Pack93z
  • Pack93z
  • Select Member Topic Starter
16 years ago
Seriously consider moving Barnett out of the middle and shifting him outside... or do you believe there is another reason he can't get off blocks or tackle with any authority?

I have kept this to my self for a couple of weeks now.. thought maybe the bye week would solve the concerns I have with Nick in the middle. But alas it didn't, if anything it added fuel to my longtime belief that he would make a better outside linebacker than a middle one. And considering some of his performances in the past couple of years.. that is saying alot.

But it once again is clearly evident, if the DT's don't keep him clean, he can't shed the blocks himself. He had a monster year in 07 and a great game against the Vikings.. but for the most part the tackles kept the traffic off him for those games..

I really would like to see what a thumper like Bishop would do in helping the interior rush defense.. we would give up some in flexibility and coverage.. but I would think be a little more stout between the tackles in the running game.

Thoughts?
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
TimeToThink
16 years ago
I think the root of the problem is more the DL than it is Barnett.

But that's not to say it's a bad idea to move Barnett to the outside. But, we'd be hard pressed to find a MLB that would be great without a better DL.
blank
DakotaT
16 years ago

Seriously consider moving Barnett out of the middle and shifting him outside... or do you believe there is another reason he can't get off blocks or tackle with any authority?

I have kept this to my self for a couple of weeks now.. thought maybe the bye week would solve the concerns I have with Nick in the middle. But alas it didn't, if anything it added fuel to my longtime belief that he would make a better outside linebacker than a middle one. And considering some of his performances in the past couple of years.. that is saying alot.

But it once again is clearly evident, if the DT's don't keep him clean, he can't shed the blocks himself. He had a monster year in 07 and a great game against the Vikings.. but for the most part the tackles kept the traffic off him for those games..



I really would like to see what a thumper like Bishop would do in helping the interior rush defense.. we would give up some in flexibility and coverage.. but I would think be a little more stout between the tackles in the running game.

Thoughts?

"pack93z" wrote:




I think Hawk should be the MLB if we are going to stay in this defense (featuring the MLB). I don't think Barnett can handle the responsibility. I think he misses too many tackles and doesn't shed blocks. He is also a hot head. I think Hawk is a real good tackler, and would handle the MLB position well.

I would really like a whole new defensive coordinator hired. I think this defense is loaded with talent, yet we don't get to the quarterback enough, or shut down the run like we should be able to. Ultimately the responsility for an underachieving defense lies with Sanders.
UserPostedImage
TengoJuego
16 years ago
I've been a big Barnett fan his whole NFL career. But I cant help but agree. He hasn't tackled, he doesn't shed the blocks. What do we do? I really don't have any ideas.
PackerTraxx
16 years ago
He never was a good middle linebacker, this should have been addressed years ago. He can't to through blockers, he can't shed blockers, he doesn't penatrate, he doesn't knock runner backwards, and when the line keeps blockers off him he over runs the play. He is too small for a ML.

I agree he should be moved to the outside. Trouble is it is sort of late in his career. He is a good football player though, just playing out of position.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Since69
16 years ago
He still got plenty of speed. More than enough to play Will. I think swapping positions with Hawk (in the offseason, not now) would be a very smart move that would pay off almost immediately.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
16 years ago
Ther's a guy named James"the little animal"Lauranitis playing at OSU right now who would be perfect for The GreenBay Packers!!!!
:icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
gbpfan
16 years ago
it is hard to say maybe he should give his mike to someone else could that be a problem he cant make ajustments
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (2m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (48m) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (48m) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (48m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (56m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (57m) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (3h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (4h) : Packers will get in
beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (17h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.