Chew on this Hawk Lovers!

[rbaloha1]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/65380942.html

[rbaloha1]

Hey Waldo what does your "film study" show? Please share with the rest of us idiots including Coach Moss.

[Lurker64]

Hawk doesn't play in Nickel. When you play basically the entire game in nickel, Hawk doesn't play much. That's not an indictment of the player, it's just a weird accident of situational packages.

We played all but nine snaps last week in either a nickel or dime package, including quite a few snaps in a 3-2-6. Of course your best run stopping LB isn't going to play in those situations.

You're not going to play all but 9 snaps in a game in nickel against a decent team, it was just a weird accident of playing a very bad team who was playing from behind for essentially the entire game.

Hawk is a freakishly reliable player, you want him on the field for every single snap in the base defense. In subpackages, you want specialists, but there's no ILB I want on the field more than Hawk in the base.

[Partial]

Completely disagree Lurker. They're going to play that much nickel because it puts their best players on the field.

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him. Winstan Moss basically said he is not playing as good as Chillar and Barnett.

[b bulldog]

Partial, great post, agree 100%

[sheepshead]

Are there really "Hawk Lovers"...maybe just guys that think he's not a total bust?

[SkinBasket]

Some of you buttlickers need to remember what it was like to have Paris Lenon, Fred Strickland, or Bernardo Harris on the field before you go calling guys talentless or busts.

[Deputy Nutz]

Completely disagree Lurker. They're going to play that much nickel because it puts their best players on the field.

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him. Winstan Moss basically said he is not playing as good as Chillar and Barnett.

You are the king of secondary sources. I guess you have to be when you don't understand what you are watching..

[Bretsky]

Hey Waldo what does your "film study" show? Please share with the rest of us idiots including Coach Moss.


Goes without saying that it's not cool to call other posters out

Barry Sanders

[Bretsky]

Are there really "Hawk Lovers"...maybe just guys that think he's not a total bust?

VERY valid post
I don't think there are any Hawk Lovers left
I think we're all disappointed

At minimum the coaches choose to have Barnett and Chillar on the field over Hawk in these packages. The article also points out that Barnett is making plays outside of his assignments where Hawk perhaps has not. I think Hawk use to play in the Nickel.

Good post by Skin in that all of these guys are better than some of the yahoos we've had in the past.

[SkinBasket]

Hey Waldo what does your "film study" show? Please share with the rest of us idiots including Coach Moss.


Goes without saying that it's not cool to call other posters out

Barry Sanders

It's especially not cool when you read articles by writers who are widely considered far less talented in their craft than any of the players on the Packer roster are at theirs, and you put that up against someone who breaks down games properly and comes to their own conclusions. I'm sure for how much thought Waldo's put into his research, he's big enough to accept that some people will be haters for the sake of being haters though.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I'll admit, I'm a Hawk lover. I think he's not being fully used to his full capabilities. It's tough to get better at something if you're not being given the opportunity to do that task. The fewer plays you are in, the more exaggerated any poor performance gets.

I don't blame him for being pissed off. I just hope he starts taking it out on the field and blows somebody up and plays with a chip on his shoulder the rest of the year.

[Zool]

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him.

Bishop

[mission]

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him.

Bishop

Perfect.

[sharpe1027]

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him.

Bishop

Hilarious.

[The Shadow]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

[sharpe1027]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

Captain Etienne Navarre

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089457/

[Partial]

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him.

Bishop

Well played. It's an anomaly. I simply do not get it.

[pbmax]

Completely disagree Lurker. They're going to play that much nickel because it puts their best players on the field.
Your point is ludicrous. If the Packers think Chillar is that much better overall than Hawk, then why isn't he in the base Defense?

[pbmax]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

Captain Etienne Navarre

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089457/
Thank you for retrieving a part of my childhood there.

[Noodle]

Coach Moss's observations about Hawk are pretty hard to argue with. Assignment sure? Yes. But inspired play? No.

No way is Hawk a JAG. He is a solid, but profoundly unspectacular player.

And it seems to me that his "good at a lot, but great at nothing" skill set would be far better suited to a 4-3, where an LB generally has to be more of a generalist than a specialist.

So, unless Barnett or Chillar get nicked, I'm thinking that his future with the Pack this year is not bright.

[cheesner]

I am hoping Hawk getting upset and pissed off is going to help him play with a little more tenacity.

I was a big Hawk fan and was expecting him to be the face of the defense for the next decade. I am disappointed that he isn't the playmaker. I do appreciate his play as being solid - but just had much bigger expectations.

There is an excuse for every season. First he was adjusting to the pro game. 2nd sophmore slump - not enough help on the DL. 3rd injury. 4th adjusting to 3-4. But then a rookie comes in and has a big impact and then I am left with the feeling of 'enough excuses'. What is especially confusing is that the guy makes big plays in practice all the time. Why doesn't it translate to Sundays?

[rbaloha1]

Hey Waldo what does your "film study" show? Please share with the rest of us idiots including Coach Moss.


Goes without saying that it's not cool to call other posters out

Barry Sanders

Noted. I apologize. Hawk is not a bust but a disappointment.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Completely disagree Lurker. They're going to play that much nickel because it puts their best players on the field.

If Hawk was playing well, they'd find a way to play him. Winstan Moss basically said he is not playing as good as Chillar and Barnett.

You are the king of secondary sources. I guess you have to be when you don't watch..

Fixed

[Freak Out]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

Captain Etienne Navarre

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089457/

Rutger rocks.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Spetters.

Nothing like a good homo gang rape scene.

[Tony Oday]

I am still a huge fan of Hawk. I like the way he approaches the game and think he would do what is best for the team. He is, to steal the term, "Packer People"

[Brandon494]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

[PackerTimer]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

I don't buy this at all. Never have. Coaches and GM's have way too much at stake to keep playing a guy they believe is inferior becuase they drafted him higher. Maybe for a year or two but not once the guy is in his fourth year.

Take Brohm and Flynn as an example. Brohm's higher draft status isn't getting him anything. Face it the coaches believe and are probably right that Hawk is better than Bishop. Period. It doesn't matter when he was drafted. That doesn't mean Hawk is great, it just means he's better than Bishop. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Bishop is just not as good as you believe he is.

[Zool]

But thats impossible. Bishop blew up 3rd and 4th stringers. He must be good.

All kidding aside, if he really was that good, he'd be playing. He just isnt.

[sharpe1027]

But thats impossible. Bishop blew up 3rd and 4th stringers. He must be good.

All kidding aside, if he really was that good, he'd be playing. He just isnt.

Coaches have been wrong before, but fans always like the guy sitting on the bench...or the guy available in free agency. Most of the time the fans end up being wrong.

[mmmdk]

Are there really "Hawk Lovers"...maybe just guys that think he's not a total bust?

VERY valid post
I don't think there are any Hawk Lovers left
I think we're all disappointed

At minimum the coaches choose to have Barnett and Chillar on the field over Hawk in these packages. The article also points out that Barnett is making plays outside of his assignments where Hawk perhaps has not. I think Hawk use to play in the Nickel.

Good post by Skin in that all of these guys are better than some of the yahoos we've had in the past.

*looking at my authentic [away] Hawk jersey* and I feel like a change is coming. :drma: Packer Pro Shop beware!!!

[Brandon494]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

I don't buy this at all. Never have. Coaches and GM's have way too much at stake to keep playing a guy they believe is inferior becuase they drafted him higher. Maybe for a year or two but not once the guy is in his fourth year.

Take Brohm and Flynn as an example. Brohm's higher draft status isn't getting him anything. Face it the coaches believe and are probably right that Hawk is better than Bishop. Period. It doesn't matter when he was drafted. That doesn't mean Hawk is great, it just means he's better than Bishop. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Bishop is just not as good as you believe he is.

Hawk played OLB until we switched to the 3-4 this season and Bishop was not going to jump Barnett for the starting MLB job. So far in the 3-4 Hawk has made NO plays! When Bishop has gotten playing time he has shown he can make plays. Yes he is not as good in coverage as Hawk but he is a better 3-4 ILB IMO. I like Hawk as a person because he does the right thing and works his ass off BUT he just isnt that good. I want playmakers on defense and Hawk is far from a playmaker.

[bobblehead]

Completely disagree Lurker. They're going to play that much nickel because it puts their best players on the field.
Your point is ludicrous. If the Packers think Chillar is that much better overall than Hawk, then why isn't he in the base Defense?

Because in reality Hawk is SLIGHTLY better than Chillar against the run (or maybe equal) and letting him play those snaps keeps him happy and keeps Chillar fresh to do what he does best?

That is just one of about 5 answers that came to mind, but the most likely.

Look, I'll crow a bit, I went head to head with waldo on this when most of you panty wastes were scared to question him. I like Waldo, very good insightful poster, but we all whiff on an occassional stance/prediction. I've had my share of having to eat crow, we all do, but the reality is that last year Chillar was the best linebacker on the field and second best before Barnett got hurt....this year he is the 4th best on the field....Anyone who is still denying the truth has a different agenda.

[ND72]

so obviously I have to speak up...maybe it's because I do love Hawk, or maybe it's because I'm going as him for Halloween, EITHER WAY, I'm still on board. That being said, there are lots of kids I coach that I see what they can do, but doesn't mean I'm happy with how they are doing it. The first few games, I saw a different AJ Hawk than I have before. He was playing with passion, and was flying to the ball, and was in on almost every running play a team threw at us.

I haven't been real happy with Dom Capers defense so far...which has nothing to do with Hawk. Against St. Louis, our "run stuffing" defense was the 2-5-4 defense. I'm sorry, but against a power running team, I do NOT want Jolly and Jenkins as my only 2 DL guys sucking up blocks, that means MOST of the blocks are being ate up by LB's and DB's are then asked to make the plays. Which also meant Kampman & Poop/Matthews essentially became blocking dumbies as they had to eat up blocks as well.

I still think Hawk's best days are yet to come. Ask Barnett. He finally got to a point in 2007 where you saw what he could be. He understood our defense, he had been in it a while, and it was starting to show in his play. Hawk comes in as a rookie, 2nd year things start looking good, 3rd year he's hurt, the entire team is hurt, Bob Sanders proves he's an idiot, and Hawk is playing in numerous different positions. Now he's in a new defense again.

Do I wish Hawk was making more noticeable plays? hell yes! But sometimes the best LB's just simply make tackles, and not much more. New England had a ton of them for years. The only reason anyone knew who Vrable was, was because he caught TD's on offense, on defense he has been a stud for years, because all he does is make tackles.

I have to agree with the one poster...do you remember the days of Paris Lenon, Bernardo Harris, and anyone else??? we are spoiled now...simple as that. We expect guys to make a play everytime they are on the field. We have a damn fine LB corp right now, and the more we learn how to use Kampman, and everyone else, the better we're going to be. Hawk will be on the field a lot more this year, I guarantee it.

[SkinBasket]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines.

SHOWTIME!!!

If we don't come away with 6 INTs, 10 FF, 5+ recoveries, 10 TFL, 25 passes defensed, and 12 sacks per game, our defense is obviously a disappointment.

[Brandon494]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines.

SHOWTIME!!!

If we don't come away with 6 INTs, 10 FF, 5+ recoveries, 10 TFL, 25 passes defensed, and 12 sacks per game, our defense is obviously a disappointment.

Yea thats exactly what I said. :roll:

If you read the damn article you would have seen that so far this season Hawk ranks eighth on the team with 21 tackles and has yet to produce a sack or a tackle for a loss or deflected a pass. I'm sorry that I expect more from our starting ILB who was the #5 pick overall.

[Lurker64]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

[Brandon494]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

:bs:

[bobblehead]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

I disagree. The main point of contention is that Hawk is so sure fired, never out of position and never driven off the ball. Many times over the years I see him get plowed by full backs or look clueless making sure he contains the outside when no one is blocking him instead of dropping down on a runner that cuts inside of him.

He is assignment sure, but he fails at that assignment more often than people seem to realize.

I love Hawk as far as attitude and prep, he is packer people, but he isn't anything other than a slightly below average NFL starting lineback or above average bench player.

[Partial]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

I don't buy this at all. Never have. Coaches and GM's have way too much at stake to keep playing a guy they believe is inferior becuase they drafted him higher. Maybe for a year or two but not once the guy is in his fourth year.

Take Brohm and Flynn as an example. Brohm's higher draft status isn't getting him anything. Face it the coaches believe and are probably right that Hawk is better than Bishop. Period. It doesn't matter when he was drafted. That doesn't mean Hawk is great, it just means he's better than Bishop. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Bishop is just not as good as you believe he is.

Brohm wasn't a top 5 pick and he was exponentially worse than Hawk. Hawk is not bad, he is okay at everything. Okay is not good enough in this D. Brohm was just all-around bad.

We have no idea what he have in Bish but in his limited action he has had game changing plays, something this defense needs.

[Brandon494]

I love Hawk as far as attitude and prep, he is packer people, but he isn't anything other than a slightly below average NFL starting lineback or above average bench player.

+1


Brohm wasn't a top 5 pick and he was exponentially worse than Hawk. Hawk is not bad, he is okay at everything. Okay is not good enough in this D. Brohm was just all-around bad.

We have no idea what he have in Bish but in his limited action he has had game changing plays, something this defense needs.

+1

[Partial]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

I completely disagree. I think you're taking a mighty big leap. Is Chillar still the situational player when he is playing exponentially more than Hawk? I definitely view it as Hawk is the situational player right now.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think Hawk sleeps in a oxygen bubble. I think he needs to get off the bubble and on regular air. Then he'll come around.

[Partial]

so obviously I have to speak up...maybe it's because I do love Hawk, or maybe it's because I'm going as him for Halloween, EITHER WAY, I'm still on board. That being said, there are lots of kids I coach that I see what they can do, but doesn't mean I'm happy with how they are doing it. The first few games, I saw a different AJ Hawk than I have before. He was playing with passion, and was flying to the ball, and was in on almost every running play a team threw at us.

I haven't been real happy with Dom Capers defense so far...which has nothing to do with Hawk. Against St. Louis, our "run stuffing" defense was the 2-5-4 defense. I'm sorry, but against a power running team, I do NOT want Jolly and Jenkins as my only 2 DL guys sucking up blocks, that means MOST of the blocks are being ate up by LB's and DB's are then asked to make the plays. Which also meant Kampman & Poop/Matthews essentially became blocking dumbies as they had to eat up blocks as well.

I still think Hawk's best days are yet to come. Ask Barnett. He finally got to a point in 2007 where you saw what he could be. He understood our defense, he had been in it a while, and it was starting to show in his play. Hawk comes in as a rookie, 2nd year things start looking good, 3rd year he's hurt, the entire team is hurt, Bob Sanders proves he's an idiot, and Hawk is playing in numerous different positions. Now he's in a new defense again.

Do I wish Hawk was making more noticeable plays? hell yes! But sometimes the best LB's just simply make tackles, and not much more. New England had a ton of them for years. The only reason anyone knew who Vrable was, was because he caught TD's on offense, on defense he has been a stud for years, because all he does is make tackles.

I have to agree with the one poster...do you remember the days of Paris Lenon, Bernardo Harris, and anyone else??? we are spoiled now...simple as that. We expect guys to make a play everytime they are on the field. We have a damn fine LB corp right now, and the more we learn how to use Kampman, and everyone else, the better we're going to be. Hawk will be on the field a lot more this year, I guarantee it.

Good post.

That said, Vraebel was in competition for defensive player of the year two years ago, wasn't he? I seem to recall hearing this.

The thing about Barnett is he always showed the athletic ability to make plays. It appears that Hawk has lost his speed and that is why he has become a worse player.

Statistically, back when he was quick and agile his rookie year, he rated by Scouts Inc as the best LB in coverage in the NFL if I remember correctly. I swear Harvey posted this numerous times or something to this general effect.

Once Barnett learned to play downhill, he became a manimal. Hawk just doesn't have the manimal attitude that Barnett has in my opinion. He just doesn't have the speed/tenancity/length to shed blocks.

