More "Mr. August" hype

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Just give the guy a fair shot at starting. What has Hawk done that is so great the last two years? Or Barnett for that matter. As for him saying that he is a top two LB in the league, idnk about that. But Finley has that sort of confidence in himself and look how that has turned out for him.

hawk rarely makes mistakes. he may not make a lot of big plays, but he does his part in preventing a lot against us

And having a player who doesn't make many mistakes is good enough for you? I actually like Hawk and I'm not bashing him. But I have been very disappointed in his play after 2007. I was expecting him to be a playmaker and he turned out be on the same level as Barnett (who is another player who is good, but nothing special)

[Fritz]

The problem being that in very limited real world experience (not pre-season), Bishop looked like a fucking retard out there last year.

Skin, both your posts seem to suggest that people who are developmentally disabled are not very good in pass coverage.

I don't know if that's true. However, I do recall seeing a pass play develop last year in a regular season game, and Bishop had coverage responsibilities. I don't remember which game.

But just last week, Tuesday, I think, Bishop recognized that the play was a pass and began to drop into coverage.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hopefully, Bishop is nearly as good as he thinks he is. Hawk is a two down player, so there's some snaps for Bishop, if Chillar goes outside.

With Jones:

Base: Jones, Barnett, Hawk, Matthews
Nickel: Jones, Barnett, Chillar, Matthews

Without Jones:

Base: Matthews, Barnett, Hawk, Chillar/Poppinga
Nickel: Matthews, Barnett, Biship, Chillar

I think I like this better than Poppinga at LOLB. You could also occasionally sub Chillar in for Jones (even if he's healthy) as a change of pace. It also gives us the flexibility to move Matthews around.

I think people are reading this wrongly. I don't think this means that Bishop will be replacing Hawk in the base defense (which is what Hawk plays in currently)--whether Jones is healthy or not. What this does is put Bishop in on occasions when Poppinga would normally play. I think this says more about Poppinga than Hawk.

[denverYooper]

I think this says more about Poppinga than Hawk.

+1

[SkinBasket]

The problem being that in very limited real world experience (not pre-season), Bishop looked like a fucking retard out there last year.

Skin, both your posts seem to suggest that people who are developmentally disabled are not very good in pass coverage.

I don't know if that's true. However, I do recall seeing a pass play develop last year in a regular season game, and Bishop had coverage responsibilities. I don't remember which game.

But just last week, Tuesday, I think, Bishop recognized that the play was a pass and began to drop into coverage.

I'm recalling a game last year where injuries gave Bishop the chance to play. He was excited, for sure, but looked like a brain dead LT on a coke binge. He was quickly pulled out and didn't come back the rest of the game on defense.

Like I said, the guy can hit, and has demonstrated the ability to play with controlled recklessness, which I like, but only in August, and usually against 2nd or 3rd string opposition. Until the guy plays in the regular season like he has in the preseason, he'll be nothing more than a tease.

[pbmax]

On Twitter, Bedard was puffing the possibility of a Chillar-Barnett-Bishop-Matthews linebacking corps, saying that it would be difficult to pass against because of what happened in practice today. He said nothing about how this might be due to how good Chillar is in coverage (he is very good), and claimed that Bishop is an improvement over Hawk in terms of pass defense.

Can someone possibly help me get into Bedard's tiny mind here? Hawk isn't everything we hoped for when we took him at #5, but one thing has actually become is someone who is very reliable and assignment sure in coverage. Since he's faster than Bishop linearly and laterally, and has better recognition skills... don't you think that would, um..., make him better against the pass?

Do you think we can trade him for a 6th round ILB who looks good in the preseason and isn't a malcontent?

From the descriptions I have read, it doesn't seem that the Bishop/Chillar pairing has anything to do with that being a positive combo versus pass or run.

Chillar was out there as they are short of starting caliber OLBs with Jones hurt. Bishop may have earned time with the ones, but there is no way he is out there to play versus an expected pass. I think Bedard's comment may have applied only the possibility of improving coverage from OLB with Chillar there.

[pbmax]

Just give the guy a fair shot at starting. What has Hawk done that is so great the last two years? Or Barnett for that matter. As for him saying that he is a top two LB in the league, idnk about that. But Finley has that sort of confidence in himself and look how that has turned out for him.

