Barnett Refuses to Move?

[RIPackerFan]

FritzDontBiltz - Great point!

I love the competition that's already being generated. The coaches have not been shy about replacing an established veteran with a rookie who can play, and we have a bunch of rookies that have promise. In the past, there was little competition, especially for established players. Now, no one is safe.

From a fan's standpoint, this is good all around. The competition will push all players to do better instead of letting complacency settle in.

[Partial]

How much is Barnett making now? How much should they pay to keep him?

I think he deserves a 6 year 25 mil.

4 mil a year. Perhaps. That seems like a lot though for his production and position. We'll have to see.

[red]

It could just be that Barnett's problems with the Green Bay police and City Council already have him thinking about leaving Green Bay. If that's the case, it might not be surprising that he is already thinking about how attractive a free-agent he will be. I hope this isn't the case, but you never know how situations like this will affect a guy's attitude.

you might be on to something. i read something in his interview that didn't sit to well with me
this is from the interview

"On top of that, Barnett says moving to sam would hurt him at the free-agent bargaining table, since his contract expires after the 2007 season"


he's already talking here about being a free agent, meaning he doesn't resign with the packers. if he was big on staying with the team wouldn't he have phrased it something like

"when it comes time to resignl" or something like that, to include the packers in the process.

to me, when he says "free agent" it means somewhere other then here. if he really wants to stay with the team, and the team wants him, then he would have a new deal, before he becomes a free agent. i would think

[Deputy Nutz]

Bottom line they didn't draft Hodge to be Barnett's backup for the next 5 years. Barnett will either be resigned to play on the outside, or he will be allowed to leave via free agency.

Harvey, how many times have you seen Barnett hit a guy hard enough to force a fumble? Barnett likes to brag about how many tackles he can get, how come he isn't bragging about his ability to create turnovers?

Basically Barnett is suitable in the middle, but would probably demonstrate an ability to be flexible both on and off the field when it came time to sell himself during free agency.

It basically doesn't matter if Hodge is one of the best 3 linebackers, because if he isn't better than Barnett in the middle, or if he is not better than Taylor on the edge, then he isn't gonna start. Those are his only options right now. If Hodge has the ability to unseat Barnett then tough shit for Nick, but just because Hodge is thought of as on of the 3 best Backers on this team doesn't give him the middle linebacker job.

[Pacopete4]

what Barnett is not getting is, he needs to do whats best FOR THE TEAM and not for him. If Hodge, Hawk, and him are the best 3.. and Hodge is better at MLB and Barnett can play SAM.. then be happy and move ur ass out there and join the pro bowl at that position.

[red]

How much is Barnett making now? How much should they pay to keep him?

I think he deserves a 6 year 25 mil.

i don't think theres anyway he signs for that. rom his statements he obviously feels like he is a top MLB that can't be replaced. other top lB's this offseason got 50 million dollar deals

however, if all this is done right it would be possible to keep all three

barnett doesn't count much against the cap now, and won't next year. hawk has his big cap hit next year, then after that his numbers should be managable. hodge should count little money for the next 4 years

now all this is based on all three ending up being really good

hawk takes his big hit in 2007

barnett gets a new deal next year and takes the big cap hit the next year in 2008

and hodge wouldn't get his big money until the 2010 season

so if it is worked out right it would be possible to keep and even resign all three to keep them for the long hall

[FritzDontBlitz]

oh yeah. one more thing i forgot to bring up in the middle of all this:

ITS NOT NICK BARNETT'S DECISION WHERE HE PLAYS, THAT WOULD BE THE HEAD COACH'S CALL?

i like the way maccarthy answered the question about nick barnett's comments by saying “I understand how Nick feels. Frankly when a decision is to be made, we’ll talk to the player first. A lot of that is kind of unnecessary, his reaction to it. He’ll be the first to know if there ever is a consideration for a position change.”

without tipping his hand either way, mccarthy basically said "WE will let YOU know" if we decide different. doesn't sound like they'd be asking his opinion....

[Tony Oday]

Yup lets move Barnett to a position he isnt suited for sounds great. I would also like Favre at WR, Taucher at FB, Clifton at DT and Woodson at Qb.

Move a 194 tackle guy outside for a rookie that may have had a decent scrimmage against guys he sees every day. Sounds like madden football on Xbox not the NFL...

[Partial]

what Barnett is not getting is, he needs to do whats best FOR THE TEAM and not for him. If Hodge, Hawk, and him are the best 3.. and Hodge is better at MLB and Barnett can play SAM.. then be happy and move ur ass out there and join the pro bowl at that position.

