PDA

View Full Version : Barnett out for the year


TitleTown088
11-10-2008, 02:44 PM
Torn Ligament. He had not played well all season but it hurts nonetheless. Maybe not the Arguments on here for Hawk at MIKE can come to fruition! ;)

OH yeah, Freaking Dome did it. They need to be banished.

bored of education
11-10-2008, 02:45 PM
Hawk At Mike Ftw!

Gay Ork Wang
11-10-2008, 02:48 PM
yay, Forte RUN ALL OVER IT!

PoopSandwich
11-10-2008, 02:50 PM
How has Hawk done so far as a pro? I haven't really gotten to see much of him.

bigbluedefense
11-10-2008, 02:53 PM
I really hope this means Hawk will move to MIKE. I think he can get in that role, and run away with it. Now is your time to shine Hawk, make it count.

Sucks for Barnett. Im a big Barnett fan.

Twiddler
11-10-2008, 02:56 PM
How has Hawk done so far as a pro? I haven't really gotten to see much of him.

Maybe not as spectacular as you'd expect from a fifth overall pick but he still has managed to perform well enough.

And this sucks about Barnett, although we'll be finding a lot out about our linebacker depth.

tjsunstein
11-10-2008, 02:59 PM
Our run D is gonna suck even more now. What sucks is that we face Forte twice, possibly a healthy Reggie, the Carolina duo, Slaton, and the Jax duo. This is why our offense cant be conservative because we wont have the ball all game if we are. Hawk is gonna have to man MIKE now because no one else is capable of doing it unless you seriously like Bishop in the middle. Yea, Desmond Bishop from Cal. The one that blew up a Jacksonville receiver last yea in pre season and the same one that Chester Taylor shook for that long catch this week.

awfullyquiet
11-10-2008, 03:00 PM
Maybe not as spectacular as you'd expect from a fifth overall pick but he still has managed to perform well enough.

And this sucks about Barnett, although we'll be finding a lot out about our linebacker depth.

he's no urlacher.

but hey packers. you win some and lose some.

bigbluedefense
11-10-2008, 03:05 PM
he's no urlacher.

but hey packers. you win some and lose some.

Briggs >>> Urlacher

Dr. Gonzo
11-10-2008, 03:05 PM
Our run D is gonna suck even more now. What sucks is that we face Forte twice, possibly a healthy Reggie, the Carolina duo, Slaton, and the Jax duo. This is why our offense cant be conservative because we wont have the ball all game if we are. Hawk is gonna have to man MIKE now because no one else is capable of doing it unless you seriously like Bishop in the middle. Yea, Desmond Bishop from Cal. The one that blew up a Jacksonville receiver last yea in pre season and the same one that Chester Taylor shook for that long catch this week.

So you complain at Nnamdi Asomugha having a thread in the NFL section and yet say nothing about this much more useless thread. Hmmmm.

Gay Ork Wang
11-10-2008, 03:06 PM
Briggs >>> Urlacher
Briggs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Urlacher >>>>>> EJ Henderson >>>>>>>>>>>> Sims >>>>>>>>> Packers LB

Dr. Gonzo
11-10-2008, 03:08 PM
Briggs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Urlacher >>>>>> EJ Henderson >>>>>>>>>>>> Sims >>>>>>>>> Packers LB

You forget the second and third best whity LB's on the Vikings, Leber and Greenway. Surely they are better than the Packers LB's.

Gay Ork Wang
11-10-2008, 03:09 PM
You forget the second and third best whity LB's on the Vikings, Leber and Greenway. Surely they are better than the Packers LB's.
i just wanted to single out EJ, leber and greenway are included

tjsunstein
11-10-2008, 03:12 PM
So you complain at Nnamdi Asomugha having a thread in the NFL section and yet say nothing about this much more useless thread. Hmmmm.

I posted about this in the Packers boards before it was posted here. Hmmm.

the_legend_killer
11-10-2008, 03:13 PM
Sucks for Barnett, guess he can't do anymore celebrating after giving up a 7 yard gain this year.......

tjsunstein
11-10-2008, 03:19 PM
Sucks for Barnett, guess he can't do anymore celebrating after giving up a 7 yard gain this year.......

Yeah, I really enjoyed those.. not. That makes me so bad when a player does that.

