Hawk Backers Inquire Within

[Farley Face]

Hawk has played well, but top 5 pick well? I'd like to hear from all the pre draft Hawk backers who had him earmarked for greatness.

Is he Urlacher or Katzenmoyer, or somewhere between? Is he a guy a rebuilding team builds around?

Please help me feel like he will be a difference maker for us in the long run like we would hope a #5 pick would be. I'm rooting for the guy, but I need to see more difference making ability.

[Partial]

He is playing as well as Urlacher did his first year up to this point. He isn't the focal point of the defense in the sense more often than not he is containing and forcing runs inside so its pretty hard to tell.

He is a very hard hitter, is always in good position, and has shown the intangibles that have made him a top 5 pick to this point imo

[Farley Face]

He is playing as well as Urlacher did his first year up to this point. He isn't the focal point of the defense in the sense more often than not he is containing and forcing runs inside so its pretty hard to tell.

He is a very hard hitter, is always in good position, and has shown the intangibles that have made him a top 5 pick to this point imo

Partial, in your opinion, is he a difference maker long term or a slightly above average LB you can depend on to not blow assignments and make an occasional play? I agree with you on the hard hitter point, but he seems to struggle at the point shedding blocks.

[Partial]

He is playing as well as Urlacher did his first year up to this point. He isn't the focal point of the defense in the sense more often than not he is containing and forcing runs inside so its pretty hard to tell.

He is a very hard hitter, is always in good position, and has shown the intangibles that have made him a top 5 pick to this point imo

Partial, in your opinion, is he a difference maker long term or a slightly above average LB you can depend on to not blow assignments and make an occasional play? I agree with you on the hard hitter point, but he seems to struggle at the point shedding blocks.

I think he is playing as good as a rookie can at this point. Cristl loves to comment on how he can't get off blocks, but what rookie can? They're not developed. Also, he compares him to Merriman and says he is coming up short. BS. Merriman did not come on until about week 10 last year and is playing a very "different" position despite both being outside linebackers. Hawk is much better in coverage already.

I think Hawk is going to be as good of an outside backer as you'll see. With that said, with the system they are currently running he will forever be limited to some extent in his playmaking ability because of that in my opinion.

I think in four years when Hawk is about 10 pounds heavier and much stronger, he'll be as good of a linebacker as their is in the game. He doesn't have the height of Urlacher but he has the quickness and the willingness to lay the wood. I could see him moved inside or the scheme will change to optimize him more in a 3-4 or whatever that may be.

[Lurker64]

As I understand it, the most desirable quality in A.J. Hawk is not that he will come in like a wrecking ball from day one and knock everybody's helmet off. The top quality of Hawk is that he is a football player's football player. He has the desire to make himself better, and the drive to accomplish this goal. Not only that, but he's purported to be sufficiently intense to drive everyone around him to also make themselves better. He's smart, follows directions, and has leadership qualities.

So if in his first year, he's not shedding blocks like a savvy veteran, I fully expect Hawk to work his ass off in the offseason and get darn good at shedding blocks for next season. If he's not a powerful force of leadership on the defense now, well it's because he's a rookie and how many rookies lead teams?

Honestly, before we really make a decision on how great a guy's career is going to be after he's played five games, how many guys drafted before him are making more of an impact on their respective teams? How many first rounders are making more of an impact on their respective teams?

The draft buzz is always "drafting player x is going to make team y an instant contender" when this frankly isn't true. Almost every player has some aspect of their game to work on when they come to the next level. The thing about Hawk is that his past performance strongly points to the fact that he's dedicated to working on his game until he's a force to be reckoned with, and five games into the season, that's good enough for me.

Plus, that sack on Kitna and Hawk's complete nonchalance afterwards was pretty keen.

[Farley Face]

He is playing as well as Urlacher did his first year up to this point. He isn't the focal point of the defense in the sense more often than not he is containing and forcing runs inside so its pretty hard to tell.

He is a very hard hitter, is always in good position, and has shown the intangibles that have made him a top 5 pick to this point imo

Partial, in your opinion, is he a difference maker long term or a slightly above average LB you can depend on to not blow assignments and make an occasional play? I agree with you on the hard hitter point, but he seems to struggle at the point shedding blocks.

