HAWK TO BE RESIGNED

[Bretsky]

FOX 6 Milwaukee News just reported AJ Hawk will be flying in tomorrow to finalize a new Five Year Deal as a fyi

[mission]

Wow that's great!

Bye bye Barnett?

[Bretsky]

these guys are usually very accurate fwiw

[mission]

these guys are usually very accurate fwiw

wilde just credited them

here's a link
http://www.todaystmj4.com/bloggers/lanceallan/117290028.html

[Joemailman]

FOX 6 Milwaukee News just reported AJ Hawk will be flying in tomorrow to finalize a new Five Year Deal as a fyi

Does this count as a FA signing? :-P

[Lurker64]

Our brief national nightmare is over!

[Bretsky]

Breaking news by Bretsky

[mission]

Ill say 5yr/32 mil although I won't be surprised if he gets more... what say you?

[Bretsky]

Does this count as a FA signing? :-P

no

[mission]

Breaking news by Bretsky

ya, nice job! i actually saw it on here before twitter

[HarveyWallbangers]

Breaking news by Bretsky

+1

[red]

wow this is some fast moving shit

[Kiwon]

Since Hawk is not a FA is the Packers' habit to not discuss contract details ($$$) still in play?

That's the detail that everyone wants to know. 5 years for how much?

[channtheman]

5 year 50 million! :lol:

[Freak Out]

Our brief national nightmare is over!

Ha ha.....you guys are on a roll today.

[Guiness]

Since Hawk is not a FA is the Packers' habit to not discuss contract details ($$$) still in play?

That's the detail that everyone wants to know. 5 years for how much?

I saw that elsewhere.

How is he not an FA? He was released. No waivers this time of year?

[Patler]

Wow that's great!

Bye bye Barnett?

It sure seems that way, doesn't it? Otherwise signing both Bishop and Hawk this year to starters money wouldn't make a lot of sense.

[mmmdk]

Glad Hawk is locked up & ready to go!

[Fritz]

5 year 50 million! :lol:

That would be hilarious.

[bobblehead]

It sure seems that way, doesn't it? Otherwise signing both Bishop and Hawk this year to starters money wouldn't make a lot of sense.

I think we keep Barnett to be honest unless we have cap issues. He has earned his contract and you can't have too much talent. He is also a cheerleader for the city of GB from what I have seen. I think they all stay and play...chillar too for that matter. Besides, we have proven this year that depth is in fact important.

[RashanGary]

With Hawk putting his house up for sale and some of the comments through the season and suggestion he should be traded to somebody who wants him (early in teh year when he wasn't playing alot). . . . I thought Hawk and his agent would be seeking max dollar. This shows me they're probably not looking for max dollar and the Packers got really fair with him (I'm guessing 7m/year).

IT's a little more than he's worth IMO, but he's a leader, durable and a good player. He's the guy I would most want starting, I just thought UFA was going to get in the way here.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Depth seems much less important with Bishop and Hawk as starters. Hawk has never missed a game and Bishop is stout and looks like somebody who will be hard to get out of the lineup.

[hoosier]

Does anyone know enough about Hawk's contract to explain why they decided to cut him before re-signing him? Couldn't they have just torn up the old contract or redone it without cutting him?

[get louder at lambeau]

(I'm guessing 7m/year).

Yesterday, right before they cut him, I guessed they would sign him up to a 5 year, $35 million contract, and you said it sounded more like wishful thinking. Less than 24 hours later, and a 5 year contract is announced, and you're guessing that it's for EXACTLY the amount I guessed. Where's the "Pat myself on the back" smiley when you need it?

As a matter of fact, where are any of the smileys when you need them on this newfangled forum?

[pbmax]

Does anyone know enough about Hawk's contract to explain why they decided to cut him before re-signing him? Couldn't they have just torn up the old contract or redone it without cutting him?

Might have been a ploy, but given they signed a deal the next day, probably not. The Packers probably wanted to protect themselves by filing the paperwork relieving them of the $10 million hit a day early rather than wait until today. That way, the only item up in the air would be the new contract, not the old. So if things drag, the team is not twisting in the wind.

Doing it a day early also lets them alert Hawk and agent to the move as one step in the negotiations rather than making it seem like an abrupt 11th hour end.

[pbmax]

Silverstein says that cutting Hawk then doing a new deal allowed them more flexibility than simply redoing and extending his last contract. And I think he has a good point; there are limits about what can be modified in an existing contract when its extended. For instance, the 30% rule (limiting base salary increases to 30% increase each year) and similar. So the cut might have been procedural all along.

[Fritz]

So is it official?

[RashanGary]

Yesterday, right before they cut him, I guessed they would sign him up to a 5 year, $35 million contract, and you said it sounded more like wishful thinking. Less than 24 hours later, and a 5 year contract is announced, and you're guessing that it's for EXACTLY the amount I guessed. Where's the "Pat myself on the back" smiley when you need it?

