Linebackers

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
1,700
Didn't see the game yesterday. Mulumba and Hubbard with sacks yesterday and Elliot had 3 in the same series. Just curious how the young guys looked and what in the world was going on late in the game. Where the Rams blockers really bad?
 

JBlood

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
467
I watched the first quarter, did some things and happened to see 2 of Elliot's sacks. Very impressive, but hard to know whether he's a superstar-in-waiting or better than a bad offensive line at the end of a preseason game. I suspect the latter since the entire defense was all over the Rams QB at the end of the game.
 

ExpatPacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,815
Reaction score
227
Location
A Galaxy Far, Far Away
On the other hand. . .

From what I see and hear, Nick Perry failed to impress yet again. Granted, neither CMIII nor Peppers did much of anything, but then they don't really have to at this stage. Perry has got to prove himself, and so far he isn't.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Didn't see the game yesterday. Mulumba and Hubbard with sacks yesterday and Elliot had 3 in the same series. Just curious how the young guys looked and what in the world was going on late in the game. Where the Rams blockers really bad?

Mulumba didn't have a sack, Barrington had one. I think it's tough to evaluate Elliott's performance as it came vs. third stringers but it was impressive nevertheless. Would like to see him get some snaps against better competition over the next two preseason games.
 

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
On the other hand. . .

From what I see and hear, Nick Perry failed to impress yet again. Granted, neither CMIII nor Peppers did much of anything, but then they don't really have to at this stage. Perry has got to prove himself, and so far he isn't.

Waste...the only reason he's still here is because he's one of Teddy's 1st round projects that has failed. If Perry was chosen any later he'd be released or traded just like Worthy.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Mulumba didn't have a sack, Barrington had one. I think it's tough to evaluate Elliott's performance as it came vs. third stringers but it was impressive nevertheless. Would like to see him get some snaps against better competition over the next two preseason games.
Yeah, Elliott was going against a dreadful LT...or maybe the buy was concussed. Who knows, but he barely laid a hand on anybody for at least 1/2 dozen consecutive plays. It would be interesting to see Elliott against a decent player to get a better gauge on that burst.
 

Einstein McFly

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
441
Reaction score
31
Perry had one of those series yesterday that just sums up his career. On one play he gave up contain and the back ran outside for nine yards. A play or two later he totally owned the left tackle, set the edge perfectly and caused a one yard loss. People just love to complain about him because they love to, no NEED to complain about something, but he'll make the team and if he's healthy he'll make enough plays to be well worth it. He's not going to cash in and probably won't stick around once his contract is up (he'll move on to a 4-3 team I'm sure) but he's not nearly as bad as whiners like to pretend.
 

Luca

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
265
Reaction score
29
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
On the other hand. . .

From what I see and hear, Nick Perry failed to impress yet again. Granted, neither CMIII nor Peppers did much of anything, but then they don't really have to at this stage. Perry has got to prove himself, and so far he isn't.

Nick Perry had two pressures on just 10 rushes. He also made two tackles tackles in the run game. Keep in mind that Perry played 10 of his 19 snaps versus an actual left tackle (Greg Robinson). Only the last 9 were versus Hooey. One of the pressures was versus Robinson.

BTW, Hooey gave up only sack and no other pressures versus New Orleans on 59 snaps. So Elliott was doing something very impresive. This guy also impressed in practice. He is 5-5 in the one-on-one drill and has beaten some of our starting lineman in that drill. Therefore I think that he will make the roster.

I think that Palmer will win the 6th spot, although Mulumba and Hubbard are still in the race for this spot. I don't think Bradford will make the team.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I think that Palmer will win the 6th spot, although Mulumba and Hubbard are still in the race for this spot. I don't think Bradford will make the team.

I took at closer look at the depth chart at OLB and came up with the same thought as well. Although Bradford was a 4th-round pick only three months ago I agree it´s highly possible that he won´t make the team.
 
OP
OP
PikeBadger

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
1,700
Waste...the only reason he's still here is because he's one of Teddy's 1st round projects that has failed. If Perry was chosen any later he'd be released or traded just like Worthy.
Big fan of Thompson, aren't ya? :)
 

packrule81

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I think that Palmer will win the 6th spot, although Mulumba and Hubbard are still in the race for this spot. I don't think Bradford will make the team.

4th round picks are hard to give up on so soon but that last spot is gonna be a tough cut, I'm with you on keeping either Palmer or Mulumba. And if Bradford or Hubbard make it through waiver put them on PS.
 

Einstein McFly

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
441
Reaction score
31
Both Lattimore and Jones started as OLBs who are now ILBs, so it's not crazy to think that that's where Bradford will end up. I highly, highly doubt he'll get cut. He's no Ricky Elmore. He'd better start working on his special teams play though if he wants to dress.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Bradford is making the team. BOOK IT! If he doesn't cut it at OLB they will move him to ILB. He has shown plenty to make this team as a draft pick.

He hasn't done anything in camp so far warranting him making the 53. We've got a lot of depth at OLB so he will have a hard time making it there. Bradford hasn't taken a single snap inside so why should the Packers hold on to him over Lattimore, Barrington or even Thomas???
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Both Lattimore and Jones started as OLBs who are now ILBs, so it's not crazy to think that that's where Bradford will end up. I highly, highly doubt he'll get cut. He's no Ricky Elmore. He'd better start working on his special teams play though if he wants to dress.

