Defensive depth chart pre-draft

[KYPack]

Posted this a few months ago.

I updated it with the new additions and poster thoughts.

DEFENSIVE DEPTH CHART

LDE
Johnny Jolly
Justin Harrell


NT
Ryan Pickett
Fred Bledsoe
A Toribio
Brian Soi

RDE
Cullen Jenkins
Alfred Malone
Michael Montgomery

LOLB
A Kampman
Jeremy Thompson

LILB
A Hawk
D Bishop
S Havner

RILB
Nick Barnett
D Lansanha
B Chillar

ROLB
B Poppinga
J Hunter

RCB
Al Harris
Tramone Williams
Jarrett Bush
Joe Porter

FS
Nick Collins
S Rouse
C Peprah

SS
A Bigby
A Smith

LCB
C Woodson
W Blackmon
P Lee
Joshua Abrams

This makes me think we will add 2-3 backers, 2 DE's and a NT + the usual corner and BPA safeties. We have needs, for sure. Right now, we have 4 NT's and 5 DE's for instance.

[wist43]

TT and MM have been saying they're set at every starter position... and, with MM saying he thinks Desmond Bishop can rush the passer for an OLB position, well...

it's obvious, we have absolutely no needs on that side of the ball

[KYPack]

So MM has Bishop penciled in at OLB?

I missed that comment.

Probably LOLB, no?

[wist43]

So MM has Bishop penciled in at OLB?

I missed that comment.

Probably LOLB, no?

He can't possibly really believe that... reporters asked him if they were going to address in the draft, what most of the rest of us see as a glaring hole, i.e. rush LB... and he said he thought they had to the players to get the job done - citing Bishop as an option.

He can't possibly be that delusional??? Can he???

[Gunakor]

TT and MM have been saying they're set at every starter position... and, with MM saying he thinks Desmond Bishop can rush the passer for an OLB position, well...

it's obvious, we have absolutely no needs on that side of the ball

Which positions would you say we are not set at with regards to starters? DE, of course, but only because of pending legal issues with Jolly and durability concerns with Jenkins and Harrell. Yet, you can't judge your starters even before OTA's start figuring that they'll surely be injured, thus needing replacement. There's certainly enough talent there to field legitimate starters if everyone is healthy and out of jail, and that's how you evaluate it.

I say we need a new NT, but I'm apparently in the minority there. I just don't like Ryan Pickett there at all, and would rather we draft/sign somebody bigger, stronger, younger and more durable.

Maybe an outside linebacker to compliment Kampman, but that's not a given either. Jeremy Thompson is moving to OLB as well, and he could flourish there same as Kampman could.

These are all things you have to consider when stating specifically that MM and TT are wrong in their assesment of the defense. We need depth on defense, just like any other team does, but I don't think we need new starters as badly as you make it seem.

[Gunakor]

So MM has Bishop penciled in at OLB?

I missed that comment.

Probably LOLB, no?

He can't possibly really believe that... reporters asked him if they were going to address in the draft, what most of the rest of us see as a glaring hole, i.e. rush LB... and he said he thought they had to the players to get the job done - citing Bishop as an option.

He can't possibly be that delusional??? Can he???

What have you seen from Bishop that suggests he can't be a rush OLB? From what I've seen of him, his strength is playing at or behind the LOS. His weakness is dropping into pass coverage. From what I gather Bishop could be a pretty good rush OLB. That position plays to his strengths better than being a 4-3 coverage OLB in a vanilla Sanders scheme did, and I expect to see great improvement in him if he's given that task.

Does this make me delusional?

[Fritz]

Curious, KY - why Lasagna before Chillar? Do you know something we don't? What are you seeing?

[KYPack]

I dunno Wist.

i think Bishop is a pretty good hand. A 3-4 could really help that guy. He could play any one of the 4 spots. Obviously, he need to find a job, but the guy has pretty good potential. As Gun says, I think he's a rush guy. it will take him forever to learn cover, but he can fold back his ears and go, we know that much.

[texaspackerbacker]

Good effort to stimulate discussion, KY.

I think Harrell is in the mix at NT, as well as DE.

At OLB, I'd put Thompson and Hunter--similar players--both on the right--Thompson probably ending up as the starter. I'd have Popinga backing up Kampman, as they are similar players. Chillar also, IMO, will be an OLB. I hadn't heard any McCarthy comment about Bishop at OLB; I doubt that one.

You're probably on target with the DBs and ILBs--except for Chillar.

This all illustrates what I have been saying about the team being fairly solid right now--maybe getting some luxury help from the draft, but few or no necessities.

[KYPack]

Curious, KY - why Lasagna before Chillar? Do you know something we don't? What are you seeing?

No, Fritz.

I don't know anything or know what I'm doing. This whole deal started by me looking at depth charts on the net to get a handle on GB '09 defense. There weren't any, so I made one up. Then I posted it. We all argued it around and came up with this chart. Today, I added the new guys and posted this one.

Lasagna over Chillar is a hold-over from my first list. You are the first sharp-eyed bastard to notice the error. Lasagna should be on the buffet menu and not a main course. I will dutifully make the change when this thread runs out.

You win a chicken leg.

[KYPack]

Good effort to stimulate discussion, KY.

I think Harrell is in the mix at NT, as well as DE.

At OLB, I'd put Thompson and Hunter--similar players--both on the right--Thompson probably ending up as the starter. I'd have Popinga backing up Kampman, as they are similar players. Chillar also, IMO, will be an OLB. I hadn't heard any McCarthy comment about Bishop at OLB; I doubt that one.

You're probably on target with the DBs and ILBs--except for Chillar.

This all illustrates what I have been saying about the team being fairly solid right now--maybe getting some luxury help from the draft, but few or no necessities.

Well thanx, T

The Packers list Harrell as a DE on their new roster. Don't think he will take any snaps at NT

I think Pop is the early starter at ROLB. he's got enough troubles, let alone move him to the other side.

They've said Chillar will get a shot at OLB and ILB, IIRC.

Bishop, he shows potential, he could wind up in a lot of different slots.

The only other thing I think is up for grabs is the S postition. Smith could well be our starter if Bigby can't run.

[Lurker64]

The Packers list Harrell as a DE on their new roster. Don't think he will take any snaps at NT

I think that the Packers would prefer to give every snap at NT to Pickett, but I think that if Pickett has to come off the field for whatever reason, Harrell is the next guy up. He's not prototypical NT size or shape, but he can handle a double-team in the A-gap, which is more than you can say about everybody but Pickett and Harrell on the DL.

I don't think he'll ever be listed there, but I could see him taking 5-10 snaps a game there, just to spell Pickett until the backup NT (whoever it is) demonstrates the ability to handle a double team in the middle.

[rbaloha1]

Bishop needs to be on the field due to his playmaking ability. Yes, Bishop was beaten several times in pass coverage. This is correctable with increased reps.

Recall TT remarking the progress Bishop made from year one to year two. Also felt Bishop is better suited at ilb but if the staff feels otherwise so be it. Maybe a stretch -- but if Bishop bulks up does he have some James Harrison capabilities?

[wist43]

Bishop as a rush LB??? You guys are kidding, right???

I figured the thought was so very laughable that even the homers on this board wouldn't make that leap... good Lord.

[Lurker64]

Bishop is strictly a gap filling, thumping ILB in this defense. It's a good spot for him, but it's not an elite position. If they bring him in to blitz, it's going to be from the inside. He's a solid backup ILB, and a good special teamer. That more than justifies his 6th round pick status and roster spot.