Here's a name to think about· Page 3

Tezzy
Senior Member

14 years ago

Hawk for him...RUMOR

"blueleopard" wrote:

Since Hawk's contract is worth millions of dollars next year, I'm not opposed to this.

"longtimefan" wrote:

I'd rather keep our depth at LB and win the Super Bowl this year than worry how much money is being spent next year. Worry about that next year when it is relevant.

On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."

doddpower
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#22

Hawk for him...RUMOR

"Tezzy" wrote:

Since Hawk's contract is worth millions of dollars next year, I'm not opposed to this.

"blueleopard" wrote:

I'd rather keep our depth at LB and win the Super Bowl this year than worry how much money is being spent next year. Worry about that next year when it is relevant.

"longtimefan" wrote:

And then perhaps lose Hawk with no compensation.

I agree it would be worth it if we do in fact win the Super Bowl. However, sometimes one must think ahead.

I don't really want to trade Hawk, but I'm just speaking in general terms. If they plan on letting him walk next season then it might not hurt to try to get something for him. If he is JUST playing in base packages I'm not sure how much difference there is between him and Bishop.

Also, I wouldn't mind having Lynch as our 2nd / 3rd string back. I wouldn't be worried about his "issues" and if they became a problem cut him lose with minimal loss. I think the risk would be worth the reward.

digsthepack
Registered

14 years ago

#23

Hawk is too much value to give up for Lynch....won't happen. Especially after the camp Hawk had. Why trade a quality LB who will be needed this season for a guy that might be had for a 4th or 5th? Does not make sense.

That said, EVERY team has a few bruised/bad apples...we are no different. We probably have fewer than other teams because of the emphasis on character under Ted Thompson and MM. Let's face it, as the smallest city in the league, the fishbowl atmosphere, and the community emphasis of the organization...bad character is less tolerated here than most other places.

Because of that, I believe our locker room could absorb a guy like Lynch and have it work. He is a quality runner who has played in Buffalo's cold and snow. Hits it hard and has some explosion.

I am not averse to bringing the kid in if that is how we go.

State Motto: "Wisconsin, our serial murderers eat their kill!"

peteralan71
Registered

14 years ago

#24

brought up the idea earlier in the ryan grant out thread. aj hawk to the billsssss

"gbguy20" wrote:

This would be trading away a strong player. I have been saying that Hawk isn't what he used to be, but still, do we want to trade him away for Lynch when we aren't sure what he could bring us, and furthermore if it would even extend past this year? NOPE.

Green Bay: Home of the Green & Gold. And the hunter orange. And the camouflage.

doddpower
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#25

Hawk is too much value to give up for Lynch....won't happen. Especially after the camp Hawk had. Why trade a quality LB who will be needed this season for a guy that might be had for a 4th or 5th? Does not make sense.

That said, EVERY team has a few bruised/bad apples...we are no different. We probably have fewer than other teams because of the emphasis on character under Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Let's face it, as the smallest city in the league, the fishbowl atmosphere, and the community emphasis of the organization...bad character is less tolerated here than most other places.

Because of that, I believe our locker room could absorb a guy like Lynch and have it work. He is a quality runner who has played in Buffalo's cold and snow. Hits it hard and has some explosion.

I am not averse to bringing the kid in if that is how we go.

"digsthepack" wrote:

I'm not sure about everyone else, but I'm not advocating a straight up player-for-player trade here. In the crazy hypothetical madden situation we are speaking of, I would expect Lynch and another player and/or draft pick. As I said, I'm sure it's not going to happen, but still fun to think about. But you're right, Hawks value is significantly more than Lynch's in my opinion.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

14 years ago

#26

Okay, so let's say that I'm the Bills.

I'm trying to trade Lynch because he's a headcase and because my backfield is just too crowded.

How would I value an ILB, who's been reduced to a two down linebacker by now and having two years left on his contract, in which he gets overpaid based on his play? Not much more than the 4th/5th rounder I think I'd be getting for Lynch. Especially not with Poluszny and Davis starting at ILB right now. No amazing duo, especially Davis is expendable at this point, but nothing that makes you pull of a lopsided trade.

If GB would call me and say that, next to Hawk, they also wanted a draft pick, I'd just slam down the phone again.

And this is not a post to bash AJ Hawk.

Pack93z
Select Member

14 years ago

#27

I believe Poluszny went down again to injury.. couple weeks at the least.. kid can't stay on the field and the Bills have little depth at linebacker..

But I agree.. I think a few are overvaluing Hawk.. but that is common with hometown players.

I like Hawk.. but I don't think he would fetch what some believe he to be worth on the open market.. he has more value with his experience here than we would get in return.. other than salary relief.

By the way.. that salary decreases his value on the market as well.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

14 years ago

#28

No doubt about it. But you really think Eugene Robinson was a different person in Green Bay than he was Atlanta?

Sometimes you have to throw a dart. Even if this is a one year rental, I'm just sayin'.

Jackson is on a tryout. The trade deadline is still a ways away. But this is a name to keep an eye on.

"porky88" wrote:

I'm not sure how that's relevant since we traded Matt LaBounty to the Seahawks for Eugene Robinson who after winning a Super Bowl with us, went to Atlanta.

I know you're just saying, I see your post, so that's not really necessary to say. :)

You would have been better to use Andre Rison instead.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

I'm talking about the character of the guy and not the means of how the Packers went and got him. Though I immediately thought of Rison once I read my post.

I'll go a step further and say there is probably a good chance Green Bay has another Marshawn Lynch like person currently in the locker room.

If this locker room can absorb it and set the guy straight, then I don't see a lot of down side in making the a deal. Again, this is purely based on Jackson struggles. If he goes out and plays well the next two weeks, Green Bay is not going to do much of anything. If he struggles and a drop off is evident, Lynch is probably the most realistic option on the table.

"porky88" wrote:

I'm not sure I'm sold on the idea of Lynch, but I will suggest that if the kid has enough sense to know he's going in the wrong direction, a second-chance opportunity to showcase his on-field ability and rehab his image might be something he'd go for. And that might hold the character issues at bay.

Woodson himself was a bit of a problem before he got to GB, as well, per his own admission.

Might be worth it - if, as you say, Jackson struggles or gets nicked up.

blank

Pack93z
Select Member

14 years ago

#29

, Jackson struggles or gets nicked up.

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:

Based on history alone.. I don't believe it to be a question if he gets nicked up.. more of a when and how long he will be down for.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

14 years ago

#30

, Jackson struggles or gets nicked up.

"pack93z" wrote:

Based on history alone.. I don't believe it to be a question if he gets nicked up.. more of a when and how long he will be down for.

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:

Possibly. And I say that on the basis of anecdotal evidence that he's been far more serious about his preparation this off-season. Yes, he could get hurt and he certainly has been fairly regularly. I won't be shocked if it happens, and I would hope the FO isn't simply assuming it won't.

But with all of one game in the books (and a W at that), I'm allowing myself a little optimism for the time being.

blank

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

dfosterf (4h) : Mackelvie

dfosterf (4h) : Michael Macelvie- NFL teams know how to draft- Why don"t they?

dfosterf (4h) : Youtube

Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.

dfosterf (11h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo

Zero2Cool (12h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha

wpr (13h) : Tomorrow is almost here.

packerfanoutwest (13h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?

packerfanoutwest (13h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him

Zero2Cool (15h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.

packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : don't care

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22-Apr) : now 3

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24