[PackerTimer]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

I don't buy this at all. Never have. Coaches and GM's have way too much at stake to keep playing a guy they believe is inferior becuase they drafted him higher. Maybe for a year or two but not once the guy is in his fourth year.

Take Brohm and Flynn as an example. Brohm's higher draft status isn't getting him anything. Face it the coaches believe and are probably right that Hawk is better than Bishop. Period. It doesn't matter when he was drafted. That doesn't mean Hawk is great, it just means he's better than Bishop. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Bishop is just not as good as you believe he is.

Brohm wasn't a top 5 pick and he was exponentially worse than Hawk. Hawk is not bad, he is okay at everything. Okay is not good enough in this D. Brohm was just all-around bad.

We have no idea what he have in Bish but in his limited action he has had game changing plays, something this defense needs.

I agree Hawk hasn't been great this year, I hope he starts playing much much better. But he is better than Bishop. If he wasn't Bishop would be playing ahead of him. The honeymoon period for him as a #5 pick is over, otherwise Chillar wouldn't be getting time in front of him. The reason Bishop isn't playing has nothing to do with Hawks draft status. It's simply that Hawk, warts and all, is better.

[Partial]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

I don't buy this at all. Never have. Coaches and GM's have way too much at stake to keep playing a guy they believe is inferior becuase they drafted him higher. Maybe for a year or two but not once the guy is in his fourth year.

Take Brohm and Flynn as an example. Brohm's higher draft status isn't getting him anything. Face it the coaches believe and are probably right that Hawk is better than Bishop. Period. It doesn't matter when he was drafted. That doesn't mean Hawk is great, it just means he's better than Bishop. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Bishop is just not as good as you believe he is.

Brohm wasn't a top 5 pick and he was exponentially worse than Hawk. Hawk is not bad, he is okay at everything. Okay is not good enough in this D. Brohm was just all-around bad.

We have no idea what he have in Bish but in his limited action he has had game changing plays, something this defense needs.

I agree Hawk hasn't been great this year, I hope he starts playing much much better. But he is better than Bishop. If he wasn't Bishop would be playing ahead of him. The honeymoon period for him as a #5 pick is over, otherwise Chillar wouldn't be getting time in front of him. The reason Bishop isn't playing has nothing to do with Hawks draft status. It's simply that Hawk, warts and all, is better.

How can you say this? Based upon what? Hawk didn't make any plays in PS either, while Bishop was making plays. Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

It's impossible to say who is better at this point as we don't have enough data to compare. I find it very hard to believe that Bishop couldn't do what Hawk does in a typical game.

[SkinBasket]

If you read the damn article you would have seen that so far this season Hawk ranks eighth on the team with 21 tackles and has yet to produce a sack or a tackle for a loss or deflected a pass. I'm sorry that I expect more from our starting ILB who was the #5 pick overall.

Maybe your expectations shouldn't be based on where a guy is drafted. That might help with some of your disappointment. Unless you're also disappointed that Donald Driver hasn't played the way a 7th round pick should play. But I accept your apology regardless.

[Brandon494]

Maybe your expectations shouldn't be based on where a guy is drafted. That might help with some of your disappointment. Unless you're also disappointed that Donald Driver hasn't played the way a 7th round pick should play. But I accept your apology regardless.

Come on man, your just making yourself look stupid now. :eyes:

[PackerTimer]

so obviously I have to speak up...maybe it's because I do love Hawk, or maybe it's because I'm going as him for Halloween, EITHER WAY, I'm still on board. That being said, there are lots of kids I coach that I see what they can do, but doesn't mean I'm happy with how they are doing it. The first few games, I saw a different AJ Hawk than I have before. He was playing with passion, and was flying to the ball, and was in on almost every running play a team threw at us.

I haven't been real happy with Dom Capers defense so far...which has nothing to do with Hawk. Against St. Louis, our "run stuffing" defense was the 2-5-4 defense. I'm sorry, but against a power running team, I do NOT want Jolly and Jenkins as my only 2 DL guys sucking up blocks, that means MOST of the blocks are being ate up by LB's and DB's are then asked to make the plays. Which also meant Kampman & Poop/Matthews essentially became blocking dumbies as they had to eat up blocks as well.

I still think Hawk's best days are yet to come. Ask Barnett. He finally got to a point in 2007 where you saw what he could be. He understood our defense, he had been in it a while, and it was starting to show in his play. Hawk comes in as a rookie, 2nd year things start looking good, 3rd year he's hurt, the entire team is hurt, Bob Sanders proves he's an idiot, and Hawk is playing in numerous different positions. Now he's in a new defense again.

Do I wish Hawk was making more noticeable plays? hell yes! But sometimes the best LB's just simply make tackles, and not much more. New England had a ton of them for years. The only reason anyone knew who Vrable was, was because he caught TD's on offense, on defense he has been a stud for years, because all he does is make tackles.

I have to agree with the one poster...do you remember the days of Paris Lenon, Bernardo Harris, and anyone else??? we are spoiled now...simple as that. We expect guys to make a play everytime they are on the field. We have a damn fine LB corp right now, and the more we learn how to use Kampman, and everyone else, the better we're going to be. Hawk will be on the field a lot more this year, I guarantee it.

Good post.

That said, Vraebel was in competition for defensive player of the year two years ago, wasn't he? I seem to recall hearing this.

The thing about Barnett is he always showed the athletic ability to make plays. It appears that Hawk has lost his speed and that is why he has become a worse player.

Statistically, back when he was quick and agile his rookie year, he rated by Scouts Inc as the best LB in coverage in the NFL if I remember correctly. I swear Harvey posted this numerous times or something to this general effect.

Once Barnett learned to play downhill, he became a manimal. Hawk just doesn't have the manimal attitude that Barnett has in my opinion. He just doesn't have the speed/tenancity/length to shed blocks.

I'm hoping that Hawk starts playing much better. I'm hoping that part of his problem this year is that he's trying to make sure he does what he needs that he isn't, as Moss said, making plays or moving outside of his responsibility to make plays. I sure hope he does. I think he has the ability to do it, he just isn't performing great over the last year and half. I think we all hope he does a nice little 180 for us.

[Brandon494]

BTW has AJ Hawk ever made one game changing play in his career as a Packer? I really can't think of one, not trying to flame the guy but if anyone can think of one please post.

[SkinBasket]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

[SkinBasket]

Maybe your expectations shouldn't be based on where a guy is drafted. That might help with some of your disappointment. Unless you're also disappointed that Donald Driver hasn't played the way a 7th round pick should play. But I accept your apology regardless.

Come on man, your just making yourself look stupid now. :eyes:

I'm sorry, I guess this is what passes for an argument with you. I should have considered that before posting actual words:

:bs:

[PackerTimer]

Tired of fans trying to defend Hawk saying he is solid. Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines. If Bishop and Hawk were both drafted in the 3rd round its no doubt Bishop would be getting more playing time then Hawk.

I don't buy this at all. Never have. Coaches and GM's have way too much at stake to keep playing a guy they believe is inferior becuase they drafted him higher. Maybe for a year or two but not once the guy is in his fourth year.

Take Brohm and Flynn as an example. Brohm's higher draft status isn't getting him anything. Face it the coaches believe and are probably right that Hawk is better than Bishop. Period. It doesn't matter when he was drafted. That doesn't mean Hawk is great, it just means he's better than Bishop. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Bishop is just not as good as you believe he is.

Brohm wasn't a top 5 pick and he was exponentially worse than Hawk. Hawk is not bad, he is okay at everything. Okay is not good enough in this D. Brohm was just all-around bad.

We have no idea what he have in Bish but in his limited action he has had game changing plays, something this defense needs.

I agree Hawk hasn't been great this year, I hope he starts playing much much better. But he is better than Bishop. If he wasn't Bishop would be playing ahead of him. The honeymoon period for him as a #5 pick is over, otherwise Chillar wouldn't be getting time in front of him. The reason Bishop isn't playing has nothing to do with Hawks draft status. It's simply that Hawk, warts and all, is better.

How can you say this? Based upon what? Hawk didn't make any plays in PS either, while Bishop was making plays. Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

It's impossible to say who is better at this point as we don't have enough data to compare. I find it very hard to believe that Bishop couldn't do what Hawk does in a typical game.

Bishop didn't make many plays last year that I recall. I recall him blowing an awful lot of assignments thought. Hell maybe I'm wrong. He's made plays against other fringe NFL players. If Hawk was out against third and fourth string players he'd probably light the world up too. You are right, we don't have a lot to compare them, but coaches do. At a certain point you have to at least feel that if the coaches aren't playing a guy it's because he's not good enough to be out there. I agree that Hawks status as a #5 pick might have gotten him playing time early in his career but that just isn't the case anymore. No coach is going to hang on that long if somebody else behind Hawk is playing better. They have their jobs at stake. I just don't think Bishop is the better player than Hawk. I also don't think the coaches do.

[Partial]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?

[Brandon494]

Maybe your expectations shouldn't be based on where a guy is drafted. That might help with some of your disappointment. Unless you're also disappointed that Donald Driver hasn't played the way a 7th round pick should play. But I accept your apology regardless.

Come on man, your just making yourself look stupid now. :eyes:

I'm sorry, I guess this is what passes for an argument with you. I should have considered that before posting:

:bs:

Your trying to compare Hawk underachieving to Driver overachieving which made no sense of all. There is a reason Hawk only played 9 snaps against the Lions last week, maybe if you took a minute to watch him play instead of wacking off to his golden locks you would understand that dude is average at best. :bs:

[Brandon494]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?

Thats because Bigby would out and Capers didn't trust his replacements to blitz as much. Since Bigby has come back you saw Capers blitz a lot more in the Lions game just as he did against the Bears. Bigby is a bigger part of his defense then some may realize, mainly because the lack of depth we have at safety.

[get louder at lambeau]

Why is it that so many Packer fans are being such negative douchebags lately? "Chew On This Hawk Lovers!"?!? Save the hate for the Bears and Vikes. They need it.

[Noodle]

BTW has AJ Hawk ever made one game changing play in his career as a Packer? I really can't think of one, not trying to flame the guy but if anyone can think of one please post.

The first Chicago game last year, when Hawk made his fiirst start at Mike in place of Barnett, he was a game changer.

But I haven't seen a game like that from him since then.

[rbaloha1]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

B.S. You need to force turnovers. The best NFL defenses force turnovers. In fact there is a direct correlation in turnover margin and winning.

[MJZiggy]

Why is it that so many Packer fans are being such negative douchebags lately? "Chew On This Hawk Lovers!"?!? Save the hate for the Bears and Vikes. They need it.
Good point. Where's Baddestbear?

[rbaloha1]

Why is it that so many Packer fans are being such negative douchebags lately? "Chew On This Hawk Lovers!"?!? Save the hate for the Bears and Vikes. They need it.

Its not about hate -- its pure comedy to read the Hawk Lovers defend him after Coach Moss has publicly challenged him 2 years in a row.

[mission]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

Can you stop posting in absolutes when you have absolutely no clue what the fuck you're talking about? We don't blitz anymore?

At some point you have to decide to slow your posting rate in direct proportion to the % of each Packer game you actually WATCH.

What a joke... dude doesn't even watch the last game and knows exactly what we're doing on defense.

Let me tell you something: You don't.

[falco]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

Can you stop posting in absolutes when you have absolutely no clue what the fuck you're talking about? We don't blitz anymore?

At some point you have to decide to slow your posting rate in direct proportion to the % of each Packer game you actually WATCH.

What a joke... dude doesn't even watch the last game and knows exactly what we're doing on defense.

Let me tell you something: You don't.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Tony Oday]

In fact, Moss said that if Hawk's low snap totals continue, the Packers will find a way to get Hawk on the field more, because they believe in him.

"That's obviously something we'll have to address," Moss said.



Well it kind of sounds like th coaching staff is behing the Hawk...

[get louder at lambeau]

In fact, Moss said that if Hawk's low snap totals continue, the Packers will find a way to get Hawk on the field more, because they believe in him.

"That's obviously something we'll have to address," Moss said.



Well it kind of sounds like th coaching staff is behing the Hawk...

Is that the part that Hawk lovers are supposed to chew on? The prospect of the coaches figuring out a way to get him on the field more because they believe in him? That's very nice.

[MJZiggy]

Eh, don't give Tony too hard a time. He's not the one who named the thread.

[Tony Oday]

In fact, Moss said that if Hawk's low snap totals continue, the Packers will find a way to get Hawk on the field more, because they believe in him.

"That's obviously something we'll have to address," Moss said.



Well it kind of sounds like th coaching staff is behing the Hawk...

Is that the part that Hawk lovers are supposed to chew on? The prospect of the coaches figuring out a way to get him on the field more because they believe in him? That's very nice.

so I am supposed to disregard the complimentary part of the article but take the criticism at face value?

[pbmax]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

B.S. You need to force turnovers. The best NFL defenses force turnovers. In fact there is a direct correlation in turnover margin and winning.
Yes, but that correlation isn't as seamless as you might believe. Teams can be successful causing more turnovers year after year (or coughing up fewer on offense). But what isn't in your control is recovering loose balls. Once the ball is loose, its a crapshoot who recovers it. The numbers are clear that even the best teams are forcing fumbles do not recover them at the same rates each year. And overall recovery rates for a team bounce around 50%.

So there are some games where you are not going to get a turnover to come your way. If you aren't assignment sure, then you are going to get your ass handed to you. You need both, cause some days are not going to go your way.

[pbmax]

Completely disagree Lurker. They're going to play that much nickel because it puts their best players on the field.
Your point is ludicrous. If the Packers think Chillar is that much better overall than Hawk, then why isn't he in the base Defense?

Because in reality Hawk is SLIGHTLY better than Chillar against the run (or maybe equal) and letting him play those snaps keeps him happy and keeps Chillar fresh to do what he does best?
So Partial believes coordinators call a defense to get the 11 best players out there regardless of position or skill set. You apparently believe coordinators hand out starting positions in base to keep players happy and fresh? I am not buying it.

Nor am I buying Chillar is a slightly worse run defender than Hawk. Chillar gets run over and cannot stop blockers from knocking him off the play and then getting to the next guy. On numerous occasions he gets steamrolled. In the article, the worst play mentioned of Hawk is a failure to get off the block to also make the tackle. Hawk on his worst play plays better run defense than Chillar.

I am not particular fan of Hawk. Other than his rookie year and the first game as MLB after Barnett got hurt, he has not seemed effective in any more than an average sense. Which is fine. But if we are taking out the starter for nickel, I would like that starter to be a demon in run defense. None of them are right now. I suspect that is why Capers has been concentrating his game plan the previous two weeks (Rams and Vikings) on stopping the run, because we aren't doing it well enough in the normal scheme.

Also, ND mentioned the Big Okie as out run defense versus the Rams. But I am pretty sure that took the place of the Packers nickle and was meant to both prepare for the pass and also the possibility of Jackson getting the handoff anyway. Similar to what we used to do with Levens.

[SkinBasket]

Maybe your expectations shouldn't be based on where a guy is drafted. That might help with some of your disappointment. Unless you're also disappointed that Donald Driver hasn't played the way a 7th round pick should play. But I accept your apology regardless.

Come on man, your just making yourself look stupid now. :eyes:

I'm sorry, I guess this is what passes for an argument with you. I should have considered that before posting:

:bs:

Your trying to compare Hawk underachieving to Driver overachieving which made no sense of all. There is a reason Hawk only played 9 snaps against the Lions last week, maybe if you took a minute to watch him play instead of wacking off to his golden locks you would understand that dude is average at best. :bs:

Excellent use of logic and reasoning. Your numbers are off and your logic is non-existent, but otherwise great effort. Really. Normally you guys bag my cans with my vegetables (and very slowly I might add), so I consider this an improvement.