As a matter of fact, where are any of the smileys when you need them on this newfangled forum?

I thought Hawk would be seeking max deal (8+ is what I figured he'd garner on the UFA market). I hope the Packers didn't go that high here and I don't picture him taking less.

But yeah, I was dead wrong. I didn't think Hawk wanted to be here. I thought he wanted max$$

[Tony Oday]

I was with a bunch of Viking buddies and they all said..."well looks like the Vikes have a FA to pursue." That was damn funny :)

[wist43]

No way is Hawk worth a max deal... he's not worth $7M a year either - if that's what they're going to pay him, then I'm not on board with it. Hawk is JAG.

[Tony Oday]

No way is Hawk worth a max deal... he's not worth $7M a year either - if that's what they're going to pay him, then I'm not on board with it. Hawk is JAG.

JAGs dont RUN the defense.

[Guiness]

I think we keep Barnett to be honest unless we have cap issues. He has earned his contract and you can't have too much talent. He is also a cheerleader for the city of GB from what I have seen. I think they all stay and play...chillar too for that matter. Besides, we have proven this year that depth is in fact important.

Ok, here's a question to put out there, and I have to admit I'm not at all sure.

One of Barnett's assets is his sideline to sideline speed, and he can cover a bit. Could he line up at OLB opposite Mathews? How would his skills translate?

[red]

ok, it sounds like the deal has been signed, its worth between 30-35 million with 10 million guaranteed thats max value so it has to have some performance based incentives


Packers re-signed ILB AJ Hawk to a five-year contract.
Hawk, 27, is expected to receive in the vicinity of $30-35 million in max value, with over $10 million guaranteed. We can't say we're in the love with the deal, but by all accounts Hawk is a coaching staff favorite despite his on-field deficiencies. He's not a stout run defender as 3-4 inside linebackers are supposed to be. For his part, Hawk ranked 22nd in the NFL in tackles last season, and the only linebacker with more pass breakups than Hawk was Kansas City's Derrick Johnson. Hawk had three interceptions and a fumble recovery.
Source: Jason La Canfora on Twitter
Mar 3, 12:49 PM

[mmmdk]

You need guys like Hawk on a winning team; SB WINNING TEAM.

[Smidgeon]

Ok, here's a question to put out there, and I have to admit I'm not at all sure.

One of Barnett's assets is his sideline to sideline speed, and he can cover a bit. Could he line up at OLB opposite Mathews? How would his skills translate?

Honestly, I only think Barnett could be good playing the OLB position off the TE (weakside), wherever that is. I don't think he's got the strength to take on a TE play after play. Maybe he could because I really know nothing, but I think if he didn't have a TE in his face, he could be decent/average as an OLB. But I really have no idea.

[Freak Out]

:)

[get louder at lambeau]

JAGs dont RUN the defense.

JAGs also don't lead all LBs in INTs and come in 2nd among LBs in passes defensed. It's amazing to me that anyone would still be parroting this stuff right now.

[Guiness]

Packers re-signed ILB AJ Hawk to a five-year contract.
Hawk, 27, is expected to receive in the vicinity of $30-35 million in max value, with over $10 million guaranteed. We can't say we're in the love with the deal, but by all accounts Hawk is a coaching staff favorite despite his on-field deficiencies. He's not a stout run defender as 3-4 inside linebackers are supposed to be. For his part, Hawk ranked 22nd in the NFL in tackles last season, and the only linebacker with more pass breakups than Hawk was Kansas City's Derrick Johnson. Hawk had three interceptions and a fumble recovery.
Source: Jason La Canfora on Twitter
Mar 3, 12:49 PM

Pretty vague, but seems in the neighborhood of what many here were thinking. $10million guaranteed is an awfully familiar number, I 'm sure that had something to do with his old contract, i.e. he didn't give up the $10million. The other number means nothing, of course, it's the max contract value so it's hard to tell how many incentives are part of it.

I'm a little curious about his old contract. He was due the bonus on the first day of the league year...if the CBA expires on the 4th (right, like it's not going to) is the 5th still the first day of the new league year? Or is there no 'new' year. Just wondering if he'd have gotten his money with or without a new CBA.

[Lurker64]

I'm not sure the person who wrote the above blurb (which is not Jason LaCanfora's twitter, I follow him on Twitter and he didn't write that) really understand's Hawk's responsibility as a run defender. It's primarily to maintain gap-integrity and to take on lead blockers. He's not the guy who's supposed to get TFLs 3 yards in the backfield, that's Bishop's job, and Hawk's job is to enable him to do it.

A lot more will be made out of the "Packers run defense was poor" than needs to be made by people who weren't really paying attention. The run defense was poor because we barely tried to stop the run. We were generally fairly successful at stopping it when we made an effort to do so.