Race for the Heisman
11-10-2008, 03:21 PM
You forget the second and third best whity LB's on the Vikings, Leber and Greenway. Surely they are better than the Packers LB's.

That goes without saying, doesn't it?

bigbluedefense
11-10-2008, 03:27 PM
Briggs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Urlacher >>>>>> EJ Henderson >>>>>>>>>>>> Sims >>>>>>>>> Packers LB

I actually like Barnett more than Urlacher.

I like Hawk more than any Vikings LB, he's at the very least comparable to EJ.

GB12
11-10-2008, 03:34 PM
I really hope this means Hawk will move to MIKE. I think he can get in that role, and run away with it. Now is your time to shine Hawk, make it count.

Sucks for Barnett. Im a big Barnett fan.
I definitely want that too happen. It's the perfect opportunity to try it out, eventhough it comes at a big expense. Long term it doesn't really solve anything because Barnett will get his job back next year, but it'll be interesting to watch how Hawk does.

Also the Chillar signing this offseason was huge. We have a guy that can step right in and be a decent starter. Had this happend last year we would have been screwed. While the loss of Barnett hurts I still feel alright about starting Poppinga, Hawk, and Chillar .

tjsunstein
11-10-2008, 03:43 PM
This absolutely works to Hawk's strengths, I think. I can see him doing well. I'm not sure how I feel about Poppinga and Chillar both starting but I have no choice but to accept it. Hopefully our run D will stay put and not suffer any more if thats even possible.

First Martin Broduer for the Devils and now Nick Barnett for my Packers. Who's next? Baron Davis? Atleast the Phillies won! Can't win them all.

Pokeys
11-10-2008, 03:44 PM
Desmond Bishop is poop...

PACKmanN
11-10-2008, 05:36 PM
I really hope this means Hawk will move to MIKE. I think he can get in that role, and run away with it. Now is your time to shine Hawk, make it count.

Sucks for Barnett. Im a big Barnett fan.

I don't think we move him to MIKE, Chillar will take that role. Plus, Hawk's injury has made him very limited this year, I don't want to see linemen running at him and cutting him.

TitleTown088
11-10-2008, 07:13 PM
yay, Forte RUN ALL OVER IT!

Barnett has been one of the biggest problems with the Packers run defense. Couldn't shed a block for his life.

Vikes99ej
11-10-2008, 07:14 PM
I know how you feel Packers' fans.

TitleTown088
11-10-2008, 07:15 PM
I know how you feel Packers' fans.

Lose your best Dlineman in addition, then you will.

Oh snap. Did I just imply Kampman isn't the best on the Packers?

ImBrotherCain
11-10-2008, 07:15 PM
**** My Life :(

Vikes99ej
11-10-2008, 07:16 PM
Lose your best Dlineman in addition, then you will.

Oh snap. Did I just imply Kampman isn't the best on the Packers?

I'm pretty sure we're losing two of them in a few weeks, so I'm bracing myself.

Dr. Gonzo
11-10-2008, 07:20 PM
I'm pretty sure we're losing two of them in a few weeks, so I'm bracing myself.

e already lost Kenechi Udeze :)

TitleTown088
11-10-2008, 07:22 PM
I'm pretty sure we're losing two of them in a few weeks, so I'm bracing myself.

Yeah well ,they have no one to blame but themselves for that.

GB12
11-10-2008, 08:32 PM
Lose your best Dlineman in addition, then you will.

Oh snap. Did I just imply Kampman isn't the best on the Packers?
I'm about as big of a Jenkins fan as you'll find, but that's ridiculous.

Vikes99ej
11-10-2008, 08:56 PM
Yeah well ,they have no one to blame but themselves for that.

Shaddup. :(

ChezPower4
11-11-2008, 12:15 AM
I've always thought that Hawk would have been a better mike than a will. Guess now we might just find out. I hope for the sake of our season that he can play well there.

bored of education
11-11-2008, 07:03 AM
Will Desmond Bishop see more time? That dude is a beast!

TitanHope
11-11-2008, 10:13 AM
I thought Bishop was receiving hype prior to this season, and that he would be a starter if not for Barnett. If that's true, it'd be a shame to not at least give him a chance at MLB. He did give up one bad play to Chester Taylor, but I thought he forced a fumble and made a few other plays (though, all I saw were highlights).