I think he is playing as good as a rookie can at this point. Cristl loves to comment on how he can't get off blocks, but what rookie can? They're not developed. Also, he compares him to Merriman and says he is coming up short. BS. Merriman did not come on until about week 10 last year and is playing a very "different" position despite both being outside linebackers. Hawk is much better in coverage already.

I think Hawk is going to be as good of an outside backer as you'll see. With that said, with the system they are currently running he will forever be limited to some extent in his playmaking ability because of that in my opinion.

I think in four years when Hawk is about 10 pounds heavier and much stronger, he'll be as good of a linebacker as their is in the game. He doesn't have the height of Urlacher but he has the quickness and the willingness to lay the wood. I could see him moved inside or the scheme will change to optimize him more in a 3-4 or whatever that may be.

You reference Christl. I agree with some of what he says, disagree with the rest. He does make a point about needing to hit homeruns with high draft picks. Right now Hawk feels like a stand up double to me. He's a guy you can root for and I'm not saying I don't see reasons for optimism, but a half dozen or so posters on this forum had Hawk labeled as the second coming and I haven't seen that.

[Farley Face]

As I understand it, the most desirable quality in A.J. Hawk is not that he will come in like a wrecking ball from day one and knock everybody's helmet off. The top quality of Hawk is that he is a football player's football player. He has the desire to make himself better, and the drive to accomplish this goal. Not only that, but he's purported to be sufficiently intense to drive everyone around him to also make themselves better. He's smart, follows directions, and has leadership qualities.

So if in his first year, he's not shedding blocks like a savvy veteran, I fully expect Hawk to work his ass off in the offseason and get darn good at shedding blocks for next season. If he's not a powerful force of leadership on the defense now, well it's because he's a rookie and how many rookies lead teams?


Good points, thanks. I need to level my expectations with what reality is. He is a hard working guy that has the physical attributes to develop into a building block type player. I certainly put him in a positive light and shouldn't hold him accountable to predraft hype.
Honestly, before we really make a decision on how great a guy's career is going to be after he's played five games, how many guys drafted before him are making more of an impact on their respective teams? How many first rounders are making more of an impact on their respective teams?

The draft buzz is always "drafting player x is going to make team y an instant contender" when this frankly isn't true. Almost every player has some aspect of their game to work on when they come to the next level. The thing about Hawk is that his past performance strongly points to the fact that he's dedicated to working on his game until he's a force to be reckoned with, and five games into the season, that's good enough for me.

Plus, that sack on Kitna and Hawk's complete nonchalance afterwards was pretty keen.

[Farley Face]

As I understand it, the most desirable quality in A.J. Hawk is not that he will come in like a wrecking ball from day one and knock everybody's helmet off. The top quality of Hawk is that he is a football player's football player. He has the desire to make himself better, and the drive to accomplish this goal. Not only that, but he's purported to be sufficiently intense to drive everyone around him to also make themselves better. He's smart, follows directions, and has leadership qualities.

So if in his first year, he's not shedding blocks like a savvy veteran, I fully expect Hawk to work his ass off in the offseason and get darn good at shedding blocks for next season. If he's not a powerful force of leadership on the defense now, well it's because he's a rookie and how many rookies lead teams?


Good points, thanks. I need to level my expectations with what reality is. He is a hard working guy that has the physical attributes to develop into a building block type player. I certainly put him in a positive light and shouldn't hold him accountable to predraft hype.
Honestly, before we really make a decision on how great a guy's career is going to be after he's played five games, how many guys drafted before him are making more of an impact on their respective teams? How many first rounders are making more of an impact on their respective teams?

The draft buzz is always "drafting player x is going to make team y an instant contender" when this frankly isn't true. Almost every player has some aspect of their game to work on when they come to the next level. The thing about Hawk is that his past performance strongly points to the fact that he's dedicated to working on his game until he's a force to be reckoned with, and five games into the season, that's good enough for me.

Plus, that sack on Kitna and Hawk's complete nonchalance afterwards was pretty keen.

Sorry, I embedded my comments into your thread. I'm still learning the navigation of this site. Here is my response to your post:

Good points, thanks. I need to level my expectations with what reality is. He is a hard working guy that has the physical attributes to develop into a building block type player. I certainly put him in a positive light and shouldn't hold him accountable to predraft hype.

[GrnBay007]

Farley, I see you joined in April but just started posting. Although it looks like you've been around awhile, Welcome to PackerRats!!

