Giving Hawk his due

[RashanGary]

Right, and when Raji comes back, he won't start but he'll play just as much as Jolly. What's more important - being on the field for the 1st snap or being on the field for more snaps?

I'd say the number and quality of snaps is more important than being on the 1st snap.

Chillar is above Hawk, Barnett, Matthews and Poppinga right now. He's our 2nd best LB after Kampman so says our DC who plays him as such. If you want to know what a coach thinks about a player, see how much he plays. Ask Manu Ginoboli.

[Waldo]

Right, and when Raji comes back, he won't start but he'll play just as much as Jolly. What's more important - being on the field for the 1st snap or being on the field for more snaps?

I'd say the number and quality of snaps is more important than being on the 1st snap.

Chillar is above Hawk, Barnett, Matthews and Poppinga right now. He's our 2nd best LB after Kampman so says our DC who plays him as such. If you want to know what a coach thinks about a player, see how much he plays. Just ask Manu Ginoboli.

But there is the fundamental thing that he is still partly playing as a backup in addition to playing his normal nickel role. Barnett is still not 100%, he is being eased into his full workload. Barnett is not going to eat into Hawk's snaps, he is going to eat into Chillar's. When Barnett is 100%, Chillar will not see any time during 3-4 sets, unless he passes Barnett on the depth chart, in which case I will share your enthusiasm. Till then he is a nickel DB that plays LB.

[RashanGary]

Right, and when Raji comes back, he won't start but he'll play just as much as Jolly. What's more important - being on the field for the 1st snap or being on the field for more snaps?

I'd say the number and quality of snaps is more important than being on the 1st snap.

Chillar is above Hawk, Barnett, Matthews and Poppinga right now. He's our 2nd best LB after Kampman so says our DC who plays him as such. If you want to know what a coach thinks about a player, see how much he plays. Just ask Manu Ginoboli.

But there is the fundamental thing that he is still partly playing as a backup in addition to playing his normal nickel role. Barnett is still not 100%, he is being eased into his full workload. Barnett is not going to eat into Hawk's snaps, he is going to eat into Chillar's. When Barnett is 100%, Chillar will not see any time during 3-4 sets, unless he passes Barnett on the depth chart, in which case I will share your enthusiasm. Till then he is a nickel DB that plays LB.

Nope. Chillar is a LB, our 2nd most played LB. We have a separate 5th DB for nickle.

[rbaloha1]

Right, and when Raji comes back, he won't start but he'll play just as much as Jolly. What's more important - being on the field for the 1st snap or being on the field for more snaps?

I'd say the number and quality of snaps is more important than being on the 1st snap.

Chillar is above Hawk, Barnett, Matthews and Poppinga right now. He's our 2nd best LB after Kampman so says our DC who plays him as such. If you want to know what a coach thinks about a player, see how much he plays. Just ask Manu Ginoboli.

But there is the fundamental thing that he is still partly playing as a backup in addition to playing his normal nickel role. Barnett is still not 100%, he is being eased into his full workload. Barnett is not going to eat into Hawk's snaps, he is going to eat into Chillar's. When Barnett is 100%, Chillar will not see any time during 3-4 sets, unless he passes Barnett on the depth chart, in which case I will share your enthusiasm. Till then he is a nickel DB that plays LB.

Nope. Chillar is a LB, our 2nd most played LB. We have a separate 5th DB for nickle.

Agreed. Chilly looks like a lb, plays like a lb and in this scheme the Packers best lb.

[Waldo]

Right, and when Raji comes back, he won't start but he'll play just as much as Jolly. What's more important - being on the field for the 1st snap or being on the field for more snaps?

I'd say the number and quality of snaps is more important than being on the 1st snap.

Chillar is above Hawk, Barnett, Matthews and Poppinga right now. He's our 2nd best LB after Kampman so says our DC who plays him as such. If you want to know what a coach thinks about a player, see how much he plays. Just ask Manu Ginoboli.

