Why this draft made no sense at all

You can fly off the handle over my opinions but you're not dealing with the facts behind them.

AJ Hawk was NOT a difference maker for the Green Bay Packers in 2006. That is a fact. He was a nice player who hopefully will rise to the level of expectation put upon him for a 5th overall pick.

I wanted Hawk over Vernon Davis. I wasn't jumping out of my chair when we got him at 5, but that's probably because I'm not a Buckeyes fan like a lot of Packer fans. By the way, are you a Buckeye fan? If you are, I'm sure that shapes your perception of him just a tad.

Alot of packer fans are buckeye fans? Uhhhh not quite. Try the Wisconsin Badgers. Btw, you are in the absolute minority in your opinion of AJ.

Wrong. Weakside is the position in our defense that is set up to be the playmaking position. That is why Hawk was put there...TO MAKE PLAYS..BIG PLAYS...and he simply didn't make very many.

Ahh this is where you are incorrect. Big plays does not equal "production" as you stated it at first. MLB usually leads the team in terms of production and Barnett did...until Hawk got here.

155 takles(112 solo) 3.5 sacks 2 ints(2 more dropped and btw he had a chance at 3 in the last 4 games I would say that is making big plays) 9 PD, 1 FF, 2 FR....He had an very strong impact for the Packers as a rookie. But hell he wasn't ROY so he's a bum. I guess any other rookie that didn't win the award is a bum, too.

Before I go any further, I just have to comment about the "obtuse" label affixed to me. Perhaps, someone shouldn't be up late watching, "The Shawshank Redemption" on TBS.

Here's a risky comment but it's heartfelt and not meant for reaction or to be racist/racial in any way. I really wonder how much of the Hawk-hype, and it most certainly is hype, is fueled by the fact that he's a white athlete? The game of football is short on white athletes with athletic ability and I think alot of white folks make more out of white athletes than is really there, sometimes, because of the dominance of the black athlete. Urlacher is worthy of the hype because he's backed it up on the field. Hawk hasn't even come close...yet. If this is my last post because I've offended the wrong person, I do apologize and have enjoyed the back and forth.

AJ is a nice player, but so far, not the impactful player you'd expect for his draft position. F-A-C-T.

I think if you ask a Packer fan about Hawk vs. a detached non-Packerfan national type you would find that the non-homer has the same view as me.

I hope he kicks it up a notch to get into Urlacher territory. He's not there or even close yet.

Big plays are important. Turnovers win/lose games more than any other stat. You need guys who can create them. Weakside IS the position that should be making those plays/and getting tackle numbers.

Ok you're clearly a twisted individual to believe it's somehow because he's a white athlete that he was hyped. Go look at the stats for Urlacher and Hawk in their rookie seasons. They are very comparable. Urlacher is a great player, no doubt. To say Hawk had no impact is ridiculous at best.

Here is a F-A-C-T for you. You are in the M-I-N-O-R-I-T-Y on this one. The VAST minority. So clearly it is your O-P-I-N-I-O-N.

LOL yeah people that dont watch the packers know better. You're really stretching for this one.

So, the only qualified analyst on Hawk is a Packer fan?

So, you have to be a homer to see him differently than you do?

Oannes.... Albeit that I do not share your opinion on Hawk, you make many a good point through your debates. As you are finding out, you can be a huge Packer fan for years upon years, but if you challenge to have an opinion of Ted other than positive, you will find it tough sledding here.

In my opinion he has made many a good move since comming to the Packers and was needed. He like any other first time GM would has made his share of mistakes and in many of opinion lacks the "eye" of the tiger type makeup to take the next step. IMO he is too dependant on the draft and young players, hence being very conservative.

On current topic, I agree that it is hard to see is "plan" for this team. Last year he signed a few free agents to strenghten the team and provide experience in needed positions, althought to date the Manuel experiment hasn't came through. Then goes into this year set to make another round of moves, and nope, now we go total youth.

But welcome to the forum and good luck debating an opinionated Ted stance.

Yes, if you bash TT there are some people who stick up for him? why is that a bad thing?

different opinions scare you?

Thank you, Pack93z. One of the hardest things to do is to see clearly when there's emotion involved. Being a fan makes objectivity a very difficult thing.

I went through many years of "objectivity" training. I do kind of miss being so subjective when it comes to my fandom.

My view of the Packers will always be that of what I honestly think, not want to believe. I apply the same rules to my family.

I do expect to get blasted for many of my views, but I'm deeply sincere in them. Who knows? With some of the comments I've made I may not be long for here. I'll be curious to see if I face any of that type of resistance.

