Bishop Captures Attention

[Partial]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/52391717.html

[rbaloha1]

Its possible Hawk is substituted by Bishop in certain schemes.

Do not expect Hawk resigned.

[Waldo]

Boy.....

I am reminded of the last golden boy backup at LB that the press fell in love with, some fans were gaga over the prospects of him kicking our best linebacker to the curb.

Hodge is long gone now. And was never a serious threat to Barnett, despite what some believed.

Just let the Hawk bashing flow. Crow tastes good.

Despite all the Bishop talk (against backups no less), reporters described Hawk as being the player of the day yesterday. Against starters.

[Patler]

Despite all the Bishop talk (against backups no less), reporters described Hawk as being the player of the day yesterday. Against starters.

Hawks big plays that were mentioned were not exactly against starters. Two of his plays were said to have come against Finley and Duke Preston. Preston had just come in for Colledge. Without those two plays, I wonder if the writers would have been so glowing in their reports yesterday? Maybe. Maybe not.

[rbaloha1]

If I recall, Bishop's impact plays were in regular season NFL games. The percentage of impact plays against snaps is very good for Bishop and lackluster for Hawk.

Recall Coach Moss calling out Hawk for the lack of impact plays which can be the difference in making the playoffs.

[Lurker64]

Hawk and Bishop are very different players. Bishop plays LB like a college LB, where he guesses what gap he should attack before the offense's play develops to the point where a "correct gap" exist. This means that when he guesses right, he'll blow up somebody in the backfield or get a sack, or commit some other kind of impact play. When he guesses wrong he gets burned, badly.

While not as quick to diagnose the play as Barnett, Hawk waits until it's clear what the offense is doing, and then half a tick later he attacks the appropriate spot of the offense. While this will result in many fewer TFLs and sacks, it means that on average the offense will be much less successful.

So which would you rather have on defense? Sacks, TFLs, and 60-yard touchdown runs -or- relatively few sacks and TFLs, but very few runs over 3 yards?

Unless Bishop learns how to play LB in the pros, his best role is on special teams. He's always going to look better than Hawk at a cursory glance, but Hawk is very much the superior player.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hawks big plays that were mentioned were not exactly against starters. Two of his plays were said to have come against Finley and Duke Preston. Preston had just come in for Colledge. Without those two plays, I wonder if the writers would have been so glowing in their reports yesterday? Maybe. Maybe not.

He made another tackle for no gain in today's practice with the first team offense in. (Well, whatever was left of the first time offense.) Who knows really. I don't take get too into individual plays. More the overall feel for how the player is doing. You have to take into account any reporter's bias though. I have no doubts that Hawk will get back to being a solid LB--as long as he's healthy.

Hawk also had this play:

Rodgers goes deep down the middle to Jermichael Finley who makes a terrific bobbling catch after Hawk first gets his hands on the ball.

Later, Chillar got burned in the same two minute drill.

Rodgers complete to Lee, who beat Chillar off the line. Touchdown.

[Partial]

They should make Bishop pay rent for the amount of time he's ij the backfield.

McCarthy calls whole team in. Bishop again in it. Greene got knocked back and his hat knocked off.

[rbaloha1]

Hawk and Bishop are very different players. Bishop plays LB like a college LB, where he guesses what gap he should attack before the offense's play develops to the point where a "correct gap" exist. This means that when he guesses right, he'll blow up somebody in the backfield or get a sack, or commit some other kind of impact play. When he guesses wrong he gets burned, badly.

While not as quick to diagnose the play as Barnett, Hawk waits until it's clear what the offense is doing, and then half a tick later he attacks the appropriate spot of the offense. While this will result in many fewer TFLs and sacks, it means that on average the offense will be much less successful.

So which would you rather have on defense? Sacks, TFLs, and 60-yard touchdown runs -or- relatively few sacks and TFLs, but very few runs over 3 yards?

Unless Bishop learns how to play LB in the pros, his best role is on special teams. He's always going to look better than Hawk at a cursory glance, but Hawk is very much the superior player.

The Packer rush defense was one of the worst in the NFL. The Packers gave up numerous runs over 3 yards while Hawk was in the game.

The 60 yard pass was a poor angle -- correctable and attributable to a lack of reps.

Your assessment of guesses are actually instincts -- a weakness of Hawk. Bishop attended Berkley and is not the dumb dumb being portrayed.

If Bishop received the same reps and playing time as Hawk, Bishop's number would far exceed Hawk. Yes, Bishop probably gives up more big plays but net gain in impact plays offset the bad plays. Ask Coach Moss.

Hawk=Another overhyped white athlete who probably used steroids at OSU.

[ND72]

Hawk and Bishop are very different players. Bishop plays LB like a college LB, where he guesses what gap he should attack before the offense's play develops to the point where a "correct gap" exist. This means that when he guesses right, he'll blow up somebody in the backfield or get a sack, or commit some other kind of impact play. When he guesses wrong he gets burned, badly.