[pbmax]

I'm not sure the person who wrote the above blurb (which is not Jason LaCanfora's twitter, I follow him on Twitter and he didn't write that) really understand's Hawk's responsibility as a run defender. It's primarily to maintain gap-integrity and to take on lead blockers. He's not the guy who's supposed to get TFLs 3 yards in the backfield, that's Bishop's job, and Hawk's job is to enable him to do it.

A lot more will be made out of the "Packers run defense was poor" than needs to be made by people who weren't really paying attention. The run defense was poor because we barely tried to stop the run. We were generally fairly successful at stopping it when we made an effort to do so.

I think you also could say the one thing he is as a run defender is stout. Downhill, supreme instincts, plays behind LOS, those are things he isn't as a run defender. He might not be Levon Kirkland in shedding a Guard's block, but he is stout and gap sure.

[pbmax]

... A lot more will be made out of the "Packers run defense was poor" than needs to be made by people who weren't really paying attention. The run defense was poor because we barely tried to stop the run...

Clearly I was on this narrative before the national sheep even knew who Diyral Briggs was.

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php?21016-Packers-Rush-Defense-Struggles&highlight=defense

[red]

I'm not sure the person who wrote the above blurb (which is not Jason LaCanfora's twitter, I follow him on Twitter and he didn't write that) really understand's Hawk's responsibility as a run defender. It's primarily to maintain gap-integrity and to take on lead blockers. He's not the guy who's supposed to get TFLs 3 yards in the backfield, that's Bishop's job, and Hawk's job is to enable him to do it.

A lot more will be made out of the "Packers run defense was poor" than needs to be made by people who weren't really paying attention. The run defense was poor because we barely tried to stop the run. We were generally fairly successful at stopping it when we made an effort to do so.

the rest of the article was written by the guys at roto world

[Smidgeon]

Pretty vague, but seems in the neighborhood of what many here were thinking. $10million guaranteed is an awfully familiar number, I 'm sure that had something to do with his old contract, i.e. he didn't give up the $10million. The other number means nothing, of course, it's the max contract value so it's hard to tell how many incentives are part of it.

I'm a little curious about his old contract. He was due the bonus on the first day of the league year...if the CBA expires on the 4th (right, like it's not going to) is the 5th still the first day of the new league year? Or is there no 'new' year. Just wondering if he'd have gotten his money with or without a new CBA.

Bingo. The new league year doesn't start until a CBA is reached.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Clearly I was on this narrative before the national sheep even knew who Diyral Briggs was.

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php?21016-Packers-Rush-Defense-Struggles&highlight=defense

:five:

I think I said it all when I said this. :)


I'm just not feeling the big concern for the run defense.

[get louder at lambeau]

Bingo. The new league year doesn't start until a CBA is reached.

The timing of Hawk's release shows that they wanted to avoid any uncertainty and the litigation that would follow that, based on what the intentions of that contract provision were, or whatthefuckever.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Per Tom Silverstein at the JS:

Linebacker A.J. Hawk has a new contract.

Hawk's agent, Mike McCartney, said Thursday that the final touches on the deal were completed and that Hawk would sign a five-year deal with the Packers.

Full terms of the contract weren't known, but an NFL source tracking the deal told me my estimate of $6 million to $7 million per year and $10 million guaranteed is about right. We'll know the full details of the contract in a day or two.

[RashanGary]

Per Tom Silverstein at the JS:

Linebacker A.J. Hawk has a new contract.

Hawk's agent, Mike McCartney, said Thursday that the final touches on the deal were completed and that Hawk would sign a five-year deal with the Packers.

Full terms of the contract weren't known, but an NFL source tracking the deal told me my estimate of $6 million to $7 million per year and $10 million guaranteed is about right. We'll know the full details of the contract in a day or two.

He's had a probowl, he's always healthy. He has a big name after being a superstar at OSU. He never lived up to the hype, but he still has hype around his name. I think he could have gotten more than this. Bart Scott got 8M after playing teh same position for Baltimore. I thought AJ would have left for bigger $$. This shows he wanted to be here and although or offer wasn't through the roof, it was enough to be serious and enough for AJ to sign.

GB is doing something right up stairs. This type of deal doesn't get done if there is any ill will at all. After Hawk putting his house up and not playing early in the year, I thought there would have been too much ill will for him to skip out on UFA. Apparently he likes GB. He never even tested the market. I'm shocked.

This sounds like a great deal.

[red]

many players would have thrown a fit and taken off to find a new team after getting cut to avoid the massive balloon payment at the end of a contract. we see it all the time

its nice to see a player that gets it for a change and didn't badmouth the team when he got cut. he could have made more money by hitting free agency, hell he could have forced the packers to pay him more by hitting free agency, but he didn't

this is a player that wanted to stay in green bay and he went out and proved it

[Smidgeon]

I'm pretty sure he's only been a probowl alternate.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I have always liked Hawk. He never became the player I thought he would his first four years. But to be honest after how he played last year, how is he not one of the most important players on the TEAM let alone the defense? By being the play caller of the defense he provides something on defense that I think we have been missing the most - a guy who is a coach on the field and gets everyone lined up. I don't remember a year were I saw the defense so organized on such a consistent basis.

