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. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Thoughts on the Packers taking Davis?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Packersfan43084, Apr 22, 2006.

  1. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    What if one of the 3 coveted QBs is still available at the 5 spot? I would be all about trading down as that #5 spot will be worth quite a bit to the team that wants to move up......potentially "king's ranson" valuable.

    Either way...an exciting day coming up.
     
  2. HatestheEagles084

    HatestheEagles084 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,423
    Ratings:
    +1
    thats exactly my thought...if arizona wants to trade up, or possibly oakland if they're afraid of us taking a qb for some reason...we can really profit...
     
  3. Packnic

    Packnic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,454
    Ratings:
    +6
    i think hawk is a good kid and will be a very decent player.

    but on film of him that ive seen, i see nothing extroidanary that says he will be a great college-nfl Transfer. everything thing ive seen on davis shows he is ready for the speed, ready for the abuse, ready for the big play ability. i agree with you pyle that there is a drop in potential from hawk to sims... but what is the drop in potential from davis to hawk is what you really need to consider. we cant have everything, so i think a solid TE with a HUGE upside is your better pick over a solid OLB when the draft is absolutely stacked with OLBS
     
  4. HatestheEagles084

    HatestheEagles084 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,423
    Ratings:
    +1
    I think we should fill need with our first pick, AJ Hawk...and allow for some flexibility with our second pick...we both know there is going to be someone who slips from the first round...and with our top need, OLB, already filled...we could have some flexibility with our second pick...look at who we could get at #36...
    S-Ko Simpson, South Carolina
    CB-Ashton Youboty, Ohio State
    OL-Nick Mangold, Ohio State
    DE-Tamba Hali, Penn State...others...

    I know the Raiders pretty well, I know Al Davis likes flashy, speedy recievers, maybe we can get him to trade up two spots to take Davis, thinking SF might have interest in him...

    To sum it up, I wouldn't mind Vernon Davis...but I don't think it's the best option, but it is indeed a good option...trust me, if we're drafting a QB as one thread suggests, I'll be on these boards in an uproar
     
  5. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    I am sorry but this may be the case for a playoff team but not for a 4-12 team. All the teams in the top 10-15 will draft for need. It doesn't matter anyways because Hawk is still rated higher overall than Davis. This draft is NOT loaded with LB's like Hawk and Greenway. After those two there is a big dropoff.

    I am not woried about Hawk, he brings an instant TOUGHNESS to your team. I am familiiar with Ben Taylor as well and he is all about effort and toughness as well. Throw Barnett into the mix and this is a very FAST and TOUGH unit.

    I think there is no doubt Hawk is going to be in a GB uniform come Saturday. It's definitely the right pick and fit for a team that lacks toughness.


    I like Davis, but he's a becoming a bit overhyped with all the talk of moving him to WR. The last thing I want is a rookie who has to learn, at a pro level, a different position.
     
  6. HatestheEagles084

    HatestheEagles084 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,423
    Ratings:
    +1
    I don't like Greenway either, I think Hawk is the guy for us...

    I agree with a lot of your points...

    Judging by what Ted Thompson has done, he's trying to toughen this defene up with physical, strong players...Manuel and Ben Taylor are both solid tacklers, and one of their outstanding characteristics for both is their ability to not quit on plays..I think AJ Hawk's total package of intensity, ability and athleticisim will be selected to be the centerpiece of this defense

    Where you guys lose me is, who's to say Hawk isn't B.P.A.
     
  7. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    I agree that we need to stay with going for the best players available. You start drafting for need and other players passed on go on to be stellar players that make their teams better.

    Needs will always change. The need for good quality players doesn't.

    I just read where The Pack has the 2nd worst record in the draft in the last 10 years measured by the number of games played by those drafted in the first three rounds. Washington Post wrote the article.

    We need to get players that can come in and contribute. Maybe they won't make the All Rookie team but hopefully sooner then later they help the team become better.
     
  8. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yes and Hawk will do that, there is no doubt he will be instantly a starter. Either way you go Hawk is the guy.

    If you draft for need it's Hawk
    If you draft best player available it's still Hawk
     
  9. dhpackr

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Ratings:
    +0
    :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
     
  10. Packnic

    Packnic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,454
    Ratings:
    +6
    who says hawk is an immediate starter.... he will have to fight for his spot in camp just like every other rookie we draft... if he preforms better than his competition he will start, otherwise he will learn from the bench like others who got beat out.

    i just dont want to be the team passing on a star.

    when davis has a antonio gates type year we will be kicking ourselves for not taking him
     
  11. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    It makes absolutely no sense to draft Davis as a WR!! A completely different position that he's never been evaluated for, who knows if he would be any good? My thoughts are based on using him as a TE who sometimes splits out like Heap, Gates or Gonzalas.

    My comments were actually directed at the idea that it would be foolish to select Davis because we don't need a TE. If it would come down to him being the best player available, then I'd draft him even after signing Franks. But if you're going for BPA and Hawk is rated above Davis, then of course draft Hawk.

    Now all we need is insight to how TT has each player rated... Logically I would think that Williams and Hawk are rated higher since all of TT's big offseason moves have been to improve the defense. I think it's obvious that TT is looking to build a strong, young defense while maintaining a solid offense. It's a good plan that has produced many SB champs.
     
  12. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    I agree Bobby. Put together a good stout defense and an offense that is productive, doesn't kill themselves with mistakes, and, doesn't have to carry the load in order to win. That wins SB's.
     
  13. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Hawk will start, he HAS no competition. I don't want to be the team passing on a star either, thats why we pick HAWK.

