1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Big Announcement Coming for 2015 Football Season!!

    Be on the look out for a big Packer Forum announcement when the schedule is released. Full details coming soon... Update: Announcement to be released on MONDAY!

Improvements in 2013

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by AmishMafia, May 8, 2013.

  1. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Hawk is an incredibly average, but solid starting player. All of our LB's suck in coverage (Jones is only decent) and Hawk wraps up then makes the tackle, it means the guy gets another 2-5 yards, but he gets tackled. Hawk's job is to plug a hole, not catch a pass. Smith was cut for a failed physical, and was the 5th guy on the DC but didn't play ST. Depth at LILB is sketchy. Bishop is the one who was supposedly on the block (if you believe those stories)
     
  2. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,825
    Ratings:
    +2,932
    "Bashing" and telling the truth are not necessarily mutually exclusive and telling the truth based on what you see is also known as an opinion. For example in the post in which you claim not to bash anyone you write, "He's total and absolute crap!" That is not close to attempting an objective analysis - which would be at least an attempt at the truth. Instead it's purely opinion hyperbolically expressed. Nothing wrong with that, unless it's presented as "the truth".

    I don't think there's a single poster on this site who would claim Hawk has lived up to his draft position or his compensation. I don't remember a single poster complaining that Hawk was forced to take a pay cut (except those who thought he should have been waived instead). I would not have been upset if after releasing Hawk in March of 2011 they wouldn't have re-signed him (they did so the next day). And I complained about the rich deal they struck with him at the time. The fact they trimmed a total of about $7M from his deal this season through 2015 indicates how out of line his 2011 deal was.

    However, here's a couple of sources of information that sincerely attempt to be objective. First, Pro Football Focus lists him as the #20 ILB in 2012. PFF has no reason to inflate Hawk's production.

    Second, in his season-ending column in which he grades every Packer, McGinn gives Hawk a B-minus. Here's part of what he writes about Hawk:
    He goes on to say he missed 9 tackles in 2012 after missing 15 in 2011. He also details Hawk's negatives:

    http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/individual-report-card-defense-2b8e22q-187608681.html

    So even with Hawk's negatives, an objective analysis of Hawk's play last season has to include that he led the team's ILBs in tackles per snap; allowed the fewest plays of 20 yards or more (in 833 snaps) among all LBs (but he didn't play in the dime); and led the team in tackles for loss. In that light, "He's total and absolute crap!" looks more like the ranting of a hysterical fan than someone attempting to get at the truth while avoiding bashing anyone.

    BTW, Hawk is 29 years old. I only mention that because it represents the absolute truth.;)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Whatthehellsgoinonouthere

    Whatthehellsgoinonouthere Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    325
    Ratings:
    +62
    Hawk should've led the TEAM in tackles, not just the ILBs, something he did twice in his first 4 years. Your point about none of the LBs being able to cover is taken and noted, but to me Hawk is by far the weakest of the linebackers in coverage. I also disagree I think CM3 COULD do well in coverage, but I, as well as most everyone else would rather him coming off the corner as much as possible. He doesn't seem to know his assignments, or the correct lanes to be in, or angles to take to get there. Truth about AJ is 1.) After 7 years in the league he should be better. 2.) In 2010, he was the ONLY starter on defense, not to miss a single snap due to injury, yet he was benched for the Philly game by the coaching staff. 3.) There were rumors LAST YEAR prior to Bishop's injury that he was on the bubble. I'll be shocked if he's on the roster at the end of the season.
     
  4. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,825
    Ratings:
    +2,932
    He should have led the team in tackles, huh? OK. He was second on the team in tackles with 120, three behind the leader and 43 ahead of the Packer who recorded the third most combined tackles in the 2012 regular season. (This according to nfl.com.) The leading tackler played 1033 plays from scrimmage and recorded 123 tackles. Hawk recorded 120 combined tackles in 833 plays. Do you understand the concept of tackles per snap? If not, let me help: The leading tackler played 200 more snaps from scrimmage and recorded THREE more tackles than Hawk. And since none of your most recent post attempts to justify "He's total and absolute crap!" or argues that's the "absolute truth" I hope you're backing away from that extreme exaggeration.