But there is the fundamental thing that he is still partly playing as a backup in addition to playing his normal nickel role. Barnett is still not 100%, he is being eased into his full workload. Barnett is not going to eat into Hawk's snaps, he is going to eat into Chillar's. When Barnett is 100%, Chillar will not see any time during 3-4 sets, unless he passes Barnett on the depth chart, in which case I will share your enthusiasm. Till then he is a nickel DB that plays LB.

Nope. Chillar is a LB, our 2nd most played LB. We have a separate 5th DB for nickle.

And a 6th that replaces our banger (Hawk), or tackler (Barnett), giving them a breather during some pass D, giving a different look to the O.

I am done with this topic. I trust my ability to evaluate players on tape, and will not partake in the Chillar dick suck fest until I actually see him play like a good LB. Chillar has a very, very low football IQ IMO, and it shows on tape constantly. He is our most athletic ILB, I'll give you that, he thrives when he can use his athletic ability (coverage/blitzing), and sucks when he has to rely on his football IQ. There will be no better illustration of this then when we play Mn, with a fast shifty RB in an unpredictable ZBS scheme.

Ask yourself, why have you almost never seen Chillar knock a play out of bounds or shut down the corner? It isn't a Hodge-like issue where he simply can't run that fast. He speed and quickness should make him always around the ball when it swings out wide. Yet he definitely spends less time around the ball by the sidelines than Hawk or Barnett. He has the physical ability to be an elite player. Why isn't he? Football IQ.

[rbaloha1]

Who cares at iq -- its about making plays with minimal mistakes. Chillar is executing the scheme better than any lb currently. Why does he get the most snaps?

[ThunderDan]

Who cares at iq -- its about making plays with minimal mistakes. Chillar is executing the scheme better than any lb currently. Why does he get the most snaps?

Because we played the 2-4-5 for almost 2/3 of the snaps if what I read is correct.

[Lurker64]

Who cares at iq -- its about making plays with minimal mistakes. Chillar is executing the scheme better than any lb currently. Why does he get the most snaps?

In the last game he got the most snaps because:
1) Barnett is still being brought along slowly in his return from a major knee injury, Chillar is Barnett's backup.
2) We took more defensive snaps in nickel than in any other defensive set, which is where Chillar plays because it plays to his strengths (coverage and blitzing). Capers played most of the game in nickel because he wanted to devote an extra DB to Olsen.

Let's see how this plays out in more than the first game before we anoint Chillar as awesome. Definitely in "run defense", I saw a hell of a lot more out of Hawk than I did out of Chillar.

[bobblehead]

What I read on JS online (and i haven't watched the game again yet) is that Hawk and Barnett were rotating while Chillar was staying in the game. That might not be accurate but it is what was reported.

I had read where Kampman played almost the entire game, Hawk and Chillar played similar number of snaps, and Barnett played a bit less than those two. You have to remember two things though:

1) Barnett was coming back from injury
2) The Packers were in nickel for 2/3 of their snaps. You won't likely see quite that high of nickel in future games. The Packers schemed against the Bears TEs.

I think it's debatable on which LB was the best in this game. Kampman provided pressure and run defense and wasn't exposed in coverage. Hawk was excellent against the run and wasn't exposed in coverage. Chillar rushed the QB, wasn't exposed in coverage, and only had a couple of plays (that I noticed) where he was exposed in run defense. I think it would be best to admit they all have their strengths, and it appears we have a defensive coordinator that can take advantage. Your argument misses on a crucial point -- the coaches don't think Chillar is good enough to start. I'm not saying that makes him any less valuable than the others, but it also shows that insinuating he is clearly the best LB is a bit much.

I have admitted that all along...I'm not the one who called one of them a glorified safety. For my money Chillar is the best all around LB on this team, unless Kampman proves to be as good at LB as he was at DE. Just my opinion and I'll defend it vigorously.