Hawk taking heat in Green Bay

[SkinBasket]

Which was dumb as shit to even think that he was. Clay Matthews should have been DPOY last season but people want to give credit to Hawk just because he had the headset in his helmet.

You really don't have a very good idea of how this whole football thing works do you? No, wait! Don't answer that. We already know, and it's okay little guy. It's okay.

[woodbuck27]

Great read. Thanks fellas.

[sharpe1027]

See what I posted two post up, no one is saying he is our biggest problem but the guy sucks and hes overpaid.

Congrats, this after 6 pages of you disagreeing with basically the same statements. Immediately before that you equate giving Hawk credit with why Matthews didn't win DPOY when the post you are replying to was merely showing the hypocrisy of relying upon flavor of the week analysis.

Clay Matthews should have been DPOY last season but people want to give credit to Hawk

[swede]

I think when talking about Hawk's draft pick, it's important to look at the time he was drafted. It was TT's second year. Our talent pool was horrible and we didn't have another linebacker besides Barnett. We had a lot of guys who were just starting to come into their own and there was still a lot of mistakes being made, but Hawk came in like a 5 year vet and actually lead the team in tackles. This is the first year where he wasn't in the top 3 for tackles on our team. When he came out, nobody said he was going to be a game changer, they said he was a safe pick, a solid starter and I don't see any evidence to contrary. I still see him as a solid player, a work horse. This year, he was an average player, but I think this is the worst year he's had. If that's his bottom, well then I think he's worth what we pay him.

I think that this take blended with Rand's is pretty close to right. I remember everyone saying pre-draft that Hawk was no stud, not likely to be a pro-bowler, but he was the surest thing in a difficult draft in terms of a ten year contributor.

Last year Hawk was the guy we expected: steady, solid, smart, but unspectacular. This year he regressed. I'll never forget the first Lions game when he had filled a gap and then disappeared while the Detroit runner gashed us for 10+ right over the spot Hawk had vacated. Did he remember his responsibility was to the outside and expected another to control the gap he was in? Did he guess wrong? It was a play that was emblematic of his season, though. I am no Hawk hater, but next year is his last year if it is again like this year.

[Brandon494]

Because he don't need no stats. He watched the games!




oh... and he's mildly retarded.

LMAO yea you show me AJ Hawks stats like a MLB making tackles is suppose to mean something. All those stats told me was his best season came when he was a rookie. The guy didn't cause one turnover this season and had 1.5 sacks. Bishop didn't have that great of a season either but at least he had 5 sacks, caused 2 turnovers, and had more solo tackles than Hawk had tackles well playing fewer games then Hawk last season.

[Brandon494]

Congrats, this after 6 pages of you disagreeing with basically the same statements. Immediately before that you equate giving Hawk credit with why Matthews didn't win DPOY when the post you are replying to was merely showing the hypocrisy of relying upon flavor of the week analysis.

Serious man? Skins wrote "And then he was praised for leading the LBs on a league leading defense. I remember that." talking about Hawk. No where in my reply did I say Matthews didn't win the DPOY award because of Hawk. Are you high right now? If so hook a brotha up because thats got to me some good shit you smoking.

[Brandon494]

I did say we should cut Hawk and use to money on getting a pass rusher without realizing his cap numbers. Obviously not the right move to cut him but I still disagree with resigning him to the deal he got. We could have signed Barnett for shorter and cheaper deal and resigned Jenkins for a little more than what Hawk's deal was worth. Which would you prefer? Barnett and Jenkins or Hawk?

[mraynrand]

I don't think anyone thinks Hawk is the main problem on defense. Obviously pass rush and secondary are our main needs but that still doesn't take anyway from the fact that Hawk played worse then a 6th round rookie this season.

I think this pretty well sums it up. Hawk is a dud. Sure, if he were a 5th or later round pick, you'd say that's pretty good value, to get a serviceable starter, but you'd be looking to upgrade. Given the other problems in the defense, you're going to spend your picks/money elsewhere, if you can.

[woodbuck27]

I did say we should cut Hawk and use to money on getting a pass rusher without realizing his cap numbers. Obviously not the right move to cut him but I still disagree with resigning him to the deal he got. We could have signed Barnett for shorter and cheaper deal and resigned Jenkins for a little more than what Hawk's deal was worth. Which would you prefer? Barnett and Jenkins or Hawk?

Ouchh !

[Zool]

Every team drafts duds in every round. Hawk is an average starter that you can live with but to Brandons point (I think?) he's overpaid and got drafted too high. Happens every day in the NFL. He doesn't suck but he's nothing to cheer about either.

He just sort of....is.

If the guy made the vet minimum he'd be great value.

[sharpe1027]

Serious man? Skins wrote "And then he was praised for leading the LBs on a league leading defense. I remember that." talking about Hawk. No where in my reply did I say Matthews didn't win the DPOY award because of Hawk. Are you high right now? If so hook a brotha up because thats got to me some good shit you smoking.

