Couple things I like about the Hawk pick....

[BF4MVP]

...Even though I'd rather have Vernon Davis..

1. He's a leader..He's gonna do his job and get others to do their job too..

2. He could become a perennial pro-bowler..We may even have our own Urlacher, who knows..I choose not to believe he's that good, but who knows..The draft is a crap chute..

3. TT says fans will love him cuz "he's all football."

4. Laura Quinn!!!!!!!!!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

5. Passing on the slipping Leinart in favor of Hawk showed that the Packers have faith in mah boy Rodgers.

Here's hopin Hawk becomes just amazing...If Shawne Merriman can make the pro bowl in his rookie year, then so can AJ right?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Nice to see you back, BF.

[BF4MVP]

Thanks Harv..Nice to see you still here..

[Deputy Nutz]

At least your smart enough to come around.

[RashanGary]

Harv lined up Urlachers athletic measurables vs Hawks and I liked Hawks just a litte more.

They are the same speed but Hawk was more explosive. I think Hawk could be as good as Urlacher. Acctually, I think he should be as good as Urlacher.

This is the most exciteing day since the Philly game as a Packer fan. I would be surprised if the Packers had a losing season. They just added a top level play maker and Favre came back.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Urlacher is 6'4" 258lbs, played S in college and is quick as hell.

Hawk is 6'1" 247 lbs and slow as a turtle. I dont care is his 40 is 4.73, that is slow.

Hawk isnt anything but the next Dat Nguyen. Mark my words on it.

[Bretsky]

Urlacher is 6'4" 258lbs, played S in college and is quick as hell.

Hawk is 6'1" 247 lbs and slow as a turtle. I dont care is his 40 is 4.73, that is slow.

Hawk isnt anything but the next Dat Nguyen. Mark my words on it.

Tank,

Why don't you look up Hawk's numbers so you are remotely in the balllpark. He is NOT a slow LB.

[ND72]

at some point, everyone will just ignore Tank cause of his out of reality comments.

[BF4MVP]

Hawk ran a 4.36 at his pro day I thought..Could be mistaken..

I don't think he's THAT fast, cuz I think those pro day times are somehow skewed in favor of the players..But he's still a fast LB and hits hard...

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Tank,

Why don't you look up Hawk's numbers so you are remotely in the balllpark. He is NOT a slow LB.

No need to do that. Watched his highlight film, and the guy is not even on par with Greenway. In fact, if you want to compare any one from this draft with Urlacher, Greenway is it.

Greenway: better coverage ablity, plays faster, hits harder.

[Scott Campbell]

I don't know about you guys, but I'm kind of relieved that Tank think the pick sucks.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Hawk ran a 4.36 at his pro day I thought..Could be mistaken..

I don't think he's THAT fast, cuz I think those pro day times are somehow skewed in favor of the players..But he's still a fast LB and hits hard...

If you want a fast lb, think 4.5, not 4.8. Hawk isnt fast and he doesnt play fast. Urlacher may have a slower time, but he plays super fast and super quick.

[Bretsky]

Tank,

Why don't you look up Hawk's numbers so you are remotely in the balllpark. He is NOT a slow LB.

No need to do that. Watched his highlight film, and the guy is not even on par with Greenway. In fact, if you want to compare any one from this draft with Urlacher, Greenway is it.

Greenway: better coverage ablity, plays faster, hits harder.

TANK,
YOU ARE SOUNDING WORSE: YOU HAVE YOUR FACTS MIXED UP; HAWK IS A 4.55 GUY

[Bretsky]

Hawk ran a 4.36 at his pro day I thought..Could be mistaken..

I don't think he's THAT fast, cuz I think those pro day times are somehow skewed in favor of the players..But he's still a fast LB and hits hard...

If you want a fast lb, think 4.5, not 4.8. Hawk isnt fast and he doesnt play fast. Urlacher may have a slower time, but he plays super fast and super quick.