Even if Hawk doesn't get all the picks and FF in the world, his clam presence and smarts allows other to consistently be in a good position thus resulting in those big plays indirectly.

Great signing.

[SkinBasket]

Even if Hawk doesn't get all the picks and FF in the world, his clam presence and smarts allows other to consistently be in a good position thus resulting in those big plays indirectly.

Great signing.

Clam presence? Is that some sort of cunnilingus thang? Because nothing allows others to be in a good position than some preliminary cunnilingus. Hawk is a better team player than I thought he was.

[MJZiggy]

With Hawk putting his house up for sale and some of the comments through the season and suggestion he should be traded to somebody who wants him (early in teh year when he wasn't playing alot). . . . I thought Hawk and his agent would be seeking max dollar. This shows me they're probably not looking for max dollar and the Packers got really fair with him (I'm guessing 7m/year).

IT's a little more than he's worth IMO, but he's a leader, durable and a good player. He's the guy I would most want starting, I just thought UFA was going to get in the way here.

I think you guys put a little too much stock in guys putting their houses up for sale. It doesn't really mean anything. I'm thinking of putting the house up for sale, but it doesn't mean I'm leaving the state or my current job or anything like that. I just want less lawn to mow. I'm willing to bet Hawk's decision had more to do with a certain baby girl...

[pbmax]

many players would have thrown a fit and taken off to find a new team after getting cut to avoid the massive balloon payment at the end of a contract. we see it all the time

its nice to see a player that gets it for a change and didn't badmouth the team when he got cut. he could have made more money by hitting free agency, hell he could have forced the packers to pay him more by hitting free agency, but he didn't

this is a player that wanted to stay in green bay and he went out and proved it

I don't think the cut to avoid the $10 mil was a shock. It was reported that the bonus was to enable a 4 year deal rather than 5, each side knowing it was highly unlikely to be paid. And given he signed the next day, Hawk probably knew they were close. There wasn't much chance to take it personal.

[Freak Out]

Clam presence? Is that some sort of cunnilingus thang? Because nothing allows others to be in a good position than some preliminary cunnilingus. Hawk is a better team player than I thought he was.

Well you do realize.......never mind....my response is best left for the GC.

[bobblehead]

:five:

I think I said it all when I said this. :)

I think my point was made in the rematch. If we had played with a lead.....

[bobblehead]

I think you guys put a little too much stock in guys putting their houses up for sale. It doesn't really mean anything. I'm thinking of putting the house up for sale, but it doesn't mean I'm leaving the state or my current job or anything like that. I just want less lawn to mow. I'm willing to bet Hawk's decision had more to do with a certain baby girl...

Is this somehow tied to Skin's post about cunnilingus?

[Fritz]

Ah, Skin has a way with words. He's a cunning linguist.

[pbmax]

Silverstein has quotes from Hawk's agent that lend credence to Hawk's release being tied to the terms of his new agreement. I bet his salary in 2011 went up by more than 30% to fit the structure the Packers wanted and the numbers Hawk wanted.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/117369533.html

[MJZiggy]

Is this somehow tied to Skin's post about cunnilingus?

No, I'm just pissed that Mad lives on the other end of the country and can't mow my lawn. So now I gotta find a townhouse or something with a lawn I can manage.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

typed that from my phone on a bus. calm

[King Friday]

Hawk is a pro. That's why he wants to be in Green Bay, and why Green Bay wants him. The guy didn't whine like a baby early in the year despite frustration. When his turn to play came around, he had perhaps his best season in Green Bay. He made some big plays and took over an important position of leadership to coordinate a defense besieged by injury.

Bye Bye Barnett...wherever you wind up, you probably won't have to worry so much about getting in the team picture at the Super Bowl.

[Guiness]

Clam presence? Is that some sort of cunnilingus thang? Because nothing allows others to be in a good position than some preliminary cunnilingus. Hawk is a better team player than I thought he was.

*opens and closes hand like a clam*

Take that!
Poor little Clam! Snap! Snap! Snap!

[Guiness]

I have always liked Hawk. He never became the player I thought he would his first four years. But to be honest after how he played last year, how is he not one of the most important players on the TEAM let alone the defense? By being the play caller of the defense he provides something on defense that I think we have been missing the most - a guy who is a coach on the field and gets everyone lined up. I don't remember a year were I saw the defense so organized on such a consistent basis.

Even if Hawk doesn't get all the picks and FF in the world, his clam presence and smarts allows other to consistently be in a good position thus resulting in those big plays indirectly.

Great signing.

