They say their not but I think that may just be PC talk. I would not be shocked if it comes out the Packers where shopping Hawk before the deadline but found no takers for what they where asking. I can see the Packers trading him in the off-season. He has been a total bust for being a top 5 pick.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/65380942.html

Why would the Packers trade Hawk? They're not going to get value for him and would almost certainly end up having to pay some of his contract just to get someone to take him.

I'm still staggered that he hasn't worked out as the playmaker he promised to be -- I had perfect faith on draft day that he was going to be the second coming of Ray Nitschke.

I was hoping the switch to the 3-4 would bring him out of his shell, but I'm starting to think that'll never happen now.

The reason I would trade him is, that in sheer cost benefit terms, Bishop is the much better investment. And if Hawk is there, its harder to get Bishop on the field since you are paying Hawk a lot of money.

In fact, if TT had any real daring or boldness or vision, he would shop both Barnett and Hawk after this year. Because neither of them is worth nearly what he signed them for. (In fact, whenever I look at the team's salary cap list, I get upset looking at what we are paying those two rather average players.) I would go with Bishop and team him with Chillar and/or Poppinga, on the inside. WIth the money saved on hawk and Barnett, you could sign two good FA's.

Further, if we stay in the 3-4, I would trade AK for a first round pick and draft another LB who fits the scheme.

Looked good his rookie year, but has fell on his face since then. But Hawk will absolutely be traded or cut before 2011.

Hawk is due to make $4.1 in 2010, $10 million in 2011, and $11.8 million on an option year for 2012.

As long as Hawk continues where he's at, Green Bay isn't going to let him get far enough to pay him $10 million in 2011.

We would have roughly $2 million in dead money through 2011 because of Hawk, but it's better then $10 million+. We're going to have a lot of dead money though considering in 2011 we'll still be paying a few million a year for Favre and Franks still.

You win some, you lose some I guess.

Did you read the article? Hawk has not been on the field... and Bishop has not been in his place. I don't get the infatuation with Bishop. If he truly was the playmaker we saw in the pre-season he'd be on the field now.

??
There is no cap hit for Favre or Franks this year or in the future. Neither were on the team in 2008 so any cap hit was accelerated to last year.

I was under the assumption that GB has dead money coming from Franks and Favre. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought that was the case.

Just like we were paying Cletidus Hunt 2-3 years after he left, I thought we were still paying Franks and Favre.

If Bishop were a better player, he'd be playing. Don't get so carried away by the fact that the guy had a good preseason.

And if Hawk were not here, wouldn't Bishop be getting more plays in practice and in games and therefore more experience? Which is what he needs to play more.

The difference between the two, as acknowledged by McGinn, is that Hawk makes all his assignments but nothing beyond that.

Bishop makes a lot beyond that, but misses some assignments. Its hard to teach the former. Not that hard to teach the latter. Usually comes with experience.

Agree. So many reasons I want to root for AJ. He is a good teammate, works extremely hard, loves the game, and while not an elite athlete he is very gifted. All he has done is what is asked of him and yet somehow it does not seem to be working out.

Just looking back and this guy was pretty much a can't miss prospect:

http://www.seattlepi.com/football/267640_draft22.html

For whatever reason it seems Ohio St linebackers rarely work out. The guys still is only 25, and he certainly is not been a bad player, but it would be a stretch to say he has been anything better than average. There may still be some hope something might click, but likely if it hasn't by now it probably won't.

Sometimes comes with experience.

Bishop has made some great plays and has been terrible on other plays. To say it's not that hard to teach assignments is completely ignoring general NFL knowledge, as there are hundreds of players who fail in that category.

IMO Hawk hasn't been the star playmaker we would expect from the #5 pick but I think is a solid and valuable player for the Packers. Hopefully we will see only improvement from him as his career continues.

Think it's just a case of a guy getting by on his athleticism in college and the pro game catching up (and surpassing). Hawk's instincts just aren't that good. He's assignment sure and doesn't make a ton of mistakes, but he just doesn't bring what you need to the table from a linebacker in a 3-4 defense.