While not as quick to diagnose the play as Barnett, Hawk waits until it's clear what the offense is doing, and then half a tick later he attacks the appropriate spot of the offense. While this will result in many fewer TFLs and sacks, it means that on average the offense will be much less successful.

So which would you rather have on defense? Sacks, TFLs, and 60-yard touchdown runs -or- relatively few sacks and TFLs, but very few runs over 3 yards?

Unless Bishop learns how to play LB in the pros, his best role is on special teams. He's always going to look better than Hawk at a cursory glance, but Hawk is very much the superior player.

The Packer rush defense was one of the worst in the NFL. The Packers gave up numerous runs over 3 yards while Hawk was in the game.

The 60 yard pass was a poor angle -- correctable and attributable to a lack of reps.

Your assessment of guesses are actually instincts -- a weakness of Hawk. Bishop attended Berkley and is not the dumb dumb being portrayed.

If Bishop received the same reps and playing time as Hawk, Bishop's number would far exceed Hawk. Yes, Bishop probably gives up more big plays but net gain in impact plays offset the bad plays. Ask Coach Moss.

Hawk=Another overhyped white athlete who probably used steroids at OSU.

Seriously? overhyped player who used steroids? Serious? I played college football...the 3:30 am random drug test, is not fun, so drop that one.

And about Bishop's 'instincts"....I love the guy, but he is a college LB, he sees the gap, and he goes for it. It has been covered time and time again already in camp that Bishop couldn't cover a High School Freshman in a pass pattern.

[pbmax]

Being smart, attending Berkeley (or OSU), guessing or instincts have nothing to do with one another. Plenty of horrible students have been tremendously instinctive football players. Bishop has demonstrated he can be allergic to coverage in practices, exhibitions and games. It wasn't one play.

He may prove to be a perfect fit to start in this defense, but that does not mean he is on the field for passing downs.

[ND72]

Being smart, attending Berkeley (or OSU), guessing or instincts have nothing to do with one another. Plenty of horrible students have been tremendously instinctive football players. Bishop has demonstrated he can be allergic to coverage in practices, exhibitions and games. It wasn't one play.

He may prove to be a perfect fit to start in this defense, but that does not mean he is on the field for passing downs.

I have said all along he is the perfect rushing LB in the 3-4, just not a MLB in a 3-4.

[Partial]

Sutton fumble. Bishop recovers. The guy is always around the ball.

I just liked this one:

McCarthy on if Jolly's getting closer: "Yeah, I think so. He showed up in the fight so I guess that's a good sign." Shocking.

[SnakeLH2006]

Boy.....

I am reminded of the last golden boy backup at LB that the press fell in love with, some fans were gaga over the prospects of him kicking our best linebacker to the curb.

Hodge is long gone now. And was never a serious threat to Barnett, despite what some believed.

Just let the Hawk bashing flow. Crow tastes good.

Despite all the Bishop talk (against backups no less), reporters described Hawk as being the player of the day yesterday. Against starters.

You aren't talking about your man-love for Jeremy Thompson the LB are ya, Waldo? It may hurt that Clay took his spot and hasn't looked back, eh? LOL J/K.....kinda, but Bishop is a beast.

That guy (Bishop unlike JT) makes plays and plays with ferocity. J. Thomp was a dude without pads in minicamps as a placeholder for Clay. Clay's starting spot is written all over it. Hawk will be fine too. There's just something about instinctive football players that Snake loves. Hawk will get there, Barnett is there, Kampy is just balling, Clay has it in his genes. Bishop just wants to punish peeps. JThomp is looking like a dude wanting a paycheck.

JSO made some good points 2 days ago saying Wynn got completely overwhelmed by Bishop (with Wynn's quotes all over it).

All aboard the Bishop bandwagon yo....Snake started it a year ago, and never wavered. This kid will be a starter (don't know where) but at some point soon (within a year). Not much of a LB J. Thompson fan, as he's just pedestrian IMO (never made half the plays Bishop made preseason or reg. season)..

Bishop with pads is a fucking terror for opposing O's. Love that guy. Glad to see that it's happening.

BTW, Snake prefers crow cooked medium rare, Waldo. I wanna taste the blood. Unleash the Bishop Beast! Never question the Bishop.

[Tarlam!]

Just let the Hawk bashing flow. Crow tastes good.

Loved this line, Waldo! My man-crush on Hawk is alive and well, so i appreciate your defending him.

Still, I am intrigued by what Wynn has to say about Bishop. That's not just press-hype. That's a teammate being publicly respectful.

And I also like how bishop handled himself in the press by not making any over-the-top claims. "play a little and contribute" is pretty humble stuff. And the "I think I have" rather than the definitive "I've always" stands out as coming from a guy not in love with his own press clippings.

I know Hawk was a #5, and it's his job to lose, but I gotta believe we start the best guys this year. If that's Bishop over Hawk, so be it. There's too much on the line for TT and M3 after last year's dismal record.