson, who was never close to signing free-agent 3-4 ends Chris Canty or Igor Olshansky, has done enough?

"I think he's done some good things by keeping guys on the team," Barnett said. "I think he's going to do some good things in the draft. Ted's style is not to overpay. He kind of does a good job of keeping guys on the team that he likes and in the draft we'll see what happens."

He's kind of the "anti-harv". When I see you post an article, I know for sure it's got nothing negative in it. When he posts something, I can always assume it has a negative somewhere.

Sure. Like the "Hawk and Barnett to switch positions," "Julius Peppers trade compensation," "Justin Harrel at DE," or "Pack on lookout for DE," all negative postings that I've put out there.

If you want negative out of me I can do that. That's easy when a team goes from 13-3 to 6-10........ with only one significant personelle move.

Just one significant personnel move?

Favre was traded, which I'm sure is the one you are referring to.

But don't forget about Corey Williams being traded (although I don't personally like the guy, his abscense was very evident), Nick Barnett and Cullen Jenkins being put on IR, etc. Those personnel moves weren't made during our 13-3 season, and by all accounts were pretty significant as well.

[digitaldean]

Here are 3 posts he has in a row (you have to click the "more" button to access older posts)

# Ok question does anyone else think we need more d line man???
2:07 PM Mar 31st from txt

# I think we need one more solid d-line man I think we have some pretty good options for olb but knowing ted I think he wants to sure it up 2:29 PM Mar 31st from txt

# To be honest I think we are going to be one he'll of a team!! We are a young hungry group of guys.. Think about a couple less injurys !!!2:31 PM Mar 31st from txt

Plus here's a challenge he got from Steven Jackson of the Rams:
# Hey everyone my friend and former teammate steven jackson has put a challenge to us.. Who can get more follwers rams or gb please help lol12:30 PM Mar 31st from web

[SMACKTALKIE]

Does smacktalkie do anything but try to stir the pot? It's not much calling out, when you read the rest of his quotes:

Asked why he felt the team needed help there, Barnett wrote: "I think we need one more solid d-line man I think we have some pretty good options for olb but knowing ted I think he wants to sure it up."

"We have Jenkins on the outside, Pickett on the inside; we'll have Jolly with whatever happens with his situation. But the years that we've been very good on defense, we've had good depth on the defensive line with some good quality. We have some young guys coming up, but it's always good to have that very good depth at d-line."

Does Barnett think Thompson, who was never close to signing free-agent 3-4 ends Chris Canty or Igor Olshansky, has done enough?

"I think he's done some good things by keeping guys on the team," Barnett said. "I think he's going to do some good things in the draft. Ted's style is not to overpay. He kind of does a good job of keeping guys on the team that he likes and in the draft we'll see what happens."

He's kind of the "anti-harv". When I see you post an article, I know for sure it's got nothing negative in it. When he posts something, I can always assume it has a negative somewhere.

Sure. Like the "Hawk and Barnett to switch positions," "Julius Peppers trade compensation," "Justin Harrel at DE," or "Pack on lookout for DE," all negative postings that I've put out there.

If you want negative out of me I can do that. That's easy when a team goes from 13-3 to 6-10........ with only one significant personelle move.

Just one significant personnel move?

Favre was traded, which I'm sure is the one you are referring to.

But don't forget about Corey Williams being traded (although I don't personally like the guy, his abscense was very evident), Nick Barnett and Cullen Jenkins being put on IR, etc. Those personnel moves weren't made during our 13-3 season, and by all accounts were pretty significant as well.

Dude I know. Williams and Barnett were huge losses. I'm just "acting out" after being called negative for posting everyday sports articles.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sure. Like the "Hawk and Barnett to switch positions," "Julius Peppers trade compensation," "Justin Harrel at DE," or "Pack on lookout for DE," all negative postings that I've put out there.

Let's see for "Hawk and Barnett to switch positons," you wrote:

Interesting move, I thought Hawk looked horrible last season at Mike.

If that ain't putting a negative spin on it, I don't know what is.

For the "just Harrell at DE?" article (and yes you put the question mark), you wrote:

Does anyone here think this will work?

Not negative?

The only other thread you've started was this gem:

"Principle vs. Reality for Ted Thompson"--which was a mostly negative article about Ted Thompson.

The "Julius Peppers trade compensation" really had nothing to do with the Packers. All it did was point out that the Panthers might be seeking what the Chiefs got for Allen.

I don't expect you to be gushing about the Packers, but I stand by my comment (rather my question).

[SMACKTALKIE]

Sure. Like the "Hawk and Barnett to switch positions," "Julius Peppers trade compensation," "Justin Harrel at DE," or "Pack on lookout for DE," all negative postings that I've put out there.

Let's see for "Hawk and Barnett to switch positons," you wrote:

Interesting move, I thought Hawk looked horrible last season at Mike.

If that ain't putting a negative spin on it, I don't know what is.

For the "just Harrell at DE?" article (and yes you put the question mark), you wrote:

Does anyone here think this will work?

Not negative?

The only other thread you've started was this gem:

"Principle vs. Reality for Ted Thompson"--which was a mostly negative article about Ted Thompson.

The "Julius Peppers trade compensation" really had nothing to do with the Packers. All it did was point out that the Panthers might be seeking what the Chiefs got for Allen.

I don't expect you to be gushing about the Packers, but I stand by my comment (rather my question).

So you don't think Hawk looked bad at mike last season? I'll give you the negative nod on this one, but to say Hawk looked bad is not a stretch.

As for the "Harrell at DE?" posting; Yes I know I put a question mark there. It was a question. I was interested in Packer fan's input on this topic, specifically if they thought it would work. Pretty straight forward.

The TT article was a simple posting and all written by Kevin Seifert on ESPN.com. I'm guessing it would have been posted here regardless. Furthermore it was on a topic I've seen discussed here many times before.

I look at many football related articles day to day. I post Packer related articles here for the purpose of discussion. I may or may not give my opinion on these topics. Most newsworthy topics in the NFL this time of year are somewhat "scandalous." My intent is to give you guys (and gals) something to discuss. I'm interested in the average Pack fan's take as well.

[Joemailman]

This is really a typical off-season non-story.

Nick Barnett seems to have suggested that the Packers could use another couple of d-linemen.

If you keep 6 or 7 d-linemen on a 3-4 team, and you've got Jenkins, Pickett, Jolly, Harrell, Montgomery and Malone plus a couple of practice guys, then, yeah, you don't really have enough guys at those positions to get through training camp.

So Nick said something obvious, pretty non-controversial as far as I can tell, then added that he was sure Ted would take care of things.

But it's the offseason, so this is pitched as a Packer "calling out" the team.

Yawn.

Yep. Probably isn't a linebacker in the league who doesn't think their team could use another good D-Lineman or two. Linebackers rely on good defensive line play almost as much as QB's and RB's rely on good offensive line play. A non-story.

[Partial]

You guys get that when he was called on it, is when he added that Thompson will take care of it, right? Of course he's going to say that. He's not a complete idiot (though his spelling makes me question that, even)

[SnakeLH2006]

Fuck a Twitter...That shit is now owned by Google. Regardless it's meaningless jabble. Snake just read his Twitter that Barnett said that the fatties were going 5:1 vs. athletes at his latest night club.....AKA meaningless babble..unless you are into fatties.