We certainly didn't see the plays we did the previous year, with players out of position, running around all over the place. It could be players in their second year of Dom's defense, but it could just as well be Hawk's influence.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

With Barnett likely on his way out, I wish him the best. While I don't think he is all that great a player, he played hard every year he was here. Besides the team photo incident he has never been a problem and I felt he really enjoyed playing for the team. I hope he is successful where ever he winds up going.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

oops meant to post that in the Barnett thread.

[rbaloha1]

Whew! Great resigning

Aloha Samurai Drama King Barnett.

[VegasPackFan]

You can't underestimate the value of having a "Packer Person" on the roster like this. AJ is a class act and he is for the team. I belive that he ended up the leading tackler on the team despite not playing a single down in the first game this year. He is a smart player with AT LEAST above average skills. This is a dude you want on your team. Good move TT!

[Patler]

I belive that he ended up the leading tackler on the team despite not playing a single down in the first game this year.

Not as impressive as it may seem, considering that you would expect a linebacker to lead in tackles and no other linebacker started more games than Hawk. Bishop's performance was more impressive, just 8 fewer tackles than Hawk while starting three fewer games.

[SkinBasket]

No, I'm just pissed that Mad lives on the other end of the country and can't mow my lawn.

God, you are dirty.

[ThunderDan]

Not as impressive as it may seem, considering that you would expect a linebacker to lead in tackles and no other linebacker started more games than Hawk. Bishop's performance was more impressive, just 8 fewer tackles than Hawk while starting three fewer games.

Except that Hawk is usually taking on a guard or a FB and Bishop is running "free". A lot of people here complained that Hawk couldn't get off the block and make tackles, obviously he is.

[Patler]

Except that Hawk is usually taking on a guard or a FB and Bishop is running "free". A lot of people here complained that Hawk couldn't get off the block and make tackles, obviously he is.

I realize that, just pointing out that Hawk "missing a game" didn't really put him behind the other linebackers in opportunities. All the linebackers missed games, none started all 16 and only Hawk and Matthews started 15. I think Bishop's 12 starts was the third highest and Zombo with 8 was 4th.

I didn't mean it as a criticism of Hawk, I hoped they would find a way to keep him, so I am pleased that they did.

[hoosier]

Silverstein says that cutting Hawk then doing a new deal allowed them more flexibility than simply redoing and extending his last contract. And I think he has a good point; there are limits about what can be modified in an existing contract when its extended. For instance, the 30% rule (limiting base salary increases to 30% increase each year) and similar. So the cut might have been procedural all along.

I guess that makes sense. It does start my brain wondering in a different direction, though. None of what Silverstein describes is new in NFL contract law. I wonder what possessed the team to agree to a $10M last year in his first contract if they knew back then that it couldn't be easily restructured? The timing issues and the expiring CPA don't affect the restructuring limitations, so why would they agree to something that was almost certainly (unless Hawk developed into the second coming of LT) going to force them to cut him? It sounds to me suspiciously like the Shermy administration's "Wahle logic" that put TT in a bind the year before they drafted Hawk.

[Fritz]

"No, I'm just pissed that Mad lives on the other end of the country and can't 'mow my lawn.'"

Your forgot the scare quotes, Zig.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The right attitude.


“The culture here is amazing,” Hawk said. “I talk to people around the league, friends who are with other teams, and I don’t think there’s any place in the league that compares to Green Bay. And being here gives me the best chance at winning more Super Bowls.”

[Cheesehead Craig]

Nice that my Hawk jersey won't go out of style for a while.

[retailguy]

Nice that my Hawk jersey won't go out of style for a while.

He's coming back as #47, which he wore at Ohio State.


























Just kidding. ;)

[RashanGary]

Green Bay's best looking couple seen strutting their stuff on the Green Carpet after their big new deal.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e331/e_mailbob/ajandlaura.jpg

[KYPack]

Clam presence.

That one has to go down in some sort of Rat Hall of Fame.

Skin got to talk dirty, this thread is a classic.

I guess this is the part where Mad swoops in and calls us all fucking Crackers, right?

[Joemailman]

“The culture here is amazing,” Hawk said. “I talk to people around the league, friends who are with other teams, and I don’t think there’s any place in the league that compares to Green Bay. And being here gives me the best chance at winning more Super Bowls.”

I guess we didn't need to worry about Hawk going home to play for one of the Ohio NFL teams.

[King Friday]

I guess we didn't need to worry about Hawk going home to play for one of the Ohio NFL teams.

He already played for the best football team in Ohio, and his eligibility has run out.

[pbmax]

I guess that makes sense. It does start my brain wondering in a different direction, though. None of what Silverstein describes is new in NFL contract law. I wonder what possessed the team to agree to a $10M last year in his first contract if they knew back then that it couldn't be easily restructured? The timing issues and the expiring CPA don't affect the restructuring limitations, so why would they agree to something that was almost certainly (unless Hawk developed into the second coming of LT) going to force them to cut him? It sounds to me suspiciously like the Shermy administration's "Wahle logic" that put TT in a bind the year before they drafted Hawk.