If Bishop plays and plays well, then he or Barnett would be trade bait come draft time.

jsa230
11-11-2008, 11:27 AM
I really like bishop, he plays with a nasty demeanor and even though he might not be the fastest or strongest player on the feild, he still makes plays. He has been a beast on st recently and i hope he sees some playing time. I know MM likes him so it seems pretty likely. I will tell you what i dont want to see, Chillar-Hawk-Poppinga. Chillar could probably start for some nfl teams but i wasnt impressed during the titans game. He had like 4 tackles but he almost cost us a silly pass interference penalty in the endzone. I think if Hawk had 100% all year chillar wouldnt have seen the feild at all. Bishop>>>Chilar

Mr.Regular
11-11-2008, 12:37 PM
Will Desmond Bishop see more time? That dude is a beast!
Meh Id rather us get Chillar/Hawk/Poppinga all on the field somehow, than see Bishop starting at MIKE.

PACKmanN
11-11-2008, 01:28 PM
I thought Bishop was receiving hype prior to this season, and that he would be a starter if not for Barnett. If that's true, it'd be a shame to not at least give him a chance at MLB. He did give up one bad play to Chester Taylor, but I thought he forced a fumble and made a few other plays (though, all I saw were highlights).

If Bishop plays and plays well, then he or Barnett would be trade bait come draft time.

Bishop is too slow to be a starter for the full season. I would rather see Chillar in the middle. He was picked up for this type of reason.

GB12
11-11-2008, 04:00 PM
I really like bishop, he plays with a nasty demeanor and even though he might not be the fastest or strongest player on the feild, he still makes plays. He has been a beast on st recently and i hope he sees some playing time. I know MM likes him so it seems pretty likely. I will tell you what i dont want to see, Chillar-Hawk-Poppinga. Chillar could probably start for some nfl teams but i wasnt impressed during the titans game. He had like 4 tackles but he almost cost us a silly pass interference penalty in the endzone. I think if Hawk had 100% all year chillar wouldnt have seen the feild at all. Bishop>>>ChilarNo. Just no. Chillar is better than Bishop and it's not even really close. The statement I bolded proves that you aren't one that should be judging this matter anyway. Chillar was brought in to play even without an injury and he did. He's been used for his superior coverage abilities and has been doing a good job at it. Last year tight ends killed us, that's why we signed Chillar to limit them. And as for him not seeing the field if Hawk wasn't hurt, he started the Dallas game over Poppinga and has had quite a bit of playing time with Hawk in at the same time throughout the season. He has been in Hawk's spot in nickel packages (a position Hawk has been at every game his NFL career prior to this season) not because of Hawk's injury, but because he was better at it. Now I think Hawk recently took that back, but Chillar was every bit as good doing that. Even if for some reason Bishop does start it will be Chillar and Hawk in nickel packages and Chillar might take over for Barnett in dime. Only way Bishop stands a chance is if for some reason they don't want to mess with moving Hawk, and even then I'd start Chillar in the middle over Bishop. Chillar was inactive due to an injury, but if he was active Bishop probably would have never gone in last week.


If Bishop plays and plays well, then he or Barnett would be trade bait come draft time. Barnett's not going anywhere.

jsa230
11-11-2008, 07:12 PM
Im sorry we have a differnece in opinions, but i really like desmond bishop. Chillar just hasnt impressed me all too much. Thats all im saying.

tjsunstein
11-11-2008, 07:44 PM
Im sorry we have a differnece in opinions, but i really like desmond bishop. Chillar just hasnt impressed me all too much. Thats all im saying.

Chillar plays with intensity so does Bishop. The thing that seperates them is expierience, which leans towards Chillar, and discipline, also goes to Chillar. We can't have Bishop give up big plays biting on a playaction, which he is known to do, and he doesnt have the speed to make up for it. I like Bishop too but the time isnt right.

TitanHope
11-11-2008, 07:50 PM
Bishop is too slow to be a starter for the full season. I would rather see Chillar in the middle. He was picked up for this type of reason.

I thought Chillar was subbing in for AJ Hawk on passing downs?