ONCE AGAIN RELOOK YOUR NUMBERS. IF 4.5 RANGE IS FAST THEN YOU WILL HAVE TO ADMIT THAT AJ HAWK IS FAST. IS THAT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT ?????????????????

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Tank,

Why don't you look up Hawk's numbers so you are remotely in the balllpark. He is NOT a slow LB.

No need to do that. Watched his highlight film, and the guy is not even on par with Greenway. In fact, if you want to compare any one from this draft with Urlacher, Greenway is it.

Greenway: better coverage ablity, plays faster, hits harder.

TANK,
YOU ARE SOUNDING WORSE: YOU HAVE YOUR FACTS MIXED UP; HAWK IS A 4.55 GUY

What the hell? Last I checked Hawk was running 4.73. According to NFL.com.

[RashanGary]

Thompson said he prayed that he'd get A.J. Hawk.....

When he said at prodays LB's had their back to the wind in the 40 I think he was trying to slight Hawks performance so nobody knew...

I always thought Thompson was a best available but you can see that he really hopes to fill the right positions.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

NFL.com:

A.J. Hawk
Height: 6-1
Weight: 247
40 Speed: 4.73*

[Anti-Polar Bear]

The thing I hate most about Hawk is that he can;t cover. Nail Diggs, anyone?

[RashanGary]

LBers are accutally asked to be more instinctive and reactive in coverage. They are not so much asked to be cover corners. I think Hawk's strength is his ability to properly anylize a play and be in the right spot...4th and 26 anyone????

[Anti-Polar Bear]

LBers are accutally asked to be more instinctive and reactive in coverage. They are not so much asked to be cover corners. I think Hawk's strength is his ability to properly anylize a play and be in the right spot...4th and 26 anyone????

Hawk dont need to be able to cover like a CB; be need to able to cover TEs man to man. That area is where diggs failed, and Hawk likely would too unless there is a miracle and Hawk suddenly become good at it.

[Bossman641]

Scouts Inc. has Hawk at a 4.65 40
NFL draft countdown has him at 4.59

Hawk is plenty fast and his instincts allow him to play even faster in the box. I'm very happy with the pick.

[RashanGary]

Hawk is a weak side linebacker. The definition of weakside is the side that does not have the TE. So he will not be asked to cover TE's although his would be decent at it. His job is going to be to play zone and be in the right place to make a play in the passing game. That acctually is one of his biggest strengths. I think you're going to see a complete player Tank. I don't think he'll cover a TE more than 1 or 2 players per game if there is a 2 TE package.

[Bretsky]

NFL.com:

A.J. Hawk
Height: 6-1
Weight: 247
40 Speed: 4.73*

HAWK RAN 4.62 AT THE COMBINE and 4.56 AT HIS PRO DAY. I CAN LIST MULTIPLE SOURCES FOR THE COMBINE IF YOU WANT

[RashanGary]

Physically not everyone has smooth enough hips to cover TE's or WRs but mentally not everyone has what it takes to properly and effectively play a zone coverage. Hawk is very strong in that area and that is the task he'll be asked to do most often.

[RashanGary]

Thompson said he ran a 4.45 at his proday. I though I heard 4.38 at one point.

[oregonpackfan]

I like Hawke because of his instincts, quickness, and aggressiveness.

I don't care what his 40 yard speed is. A linebacker needs quickness for 8-15 yards. Hawke has that quickness.

His selection is a fine first round pick for the Packers, IMO.

Oregonpackfan

[Bretsky]

Thompson said he ran a 4.45 at his proday. I though I heard 4.38 at one point.

I didn't find the pro day numbers but thought it was 4.56; maybe it was 4.46. Reportdedly he has run a below 4.4 and he's one of the fastest LB's among the top tier backers.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Hawk is a weak side linebacker. The definition of weakside is the side that does not have the TE. So he will not be asked to cover TE's although his would be decent at it. His job is going to be to play zone and be in the right place to make a play in the passing game. That acctually is one of his biggest strengths. I think you're going to see a complete player Tank. I don't think he'll cover a TE more than 1 or 2 players per game if there is a 2 TE package.

