Packers release Brad Jones

  • Thread starter Deleted member 6794
  • Start date
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I was all in favor of cutting Hawk and bringing him back at Vet. Min until I read Captain's post. If that is the case, he isn't worth the additional $2.47 million. Thank you for your service as a Packer A.J.

Actually I forgot to mention that he will count $1.6 million in dead money towards the Packers cap when he is released.

So bringing him back on a veteran's minimum deal would add another $870K towards the cap.
 

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
By releasing him and then bringing him back I thought you are only adding the vet. minimum to the dead money. I am fine with him being gone all together. That isn't the worst thing in the world though saving the 2.75 or whatever it is. I highly doubt he does that. Enjoy Cleveland AJ.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I would not be opposed to keeping Hawk around 1 more year. He knows the defense and the middle of the defense better than anybody, and if we're looking to bring in a new body or two, his knowledge would be nice to have and share. So long as he doesn't actually get on the field too much...
I hope the Packers aren't thinking along these lines. IMO at this point keeping Hawk because his knowledge of the defense is analogous to having 49 year old Winston Moss play. They both know the D like the back of their hands, they both know where they should be on every play, and neither of them can physically execute what they know on an adequate NFL level.
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
By releasing him and then bringing him back I thought you are only adding the vet. minimum to the dead money.

That's true, it would only add another $870K to the cap. I was talking about the total cap hit in one of my previous posts.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,797
I thought they might bring one back, and as much as I've always thought Hawk was getting a raw deal from the fans, he just can't keep up out there. He may know where to be, but he can't get there anymore. He's not a step slow, he's 2 or 3 and all the knowledge in the world can't make up for that on the field.
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
Let's have a moment of silence for Brad Jones. Lol. Thank God it's over. Hawk has to go. I think they double up at ILB in draft like they did at RB a couple years back. Joe Thomas has upside to be good sub package LB.

Denzel. Denzel. Denzel. Denzel. Denzel
 
Last edited:

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,623
Reaction score
8,199
Location
Madison, WI
Anyone know the future of Adrian Hubbard? At 6' 6" , 250 # and showing some major potential before leaving Alabama as a Junior, he has to figure into the Packers future plans at OLB?
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
Anyone know the future of Adrian Hubbard? At 6' 6" , 250 # and showing some major potential before leaving Alabama as a Junior, he has to figure into the Packers future plans at OLB?

He is one of those guys who will be in the mix come OTA's.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I hope this doesn't mean the Packers will hold on to Hawk because they expect him to be more athletic in 2015.
Given that Hawk's 2012 - 2014 was a case of slow/slower/slowest, one would hope memories are not that short.

Demovsky quotes a source saying Hawk dropped down under 235 lbs. to compensate for the ankle. However, reports of Hawk dropping into the 230's to improve his quickness go back prior to the 2012 season:

http://host.madison.com/sports/foot...cle_2cf50230-bc9d-11e1-96e2-0019bb2963f4.html

Hawk peaked in 2010, being the glue that held together Capers organized chaos, and has been on a steady physical decline since. There's not any going back on that.

It's worth noting that the Packers paid Driver $4.1 million in 2011 as the #5 receiver behind Nelson/Jennings/Jones/Finley, and $2.3 million in 2012 as the #6 receiver with Cobb in his second year. Since Driver was beloved by the fans, was outspoken about wanting to play, and the Favre debacle was still fresh, wanting to avoid another PR dust up would be understandable.

While Hawk enjoys no such popularity, bordering on pariah among a large swath of fans and media, unlike the receiver depth in the last Driver years the ILB cupboard is nearly bare. The Driver example goes to show that money is dispensed at times for things having little to do with expected future productivity.

At least 3 ILBs who qualify as serviceable or better would be the requirement. At this moment there's Barrington, perhaps Hawk situationally, Matthews out of position, "just guys" special team players, and inexperienced and unproven players of dubious potential. Even with the #30 pick going to the position, there's still a need for a 3rd. serviceable guy not named Matthews.

Further, if you look down this roster, there's little playing experience at the position. Other than Barrington and two emergency starts by Palmer in 2013, there are few defensive snaps (or is it no snaps?) among this group sans Hawk. Did Palmer even make a game day roster last year?

