nerdmann
15 years ago

Yep... all a figment of the imagination ..

Again Solid Player.. but makes little impact around the line of scrimmage and plays like a Barnett junior.. makes tackles 3 to 7 yards past the line of scrimmage..

But carry on with the dramatics... no one is saying he "sucks".. never uttered that phrase in my days... could he play better, more aggressively and make impact hits.. you bet.

All I want is some of the OSU intensity he played with.. not this sitting on his heels (for Foster) and waiting for everything.

You notice the broken record type effect with this.. I knew I shouldn't have hopped into this thread.. some can't handle when players are criticized for play without taking it to the "he sucks" limit.

"dd80forever" wrote:




I understand you Pack93. I love Hawk, I really do, but his play is not been anything more than decent. Not the impact player we thought he was going to be.

"pack93z" wrote:




People bitch about Ted Thompson taking the risk of drafting Harrell. Then they bitch about him "playing it safe" by taking a guy like Hawk, who had little to no downside. Bottom line, people just like to bitch.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
nerdmann
15 years ago

The performance of our LBrs shouldn't even be a big topic of conversation right now, especially after holding Peterson to 2.2 ypc. I feel like this is just fallout from last season when we couldn't get enough of attacking them. As a group they are performing admirably.

"gijoe82" wrote:



+1 smartest thing said in this thread

"MassPackersFan" wrote:




I agree. Unlike last year, the defense hasn't cost us a game yet.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
nerdmann
15 years ago

Last season
- I really like barnett (till his injury)
- didnt like hawk - thought he was always late to the ball and he covered worse then a wet paper bag.
- Liked chillar alot even thou he had a few blown coverages (was aggressive).

This year
- dying to see bishop on the field; but hes getting no reps ... ya I know he did well in preseason and its not the same as reg. season. But lets get him some reps come on ... just to see how he does. When you are up 20+ on detroit; its time to stick in some guys just to see what they can do.
and ya my perception could change if he say plays for 20 snaps and is crap. (prefer a bigger sample thou).

- hawk ... actually doing better then last year IMO. See him around the ball more and appears to be more aggressive
- barnett - To be honest I think he's slow since his surgery; hes got alright coverage skills but as far as penetration or rushing the passer. Much worse then all our other backs.
- Chillar - still doing quiet well; and shined vs chicago. Got played vs MN since he was lined up a wideout and they were playing him like a safety (obviously he might not be able to cover a WR that well). Still key to this defense thou IMO.
- Kampman - Doing a adequate job considering what the coaches are calling him to do. If only they would let him rush the passer more.
- Matthews - star of our LB core so far IMO. Great start for the guy's first season. Great pass rusher and go getter. Got to love the AP strip and score.

If it were me picking which backers play ...

Chillar on passing downs or on rushing downs/splitting time with hawk which is used more for running plays.

Bishop used for running downs and rushing downs; barnett when wanting another coverage guy. (again my opinion could change once I see bishop in some games) ... but the guy was a stud in preseason. Hello 2 int a sack and the most tackles out of all players.

"Dulak" wrote:




I agree. Hopefully, we'll see Bishop and Flynn this week...
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
nerdmann
15 years ago

Hawk wants to return to Packers next season 

by Pete Dougherty, Green Bay Press-Gazette

Regardless of his current role, linebacker A.J. Hawk says he would like to remain with the Packers beyond this season.

That decision, though, almost surely will come down to whether hes willing to take a major pay cut from the $4.1 million hes scheduled to make in base salary next year.

Hawk, who has played only in the Packers base defense the last two games, was on the field for only nine snaps against the Detroit Lions last week because defensive coordiator Dom Capers deployed nickel personnel most of the game.

Its a given the Packers wont bring back Hawk next year at that pay. They presumably would ask him to take a pay cut before releasing him, and if they do, it will be up to Hawk to accept their new offer or force them to cut him so he can sign with another club.

I dont know, if that happens well cross that bridge when we come to it, Hawk said of a pay cut. I like it here. Definitely. Regardless of how many reps Im getting right now I still want to be here. Id much rather be not playing as much as Id like on a good winning team and a solid organization than starting for a team going 2-14.

"Rockmolder" wrote:




Hawk's going to do and say all the right things. That's the type of guy he is. He's not going to create a controversy.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
nerdmann
15 years ago

I don't agree having Chillar over Hawk. Hawk IMO is more balanced than him. I like Chillar, but when Hawk is on the field you know he isn't going to screw it up. This situation bothers me, I hope we can get Hawk on the field more.

"Patlee22" wrote:




Chillar's role is in coverage. Hawk's role is more to play the run. Chillar got more time against Detroit, because their passing game was much more of a threat.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
15 years ago


People bitch about Ted Thompson taking the risk of drafting Harrell. Then they bitch about him "playing it safe" by taking a guy like Hawk, who had little to no downside. Bottom line, people just like to bitch.

