The Packers denied all rumors that they will ask AJ to take a cut into his salary today: Agent: Packers won't ask Hawk to take pay cut | ProFootballTalk.com
Back in October, Pete Dougherty wrote the following:
Regardless of his current role, linebacker A.J. Hawk says he would like to remain with the Packers beyond this season.I just remember saying on Packer Transplants at the time that there was no way the Packers would be asking Hawk to take a pay cut considering the fact that Thompson went into 2008 willing to pay Kabeer Gbaja Biamila north of 10 million to only play on 3rd downs. Also add in the fact that the last player Thompson asked to take a pay cut was Darren Sharper, and it just didn’t seem plausible.
That decision, though, almost surely will come down to whether he’s willing to take a major pay cut from the $4.1 million he’s scheduled to make in base salary next year.
It’s a given the Packers won’t 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.
So when told point blank by Hawk’s agent yesterday that the team would most certainly NOT be asking his client to take a pay cut, Dougherty gives us the following:
Hawk’s 2010 salary is $4.1 million after he reached playing-time escalators earlier in his career, and he’s also due a $500,000 workout bonus. Considering Chillar’s contract extension and the possibility that Desmond Bishop offers an alternative to share time at that position, the Packers had to think about whether Hawk was worth $4.6 million this year.No, they didn’t Pete. YOU thought about it and chose to share your musing in a blog post for all to see. You said that it was “a given”. How about a follow up saying that you were wrong? Or maybe a post how you think the Packers are blowing it by hanging onto Hawk? Give me something, anything that shows me you take ownership of what you wrote back in October – unless it’s only low-life bloggers that have, you know, some sense of accountability…
This.Trade him.
We need to cut our loses with Hawk. He is a great guy, has the football mind and character you want in all your players, but he is slow. The only reason he does not look like Bush out there is because he knows where to position himself, he just does not have the speed to finish it. When Johnny Jolly and Hawk are on the field our pass rush and pass defense suffers greatly. They double team Mathews and the QB has plenty of time to throw the ball.
I believe our inside LBs are a greater need than secondary help, we can draft another Woodson, but if we do not get consistent pressure on the QB they will still pick us apart.
We need to cut our loses with Hawk. He is a great guy, has the football mind and character you want in all your players, but he is slow. The only reason he does not look like Bush out there is because he knows where to position himself, he just does not have the speed to finish it. When Johnny Jolly and Hawk are on the field our pass rush and pass defense suffers greatly. They double team Mathews and the QB has plenty of time to throw the ball.
I believe our inside LBs are a greater need than secondary help, we can draft another Woodson, but if we do not get consistent pressure on the QB they will still pick us apart.
The late season Barnett deserved Pro Bowl honors. We need someone besides him. Not someone to replace him.If you followed Nick Barnett on Twitter then you would know that he is working really hard this offseason. Clearly we don't need help at lineback now!!! LOL
Dilligaff you're making it sound like it's easy when it comes to finding replacements. If we were to cut Jolly and Hawk, who would be their immediate replacements? Can you list specific names of players that we can bring in to replace them? And what if the guys that we bring in end up doing a worse job than either Jolly or Hawk, you end up creating bigger holes on the team which hurts the team even more in the long run.
Dilligaff you're making it sound like it's easy when it comes to finding replacements. If we were to cut Jolly and Hawk, who would be their immediate replacements? Can you list specific names of players that we can bring in to replace them? And what if the guys that we bring in end up doing a worse job than either Jolly or Hawk, you end up creating bigger holes on the team which hurts the team even more in the long run.
Wait, wait, wait... I mean, okay, defensive linemen have to drop into coverage sometimes in Capers' system, but that's a) very seldom and b) by far not that often, that you could call one of 'em a liability in the passing game., even more so, it is pretty obvious that DLiners are pretty slow.I never said that both players need to be cut together, but the combination of the 2 players do not compliment each other well. IMO we have enough talent at the LB position right now to fill the position, the only thing Hawk brings is depth at a very high price. However I feel Johnny Jolly is very good against the run where as Hawk is average at best against the run combined with his lack of pass rushing and pass defensive skills in the 3-4 defense.
When Jolly and Hawk are in together they are a liability against the pass. IMO we need another player to compliment Jolly.
I never said that both players need to be cut together, but the combination of the 2 players do not compliment each other well. IMO we have enough talent at the LB position right now to fill the position, the only thing Hawk brings is depth at a very high price. However I feel Johnny Jolly is very good against the run where as Hawk is average at best against the run combined with his lack of pass rushing and pass defensive skills in the 3-4 defense.
When Jolly and Hawk are in together they are a liability against the pass. IMO we need another player to compliment Jolly.
Hawk is just not a 3-4 LB. Other teams feel they get the same skill sets and abilities of Hawk in the 3rd rounds and lower in the draft at a fraction of the costs. I believe Chillar/Bishop/3rd rookie can fill the position next year.
As far as the long run Hawk will defiantly not be around the following year unless he renegotiates his contract. Unless Hawk has a big break out year how does keeping Hawk now help this defense in the long run?
I honestly don't know how keeping Hawk is even an option. He was a glaring hole in our defense. It is kind like Dilligaff was saying, a thrid rounder could probably fill that spot to the same level that Hawk plays it at. I think Hawk is perfect for trade bait... pull the trigger now while he still has value.
I think Spikes could replace Hawk rather easily.
But i'm biased, because I love the Gators.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
Wait, wait, wait... I mean, okay, defensive linemen have to drop into coverage sometimes in Capers' system, but that's a) very seldom and b) by far not that often, that you could call one of 'em a liability in the passing game., even more so, it is pretty obvious that DLiners are pretty slow.
Additionally Johnny Jolly specifically had a heckuva a year in knocking passes down at the LOS.
I can't see your point on Jolly at all, unless you didn't confuse him with Nick Barnett.
Oh and btw, draft Angerer, who sould perfectly complement Barnett speed and coveragewise, and trade Hawk.
Who is this magical 3rd rookie that we are talking about? Spikes? Angerer? Edds? I'm not saying that these will be bad players next year but you can't rely on them to contribute right away. Even though Matthews had a breakout season it took him at least 3-4 games into the season to finally start making an impact. Nonetheless whoever we draft to possibly "replace" Hawk has to play at a level like Hawk or a little better. But how will you know that if you cut Hawk now? How will you compare this rookie to Hawk without hawk ever playing for this defense for one more year? I think this is the reasoning that TT and the Packers staff are trying to get accross to people, that it's a new defense and they might learn it eventually. This is why I'm not decrying Kampman as a failure just yet. Kampman showed in the 49ers game that he was "getting" what this defense was all about. Instead of runnning into a lineman you have to swing by them, which is what Kampman was doing the whole game and it worked. I'd rather see what he does once he tries this out from the beginning of the season. Same with hawk, let him learn first. THEN you cut/trade either of them.