Can't compare stats on these guys. I have used this analogy before. Hawk is the FB of the defense. He many not be making as many tackles or getting huge sacks and making the highlights. He is just doing his job. He takes on the lead blockers so Barnett or who ever can make the tackle. He is sacrificing himself for the team.
"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:
So what is Hawk doing that Lansanah or some other big LB couldn't have? It seems like a waste to me.
"Stevetarded" wrote:
That may be, but I don't blame Hawk for the change in the scheme. The first two years, Hawk was pretty good. Last year, I am not even looking at because of injury and getting shuffled around.
But he is on the team. Should we just bench him because a cheaper player may be able to do the same thing, close to the same? I don't think so. I would be for trading Hawk as long as Chillar is around to take his role. We then need a backup for him. Bishop is not it.
Leading on the cross blitz or taking on the FB is Hawks job, We don't want Barnett or Bishop with that responsibility, they are to small. Chillar and Hawk are sharing time because the each are better at one aspect over the other. Until one of them is no longer around, that is the way it should stay. Just because they are not getting the tackles doesn't matter because that is the job.
"PackFanWithTwins" wrote: