Hawk to be replaced?

[packers11]

www.rotoworld.com

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel expects the Packers to replace AJ Hawk as the team's starting middle linebacker this offseason.

Hawk finished 2009 with 89 tackles, but made few big plays and was often beaten in coverage. Brandon Chillar and Desmond Bishop are in-house options to take over, especially if Hawk refuses a cut from his $4.1M salary.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

[get louder at lambeau]

Not gonna happen. Wouldn't be prudent.

http://static.tvguide.com/MediaBin/Galleries/Editorial/081027/Best-SNL-PoliticalImpressions/SNL-DanaCarvey-GeorgeBushSr3.jpg

[Zool]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

[bobblehead]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

this is a classic example of two people having polar opposite perceptions. Whereas I won't claim chillar had a good game, he outplayed Hawk badly again this season. He is a solid starter imo. Stud, not by any stretch, I thought he was the 4th best backer when kamp was healthy, but a starter none the less.

[Zool]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

this is a classic example of two people having polar opposite perceptions. Whereas I won't claim chillar had a good game, he outplayed Hawk badly again this season. He is a solid starter imo. Stud, not by any stretch, I thought he was the 4th best backer when kamp was healthy, but a starter none the less.

Hawk put together 3-4 really good games...all happened to be while Chillar was out. Hawk played his worst game against the Cards. All 4 LB's looked lost for the bulk of that game. I wouldn't mind seeing Hawk replaced with an upgrade, but Chillar is not that guy. That's a lateral move at best(as you said we disagree on which turd smells less), and now that Chillar got his fancy new contract, he's not even much cheaper. Find someone better.

[Brandon494]

Chillar was having a great season before the injury.

I said earlier in the season if Hawk was not willing to take a paycut his days in Green Bay could be over. Hawk had a better season then in 2008 but he is just not that good and I've seen enough of him during the years that tells me he will never get better.

[Bretsky]

Hawk was a Pro Bowl Alternate

Anybody else think he was worthy of this ?

Gotta love his attitude.....gotta love him as a Packer person

Just not sure he's a good fit here

Wonder what he might garner in a trade ????

[Patler]

i am at a loss trying to understand how Hawk got to the position he is now in.

As a rookie they talked about using him instead of Barnett in passing situations, and rotated them at times. He made several quick reacting plays in pass coverage that brought praise from Larry McCarren, who once said there was a combination of athletic ability and instinct that Hawk had which was lacking in other Packer LBs. He wasn't eye-popping, but seemed solid.

Now, he is just a situational player with little to no value in pass defense. He looks almost plodding at times.

What happened? Too much pure oxygen in his hyperbaric bedroom? Too much weight work in the weight room?

How does a guy who barely played in some games become a Pro Bowl alternate???

[Joemailman]

Hawk played his best football when Chillar was hurt and he was on the field more. Not sure being a rotational player works for him. I'm more of a Hawk supporter than a Chillar supporter, but I don't know if it's worth keeping him around as a part time player. Desmond Bishop is waiting in the wings.

[Lurker64]

I don't think anybody who's suggesting that Chillar ought to take Hawk's position in the base defense actually understands Hawk's position in the base defense. Chillar does many things well (notably blitzing and coverage), but the primary responsibilities of Hawk's position in the base defense are "run support", "clearing the way for somebody else on an inside blitz", and "hitting the first man through the hole" (and then getting off a block if it's not the ballcarrier). Chillar's skillset makes him a better fit for Barnett's spot (the playmaking ILB) and not Hawk's spot (the physical ILB). Getting rid of Hawk at this point is silly, since we don't have any other LBs with the same level of physicalit who can match his instincts and reaction speed. In the preseason we may see Bishop play Hawk's position a little bit, but I fear he's going to guess wrong in an attempt to make a big play too much for Capers' preference (the same thing that doomed Anthony Smith).

What you may well see next year is significantly different personnel for the DL and LBs in the nickel vs. base. Base, you expect Jenkins, Pickett, and Jolly on the line with Matthews, Barnett, Hawk, and rotating personnel at the other LB spot, whereas Nickel you'd get Raji and Jenkins on the line with Barnett, Chillar, Mathews, and Jones as the LBs. You could possibly put Kampman in for Jones in the nickel, but Jones is significantly better in coverage.

[ND72]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

this is a classic example of two people having polar opposite perceptions. Whereas I won't claim chillar had a good game, he outplayed Hawk badly again this season. He is a solid starter imo. Stud, not by any stretch, I thought he was the 4th best backer when kamp was healthy, but a starter none the less.