[Bretsky]

Yes Farley; glad you joined the gang. Welcome. I thought Hawk would start a little faster; with that being said not many rookies have.

B

[Farley Face]

Farley, I see you joined in April but just started posting. Although it looks like you've been around awhile, Welcome to PackerRats!!

I'm a JSO convert, looking for what Rats delivers, a more balanced view of the Packer Nation. Thanks for the welocme.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hawk is doing a hell of a lot better than a lot of rookies taken around him. With all of the hype, even Bush has disappointed a bit (although I'd say he changed the dimension of that office with his all around skills). Mario isn't dominating. Vernon Davis isn't. Ernie Sims has slightly better stats, but the only time I watched Sims was against Green Bay. He had as many tackles as Hawk, but Hawk was better. Most of Sims tackles were 6+ yards downfield--while Hawk's tackles were much closer to the line of scrimmage. Can't really judge the QBs like Cutler, Young, and Leinart yet. Ferguson has struggles at times. Most rookies do. He won't be Shawne Merriman, but Merriman turned out to be a out of this world talent. I certainly think Hawk can be a Pro Bowl caliber player some day.

[Partial]

He is playing as well as Urlacher did his first year up to this point. He isn't the focal point of the defense in the sense more often than not he is containing and forcing runs inside so its pretty hard to tell.

He is a very hard hitter, is always in good position, and has shown the intangibles that have made him a top 5 pick to this point imo

Partial, in your opinion, is he a difference maker long term or a slightly above average LB you can depend on to not blow assignments and make an occasional play? I agree with you on the hard hitter point, but he seems to struggle at the point shedding blocks.

I think he is playing as good as a rookie can at this point. Cristl loves to comment on how he can't get off blocks, but what rookie can? They're not developed. Also, he compares him to Merriman and says he is coming up short. BS. Merriman did not come on until about week 10 last year and is playing a very "different" position despite both being outside linebackers. Hawk is much better in coverage already.

I think Hawk is going to be as good of an outside backer as you'll see. With that said, with the system they are currently running he will forever be limited to some extent in his playmaking ability because of that in my opinion.

I think in four years when Hawk is about 10 pounds heavier and much stronger, he'll be as good of a linebacker as their is in the game. He doesn't have the height of Urlacher but he has the quickness and the willingness to lay the wood. I could see him moved inside or the scheme will change to optimize him more in a 3-4 or whatever that may be.

You reference Christl. I agree with some of what he says, disagree with the rest. He does make a point about needing to hit homeruns with high draft picks. Right now Hawk feels like a stand up double to me. He's a guy you can root for and I'm not saying I don't see reasons for optimism, but a half dozen or so posters on this forum had Hawk labeled as the second coming and I haven't seen that.

Well, what top 10 picks have done better than him so far?
Mario - In time he may have a bigger impact, but he has been disciplined for a lack of work ethic so far and hasn't been the difference maker a #1 pick should be.
Bush - Yes, he has had a much bigger impact.
Young - Nope
Ferguson - Dunno.
Hawk
Davis - Injured, no impact yet.
Texas Safety - Not starting
OSU safety for buffalo - Unsure
Sims - Hawk had a much bigger impact in that matchup than Sims did
Leinart - Bigger.

[Bretsky]

Farley, I see you joined in April but just started posting. Although it looks like you've been around awhile, Welcome to PackerRats!!

I'm a JSO convert, looking for what Rats delivers, a more balanced view of the Packer Nation. Thanks for the welocme.

If you can be in front of a TV while watching the game, but Rats Official Game thread will be second to none as well. It'll have about 40-50 pages of posts by the end.

Welcome; you might recognize many many old JS people over here.

B

[Partial]

Hawk is doing a hell of a lot better than a lot of rookies taken around him. With all of the hype, even Bush has disappointed a bit (although I'd say he changed the dimension of that office with his all around skills). Mario isn't dominating. Vernon Davis isn't. Ernie Sims has slightly better stats, but the only time I watched Sims was against Green Bay. He had as many tackles as Hawk, but Hawk was better. Most of Sims tackles were 6+ yards downfield--while Hawk's tackles were much closer to the line of scrimmage. Can't really judge the QBs like Cutler, Young, and Leinart yet. Ferguson has struggles at times. Most rookies do. He won't be Shawne Merriman, but Merriman turned out to be a out of this world talent. I certainly think Hawk can be a Pro Bowl caliber player some day.

