Hawk to be replaced?

[packers11]

https://www.rotoworld.com

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel expects the Packers to replace AJ Hawk as the team's starting middle linebacker this offseason.

Hawk finished 2009 with 89 tackles, but made few big plays and was often beaten in coverage. Brandon Chillar and Desmond Bishop are in-house options to take over, especially if Hawk refuses a cut from his $4.1M salary.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

[get louder at lambeau]

Not gonna happen. Wouldn't be prudent.

[Zool]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

[bobblehead]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

this is a classic example of two people having polar opposite perceptions. Whereas I won't claim chillar had a good game, he outplayed Hawk badly again this season. He is a solid starter imo. Stud, not by any stretch, I thought he was the 4th best backer when kamp was healthy, but a starter none the less.

[Zool]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

this is a classic example of two people having polar opposite perceptions. Whereas I won't claim chillar had a good game, he outplayed Hawk badly again this season. He is a solid starter imo. Stud, not by any stretch, I thought he was the 4th best backer when kamp was healthy, but a starter none the less.

Hawk put together 3-4 really good games...all happened to be while Chillar was out. Hawk played his worst game against the Cards. All 4 LB's looked lost for the bulk of that game. I wouldn't mind seeing Hawk replaced with an upgrade, but Chillar is not that guy. That's a lateral move at best(as you said we disagree on which turd smells less), and now that Chillar got his fancy new contract, he's not even much cheaper. Find someone better.

[Brandon494]

Chillar was having a great season before the injury.

I said earlier in the season if Hawk was not willing to take a paycut his days in Green Bay could be over. Hawk had a better season then in 2008 but he is just not that good and I've seen enough of him during the years that tells me he will never get better.

[Bretsky]

Hawk was a Pro Bowl Alternate

Anybody else think he was worthy of this ?

Gotta love his attitude.....gotta love him as a Packer person

Just not sure he's a good fit here

Wonder what he might garner in a trade ????

[Patler]

i am at a loss trying to understand how Hawk got to the position he is now in.

As a rookie they talked about using him instead of Barnett in passing situations, and rotated them at times. He made several quick reacting plays in pass coverage that brought praise from Larry McCarren, who once said there was a combination of athletic ability and instinct that Hawk had which was lacking in other Packer LBs. He wasn't eye-popping, but seemed solid.

Now, he is just a situational player with little to no value in pass defense. He looks almost plodding at times.

What happened? Too much pure oxygen in his hyperbaric bedroom? Too much weight work in the weight room?

How does a guy who barely played in some games become a Pro Bowl alternate???

[Joemailman]

Hawk played his best football when Chillar was hurt and he was on the field more. Not sure being a rotational player works for him. I'm more of a Hawk supporter than a Chillar supporter, but I don't know if it's worth keeping him around as a part time player. Desmond Bishop is waiting in the wings.

[Lurker64]

I don't think anybody who's suggesting that Chillar ought to take Hawk's position in the base defense actually understands Hawk's position in the base defense. Chillar does many things well (notably blitzing and coverage), but the primary responsibilities of Hawk's position in the base defense are "run support", "clearing the way for somebody else on an inside blitz", and "hitting the first man through the hole" (and then getting off a block if it's not the ballcarrier). Chillar's skillset makes him a better fit for Barnett's spot (the playmaking ILB) and not Hawk's spot (the physical ILB). Getting rid of Hawk at this point is silly, since we don't have any other LBs with the same level of physicalit who can match his instincts and reaction speed. In the preseason we may see Bishop play Hawk's position a little bit, but I fear he's going to guess wrong in an attempt to make a big play too much for Capers' preference (the same thing that doomed Anthony Smith).

What you may well see next year is significantly different personnel for the DL and LBs in the nickel vs. base. Base, you expect Jenkins, Pickett, and Jolly on the line with Matthews, Barnett, Hawk, and rotating personnel at the other LB spot, whereas Nickel you'd get Raji and Jenkins on the line with Barnett, Chillar, Mathews, and Jones as the LBs. You could possibly put Kampman in for Jones in the nickel, but Jones is significantly better in coverage.

[ND72]

Good lord, if Chillar is starting next year he either has compromising pics of the coaching staff or someone has their head firmly implanted in their ass.

this is a classic example of two people having polar opposite perceptions. Whereas I won't claim chillar had a good game, he outplayed Hawk badly again this season. He is a solid starter imo. Stud, not by any stretch, I thought he was the 4th best backer when kamp was healthy, but a starter none the less.

Totally disagree. Chillar started the season doing pretty well, but what most people don't realize, and what JSO doesn't say is that his "good start" against Chicago, and the St. Louis game, he wasn't even playing the MLB position. His sack against Chicago, he came in for Kampman and was at an OLB, and against St. Louis he was playing a safety position in the BIG OKIE thing that was stupid.

Chillar has shown his true MLB play late in the year, and he was HORRIBLE. He was listed as a cover guy, he got burned many many times. He is also considered a good tackler, but couldn't tackle anyone in the Arizona game. Anyone watch ESPN First take on monday? They pointed him out time and time again.

If Chillar is a starter, we can't run a 3-4. Period.

[ND72]

Hawk played his best football when Chillar was hurt and he was on the field more. Not sure being a rotational player works for him. I'm more of a Hawk supporter than a Chillar supporter, but I don't know if it's worth keeping him around as a part time player. Desmond Bishop is waiting in the wings.

Bishop is worse than Chillar.

[b bulldog]

Made the probowl off of his name and college rep. Barnett was clearly our best MLB but Hawk should still be kept unless we upgrade via draft or ufa.

[ND72]

Made the probowl off of his name and college rep. Barnett was clearly our best MLB but Hawk should still be kept unless we upgrade via draft or ufa.

then why wasn't he a probowl alternate the past 2 years?

[Lurker64]

Made the probowl off of his name and college rep. Barnett was clearly our best MLB but Hawk should still be kept unless we upgrade via draft or ufa.

And there shouldn't be any ILBs available at #23 who are immediately an upgrade over Hawk. Rolando McClain would be probably, but he is unlikely to make it out of the top 10. There are other guys who would probably be comparable to Hawk (e.g. Brandon Spikes) but no way should we spend our first round pick on them.