Totally disagree. Chillar started the season doing pretty well, but what most people don't realize, and what JSO doesn't say is that his "good start" against Chicago, and the St. Louis game, he wasn't even playing the MLB position. His sack against Chicago, he came in for Kampman and was at an OLB, and against St. Louis he was playing a safety position in the BIG OKIE thing that was stupid.

Chillar has shown his true MLB play late in the year, and he was HORRIBLE. He was listed as a cover guy, he got burned many many times. He is also considered a good tackler, but couldn't tackle anyone in the Arizona game. Anyone watch ESPN First take on monday? They pointed him out time and time again.

If Chillar is a starter, we can't run a 3-4. Period.

[ND72]

Hawk played his best football when Chillar was hurt and he was on the field more. Not sure being a rotational player works for him. I'm more of a Hawk supporter than a Chillar supporter, but I don't know if it's worth keeping him around as a part time player. Desmond Bishop is waiting in the wings.

Bishop is worse than Chillar.

[b bulldog]

Made the probowl off of his name and college rep. Barnett was clearly our best MLB but Hawk should still be kept unless we upgrade via draft or ufa.

[ND72]

Made the probowl off of his name and college rep. Barnett was clearly our best MLB but Hawk should still be kept unless we upgrade via draft or ufa.

then why wasn't he a probowl alternate the past 2 years?

[Lurker64]

Made the probowl off of his name and college rep. Barnett was clearly our best MLB but Hawk should still be kept unless we upgrade via draft or ufa.

And there shouldn't be any ILBs available at #23 who are immediately an upgrade over Hawk. Rolando McClain would be probably, but he is unlikely to make it out of the top 10. There are other guys who would probably be comparable to Hawk (e.g. Brandon Spikes) but no way should we spend our first round pick on them.

[b bulldog]

he did play better this year but was clearly the second best MLB on the Packers, no debate there. People for some odd reason really seem to like AJ. That is fine but his play does not merit his strong support.

[b bulldog]

Agree and that is why I think he stays

[The Leaper]

Hawk is not a great LB...but I don't see why you would get rid of him right now. He's at least a serviceable MLB in the 3-4. Sure, he could be upgraded...but why get rid of him before you actually FIND the upgrade? Considering that the "upgrade" is likely to be a draft pick, there is no guarantee the "upgrade" will actually be an upgrade in 2010. It may take another year or two.

[red]

i think hawk is solid, not spectacular at all. but solid

replacing hawk with chillar is a step in the wrong direction IMO. i haven't seen anything out of the guy to make me think he's anything more then a decent backup

if they want to replace him, then fine. they better draft a damn good MLB or pick one up in free agency, because an upgrade is not on our roster

hawk might not have lived up to the #5 overall pick to this point. but he's become a quality starter. if he was picked in the second or third, i doubt people would be complaining about him

[rbaloha1]

Hawk is too inconsistent. If unwilling to take roster bonus reduction then trade.

McClain or Spikes may warrant moving up ala Clay Matthews. Physical players better suited for the 3-4 ilb than Hawk.

[ND72]

Hawk is too inconsistent. If unwilling to take roster bonus reduction then trade.

McClain or Spikes may warrant moving up ala Clay Matthews. Physical players better suited for the 3-4 ilb than Hawk.

Spikes is worthless. McClain is the only MLB worth taking in round 1, and he didn't impress me at all in the national championship. I saw better players around him making plays which put McClain in position at times. Alabama's DL is nasty, which makes decent LB's a TON better in college.

[The Leaper]

McClain or Spikes may warrant moving up ala Clay Matthews.

We have far more pressing needs at OT and CB to address with high draft picks, IMO.

Why dump Hawk to pick up an unproven rookie LB? Again, Hawk is not great, but he IS serviceable. No draft pick is guaranteed to be serviceable.

[Patler]

Hawk is not a great LB...but I don't see why you would get rid of him right now.

I think he is due for a sizable salary increase next year, leading to speculation that GB might not want to pay it for a part time player.

[MJZiggy]

You guys realize that the blurb said Milwaukee Journal Sentinel EXPECTS Hawk to be replaced. They EXPECT a lot of crap that never happens. More stellar journalism from the JS of misinformation.

[jmbarnes101]

You guys realize that the blurb said Milwaukee Journal Sentinel EXPECTS Hawk to be replaced. They EXPECT a lot of crap that never happens. More stellar journalism from the JS of misinformation.

Ding, ding, ding... I think we have a winner. That was my first reaction to the story and than I watched a lot of people step over others in order to rip A.J. Anybody that thinks Chiller or Bishop is better needs to pay more attention. I'd replace Barnett & Jones before I changed out A.J. unless you found a more physical LB that can play better in coverage.

[get louder at lambeau]

Hawk is not a great LB...but I don't see why you would get rid of him right now.