Judging by your response, I am guessing that when you said "Clay Matthews should have been DPOY last season but people want to give credit to Hawk" you meant it in a different context than how I initially read it. I can see that now and it was my mistake, perhaps you can see how it could be read as suggesting that Clay should have won but instead people want to give credit to Hawk. Either way, I understand your point.

Skins post was in response to someone commenting on how people were talking about Hawk being phased out. I read it as a pretty clear cut dig at using that type of flavor of the week analysis since two contradictory opinions were formed on Hawk within a short time frame. I didn't read it as arguing that Hawk really was responsible for the defense's improvement, but merely pointing out the fickle nature of such analysis. Perhaps I'm wrong again.

In any event, Hawk is going nowhere anytime soon. I think that is a wise decision as they gain nothing next year by cutting him.

[mraynrand]

but to Brandons point (I think?) he's overpaid and got drafted too high. Happens every day in the NFL. He doesn't suck but he's nothing to cheer about either.

He just sort of....is.

If the guy made the vet minimum he'd be great value.

I agree, except I'd change Great to Good

[Smidgeon]

I won't argue with any negative said about Hawk...he is who he is I guess. I just see a few things that bother me about our defense...#1, coaching. If the middle of the field is still wide open game after game, that is no longer on the player, that is on coaching. I may just be an OL/DL coach, and my years of film study is based aroudn that, but when I coach a kid, and someone is beating him on a move every play, that is my job to correct it. fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

#2, lockout. Something altered our defense this year. Tramon was off, Chuck was off at times, Hawk was off, Matthews, while still solid, was off. Something was going on that we as fans couldn't connect the dots to. And I still get the arguement that by week 17 things should have been fixed, but obviously they weren't.

#3, Scheme. We saw less of they "psycho" defense this year, and more of the base 3-4 than the nickle that was used a lot last year. Our defense just seemed very vanilla and basic all year. Then when we realized we couldn't get any pressure, we tried blitzing more, which also didn't happen. One play in the Giants game that pissed me off beyond belief was when we brought 3 guys, dropped 8 into coverage, and Nicks was standing in the middle of the field wide ass open directly in between LB & S depths. What the hell? And it happened more than once, so again that brings me back to what are the coaches seeing and communicating to players on the field?

#4, players. I hate to keep bringing it up because it is a BS reason, but teams went after the DE/ROLB positions this year because we were horrible. AND, teams threw it at Tramon...ALOT. If not Tramon, then they threw it at Peprah...ALOT. Teams exploited our weaknesses almost weekly this year. That happened in 2009/2010 also, and we came back last year as a different defense. I hope the same is true in 2012/2013.

Personally, I think the Psycho being used less is less of an indication about scheme than the nickel being used less. Last year the Packers were in the nickel over 70% of the total snaps (if I remember correctly). I even made several comments wondering if this would be one of those defining schemes that one team pulled off that none other could duplicate (like the old Cowboys or Bears systems).

Does anyone know why the Pack couldn't run it as much? Pickett and Raji switching around doesn't sound right. Collins being gone sounds closer to the truth. But I don't know enough about the mechanics of football to offer anything educated.

[Smidgeon]

I think that this take blended with Rand's is pretty close to right. I remember everyone saying pre-draft that Hawk was no stud, not likely to be a pro-bowler, but he was the surest thing in a difficult draft in terms of a ten year contributor.

Last year Hawk was the guy we expected: steady, solid, smart, but unspectacular. This year he regressed. I'll never forget the first Lions game when he had filled a gap and then disappeared while the Detroit runner gashed us for 10+ right over the spot Hawk had vacated. Did he remember his responsibility was to the outside and expected another to control the gap he was in? Did he guess wrong? It was a play that was emblematic of his season, though. I am no Hawk hater, but next year is his last year if it is again like this year.

Hindsight is 20/20 and Ngata would look good in green and gold. Maybe Whitner too. But Hawk will be a ten year contributor. Nothing amazing. Nothing great. But he'll be employed for at least a decade in the NFL. On the Packers or elsewhere, considering the natural flops that come with drafting, you could do a lot worse in any draft.

In fact, no matter where in the first round, if Hawk is TT's worst first round draft pick (jury's out on Sherrod and I still maintain Harrell would have been good if not for injury), then that's not a bad track record. He got Rodgers in the 20s, Matthews in the 20s, Bulaga in the 20s. For as often as 20s picks don't pan out, I'll accept that track record.

[mraynrand]

Hindsight is 20/20 and Ngata would look good in green and gold. Maybe Whitner too. But Hawk will be a ten year contributor. Nothing amazing. Nothing great. But he'll be employed for at least a decade in the NFL. On the Packers or elsewhere, considering the natural flops that come with drafting, you could do a lot worse in any draft.

In fact, no matter where in the first round, if Hawk is TT's worst first round draft pick (jury's out on Sherrod and I still maintain Harrell would have been good if not for injury), then that's not a bad track record. He got Rodgers in the 20s, Matthews in the 20s, Bulaga in the 20s. For as often as 20s picks don't pan out, I'll accept that track record.

I agree, TT has had plenty of first round successes - It's just so hard to take, because he was at #5. And for those who hate McGinn, he was the guy arguing before the draft that the Packers should trade down and take Ngata.