Almost all teams have a weakness... I rather be "weak" at ILB than any of the other defensive positions... don't want to be weak on DL, pass rushers (OLB), CBs or S.... if you keep addressing and improving though I'm okay for the ILBers to be average if the others positions are above average.

Also if the Packers want too (and they might of done some of this already)... they can have an OLB play ILB and help the pass rush... a Safety play ILB and help the coverage etc... heck if you count Neal as a DL (as he used to be and sorta still is... might even have a DL play ILB for when you have goal line / short yardages and need run support.

That second ILB can be used the most versatile of ways... if a coach can think of ways and willing to do it.

---

Like Ryan Grant I have defended Hawk and will continue to do so. I don't care what slot he was drafted in. For the money he receives I have had no issues with his play as well as his leadership on the field to make intelligent calls on shifting the defense as needed. Dude brings his lunch pail every week and just lines up and plays. Now, with that said, if there were better players behind him than I would have no issues replacing him. As Beast just alluded to, Hawk gives us a lot of options of how we play around him, and I like it. Is ILB our weakness right now? I think it is a tie with our NT position. Too many players have shown flashes and then not repeated the success, which to me just says it is about match ups and Dom making the best usage of marginal talent.

Ok, I just read what I wrote, and it really makes no sense, but I will post it anyways because it's how my brain is thinking right at this moment.

---