Merriman was NOT that good to start the year. He turned it on around this time or a little later. Plus, he wasn't great in coverage last year. His strength was his height, size and speed as an edge rusher in the 3-4. He is a great player no doubt, but people overhyped him last year. This year he is living up to the hype, though. We also cannot ignore that OLB in a 3-4 are the featured LB. In our scheme, Barnett is.

One huge thing is Hawk hasn't made any major mistakes yet. That is ridiculously surprising for a rookie defending in space.

edit - I was referencing his rookie year when I said not that good at the start of the year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Merriman deserves all the hype he gets. He's ridiculously good. While it's true that he didn't really start to go off until about this time last year, he was one of the best players in the NFL by the end of the year. I don't care that he can't cover. The things he can do he can do as well as anyone in the league.

[Farley Face]

Farley, I see you joined in April but just started posting. Although it looks like you've been around awhile, Welcome to PackerRats!!

I'm a JSO convert, looking for what Rats delivers, a more balanced view of the Packer Nation. Thanks for the welocme.

If you can be in front of a TV while watching the game, but Rats Official Game thread will be second to none as well. It'll have about 40-50 pages of posts by the end.

Welcome; you might recognize many many old JS people over here.

B

I sat on the sidelines during the two days of the draft as Packer Rats delivered 100+ pages of analysis. Loved every minute of it!

[Bretsky]

Hawk is doing a hell of a lot better than a lot of rookies taken around him. With all of the hype, even Bush has disappointed a bit (although I'd say he changed the dimension of that office with his all around skills). Mario isn't dominating. Vernon Davis isn't. Ernie Sims has slightly better stats, but the only time I watched Sims was against Green Bay. He had as many tackles as Hawk, but Hawk was better. Most of Sims tackles were 6+ yards downfield--while Hawk's tackles were much closer to the line of scrimmage. Can't really judge the QBs like Cutler, Young, and Leinart yet. Ferguson has struggles at times. Most rookies do. He won't be Shawne Merriman, but Merriman turned out to be a out of this world talent. I certainly think Hawk can be a Pro Bowl caliber player some day.

Merriman was NOT that good to start the year. He turned it on around this time or a little later. Plus, he wasn't great in coverage last year. His strength was his height, size and speed as an edge rusher in the 3-4. He is a great player no doubt, but people overhyped him last year. This year he is living up to the hype, though. We also cannot ignore that OLB in a 3-4 are the featured LB. In our scheme, Barnett is.

One huge thing is Hawk hasn't made any major mistakes yet. That is ridiculously surprising for a rookie defending in space.

edit - I was referencing his rookie year when I said not that good at the start of the year.

Yes, Merriman came on strong at the end.

The rookie that was tearing it up last year was Odell Thurman for the first half of the season. He faded away the last six games; I think Dennis Rodman came to town and they started doing bad things together.

B

[HarveyWallbangers]

Now, all Bretsky has to do is mention Chris Chambers and we'll be all set.
:D

[Bretsky]

Now, all Bretsky has to do is mention Chris Chambers and we'll be all set.
:D

Chambers tore it up from day one while Ferguson was resting up on the inactive list his rookie season :wink:

Now we're in action.

[Bretsky]

Farley, I see you joined in April but just started posting. Although it looks like you've been around awhile, Welcome to PackerRats!!

I'm a JSO convert, looking for what Rats delivers, a more balanced view of the Packer Nation. Thanks for the welocme.

If you can be in front of a TV while watching the game, but Rats Official Game thread will be second to none as well. It'll have about 40-50 pages of posts by the end.

Welcome; you might recognize many many old JS people over here.

B

I sat on the sidelines during the two days of the draft as Packer Rats delivered 100+ pages of analysis. Loved every minute of it!

Cool; then you already know we're whack jobs...aka Packer fanatics. You'll fit right in.

B

[VegasPackFan]

Hawk is already doing pretty much everything he has been asked to do. He is not a primadonna (like Barnett) so the team can play him at the very unglamorous position of OLB and he will still give it his all. In this scheme, AJ's main job is to force the plays to the inside so the middle LB can make the play.

I have not seen AJ miss many tackles. He is already a fundamentally sound player. His work ethic is such that you can be very assured that he will improve in every aspect of his game over the course of his early career - you havent seen the best of him yet.