That all said, I can't think of a player I'm hoping more for that he turns the corner.

To be fair, he didn't bring it in the 4-3 either. Just did his job in an average kind of way- like he is now.

I'm also hoping he turns the corner.

Exactly. See: Marshall, Torrence

At least he's not Bobby Carpenter.

I hear you Jim. This is not a new tale. For whatever reason fans get infatuated with certain players and disdain others without much reason or reliance upon actual performance.

Simply for illustrations sake let's look at 3 players who fit this pattern - two over-hyped draft picks and 1 under-appreciated undrafted free agent..

Torrance Marshall, who currently is playing arena football is a player fans were enamored with and screamed and kicked that he was not getting on the football field often enough,

While he delivered some big hits and a few plays in the exhibition season he made far too many mistakes for the coaches to elevate him into the starting lineup short of being forced by injury.

NFL Career:

Marshall - 76 total tackles, 1 sack, 1 interception, 0 passes defended, 1 forced fumble

Abdul Hodges was another player who fans screamed should be inserted into the starting lineup so far he has faired worse than Marshall

NFL Career:

Hodges - 17 total tackles, 0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 2 passes defended and 0 FF

Meanwhile there was a kid named Paris Lenon who was a lowly undrafted free agent who came into the league about the same time as Marshall a high Packer draft pick.Fans decried Paris making the roster each season and declared him less than a NFL talent. Meanwhile, Lenon is still playing in the NFL

NFL Career:

Lenon - 456 total tackles, 5 sacks, 2 interceptions, 16 passes defended and 5 forced fumbles

This is one of the reasons I pay little attention to fans who scream for Nick Barnett's and/or Hawk's head each season and are ready to give their playing time to the most recent fan-crush-of-the-month player they have latched onto.

Hawk has not live up to the top ten draft pick status that he was selected in. However it was a very weak draft and hardly anyone selected in the first round (especially early) in that year's draft has lived up to the hype. AJ may never turn into the player we hoped for but the Why isn't Bishop (BTW a player I praised TT for drafting on draft day) on the field now??? grows weary IMO too.

Great minds think alike See post above posted within moments of your post

I have also been extremely disappointed with Hawk and can't really see him with the team next year unless he significantly renegoiates hiscntract . . . just not worth $4mm.

I have thought back to that daft frequently . . . not sure what TT could have done differently . . . except maybe trade down 3-4 times.

It is for the Lions . . . are they still in the NFL?

Those of us that wanted TE Vernon Davis took a lot of flack from the Hawk cult around here. Now, Davis appears to be blossoming into a top ten player at his position.

So, you must allow us in the Davis camp to thump our chests and enjoy our hollow victory (hollow because I'd have much rather have seen Hawk succeed, being a Packer fan and all).

Anyway, it's laughable to read about the Packers "trading" Hawk. No team is going to trade something and pay $4M salary for him. Why not just keep your fourth round pick and draft a much cheaper (maybe better) LB?

Davis is doing well now after being an absolute turd his first few years. The guy owes Singletary big for stomping down on his stupid antics and making him play football -- the only two coaches I think could have prevented that guy from continuing his Mini-TO act are Singletary and probably Billicheck.

And I was only talking about players who weren't able to be coached up.

I also often think about Hodges when people start crying about why we don't see Bishop more. It seems like almost the identical scenario, except now we have to keep more LBs, playing the 3-4, so Bishop was able to stick.

That being said, just because this scenario seems like the same thing, it certainly doesn't mean the player will end up with the same fate. Bishop isn't Marshall or Hodges. He is Bishop. Maybe a light will come on and by the end of the season he'll be fast, hard-hitting and assignment sure. We can hope.

