Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why this draft made no sense at all
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Oannes" data-source="post: 149253" data-attributes="member: 816"><p>Your Hall of Famer-ness.... I compared Hawk to Urlacher in their ROOKIE years. Cripes. How many times do I need to say that?</p><p></p><p>I've given plenty of stuff to this argument. I've gotten called names. I've had people call me names and use "facts" that weren't facts at all to defend their wrong stances ala Briggs and Urlacher.</p><p></p><p>The Weakside LB is the PLAYMAKING position. I don't care if the middle backer makes 200 tackles. Weakside is where the playmaker is lined up in our scheme. As I said, who knows how many times, that the debate raged between fans and coaching staff alike about whether to move Barnett to weakside. Why would that be? It was to take more advantage of his skills. He's light in the shorts and would be able to make more plays if he wasn't dealing with olineman running at him. Hawk is freer at Weak to make plays. I'm not disparaging Hawk because of his position. Maybe, they'll decide to move Barnett to Weak and put Hawk in the middle.... I'm not the fortune teller I've been accused of being.</p><p></p><p>A person comes here and posts Bates thoughts on the middle backer position and you all assume the role of the weakside guy is somehow less? Again, I ask why the thought of moving Barnett to weak all those years? SO HE COULD MAKE MORE PLAYS. Man. Just because Zach Thomas led the Dolphins all those years means what? Who did the Dolphins have playing weakside? Anyone?</p><p></p><p>Hawk and Barnett are a nice duo. Both are extremely important. </p><p></p><p>Would it make you feel better if I found a story talking about Sanders tweaking Bates scheme?</p><p></p><p>Here ya go...</p><p></p><p>Packers | Sanders will use same 4-3 defense</p><p>Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:39:52 -0800</p><p></p><p>Jeff Fedotin, of Packers.com, reports Green Bay Packers defensive coordinator Bob Sanders will use a similar 4-3 defense, but will tweak former defensive coordinator Jim Bates' scheme. Sanders did not elaborate but said they could include some different coverages.</p><p></p><p>Here's more from Nick Barnett himself from a Tom Oates article...</p><p></p><p>And, as Barnett admitted Tuesday, the Packers aren't going to move the high-profile Hawk to the lowest-profile linebacker position.</p><p></p><p>"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, but I think Abdul's smart enough to play that position, too.</p><p></p><p>---They always talked of Barnett to the Will and then Hawk comes and they're talking Hodge at Mike...Hawk at Will and Barnett at Sam. Why? </p><p></p><p>Hawk is expected to be the playmaker.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Oannes, post: 149253, member: 816"] Your Hall of Famer-ness.... I compared Hawk to Urlacher in their ROOKIE years. Cripes. How many times do I need to say that? I've given plenty of stuff to this argument. I've gotten called names. I've had people call me names and use "facts" that weren't facts at all to defend their wrong stances ala Briggs and Urlacher. The Weakside LB is the PLAYMAKING position. I don't care if the middle backer makes 200 tackles. Weakside is where the playmaker is lined up in our scheme. As I said, who knows how many times, that the debate raged between fans and coaching staff alike about whether to move Barnett to weakside. Why would that be? It was to take more advantage of his skills. He's light in the shorts and would be able to make more plays if he wasn't dealing with olineman running at him. Hawk is freer at Weak to make plays. I'm not disparaging Hawk because of his position. Maybe, they'll decide to move Barnett to Weak and put Hawk in the middle.... I'm not the fortune teller I've been accused of being. A person comes here and posts Bates thoughts on the middle backer position and you all assume the role of the weakside guy is somehow less? Again, I ask why the thought of moving Barnett to weak all those years? SO HE COULD MAKE MORE PLAYS. Man. Just because Zach Thomas led the Dolphins all those years means what? Who did the Dolphins have playing weakside? Anyone? Hawk and Barnett are a nice duo. Both are extremely important. Would it make you feel better if I found a story talking about Sanders tweaking Bates scheme? Here ya go... Packers | Sanders will use same 4-3 defense Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:39:52 -0800 Jeff Fedotin, of Packers.com, reports Green Bay Packers defensive coordinator Bob Sanders will use a similar 4-3 defense, but will tweak former defensive coordinator Jim Bates' scheme. Sanders did not elaborate but said they could include some different coverages. Here's more from Nick Barnett himself from a Tom Oates article... And, as Barnett admitted Tuesday, the Packers aren't going to move the high-profile Hawk to the lowest-profile linebacker position. "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, but I think Abdul's smart enough to play that position, too. ---They always talked of Barnett to the Will and then Hawk comes and they're talking Hodge at Mike...Hawk at Will and Barnett at Sam. Why? Hawk is expected to be the playmaker. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Firethorn1001
SudsMcBucky
Latest posts
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: milani
54 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: CarryTheG14
Today at 12:24 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
M
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: Magooch
Today at 11:43 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
P
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pugger
Today at 10:17 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: Curly Calhoun
Today at 8:28 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why this draft made no sense at all
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