"nerdmann" wrote:



Yep they sure do.
UserPostedImage
Patlee22
15 years ago
Hmm...seems like the more we win and the larger lead we have on the opposing team, the less Hawk will see the field. I can't help but be bothered by him not being on the field, he does a very good job at defending the run and he does a solid job in pass coverage. Other than not making much plays he does a solid job. I guess you can't win with everyone...
blank
Rockmolder
15 years ago

People bitch about Ted Thompson taking the risk of drafting Harrell. Then they bitch about him "playing it safe" by taking a guy like Hawk, who had little to no downside. Bottom line, people just like to bitch.

"nerdmann" wrote:



I'm not bitching about the picks at all. Hawk was a no brainer with the 5th overall pick. Especially with Na'il gone.

I'm not bitching about Harrell, either. Go and see Foster's 'once in a decade talent' threads. Yes, he was injury prone already, but not anymore than a Crabtree or anything. We just had bad luck, if you ask me.

We're mainly bitching about how Hawk turned out. It was a great pick, but we expected a lot more from him than what he's giving us. Normally I'm not too bothered by that (It's a shame, of course, but he's no bust at least), but at the salary that we're currently giving him, I am.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
15 years ago
There is a lot of bashing of Hawk. I agree that as a number 5 pick he has been a little disappointing. But there were not a lot of choices available to GB in that draft. You always hope for a special player when you get a top 5 pick. But there were a lot of people before the draft saying not to expect too much.
I seem to recall that on draft day it was almost unanimous among Packer fans that Hawk was the player they wanted Uncle Teddy to select.
Now that it is hindsight who would you have wanted to take?


Round one
Pick #   	NFL Team   	Player   	Position   	
1 	Houston Texans 	        Mario Williams 	Defensive End
2 	New Orleans Saints 	Reggie Bush  	Running back 
3 	Tennessee Titans 	Vince Young 	Quarterback
4 	New York Jets 	        D'Brickashaw Ferguson 	Offensive Tackle
5 	Green Bay Packers 	A. J. Hawk 	Linebacker
6 	San Francisco 49ers 	Vernon Davis 	Tight End 
7 	Oakland Raiders 	Michael Huff 	Safety 
8 	Buffalo Bills 	        Donte Whitner 	Safety 
9 	Detroit Lions 	        Ernie Sims 	Linebacker 
10 	Arizona Cardinals 	Matt Leinart  	Quarterback
11 	Denver Broncos  	Jay Cutler 	Quarterback 
12 	Baltimore Ravens  	Haloti Ngata 	Defensive Tackle 
13 	Cleveland Browns 	Kamerion Wimbley Defensive End 
14 	Philadelphia Eagles 	Brodrick Bunkley Defensive Tackle 
15 	St. Louis Rams  	    Tye Hill 	Cornerback 
16 	Miami Dolphins 	        Jason Allen 	Safety 
17 	Minnesota Vikings 	Chad Greenway 	Linebacker 
18 	Dallas Cowboys 	        Bobby Carpenter Linebacker 
19 	San Diego Chargers 	Antonio CromartieCornerback
20 	Kansas City Chiefs 	Tamba Hali 	Defensive End 
21 	New England Patriots 	Laurence MaroneyRunning back 
22 	San Francisco 49ers  	Manny Lawson 	Linebacker 
23 	Tampa Bay Buc   	Davin Joseph 	Guard 
24 	Cincinnati Bengals 	Johnathan Joseph Cornerback 
25 	Pittsburgh Steelers  	Santonio Holmes Wide Receiver 
26 	Buffalo Bills  	        John McCargo 	D Tackle
27 	Carolina Panthers 	DeAngelo WilliamsRunning back 
28 	Jacksonville Jaguars 	Marcedes Lewis 	Tight End 
29 	New York Jets  	        Nick Mangold 	Center 
30 	Indianapolis Colts 	Joseph Addai 	Running back
31 	Seattle Seahawks 	Kelly Jennings 	Cornerback 
32 	New York Giants 	Mathias Kiwanuka Defensive End 

I seem to recall that on draft day it was almost unanimous among Packer fans that Hawk was the player they wanted Uncle Teddy to select.
Now that it is hindsight who would you have wanted to take?

Here are the players who have made it to the Pro Bowl along with the players GB had on the 2006 team. Each of them has made it one time since being drafted.
GB certainly did not need Cutler or Cromartie.
Joseph and Mangold are fine selections but with the #5 pick you always hope to get an impact player.
It would have been nice to have picked DeAngelo but since they had Green it just doesn't seem a need.

Jay Cutler QB 1 Pro Bowl Favre, Rodgers
Antonio Cromartie CB 1 Pro Bowl Woodson, Harris
Davin Joseph OG 1 Pro Bowl Spitz, Colledge drafted in 2006 as well.
DeAngelo Williams RB 1 Pro Bowl A. Green
Nick Mangold C 1 Pro Bowl Scott Wells
Joseph Addai RB 1 Pro Bowl A. Green
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
I wanted an was happy with the Hawk selection. Still am fine with it too. To answer your question, which I think is very easy. Haloti Ngata.
UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Martha Careful (21h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
    Martha Careful (21h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
    Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
    beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
    Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
    dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
    beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
    beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
    beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
    wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
    wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
    wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
    Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
    Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
    beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
    beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
    beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
    Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
    beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
    beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
    wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
    wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
    wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
    Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
    Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
    beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
    beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
    beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled
    Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    Recent Topics
    11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    21h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.