Hawk has 175 tackles of which 134 are solo tackles (77%), 4 sacks and 2 ints.

Divided by two and those numbers are very replacable. Chillar would without a doubt get those numbers and maybe Bishop if given the chance who knows.

No he wouldn't. There is a reason Chillar doesn't play versus the run. He's light and cannot hold a point.

[pbmax]

Hopefully, Bishop is nearly as good as he thinks he is. Hawk is a two down player, so there's some snaps for Bishop, if Chillar goes outside.

With Jones:

Base: Jones, Barnett, Hawk, Matthews
Nickel: Jones, Barnett, Chillar, Matthews

Without Jones:

Base: Matthews, Barnett, Hawk, Chillar/Poppinga
Nickel: Matthews, Barnett, Biship, Chillar

I think I like this better than Poppinga at LOLB. You could also occasionally sub Chillar in for Jones (even if he's healthy) as a change of pace. It also gives us the flexibility to move Matthews around.

I think people are reading this wrongly. I don't think this means that Bishop will be replacing Hawk in the base defense (which is what Hawk plays in currently)--whether Jones is healthy or not. What this does is put Bishop in on occasions when Poppinga would normally play. I think this says more about Poppinga than Hawk.

It would be gutsy to stick Bishop in a nickel package. He would have to stay at home to play the run or rush the passer. Coverage would have to be infrequent. I doubt this happens, unless he can improve in space. Hawk may suffer in comparison to Chillar in coverage, but not to Bishop.

[bobblehead]

Just give the guy a fair shot at starting. What has Hawk done that is so great the last two years? Or Barnett for that matter. As for him saying that he is a top two LB in the league, idnk about that. But Finley has that sort of confidence in himself and look how that has turned out for him.

Hawk has 175 tackles of which 134 are solo tackles (77%), 4 sacks and 2 ints.

Divided by two and those numbers are very replacable. Chillar would without a doubt get those numbers and maybe Bishop if given the chance who knows.

No he wouldn't. There is a reason Chillar doesn't play versus the run. He's light and cannot hold a point.

Chillar is a little bigger than Barnett, and in St. Louis he was considered better against the run than he was against the pass. I'm not saying perception is always reality, and I agree he isn't as stout against the run as I would like, but the number of times I see Hawk get washed to the outside because his assignment is "containing" is sickening.

My perception is that none of the above is as stout as we would like, but Hawk doesn't blow his gap in ways that result in 40 yard runs.

[packerbacker1234]

The problem being that in very limited real world experience (not pre-season), Bishop looked like a fucking retard out there last year.

Skin, both your posts seem to suggest that people who are developmentally disabled are not very good in pass coverage.

I don't know if that's true. However, I do recall seeing a pass play develop last year in a regular season game, and Bishop had coverage responsibilities. I don't remember which game.

But just last week, Tuesday, I think, Bishop recognized that the play was a pass and began to drop into coverage.

I'm recalling a game last year where injuries gave Bishop the chance to play. He was excited, for sure, but looked like a brain dead LT on a coke binge. He was quickly pulled out and didn't come back the rest of the game on defense.

Like I said, the guy can hit, and has demonstrated the ability to play with controlled recklessness, which I like, but only in August, and usually against 2nd or 3rd string opposition. Until the guy plays in the regular season like he has in the preseason, he'll be nothing more than a tease.

Was going to say, I distinctly remember bishop given a shot last year due to injury and he was sucking it up so bad they yanked him. Unlike Brad Jones who came in to replace KAMPMAN and magically didn't suck. He wasn't great, but he held his own, unlike Bishop.

I like Bishop in that he can hit hard, but this conversation with him makes him look likea whiney baby. Why is no one knocking on your door? Your a diva already without anything to back you up, you think "you derserve" to play, and are only not playing due to draft status, and wont admit that possibly you are your own worst enemy.

Draft status? Hello Donald Driver. He was given a shot once, he excelled, and we never looked back (he was a 7th rounder). Not to mentioned all the undrafted free agents we picked up, and all that shit. When you are good, you excel with the opportunity. The few times he had real playing time in a meaningful game, he looked lost. Yeah, he laid out a wr from the cards - we get it it, the guy can hit. But he misses so much that he's a liability out there.