Actually, it was exactly Wahle logic if reports are to be believed. It was intentional and gave the Packers a reason to end the contract early and gave Hawk either a replacement for a second contract bonus (one year early) or the chance to hit FA and his second contract one year earlier and receive guaranteed money in the new contract.

[pbmax]

He already played for the best football team in Ohio, and his eligibility has run out.

Nicely done.

[Fritz]

Actually, it was exactly Wahle logic if reports are to be believed. It was intentional and gave the Packers a reason to end the contract early and gave Hawk either a replacement for a second contract bonus (one year early) or the chance to hit FA and his second contract one year earlier and receive guaranteed money in the new contract.

The difference in the situations from a wider context is that TT has positioned the team's finances such that he could then afford to re-sign Hawk, while Shermy-the-GM positioned the team's finances such that it would've been crippling to give a left guard the kind of contract Wahle wanted.

[pbmax]

The difference in the situations from a wider context is that TT has positioned the team's finances such that he could then afford to re-sign Hawk, while Shermy-the-GM positioned the team's finances such that it would've been crippling to give a left guard the kind of contract Wahle wanted.

True. Though if Hawk had people chasing him like they were Wahle, even Thompson this year would have been hard pressed to meet that contract, especially given the uncertainty of the eventual cap number.

Wahle and Rivera were beneficiaries of the last great wave of huge up front money in contracts. They hit it big by being UFAs in 2005 rather than just a couple years later.

[Patler]

True. Though if Hawk had people chasing him like they were Wahle, even Thompson this year would have been hard pressed to meet that contract, especially given the uncertainty of the eventual cap number.

Wahle and Rivera were beneficiaries of the last great wave of huge up front money in contracts. They hit it big by being UFAs in 2005 rather than just a couple years later.

That's how Sherman really screwed up. He had both Wahle and Rivera due the same year, and no suitable backup guard on the roster. The position guard was completely void. TT has Jenkins in a similar situation this year where it might be hard to keep him, but he has Pickett signed long term and a couple promising reserves in Neal and Wilson even without Green or Jolly. If he couldn't retain Hawk, he had Barnett. There are players on the roster to fill the spots. Sherman had no backup plan for replacing both guards in the same year.

[Iron Mike]

Per Tom Silverstein at the JS:

Linebacker A.J. Hawk has a new contract.

Hawk's agent, Mike McCartney, said Thursday that the final touches on the deal were completed and that Hawk would sign a five-year deal with the Packers.

Full terms of the contract weren't known, but an NFL source tracking the deal told me my estimate of $6 million to $7 million per year and $10 million guaranteed is about right. We'll know the full details of the contract in a day or two.

Isn't that Paul McCartney's brother???

http://blog.newsok.com/staticblog/files/2009/01/paul-mccartney.jpg

[swede]

Let it be.

[Fritz]

True. Though if Hawk had people chasing him like they were Wahle, even Thompson this year would have been hard pressed to meet that contract, especially given the uncertainty of the eventual cap number.

Wahle and Rivera were beneficiaries of the last great wave of huge up front money in contracts. They hit it big by being UFAs in 2005 rather than just a couple years later.

I agree with your last statement, absolutely, I do wonder, though, if Hawk's agent, Mike "Brother of Paul" McCartney is to be believed when he said that the phone was ringing off the hook - teams wanted to get in on the bidding, it would seem.

My own belief is that Hawk and Wahle are different people - Hawk seemed to really want to be here (even after he coulda played the whole "disrespect" card after not playing that what, first game, at all?), while Wahle really seemed to want a big contract in part as a sign of respect - that ever elusive respect. He seemed, at times, to have felt slighted or unappreciated in GB, maybe? Or maybe the rumors that he didn't get along with Shermy were true. I don't know. But Wahle seemed to want a big paycheck as proof of respect, whereas Hawk seems to be a little more at ease with himself regarding his contributions to the team.

Okay, Dr. Fritz is ready for his reality show now. Bring on the athletes, and Dr. Fritz will explain their deep psychological needs and why they do what they do. First guest: the former Ochocinco.

[pbmax]

I agree with your last statement, absolutely, I do wonder, though, if Hawk's agent, Mike "Brother of Paul" McCartney is to be believed when he said that the phone was ringing off the hook - teams wanted to get in on the bidding, it would seem.

My own belief is that Hawk and Wahle are different people - Hawk seemed to really want to be here (even after he coulda played the whole "disrespect" card after not playing that what, first game, at all?), while Wahle really seemed to want a big contract in part as a sign of respect - that ever elusive respect. He seemed, at times, to have felt slighted or unappreciated in GB, maybe? Or maybe the rumors that he didn't get along with Shermy were true. I don't know. But Wahle seemed to want a big paycheck as proof of respect, whereas Hawk seems to be a little more at ease with himself regarding his contributions to the team.