    Oh ya: I'll bet you don't know who the leader tackler was (without looking it up). It was Morgan Burnett who was one of two players in the entire league who played every snap from scrimmage. He not only led the Packers but led all DBs in the league in tackles (according to nfl.com). Also, McGinn called him the best blitzer among DBs and ILBs with a pressure every 4.3 snaps. Why am I sure you didn't know that?
    Never mind that leaves two true safeties on the roster, it would remove a durable player who happens to be the team's best safety and leading tackler. Which leads me to ask regarding your posts, "What the hells goin on in here?;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    I don't ever want to hear him complain about the team's tackling, now that he's endorsed the release of the two leading tacklers.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    To be fair Burnett also tied for the team lead in missed tackles at 11. But I don't disagree with the dialogue that Hawk isn't as bad as presented by some. Having said that, I'd definitely like to see a more athletic and better linebacker at the position(It isn't Brad Jones).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. fanindaup

    fanindaup Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +60
    I already said he turned out not to be worth his lofty draft status, or the contract extension TT gave him. That part at least was rectified. Tackling for several years has been an issue on the entire defense, so singling Hawk out for one example of terrible form tackling seems vindictive. I don't care about his first contract, it's old news and lots of first round draft picks get (or got before the new CBA) perks. We got more out of Hawk for his rookie contract than we got from Jamal Reynolds, Ahmad Carrol, Justin Harrell or Tony Mandarich...Brent Fullwood, Rich Campbell, etc. Does that make Hawk a star? No. But he's not the worst player to play defense for the Packers either, and has led the team in tackles several times so he can't be that bad either. And unless you can tell me which team you coached or was GM for, I guess I'll accept that TT and MM know more about it than you do.
     
  8. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,839
    Ratings:
    +1,371
    Hawk has been disappointing, but he was the no-brainer pick in 2006. No, he didn't turn out to be the next Ray Nitschke, but it was an unquestionable pick at the time. Some college stars just don't translate out to be NFL stars. Just the way it is.

    Could have been worse, at least he turned out to be a reliable, albeit average, NFL starter, not one out of the league after 3 years.

    He's not a playmaker, but he's at least an average ILB and he's historically always healthy. With all the issues we've had with injuries over the years, there's something to be said for someone we can count on for 16 games a season.
     
  9. fanindaup

    fanindaup Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +60
    agreed. precisely my conclusion as well.
     
  10. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
  11. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,825
    Ratings:
    +2,932
    Chances of Bishop being the NFL defensive player of the year are nearly zero. His chances of being the Packers' defensive player of the year aren't great either. But I don't care. If he's 100% healthy and plays to his ability he'll provide a sorely needed enforcer inside. And he's more adept at blitzing than the other ILBs. Bishop's presence would also lessen the number of snaps for Hawk and Brad Jones. Looking forward to any season is obviously full of "ifs"; even so this is another reason for optimism because Bishop's statements should at least mean he's nearly 100% healthy. If Jones can add a pass rushing threat from the DL and if Perry stays healthy and continues his progress, they should not only add to the pressure on opposing Os, they'll help to free up Clay as well. If Jones is good enough to start at DE in the base, that should provide more rest for Raji and that should also increase the inside pass rush pressure.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. The Drew

    The Drew #packergang

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,262
    Ratings:
    +484
    overall I agree with the OP... only thing I would say would be different is having BISH PLEASE at ILB... I think he comes back strong and has a hell of a season!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. fanindaup

    fanindaup Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +60
    Just having a healthy Bishop aspiring to be defensive player of the year has me salivating...
     
  14. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,949
    Ratings:
    +2,250
    There is no question Matthews is the best coverage LB on this team. If memory serves he took about 6 coverage snaps per game in 2011 and gave up next to nothing...teams did not throw at him much for good reason. The eye test says he had fewer coverage snaps in 2012, though I've not seen that stat.
     

Share This Page