McGinn: Hawk, Epitome of Mediocrity

[Tyrion Lannister]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...280436312.html

I could not agree more with McGinn.

I was just wondering why the Packers are having problems stopping the run up the middle, so with no date tonight, I went and rewatch a few "Shortcuts" of Packers victories this season (never record loses; too depressing). Shortcuts are where you can watch an entire game in 30 minutes

Hawk just can't shed blocks. Time and time again, teams ran at Hawk. Time and time again, an offensive lineman swallowed Hawk like a hawk swallowing a sparrow. A guy like Urlacher would've seen it coming a mile away and shot through a gap and tackle the runner for -5 before a lineman even got off his fat ass.

There's nothing to talk about Hawk's coverage ability. He sucks in coverage. Period.

Hawk, in his prime, was average at best. Now he has lost a step. The Packers need 2 new starting ILB, imho.

[channtheman]

Hawk's problem is that he is so assignment sure that he actually initiates the guy on the offense who is supposed to block him because "he's supposed to block me" thinks Hawk. I've actually seen plays where Hawk was going to be right where the RB is and instead of breaking down and attacking the RB he dove at the lineman's knees that was supposed to block him and took himself out of the play. Time and time again, I've seen Hawk take on a blocker like he was on offense. It's like he doesn't understand that he is supposed to shed the block and tackle the RB.

[Tyrion Lannister]

I've actually seen plays where Hawk was going to be right where the RB is and instead of breaking down and attacking the RB he dove at the lineman's knees that was supposed to block him and took himself out of the play. Time and time again, I've seen Hawk take on a blocker like he was on offense. It's like he doesn't understand that he is supposed to shed the block and tackle the RB.

Saw plenty of that against the Saints.

Hawk sucks motherfucking balls and bigot dicks. He needs to take his lame ass back to Ohio and fuck up that fucking state like he's fucking up the Packers!!!!

I am fucking pissed!!!

[wist43]

We definitely need upgrades at both ILB positions, but of course 1265 doesn't agree.

I reluctantly signed off on the Hawk pick b/c I figured he at least wouldn't be a bust, but he's underperformed even what I expected. Most Packerrats expected he'd be a probowler, but I just didn't see it. He had great stats in college, but when I watched him in college he didn't look dynamic at all. He garbaged into sacks, and he looked average in every way to me - he's proven to be just that as a pro.

I wanted Vernon Davis or Ngata in that draft as I remember, and both have been much better than Hawk. Hawk hasn't been a bust per se, but you need to get more out of a #5 pick. Hopefully both he and Brad Jones will be gone next year, and we can start over at ILB.

[Fritz]

We definitely need upgrades at both ILB positions, but of course 1265 doesn't agree.

I reluctantly signed off on the Hawk pick b/c I figured he at least wouldn't be a bust, but he's underperformed even what I expected. Most Packerrats expected he'd be a probowler, but I just didn't see it. He had great stats in college, but when I watched him in college he didn't look dynamic at all. He garbaged into sacks, and he looked average in every way to me - he's proven to be just that as a pro.

I wanted Vernon Davis or Ngata in that draft as I remember, and both have been much better than Hawk. Hawk hasn't been a bust per se, but you need to get more out of a #5 pick. Hopefully both he and Brad Jones will be gone next year, and we can start over at ILB.

Uh, even morose McGinn understands that the Packer execs know an upgrade at ILB is needed - both Shazier and Mosely are mentioned in the article. Your insistence that somehow the Packer front office walks around saying "yeah, we're happy to be mediocre on defense" is not only preposterous but takes away from some of the decent points you try to make.

I think the front office understands Hawk's value and his limitations, and I don't think if they had a chance they'd somehow pass on the opportunity to put a better player than he is in that spot. They've been spending their draft resources on other areas, though sadly the last few first rounders have not played up to what I'd consider a first-round status.

But any knucklehead could write an article lamenting a weak position on a football team, and point out examples of players from other teams that are way better.

But every team's resources are limited, so it's really not very helpful to say that the Packers, or any team, shoulda coulda got these other players. Sure, but if they'd, say, traded up to get Shazier or Mosely, there'd be no Clinton-Dix.

No, the Packer inside linebackers aren't very good. But I highly doubt that the Packer front office is content and happy and wouldn't want anyone else.

[Carolina_Packer]

Uh, even morose McGinn understands that the Packer execs know an upgrade at ILB is needed - both Shazier and Mosely are mentioned in the article. Your insistence that somehow the Packer front office walks around saying "yeah, we're happy to be mediocre on defense" is not only preposterous but takes away from some of the decent points you try to make.

I think the front office understands Hawk's value and his limitations, and I don't think if they had a chance they'd somehow pass on the opportunity to put a better player than he is in that spot. They've been spending their draft resources on other areas, though sadly the last few first rounders have not played up to what I'd consider a first-round status.

But any knucklehead could write an article lamenting a weak position on a football team, and point out examples of players from other teams that are way better.

But every team's resources are limited, so it's really not very helpful to say that the Packers, or any team, shoulda coulda got these other players. Sure, but if they'd, say, traded up to get Shazier or Mosely, there'd be no Clinton-Dix.

