Chew on this Hawk Lovers!

[HarveyWallbangers]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

Every article you read in the paper comes true about 2010 written in Oct 2009. What else could it prove?

This guy gets it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

Serioulsy dude, your posts are horrible. Just like most of you posts what does that have to do with anything?

It ain't that hard to figure out.

[Partial]

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

What does this have to do with anything? If they're wrong on the above, are they automatically wrong on everything else?

pb-

I did some more digging.

In 2006, Hawk was the 6th leading OLB tackler behind Bulluck, June, Briggs, Sims and Brooks.

In 2007, Hawk was the 9th leading OLB tackler.

Hard to compare 2008 with him playing both OLB and MLB.

Who cares how many tackles he has? How does he compare to those players in game changing plays such as sacks, tackles for loss, interceptions, forced fumbles?!? Those are the stats that matter. We're running a defense where the linebackers are the playmakers. If they're only going to gently tackle instead of making an impact, then you move on.

[ND72]

Hawk will have to take a pay cut from $4.1 million when we will be either millions of dollars under the salary cap, or will have an uncapped year??? He got a $13 million dollar roster bonus in March of 2008, pretty sure $4.1 million is nothing, especially since Ted loves him, Moss loves him, and McCarthy love him.

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

I don't think they love him as much as you think. I've never heard MM say anything glowing about him this year. In fact I've only heard things with a negative connotation like (paraphrase) "We'd like him to let loose and play more aggressively", etc.

Moss basically said the same thing the other day in the JSO article.

I don't think they're as high on him as you think.

The past couple of weeks Moss has said stuff yes....but have you read any of his other comments from pre-season or even before the season regarding Hawk? That still doesn't mean they are going to cut him with a year left on his contract as a #5 pick.

[ND72]

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

So you admit it?

That I have a "hard on" for Hawk? yes....I loved him before he was a packer. I should mention that at my wedding this summer, my best man even said in his speech, "We cheered when we drafted A.J. Hawk...and I only mention that because him and I usually can't go more than 15 minutes without saying the words A.J. Hawk."

[ThunderDan]

What is posting that article supposed to prove?

That insiders believe that Hawk is going to have to take a paycut to remain on the Packers. I agree with them if he plays like he typically has the past two years. If he continues like he did yesterday he will be a Packer for awhile.

Thank you, its not that hard to figure out.

How about those August columns saying the Packers were SuperBowl bound?

Serioulsy dude, your posts are horrible. Just like most of you posts what does that have to do with anything?

Let's see..... every story you read in a paper about the NFL comes true. Are you that blinded about Hawk that the report could be completely wrong? If Hawk plays in the last 10 games, like last week, would you ask him as GM to take a pay cut?

I'm sure 6 games into the 2009 season TT and MM have already desided who is going to get paid their money and who is going to take a pay cut. I mean if Hawk has to take a cut GJ with 22 catches and 1 TD isn't playing to his new contact and needs a pay cut.

[pbmax]

Hawk will have to take a pay cut from $4.1 million when we will be either millions of dollars under the salary cap, or will have an uncapped year??? He got a $13 million dollar roster bonus in March of 2008, pretty sure $4.1 million is nothing, especially since Ted loves him, Moss loves him, and McCarthy love him.

My "hard on" for Hawk has nothing to do with common sense.

I don't think they love him as much as you think. I've never heard MM say anything glowing about him this year. In fact I've only heard things with a negative connotation like (paraphrase) "We'd like him to let loose and play more aggressively", etc.

Moss basically said the same thing the other day in the JSO article.

I don't think they're as high on him as you think.

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

[Partial]

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

ND, I don't disagree with you, I have no idea if he will be cut, but I don't think the coaching staff is sky high on him either.

PB, again, I don't know if I'd call him a cap causality as they have plenty of cap space. Say they resign Chillar, Bishop takes another step forward, they keep Barnett (better than Hawk) and draft an ILB that falls to the bottom of the first round (we'll say projected top 10 guy). Is Hawk still a lock in that case? I can't say with confidence that he is.

