How could he be dreadful at shedding blocks yet basically lead the team in tackles whenever he got a chance to start? If anyone is bad at block shedding it's AJ Hawk. If there is anything I've seen out of Bishop it's that he is one of the better linebackers on the team at shedding blocks.

---

There are many reasons a LB can go unblocked: missed blocking assignment, getting to the LOS faster than the O-linemen who is covering you, or a DE causing disruption to the point where the blocker responsible for picking up the LBer gets disrupted.

I'll agree that Hawk isn't an exceptional shedder of blocks. But look at his play, he can hold the point of attack, and times he drives the blocker back to the point where he gets involved in the play.

Bishop gets swallowed when he gets blocked. Either we're not watching the same film, or I have erred in my analysis of film on Bishop (which is quite possible). Add to that his slow speed and limitations in pass coverage.... and I have my issues with him getting more playing time.

I think I might take a much more keen interest in the pre-season this year to do a more thorough evaluation of our players - I've finally got some time on my hands. But for now, I'll stick with my assessment that Bishop is still not quite on the overall level of the players above him. I still think though that the staff is very aware of Bishop's limitations, and hence why Hawk was shifted to MLB two seasons ago after Barnett's injury (and Chillar inserted in Hawk's place) ... because they give you better overall play - and your LBs have to be able to cover in an increasingly more passing league.

---

lol and how did THAT work out?

im not a Hawk hater, but that wasn't pretty.

---

And what does that say about Bishop, that even in THAT situation the coaching staff did not throw him out there, at all?

---

It says the coaches need a kick in the pants ... and get our man bishop on the field.

You'd think it wouldn't take the coaches, who have the most access to players during practices in a league where winning matters most of all, much of anything to realize which players puts them in the best spots to win games.

That they didn't.... well considering my abnormally high posts in this thread, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out what I think that is indicative of.

---

there are some politics to who starts i believe. esp. in the case of 1st rounders and who is gettin the bigger check.

^ is also an argument as to why we havn't cut Harrel yet. we have to justify the tens of MILLIONS we are spending on these guys.

my wording is terrible but you get the meaning

---

True, but that reasoning doesn't quite apply in this context, though.

Hawk, a first rounder, was starting at WLB before Barnett's injury.

You'd expect that when a player is injured for the season, the player behind him on the depth chart will replace him. Bishop was that player. He got passed up on: Hawk was moved to MLB (he was starting before being moved) and Chillar was inserted at WLB.

It's kinda odd they'd shuffle the unit so much, considering moving Hawk to MLB entailed him having to learn to call Sander's defense too, in addition to learning a new position.

---

I understand your point, but I still don't think it's as representative of as much as you claim. Perhaps they just felt more comfortable with Hawk at MLB because of his experience as a starter in that defense and even with Poppinga and Chillar (playing time). Perhaps they just felt that was the best route.

Hopefully no one thinks that Bishop would come straight in and perform much better then Hawk or Barnett. He would have many up's and down's mostly due to inexperience as a starter against other starters. However, after getting several games under his belt many think that he could be a potential upgrade. I certainly would not want to see him in man coverage which was an issue under Sander's defense. Now, however, he'd mostly be in zone and as long as we consistently pressured the quarterback I think he would be fine in coverage. His biggest asset would be stuffing the run which I think he would do better then Hawk and Barnett. However, it's hard to complain much about our run D last season, so who knows. I think it all has more to do with the amount of pressure we get on opposing QB's.

I think there are a few teams in the NFL that could really put Bishop in a position to succeed though, such as the Eagles. They would find a way to put him in position to make plays.

And David Clowny has lead the NFL in yardard in preseason yet hasn't done much in the real season...

Bishop can make plays... BUT he gives up more plays than he makes... clearly the coaches noted that and that's why he's not giving playing time...

there is no other reason not to play him... other than he's not the best they have...

---