Well, in this case, you are basically saying Hawk is a one dimensional players. And that is exactly what he is, a one dimensional player, who cant play the mike or sam.

I watched Greenway's highlights when Minnesota were drafting him, and that guy is better overall than Hawk. Greenway is excellent in coverage, and can do all thing things that are Hawk's strengths just as good.

[RashanGary]

He's on dimensional if you don't take into account his zone coverage ability. It's like saying a QB is a bad blocker so don't take him or a DE is not very instinctive in zone coverage. It is just not something he is going to be asked to do so it's not something to even consider really.

You are correct that he is not as natural of a coverman as some other players but you are putting a lot of stock into an area that is 1 smidge away from being completely irrelevant.

Huff cannot shed block on a OG or FB. Are you saying he's on dimensional? Seriously Tank...You take one little thing wich is true BTW and blow it way out of perportion. Do you completely lack the ability to rationally weigh evidence or do you just try to stir shit up?

[dr.tedGM]

Hawk was too good to pass on. Though I would agree I do not think Greenway is that far from Hawk.

[Bretsky]

Hawk was too good to pass on. Though I would agree I do not think Greenway is that far from Hawk.


WELCOME TO PACKERRATS.COM

Out of curiosity how did you find us.


Cheers,
Bretsky

[Anti-Polar Bear]

He's on dimensional if you don't take into account his zone coverage ability. It's like saying a QB is a bad blocker so don't take him or a DE is not very instinctive in zone coverage. It is just not something he is going to be asked to do so it's not something to even consider really.

You are correct that he is not as natural of a coverman as some other players but you are putting a lot of stock into an area that is 1 smidge away from being completely irrelevant.

Huff cannot shed block on a OG or FB. Are you saying he's on dimensional? Seriously Tank...You take one little thing wich is true BTW and blow it way out of perportion. Do you completely lack the ability to rationally weigh evidence or do you just try to stir shit up?

I was not comparing Huff to Hawk, in this instance because that would be like comparing apples to oranges. I was comparing Hawk to Greenway. Greenway is the better player overall, because he can cover and Hawk is medecre in that area.

BTW, zone coverage is overrated. Qbs always find seams against zone. If hawk cant cover TEs and RBs man to man, then he simply is a one diminsional player; you cant depend on him if your stronger side LB got hurt. Say, you have 2 good WLB on your team. What if, say, Manning gets hurt and there is no one else capable of replacing him. You cant depend on Hawk, your 5th overall pick, in this instance.

LBs who can play all 3 lb positions well are the best LBs. Greenway fits this mode.

[MadtownPacker]

Well, in this case, you are basically saying Hawk is a one dimensional players. And that is exactly what he is, a one dimensional player, who cant play the mike or sam.

I watched Greenway's highlights when Minnesota were drafting him, and that guy is better overall than Hawk. Greenway is excellent in coverage, and can do all thing things that are Hawk's strengths just as good.

You better straighten your ass out Tank! Hawk is a Packer and lavenderway is a queen so he sucks. Understand now college boy?

[Homer Jay]

I was all for Hawk being the pick, but it would have been fun to see the spin Tank would have put on Davis being the pick. I find it hard to believe he would have thought it was a good pick.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I was all for Hawk being the pick, but it would have been fun to see the spin Tank would have put on Davis being the pick. I find it hard to believe he would have thought it was a good pick.

I would be disappointed, but not THIS disappointed.

Here's the top 3 decisions that would benefit the Pack most:

1. Trade with Raiders, acquire Moss and Huff
2. Trade with NO, acquire Bush
3. Draft Davis.

[outflow]

WELCOME TO PACKERRATS.COM


Thank you! Hawk reminds me of Jeremy Shockey and what he brought to the Giants. Some attitude and identity to a defense that really doesn't have one. I would have been just as happy with Vernon Davis but A.J. helps a whole lot sooner.