[rbaloha1]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

B.S. You need to force turnovers. The best NFL defenses force turnovers. In fact there is a direct correlation in turnover margin and winning.
Yes, but that correlation isn't as seamless as you might believe. Teams can be successful causing more turnovers year after year (or coughing up fewer on offense). But what isn't in your control is recovering loose balls. Once the ball is loose, its a crapshoot who recovers it. The numbers are clear that even the best teams are forcing fumbles do not recover them at the same rates each year. And overall recovery rates for a team bounce around 50%.

So there are some games where you are not going to get a turnover to come your way. If you aren't assignment sure, then you are going to get your ass handed to you. You need both, cause some days are not going to go your way.

Not talking about potential turnovers but actual turnovers -- change of possessions.

Recall stats from the NFL stating that a +1 turnover margin correlates to at least a 75 per cent winning. +3 is over 90 per cent.

This not a read and react defense -- its an attacking defense designed to force turnovers and sacks -- not just Hawk fill your gap.

[pbmax]

Not talking about potential turnovers but actual turnovers -- change of possessions.

Recall stats from the NFL stating that a +1 turnover margin correlates to at least a 75 per cent winning. +3 is over 90 per cent.

This not a read and react defense -- its an attacking defense designed to force turnovers and sacks -- not just Hawk fill your gap.
I am talking about the same thing. You cannot teach a team, in a repeatable manner, to recover forced fumbles more often. You can teach them to force more fumbles. A team can also be adept at snagging INTs.

But the random chance factor of recovering a forced fumble means you will have games where the bounce doesn't go your way. So if for the season you are +12 or whatever, there will be games where you recover none.

At that point, rather than declare it a lost cause and give in to the probabilities, I would rather be assignment sure. As for read and react versus attack, this defense does both. Its reads the offenses protection and attacks the opposite side.

And I am sure describing a zone pass coverage looks more like read and react than attack.

[SkinBasket]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?

Thats because Bigby would out and Capers didn't trust his replacements to blitz as much. Since Bigby has come back you saw Capers blitz a lot more in the Lions game just as he did against the Bears. Bigby is a bigger part of his defense then some may realize, mainly because the lack of depth we have at safety.

I laughed. Then I cried. Then I laughed again. Then I puked, giggled, and cried some more. Thanks Branden420, you're a hoot.

Partial, you'll recall that Hawk struggled through two rather significant injuries and still changed positions to cover for Barnett, which in theory should have opened a vault load of opportunity for a player in Bishop's position - young, exciting, healthy, and having made an impression in the preseason - especially when Chillar kind of fucked the pooch and Poppinga struggled to do anything other than run in a straight line until he ran into someone - usually the back of a D lineman. Instead he came in, looked all jumpy and crazy, and seemed to short circuit. Bishop made some big hits two years ago in preseason. This year he looked nice against backups. But the guy obviously doesn't have the mental wiring needed yet. I really hope he figures shit out, because I like a guy who hits people, which is why I hate Barnett. And Chillar. And Poppinga. Until he figures out how to play defense, and not just run into people really hard, it looks like his opportunity will be limited.

[pbmax]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?
Since you didn't watch the game, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But I would check with your sources before you declare we didn't blitz against the Lions. You are about to get Patlerized.

[Brandon494]

I laughed. Then I cried. Then I laughed again. Then I puked, giggled, and cried some more. Thanks Branden420, you're a hoot.

:wow: :crazy:

[b bulldog]

Some stated that Hawk was already at his ceiling at O St., I think that assumption was dead on. He is ok but will never get a big contract in GB unless he starts to play as we would all want him to play. just a guy!

[Brandon494]

Some stated that Hawk was already at his ceiling at O St., I think that assumption was dead on. He is ok but will never get a big contract in GB unless he starts to play as we would all want him to play. just a guy!

Hawk wants to return to Packers next season

Regardless of his current role, linebacker A.J. Hawk says he would like to remain with the Packers beyond this season.

That decision, though, almost surely will come down to whether he’s willing to take a major pay cut from the $4.1 million he’s scheduled to make in base salary next year.

Hawk, who has played only in the Packers’ base defense the last two games, was on the field for only nine snaps against the Detroit Lions last week because defensive coordiator Dom Capers deployed nickel personnel most of the game.

It’s a given the Packers won’t bring back Hawk next year at that pay. They presumably would ask him to take a pay cut before releasing him, and if they do, it will be up to Hawk to accept their new offer or force them to cut him so he can sign with another club.

“I don’t know, if that happens we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” Hawk said of a pay cut. “I like it here. Definitely. Regardless of how many reps I’m getting right now I still want to be here. I’d much rather be not playing as much as I’d like on a good winning team and a solid organization than starting for a team going 2-14.”

-- Pete Dougherty, pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com

[rbaloha1]

Some stated that Hawk was already at his ceiling at O St., I think that assumption was dead on. He is ok but will never get a big contract in GB unless he starts to play as we would all want him to play. just a guy!

Hawk wants to return to Packers next season

Regardless of his current role, linebacker A.J. Hawk says he would like to remain with the Packers beyond this season.

That decision, though, almost surely will come down to whether he’s willing to take a major pay cut from the $4.1 million he’s scheduled to make in base salary next year.

Hawk, who has played only in the Packers’ base defense the last two games, was on the field for only nine snaps against the Detroit Lions last week because defensive coordiator Dom Capers deployed nickel personnel most of the game.

It’s a given the Packers won’t bring back Hawk next year at that pay. They presumably would ask him to take a pay cut before releasing him, and if they do, it will be up to Hawk to accept their new offer or force them to cut him so he can sign with another club.

“I don’t know, if that happens we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” Hawk said of a pay cut. “I like it here. Definitely. Regardless of how many reps I’m getting right now I still want to be here. I’d much rather be not playing as much as I’d like on a good winning team and a solid organization than starting for a team going 2-14.”

-- Pete Dougherty, pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com


Hawk at the NFL minimum is worth keeping.

[pbmax]

Some stated that Hawk was already at his ceiling at O St., I think that assumption was dead on. He is ok but will never get a big contract in GB unless he starts to play as we would all want him to play. just a guy!

Hawk wants to return to Packers next season

Regardless of his current role, linebacker A.J. Hawk says he would like to remain with the Packers beyond this season.

That decision, though, almost surely will come down to whether he’s willing to take a major pay cut from the $4.1 million he’s scheduled to make in base salary next year.

Hawk, who has played only in the Packers’ base defense the last two games, was on the field for only nine snaps against the Detroit Lions last week because defensive coordiator Dom Capers deployed nickel personnel most of the game.

It’s a given the Packers won’t bring back Hawk next year at that pay. They presumably would ask him to take a pay cut before releasing him, and if they do, it will be up to Hawk to accept their new offer or force them to cut him so he can sign with another club.

“I don’t know, if that happens we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” Hawk said of a pay cut. “I like it here. Definitely. Regardless of how many reps I’m getting right now I still want to be here. I’d much rather be not playing as much as I’d like on a good winning team and a solid organization than starting for a team going 2-14.”

-- Pete Dougherty, pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com
Not sure about this. Every year someone is deemed to be staring down the barrel of a pay cut ultimatum. Then it doesn't happen. First it was KGB. Then it was Harris. We heard TT would never pay more for Driver and Harris and he adjusted the contracts.

Outside of the year of salary cap readjustment (Wahle, Rivera and Sharper) has anyone had a pay cut ultimatum from the Packers?

KGB eventually was released when he couldn't rebound from the surgery. Ahman left for a better contract. Has anyone had this gun pointed at them by T2?

[Partial]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

Can you stop posting in absolutes when you have absolutely no clue what the fuck you're talking about? We don't blitz anymore?

At some point you have to decide to slow your posting rate in direct proportion to the % of each Packer game you actually WATCH.

What a joke... dude doesn't even watch the last game and knows exactly what we're doing on defense.

Let me tell you something: You don't.

Please tell me how many games you would consider having an aggressive game plan other than Chicago and Detroit? He's done 2 of 5, less than 50% bro.

I cannot get the memory of Brett Favre carving our defense apart because the DFI sent 3 rushers third down after third down.

[Partial]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?

Thats because Bigby would out and Capers didn't trust his replacements to blitz as much. Since Bigby has come back you saw Capers blitz a lot more in the Lions game just as he did against the Bears. Bigby is a bigger part of his defense then some may realize, mainly because the lack of depth we have at safety.

I laughed. Then I cried. Then I laughed again. Then I puked, giggled, and cried some more. Thanks Branden420, you're a hoot.

Partial, you'll recall that Hawk struggled through two rather significant injuries and still changed positions to cover for Barnett, which in theory should have opened a vault load of opportunity for a player in Bishop's position - young, exciting, healthy, and having made an impression in the preseason - especially when Chillar kind of fucked the pooch and Poppinga struggled to do anything other than run in a straight line until he ran into someone - usually the back of a D lineman. Instead he came in, looked all jumpy and crazy, and seemed to short circuit. Bishop made some big hits two years ago in preseason. This year he looked nice against backups. But the guy obviously doesn't have the mental wiring needed yet. I really hope he figures shit out, because I like a guy who hits people, which is why I hate Barnett. And Chillar. And Poppinga. Until he figures out how to play defense, and not just run into people really hard, it looks like his opportunity will be limited.

Bishop isn't an outside linebacker. I don't believe what you're saying at all about Chill as the coaches are on record as saying he was the best linebacker last season. Poppinga is an outside LB in 4-3. They wanted to see Hawk in the middle so they moved him instead of bringing in Bishop who is not a coverage LB.

I see this system being much more in tune with Bishop's skill set. He is an excellent blitzer and a huge hitter. He is solid enough to drop into a zone and hold his arms up.

You're comparing Apples to Starfruits.

[Partial]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?
Since you didn't watch the game, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But I would check with your sources before you declare we didn't blitz against the Lions. You are about to get Patlerized.

They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents? We've played aggressive and set the tone in two games. In the other game, we played not to lose. Capers was worse than Sanders against Minne. At least Sanders would send all 4 linemen where as Capers was only sending 3 dudes on third down against Minne.

[Partial]

Backups are suppose to be solid, starters are suppose to make plays and until Hawk starts to do that he needs to stay on the sidelines

If you could get 11 players at all the positions of defense who are as consistently assignment sure as Hawk is, you would have the best defense in the NFL year in and year out.

B.S. You need to force turnovers. The best NFL defenses force turnovers. In fact there is a direct correlation in turnover margin and winning.

I don't even know about that, but I think the biggest thing is intimidation. I remember two years ago the Monday night game against the Perfect Pats and the Ravens where it came down to the final minutes. The Ravens were just so intense and playing with so much attitude and intensity that they were bullying the Pats around at the end. Finally, their was a penalty and eventually the Pats pulled it off after an epic stand by the Ravens.

The morale of the story? Attitude is everything, and playing aggressively and hitting hard gets the entire team fired up. Do you remember how pumped up everyone was out of the gate in the Chicago game? Where is that fire? I don't see everyone on the D communicating, gang tackling, and supporting one another like they were then.

[MJZiggy]

Oh god. Here we go again. It's MORAL. Morale deals with mood; moral deals with ethics. (or in this usage a lesson for how to live your life). [Snarky comment removed]

[Fritz]

Hey, don't let this affect your moral, Zig.

[SkinBasket]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?

Thats because Bigby would out and Capers didn't trust his replacements to blitz as much. Since Bigby has come back you saw Capers blitz a lot more in the Lions game just as he did against the Bears. Bigby is a bigger part of his defense then some may realize, mainly because the lack of depth we have at safety.

I laughed. Then I cried. Then I laughed again. Then I puked, giggled, and cried some more. Thanks Branden420, you're a hoot.

Partial, you'll recall that Hawk struggled through two rather significant injuries and still changed positions to cover for Barnett, which in theory should have opened a vault load of opportunity for a player in Bishop's position - young, exciting, healthy, and having made an impression in the preseason - especially when Chillar kind of fucked the pooch and Poppinga struggled to do anything other than run in a straight line until he ran into someone - usually the back of a D lineman. Instead he came in, looked all jumpy and crazy, and seemed to short circuit. Bishop made some big hits two years ago in preseason. This year he looked nice against backups. But the guy obviously doesn't have the mental wiring needed yet. I really hope he figures shit out, because I like a guy who hits people, which is why I hate Barnett. And Chillar. And Poppinga. Until he figures out how to play defense, and not just run into people really hard, it looks like his opportunity will be limited.

Bishop isn't an outside linebacker. I don't believe what you're saying at all about Chill as the coaches are on record as saying he was the best linebacker last season. Poppinga is an outside LB in 4-3. They wanted to see Hawk in the middle so they moved him instead of bringing in Bishop who is not a coverage LB.

I see this system being much more in tune with Bishop's skill set. He is an excellent blitzer and a huge hitter. He is solid enough to drop into a zone and hold his arms up.

You're comparing Apples to Starfruits.

Chillar arguably played better than a twice injured Hawk out of position and a retarded Poppinga. That doesn't mean he played great. If Bishop were as awesome as some seem to think, he steps into Barnett's spot last year and allows hawk to maintain his position. Problem is, when he did see the field, he was terrible. And if Chillar was as flexible as the team thought when they signed him, he would have been the one in the middle, being blasted by linemen and fullbacks as they plunged right through our makeshift DL. But he wasn't, and he isn't strong enough for that, so he got to stay outside.

I'm not comparing apples to anything. I'm saying Bishop's had more opportunity than most ever do to make the field and he hasn't. You can make all the excuses and have all the coaching conspiracies you want, but the fact remains he hasn't been able to capitalize on those opportunities.

Hawk obviously isn't the one preventing him from seeing the field, because as you and others have pointed out, he wasn't on the field very often. Again, seems like another opportunity for Bishop to be out there if he could offer something the current starters don't.

[pbmax]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

[sheepshead]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

He doesnt have one, never has. He gets to say anything he wants, all of it conflicting previous thoughts and if you are critical, you might get a time out.

[sharpe1027]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

At some point trying to prove the point trumps an open discussion. That point happens sooner for some people.

[Partial]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

My current position is we have blitzed heavily in 2 games, and played less aggressive defense than Vanilla Bob for another 3.

[Partial]

Hawk didn't make any plays last year while Bishop (albeit in limited action) was making plays.

You are remembering Bishop's preseason last year. When he got in the game last season he looked like a retard on cocaine. He made Poppinga look like a smart football player. Which is why his time on the field last season was very limited despite the cornucopia of injuries there last year.

Bishop can't even get on the field as even a pass rusher this year.

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since. I've been extremely disappointed. You cannot develop swagger when you play scared.

I don't remember the plethora of injuries at LB. Who was injured and missed significant playing time besides Barnett?

Thats because Bigby would out and Capers didn't trust his replacements to blitz as much. Since Bigby has come back you saw Capers blitz a lot more in the Lions game just as he did against the Bears. Bigby is a bigger part of his defense then some may realize, mainly because the lack of depth we have at safety.

I laughed. Then I cried. Then I laughed again. Then I puked, giggled, and cried some more. Thanks Branden420, you're a hoot.

Partial, you'll recall that Hawk struggled through two rather significant injuries and still changed positions to cover for Barnett, which in theory should have opened a vault load of opportunity for a player in Bishop's position - young, exciting, healthy, and having made an impression in the preseason - especially when Chillar kind of fucked the pooch and Poppinga struggled to do anything other than run in a straight line until he ran into someone - usually the back of a D lineman. Instead he came in, looked all jumpy and crazy, and seemed to short circuit. Bishop made some big hits two years ago in preseason. This year he looked nice against backups. But the guy obviously doesn't have the mental wiring needed yet. I really hope he figures shit out, because I like a guy who hits people, which is why I hate Barnett. And Chillar. And Poppinga. Until he figures out how to play defense, and not just run into people really hard, it looks like his opportunity will be limited.

Bishop isn't an outside linebacker. I don't believe what you're saying at all about Chill as the coaches are on record as saying he was the best linebacker last season. Poppinga is an outside LB in 4-3. They wanted to see Hawk in the middle so they moved him instead of bringing in Bishop who is not a coverage LB.

