Chew on this Hawk Lovers!

[The Shadow]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

[sharpe1027]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

Captain Etienne Navarre

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

[Partial]

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

Bishop

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

[pbmax]

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

Your point is ludicrous. If the Packers think Chillar is that much better overall than Hawk, then why isn't he in the base Defense?

[pbmax]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

Captain Etienne Navarre

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

Thank you for retrieving a part of my childhood there.

[Noodle]

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

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

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

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

[cheesner]

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

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

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

[rbaloha1]

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

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

Barry Sanders

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

[Tyrone Bigguns]

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

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

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

Fixed

[Freak Out]

What exactly constitutes a 'Hawk lover'?

Captain Etienne Navarre

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

Rutger rocks.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Spetters.

Nothing like a good homo gang rape scene.

[Tony Oday]

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

[Brandon494]

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

[PackerTimer]

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

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

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

[Zool]

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

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