    Could Davis have a Gates like year? Maybe
    Could Davis have a Winslow type year? Maybe
     
  14. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    pyledriver80,
    I like Hawk because he has the leadership qualities and the ability to give the "D" an identity.

    Watching games last year when the wheels would start coming off a little bit there wasn't anyone to step in the huddle and take over. No real leader to get in there and challenge the guys and turn things around.

    They all seemed to look to someone else to make a play. Hawk does not seem like the kind of player that will accept an offense moving the ball down the field. Rather, he will take exception to it and get in there and raise some hell.

    We need some players. Yes. But we need a leader.
     
  15. spardo62

    spardo62 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    559
    Ratings:
    +0
    Lets face it , when you are coming off a 4-12 you need help everywhere, and by taking the BPA you are by default filling a need. With the lack of true impact players on this roster, any impact player, at any position would be a significant upgrade. I am just basing my preference for Davis over Hawk on the fact that I personally feel that Hawk has somewhat plateaued and while a solid prosepect, will not be an Urlacher/Lewis type of force at LB and there are solid LB's to be had in rounds 2,3 or later. I agree that TE is not our most glaring need, however neither Franks nor any of the other tight ends has proven to be a difference maker. But the presence of Davis could elevate their games, while also masking a somewhat thin WR corps. Although he would take heat, I would not be opposed to taking a QB at 5 either, if it is felt that this player is special and has great upside. Even though Favre might be back and we took QB 1st last year.
     
  16. kmac

    kmac Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    849
    Ratings:
    +0
    Taking Vernon Davis would be a HUGE mistake. Sure, he's got the athleticism, but Hawk has something you can't teach. Intensity. Watch some tape of Ohio State. Hawk is one of very few players that you can say have the burning need inside of them to smack the living sh*t out of people. There's no doubt that Hawk comes in and becomes the anchor of this defense overnight.

    Vernon Davis, however, has a few knocks on him. He's only 6'3, shorter than Shockey, Gonzolez, Gates, Heap, all of the elite tight ends. In addition, he hasn't exactly been the most productive guy in college. I'd think a freaky red zone threat like Davis would be able to put up more than 9 touchdowns over his entire college career.

    Just my 2 cents
     
  17. gopackgo4

    gopackgo4 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,080
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well I really believe that this guy could be great for us, however we have enough TE's. We need to fill a hole with an impact player. Dont fix something that aint broken
     
  18. Packnic

    Packnic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,454
    Ratings:
    +6
    look who he played for... maryland not exactly an elite offense. and believe me im not crappin on hawk... if we draft him ill be the first guy buying a packer jersey that has Hawk written on the back. (how old school bad *** would that look)

    however if it were up to me and it most certainly is not. i cant pass on davis.. if you think thomas or popp/barnett/taylor at linebacker is much worse than driver/ferfy/gardner at reciever...you see something i dont. we went 4-12 last year and i wouldnt qualify driver or lee as memorable... im not sayin they arent good but we arent exactly STACKED at TE either! TT has also spent a lot of time on defense in the offseason and they were arguably the best part of our game last year.

    SO weve built up some defense that was good last year, and our Offense is virtually untouched. i just think we could use some offensive help RIGHT NOW and davis will bring you that.

    ps not many rookies come in and take over a defense these days ... if you think a group of seasoned vets like al harris, barnett, and kgb is gonna let some punk from college come in and tell them they need to play harder .. your crazy.
     
  19. HatestheEagles084

    HatestheEagles084 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,423
    Ratings:
    +1
    no but if these vets give half a damn about their career standing they're not gonna let themselves be outplayed by a rookie
     
  20. rundemc

    rundemc Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    106
    Ratings:
    +0
    if u take hawk he would immediatley become either your first or second best defensive player (maybe second to al harris)
     
  21. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hawk's intensity is what this Def. really needs. Taylor is the same way and would definitely benefit from his intensity. Hawk/Barnett/Taylor is really a nice mix of speed, intesity and toughness.

    I know people seem to have a problem with the recieving corps but they honestly are not that bad at all.

    Driver is completely the most underrated player in the history of the NFL, not being serious here, but I don't know why the guy can't get the respect he deserves. All he does is put up consistent numbers year after year. On top of that he is an all out Class Act, unlike some other jerkoff on the roster. He just plays ball and loves it.If he ran his mouth and gave himself half the "Self Promotion" guys like TO and Jwalk give, I think people would recognize him more. No hype, from a small college, and an all around good guy who plays football with a smile, I would rather have 1 DD than 2 Javon Walkers.

    Gardner has started in this league and has put up good numbers in the past. His inconistency seems to be the problem but the guy seemed to play like he knew this could be his last chance at the end of last year. He has the skills and experience and with Brett you better play your *** off or he's going to make you look real silly


    Fergie is what he is. I am done expecting anything great from him. Can he step in and make some catches on occasion, sure. I don't have a problem with Fergie as a 3rd or 4th WR.

    Boerighter could really be a good signing. He is a big target that could probably never be a no. 1 or 2 guy but when your in a 3WR or 4WR set with the shutdowns on the 2 top guys, Boerichter on a Nickel back/safety/Lb is a matchup I will take anyday.

    Franks has not used as he should be. Lets work Bubba in the middle of the field more. You know what you are going to get from Bubba.

    Lee has really impressed me. I love his size and Favre seemed to look for him last year. May be an unknown gem.

    Martin, uh the third tight end I guess, he's pretty much worthless though I do think if he stayed healthy could contribute 25 catches and 2-3 TD's a year. Similar to what Jeff Thomason used to give us.

    JWalk.......Rot in hell, crybaby
     

Share This Page