As far as starting Hawk instead of him, well I guess I don't really think coaches pay attention to salaries (or draft positions) when choosing who starts. Maybe I'm naive. But, if a coaches career is on the line, why wouldn't he play his best guy even if the GM would want him to play the higher paid guy? (This is a good reason to separate coaching and GM capabilities.) So, I think they think they are playing the player who is more likely to produce a Packer W, which is as it should be.

$4 million is a pretty reasonable salary nowadays for a guy who just does what he's told. It's the 2010 salary that will scare teams away. That is unless Green Bay let's them work out a restructure. Players like Hawk have been traded before, but just with a restructured contract.

But unless Hawk flip on a switch this year, Green Bay will trade or release him before the 2010 season. Unless Green Bay can't find a replacement quick enough, and if he wants to stay, and if he's willing to restructure his remaining years for Green Bay to accommodate him.

If we hadn't just played the Lions I might need to check give their performance the past two seasons.

But on a more serious note, Paris who is playing with his 3rd NFL season matched or surpassed both players combine with just his last season in Green Bay

Paris Lenon's 2005 season stats: 65 tackles, 1.5 sacks, 6 passes defended, 1 forced fumble in 12 games
Marshall & Hodges career totals: 93 tackles, 1.0 sacks, 2 passes defended, 1 forced fumble in their combined careers

I got the smiley face, but I think you and others get the point.

didn't Hodge have an INT return for a touchdown against Seattle? Barnett was hurt so he started and Alexander ran over us all day long, but Hodge did have that one big play. Was that Hodge or another middle LB of the month ready to take Nicks place?

Looked it up, it was a fumble return for a TD.

Maybe Hawk should "hang" with Mathews a bit...

On the local news they said that Hawk only plays in the base defense. I forgot what games they said but one he only played 9% of the snaps and the other 12%. Now you could say he isn't getting a chance to be on the fields to make the plays we expect out of a #5 pick.

Waste of time -- they'd just swap hair care tips.

I just have this dreadful feeling that we will see bishop go to another team without getting a chance in GB and being a dominant force at MLB.

No I don't Bruce.

This is a faulty comparison on two levels.

Hodge and Marshall never became consistent starters in their brief careers with GB. Lennon did elsewhere. So what are you comparing? Young injured players, vs. older veterans who managed to stay healthy?

Further, while in GB Marshall never exhibited the kind of ability that Bishop has shown. If you recall, Marshall was a good MLB at Oklahoma who very rarely played MLB in GB. He was usually stuck at OLB, at times on the weak side. And he was just too big to play there. Partly because of his size, and partly because he was playing out of position, he never showed the kind of instincts, explosiveness, and penetration ability that Bishop does. Once he got hurt, GB gave him an injury settlement.

Hodge never got a real opportunity here because he was playing on bad knees. He finally got the necessary operation to alleviate the condition and when he came back that following preseason he actually looked like the guy he was in college: quick, darting, sure tackling, and aggressive. The problem was he was also a MLB. So he was one of the very last cuts. From what I saw of Hodge that preseason, I would not have cut him. He caught on in Cincy and is second team MLB there. But just for the record, from what I saw of Hodge that preseason, I thought TT was making a mistake. The kid was finally healthy and had nowhere to go but up.

To compare either one of these guys with Bishop is misguided at best. First of all, we are now in a 3-4 so we have room for more than one MLB and more depth. Second, that defense demands that your LB crew make some big plays. In a 4-3 not so much. Because the down linemen are expected to get penetration on both runs and passes and therefore make sacks, TFLs and batted balls. In a 3-4, DL are much more contain minded. The big plays therefore mostly come from the linebackers. This has so far been a failing with both Hawk and Barnett in the 4-3 that has continued in the 3-4. They do little in the area of TFL, sacks, pressures, forced fumbles, deflections, even real hard hits. Bishop looks like he can do that. Much more than Marshall, and even more than Hodge in his one healthy preseason. The other stuff can be coached: that is the assignment security. It comes from experience, reps, and good teaching from smart coaches.