Okay, Dr. Fritz is ready for his reality show now. Bring on the athletes, and Dr. Fritz will explain their deep psychological needs and why they do what they do. First guest: the former Ochocinco.

I think Wahle's motivations were less complex. He wanted a really big contract because it comes hand delivered with a lot of cash. And Hawk was probably thinking along those same lines. Hawk came closer to a Wahle score than I thought he would. Adjusted for inflation, Wahle's $12-13 million guaranteed still trumps Hawk's $10 mil, but not a bad haul for a player people were wondering about being released after Game 1 this season.

Wahle privately was said to be upset that the Packer coaches were always talking up Rivera for the Pro Bowl, but had the Packers matched the contract, I bet he would have been happy to endure the disrespect.

[Patler]

Wahle privately was said to be upset that the Packer coaches were always talking up Rivera for the Pro Bowl, but had the Packers matched the contract, I bet he would have been happy to endure the disrespect.

Didn't Wahle complain in his last season about being the only O-lineman who hadn't been the subject of a game-day program cover at least once? He seemed to find hidden messages in that sort of thing.

[pbmax]

Didn't Wahle complain in his last season about being the only O-lineman who hadn't been the subject of a game-day program cover at least once? He seemed to find hidden messages in that sort of thing.

I don't remember that, but it sounds consistent. I think when all your mates except Tausher (a lowly seventh rounder who was still getting tackle money) are regularly mentioned as Pro Bowlers and you might be the most gifted save Clifton, then you might want to stand out. But as with most things, I think he wanted to get paid big time, and a Pro Bowl nod helps your case. Its not much different than most players. Most rookie contracts are favorable to the team if you are playing well.

If you play a long time, your last contract will likely be favorable to the team so you can stay where you want. That means in the very short career of an NFL player, unless you are a top seven first round pick, you often have only one contract to max out on. Otherwise, its a lost opportunity.

Ironically, if the owners get a hard(er) rookie slotting system in this CBA system, it is a near certainty that the players will ask for a limit on the number of years the rookie contract can cover, in order for them to convert success into pay in a shorter time frame. A shorter term first contract will introduce a concept familiar to the NBA to the NFL. Top rookie players in the NBA are already planning their second contract when they enter the league. In fact, the second contract is a factor in determining when the declare eligible for the draft.

I think players who believe themselves capable of getting a good second contract will be more likely to enter the draft as juniors, placing less concern on the NFL feedback about where they could get picked. The idea, encouraged by agents, will be to enter the NFL younger, healthier and more likely to get a second contract while still young and improving.

In turn, there will be pressure from agents and families to lower the age for NFL draft eligibility.

[vince]

Based on all the info I've seen from A.J. over time, I'd say his motivations are 1) playing and 2) winning. The money is always important but given the millions he's already making, it's clear he values the quality of experience playing the game more than the money.

A.J.’s a solid professional with the maturity and team focus you want. He’s stepped up his leadership, which McCarthy values and I think his steadying presence on the field and in the locker room has value beyond his steady play. In many ways he’s the anti-emotional-roller-coaster-tweeting-injury-prone-look-at-me-vampire-Samurai-Barnett. That’s good for a young team I’d say.

That said, it seems pretty clear based what A.J. said after the first game and especially what his agent has said upon completing this new deal that A.J. was assured he would continue to be the guy captaining the defense and Barnett would be gone one way or another. Without this assurance, I don’t think A.J. re-signs with the Packers, particularly without testing the free agent waters and/or maximizing his contract with assurance of being a three-down guy somewhere else.

[Fritz]

"I think Wahle's motivations were less complex. He wanted a really big contract because it comes hand delivered with a lot of cash. And Hawk was probably thinking along those same lines. Hawk came closer to a Wahle score than I thought he would. Adjusted for inflation, Wahle's $12-13 million guaranteed still trumps Hawk's $10 mil, but not a bad haul for a player people were wondering about being released after Game 1."

PB, it's clear you're not ready for a reality television show. You're being a little too logical here.

[vince]

I think players who believe themselves capable of getting a good second contract will be more likely to enter the draft as juniors, placing less concern on the NFL feedback about where they could get picked. The idea, encouraged by agents, will be to enter the NFL younger, healthier and more likely to get a second contract while still young and improving.

In turn, there will be pressure from agents and families to lower the age for NFL draft eligibility.
I'd be surprised to see this happen. Not sure what would be the motivation for anyone, including the agents. There are only so many players who can sign a deal in the NFL, regardless of the age of entry, so it doesn't expand the pool for them.

The NFL is a young man's game, but the emphasis is overwhelmingly on the man part. Even with a slightly larger roster, there isn't much room for stashing projects who you hope will pan out some day. The practice squad isn't the place for kids who project to be stars when they could be playing competitively in the SEC or Big Ten. That's the best place for them at that level of development, and the best place for them to showcase their talents and build their marketability.