As for Cory...No. You don't have to be a homer to see him differently than I do. I'm a homer, but an intellectually honest one. I hope the best for Green Bay, but see reality.

I'd hate to even ask what your stance is on an aged Brett Favre who is now nothing but a shadow of his former self.

By the way, I like Justin Harrell. I had him going 18th in my mock draft. I actually am okay with that pick, but not vs. taking the Cleveland deal. To me, there's little doubt the Harrell pick was made to enhance the production of Barnett and Hawk, because they didn't get to where we all hoped they'd get to last season. Hopefully, Harrell isn't the next David Martin and can live up to potential and stay on the field. If he can, maybe, AJ Hawk will realize some of his vast potential.

Unfortunately Oannes, you'll find that holding TT accountable for his actions and the team's performance is considered "bashing" around here.

I can't explain it, but to many people 12-20 is an improvement over all those rotten years of winning we experienced over the last 15 years. Losing is apparently something that a team HAS to go through now in order to win again, I guess it's an NFL rule or something.

Although I must admit, the name they use for losing these days (rebuilding) is a lot fancier than what we had in the 70s and 80s.

So you're saying Hawk wasn't a good pick?

He was an amazing pick

If they were going to stay at 5, I couldn't see any any other way to go. I suppose Huff was a strong consideration seeing that safety has been an achilles heel since ole #36 left.

I really, really, really wanted a trade up for Reggie Bush. There's a guy who changes games. That is the impact you should have from a pick in the range we were selecting.

Barring Bush, I really wanted a trade down and DeAngelo Williams.

Hawk was considered a "safe" pick and therefore was right up TT's alley. Like I said earlier, I wasn't excited about Hawk but thought he was nice building block player and hoped he'd have the type of impact he had at THE Ohio State University, but he fell well short. He was 3rd in Defensive Rookie of the Year. Fortunately, we didn't get Mario Williams, who I also wanted. He was a big disappointment.

I just wish people would be honest. AJ Hawk didn't do what people thought he would do. He wasn't a force. He might be but wasn't last year.

Hawk will be changing games longer than Bush will. Bush is frail. Hawk is a beast.

Possibly. There is one thing wrong with your statement. Hawk hasn't changed any games, yet, and Reggie Bush changed many.

By nature of position, Bush is more likely to get injured. I can't argue that Hawk looks every bit the part of a stud. He seems to be of high character and loves football. I love guys like that, but he's not the dynamo, yet, that you guys seem to think he is.

Harder to change games from the Lber position even for a guy like Urlacher. Reggie Bush was the #2 pick and didn't win ROY....I mean that was part of your justification for Hawk wasn't it?

Not sure what this particular debate has to do with TT, but his detractors easily can act the same way and do.

Bush was injured at the beginning of the season. Had he been healthy there's little doubt he would've been the ROY.

Many LB's change the game. Shawne Merriman anyone? Ray Lewis? Urlacher? Let's go way back and look at Lawrence Taylor. LB's can dramatically affect games. Our guy might do that someday, even next year, but not last year.

I have this feeling that if Hawk comes out and dominates next year you're going to be first in line to try and rub it in my face. The thing is there's nothing to rub my face in. I'm talking to what AJ Hawk DID last year, not what he will DO in the future. I hope he justifies your faith in him.

If challenging the thoughts and the direction of this team is bashing... I guess so. Apparently opinions do scare you, because you seem to want to take it to a personal level. Knock yourself out.

The reason I post here in the first place is to learn of others opinions.

Urlacher his rookie season (from ESPN):
124 tackles, 8 sacks, 4 stuffs, 5 pass defense, 2 INT, 0 FF

Hawk his rookie season:
121 tackles, 3.5 sacks, 3 stuffs, 7 pass defense, 2 INT, 1 FF

If you take into account the fact that Urlacher blitzed a heck of a lot more than Hawk his rookie year, there isn't a major difference between the two in production. Of course, Urlacher really took off in the third and fourth seasons once they added the big DTs.

Hey, maybe Harrell will help Hawk improve like the high picks helped Urlacher improve? Nah, that stuff only works on others teams - not GB. We just need to face the fact that Hawk won't ever amount to anything and will never reach the level Urlacher is at. :roll:

As Cory so eloquently stated previously, it just isn't about the numbers. Although, comparing 8 sacks to 3.5 shows quite a bit more production for Bear Brian.

Urlacher was a guy who had to be accounted for in his rookie year. I watched some of his games and he was all over the field making big plays.

For you to post stats like that and call their seasons comparable is as silly as the article today from McGinn that compared Sterling Sharpe's measurables with James Jones'.

Are you honestly arguing that AJ Hawk had a better rookie year than Urlacher? Seriously? I'm at a loss now.