Yeah, both Jones and Lattimore started outside but they changed positions during the offseason not camp.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Well for one, Thomas isn't even healthy so that's a good reason. Again today, he Thomas didn't practice. For two, he was a 4th round pick. What's the point in getting a guy as high as the 4th round and then giving up on him after 1 offseason/presesason without ever letting him even try ILB? Very few 4th round picks get cut. For three, it's not uncommon to keep 10 LB's. For four, it's not like Barrington is really knocking it out of the park. Sure, he had a sack, but he could be doing a lot more.

There's absolutely no chance that Bradford will make the team at ILB over Lattimore, Barrington or even Thomas. He hasn't played a single snap at the position.

Right now I could 7 LB locks: Peppers, Neal, Perry, Matthews, Lattimore, B Jones, and Hawk. That leaves 3 open spots for guys like Barrington, Bradford, Elliott, Hubbard, K Jones, Mulumba, Palmer, and Thomas. Thomas is injured, Jones will likely be cut, and there are UDFA guys eligible for the PS such as Elliott and Hubbard. They'll find a way to keep Bradford.

I think the Packers will keep six OLBs on the roster with Matthews, Peppers, Perry and Neal locks to make the team. Elliott, Hubbard, Mulumba and Palmer all have made way more plays than Bradford so right now I don't see a reason to hold on to him just because he was a fourth round pick.

Put him on the practice squad (no team will pick him up after watching preseason film) and move him inside for next season.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Why do you keep misrepresenting what I said? I didn't say we would keep Bradford "as an ILB". I said that it's very possible we keep 10 LB's and that Bradford should make it being a 4th round pick, since most 4th round picks make the team. I have said that I think he should eventually be moved to ILB, but he doesn't necessarily make the team "as an ILB". In fact, he doesn't even really need to make the team as any specific type of LB. The Packers can put him on the roster, let him practice, and figure out his best position as the year goes on.

Right now Bradford is ninth on the depth chart at OLB and hasn´t played a single down at ILB. Bottom line if he doesn´t show major improvement over the next two weeks he doesn´t deserve to be on the 53.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Preseason depth chart means nothing, and he's listed as the 4th ROLB.

The depth chart you´re talking about was published before the second preseason game and I´m quite sure both Elliott and Hubbard (listed at 4th LOLB at the time) passed Bradford after their performance vs. the Rams.
 

Luca

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
265
Reaction score
29
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
So basically you are just making stuff up then. He's not actually 9th on the depth chart he's just 9th on your depth chart. Got it.

He is not making stuff up. Both Elliot and Hubbard played before Bradford, so it's safe to assume that they are above him on the depth chart. Moreover Elliot and Hubbard have made plays, something Bradford hasn't done yet. So I think Bradford's roster spot is in serious danger.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Well usually when someone says a guy is 9th on the depth chart as a matter of fact they aren't assuming something. Usually it's based off the actual depth chart.

Geez, it´s really not that tough if you need the official depth chart to figure it out. Before the preseason game vs. the Rams Bradford, Elliott and Hubbard were rated as the fourth string OLBs, meaning they were ranked 7th-9th on the depth chart. After the game vs. the Rams you should be able to figure out that Elliott and Hubbard have passed Bradford on the depth chart (not sure they were behind him before the game) leaving Bradford ranked 9th on it.
 

wist43

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
367
Reaction score
32
Bradford just looked small out there... he certainly doesn't have a roster spot locked up. When they drafted him, first thing I thought of was, 'inside linebacker', but not sure they've tried him there. Short arms, lack of length... can get away with that in college, not so much the pros.

Missed the Elliot sacks... after we signed him I went and looked him up on utube - couple things stood out, 1) he looks the part. He has size, length, speed, fluid athlete; 2) he looks very passive on the field, uses his hand poorly, doesn't play to what looks like should be his ability.

The guy looks like he should have the athletic ability to be a stud, but he just didn't play well in the tape I saw of him.

Saw Hubbard's sack... he's definitely long, and can get the edge. Don't know what he can do on special teams, but he looks like he has the tools to develop. If the Packers cut him and try to sneak him on to the PS - he won't make it there, he would be claimed by another team.

If we keep Hubbard, who goes?? Perry?? All the positions in the front seven are crowded, and outside of CM, Peppers, Daniels, and a couple others, everyone's roster spot should be at risk.
 
OP
OP
PikeBadger

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
1,700
Bradford just looked small out there... he certainly doesn't have a roster spot locked up. When they drafted him, first thing I thought of was, 'inside linebacker', but not sure they've tried him there. Short arms, lack of length... can get away with that in college, not so much the pros.

Missed the Elliot sacks... after we signed him I went and looked him up on utube - couple things stood out, 1) he looks the part. He has size, length, speed, fluid athlete; 2) he looks very passive on the field, uses his hand poorly, doesn't play to what looks like should be his ability.

The guy looks like he should have the athletic ability to be a stud, but he just didn't play well in the tape I saw of him.

Saw Hubbard's sack... he's definitely long, and can get the edge. Don't know what he can do on special teams, but he looks like he has the tools to develop. If the Packers cut him and try to sneak him on to the PS - he won't make it there, he would be claimed by another team.

If we keep Hubbard, who goes?? Perry?? All the positions in the front seven are crowded, and outside of CM, Peppers, Daniels, and a couple others, everyone's roster spot should be at risk.
How do you know Hubbard would be claimed? The guy wasn't even drafted.
 

HyponGrey

Caseus Locutus Est
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
221
Location
South Jersey
Well usually when someone says a guy is 9th on the depth chart as a matter of fact they aren't assuming something. Usually it's based off the actual depth chart.
PS DC is BS. There is no "official" DC. You look at the snaps played in the actual games and the "string" those snaps were played, and you have the "Depth Chart". Fact is Bradford is the last OLB to get snaps, and is therefore at the bottom of the DC.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top