[AtlPackFan]

My question to everyone is who would you have taken in that spot if not Hawk? Vernon Davis who had, in interviews I saw at the time, eluded to the fact that he didn't want to play in a small market? One of the quarterbacks with the Rodgers still untested? Who?

So, Hawk isn't a world beater at this point. Maybe he never will be...none of us - at this point - know. But if your down on Hawk for not fulfilling your #5 pick expectations, who would you have picked?! In my un-expert opinion, there was just no clear cut #5.

I'll take Hawk. From what I have heard he practices hard, he appears to play hard, he appears to have a great attitude and he appears to be a team-first player. I'll take that every day of the week over some of the MFing, cry baby, TO-types that are playing the game today!!!

[pacfan]

I think Hawk was a great pick at #5. The hype and expectations are overblown with media coverage and "sometimes" unfair expectations from the fans.

Hawk has been a good LB since he arrived. No drama, no BS, no ego. He does his job and makes plays. He's a rookie adjusting to a faster game, so everyday won't be a highlight reel. He is establishing himself as a leader of the defense and I hope he gives the Pack 10 great years of service.

[b bulldog]

Hawk comparisons to Urlacher is unfair. Urlacher is an animal and was from his first year. Hawk may be worth the fifth pick but Uralcher is just plain a stud and I don't see AJ ever getting to his level.

[Scott Campbell]

My question to everyone is who would you have taken in that spot if not Hawk? Vernon Davis who had, in interviews I saw at the time, eluded to the fact that he didn't want to play in a small market? One of the quarterbacks with the Rodgers still untested? Who?


Leinart.

[red]

most rookies haven't done much of anything yet, like partial said

hawk plays a different position then urlacher. if hawk played MLB, you would hear his name called all the time like barnett. with the exception of a few plays, he has played pretty damn good for a rookie, and has showed the flashes to show he should turn into a damn good pro.

and like someone on here siad the other day, he's already an upgrade at that position over what we had before him. and isn't that the point?

[gbgary]

hawk's done a fine job so far. think how the cowboys must feel with their first-round pick. carpenter can't even make a special-teams contribution...hell, i don't think he's been on the active roster a single game this year. http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_mrgreen.gif

[Tarlam!]

Leinart.

I wouldn't have taken Leiny, but, I would have been wrong. That boy has surprised me coming outta the gate. He as finished a rookie as any to play the position.

[mmmdk]

I'm impressed with Hawk, he's all about football and he'll get better and better. Those who like to compare Urlacher to Hawk are wrong; Hawk is in the mold of Zach Thomas but Hawk has more upside as a blitzer. Hawk needs to be better in coverage but it'll all come together.

Draft note 2006: I'm glad Packers picked Hawk over Vernon but Matt Leinert is the real deal - a franchise QB. Leinert has many future probowls in sight (especially if he leaves Cardinals :lol: ) and he's the kind of player that makes you wonder...could he make it to the HOF? Maybe but it is early yet he has that class. Packers already have Aaron Rodgers so Hawk still makes sense. But Rodgers had better be in the class of a Drew Brees or Jake Delhomme - those types of QBs can win you Super Bowls too. Well, I believe in Rodgers, look at my avatar. I think he'll have a long and good career in Green Bay. That's what TT is banking on too.

[Partial]

Hawk is already doing pretty much everything he has been asked to do. He is not a primadonna (like Barnett) so the team can play him at the very unglamorous position of OLB and he will still give it his all. In this scheme, AJ's main job is to force the plays to the inside so the middle LB can make the play.

I have not seen AJ miss many tackles. He is already a fundamentally sound player. His work ethic is such that you can be very assured that he will improve in every aspect of his game over the course of his early career - you havent seen the best of him yet.

He is doing everything he is asked to do. I question whether he role will ever be impactful enough in this defensive scheme. My guess is no.

[Partial]

and like someone on here siad the other day, he's already an upgrade at that position over what we had before him. and isn't that the point?

sure is

[Partial]

I'm impressed with Hawk, he's all about football and he'll get better and better. Those who like to compare Urlacher to Hawk are wrong; Hawk is in the mold of Zach Thomas but Hawk has more upside as a blitzer. Hawk needs to be better in coverage but it'll all come together.