I see this system being much more in tune with Bishop's skill set. He is an excellent blitzer and a huge hitter. He is solid enough to drop into a zone and hold his arms up.

You're comparing Apples to Starfruits.

Chillar arguably played better than a twice injured Hawk out of position and a retarded Poppinga. That doesn't mean he played great. If Bishop were as awesome as some seem to think, he steps into Barnett's spot last year and allows hawk to maintain his position. Problem is, when he did see the field, he was terrible. And if Chillar was as flexible as the team thought when they signed him, he would have been the one in the middle, being blasted by linemen and fullbacks as they plunged right through our makeshift DL. But he wasn't, and he isn't strong enough for that, so he got to stay outside.

I'm not comparing apples to anything. I'm saying Bishop's had more opportunity than most ever do to make the field and he hasn't. You can make all the excuses and have all the coaching conspiracies you want, but the fact remains he hasn't been able to capitalize on those opportunities.

Hawk obviously isn't the one preventing him from seeing the field, because as you and others have pointed out, he wasn't on the field very often. Again, seems like another opportunity for Bishop to be out there if he could offer something the current starters don't.

I can agree with this. It is mind boggling to me, but we shall see.

[pbmax]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

My current position is we have blitzed heavily in 2 games, and played less aggressive defense than Vanilla Bob for another 3.
Does your definition of blitz mean five or more rushers or do 4 in a zone blitz count?

[Partial]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

My current position is we have blitzed heavily in 2 games, and played less aggressive defense than Vanilla Bob for another 3.
Does your definition of blitz mean five or more rushers or do 4 in a zone blitz count?

5+

[mmmdk]

What day is this :?: :talk:

[bobblehead]

In fact, Moss said that if Hawk's low snap totals continue, the Packers will find a way to get Hawk on the field more, because they believe in him.

"That's obviously something we'll have to address," Moss said.



Well it kind of sounds like th coaching staff is behing the Hawk...

Is that the part that Hawk lovers are supposed to chew on? The prospect of the coaches figuring out a way to get him on the field more because they believe in him? That's very nice.

so I am supposed to disregard the complimentary part of the article but take the criticism at face value?

Yes....its called reading between the lines. The coaches are naturally going to throw him a bone for being a hard worker and such. He isn't on the field because he isn't doing the best job, but he is a great team guy, so the coaches are going to say some feel good things as well.

[bobblehead]

BTW has AJ Hawk ever made one game changing play in his career as a Packer? I really can't think of one, not trying to flame the guy but if anyone can think of one please post.

The first Chicago game last year, when Hawk made his fiirst start at Mike in place of Barnett, he was a game changer.

But I haven't seen a game like that from him since then.

He also made a one handed leaping Pick in the endzone in front of vernon davis as a rookie. And in a preseason game he looked lightning fast on a sack off the edge once. So there you have it, 3 impact plays.

the only reason he looked so good at mike in that game is because it was Chillar's first start. :shock:

[bobblehead]

Hey, don't let this affect your moral, Zig.
No, do. We need more immoral women in the world.

[bobblehead]

[quote="SkinBasket" And if Chillar was as flexible as the team thought when they signed him.[/quote]

they never thought he was almighty flexible. they signed him cuz Popp couldn't cover a TE. Against teams that utilized a good pass game TE they were starting Chillar (or giving him most of the snaps) and in games that ran it tough they were using Popp. that is why they signed him.

[MJZiggy]

Hey, don't let this affect your moral, Zig.
No, do. We need more immoral women in the world.

:lol: :lol:

[POLISHHAWK]

Hawk is the best ILB we have right now... I would expell Barnett in a heartbeat... he's a puss, period.
Hawk is not the fastest, not the best blitzer, not the best coverage guy; but he is the most dependable.

Get rid of Barnett... he gets washed up worse than my dirtiest underwear in a spin cycle.

How many sacks do you see Pittsburgh's ILB's getting? Interceptions? Ya, I thought so.

Bishop, Hawk & Chillar should be our inside guys. Barnett is nothing more than a slow Strong Safety trying to play LB.

Good Bye
I love u all

[bobblehead]

Hawk is the best ILB we have right now... I would expell Barnett in a heartbeat... he's a puss, period.
Hawk is not the fastest, not the best blitzer, not the best coverage guy; but he is the most dependable.

Get rid of Barnett... he gets washed up worse than my dirtiest underwear in a spin cycle.

How many sacks do you see Pittsburgh's ILB's getting? Interceptions? Ya, I thought so.

Bishop, Hawk & Chillar should be our inside guys. Barnett is nothing more than a slow Strong Safety trying to play LB.

Good Bye
I love u all

Lamarr Woodley: has 2 sacks...had 11.5 last season. 3 pass defensed 2 last year.

James Farrior: has 1 sack and had 3.5 last season. 1 pass defensed 5 last year.

AJ Hawk: has 0 sacks...had 3 last season. 0 passes defensed, 1 last season

Barnett: has 1 sack..had 0 in 9 games last year, 0 passes defensed, 2 last year.

Hawk in 3.5 seasons has 7.5 sacks and 11 passes defensed. (chillar had 8 last season in 7 starts)

One thing I will tellyou about posters on this website. We know how to google, so when you post a questing thinking you are making a point check it out first or you may look silly. Stats don't always tell the entire story, but you brought it up so.....

[SnakeLH2006]

Hawk is the best ILB we have right now... I would expell Barnett in a heartbeat... he's a puss, period.
Hawk is not the fastest, not the best blitzer, not the best coverage guy; but he is the most dependable.

Get rid of Barnett... he gets washed up worse than my dirtiest underwear in a spin cycle.

How many sacks do you see Pittsburgh's ILB's getting? Interceptions? Ya, I thought so.

Bishop, Hawk & Chillar should be our inside guys. Barnett is nothing more than a slow Strong Safety trying to play LB.

Good Bye
I love u all

Lamarr Woodley: has 2 sacks...had 11.5 last season. 3 pass defensed 2 last year.

James Farrior: has 1 sack and had 3.5 last season. 1 pass defensed 5 last year.

AJ Hawk: has 0 sacks...had 3 last season. 0 passes defensed, 1 last season

Barnett: has 1 sack..had 0 in 9 games last year, 0 passes defensed, 2 last year.

Hawk in 3.5 seasons has 7.5 sacks and 11 passes defensed. (chillar had 8 last season in 7 starts)

One thing I will tellyou about posters on this website. We know how to google, so when you post a questing thinking you are making a point check it out first or you may look silly. Stats don't always tell the entire story, but you brought it up so.....

Yep. Pretty much. Snake likes Bobblehead, and to boot I suggest you change your Rat callsign to Common Sense Rat.

Snake for one would love for AJ to flash some of his NFL combine/collegiate playmaking/ballHawk skills....but damn. He's just an ordinary starter. Different schemes. Different attacks. Same boring ass Hawk. In fact, I feel (as the coaches must too) that Hawk (seen it without stats...my own eyes over the past few seasons) that AJ can't cover guys worth a shit in pass coverage. He get's toasted again and again by TE's and RB's out the flat. He not a great tackler (like I thought at minimum he would be) either. He hasn't demonstrated he can pass-rush at the NFL level either.

So what do you get for a guy with a HUGE NFL contract like Hawk so far?:

1) Terrible in pass coverage.
2) So-so starting caliber NFL LB tackling ability.
3) Limited pass-rush ability (based on his pass-rush thus far).
4) Huge contract for a guy who averages 10 snaps a game when healthy in the past 2 games.

Dude's a bust. I'm sorry to say it..but I hoped the new 3-4 would help him. It really made him a liability for a guy getting $6+ million a year. Sad.

[Gunakor]

He's a bust because of his salary? What if he gets extended at a lower salary after the season, is he still a bust?

Busts LOSE games for your team. While Hawk hasn't been a key contributor to many wins, he certainly hasn't lost any games. He doesn't make many big plays, but he rarely makes any big mistakes either. I can't call him a bust. Maybe a disappointment, but a solid starter nonetheless.

[SnakeLH2006]

He's a bust because of his salary? What if he gets extended at a lower salary after the season, is he still a bust?

Yep. At a lower salary, he won't be a bust...just an average LB busting his butt to suck at Special Teams and underwhelm on the field. What are you arguing? He is paid as a gamebreaker/playmaker but doesn't play even while healthy. That is a bust. But at the 3rd highest paid Packer for a guy who's playing 8-10 snaps a game over the past two games, and healthy to boot, and NEVER made ANY plays to affect games in the NFL. Yep, he sure is. What the hell is a bust then if that doesn't augment/classify/statisfy it as such. That about does it. B.U.S.T. = H.A.W.K.

Bust (my definition..but will look up some Internet searches if this does not suffice, but doubt I have to...off the top of my head):

1) High Draft status
2) Big Salary
3) Not Making Big Plays
4) No Significant Stats To Warrant Good Player Status
5) Bench Guys Outperform Said Dude
6) Healthy and Only Plays 8-10 Snaps Per Game When Healthy and No Special Teams

I don't have a Bust calculator, but if I did I'd put those variables in and a blind man could see it. B.U.S.T.

[Gunakor]

Busts LOSE games for your team. While Hawk hasn't been a key contributor to many wins, he certainly hasn't lost any games.

This is my definition of a bust, and Hawk doesn't meet the criteria. He's a disappointment for his draft position, but that's all. Would you rather have a guy that misses a bunch of tackles and is always out of position? That's what a bust is. That's not what Hawk is. He's a solid starter that doesn't make mistakes.

[SnakeLH2006]

Busts LOSE games for your team. While Hawk hasn't been a key contributor to many wins, he certainly hasn't lost any games.

This is my definition of a bust, and Hawk doesn't meet the criteria. He's a disappointment for his draft position, but that's all. Would you rather have a guy that misses a bunch of tackles and is always out of position? That's what a bust is. That's not what Hawk is. He's a solid starter that doesn't make mistakes.

Dude I like trading late nite posts with ya, but that is weak as hell. You quoted yourself. Your definition of a bust is your own. My definition of bust is universal when looking at top NFL picks. And, yah, Hawk has hurt us, just about every game when I rewind it on HD-DVR he gets his ass toasted in pass coverage and does a minute non-challant shake of his head when he gets toasted for a 25 yard game by a TE. Thank god it hasn't been in the past 2 weeks, as the coaches see it too. I ain't busting his balls now cuz he's getting 8 snaps a game. He's a bust cuz:

1) He is getting paid superstar money.
2) He is healthy and not playing cuz he sucks and is a liabilty.
3) If he was good, he'd make some plays. He's made/makes none.
4) He's VERY bad in pass-coverage (I'm no scout, but shit, been saying it game after game he just get's roasted in coverage with TE's and RB's).
5) He makes no plays.

THAT IS A BUST. He ain't Paris Lenon. He's a BUST cuz he was/is/paid/expected to make those plays. He can't/hasn't/won't anymore cuz he's benched and proven ineffective at his salary/#5 overall Draft status. THAT IS A BUST. Read that again. He might be a deece backup and not cost games there, but he is a liability/seen him lose games as a starter (so did the coaches).......THAT IS A BUST!!!!!!!!!!

Damn, Gun. I thought you were smarter than that. Give it up. I still respect ya. Hawk is done.

[Gunakor]

Well, I respectfully disagree. I see an assignment sure tackler who doesn't hit home on the blitz and doesn't force fumbles. I see a guy who hasn't seen a whole lot of PT because the defense has been in nickel 80% of the time, and he doesn't play in nickel. I see a guy who the coaches were/are adament about getting more playing time. (You say the coaches see these horrible things in Hawk that in reality they don't, and imply that the lack of snaps for Hawk was by design when it wasn't)

His superstar salary was pretty much predetermined by his draft position. He's still on his rookie contract. It's not like the Packers had a whole lot of leeway there. He's not making a superstar salary because he's a superstar, he's making it because he was the #5 overall pick. Which makes him a disappointment for his draft position, not a bust. Nobody on the draft board is an NFL superstar. The ones at the top just get superstar money. So if your complaint is about the money he's making, complain to the union. Not the Packers.

I wish people would stop trying to tie salary to bust status anyway. Being a bust isn't about the money. It's about being a piss poor NFL football player. Hawk isn't a piss poor NFL football player. Hawk is a solid starter. He just doesn't play nickel, thus hasn't seen many snaps recently. That doesn't mean he's a bust.

[SkinBasket]

Since when the fuck is 4 mil "superstar" money anyway? I remember a butt load of piss flaps on here defending KGB's 9 mil contract saying it wasn't that far out of line with other DEs (ignoring the fact he wasn't those other DEs, nor was he anywhere as good as those DEs). If we were up against the cap, or anywhere near it, then it would be an issue, but we're not, so what the fuck does it matter?

[pbmax]

Hawk is the best ILB we have right now... I would expell Barnett in a heartbeat... he's a puss, period.
Hawk is not the fastest, not the best blitzer, not the best coverage guy; but he is the most dependable.

Get rid of Barnett... he gets washed up worse than my dirtiest underwear in a spin cycle.

How many sacks do you see Pittsburgh's ILB's getting? Interceptions? Ya, I thought so.

Bishop, Hawk & Chillar should be our inside guys. Barnett is nothing more than a slow Strong Safety trying to play LB.

Good Bye
I love u all

Lamarr Woodley: has 2 sacks...had 11.5 last season. 3 pass defensed 2 last year.

James Farrior: has 1 sack and had 3.5 last season. 1 pass defensed 5 last year.

AJ Hawk: has 0 sacks...had 3 last season. 0 passes defensed, 1 last season

Barnett: has 1 sack..had 0 in 9 games last year, 0 passes defensed, 2 last year.

Hawk in 3.5 seasons has 7.5 sacks and 11 passes defensed. (chillar had 8 last season in 7 starts)

One thing I will tellyou about posters on this website. We know how to google, so when you post a questing thinking you are making a point check it out first or you may look silly. Stats don't always tell the entire story, but you brought it up so.....
Isn't Woodley on OLB? I think you want Farrior and Timmons.

[mission]

Ya I'm with skin on this one... 4 mil is really nothing. I bet if you took a list of 4 mil a year players and compared them to Hawk, he'd sit right around the middle when choosing who you'd want on your team. Can't really count guys who are out performing rookie contracts as they're in line for more soon and Hawk, while underperforming his rookie contract, looks to probably make less next seasn.

Trying to post this on my phone an it's hard to reread my post so apologies in advance.

Snake--btw I strongly disagree with your assessment of Hawks tackling ability

[Fritz]

People want Hawk to be that sexy supermodel with plastic boobs who looks great on your arm but makes key mistakes at crucial moments ("Can you hurry up a little? I have a hair appointment in five minutes"). Hawk's more like the loyal, smart, pretty wife who has short hair and a pert nose but knows what to do.

[wist43]

People want Hawk to be that sexy supermodel with plastic boobs who looks great on your arm but makes key mistakes at crucial moments ("Can you hurry up a little? I have a hair appointment in five minutes"). Hawk's more like the loyal, smart, pretty wife who has short hair and a pert nose but knows what to do.

Fritz, that has to be the single worst analogy for the play of an NFL LB I have ever heard :lol:

Besides, some of us prefer short and cute over fake boobs anyway :D

[Brandon494]

People want Hawk to be that sexy supermodel with plastic boobs who looks great on your arm but makes key mistakes at crucial moments ("Can you hurry up a little? I have a hair appointment in five minutes"). Hawk's more like the loyal, smart, pretty wife who has short hair and a pert nose but knows what to do.

Seriously, what are you talking about?

Anyway people call Bush a bust being picked #2 overall so why isnt Hawk considered a bust at #5? Atleast Bush makes game changing plays, Hawk is just another guy. I tell you another thing, if Hawk doesnt take a paycut next season he will not be a Packer. I like the guy because he does seem to work his ass off but we need playmakers on defense, not god damn Rudy.