Lots of combonations at the LB spots, but I'm guessing Poppinga/Bishop/Hawk on 1st and 2nd Down would work, and on 3rd Down and obvious passing downs, Bishop comes out because he's too slow, Hawk moves to MIKE where he should have enough speed for a MLB, and Chillar goes in at WLB as usual to replace Hawk. That way no liabilities are left to be exploited.

GB12
11-11-2008, 08:10 PM
I thought Chillar was subbing in for AJ Hawk on passing downs?

Lots of combonations at the LB spots, but I'm guessing Poppinga/Bishop/Hawk on 1st and 2nd Down would work, and on 3rd Down and obvious passing downs, Bishop comes out because he's too slow, Hawk moves to MIKE where he should have enough speed for a MLB, and Chillar goes in at WLB as usual to replace Hawk. That way no liabilities are left to be exploited.
Chillar can play all 3 of our LB positions.

The scenario you explained doesn't make any sense. The reason there's any question of what we're going to do is because we don't know if the coaching staff is willing to move Hawk for just half a season or if they don't want to mess with moving him. If they're willing to move him like you have then he'd be there full time with Poppinga and Chillar on the outside. If they're not willing to move him I'd say the odds of Chillar in the middle over Bishop are 75-25. Bishop should not be a starter and in all likelyhood won't be.

TitanHope
11-11-2008, 08:19 PM
Chillar can play all 3 of our LB positions.

The scenario you explained doesn't make any sense. The reason there's any question of what we're going to do is because we don't know if the coaching staff is willing to move Hawk for just half a season or if they don't want to mess with moving him. If they're willing to move him like you have then he'd be there full time with Poppinga and Chillar on the outside. If they're not willing to move him I'd say the odds of Chillar in the middle over Bishop are 75-25. Bishop should not be a starter and in all likelyhood won't be.

I was thinking along that line, but wanted to create a solution for AJ Hawk's pass-coverage liability as well as Bishop's deficiencies.

If AJ Hawk really isn't all that bad, then your scenario is most likely.

Why does Bishop have a roster spot?

tjsunstein
11-11-2008, 08:21 PM
I was thinking along that line, but wanted to create a solution for AJ Hawk's pass-coverage liability as well as Bishop's deficiencies.

If AJ Hawk really isn't all that bad, then your scenario is most likely.

Why does Bishop have a roster spot?

Special Teams.

GB12
11-11-2008, 08:28 PM
I was thinking along that line, but wanted to create a solution for AJ Hawk's pass-coverage liability as well as Bishop's deficiencies.

If AJ Hawk really isn't all that bad, then your scenario is most likely.

Why does Bishop have a roster spot?
Hawk isn't much of a liability in coverage. He's definitely a step down from Barnett, but I'm not too worried about it. If pass coverage is the concern then it sure as hell won't be Bishop.

No matter what the starting alignment is Chillar will take Barnett's space in the nickel, and probably his spot for dime and other single LB packages.

Bishop is on the team as our 5th linebacker and his special teams.

dc22
11-12-2008, 02:04 PM
chillar was in the nickel cause hawk wasn't a 100 percent but now he's once again ahead of him

i'd rather see pop at strong side, hawk middle, and chillar on the weak-side

idk if it's just me or does anybody else think that barnett has struggled all year in coverage

PACKmanN
11-12-2008, 03:50 PM
Hawk isn't much of a liability in coverage. He's definitely a step down from Barnett, but I'm not too worried about it. If pass coverage is the concern then it sure as hell won't be Bishop.

No matter what the starting alignment is Chillar will take Barnett's space in the nickel, and probably his spot for dime and other single LB packages.

Bishop is on the team as our 5th linebacker and his special teams.

right now with how Barnett is playing, I wouldn't say Hawk is a step down from Barnett.

TitleTown088
11-12-2008, 04:50 PM
Hawk isn't much of a liability in coverage. He's definitely a step down from Barnett, but I'm not too worried about it. If pass coverage is the concern then it sure as hell won't be Bishop.

Statistically Hawk was the best coverage LB in the league last season if i remember correctly.

JSonline reported Hawk is going to start at MIKE vs Da bears.

jsa230
11-12-2008, 10:07 PM
so that means its going to be popp/hawk/chillar... i really wish they would just leave hawk at will:<