If he plays like he did yesterday, then yes, he will be. If he plays like he did for much of last year and much of this year, than he may not be.

[Brandon494]

Let's see..... every story you read in a paper about the NFL comes true. Are you that blinded about Hawk that the report could be completely wrong? If Hawk plays in the last 10 games, like last week, would you ask him as GM to take a pay cut?

I'm sure 6 games into the 2009 season TT and MM have already desided who is going to get paid their money and who is going to take a pay cut. I mean if Hawk has to take a cut GJ with 22 catches and 1 TD isn't playing to his new contact and needs a pay cut.

Never said anything about the story being true or not, just a reference. Then you bring up a article written by another columnist that has nothing to do with the topic to try to make a point.

AJ Hawk did have a good game against the Browns, do you really expect him to play that well all season? I hope he does but I surely doubt it. Also why are you trying to bring GJ into the discussion, GJ earned his contract by playing his ass off. Hawk is only getting paid to big bucks because of his draft status, not his play on the field.

[bobblehead]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.

That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Thats exactly what Waldo said to me right before Chillar started taking his playing time away.

[MJZiggy]

I'm finding Jon Gruden's voice to be oddly irritating. Kind of what I imagine jock itch would be like...

[pbmax]

Still waiting for someone to name a Packer Cap Casualty since Darren Sharper in the 2005 offseason. Every year they have a list of cap casualties and its wrong. Every year they predict someone isn't going to get a contract adjustment. But Driver and Harris do (Driver twice).

This doesn't even begin to address the very real possibility that there will be no cap in 2010. At which point the discussion is almost moot.

ND, I don't disagree with you, I have no idea if he will be cut, but I don't think the coaching staff is sky high on him either.

PB, again, I don't know if I'd call him a cap causality as they have plenty of cap space. Say they resign Chillar, Bishop takes another step forward, they keep Barnett (better than Hawk) and draft an ILB that falls to the bottom of the first round (we'll say projected top 10 guy). Is Hawk still a lock in that case? I can't say with confidence that he is.

If he plays like he did yesterday, then yes, he will be. If he plays like he did for much of last year and much of this year, than he may not be.

Anything is possible. But I think they will first go OLB on defense well before another ILB. Until they feel the need to replace Barnett or if Chillar is too costly, then I can see an ILB. But that will tend to push Chillar/Barnett out not Hawk. The vets he cuts are replacement level and expensive, even in his poor games, Hawk is better than that.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.

That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Thats exactly what Waldo said to me right before Chillar started taking his playing time away.

And then right after you realized Chillar still had all the worts Waldo described.

[ND72]

Anyway I'm done with this topic, Hawk has been a disappointment for where he was drafted and there is nothing you can say to me to prove otherwise. Unless he suddenly starts to break out in the new 3-4 scheme you won't be seeing him in GB next season unless he takes a paycut.

That's pretty laughable...Can't wait until next season when Hawk is still inthe starting lineup in Green Bay so I can reference back and let you "chew" on that yourself.

Thats exactly what Waldo said to me right before Chillar started taking his playing time away.

See even that is false. he never took his playing time away. In base 3-4, or their 2-4/2-5, Hawk is on the field. when they go to a 3-2 or a 4-2, Chillar comes in. It was that way before the season even. Hawk only played in their Nickle set for the first preseason game, but never played another down of nickle in the preseason.

So the fact people say he's lost his snaps to Chillar is technically false, since he has never played a single down of regular season football in nickle or dime.

Reminder though (this was on a local Madison ESPN show today), other than the Lions game, AJ Hawk has been on the field for 89% of every defense snap. I have no numbers, or any other reference other than what I heard on the radio.

[bobblehead]

I'm finding Jon Gruden's voice to be oddly irritating. Kind of what I imagine jock itch would be like...

And I'm finding it oddly irritating that you are imagining what jock itch would be like.....