Barnett Refuses to Move?

[MJZiggy]

Harv, Helsinki Hannah makes Wist look like King Kool-Aid.

Who makes me look like what???

Ya gotta cut me slack... I'm wildly optimistic - I'm inching my prediction toward 7-9!!!!

Read the middle of the Cliff chat Harvey posted. Then again, don't--she may sour your opinion of the team!!

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

McCarthy should sit Nick down immediately and have a serious discussion about the type of attitude that is required to play on this team.

This whiny-ass talk about his free agenct year is ridiculous. When Hodge learns his assignments, he will be a better MLB than Barnett ever thought about being. Get Hodge in there as soon as he's ready and move Barnett to SLB.

If his attitude keeps up, trade him when you can get something for him.

I CAN'T AGREE MORE.

This is MM's first challenge to shape attitudes and anything that could turn into the me mentality.

Talk to Nick
Let him know he's important to GB's success
But let him know it's the coaches job to decide where players play and all decisions are made for the best interests of the TEAM.

A strong coach should be able to get that accross far better then TT massaging Javon Walker's ego along the route to his departure.

I agree it seems like theres no communication b/w players and coaches anymore. They let the press do all talking for everyone.

[MadtownPacker]

Damn I thought this thread was about Barnett moving his club!
Show him the $$$ cuz he has been a good LBer for the last 3 years, never out hurt, fast, but his only downfall, can't smell the ball! So dont overpay!

Besides, gotta make nice for all that club mess and keep the teams rep clean.

[Bretsky]

Wonder if Abdul Hodge could be this teams Odell Smash Mouth Thurman cause he looks like a mean one as well.

Gotta love the name ABDUUUL for a MLB if he ends up there.

[Brainerd]

A: Cliff Christl - You're absolutely right. You never know. A team can get on a roll, gain confidence and surprise, as you noted. But, again, I think it takes some special players and I don't see any playmakers on this team yet.

Cliff Cristl is a blind boob who takes anti-homerism to a ridiculous level. If he doesn't see any playmakers on this team then he doesn't understand the concept.

He always covers himself with not yet or not so far or that guy isn't what he was 10 years ago. Oh really, an athelete isn't what they were 10 years ago. Who would have thought? He's a plain, boring simpleton with one of the best jobs in the world and every word he writes pisses me off.

As for Barnett, I could care less if he stays or if he goes. He doesn't do much wrong but he doesn't do anything great either. Just a guy. A guy with some speed and speed fades with age (see Cliff Christl).

[pbmax]

Wonder if Abdul Hodge could be this teams Odell Smash Mouth Thurman cause he looks like a mean one as well.

Gotta love the name ABDUUUL for a MLB if he ends up there.

Bretsky, I just hope Hodge stays eligible longer than Odell has. Nice collection of headcases in Cincy.

Wist, its good to know you are still upright. When I heard talk on the way home of moving Barnett and installing the harder hitting Hodge in the middle I thought you were a goner, having nearly had back to back answers to prayers coming round the corner for your defensive concerns.

And just my two cents, I am much less worried that Barnett is going to cause a stink because his problem is internal competition. Losing a starting position by being beaten out and sitting on the bench wil do more to depress his salary than moving outside, if Hodge makes it happen.

Unlike Harris, Walker and McKenzie, the problem isn't a complete lack of depth giving the player leverage, it the competition. I like this position better, and it will aid in keeping people in line, especially of the team is really on the upswing this year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

#56= 4.65 second 40 time (we think)

Hodge= 4.70

According to JSO, Barnett = 4.64 and Hodge = 4.79. That's a pretty meaningful difference. It's not a few hundredths. Now, Hodge appears to have a quick burst, but so does Barnett. No matter how much you hate Barnett, it's pretty easy to tell he's a damn fast LB.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Snippeet from the JSO:

For new Packers like linebacker Ben Taylor, it was a bit of a culture shock, too. Taylor thought he had seen serious fans during his four seasons with the Cleveland Browns.

"You know, Cleveland, they're supposed to have these great fans. They had like only 30-some (thousand)," Taylor said of his scrimmages with the Browns. "This looked like a regular season home game to me. It's just amazing. When you talk about the Packers there is no question about the support. It's just amazing.

"It's just the aura. You can feel the aura from Green Bay. . . . Lambeau Field. You're playing for the Packers, it's something special that you're a part of. I'm thrilled to be a Packer. It's been absolutely awesome. A fresh start for me. I'm really looking forward to the season. . . . big things. I'm really excited."

[RashanGary]

Barnett is a very good all around LB. He's better than Hodge IMO but Hodge might be better than Taylor and not flexible enough to play on the outside. I don't really like the Barnett sucks arguement, but I definitly don't like the idea of Hodge playing on the outside and I don't think it's fair to the team for McCarthy to placate Barnett at the expense of the team. Is Hodge better than Taylor right now? I don't know but he very well could be sooner than later and when that day comes, I'd liek to think the coaches would field the best possible team.