No, the Packer inside linebackers aren't very good. But I highly doubt that the Packer front office is content and happy and wouldn't want anyone else.

I think the front office never tries to outspend what turn out to be mistakes, meaning, if they sign a guy to an extension and he doesn't grade out to the level they are paying him, they don't just kick him to the curb and bring in a free agent like some teams do. Like it or not, TT is never going to swing for the fence on free agent signings because I think he views one of his core jobs as GM is to keep the salary cap situation healthy and flexible. That said, I agree with Fritz that they know it's time to move on from what they have, and they'll do that in their deliberate, non-splashy, player development way. They are probably still wondering if Sam Barrington has the goods to take over, instead of some teams who might spend a boat load on a FA ILB.

[Zool]

I reluctantly signed off on the Hawk pick b/c I figured he at least wouldn't be a bust

I'm just glad they asked for your opinion.

[wist43]

I'm just glad they asked for your opinion.

Sand in your vagina??

[Fosco33]

Hawk may bring leadership/vet appeal and communication. But I've been saying for a long time here that he's a soft pillow for opponents to land on. There are way too many plays where he takes a bad angle and his coverage is poor at best.

If they found the magic pony of leadership and upgraded athleticism - I think the brass would've done so by now.

[Zool]

Sand in your vagina??

Head too large to use doors?

[red]

And here we all are talking about how we needed to "draft" an ILB in order to upgrade the position

Like there are no other means available to us to upgrade the position

Btw. We are currently sitting on almost 8 million in free cap space

[Fritz]

And here we all are talking about how we needed to "draft" an ILB in order to upgrade the position

Like there are no other means available to us to upgrade the position

Btw. We are currently sitting on almost 8 million in free cap space

Okay, Red. Give us the names of the players this past offseason you'd have signed.

[red]

Okay, Red. Give us the names of the players this past offseason you'd have signed.

I have no clue, but seeings how we have two of the worst ILBs in the game, it couldnt have been to hard to find an upgrade.

Im not saying we had to sign a kuecley or a ray lewis, but trying to bring in competion or someone other then the crap we had would have been nice.

Mcginn justbnamed a handfullnof players that i have never heard of, who are all (in his opinion) playing better then our two.

We didnt even try to upgrade the position, the one guy they drafted they kept saying was an OLB and nothing more. That leads me to believe the coaches and GM think we are "just fine" at that position

[George Cumby]

Yup. Mediocre but always available. Not exactly cutting edge journalism, Bob.

[KYPack]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...280436312.html

I could not agree more with McGinn.

I was just wondering why the Packers are having problems stopping the run up the middle, so with no date tonight, I went and rewatch a few "Shortcuts" of Packers victories this season (never record loses; too depressing). Shortcuts are where you can watch an entire game in 30 minutes

Hawk just can't shed blocks. Time and time again, teams ran at Hawk. Time and time again, an offensive lineman swallowed Hawk like a hawk swallowing a sparrow. A guy like Urlacher would've seen it coming a mile away and shot through a gap and tackle the runner for -5 before a lineman even got off his fat ass.

There's nothing to talk about Hawk's coverage ability. He sucks in coverage. Period.

Hawk, in his prime, was average at best. Now he has lost a step. The Packers need 2 new starting ILB, imho.

We all knew it was you Tank, when you first signed on here.

Stay within yer little confines or you'll be blown outta here like a watermelon seed.

[Maxie the Taxi]

When Brad Jones wore the communication helmet, he played every down. Now that Hawk wears it, he plays every down. So your two weakest links play every down. Why? Now we're set to play a team with the best tight end in football. I guarantee NO will find a way to isolate him over the middle on the slowest LB in football...who will ALWAYS be in the game.

There is a lot about this modern game I don't understand.

[Fritz]

Apparently the smartest players are also some of the slowest and least athletic.

Can't they put Hawk on the sideline and let him wear the headset, then scream shit out to the guys on the field?

But wait...who would play? Barrington and Lattimore? That'd be spooky in its own right.

I sure hope there's some college kid out there who plays inside linebacker in a 3-4 who is waiting to be a Packer.

And speaking of, I wonder if Carl Bradford is progressing at all.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Hawk, in his prime, was average at best. Now he has lost a step. The Packers need 2 new starting ILB, imho.

I think Hawk had his best season ever last year, if my memory can be trusted. It is possible that this season is start of decline, not sure. Packers won Super Bowl with in 2010, and he was generally worse as a young player, IMO.

Hawk is a JAG this year, sure, it would be nice to upgrade him.

[red]

Or how bout "gasp" trading one of our precious draft picks for one

Im sure one of our 2 3rd round picks we threw away in the last draft could have been swungfor an upgrade

[Bretsky]

Or how bout "gasp" trading one of our precious draft picks for one

Im sure one of our 2 3rd round picks we threw away in the last draft could have been swungfor an upgrade

I know you were a hater but Chris Borland hasn't looked bad. 18 Tackles last week. Rock solid guy and great leader. Many of his Badger teammates called him last week to congratulate him on a great game....however...he misread a play that resulted in the final TD for the Rams...so he was very bummed out/unhappy about his performance. Nice interviews on ESPN 1070 in Madison