[Packers4Ever]

He's on dimensional if you don't take into account his zone coverage ability. It's like saying a QB is a bad blocker so don't take him or a DE is not very instinctive in zone coverage. It is just not something he is going to be asked to do so it's not something to even consider really.

You are correct that he is not as natural of a coverman as some other players but you are putting a lot of stock into an area that is 1 smidge away from being completely irrelevant.

Huff cannot shed block on a OG or FB. Are you saying he's on dimensional? Seriously Tank...You take one little thing wich is true BTW and blow it way out of perportion. Do you completely lack the ability to rationally weigh evidence or do you just try to stir shit up?
__________________________________

I was not comparing Huff to Hawk, in this instance because that would be like comparing apples to oranges. I was comparing Hawk to Greenway. Greenway is the better player overall, because he can cover and Hawk is medecre in that area.

BTW, zone coverage is overrated. Qbs always find seams against zone. If hawk cant cover TEs and RBs man to man, then he simply is a one diminsional player; you cant depend on him if your stronger side LB got hurt. Say, you have 2 good WLB on your team. What if, say, Manning gets hurt and there is no one else capable of replacing him. You cant depend on Hawk, your 5th overall pick, in this instance.

LBs who can play all 3 lb positions well are the best LBs. Greenway fits this mode.

________________________________________

Might as well give it up, Bretsky and Nick and others, there are those who are simply unable to listen to others' viewpoints and ponder them, they only listen to what they themselves have to say.
But we can watch next fall when Tank eats his own words !!!! :wink:

[Scott Campbell]

SATURDAY, April 29, 2006, 3:34 p.m.

By Cliff Christl
The fallacy about Hawk
Tight end Vernon Davis might have a bigger upside than A.J. Hawk. Mario Williams, Reggie Bush, Vince Young and D'Brickashaw Ferguson might be superior athletes.

But Hawk isn't just a high-motor, hard-nosed throwback as a linebacker. Any linebacker who stands 6-foot-1, weighs 243 pounds, runs a 4.59 or better 40-yard dash and jumps 40 inches is a special athlete.

[RashanGary]

Hawk might not be as good at covering TE's but he's better at every single toher area........

[MJZiggy]

But we can watch next fall when Tank eats his own words !!!! :wink:

It'll never happen as I'm finding out. Even when he gives you his word on something, it is no good. You owe me, Tank. Pay up!

[Joemailman]

When I watched Hawk against Notre Dame, the thing that impressed me most was his instincts. It seemed like he must have had a copy of the Notre Dame playbook. That is more important than what his 40 time was.

Notre Dame had a great offense. No defensive player was able to do to them what Hawk did.

[Homer Jay]

I read a couple of places that Hawk wasn't very good at rushing the quarterback. Can somebody tell me how he ended up with 9.5 sacks? I'd take something close to that next season.

[RashanGary]

Favre, Hawk, Woodson, Collins, Barnett, Clifton, Tauscher, Driver......

We have enough good players to be really good next year. By far the biggest addtion is Hawk. Woodson is OK but Hawk is a true playmaker who will grow with the team.

[Bretsky]

Favre, Hawk, Woodson, Collins, Barnett, Clifton, Tauscher, Driver......

We have enough good players to be really good next year. By far the biggest addtion is Hawk. Woodson is OK but Hawk is a true playmaker who will grow with the team.

Darnell Bing, Ko Simpson, and Demetrius Williams would still make wonderful additions.

[jack's smirking revenge]

I hope some of them are left around our picks. Some 2nd/3rd round talent there.

tyler

[Bretsky]

Well, we have the 7th and 12th picks next round. If Williams is still there I'll be praying TT takes him. After that I'd want Bing or Simpson followed probably by Rodrique Wright.