[red]

#56= 4.65 second 40 time (we think)

Hodge= 4.70

According to JSO, Barnett = 4.64 and Hodge = 4.79. That's a pretty meaningful difference. It's not a few hundredths. Now, Hodge appears to have a quick burst, but so does Barnett. No matter how much you hate Barnett, it's pretty easy to tell he's a damn fast LB.

damnit, someone gave the wrong number and screwed up all my hard work

ok, just to make it right i redid the numbers

in the time it takes barnett to get to the sideline (80 feet-ish). hodge would have gone 77.6 feet. so instead of 10 inches he would be about 1 yard behind. or about an arms length. he would also get to the same spot 1 tenth of a second after #56

so its still not that big of a deal and can easily be negation by things like reading were the play is going, sheading blocks etc. and preseason will show us who is better at those things. but i would say those things are more important then 40 times

and neither time is blazing, and neither one is going to be running down a rb in the open field.

thats what we have nick collins for

[Green Bud Packer]

hey nutz whats a debuty?

[Zool]

Man why do i bother to read anything by Cristl. Every time someone brings up playmakers, he brings up Lofton. The guy hasnt been on the team in 2 decades. Time to let him go.

He didnt think Sharpe was a special player? He was the only one teams had to even worry about covering in '93 and he still caught 112 passes. 108 in '92.

Does he even watch football?

[woodbuck27]

Wait just a minute
Possible position shift doesn't excite Barnett

By BOB McGINN
bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

Posted: Aug. 9, 2006
Green Bay - Nick Barnett's future is tied to his next contract with the Green Bay Packers.

Barnett, 25, has this season and next season remaining on his original rookie deal. He has done his fair share. Now he hopes the club does likewise.

If the Packers want Barnett to shift from middle linebacker (Mike) to the strong-side (Sam) to accommodate the comfort level of rookie Abdul Hodge, then Barnett implied that to keep him on board as a happy camper a contract extension should soon follow.

"When I think about a switch happening, my contract years are coming up," Barnett said. "You know what I mean? And you want to move me to an unproductive position at Sam, which isn't really a tackle position? I'd say, 'Let's talk about it right now.' "

Barnett was adamant that he doesn't want to play anywhere other than middle linebacker, where he has started all but one game over the last three seasons since being drafted with the 29th pick in the first round.

"The only position that I would give 10% thought to is Will (weak-side linebacker)," he said. "But that's not going to happen because we got A.J. (Hawk) at the Will. Honestly, I'd be successful at whatever position they put me in. But I've grown to love that position (Mike)."

By now, Barnett has outperformed what in effect was a five-year, $6 million deal that he signed as a rookie. His base salary this year is $601,000, just $101,000 more than the minimum. And his cap salary of $1.11 million ranks 22nd on the team.

The Packers, who are 15th among National Football League teams in available cap room at $7.919 million, have what it takes financially to lock up Barnett with a lifetime contract. Barnett probably would be looking at a deal averaging in the $5.3 million range like those signed by Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila in April 2003, Chad Clifton in March 2004 and Aaron Kampman in March 2006.

Barnett's value to the Packers hinges on his health, his performance and his production.

His durability has been exceptional. It's why he was able to play 87% of the defensive snaps in 2003, 99% in '04 and 97% in '05.

His performance has been pretty good, never great, although this has been perhaps his finest training camp.

"I think his best ball is still ahead of him," linebackers coach Winston Moss said. "He's had a great attitude. We can coach him hard. He tries to get it done every single practice."

For as many snaps as Barnett has played, his big-play production (five interceptions, six fumble recoveries, one fumble forced) has been pedestrian. However, he has put up big numbers of tackles, including a club-record 194 last season.

Just like the 4-3 "under" defense of Ed Donatell and Bob Slowik was designed for the weak-side linebacker to make the most tackles, the 4-3 "over" defense of Jim Bates and now Bob Sanders is geared for the middle linebacker to make the most.

If Barnett were moved to the strong side to make way for Hodge, the rookie probably would make most of the tackles in base. Barnett's numbers still would be high because of his presence in the nickel and dime defenses, just not as high.

"I'm balling," Barnett said. "I'm the leader of this team. I'm playing Mike, man. Coach (Mike) McCarthy hasn't come to me to ask me to move. I don't think it will happen. But if you're going to move to Sam after three years in a row let's talk about the future - not just about that position but my future here."

The Packers undoubtedly will be looking to extend Barnett within the next 12 months. A position change could hasten those negotiations.

In the first 11 days of camp, all of both Barnett's and Hodge's snaps in the base defense had come in the middle. But on Tuesday Sanders said Hodge received a few snaps on the strong side, where Ben Taylor has been starting.

No one knows if Hodge can play anywhere but the middle. But Sanders didn't sound like a man unwilling to step on toes when he said the best three would be on the field Sept. 10 against Chicago.

"I'm not going to take nothing away from Hodge," Barnett said. "I think he's a great young player. Is he ready to get on the field? I think he's excellent against the run. I think he's got to do some work in coverage. They're in that quandary. They want to get him on the field because (reporters) and the public wants to see him on the field."