[bobblehead]

Hawk is the best ILB we have right now... I would expell Barnett in a heartbeat... he's a puss, period.
Hawk is not the fastest, not the best blitzer, not the best coverage guy; but he is the most dependable.

Get rid of Barnett... he gets washed up worse than my dirtiest underwear in a spin cycle.

How many sacks do you see Pittsburgh's ILB's getting? Interceptions? Ya, I thought so.

Bishop, Hawk & Chillar should be our inside guys. Barnett is nothing more than a slow Strong Safety trying to play LB.

Good Bye
I love u all

Lamarr Woodley: has 2 sacks...had 11.5 last season. 3 pass defensed 2 last year.

James Farrior: has 1 sack and had 3.5 last season. 1 pass defensed 5 last year.

AJ Hawk: has 0 sacks...had 3 last season. 0 passes defensed, 1 last season

Barnett: has 1 sack..had 0 in 9 games last year, 0 passes defensed, 2 last year.

Hawk in 3.5 seasons has 7.5 sacks and 11 passes defensed. (chillar had 8 last season in 7 starts)

One thing I will tellyou about posters on this website. We know how to google, so when you post a questing thinking you are making a point check it out first or you may look silly. Stats don't always tell the entire story, but you brought it up so.....
Isn't Woodley on OLB? I think you want Farrior and Timmons.

YOu are correct...see I told you posters here knew their shit. (fucking google failed me....note to self...always check 2 search results)

For the record Timmons has 3 sacks and 4 pass defenses....he is actually having a BETTER season than Woodley atm.

[bobblehead]

One thing I will say....only a guy with expectations can be a bust. Jonny Jolly could not be a bust, he was a 6th? round pick.

AJ is a bust by draft status, but he is still a legitimate NFL player.

Honestly, I would work him onto some special teams. I don't think he would mind. AJ is a player, I like him, I would get him on the field on special teams to increase his contribution.

I will never say AJ sucks ass or anything of the sort, simply that he is a below average starter who was picked at #5. Worse yet he was an LB which in itself barely merits a #5 overall. His only saving grace is that no one picked 6-10 is actually looking that great to my knowledge (but i'm sure someone will use google and prove me wrong if I am :P)

[pbmax]

That's because we don't blitz anymore. Capers went from one of the Ryan boys in week 1 to Bob Sanders 2.0 since.


They said all week they were going to Blitz the Lions so I would be shocked if they did not... however, where was the blitzing against the other quality opponents?.
Which point represents your current position?

My current position is we have blitzed heavily in 2 games, and played less aggressive defense than Vanilla Bob for another 3.
Does your definition of blitz mean five or more rushers or do 4 in a zone blitz count?

5+
Well, for the record, to say a five or more man blitz is the only way to be aggressive is a narrow minded approach to a game plan. For example, two blitzes in the Rams game gave Jackson his longest plays.

But here are the numbers:

McGinn
Lions 48% (no definition)
Vikngs 16.7 %
Rams (21 blitzes by ILBs mentioned but no percentage or five/six man breakdown)
Bengals 19.2%
Bears (14 blitzes by Chillar the only mention)

Press Gazette
Lions 50%
Vikings 17.2
Bengals 14.3
Rams 16.7
Bears (no mention of blitz percentage)

Given the disparity between the run game of the Bears and the Lions, I don't think the blitz strategy has been dependent on the nature of the run game. Also, the fact that we blitzed the Bears shows that Capers isn't simply blitzing bad teams.

It would seem to be a function of player availability. Specifically, Bigby and Matthews in that order.

[mmmdk]

Google = pseudo knowledge

[bobblehead]

Google = pseudo knowledge

Well, that is so generic I probably shouldn't even bother, but if you use the argument that pitts ILB's don't get any sacks or interceptions I have to admit I won't know the answer off the top of my head. I doubt any poster here would. Google simply allowed me to call bullshit and if you want to bag on me for using google when another poster asserts something as fact....well, what can I say, you're a tool.

ARod has a MUCH better career passer rating than Brett Favre...isn't even close. Now tell me that off the top of your head you know for sure I'm wrong. (I would actually guess I'm not)

[Fritz]

People want Hawk to be that sexy supermodel with plastic boobs who looks great on your arm but makes key mistakes at crucial moments ("Can you hurry up a little? I have a hair appointment in five minutes"). Hawk's more like the loyal, smart, pretty wife who has short hair and a pert nose but knows what to do.

Fritz, that has to be the single worst analogy for the play of an NFL LB I have ever heard :lol:

Besides, some of us prefer short and cute over fake boobs anyway :D

That would be my point. And it was a damn fine analogy. Ever see AJ Hawk's cute little nose?

[mmmdk]

Google = pseudo knowledge

Well, that is so generic I probably shouldn't even bother, but if you use the argument that pitts ILB's don't get any sacks or interceptions I have to admit I won't know the answer off the top of my head. I doubt any poster here would. Google simply allowed me to call bullshit and if you want to bag on me for using google when another poster asserts something as fact....well, what can I say, you're a tool.

ARod has a MUCH better career passer rating than Brett Favre...isn't even close. Now tell me that off the top of your head you know for sure I'm wrong. (I would actually guess I'm not)

...don't be all Favred up about this; you read way too much into it.

[bobblehead]

Google = pseudo knowledge

Well, that is so generic I probably shouldn't even bother, but if you use the argument that pitts ILB's don't get any sacks or interceptions I have to admit I won't know the answer off the top of my head. I doubt any poster here would. Google simply allowed me to call bullshit and if you want to bag on me for using google when another poster asserts something as fact....well, what can I say, you're a tool.

ARod has a MUCH better career passer rating than Brett Favre...isn't even close. Now tell me that off the top of your head you know for sure I'm wrong. (I would actually guess I'm not)

...don't be all Favred up about this; you read way too much into it.

enlighten me, what should I have inferred from you saying me googling = pseudo knowledge. I use a spell check at times too, does that make me less intelligent?

[mmmdk]

Google = pseudo knowledge

Well, that is so generic I probably shouldn't even bother, but if you use the argument that pitts ILB's don't get any sacks or interceptions I have to admit I won't know the answer off the top of my head. I doubt any poster here would. Google simply allowed me to call bullshit and if you want to bag on me for using google when another poster asserts something as fact....well, what can I say, you're a tool.

ARod has a MUCH better career passer rating than Brett Favre...isn't even close. Now tell me that off the top of your head you know for sure I'm wrong. (I would actually guess I'm not)

...don't be all Favred up about this; you read way too much into it.

enlighten me, what should I have inferred from you saying me googling = pseudo knowledge. I use a spell check at times too, does that make me less intelligent?

No you're not !

Google is a nice tool but some, not you for all I know, boost their low selfesteem by googling their lack of a proper argument and/or lack of real evidence. Erudition beats online wanking 10 times out of 10.

My post in this thread stands alone and was not a reply. Actually, I was stating the obvious.

It's Browns week !

[bobblehead]

Google = pseudo knowledge

Well, that is so generic I probably shouldn't even bother, but if you use the argument that pitts ILB's don't get any sacks or interceptions I have to admit I won't know the answer off the top of my head. I doubt any poster here would. Google simply allowed me to call bullshit and if you want to bag on me for using google when another poster asserts something as fact....well, what can I say, you're a tool.

ARod has a MUCH better career passer rating than Brett Favre...isn't even close. Now tell me that off the top of your head you know for sure I'm wrong. (I would actually guess I'm not)

...don't be all Favred up about this; you read way too much into it.

enlighten me, what should I have inferred from you saying me googling = pseudo knowledge. I use a spell check at times too, does that make me less intelligent?

No you're not !

Google is a nice tool but some, not you for all I know, boost their low selfesteem by googling their lack of a proper argument and/or lack of real evidence. Erudition beats online wanking 10 times out of 10.

My post in this thread stands alone and was not a reply. Actually, I was stating the obvious.

It's Browns week !

well mr. erudite, since i mentioned google and you made a stand alone post google = pseudo knowledge I suspected (apparently incorrectly) that you might be trying to invalidate my point. Obviously you are in the habit of posting google = pseudo knowledge randomly throughout packer rats, not in reply to anything, simply making a point with no implications whatsoever.

My sincerest apologies.

Mars is a red planet. I'm just saying is all.

[mmmdk]

Google = pseudo knowledge

Well, that is so generic I probably shouldn't even bother, but if you use the argument that pitts ILB's don't get any sacks or interceptions I have to admit I won't know the answer off the top of my head. I doubt any poster here would. Google simply allowed me to call bullshit and if you want to bag on me for using google when another poster asserts something as fact....well, what can I say, you're a tool.

ARod has a MUCH better career passer rating than Brett Favre...isn't even close. Now tell me that off the top of your head you know for sure I'm wrong. (I would actually guess I'm not)

...don't be all Favred up about this; you read way too much into it.

enlighten me, what should I have inferred from you saying me googling = pseudo knowledge. I use a spell check at times too, does that make me less intelligent?

No you're not !

Google is a nice tool but some, not you for all I know, boost their low selfesteem by googling their lack of a proper argument and/or lack of real evidence. Erudition beats online wanking 10 times out of 10.

My post in this thread stands alone and was not a reply. Actually, I was stating the obvious.

It's Browns week !

well mr. erudite, since i mentioned google and you made a stand alone post google = pseudo knowledge I suspected (apparently incorrectly) that you might be trying to invalidate my point. Obviously you are in the habit of posting google = pseudo knowledge randomly throughout packer rats, not in reply to anything, simply making a point with no implications whatsoever.

My sincerest apologies.

Mars is a red planet. I'm just saying is all.

:smk: Cool, I'm going to bed [it's 3:00am here] and getting ready for Browns.

[b bulldog]

Question, what has Hawk ever done to merit such a following? He was good in college but he is an average player at the absolute best in the NFL. I just do not get it.

[Gunakor]

Question, what has Hawk ever done to merit such a following? He was good in college but he is an average player at the absolute best in the NFL. I just do not get it.

He isn't great but he doesn't suck. He doesn't make big plays but he doesn't make big mistakes. He doesn't win games but he doesn't lose them either. So it's all a matter of perspective. We could be better there, for sure, but we could do far worse at LB than AJ Hawk. As a matter of priority, I don't see what the fuck people are worried about Hawk for when there's so many other much more glaring needs right now.

[rbaloha1]

Question, what has Hawk ever done to merit such a following? He was good in college but he is an average player at the absolute best in the NFL. I just do not get it.

Considered the safest pick in the draft. Recall the Saints almost selected over Bush. A great combine player but a completely over hyped football player.

[Brandon494]

Question, what has Hawk ever done to merit such a following? He was good in college but he is an average player at the absolute best in the NFL. I just do not get it.

"He got perty hair"

http://www.andrasta.com/images/Hick.jpg

[pbmax]

Question, what has Hawk ever done to merit such a following? He was good in college but he is an average player at the absolute best in the NFL. I just do not get it.

Considered the safest pick in the draft. Recall the Saints almost selected over Bush. A great combine player but a completely over hyped football player.
What does combine player mean? Are you saying workout warrior? Because that doesn't fit. Hawk had a very productive college career at a big time school in a big time conference. Whether you agree with the pick or not, he wasn't Mike Mamula.

[pbmax]

Question, what has Hawk ever done to merit such a following? He was good in college but he is an average player at the absolute best in the NFL. I just do not get it.

Considered the safest pick in the draft. Recall the Saints almost selected over Bush. A great combine player but a completely over hyped football player.
What does combine player mean? Are you saying workout warrior? Because that doesn't fit. Hawk had a very productive college career at a big time school in a big time conference. Whether you agree with the pick or not, he wasn't Mike Mamula.
And I call a second round of bologna. Didn't he start in 3 of his 4 years? There is a reason he was considered the safest pick in the top ten and that was evident before the combine. But that designation comes with an implicit understanding that he probably has the more limited upside.

[Fritz]

Do tell, oh Rats, who you wanted - at the time. Not now. Not with hindsight. So who'd you want them to take at #5??

Round One
1. Houston - Mario Williams, DE North Carolina State
2. New Orleans - Reggie Bush, RB USC
3. Tennessee - Vince Young, QB Texas
4. N.Y. Jets - D'Brickashaw Ferguson, OT Virginia
5. Green Bay - A.J. Hawk, LB Ohio State
6. San Francisco - Vernon Davis, TE Maryland
7. Oakland - Michael Huff, DB Texas
8. Buffalo - Donte Whitner, S Ohio State
9. Detroit - Ernie Sims, LB Florida State
10. Arizona - Matt Leinart, QB USC
11. Denver (from St. Louis) - Jay Cutler, QB Vanderbilt
12. Baltimore (from Cleveland) - Haloti Ngata, DT Oregon
13. Cleveland (from Baltimore) - Kamerion Wimbley, DE/OLB Florida State
14. Philadelphia - Broderick Bunkley, DT Florida State
15. St. Louis (from Atlanta through Denver) - Tye Hill, Cb Clemson
16. Miami - Jason Allen, DB Tennessee
17. Minnesota - Chad Greenway, LB Iowa
18. Dallas - Bobby Carpenter, LB Ohio State
19. San Diego - Antonio Cromartie, CB Florida State
20. Kansas City - Tamba Hali, DE Penn State
21. New England - Laurence Maroney, RB Minnesota
22. San Francisco (from Washington through Denver) - Manny Lawson, DE/OLB North Carolina State
23. Tampa Bay - Davin Joseph, G Oklahoma
24. Cincinnati - Johnathan Joseph, CB South Carolina
25. Pittsburgh (from N.Y. Giants) - Santonio Holmes, WR Ohio State
26. Buffalo (from Chicago) - John McCargo, DT North Carolina State
27. Carolina - DeAngelo Williams, RB Memphis
28. Jacksonville - Marcedes Lewis, TE UCLA
29. NY Jets (from Denver through Atlanta) - Nick Mangold, C Ohio State
30. Indianapolis - Joseph Addai, RB LSU
31. Seattle - Kelly Jennings, CB Miami (FL)
32. N.Y. Giants (from Pittsburgh) - Mathias Kiwanuka, DE Boston College

[Pugger]

The reason folks say he is a bust is because he was such a high draft pick. Some fans don't think he has lived up to those loft expectations (and a lot of players don't, frankly). If Hawk had been taken in the 2nd round we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Fritz]

I agree, but that's why I'm asking who they were supposed to take. Ngata was the only one some folks here wanted, I think. Some wanted Vernon Davis, others wanted Michael Huff. And nobody was advocating for Greenway.

So - you coulda done worse than Hawk. Look at Vince Young. Look at Huff.

[MJZiggy]

I think APB wanted Mangold...

[bobblehead]

I think APB wanted Mangold...

Or wasn't it Logan Mankins? If that was the same draft.

I'll say this, I don't believe in drafting LB's in the top 10. In the one draft I have been right on ever I wanted to trade down and take Cromartie. I'm almost always wrong on college guys, but that would have been a much better pick. I don't watch a ton of college, don't rewatch any, so its safe to say, anyone I wanted at the time was irrelevant.

[Rastak]

I agree, but that's why I'm asking who they were supposed to take. Ngata was the only one some folks here wanted, I think. Some wanted Vernon Davis, others wanted Michael Huff. And nobody was advocating for Greenway.

So - you coulda done worse than Hawk. Look at Vince Young. Look at Huff.


That's true, on Greenway. Hell, people here were claiming Hodge was better than Greenway.

[Fred's Slacks]

I think APB wanted Mangold...

I remember him distinctly having a woody for Micheal Huff.

Anyway, I know I wanted VD (not the disease) although I was very happy with the Hawk pick. I really thought he'd be an impact player that would bring an attitude to this defense. I was wrong.

The thing that sticks out to me about Hawk isn't the lack of a ton of big plays. Rather its the times he has a clear opportunity to make a big play and hasn't gotten it done. The one that sticks out in my mind was the NFC championship game 2 yrs back when he had Bradshaw one on one in the open field on a 3rd and short just outside of field goal range. That would have been a huge play. Bradshaw made one jab step outside, got Hawk leaning, then cut inside him for a big gain and easy first down.