I think he is due for a sizable salary increase next year, leading to speculation that GB might not want to pay it for a part time player.

Rotoworld says he is due $4.1 mil for 2010. Chillar is set to make $1.9 mil.

Not sure I'd make any assumptions based on either number. Sounds like starter money and part time starter money. I doubt they'd be inclined to let finances make the decision on this one. Seems like they can easily keep both around without any major effect on their budget, and there is no salary cap, so they don't have to worry as much about dropping a chunk of money on new contracts. They have the money.

[Lurker64]

Hawk is not a great LB...but I don't see why you would get rid of him right now.

I think he is due for a sizable salary increase next year, leading to speculation that GB might not want to pay it for a part time player.

At the same time though, it's looking like there will be no salary cap next year and the Packers are one of the more profitable teams in the NFL. I'm sure they can afford to keep him.

[KYPack]

What happened to this kid? One thing I liked about him in his early career was the constant improvement. Well, that shit came to a halt.

He's regressing. His foot speed and quickness have greatly diminished. I can't help wonder if last year's injury was some kind of career limiting deal. He can't move anywhere close to what he once did.

[b bulldog]

Think he is due a 3 to 4 million dollar roster bonus in the next few months. His future as a Packer probably rides on his willingness to waive or severly reduce that.

[b bulldog]

$4.123 MIL bonus if what I read was correct

[get louder at lambeau]

$4.123 MIL bonus if what I read was correct

From what I see, that's his total salary, not a bonus.

[packers11]

Doesn't it look like hawk hit the weight room to hard from year 1 to year 4 ? It looks like he put on to much muscle and doesn't move as fluid / fast . I remember he used to fly around and the coaches kept saying he was a workout warrior... I hope this off-season they trim him down, it would improve his game (IMO)

[Bossman641]

Doesn't it look like hawk hit the weight room to hard from year 1 to year 4 ? It looks like he put on to much muscle and doesn't move as fluid / fast . I remember he used to fly around and the coaches kept saying he was a workout warrior... I hope this off-season they trim him down, it would improve his game (IMO)

I said the same thing earlier this season. He looks way to bulky in the chest. I don't know what happened to him, but he isn't fluid at all anymore.

[ICU81MI]

I think Hawk is just an average nfl player these days. I think he'll have a hard time finding a starting spot on a good defense, but could walk onto a lower echelon defense as a middle linebacker I would think.

[Patler]

Checking numerous sources, it seems the Packers owe Hawk something around $15 million in new money (salary or bonuses) the last two years of his contract (2010 and 2011). Could be around $10 million of that in 2011.

Like KYPack, I am at a loss to explain how the ahtlete of 2006 got to be the plodding player of 2009. He was expected to and did take snaps away from Barnett in passing downs early in his career. Now he is so far out of consideration in passing situations that there was a game this year in which he had something like 8 snaps the entire game. I don't get it.

Nor can I understand how he gets any Pro Bowl consideration over Barnett at all.

[pbmax]

www.rotoworld.com

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel expects the Packers to replace AJ Hawk as the team's starting middle linebacker this offseason.

Hawk finished 2009 with 89 tackles, but made few big plays and was often beaten in coverage. Brandon Chillar and Desmond Bishop are in-house options to take over, especially if Hawk refuses a cut from his $4.1M salary.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has been predicting this for two years. As they had for Bubba Franks and KGB for several years prior. I haven't seen the article yet but I am going to guess its Bedard once again demonstrating he has no idea how Thompson operates. Could also be Silverstein as he was carrying the KGB release story for KGBs last three years.

[retailguy]

Doesn't it look like hawk hit the weight room to hard from year 1 to year 4 ? It looks like he put on to much muscle and doesn't move as fluid / fast . I remember he used to fly around and the coaches kept saying he was a workout warrior... I hope this off-season they trim him down, it would improve his game (IMO)

I said the same thing earlier this season. He looks way to bulky in the chest. I don't know what happened to him, but he isn't fluid at all anymore.

Admittedly I didn't watch Hawk as a college player. When he got here, that's what everyone talked about. He might not be flashy but he'd be where he was supposed to be.

He looks slow. It is disappointing. This was supposed to be the "can't miss, safe pick"... Yeah. It didn't work out too well, so far.

To the linebacker experts - Could it be coaching? He seemed better earlier in his career as others have said...

[pbmax]

7/28/2006: Signed a six-year, $37.5 million contract. The deal contains $16 million guaranteed, including an $11.85 million option bonus in the second year. 2009: $3.025 million, 2010: $4,123,750, 2011: $10 million, 2012: Free Agent

Looks like he already go the big option bonus. 2010 isn't the year he will be under the budget gun, that will be 2011.