Packers expected to cut Hawk when CBA done

[rbaloha1]

Get rid of Barnett instead

Agreed. As a previous Hawk critic, AJ is a proven ilb starter. My guess is Hawk renegotiates a long term cap friendly contract.

[The Shadow]

Easy to say, but Barnett is signed for 2 more years to the contract we all want Hawk to sign. Barnett is also only 29 and historically equal or better than Hawk when healthy. The most likely outcome is bye bye hawk.

"..equal or better than Hawk when healthy" ??
I must be watching the wrong games - I find Hawk's play considerably superior to Barnett's.

[pbmax]

A lot depends on the new CBA and the FA period. The Packers aren't even sure if they will need to create cap room yet. And there is still the matter of Mack versus Buck ILBs in the base D. Only Hawk and the camp bodies played Buck (Simpkins and Francois I think).

While there is a lot more noise about the paycut, including comments from the agent, I could still see a scenario with a high enugh cap number, Hawk is back.

[Pugger]

Let's suppose Hawk does not agree to a pay decrease for the coming season, the Packers do cut him and he decides to test the market. Do any of you think any other team is gonna pay him $10M in 2011?

[prime311]

Kind of a no brainer, no way he was coming back at that price. I wouldn't be surprised to see him sign a long term deal though. Guess we'll see how the market plays out. Interesting to see the Pack in this scenario at all. TT has made a point of frontloading contracts so they don't balloon into ridiculous numbers we can't afford. I can only surmise that this was due to his being a high draft pick.

[Patler]

A lot depends on the new CBA and the FA period. The Packers aren't even sure if they will need to create cap room yet. And there is still the matter of Mack versus Buck ILBs in the base D. Only Hawk and the camp bodies played Buck (Simpkins and Francois I think).

While there is a lot more noise about the paycut, including comments from the agent, I could still see a scenario with a high enugh cap number, Hawk is back.

Yes, I also would not be surprised if the Packers went ahead and paid Hawk. The Packers brought back KGB for at least two seasons when the writers assured us they would release him because of his exorbitant salary in relationship to the then-existing salary cap. They brought him back on a hope and a prayer that he could fill a bit role for them as a pass rush specialist. Hawk will be a starter if he is brought back. $10 million for Hawk now looks like a better investment than nearly $8 million for KGB in 2008.

I could very easily see Barnett being the odd man out. The defense played pretty well without him this year. If it were a normal year, I might expect a draft day trade involving Barnett. Without a new CBA, it is my understanding players can not be traded.

[Brandon494]

I hope they cut him just so I won't have to see you guys on his dick anymore. He gets way too much love for the average player he is. Barnett when healthy is clearly the better LB. Now if he can stay healthy is the question. I've been saying for years the only reason he was playing ahead of Bishop was because of his draft status and the money he was making. Bishop finally got on the field this year and proved you haters wrong. If not for Bishop making that shoe string tackle against his college teammate Jackson the Packers don't even make it out of the first round. Yea I'm really going to miss him making tackles from knees while getting push back 2 more yards. 10 million for Hawk? He should be making 2 million at the max.

[Brandon494]

KGB was a pass rusher, that's why they took a chance on him for that amount of money. They arent going to pay Hawk 10 million when they have two other guys on the bench who are just as good if not better then Hawk. If they keep Hawk for 10 million and let Jenkins go instead of franchising him I'll be pissed.

[RashanGary]

Hawk took over leading the defense and did it in a way that had coaches and players raving. He was voted a team captain for the playoffs (a kinda big deal).

I never thought much of Hawk either. He's always been so darn pedestrian. You feel like Robert Francois could come in and play as mediocre as Hawk. Barnett hasn't been much better. This year though, Hawk rose a level above Barnett in my eyes (good LB) and seems to do all of the little things right.

I think the Packers will value Hawk more than Barnett. 6M per year should be the max though. There are better players you can have for 8M/year. Jennings, Nick Collins, Tramon Williams, Ryan Grant just to name a couple on our team. Hawk doesn't deserve that jack and if they pay it to him I wont be on board with it. Then other teams will value our SB winning players through the roof. A lot of wise posters think he's here, but the writing is on the wall that he very well may not be. This is a story whether we want it to be or not.


As far as Cullen Jenkins, this is an incredibly deep draft for DE's. With everyone we already have and the chances of BPA being DE at some point, I don't know if resigning him (30 years old, will be declining and paid through the roof) will be a good thing.

[Kiwon]

In other interviews I got the impression that Hawk would be fine going elsewhere. He'll take getting paid more $$ over giving GB a hometown discount.

[mraynrand]

I think Hawk is gone, simply due to his on-field performance. The film most damning is probably from the reg. season game at Philly. Nice knowin' ya Hawk.

[RashanGary]

I think Hawk is gone, simply due to his on-field performance. The film most damning is probably from the reg. season game at Philly. Nice knowin' ya Hawk.

Yeah, that was bad that game for him. No sacks or forced fumbles, just like usual for him.

In all seriousness though, Hawk almost never makes big plays. Matthews, Raji, Tramon, Collins, Bishop even, hell throw Shields in there. . . There are guys out there making it happen. Hawk is now and has always been pedestrian, similar to what Peprah has been at Safety.

He did a nice job running the defense and he was voted as a captain so obviously he's a leader.


Actual play though, Hawk is just a guy. He's replaceable. I don't want him gone, but a lot of teams fell in love with him after his SR season at OSU. He hasn't flopped so some guys are probably still in love with him and he's coming from the Champs. He's gonna get paid and he's not worth it.

I see the 10m one year deal as being more likely than an extension and I see him going elsewhere as the most likely option of all.

[mmmdk]

Get rid of Barnett instead

Agree 100% - Hawk is a leader, rock solid football player & durable too. Get rid of the "Bitter Twitter"!

[KYPack]

KGB was a pass rusher, that's why they took a chance on him for that amount of money. They arent going to pay Hawk 10 million when they have two other guys on the bench who are just as good if not better then Hawk. If they keep Hawk for 10 million and let Jenkins go instead of franchising him I'll be pissed.

The deadline for using the two tags has passed. Jenkins won't be tagged as no Packer will be tagged this season.

[RashanGary]

We've successfully moved on from Favre, A Green, J Walker, D Sharper, W Henderson, M Tausher, M Rivera, M Flannagen, C Williams, KGB and many many more. We all get attached to the players but the reality is, when you have a good GM, you don't have to pay through the roof for decent talent. YOu can find that for almost free in the draft and UFA. Even the best talent, you can replace.

We have Ted and with that, AJ or Barnett are replaceable. We could lose both at the same time and I wouldn't fret. Save the big bucks for Matthews. He's actually worth it.