Now, one on one in open field with Bradshaw is a tough task but its one you'd think a 5th overall pick would be up to. That's just one example but it seems like every time he's in the open field with a ball carrier, he's left hugging air. He seems to play tentatively like he's afraid to make a mistake, rather than be aggressive and attack. I'm hoping this lack of playing time lights a fire and he says F--- it and stops worrying about mistakes and just start playing and having fun.

[wist43]

I agree, but that's why I'm asking who they were supposed to take. Ngata was the only one some folks here wanted, I think. Some wanted Vernon Davis, others wanted Michael Huff. And nobody was advocating for Greenway.

So - you coulda done worse than Hawk. Look at Vince Young. Look at Huff.


That's true, on Greenway. Hell, people here were claiming Hodge was better than Greenway.

Yeah, I didn't like Greenway coming out I remember... and I loved Hodge; however, his knees put him into Terrence Murphy territory, IMO. Can't play the game without knees.

As for Greenway... I haven't followed Minnesota's defense that closely, other than the basics, i.e. Allen, Winfield, the Williams'... I did notice Greenway played fairly well in the Packer game, from what I saw of him.

They seemed to use him to his strenths... and protected him in his coverages, didn't put him in mismatch situations - coordinator seems to get it. Who is their coordinator btw??? lol... I suppose I could be unlazy and look it up :)

[Rastak]

Greenway has been outstanding the last two years now....a bigtime playmaker for Minnesota.

Les Frazier is the coordinator since Tomlin left.

[wist43]

Do tell, oh Rats, who you wanted - at the time. Not now. Not with hindsight. So who'd you want them to take at #5??

Round One
1. Houston - Mario Williams, DE North Carolina State
2. New Orleans - Reggie Bush, RB USC
3. Tennessee - Vince Young, QB Texas
4. N.Y. Jets - D'Brickashaw Ferguson, OT Virginia
5. Green Bay - A.J. Hawk, LB Ohio State
6. San Francisco - Vernon Davis, TE Maryland
7. Oakland - Michael Huff, DB Texas
8. Buffalo - Donte Whitner, S Ohio State
9. Detroit - Ernie Sims, LB Florida State
10. Arizona - Matt Leinart, QB USC
11. Denver (from St. Louis) - Jay Cutler, QB Vanderbilt
12. Baltimore (from Cleveland) - Haloti Ngata, DT Oregon
13. Cleveland (from Baltimore) - Kamerion Wimbley, DE/OLB Florida State
14. Philadelphia - Broderick Bunkley, DT Florida State
15. St. Louis (from Atlanta through Denver) - Tye Hill, Cb Clemson
16. Miami - Jason Allen, DB Tennessee
17. Minnesota - Chad Greenway, LB Iowa
18. Dallas - Bobby Carpenter, LB Ohio State
19. San Diego - Antonio Cromartie, CB Florida State
20. Kansas City - Tamba Hali, DE Penn State
21. New England - Laurence Maroney, RB Minnesota
22. San Francisco (from Washington through Denver) - Manny Lawson, DE/OLB North Carolina State
23. Tampa Bay - Davin Joseph, G Oklahoma
24. Cincinnati - Johnathan Joseph, CB South Carolina
25. Pittsburgh (from N.Y. Giants) - Santonio Holmes, WR Ohio State
26. Buffalo (from Chicago) - John McCargo, DT North Carolina State
27. Carolina - DeAngelo Williams, RB Memphis
28. Jacksonville - Marcedes Lewis, TE UCLA
29. NY Jets (from Denver through Atlanta) - Nick Mangold, C Ohio State
30. Indianapolis - Joseph Addai, RB LSU
31. Seattle - Kelly Jennings, CB Miami (FL)
32. N.Y. Giants (from Pittsburgh) - Mathias Kiwanuka, DE Boston College

I wanted Davis... as I saw him as a much more explosive athlete than Hawk. SF is offensively challenged and has been for a while; so Davis hasn't been utilized properly, and he has had some bouts of acting up. Even now though, he has more upside than Hawk. In the right offense, he has "Gates-like" potential... which is how I viewed him coming out.

Of course, no. 1 for me was Mario Williams... next on my wish list was Ngata - however, I saw that as unlikely, and didn't really research Ngata too extensively.

Also argued that Cutler had to be considered... if trading down into the area he was projected - somewhere around 10. As I said then though, QB's are next to impossible to project. I thought Cutler had the arm and physical ability, but that doesn't always translate on an intellectual level.

Still, this was after Rodgers had been drafted, and he has proven better than I could have hoped. Rationale was Rodgers had been iffy enough, that if they really felt Cutler had a chance to be a franchise QB, then they'd be foolish not to consider him.

Those are my memories of that draft anyway... too lazy to go back and look at our arguments - do remember never liking the Hawk pick though. You guys beat me down, and forced me into accepting it as "safe" :D

[Brandon494]

Do tell, oh Rats, who you wanted - at the time. Not now. Not with hindsight. So who'd you want them to take at #5??

I honestly wanted TT to take Vernon Davis, you rarely see a TE with 4.3 speed and would have given Favre another weapon. Looks like he wouldnt have been much better but you never know how he would have done with Favre/AR throwing him the ball instead of Alex Smith and Shaun Hill.

[wist43]

Greenway has been outstanding the last two years now....a bigtime playmaker for Minnesota.

Les Frazier is the coordinator since Tomlin left.

Yes, Frazier... good coordinator. I have a lot of respect for the Vikings defense.

Losing Winfield hurts... be interesting to see how their secondary holds up in his absence. Winfield is one hell of a football player.

You guys are definitely looking like you could have a shot at winning it all... hate to say it - but, good luck :D

[Rastak]

Greenway has been outstanding the last two years now....a bigtime playmaker for Minnesota.

Les Frazier is the coordinator since Tomlin left.

Yes, Frazier... good coordinator. I have a lot of respect for the Vikings defense.

Losing Winfield hurts... be interesting to see how their secondary holds up in his absence. Winfield is one hell of a football player.

You guys are definitely looking like you could have a shot at winning it all... hate to say it - but, good luck :D

Thanks Wist. Lots of games to play, anything can happen.

[Gunakor]

Do tell, oh Rats, who you wanted - at the time. Not now. Not with hindsight. So who'd you want them to take at #5??

Round One
1. Houston - Mario Williams, DE North Carolina State
2. New Orleans - Reggie Bush, RB USC
3. Tennessee - Vince Young, QB Texas
4. N.Y. Jets - D'Brickashaw Ferguson, OT Virginia
5. Green Bay - A.J. Hawk, LB Ohio State
6. San Francisco - Vernon Davis, TE Maryland
7. Oakland - Michael Huff, DB Texas
8. Buffalo - Donte Whitner, S Ohio State
9. Detroit - Ernie Sims, LB Florida State
10. Arizona - Matt Leinart, QB USC
11. Denver (from St. Louis) - Jay Cutler, QB Vanderbilt
12. Baltimore (from Cleveland) - Haloti Ngata, DT Oregon
13. Cleveland (from Baltimore) - Kamerion Wimbley, DE/OLB Florida State
14. Philadelphia - Broderick Bunkley, DT Florida State
15. St. Louis (from Atlanta through Denver) - Tye Hill, Cb Clemson
16. Miami - Jason Allen, DB Tennessee
17. Minnesota - Chad Greenway, LB Iowa
18. Dallas - Bobby Carpenter, LB Ohio State
19. San Diego - Antonio Cromartie, CB Florida State
20. Kansas City - Tamba Hali, DE Penn State
21. New England - Laurence Maroney, RB Minnesota
22. San Francisco (from Washington through Denver) - Manny Lawson, DE/OLB North Carolina State
23. Tampa Bay - Davin Joseph, G Oklahoma
24. Cincinnati - Johnathan Joseph, CB South Carolina
25. Pittsburgh (from N.Y. Giants) - Santonio Holmes, WR Ohio State
26. Buffalo (from Chicago) - John McCargo, DT North Carolina State
27. Carolina - DeAngelo Williams, RB Memphis
28. Jacksonville - Marcedes Lewis, TE UCLA
29. NY Jets (from Denver through Atlanta) - Nick Mangold, C Ohio State
30. Indianapolis - Joseph Addai, RB LSU
31. Seattle - Kelly Jennings, CB Miami (FL)
32. N.Y. Giants (from Pittsburgh) - Mathias Kiwanuka, DE Boston College

I wanted Vernon Davis, but with hindsight I'm glad he wasn't the one we took. I think Finley is going to be just as good, and we didn't have to use a top 10 pick to get him. But at the time we really needed a TE, and Vernon Davis looked to be the answer.

[Cheesehead Craig]

If Hawk is labeled as a bust, what is Davis to be labeled then? A uber-bust? He's been Donald Lee except with a much bigger cap number.

[Brandon494]

If Hawk is labeled as a bust, what is Davis to be labeled then? A uber-bust? He's been Donald Lee except with a much bigger cap number.

Well its not like Davis has had at QB to throw him the ball.

[Bretsky]

If Hawk is labeled as a bust, what is Davis to be labeled then? A uber-bust? He's been Donald Lee except with a much bigger cap number.


Davis has shown flashes this year of being very talented as a receiving TE...more than we can say about Lee

[Gunakor]

If Hawk is labeled as a bust, what is Davis to be labeled then? A uber-bust? He's been Donald Lee except with a much bigger cap number.


Davis has shown flashes this year of being very talented as a receiving TE...more than we can say about Lee

Lee showed flashes a couple years ago. That's why he got his contract extension. One year is one year.

[Brandon494]

If Hawk is labeled as a bust, what is Davis to be labeled then? A uber-bust? He's been Donald Lee except with a much bigger cap number.


Davis has shown flashes this year of being very talented as a receiving TE...more than we can say about Lee

Lee showed flashes a couple years ago. That's why he got his contract extension. One year is one year.

Well this year he finally has a half decent QB, and I'm being generous when I say half decent.

[Cheesehead Craig]

From what I could see, Hawk had a real good game. Couple tackles for a loss and several other good plays.

[PackerTimer]

From what I could see, Hawk had a real good game. Couple tackles for a loss and several other good plays.


He had a hell of a good game. Maybe a taste of sitting on the bench will be good for him.

[Brandon494]

From what I could see, Hawk had a real good game. Couple tackles for a loss and several other good plays.


He had a hell of a good game. Maybe a taste of sitting on the bench will be good for him.

I wouldnt call it a hell of a game, had 1 tackle for loss. Vernon Davis on the other hand had a hell of a game with 3 TDs.

[rbaloha1]

Hawk played well -- flying around and tfl. If he continues to play this way the impact plays shall happen. Impressive performance albeit against a bad team.

[HarveyWallbangers]

He pretty much did what he's done all season. He's been stout against the run. He doesn't make a lot of plays, but he's far and away our best LB against the run.

[jmbarnes101]

I like A.J. He's the player I wanted us to draft and I'm glad he's on the team. I do think he's a better 4-3 LB than a 3-4 LB but he does his job and I'm good with that.

[ND72]

From what I could see, Hawk had a real good game. Couple tackles for a loss and several other good plays.


He had a hell of a good game. Maybe a taste of sitting on the bench will be good for him.

I wouldnt call it a hell of a game, had 1 tackle for loss. Vernon Davis on the other hand had a hell of a game with 3 TDs.

sometimes forcing the other team to alter their play because you're blowing it up in the backfield is as impressive as actually having a TFL. I'll still take Hawk over Davis anyday.

[mission]

From what I could see, Hawk had a real good game. Couple tackles for a loss and several other good plays.


He had a hell of a good game. Maybe a taste of sitting on the bench will be good for him.

I wouldnt call it a hell of a game, had 1 tackle for loss. Vernon Davis on the other hand had a hell of a game with 3 TDs.

Hawk had his best game of the season... he was all over the place and around (involved in tackles) most of the runs that were stuffed for <1 yard gains. Although I thought he looked pretty bonehead on the play where Anderson fumbled the snap at the goal line and he rolled around like an idiot with the ball right underneath him.

Now if you want to compare Hawk's game to Davis' that's another story... yall seem to forget Davis not wanting to come to GB at all so if it took him this long to start making some impact plays, I wonder if they would have ever came in GB.

[pbmax]

From what I could see, Hawk had a real good game. Couple tackles for a loss and several other good plays.


He had a hell of a good game. Maybe a taste of sitting on the bench will be good for him.

I wouldnt call it a hell of a game, had 1 tackle for loss. Vernon Davis on the other hand had a hell of a game with 3 TDs.
It was a very good game. Maybe only one tackle for loss, but he beat single blocking several times to make tackles. Exactly what Moss asked him to do last week.

[Brandon494]

sometimes forcing the other team to alter their play because you're blowing it up in the backfield is as impressive as actually having a TFL. I'll still take Hawk over Davis anyday.

Yea I kinda figured that from your avatar.

[Brandon494]

Hawk had his best game of the season... he was all over the place and around (involved in tackles) most of the runs that were stuffed for <1 yard gains. Although I thought he looked pretty bonehead on the play where Anderson fumbled the snap at the goal line and he rolled around like an idiot with the ball right underneath him.

Now if you want to compare Hawk's game to Davis' that's another story... yall seem to forget Davis not wanting to come to GB at all so if it took him this long to start making some impact plays, I wonder if they would have ever came in GB.

Davis has never had a solid QB in SF to throw him the ball. Also about the fact not wanting to come to Green Bay I'm sure most players coming out of college arent big fans about coming to Green Bay. I mean even Charles Woodson said he would never play in Green Bay before coming here.

[Badgerinmaine]

Do tell, oh Rats, who you wanted - at the time. Not now. Not with hindsight. So who'd you want them to take at #5??
(snip)

I had been hoping D'Brickashaw Ferguson would fall to us, but when the Jets took him, I wanted Hawk.

[MJZiggy]

I knew when Davis burst into tears at the Hawk pick that TT made the right call. There's not wanting to be somewhere, but that's a WHOLE LOT of not wanting to be somewhere. I wonder if he said something in his interviews to seal his fate.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Davis has never had a solid QB in SF to throw him the ball.
Up until this year, Hawk hasn't had a DC worth a damn that could utilize him. So does he then get a free pass also?

[Tony Oday]

Davis has never had a solid QB in SF to throw him the ball.
Up until this year, Hawk hasn't had a DC worth a damn that could utilize him. So does he then get a free pass also?

no Hawk does not get the benefit of the doubt! He is too high of a pick to get a pass...

[Brandon494]

I knew when Davis burst into tears at the Hawk pick that TT made the right call. There's not wanting to be somewhere, but that's a WHOLE LOT of not wanting to be somewhere. I wonder if he said something in his interviews to seal his fate.

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

[Maxie the Taxi]

As I recall, this board was divided down the middle between those who wanted Hawk and those who wanted Mario. Both players were projected as possible choice for GB. That Houston went for Mario at #1 was a huge surprise (and disappointment for me). I wanted Mario.

That said I'm cool with Hawk. He's not the HOFamer half on this board thought he'd be, but he's a reliable pro who I expect to get better. Maybe an eventual all-Pro.

[Brandon494]

Davis has never had a solid QB in SF to throw him the ball.
Up until this year, Hawk hasn't had a DC worth a damn that could utilize him. So does he then get a free pass also?

no Hawk does not get the benefit of the doubt! He is too high of a pick to get a pass...

Not having a QB and not having a DC worth a damn is not the samething. Other players made plays with Sanders at DC, so why did Hawk only look average well other players like Woodson, Collins, Barnett, Kampman, and Harris still managed to make plays under Sanders. Time to face the facts, Hawk is never going to be better than what he is now.

[Fred's Slacks]

As I recall, this board was divided down the middle between those who wanted Hawk and those who wanted Mario. Both players were projected as possible choice for GB. That Houston went for Mario at #1 was a huge surprise (and disappointment for me). I wanted Mario.