Welcome to the forum dog!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sure. It would be nice to have a fumble causing LB, but really I think fumbles come down to circumstance (fumble prone offensive player) and luck. Urlacher caused 1 fumble last year and recovered 0. Barnett caused 1 fumble last year and recovered 3. Would you say Urlacher isn't a hitting machine? I realize Urlacher has done it more throughout his career (he has 7 career forced fumbles in 6 years), but it's not like he forces 4 or 5 fumbles/year. More than anything, I want a MLB that gets tackles near the line of scrimmage. Barnett does that--despite the myth that all of his tackles are downfield. In 2004 that was the case. That wasn't the case in 2005, and I think patler had the stats to prove it.

[Deputy Nutz]

Yup lets move Barnett to a position he isnt suited for sounds great. I would also like Favre at WR, Taucher at FB, Clifton at DT and Woodson at Qb.

Move a 194 tackle guy outside for a rookie that may have had a decent scrimmage against guys he sees every day. Sounds like madden football on Xbox not the NFL...

"Look, I can play it. I can play any linebacker position we've got," Barnett said. "But you start to think about other things as well, as far as your future. My free-agent year is coming up. You move me to sam, (and it's) really an unproductive position, doesn't get a lot of opportunities to make tackles.

Care to edit your above post? He can play outside linebacker, but apparently he would rather not because of his up coming free agency in two years, and he doesn't want to be thought of as an unproductive strong side linebacker.

Another quote by Barnett, "They need A.J. at will. When you draft somebody that high, you want to put him at the mike or the will so they'll have productive numbers," Barnett said. "And I understand the reasoning of wanting to move me to the sam, because I can cover and I'm a smart player..."

Gee seems like he believes he has all the traits to move to the strongside!

[woodbuck27]

Nick has stated before that he likes it in Green Bay. If he stays... we'll see.

IMO, there is no reason to move Barnett. Since he's got here he's had tackle totals of 109, 121, and 139. He's not a guy that will deliver the bonecrushing tackle to the RB, but he is consistent. Hodge has looked great in camp, but what has he done on the field yet? Barnett has done all he's been asked of and more since he's been here, why should he move. If I was Nick I'd be pissed to. The Preseason will be very revealing in Hodge's play, but I see no reason to move Barnett.

P.S. Woodbuck, I think you mean ALFONSO Soriano.

Thanks. I don't know where that came from.

Nelson, Uhhhh !??

[HarveyWallbangers]

Q: Dave of Beloit - Silverstein made some interesting observations about Hodge's strenghts and weaknesses in his article Monday. Since we have a new coaching regime why is there still a refusal to recognize that Barnett is better suited to play outside with his speed/pursuit talent and Hodge to man the middle with his shorter burst speed and more punishing hitting? We all know Barnett made a lot of tackles in years past but precious few were at the line of scrimmage or of the bell ringing variety that middle linebackers should make...

A: Cliff Christl - Speed at middle linebacker offers some real advantages in scheming in today's game. And Barnett has speed. I'm not sure you're right: That he'd be better outside. I think he's better suited for middle linebacker than the weak-side. I don't know about strong side in this defense. Never seen him there.

[woodbuck27]

Yup lets move Barnett to a position he isnt suited for sounds great. I would also like Favre at WR, Taucher at FB, Clifton at DT and Woodson at Qb.

Move a 194 tackle guy outside for a rookie that may have had a decent scrimmage against guys he sees every day. Sounds like madden football on Xbox not the NFL...

I don't want Charles Woodson at QB. Don't even suggest it !

shhhh.

[Deputy Nutz]

Q: Dave of Beloit - Silverstein made some interesting observations about Hodge's strenghts and weaknesses in his article Monday. Since we have a new coaching regime why is there still a refusal to recognize that Barnett is better suited to play outside with his speed/pursuit talent and Hodge to man the middle with his shorter burst speed and more punishing hitting? We all know Barnett made a lot of tackles in years past but precious few were at the line of scrimmage or of the bell ringing variety that middle linebackers should make...

A: Cliff Christl - Speed at middle linebacker offers some real advantages in scheming in today's game. And Barnett has speed. I'm not sure you're right: That he'd be better outside. I think he's better suited for middle linebacker than the weak-side. I don't know about strong side in this defense. Never seen him there.

I guess if Cliff Christl believes in Barnett than this topic is now muted. Good find Harvey