Unless Thompson signs a proven veteran ILB (not some vet minimum cast off), I'd put the odds at better than 50/50 that Hawk will be back for his value in the locker room, in the position room, and in the event of emergency among a group that's bound to be exceptionally green. One hopes Thompson finds that guy and can pull the trigger.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,623
Reaction score
8,199
Location
Madison, WI
I was excited when we got him (Hubbard) as an UFA....surprised in fact given the fact some had him going as early as the 4th round. I know he had some heart things that were a concern, but haven't heard much about him in the press.
 
Last edited:

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
Hubbard and Joe Thomas are both going to be in the mix for playing time next season IMO. I think they are high on both of them and use this year as a teaching year.
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
Given that Hawk's 2012 - 2014 was a case of slow/slower/slowest, one would hope memories are not that short.

Demovsky quotes a source saying Hawk dropped down under 235 lbs. to compensate for the ankle. However, reports of Hawk dropping into the 230's to improve his quickness go back prior to the 2012 season:

http://host.madison.com/sports/foot...cle_2cf50230-bc9d-11e1-96e2-0019bb2963f4.html

Hawk peaked in 2010, being the glue that held together Capers organized chaos, and has been on a steady physical decline since. There's not any going back on that.

It's worth noting that the Packers paid Driver $4.1 million in 2011 as the #5 receiver behind Nelson/Jennings/Jones/Finley, and $2.3 million in 2012 as the #6 receiver with Cobb in his second year. Since Driver was beloved by the fans, was outspoken about wanting to play, and the Favre debacle was still fresh, wanting to avoid another PR dust up would be understandable.

While Hawk enjoys no such popularity, bordering on pariah among a large swath of fans and media, unlike the receiver depth in the last Driver years the ILB cupboard is nearly bare. The Driver example goes to show that money is dispensed at times for things having little to do with expected future productivity.

At least 3 ILBs who qualify as serviceable or better would be the requirement. At this moment there's Barrington, perhaps Hawk situationally, Matthews out of position, "just guys" special team players, and inexperienced and unproven players of dubious potential. Even with the #30 pick going to the position, there's still a need for a 3rd. serviceable guy not named Matthews.

Further, if you look down this roster, there's little playing experience at the position. Other than Barrington and two emergency starts by Palmer in 2013, there are few defensive snaps (or is it no snaps?) among this group sans Hawk. Did Palmer even make a game day roster last year?

Unless Thompson signs a proven veteran ILB (not some vet minimum cast off), I'd put the odds at better than 50/50 that Hawk will be back for his value in the locker room, in the position room, and in the event of emergency among a group that's bound to be exceptionally green. One hopes Thompson finds that guy and can pull the trigger.

Agreed on needing 3. If they let Hawk go they would have 3.5 million to bring someone else in. They could even pony that with the money they just saved on Jones.

I think it's time to move on from Hawk. Good ankle or bad ankle he simply isn't fast enough. Speed has always been a premium but even more so today then the days when Hawk was drafted. He isn't even as fast as when he was back when he was drafted. IMO a veterans minimum deal would be the most his value would bring at this stage in his career.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Agreed on needing 3. If they let Hawk go they would have 3.5 million to bring someone else in. They could even pony that with the money they just saved on Jones.

I think it's time to ove on from Hawk. Good ankle or bad ankle he simply isn't fast enough. Speed has always been a premium but even more so today then the days when Hawk was drafted. He isn't even as fast as when he was back when he was drafted. IMO a veterans minimum deal would be the most his value would bring at this stage in his career.
In the absence of a quality FA signing, a vet minimum deal would be slap in the face; you might as well cut him and roll the dice on youth, something I would not endorse. Something less is in order, maybe a $2 mil. deal; that's pretty standard around the league for a long-time core player's swan song year or two. That's a $1.5 mil cap savings.

But as noted previously, Thompson needs to get on his horse and find a quality veteran player if Hawk is released, even if its just a less-than-preferable 2 down guy with leadership chops. Thompson is working "at many levels"; I'd hope this is one of them.

By the way, Hawk was fast when he came into the league as befitting his draft status. He ran 4.59 at the Combine. I'm not sure he could have broken 5.0 last year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cwoodson21

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Jones was a better player at the time of signing the deal too. Somehow he got worse without being old for player.
I thought that he was already trending down at the time of the signing. My thought at the time was "What are the Packers thinking?"
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
I thought that he was already trending down at the time of the signing. My thought at the time was "What are the Packers thinking?"