But this last matter is something that some people on this forum do not want to address. That is the failings of management with both player procurement and player development. The last notable example was Jamon Meredith. Was not good enough for the squad in GB, suddenly a starter in Buffalo. Getting away from Campen apparently helped. (Smily face.)

Yet some posters are reluctant to acknowledge those kind of errors. Yet there have been many of them with TT, MM and the rest of the coaches.

But that's for another thread. This one is dedicated to protecting Hawk, downgrading Bishop, and never saying anything critical about player management.

You can say that if you like. I would say he isn't good enough to be on the field enough to give himself those chances. If he were better, he would be playing on more than just the base D. A #5 pick should be. I was hoping that it was Sanders scheme that was holding him back, but it appears that it's just his talent.

As mentioned earlier, it was a weak draft.

I remember talking to a guy at work before this draft. He really liked Hawk even though he is a big ND fan. I liked Veron Davis. I told him Hawk was nothing but another overhyped overrated OSU LB and that 9 times out of 10 they never live up to the hype as most OSU players are know for. I said that if the Packer drafted him he would be with the Packers for 4-5 years bounce around the NFL for another 3-4 then be gone out of the NFL.

I agree with your post, except I have to nit pick one little thing.

Meredith earning a starting job in Buffalo doesn't say much. Even though Green Bay's line is bad, Buffalo's line is worse. BUF and KC are probably the 2 worst lines in the NFL (with teams like OAK, DET, SEA, worse then GB also).

So Meredith getting a job in Buffalo, isn't showing the Packers were wrong on Meredith to me yet.

Maybe Hawk is so scared of making a mistake, that he'd rather just have his assignment down rather than making a play where he could mess up.

Why are so many people this high on Bishop? He's been incredible... IN PRESEASON. If he was that great the coaches would find a way to put him on the field, don't you think? Maybe we're overhyping Bishop like we did Hawk.

Assuming we resign Chillar (a big assumption), I have to think that Hawk won't be around next season unless his contract is reworked. I can't see keeping a guy on at 4M+ when he’s expected to play maybe 25% of the defensive snaps. I’m guessing that Hawk has the rest of the season to show whether he can be a play maker. I don’t have any problem with Hawk staying ahead of Bishop this season, but it seems to me that 15-20 snaps a game in the base defense would be a pretty good way to use Bishop.

As for the Vernon Davis hindsight… please. Even with Hawk’s limitations, we’ve gotten much more from Hawk than SF has gotten from Davis. I’m not at all convinced that Davis has a higher ceiling than Finley.

Thoughts on the LB's-

-Aj continues to act with the utmost class, and wants to stay with the team. He is assignment sure, but unspectacular..
-If there is no new CBA Chillar is one of the few players in position to cash in and he knows it. Even with a new CBA probably going to be more costly than Hawk is now to resign him.
-IMO Poppinga is far and away the most overpaid LB on the team. He gets more of a pass based on draft position.

I think there is a good chance AJ is back because of the Chillar situation. While not a great player or what you would typically hope for from a fifth overall pick I worry less when he is on the field than when I see Poppinga. I believe that if a better solution can be found great otherwise I would prefer TT focus on fixing the O line, and secondary before worrying about the LB's.

Hawks lack of impact certainly isnt a surprise to me, I called it prior to the draft. Im a huge Ohio State fan , watched him his entire college career. Hawk was a good college linebacker, he made plays all the time, because the defense was designed to funnel plays to him, but may people fell in love with his highlight reel where he often went untouched to the ball carrier. Doesnt happen in the pro's very often. I absolutely loved him at Ohio State, but knew his game wouldnt translate, and certainly wouldnt be the impact player at #5 we needed. When you draft a linbacker that high, he needs to be a Lawrence Taylor type impact player, I know there is only one Lawrence Taylor, but he needs to have great impact, AJ Hawk wasnt even close to that. I thought he'd be a solid assignment sure, John Anderson type linbacker, not the impact player usually reserved for players drafted that high.