The Packers already have another viable candidate on the strong side in Brady Poppinga.

"I think people are just looking past Ben Taylor," said Barnett. "Ben Taylor is a smart player. He has been playing real good Sam."

The highest-paid linebacker is Hawk, whose six-year, $37.5 million deal includes a cap salary of $2.185 million that ranks 12th on the club. But after two weeks of camp, Barnett still is the team's best linebacker and Hodge has flashed more than Hawk on a day-in, day-out basis.

Barnett said Hawk and Hodge still have to earn their positions in the exhibition season. Then he caught himself and said, "Hawk has. The $37 million earned it."

A scenario in which Hawk would move to the strong side, with Barnett and Hodge occupying the two inside posts, seems unlikely.

"We've thrown a year's worth of stuff at (Hawk) in two weeks," Sanders said. "He's doing 45 (nickel), 46 (dime) and we got a rush package for him we just installed. All of a sudden, to put anybody into another position in 44 (base), I don't know that that's fair."

Soon, however, all the defenses will be in. The players will be judged on what they can do to defeat the Bears. And then that conversation involving Barnett, McCarthy and GM Ted Thompson might take place.

"As far as general philosophy, you're always going to do what's in the best interests of your football team," McCarthy said. "I understand how Nick feels . . . I think a lot of that's kind of necessary. He'll be the first to know if there ever is a consideration."


From the Aug. 10, 2006 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

[Terry]

I think Red has a point. It's not that speed isn't important, but there are other qualities that are just as important, perhaps sometimes more important. When I was a kid, I was as slow as molasses, but I was always getting interceptions from much faster players. Ok, pro quarterbacking is a whole different ballgame than children throwing passes, but then too, the distinctions in speed are significantly less between pro football players, as Red points out. Smart play will always be more of a difference than speed. Remember Eugene Robinson?

A: Cliff Christl - You're absolutely right. You never know. A team can get on a roll, gain confidence and surprise, as you noted. But, again, I think it takes some special players and I don't see any playmakers on this team yet.

Cliff Cristl is a blind boob who takes anti-homerism to a ridiculous level. If he doesn't see any playmakers on this team then he doesn't understand the concept.

He always covers himself with not yet or not so far or that guy isn't what he was 10 years ago. Oh really, an athelete isn't what they were 10 years ago. Who would have thought? He's a plain, boring simpleton with one of the best jobs in the world and every word he writes pisses me off.

As for Barnett, I could care less if he stays or if he goes. He doesn't do much wrong but he doesn't do anything great either. Just a guy. A guy with some speed and speed fades with age (see Cliff Christl).

You beat me to it and I agree with you completely. Christl made two points that I had issues with, plus one general, overall point.

Firstly, the same quote that you referred to about Cliff not seeing playmakers. He repeated that theme a few times, when he said he didn't see 'special' players and when he said he didn't see even one 'stallion' out there. Like you, apparently, I think Christl is totally lacking in imagination. I don't know if Cliff would recognize a potential playmaker if one jumped up and bit him in the arse.

Similarly, he made that snide remark about Chatman ("...when he was playing with the likes of Antonio Chatman. You're playing with an Arena League receiver, he can drag a quarterback down to his level.") Man, that's just huge disrespect, even contempt. For a guy who played quite well for us, overall. No star, to be sure, but he never fumbled a punt and he was quite reliable as a receiver. Things like that piss me off too.

But the other thing that really hit me was, "And I think what he was saying was that players and luck will determine McCarthy's fate, just as they did Sherman's." Man, that's just codswallop. I wonder what Lombardi would have to say about Christl's take on coaching - Lombardi felt that ALL the difference between teams in the NFL was coaching.

That leads me to my general point too. Christl keeps talking about playmakers, about player talent, and his only comment about coaching was that the coaches are at the mercy of the talent and luck. He sure gives Sherman a free pass. Actually, Sherman got much more out of his players during regular season than most coaches would have. Where he fell apart was in the post season.

I wonder what Christl would have thought about watching the practices in Lombardi's first season. Especially if he'd been watching the same players in training camp over the previous few years. Lombardi takes a 1-10-1 team and turns them into a 7-5 team in his first season, with the same players! In his second year, he has the team in the championship game and he nearly won it (he ran out of time when Jim Taylor was stopped at the nine yard line as time expired). I don't remember if there were new players that year, but there certainly weren't many.

I'm not suggesting that McCarthy is a good coach, never mind great coach. I think we have yet to find that out. But if he is a good coach, you can be sure that the group of non-players the Packers have will go a lot further this year than Cliff Christl or any of his genius friends (worse than last year, my ass) could ever conceive of. And if the season goes bad, it won't prove Christl right, imo, but will be more a reflection on the coaching. On the other hand, if the team actually manages to go something like 9-7 or even, especially, 10-6, you can be sure that Christl will be dancing all year.

[Tarlam!]

I would do EXACTLY what Vince would do, in this situation, if I were TT.

I would call Barnett into my office and tell him he's been traded to Buffalo.