They were thinking Bishop wasn't a 100 percent after tearing his hamstring. It was a " panic signing"
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I thought that he was already trending down at the time of the signing. My thought at the time was "What are the Packers thinking?"
If memory serves, PFF rated Jones the #8 ILB in 2012. That's a cautionary tale on a couple of levels.
 

JBlood

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
467
Glad to see Jones go; Hawk will be next, but I feel badly for him. The guy never missed a game and gave it all he had. Unfortunately, all he had is simply not enough. I think he may wind up in coaching, and I hope he's a good one. He appears to be a very, very good man.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
If memory serves, PFF rated Jones the #8 ILB in 2012. That's a cautionary tale on a couple of levels.
Jones saved the day in 2012. He was third on the depth chart (behind Bishop and DJ Smith) and was a three down player for them that season. In hindsight the error Thompson made was relying too much on that one season.
- - - - -

I agree with JBlood about Hawk and extend that to Brad Jones too. I hope Hawk is waived too but I bear no ill-will towards either of them. I don't blame players for their draft position or for signing contracts that turn out to be too rich for their later performance. I don't remember reading either being anything close to a problem in the locker room. I believe both were/are dedicated and gave their best efforts. Neither's best is good enough in my estimation but it's not for lack of trying on their part.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Jones saved the day in 2012. He was third on the depth chart (behind Bishop and DJ Smith) and was a three down player for them that season. In hindsight the error Thompson made was relying too much on that one season.
- - - - -

I agree with JBlood about Hawk and extend that to Brad Jones too. I hope Hawk is waived too but I bear no ill-will towards either of them. I don't blame players for their draft position or for signing contracts that turn out to be too rich for their later performance. I don't remember reading either being anything close to a problem in the locker room. I believe both were/are dedicated and gave their best efforts. Neither's best is good enough in my estimation but it's not for lack of trying on their part.
As stated earlier, if Thompson signs a quality veteran ILB, even if he's a 2-down player, I have no problem with giving Hawk his gold watch.

Otherwise, the most experienced player at the position is Barrington with a handful of starts . Discounting Palmer, who likely won't survive final cuts, that leaves zero guys on the roster who have taken a snap, even on special teams.

Even with an ILB taken at #30, if no vet FA is signed there would be zero depth at the position.

It's a leadership position in a complicated defense. Hawk would be an asset in the position room and as a 2-down backup.

Barrington, a rookie and just some guys doesn't cut it.
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
6,451
Reaction score
1,507
They'll have the cap room and opportunity to address this. Will they be as aggressive on the personnel front as they've been elsewhere so far this off season?
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Hawk is bad on the field. Just make him a coach if his leadership is that important.
OK, so Barrinton or Kendricks ;) blows out his knee in preseason. Now what do you do?

I'm no fan of Hawk. I was quite p*ssed at his 2011 performance after getting the contract, and have not seen anything since to change my mind about the performance-for-pay.

But it seems to me that many of the Hawk critics who would like to see him gone regardless of circumstances are the same people who thought our defense played well after the bye. Guess what...Hawk was on the field for half of those snaps. You just don't want to see him in coverage and you don't want him on the strong side.

Get me a vet who can play and it's case closed.
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
As stated earlier, if Thompson signs a quality veteran ILB, even if he's a 2-down player, I have no problem with giving Hawk his gold watch.

Otherwise, the most experienced player at the position is Barrington with a handful of starts . Discounting Palmer, who likely won't survive final cuts, that leaves zero guys on the roster who have taken a snap, even on special teams.

Even with an ILB taken at #30, if no vet FA is signed there would be zero depth at the position.

It's a leadership position in a complicated defense. Hawk would be an asset in the position room and as a 2-down backup.

Barrington, a rookie and just some guys doesn't cut it.

The Packers have to address the position this offseason and I would like them to bring in a free agent and spend an early draft pick on an ILB.

But even if they don't sign a veteran there's no need for the team to retain Hawk. I'd rather have an inexperienced guy on the field than continue to warch teams exploiting Hawk's shortcomings.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top