That said I'm cool with Hawk. He's not the HOFamer half on this board thought he'd be, but he's a reliable pro who I expect to get better. Maybe an eventual all-Pro.

Mario was my favorite too but I gave up hope of getting him after the combine. I thought he might make it to 4 but I didn't think there was any chance he was getting past the Jets. Going 1 was a surprise though. I, like many, mistakenly thought Bush was going to be LT 2.0.

[HarveyWallbangers]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

[Brandon494]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?

[HarveyWallbangers]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?

Tradition, great fans, best environment to be a FOOTBALL player

I think I'd be happy with the millions they were going to pay me. I definitely wouldn't let it be public knowledge that I didn't want to play in Green Bay. Davis is a grade A jerk.

[pbmax]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?
Depends on what is most important to you. Weather shouldn't matter until you win a ring. Davis should have talked to Keith Jackson.

[Brandon494]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?

Tradition, great fans, best environment to be a FOOTBALL player

I think I'd be happy with the millions they were going to pay me. I definitely wouldn't let it be public knowledge that I didn't want to play in Green Bay. Davis is a grade A jerk.

He is a jerk because he didn't want GB to select him? Like I said Charles Woodson even said early in his career that he would never play in GB. Davis never said that he would not have played for the Packers if they did in fact select him. Eli Manning on the other hand turned down the warm weather city and refused to play for the Chargers, would you consider him a grade A jerk?

[MJZiggy]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?

Tradition, great fans, best environment to be a FOOTBALL player

I think I'd be happy with the millions they were going to pay me. I definitely wouldn't let it be public knowledge that I didn't want to play in Green Bay. Davis is a grade A jerk.

He is a jerk because he didn't want GB to select him? Like I said Charles Woodson even said early in his career that he would never play in GB. Davis never said that he would not have played for the Packers if they did in fact select him. Eli Manning on the other hand turned down the warm weather city and refused to play for the Chargers, would you consider him a grade A jerk?Yes.

[The Shadow]

I think Hawk is a valuable player.

[HarveyWallbangers]

He is a jerk because he didn't want GB to select him?

No. It's one small thing on a list of reasons he's a jerk.

[Brandon494]

He is a jerk because he didn't want GB to select him?

No. It's one small thing on a list of reasons he's a jerk.

Please fill me in

[ND72]

This is becoming clearly dumb conversation. It reminds me of a coaches meeting we had after a loss this season...first thing the Head Coach start with was, "this is what we should have done..."....does it really matter anymore? Couldn't replay that game, so lets move on.

Davis is a jerk, and I'm glad he's not a Packer. AJ Hawk isn't a world beater, but he's a very solid player, and personally, I really enjoy having "just solid" players on my teams. I think the more comfortable we get in the 3-4 under Dom, and the more he learns how to use players, you'll continue to see an AJ Hawk like we saw today.

Dom has for years been great at finding strengths and using them, and I think priority #1 for him this year has been Aaron Kampman, and it seems as though he's figured that out more than earlier.

It's really dumb to argue who we should have drafted...probably should have drafted Tom Brady in the 6th round the year he was picked huh?

[MJZiggy]

probably should have drafted Tom Brady in the 6th round the year he was picked huh?

Probably wouldn't have fit our offense, been tired of sitting behind Favre and then busted...

[The Leaper]

This is laughable.

Is Hawk playing at a level worthy of a #5 pick? Of course not.

Is Hawk a bust? Hell, no. He is a solid but unspectacular LB who is assignment sure and highly durable.

Is there an obvious pick TT missed on by taking Hawk? Again, no...Vernon Davis was nothing more than a combine warrior, and his play has thus far borne that out. IMO, Finley is a far better potential talent at the TE position...so if we take Davis, we are stuck in the same boat IMO by having a guy holding down a starting role who is unspectacular as a high draft pick. Only this time it would be at TE.

If Mario Williams was taken 2 picks after Hawk, I could see the griping. If Hawk was a bona fide bust, I could see the griping. At present...I don't see any real reason to waste this much time playing tug of war over this topic. It wasn't a home run of a draft pick...but it wasn't a strike out either.

[Lurker64]

It's also worth noting that even taking Hawk out of the equation entirely, the 2006 draft was a very successful one since we got three starters (Colledge, Spitz, and a superstar in the making in Jennings) out if it as well as two solid backup/role players (Jolly, Blackmon).

When you look at a draft where you got 6 guys who either start or are important role players, including at least one potential superstar, four years after the fact, that's a successful draft regardless of whether or not you didn't hit on every pick as well as you could have.

[Partial]

Hawk played a very good game in response to his 9 snap performance last week. He was all over in the running game but it also seems like they ran right at him.

Clay Matthews is going to be a superstar.

[MadtownPacker]

Youre right for once. Matthews is going to be the next NFCN great White LB hope. The former is dead (urleaker) so time for a new one to be crowned. Figured he would be good when I heard his uncle is Bruce Matthews.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Youre right for once. Matthews is going to be the next NFCN great White LB hope. The former is dead (urleaker) so time for a new one to be crowned. Figured he would be good when I heard his uncle is Bruce Matthews.

Being the son of a 19 year vet, 4 time pro bowler wasn't enough. It took being Bruce Matthews nephew to figure it out? :lol:

[Fritz]

Looks like most who replied to my question of who you'd take wanted Davis.

What I don't understand is that several of those who wanted Davis are still making excuses for him and still saying he's got "upside." If anyone defended Hawk by saying that, they'd be laughed off the board. This is year four, and if you're a tight end, that's a long time.

I imagine that there are posters out if SF saying "Y'know, if Davis had been a second or third round pick that'd be okay, but for a guy who's #6 overall, he's a bust..."

I'd rather have Hawk. Now, Ngata, that's a guy the team missed out on. But I didn't advocate for him at the time, knowing little. But some folks here did - and they'd have been correct.

[SkinBasket]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?

What does it matter? We got a player in Finley who has shown just as many flashes of potential, came a lot cheaper, and isn't a total cocksucker.

[denverYooper]

haha really?

Davis didn't cry over the Hawk pick, he was crying because he made his dream of playing in the NFL come true. I clearly remember him saying to his mom "I made it".

Nah, Davis made it well known that he was very happy not to be going to Green Bay.

I realize that but thats not the reason why he was crying. Also can you really blame him? If you were not a Green Bay fan why would you want to play for the Packers over a warm weather city?

Tradition, great fans, best environment to be a FOOTBALL player

I think I'd be happy with the millions they were going to pay me. I definitely wouldn't let it be public knowledge that I didn't want to play in Green Bay. Davis is a grade A jerk.

He is a jerk because he didn't want GB to select him? Like I said Charles Woodson even said early in his career that he would never play in GB. Davis never said that he would not have played for the Packers if they did in fact select him. Eli Manning on the other hand turned down the warm weather city and refused to play for the Chargers, would you consider him a grade A jerk?Yes.

Well, that was easy.

[MichiganPackerFan]

If Hawk is labeled as a bust, what is Davis to be labeled then? A uber-bust? He's been Donald Lee except with a much bigger cap number.

Well its not like Davis has had at QB to throw him the ball.

Didn't he have a former first-overall (bust) pick tossing it to him? :D

[MichiganPackerFan]

As far as Hawk goes, sometimes it's hard for me to follow what his role is and when he's doing his job. It looks like he's struggled in coverage. However, he's not a flashy player, so when he DOES make big plays, it's a trot back to the huddle rather than a big samurai celebration. Not that either is wrong, but it does seem the failures are more weighted than the triumphs. Similar to an offensive linemen (but not as extreme): his name is only called when he screws up. For a #5 pick, I think we needed a playmaker, but he does seem to be reliable and consistent. I also do not think he's reached the top of his upside yet either.

[Brandon494]

You can defend Hawk all you want, Davis is the better player. Now I'm not saying Davis has proven to be worth that #6 pick yet, but he has shown more pontenial than Hawk. I like Hawk and he is servicable but I would rather have Davis. Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:

[PackerTimer]

You can defend Hawk all you want, Davis is the better player. Now I'm not saying Davis has proven to be worth that #6 pick yet, but he has shown more pontenial than Hawk. I like Hawk and he is servicable but I would rather have Davis. Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:

He's a jerk because he essentially told Green Bay not to draft him. Same reason Eli Manning is a jerk for doing it to San Diego. Just show up and play for the team that drafts you. That's how it works.

[Brandon494]

You can defend Hawk all you want, Davis is the better player. Now I'm not saying Davis has proven to be worth that #6 pick yet, but he has shown more pontenial than Hawk. I like Hawk and he is servicable but I would rather have Davis. Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:

He's a jerk because he essentially told Green Bay not to draft him. Same reason Eli Manning is a jerk for doing it to San Diego. Just show up and play for the team that drafts you. That's how it works.

He never told GB not to draft him, he just said he was happy they didn't select him.

[pbmax]

The number six pick Davis had 9 total touchdowns in his first three years and never averaged more than 36 yards per game. How you can call this "better player" than Hawk is questionable.

This year he is off to a better start, but the QB who had been ignoring him for 3 years is back, so I'd say the jury is out. And with Hawk its quite simple. We played A LOT more base against the Browns than the Lions. So he had many more opportunities. He also made a couple of nice plays off blocks.

[sharpe1027]

Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:

Are you defending his actions? Maybe they should do away with the draft and just recruit like in college. :roll:

Also, why the huge man-love for Davis? Donald Lee has been just as effective over the past few years. That's right, Donald Lee has similar numbers. I know there's going to be all sorts of excuses ect..., but that just sounds like the excuses that are made for Hawk....

[Brandon494]

Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:

Are you defending his actions? Maybe they should do away with the draft and just recruit like in college. :roll:

Also, why the huge man-love for Davis? Donald Lee has been just as effective over the past few years. That's right, Donald Lee has similar numbers. I know there's going to be all sorts of excuses ect..., but that just sounds like the excuses that are made for Hawk....

Man love? Just because I prefer Davis over Hawk? You want to compare Davis to Donald Lee, yet do know how many average LBs I can compare to AJ Hawk's stats?

Also how am I defending his actions? Calling someone an asshole just because they don't want to live in a certain place is ignorant. Davis never told GB not to draft him, he just said he was happy they picked Hawk over him. Also you little comment about doing away with the draft and recruiting like college teams made no sense.

[cheesner]

You can defend Hawk all you want, Davis is the better player. Now I'm not saying Davis has proven to be worth that #6 pick yet, but he has shown more pontenial than Hawk. I like Hawk and he is servicable but I would rather have Davis. Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:

He's a jerk because he essentially told Green Bay not to draft him. Same reason Eli Manning is a jerk for doing it to San Diego. Just show up and play for the team that drafts you. That's how it works.

He never told GB not to draft him, he just said he was happy they didn't select him.Clearly he did not want GB to draft him. Stating that he was very happy the Pack did not take him at his welcome to SF press conference was a bit unusual. You don't think that attitude was apparent in pre-draft interviews? Whether he said 'don't draft me' in those words or not, I am sure that sentiment was conveyed.

Davis was very immature at the time and has only recently come around. He played so poorly in SF his first 2 years, imagine how he would have responded in GB, a place where he dreaded going.

My bet, is that if GB had selected him, we wouldn't have even a glimmer of hope (he is looking better now in SF) of him doing anything in the NFL. He would be considered a huge bust by everyone.

[Partial]

Vernon Davis is a douche. Glad he is not a Packer. Lee is a more complete player imo.

[Brandon494]

Vernon Davis is a douche. Glad he is not a Packer. Lee is a more complete player imo.

I'd rather have Finley over Davis, not so such about Lee.

[ThunderDan]

You can defend Hawk all you want, Davis is the better player. Now I'm not saying Davis has proven to be worth that #6 pick yet, but he has shown more pontenial than Hawk. I like Hawk and he is servicable but I would rather have Davis. Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:


What has Davis done?

Here are AJs stats as a Packer.

2006 119T 18th in the league in tackles
2007 105T 28th in the league in tackles
2008 86T 66th in the league in tackles
2009 31T 100th in the league in tackles

To say a "guy" hasn't produced at LB but averages over 100 tackles a year is silly. A "guy" who was in the top 30 in tackles, of the whole NFL, the two years he wasn't hurt.

[Brandon494]

You can defend Hawk all you want, Davis is the better player. Now I'm not saying Davis has proven to be worth that #6 pick yet, but he has shown more pontenial than Hawk. I like Hawk and he is servicable but I would rather have Davis. Also love how some of you call him a asshole because a 21 year old southern boy didn't want to play in Green Bay. :roll:


What has Davis done?

Here are AJs stats as a Packer.

2006 119T 18th in the league in tackles
2007 105T 28th in the league in tackles
2008 86T 66th in the league in tackles
2009 31T 100th in the league in tackles

To say a "guy" hasn't produced at LB but averages over 100 tackles a year is silly. A "guy" who was in the top 30 in tackles, of the whole NFL, the two years he wasn't hurt.

Anyone can make tackles man, I like how you left out sacks, tackle for loss, INT, pass delections, etc.

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.

[rbaloha1]

It may safe to say Davis has more upside than Hawk.

However maybe the light went on for Hawk.

[ThunderDan]

Anyone can make tackles man, I like how you left out sacks, tackle for loss, INT, pass delections, etc.


If it is so easy to make tackles, how come, on average, only 38 players a year over the last 3 years made a 100 tackles or more in a season?

[sharpe1027]

Man love? Just because I prefer Davis over Hawk? You want to compare Davis to Donald Lee, yet do know how many average LBs I can compare to AJ Hawk's stats?

Also how am I defending his actions? Calling someone an asshole just because they don't want to live in a certain place is ignorant. Davis never told GB not to draft him, he just said he was happy they picked Hawk over him. Also you little comment about doing away with the draft and recruiting like college teams made no sense.

Forget the man-love comment then, it seems we both agree that both Davis and AJ have been pretty average so far.

Davis didn't go public with his displeasure until after the draft, I'll give him that and he is one up on Manning for that reason. I didn't hear Davis say he was happy he didn't go to the other teams that passed him up. Singling out a specific team for whatever reason is a stupid move. Forgive me for actually giving a damn about how people perceive/portray the Wisconsin to the national media. How ignorant of me.

What exactly qualifies my opinion as ignorant? It doesn't agree with your opinion? I guess I'm happily ignorant.

The point about recruiting makes sense if you take a second and think about it. If players start selecting which team they prefer or will not play for, then what's the point of the draft? Maybe Davis didn't privately express his displeasure to the Packers before the draft, but the fact that he had no qualms telling the whole world about it makes it at least plausible.

I can understand being underwhelmed with the AJ pick, but the production of Davis doesn't seem to be a strong argument for or against the pick.

[Brandon494]

Anyone can make tackles man, I like how you left out sacks, tackle for loss, INT, pass delections, etc.


If it is so easy to make tackles, how come, on average, only 38 players a year over the last 3 years made a 100 tackles or more in a season?

Never said it was easy, just said anyone can make tackles. Keep hyping Hawk up, its never going to make him a pro bowl player.

[ThunderDan]

Anyone can make tackles man, I like how you left out sacks, tackle for loss, INT, pass delections, etc.


If it is so easy to make tackles, how come, on average, only 38 players a year over the last 3 years made a 100 tackles or more in a season?

Never said it was easy, just said anyone can make tackles. Keep hyping Hawk up, its never going to make him a pro bowl player.

When did I ever say he was a ProBowl quality player? He makes a lot of tackles and is assignment sure. He isn't the impact player you want at 5 but he's under contract and plays well.

[get louder at lambeau]

I hope you Hawk lovers are still chewing.

[Partial]

Anyone can make tackles man, I like how you left out sacks, tackle for loss, INT, pass delections, etc.


If it is so easy to make tackles, how come, on average, only 38 players a year over the last 3 years made a 100 tackles or more in a season?

This is the most meaningless stat ever. Show me game changing plays, not tackles that could be 5-10 yards down field.

[sharpe1027]

This is the most meaningless stat ever.