Guys who come into the league need to be ready to play. Not many sophomore's or younger are ready to compete at that level, and unless drastic changes are made to how rosters are put together, teams aren't likely to hold spots for the promise of a kid who might be good some day beyond the existing eight spots that are held by young men already with the current system. Having guys declaring and then not getting drafted because they're not physically mature enough doesn't seem to be in anyone's best interests.

[pbmax]

Hawk got a serious amount of money up front. But unlike past Thompson deals, the cap hit is at its highest early. Sign of the unknown CBA times or new Thompson method of contracts?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/07/a-j-hawk-will-get-almost-11-million-in-2011/


The Packers cut A.J. Hawk before re-signing him, in part to avoid a $10 million option payment that was in his last contract.

It turns out he got almost that much to sign on the dotted line when he re-joined the team.

Pete Dougherty of the Green Bay Press-Gazette reports and PFT has confirmed that Hawk received an $8 million signing bonus when he inked the deal. Including a $1.8 million roster bonus and $1.15 million base salary, Hawk will earn $10.95 million in 2011.

He is set to earn $21.35 million over the first three years of the deal and $33.75 million over the entire five year deal. He is set to make $4.95 million in total pay in 2012, with $4.4 million in base salary, $300,000 in a roster bonus and $250,000 in a workout bonus.

In 2013, he’ll make $5.45 million. That includes $4.9 million in base salary, a $300,000 roster bonus and a $250,000 workout bonus.

In 2014, he’ll make $5.95 million. That includes $4.9 million in base salary, an $800,000 roster bonus and a $250,000 workout bonus.

In 2015, he’ll make $6.45 million. That includes $5.4 million in base salary, an $800,000 roster bonus and a $250,000 workout bonus.

Hawk could be vulnerable to being released after 2013 depending on his play. His cap number that year will be $7.55 million, and the team would only take a $3.2 cap hit to release him.

A league source tells PFT that Hawk’s cap numbers are as follows: 2011: $4.55 million, 2012: $6.55 million, 2013: $7.05 million, 2014: $7.55 million, 2015: $8.05 million.

The Packers said they valued Hawk’s contributions highly, and they proved it with this deal. He will be one of the most highly paid inside linebackers in football.

Hat tip: http://blogs.greenbaypressgazette.com/blogs/gpg/insider/

[MadScientist]

Hawk got a serious amount of money up front. But unlike past Thompson deals, the cap hit is at its highest early. Sign of the unknown CBA times or new Thompson method of contracts?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/07/a-j-hawk-will-get-almost-11-million-in-2011/


Hat tip: http://blogs.greenbaypressgazette.com/blogs/gpg/insider/

If there is a cap, the Packers will be pushing it this year, which is why it's structured to give them ~7M relief. Dropping Barnett will give them another 6M and they won't have to worry about rookies and will be able to sign their key FA's.

[SnakeLH2006]

Snake has never been a Hawk fan since he studded out at Ohio The University....but really he did ok last year. Depends on the money/year but at $6 million yearly that is ok....with the new bargaining agreement it will look like peanuts. Let's trade Barnett now though before his Twitter gets too nutz.

[Smidgeon]

Hawk got a serious amount of money up front. But unlike past Thompson deals, the cap hit is at its highest early. Sign of the unknown CBA times or new Thompson method of contracts?

I'm missing something. You're saying the cap hit is highest early. Two things: First, I thought that was normal to TT deals. Second, this is the paragraph from the PFT piece that confuses me: A league source tells PFT that Hawk’s cap numbers are as follows: 2011: $4.55 million, 2012: $6.55 million, 2013: $7.05 million, 2014: $7.55 million, 2015: $8.05 million.

That makes it seem to me that the cap hit is higher late. What am I missing?

[Fritz]

"Let's trade Barnett now though before his Twitter gets too nutz."

-Snake

I think it's more like "Let's trade Barnett now though before his nutz get too Twittered."

[pbmax]

I'm missing something. You're saying the cap hit is highest early. Two things: First, I thought that was normal to TT deals. Second, this is the paragraph from the PFT piece that confuses me: A league source tells PFT that Hawk’s cap numbers are as follows: 2011: $4.55 million, 2012: $6.55 million, 2013: $7.05 million, 2014: $7.55 million, 2015: $8.05 million.

That makes it seem to me that the cap hit is higher late. What am I missing?

You aren't missing anything, that was a mistake. I meant to say unlike other Thompson deals, the money is upfront but the cap hit is late. Instead, I just posted gibberish.

[SnakeLH2006]

"Let's trade Barnett now though before his Twitter gets too nutz."

-Snake

I think it's more like "Let's trade Barnett now though before his nutz get too Twittered."

Fritz your awesomeness rivals Chuck Norris. You aren't Chuck Norris are you, Fritz?