Draft note 2006: I'm glad Packers picked Hawk over Vernon but Matt Leinert is the real deal - a franchise QB. Leinert has many future probowls in sight (especially if he leaves Cardinals :lol: ) and he's the kind of player that makes you wonder...could he make it to the HOF? Maybe but it is early yet he has that class. Packers already have Aaron Rodgers so Hawk still makes sense. But Rodgers had better be in the class of a Drew Brees or Jake Delhomme - those types of QBs can win you Super Bowls too. Well, I believe in Rodgers, look at my avatar. I think he'll have a long and good career in Green Bay. That's what TT is banking on too.

atta boy, i'm right with you with A-Rod support. A-rod = Jake Delhomme in 3 years. :mrgreen:

[Iron Mike]

Texas Safety - Not starting


Isn't that Michael Huff....who Tank was pimping as the answer to GBs problems and a "can't miss" DROY????? :eyes:

[Partial]

Texas Safety - Not starting


Isn't that Michael Huff....who Tank was pimping as the answer to GBs problems and a "can't miss" DROY????? :eyes:

Yes it is. Tank's crazy. I am awful at remembering names when I need to, and am too lazy to actually look them up.

[ahaha]

I was one of those who thought Huff would have been a good choice. The guy has the atheleticism to cover as a corner and the strength and toughness to be an enforcer at safety. After watching guys like Ed Reed, Brian Dawkins, and Troy Polamao the past few years, I really wanted a guy like that on our defense. Huff hasn't stood out yet, but it's so early and he's surrounded by substandard talent in Oakland. I still think he's going to be a star.

[Patler]

Hawk has already made some plays that demonstrate how really good he is. For example:

Against Bush - a couple open field takles and plays where he prevented Bush from getting outside allowing the pursuit to get him were plays that not every outside linebacker could make. These weren't lucky plays or "excuse me" tackles. These were plays in which Hawk was in total control of himself and the play, against one of the most elusive players in the league.

I've forgotten which game, but it was first and goal from inside the 5. Hawk bit on a play fake, taking a step toward the line of scrimmage. The TE cut in behind him and should should have been wide open for an easy TD. The QB threw quick and on target. Hawk recovered, dropped back three quick steps and knocked the ball down. Biting on the fake should have ensured an easy TD. Hawks exceptional quickness prevented it.

Hawk hasn't made the interceptions or caused the fumbles the "experts" look for, but for being a rookie starting in his first games as a pro, he is doing fine and should get better and better over the next two years or so.

[Patler]

People want to compare Hawk to Urlacher. Apart from that they play different positions, people wrongly seem to suggest that Urlacher was as good from day one as he is today, and conclude that Hawk doesn't measure up.. That is absolutely wrong. While Urlacher has had a knack for big plays like sacks and interceptions, his first few years he was very easy to take advantage of because he over-pursued and would get tied up with blockers. Many teams, including the Packers, took advantage of this the first few years to run very successfully against him.

But, if you want to compare, here are the stats for their first 5 NFL games, with Urlacher's listed first in each column and Hawk listed second:

First 5 NFL games – Urlacher/Hawk

Game...Tackles....Sacks.....Int.....FF....RF
...1.......2/5.........0/0........0/0....0/0..0/0
...2.......3/7.........0/0........0/0....0/0..0/0
...3......11/8........1/1........0/0....0/0..0/0
...4.......5/3........1/0.5......1/0....0/0..0/1
...5.......5/8........1/0........0/0....0/0..1/0

Total tackles - 26/31
Total sacks - 3/1.5
Interceptions - 1/0
Fumbles forced - 0/0
Fumbles recovered - 1/1

Had Hawk not dropped the one easy interception that was right in his hands, their stats would be earily similar through their first 5 games.

[SD GB fan]

The guy has the atheleticism to cover as a corner and the strength and toughness to be an enforcer at safety. After watching guys like Ed Reed, Brian Dawkins, and Troy Polamao the past few years, I really wanted a guy like that on our defense.

you mean nick collins?

[GrnBay007]

Great info Patler! Hawk will be fun to watch in the upcoming years.

[ahaha]

The guy has the atheleticism to cover as a corner and the strength and toughness to be an enforcer at safety. After watching guys like Ed Reed, Brian Dawkins, and Troy Polamao the past few years, I really wanted a guy like that on our defense.

you mean nick collins?

Can you imagine having two safeties like that? :?: