Comments on: LB movement afoot? http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/ All Things Green Bay Packers Tue, 21 May 2013 08:09:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: AZ Warrior http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-10002 Wed, 04 Aug 2010 15:37:10 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-10002 Thanks awhayes. Appreciate the insight.

]]> By: awhayes http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9997 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 23:11:07 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9997 AZ – I think the ideal size for an OLB in a 3-4 is about 245-255 or so. They do need to be quick enough to drop back into coverage (which was part of the knock on Kampman as a 3-4 OLB, he was a bit too big) but they also need to be big enough to not get thrown around at the line of scrimmage when rushing. (I think Matthews is about 255, ideal.) I think that is what the coaches might answer anyway – but I don’t think 5-6 pounds will make THAT big of a difference in Chillar’s case. He’s fairly tenacious and I think both he and Bishop (who is 238) could be quite disruptive coming from the outside.

]]> By: AZ Warrior http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9996 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:50:33 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9996 They (reports) keep referring to Chillar’s weight (237 lbs) being light for an outside LB. But I always thought the inside LBs were heavier than the OLBs, as the OLBs had to be more fleet of foot, cover more territory, etc. what gives?

]]> By: awhayes http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9995 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:29:23 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9995 Ted – I think you’re right, I don’t think this new line-up was meant to be a new starting line-up (I’d like it if it were). I think it’s more of a situational package deal – still interesting that Hawk’s PT may be the casualty.

]]> By: Ted http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9994 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:20:57 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9994 I read the same article yesterday and got the impression the Hawk-less lineup was in passing downs or nickle packages. Implication he is still in there on 1st downs and running situations.

Pretty high pick for a situational LB.

]]> By: TheChoj http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9974 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:53:28 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9974 but on the other hand, I won’t really believe it until he’s not there in NO on Sept. 9

]]> By: TheChoj http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9973 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:51:47 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9973 Report this morning out of Minn. – Favre tells Vikings he’s not returning

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/03/report-favre-tells-vikings-hes-not-returning/

all I can say is WOO HOO!

]]> By: Nick http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/lb-movement-afoot/#comment-9972 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:25:46 +0000 http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=4886#comment-9972 A commentor on that article made a fantastic point about Matthews…if you get him some practice on the LOLB, he could get to the point where he could come from either side more fluently. Imagine the possibilities of mixing that up with defensive audibles….

I’ll admit, I dont know much about Hawk aside from I think he’s paid too much to do too little, but any issues with putting him on the outside and Bishop/Chillar in the middle with Barnett? That has a potential to be pretty potent.

]]>