zombieslayer
12 years ago

Barnett missed a lot of games during his last three seasons as a Packer. He played in something like 29 out of a possible 48. I liked Barnett, but he was another grab an drag tackler who seemed to be getting fragile. I think Hawk was the better choice over Barnett.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Understood about the injury thing.

This is another case where hindsight's 20/20. Barnett ended up playing the full season for the Bills and had a better year than Hawk.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
PackerTraxx
12 years ago

Barnett missed a lot of games during his last three seasons as a Packer. He played in something like 29 out of a possible 48. I liked Barnett, but he was another grab an drag tackler who seemed to be getting fragile. I think Hawk was the better choice over Barnett.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



This is why I was never a big Barnett fan. He was great at making sure the back didn't gain 10 yards, but he seldom stopped them from gaining 5.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
buckeyepackfan
12 years ago

I'm too fricken tired to rattle your cage today Buckeye, so I'll let this one slide.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



😂 🤐 😂
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
nerdmann
12 years ago
Demovsky 

“Watching film I felt like I got stuck on blocks a little too much,” Hawk said Thursday after the team’s mandatory minicamp concluded. “When I was able to blitz, a lot of times I’m blitzing up the middle or going against a center or a guard, and I feel like I got Velcroed or stuck to them a little too much. So I’ve focused on working on my hands and getting off (blocks) and get to the ball more.”


“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Dexter_Sinister
12 years ago

This is why I was never a big Barnett fan. He was great at making sure the back didn't gain 10 yards, but he seldom stopped them from gaining 5.

Originally Posted by: PackerTraxx 



One of these days someone is going to have to prove that to me. I have seen that argument quite a few times, but nobody has anything concrete to back it up besides opinion. Since it tends to be people who already didn't like Barnett, I am thinking the eye test won't be unbiased.

I made some attempt to see how many yards down field Barnett made his tackles on running plays, I had nothing to compare it too, but it didn't look that bad. Certainly not 5 yards per carry. Barnett had the most tackles on the team but a wide margin most years, if he was consistently failing to make stops, the Packers yard per carry allowed would have been worse.

In the last 3 years Barnett was a starter the whole year, the Packers YPC allowed on D was 4.1 in '06, 3.9 in '07 and 3.6 in '09.

When he wasn't in for most of the year the D allowed 4.6 and 4.7 ypc in '08 and '10.

If Barnett was getting carried 5 yards, he was initiating contact over a yard before the line of scrimmage consistently.

Now I thought Barnett was a tool as much as anybody else. But if anybody knows me, they know I want to see the numbers. To me, the accusation that Barnett couldn't make a tackle and using the eye test as evidence makes me trust that measure of a player even less. And I don't trust it in the slightest already.

Basically I am saying, until you show me, I don't believe it.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
porky88
12 years ago

Even if Hawk manged to get knocked down to 2nd string there is no point in cutting him. You are still on the hook for almost all of his salary and he's a great teammate/locker room guy and would be a great back up as long as he didn't get too disgruntled about it. Either way the fact that they like DJ Smith that much is great news.

Originally Posted by: Stevetarded 


Players know how much their teammates make. I can't imagine Desmond Bishop appreciating that Hawk (a second stringer) makes more than him, especially if he leads the team in tackles. There are so many variables that goes into the 53-man roster. In Hawk's case, I think you cut your losses if Smith beats him for the starting job. Maybe you try to trade him before cut down day. I can't justify hanging onto him at his salary unless he's a starter.
zombieslayer
12 years ago

One of these days someone is going to have to prove that to me. I have seen that argument quite a few times, but nobody has anything concrete to back it up besides opinion. Since it tends to be people who already didn't like Barnett, I am thinking the eye test won't be unbiased.

I made some attempt to see how many yards down field Barnett made his tackles on running plays, I had nothing to compare it too, but it didn't look that bad. Certainly not 5 yards per carry. Barnett had the most tackles on the team but a wide margin most years, if he was consistently failing to make stops, the Packers yard per carry allowed would have been worse.

In the last 3 years Barnett was a starter the whole year, the Packers YPC allowed on D was 4.1 in '06, 3.9 in '07 and 3.6 in '09.

When he wasn't in for most of the year the D allowed 4.6 and 4.7 ypc in '08 and '10.

If Barnett was getting carried 5 yards, he was initiating contact over a yard before the line of scrimmage consistently.

Now I thought Barnett was a tool as much as anybody else. But if anybody knows me, they know I want to see the numbers. To me, the accusation that Barnett couldn't make a tackle and using the eye test as evidence makes me trust that measure of a player even less. And I don't trust it in the slightest already.

Basically I am saying, until you show me, I don't believe it.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



Yes. People let their personal biases get in the way of facts. Like the Favre fiasco, people took sides and there wasn't much of an honest appraisal on Favre's abilities. They were either exaggerated good or exaggerated bad, depending on which side of the fence you took.

I know, bad example and my apologies for bringing him up. But he's immediately who comes to mind when biases get in the way of facts.

I showed Barnett's stats last year with Buffalo. They weren't too shabby and he's certainly missed here. I know he had personality issues. That's not what I'm discussing. I'm discussing his actual abilities.

I think the best criticism of Nick Barnett comes down to availability. 🇲🇲 talks about accountability and availability. Barnett's raw numbers spoke for themselves. However, he did miss a lot of games in the past few years and that was a valid argument for letting him go. His performance wasn't.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

One of these days someone is going to have to prove that to me. I have seen that argument quite a few times, but nobody has anything concrete to back it up besides opinion. Since it tends to be people who already didn't like Barnett, I am thinking the eye test won't be unbiased.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



I said it, I like Nick Barnett and have since the day he was drafted. Remember when he was at someones house and fell into a metal fence giving him a black eye before he even donned a Packers uniform?

It's also convenient to say you want that proven to you because so many websites have the stat "point of contact" and "point of tackle" so you can measure it up against others, lol.

I'm probably guilty of holding to high of a standard on middle/inside linebackers. The games I've seen Ray Lewis play, he seems to always knock the guy backward or they are tackled quick. Nick Barnett it seems he's out of position, not shedding blocks and gets guys from behind while they have momentum going forward and they drag him a bit. I want linebackers to make the contact, not react to it.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

I think the best criticism of Nick Barnett comes down to availability. 🇲🇲 talks about accountability and availability. Barnett's raw numbers spoke for themselves. However, he did miss a lot of games in the past few years and that was a valid argument for letting him go. His performance wasn't.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



lol, just realized this thread is about Smith and Hawk haha oops. Anyhow, I think Barnett led the Packers in tackles most of his years as a Packer.

Edit, stats + curiosity = my weakness. Barnett led the team every year he played except three times, two of which he was injured.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
12 years ago

lol, just realized this thread is about Smith and Hawk haha oops. Anyhow, I think Barnett led the Packers in tackles most of his years as a Packer.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Well he should have, he was the fricken MLB in a 4-3. The thing that always bugged me about Barnett besides the samurai dance, was that anybody he tackled never went backward. Just never any thump to him. Hawk has the same problem.


UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
beast (17m) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs
Mucky Tundra (22m) : This game looks too big for Washington
packerfanoutwest (3h) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns
packerfanoutwest (3h) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts
packerfanoutwest (3h) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,
beast (14h) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
beast (19h) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
Zero2Cool (22h) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
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
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.