Great in TC, sucks in games. However, if it is true he is sticking with Finely well, I could see against pass heavy teams him getting a tad bit of play time with chillar moving outside for jones in coverage.

At least, I could see them playing with the idea. Moving Chillar outside for passing teams makes sense because he CAN cover, and he can blitz decently. Barnett is pretty good in coverage, and Hawk is just so-so.

[Tony Oday]

Maybe Bishop meant he is the second best SPECIAL TEAMS LB?

[sharpe1027]

My biggest recollection of Bishop was seeing a replay of a huge play the D gave up (I think a screen play) and wondering what the hell was Hawk doing? Then I realized it was Bishop. Thus far, he has proved about as much as Travis Jervey did.

[pbmax]

Just give the guy a fair shot at starting. What has Hawk done that is so great the last two years? Or Barnett for that matter. As for him saying that he is a top two LB in the league, idnk about that. But Finley has that sort of confidence in himself and look how that has turned out for him.

Hawk has 175 tackles of which 134 are solo tackles (77%), 4 sacks and 2 ints.

Divided by two and those numbers are very replacable. Chillar would without a doubt get those numbers and maybe Bishop if given the chance who knows.

No he wouldn't. There is a reason Chillar doesn't play versus the run. He's light and cannot hold a point.

Chillar is a little bigger than Barnett, and in St. Louis he was considered better against the run than he was against the pass. I'm not saying perception is always reality, and I agree he isn't as stout against the run as I would like, but the number of times I see Hawk get washed to the outside because his assignment is "containing" is sickening.

My perception is that none of the above is as stout as we would like, but Hawk doesn't blow his gap in ways that result in 40 yard runs.

Chillar may be comparable to Barnett. But in this D, you cannot have two ILBs that play that way. Someone has to stuff a Guard or FB and not lose the gap. Barnett and Chillar would both run around or get pushed out of the way.

[mngolf19]

The problem being that in very limited real world experience (not pre-season), Bishop looked like a fucking retard out there last year.

Skin, both your posts seem to suggest that people who are developmentally disabled are not very good in pass coverage.

I don't know if that's true. However, I do recall seeing a pass play develop last year in a regular season game, and Bishop had coverage responsibilities. I don't remember which game.

But just last week, Tuesday, I think, Bishop recognized that the play was a pass and began to drop into coverage.

Bobby Boucher was pretty good. And he also kept the waterjugs full.

[get louder at lambeau]

On Twitter, Bedard was puffing the possibility of a Chillar-Barnett-Bishop-Matthews linebacking corps, saying that it would be difficult to pass against because of what happened in practice today. He said nothing about how this might be due to how good Chillar is in coverage (he is very good), and claimed that Bishop is an improvement over Hawk in terms of pass defense.

Can someone possibly help me get into Bedard's tiny mind here? Hawk isn't everything we hoped for when we took him at #5, but one thing has actually become is someone who is very reliable and assignment sure in coverage. Since he's faster than Bishop linearly and laterally, and has better recognition skills... don't you think that would, um..., make him better against the pass?

Do you think we can trade him for a 6th round ILB who looks good in the preseason and isn't a malcontent?

From the descriptions I have read, it doesn't seem that the Bishop/Chillar pairing has anything to do with that being a positive combo versus pass or run.

Chillar was out there as they are short of starting caliber OLBs with Jones hurt. Bishop may have earned time with the ones, but there is no way he is out there to play versus an expected pass. I think Bedard's comment may have applied only the possibility of improving coverage from OLB with Chillar there.

Greg_A_Bedard - Only way Matthew-Barnett-Bishop-Chillar stick IMO is if Packers think they're OK vs run but really want to improve LB zone pass coverage.

PackersPlanet - @Greg_A_Bedard whaaaa? Can you imagine that. So you think Bishop is that much better than Hawk vs the pass?

Greg_A_Bedard - Um, yup RT @PackersPlanet: So you think Bishop is that much better than Hawk vs the pass?

http://www.packersplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7807