No it is not. It is a statistic that can be misleading, just as any statistic out there can be. It is far, far, far from meaningless. It just doesn't agree with your current position.

[pbmax]

Anyone can make tackles man, I like how you left out sacks, tackle for loss, INT, pass delections, etc.


If it is so easy to make tackles, how come, on average, only 38 players a year over the last 3 years made a 100 tackles or more in a season?

This is the most meaningless stat ever. Show me game changing plays, not tackles that could be 5-10 yards down field.
Not that easy. Total number of tackles does mean something for linebackers, its a bad sign for safeties, but linebackers need to make tackles. Whether its for a loss or not, the tackle must be made.

In fact, this information casts some doubt on the major theme of Hawk's demise (outside of coverage ability vis a vis Chillar). If he was so poor at shedding blocks, he wouldn't have been making this number of tackles.

[b bulldog]

Hawk played a very physical game on Sunday. He looked like he really wanted to play. let's all hope he continues this for the rest of the season, great job AJ.

[ND72]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

[SkinBasket]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Like the troll will still be here.

[Brandon494]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

You need to get over your hard on for AJ Hawk. :bs:

Hawk wants to return to Packers next season
Regardless of his current role, linebacker A.J. Hawk says he would like to remain with the Packers beyond this season.

That decision, though, almost surely will come down to whether he’s willing to take a major pay cut from the $4.1 million he’s scheduled to make in base salary next year.

Hawk, who has played only in the Packers’ base defense the last two games, was on the field for only nine snaps against the Detroit Lions last week because defensive coordiator Dom Capers deployed nickel personnel most of the game.

It’s a given the Packers won’t bring back Hawk next year at that pay. They presumably would ask him to take a pay cut before releasing him, and if they do, it will be up to Hawk to accept their new offer or force them to cut him so he can sign with another club.

“I don’t know, if that happens we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” Hawk said of a pay cut. “I like it here. Definitely. Regardless of how many reps I’m getting right now I still want to be here. I’d much rather be not playing as much as I’d like on a good winning team and a solid organization than starting for a team going 2-14.”

-- Pete Dougherty, pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com

[HarveyWallbangers]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

[Partial]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

That insiders believe that Hawk is going to have to take a paycut to remain on the Packers. I agree with them if he plays like he typically has the past two years. If he continues like he did yesterday he will be a Packer for awhile.

[ThunderDan]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

Every article you read in the paper comes true about 2010 written in Oct 2009. What else could it prove?

[Brandon494]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Like the troll will still be here.

I'm a troll now? I've been a member of his board since 2006 dick face, just don't post as much.

[Brandon494]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

That insiders believe that Hawk is going to have to take a paycut to remain on the Packers. I agree with them if he plays like he typically has the past two years. If he continues like he did yesterday he will be a Packer for awhile.

Thank you, its not that hard to figure out.

[ThunderDan]

pb-

I did some more digging.

In 2006, Hawk was the 6th leading OLB tackler behind Bulluck, June, Briggs, Sims and Brooks.

In 2007, Hawk was the 9th leading OLB tackler.

Hard to compare 2008 with him playing both OLB and MLB.

[ThunderDan]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

That insiders believe that Hawk is going to have to take a paycut to remain on the Packers. I agree with them if he plays like he typically has the past two years. If he continues like he did yesterday he will be a Packer for awhile.

Thank you, its not that hard to figure out.

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

[ND72]

Hawk will have to take a pay cut from $4.1 million when we will be either millions of dollars under the salary cap, or will have an uncapped year??? He got a $13 million dollar roster bonus in March of 2008, pretty sure $4.1 million is nothing, especially since Ted loves him, Moss loves him, and McCarthy love him.

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

[Partial]

Hawk will have to take a pay cut from $4.1 million when we will be either millions of dollars under the salary cap, or will have an uncapped year??? He got a $13 million dollar roster bonus in March of 2008, pretty sure $4.1 million is nothing, especially since Ted loves him, Moss loves him, and McCarthy love him.

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

I don't think they love him as much as you think. I've never heard MM say anything glowing about him this year. In fact I've only heard things with a negative connotation like (paraphrase) "We'd like him to let loose and play more aggressively", etc.

Moss basically said the same thing the other day in the JSO article.

I don't think they're as high on him as you think.

[Brandon494]

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

So you admit it? :lol:

[Brandon494]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

That insiders believe that Hawk is going to have to take a paycut to remain on the Packers. I agree with them if he plays like he typically has the past two years. If he continues like he did yesterday he will be a Packer for awhile.

Thank you, its not that hard to figure out.

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

Serioulsy dude, your posts are horrible. Just like most of you posts what does that have to do with anything? :roll:

[HarveyWallbangers]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

Every article you read in the paper comes true about 2010 written in Oct 2009. What else could it prove?

This guy gets it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

Serioulsy dude, your posts are horrible. Just like most of you posts what does that have to do with anything? :roll:

It ain't that hard to figure out.

[Partial]

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

What does this have to do with anything? If they're wrong on the above, are they automatically wrong on everything else?


pb-

I did some more digging.

In 2006, Hawk was the 6th leading OLB tackler behind Bulluck, June, Briggs, Sims and Brooks.

In 2007, Hawk was the 9th leading OLB tackler.

Hard to compare 2008 with him playing both OLB and MLB.

Who cares how many tackles he has? How does he compare to those players in game changing plays such as sacks, tackles for loss, interceptions, forced fumbles?!? Those are the stats that matter. We're running a defense where the linebackers are the playmakers. If they're only going to gently tackle instead of making an impact, then you move on.

[ND72]

Hawk will have to take a pay cut from $4.1 million when we will be either millions of dollars under the salary cap, or will have an uncapped year??? He got a $13 million dollar roster bonus in March of 2008, pretty sure $4.1 million is nothing, especially since Ted loves him, Moss loves him, and McCarthy love him.

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

I don't think they love him as much as you think. I've never heard MM say anything glowing about him this year. In fact I've only heard things with a negative connotation like (paraphrase) "We'd like him to let loose and play more aggressively", etc.

Moss basically said the same thing the other day in the JSO article.

I don't think they're as high on him as you think.


The past couple of weeks Moss has said stuff yes....but have you read any of his other comments from pre-season or even before the season regarding Hawk? That still doesn't mean they are going to cut him with a year left on his contract as a #5 pick.

[ND72]

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

So you admit it? :lol:


That I have a "hard on" for Hawk? yes....I loved him before he was a packer. I should mention that at my wedding this summer, my best man even said in his speech, "We cheered when we drafted A.J. Hawk...and I only mention that because him and I usually can't go more than 15 minutes without saying the words A.J. Hawk."

[ThunderDan]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

That insiders believe that Hawk is going to have to take a paycut to remain on the Packers. I agree with them if he plays like he typically has the past two years. If he continues like he did yesterday he will be a Packer for awhile.

Thank you, its not that hard to figure out.

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

Serioulsy dude, your posts are horrible. Just like most of you posts what does that have to do with anything? :roll:

Let's see..... every story you read in a paper about the NFL comes true. :oops: Are you that blinded about Hawk that the report could be completely wrong? :roll: If Hawk plays in the last 10 games, like last week, would you ask him as GM to take a pay cut? :oops:

I'm sure 6 games into the 2009 season TT and MM have already desided who is going to get paid their money and who is going to take a pay cut. I mean if Hawk has to take a cut GJ with 22 catches and 1 TD isn't playing to his new contact and needs a pay cut.

[pbmax]

Hawk will have to take a pay cut from $4.1 million when we will be either millions of dollars under the salary cap, or will have an uncapped year??? He got a $13 million dollar roster bonus in March of 2008, pretty sure $4.1 million is nothing, especially since Ted loves him, Moss loves him, and McCarthy love him.

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

I don't think they love him as much as you think. I've never heard MM say anything glowing about him this year. In fact I've only heard things with a negative connotation like (paraphrase) "We'd like him to let loose and play more aggressively", etc.

Moss basically said the same thing the other day in the JSO article.

I don't think they're as high on him as you think.
Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

[Partial]

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

ND, I don't disagree with you, I have no idea if he will be cut, but I don't think the coaching staff is sky high on him either.

PB, again, I don't know if I'd call him a cap causality as they have plenty of cap space. Say they resign Chillar, Bishop takes another step forward, they keep Barnett (better than Hawk) and draft an ILB that falls to the bottom of the first round (we'll say projected top 10 guy). Is Hawk still a lock in that case? I can't say with confidence that he is.

If he plays like he did yesterday, then yes, he will be. If he plays like he did for much of last year and much of this year, than he may not be.

[Brandon494]

Let's see..... every story you read in a paper about the NFL comes true. :oops: Are you that blinded about Hawk that the report could be completely wrong? :roll: If Hawk plays in the last 10 games, like last week, would you ask him as GM to take a pay cut? :oops:

I'm sure 6 games into the 2009 season TT and MM have already desided who is going to get paid their money and who is going to take a pay cut. I mean if Hawk has to take a cut GJ with 22 catches and 1 TD isn't playing to his new contact and needs a pay cut.

Never said anything about the story being true or not, just a reference. Then you bring up a article written by another columnist that has nothing to do with the topic to try to make a point.

AJ Hawk did have a good game against the Browns, do you really expect him to play that well all season? I hope he does but I surely doubt it. Also why are you trying to bring GJ into the discussion, GJ earned his contract by playing his ass off. Hawk is only getting paid to big bucks because of his draft status, not his play on the field.

[bobblehead]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Thats exactly what Waldo said to me right before Chillar started taking his playing time away.

[MJZiggy]

I'm finding Jon Gruden's voice to be oddly irritating. Kind of what I imagine jock itch would be like...

[pbmax]

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

ND, I don't disagree with you, I have no idea if he will be cut, but I don't think the coaching staff is sky high on him either.

PB, again, I don't know if I'd call him a cap causality as they have plenty of cap space. Say they resign Chillar, Bishop takes another step forward, they keep Barnett (better than Hawk) and draft an ILB that falls to the bottom of the first round (we'll say projected top 10 guy). Is Hawk still a lock in that case? I can't say with confidence that he is.

If he plays like he did yesterday, then yes, he will be. If he plays like he did for much of last year and much of this year, than he may not be.
Anything is possible. But I think they will first go OLB on defense well before another ILB. Until they feel the need to replace Barnett or if Chillar is too costly, then I can see an ILB. But that will tend to push Chillar/Barnett out not Hawk. The vets he cuts are replacement level and expensive, even in his poor games, Hawk is better than that.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Thats exactly what Waldo said to me right before Chillar started taking his playing time away.

And then right after you realized Chillar still had all the worts Waldo described.

[ND72]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.


That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Thats exactly what Waldo said to me right before Chillar started taking his playing time away.

See even that is false. he never took his playing time away. In base 3-4, or their 2-4/2-5, Hawk is on the field. when they go to a 3-2 or a 4-2, Chillar comes in. It was that way before the season even. Hawk only played in their Nickle set for the first preseason game, but never played another down of nickle in the preseason.

So the fact people say he's lost his snaps to Chillar is technically false, since he has never played a single down of regular season football in nickle or dime.

Reminder though (this was on a local Madison ESPN show today), other than the Lions game, AJ Hawk has been on the field for 89% of every defense snap. I have no numbers, or any other reference other than what I heard on the radio.

[bobblehead]

I'm finding Jon Gruden's voice to be oddly irritating. Kind of what I imagine jock itch would be like...

And I'm finding it oddly irritating that you are imagining what jock itch would be like.....

[Brandon494]

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

ND, I don't disagree with you, I have no idea if he will be cut, but I don't think the coaching staff is sky high on him either.

PB, again, I don't know if I'd call him a cap causality as they have plenty of cap space. Say they resign Chillar, Bishop takes another step forward, they keep Barnett (better than Hawk) and draft an ILB that falls to the bottom of the first round (we'll say projected top 10 guy). Is Hawk still a lock in that case? I can't say with confidence that he is.

If he plays like he did yesterday, then yes, he will be. If he plays like he did for much of last year and much of this year, than he may not be.
Anything is possible. But I think they will first go OLB on defense well before another ILB. Until they feel the need to replace Barnett or if Chillar is too costly, then I can see an ILB. But that will tend to push Chillar/Barnett out not Hawk. The vets he cuts are replacement level and expensive, even in his poor games, Hawk is better than that.

I doubt they will even draft a LB on the first day next season. We need to improve our safety and corner depth before we think about drafting a LB.

[ND72]

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

ND, I don't disagree with you, I have no idea if he will be cut, but I don't think the coaching staff is sky high on him either.

PB, again, I don't know if I'd call him a cap causality as they have plenty of cap space. Say they resign Chillar, Bishop takes another step forward, they keep Barnett (better than Hawk) and draft an ILB that falls to the bottom of the first round (we'll say projected top 10 guy). Is Hawk still a lock in that case? I can't say with confidence that he is.

If he plays like he did yesterday, then yes, he will be. If he plays like he did for much of last year and much of this year, than he may not be.
Anything is possible. But I think they will first go OLB on defense well before another ILB. Until they feel the need to replace Barnett or if Chillar is too costly, then I can see an ILB. But that will tend to push Chillar/Barnett out not Hawk. The vets he cuts are replacement level and expensive, even in his poor games, Hawk is better than that.

I doubt they will even draft a LB on the first day next season. We need to improve our safety and corner depth before we think about drafting a LB.

First day being Thursday next year.....Wasn't a fan of that, until I saw my annual state conference is the Draft weekend, so I'm cool now with the Thursday/Friday/Saturday thing now.

[MJZiggy]

I'm finding Jon Gruden's voice to be oddly irritating. Kind of what I imagine jock itch would be like...

And I'm finding it oddly irritating that you are imagining what jock itch would be like.....

Not the happiest thought I've had all day...

[Zool]

Anyway I'm done with this topic,

Id hate to see what would happen if you weren't "done with this topic".

[ThunderDan]

Let's see..... every story you read in a paper about the NFL comes true. :oops: Are you that blinded about Hawk that the report could be completely wrong? :roll: If Hawk plays in the last 10 games, like last week, would you ask him as GM to take a pay cut? :oops:

I'm sure 6 games into the 2009 season TT and MM have already desided who is going to get paid their money and who is going to take a pay cut. I mean if Hawk has to take a cut GJ with 22 catches and 1 TD isn't playing to his new contact and needs a pay cut.

Never said anything about the story being true or not, just a reference. Then you bring up a article written by another columnist that has nothing to do with the topic to try to make a point.

AJ Hawk did have a good game against the Browns, do you really expect him to play that well all season? I hope he does but I surely doubt it. Also why are you trying to bring GJ into the discussion, GJ earned his contract by playing his ass off. Hawk is only getting paid to big bucks because of his draft status, not his play on the field.

Your argument seems to be that Hawk isn't earning his contract. If he isn't surely GJ isn't either. Is it that hard to connect the dots?

8.149 million for 22 catches and a TD so far.

Oh and by the way I like G Jennings a lot!

[Brandon494]

Anyway I'm done with this topic,

Id hate to see what would happen if you weren't "done with this topic".

great input!

[Cheesehead Craig]

Hawk getting released after the season if he doesn't take a pay cut? To me, that's just silly talk. Won't happen.

[SnakeLH2006]

I doubt they will even draft a LB on the first day next season. We need to improve our safety and corner depth before we think about drafting a LB.

How about getting an OT? Or an RB? We don't need more LB's, though.

[Partial]

Moss has had some pretty harsh words about Hawk the past two days. They're sort of backhanded compliments, saying he is playing good right now but was basically really bad before.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/70298492.html

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/70246992.html

[Fritz]

I don't think he's been all that harsh. I read his comments as having two points:

1. He seems to feel there's a hell of a lot of talent just barely behind Hawk, and if AJ wants to play he better make some plays cuz just being assignment sure isn't good enough.

2. Hawk's nature is to not make mistakes, and while that is important - not make mistakes - he is capable of more and is starting to understand that and play to his abilities and not overthink it so much any more.