In his defense, that wasnt a strong draft, and I cant play the "should have drafted" game. It came down to 3 players that were the consensus pick: Hawk, Vernon Davis, or Micheal Huff. I wanted Davis, but cant say I'd would have been happy with any of them. Call it fate.

I disagree.

Why?

Up until this year, Davis has averaged about 34 catches a year, even though he missed ten games. But that does not begin to tell the whole story. Because Davis has played with the likes of Alex Smith etc. at QB. Plus Martz as OC, and Martz did not feature the TE in his offense. Now, imagine if he had not missed the ten games and had Favre or AR to throw to him.

Further, the scouting reports were wrong about Davis. They pegged him as a WR type of TE who would be a liability as a blocker. Wrongo. The guy is an excellent blocker. Last year Singletary called him one of the best blocking TE's in the NFL. In fact, Davis is such a fine blocking TE that in one game he 1.) started KGB into retirement and 2.) made Jenkins a starter. If you recall the SF/GB game where Gore had those two good runs in the first half against KGB's side of the ball, the guy blocking him was Davis. I watched those two plays more than once. I was surprised at how easily Davis handled KGB, essentially one on one. Apparently, so was MM, since during and after that game KGB became a situational pass rusher and Jenkins became the base starter. Except KGB couldn't even pass rush anymore and was forced into retirement.

This year, in a more stable offense, Davis looks like he has hit his stride. And will end up with about 60-70 catches. And this is still without a really good QB.

Question: Do you know how hard it is to find a TE who is a front tier blocker and can run and catch like that? The only other guys in the league I can think of who have that unique combination of abilities are Witten and Gonzalez.

Second question: Do you know how easy it is to find an average LB like Hawk who is assignment sure but almost never makes any big or impact or turnover type plays? And is now on his way out. In other words, Hawk appears to have had the reverse career curve of what you want in a highly drafted player: He hit his peak in his first two years, and is now either flat or declining. Except the peak was not even very high.

I also do not agree that the 2006 draft was oh so awful and that Hawk really was not that bad of a pick. Of the top 12 players chosen that year, I think Hawk is in the bottom fourth. People like Williams, Ferguson, Cutler and Ngata are clearly way above Hawk as players at their positions. In fact, the only players I would put either at Hawk's level or slightly below are Young, and maybe Huff. (You could argue about Sims, and maybe Whitner.)

But its even worse than that because there were better players in the mid to lower areas of the first round, not just the top. People like Greenway, Cromartie, Maroney, Joseph, Holmes, Lawson, Williams, and Addai. Two of those play Hawk's position of LB. And Maroney, Addai, and Williams play RB better than Grant does. This means you likely could have traded down and got a better player than Hawk plus one other prospect. (And BTW, Patty had Greenway ranked above Hawk throughout the pre draft season.)

In light of the above, I don't see how anyone cannot say Hawk was a serious mistake by TT. And people talked about not taking Hawk BEFORE THE DRAFT, so its not hindsight.

If that was an isolated incident one could discount it. But it was not. Because TT duplicated it the next year with Harrell.

It was those two picks that made me fall away from TT. Plus his failure to get Randy Moss.

I can only appreciate the multiple excuses you are prepared to extend Davis for his lack of past production, as well as your willingness to assume he will develop into a top-tier TE. If only players on the GB roster were extended such courtesies we’d have a much happier fan base.



You say Hawk was in the bottom 1/4 of the top 12 picks in that draft, which I would agree with. However, the fact that two of the four players you list as being better picks than Hawk were picked BEFORE him doesn’t do much to support your argument that he was a bad pick. Your assertion that Cutler would have been a better pick when we already had Favre and Rodgers on the roster is somewhat flawed IMO. Which leaves Ngata. I agree 100% in hindsight Ngata would have been a better pick. The fact that even in hindsight you have to go to pick 12 to find a clearly better player doesn’t do much to support the argument that Hawk was a bad pick. I don't even know what to say to your claim that someone like Maroney would have been a better pick.

For what it's worth, Vernon Davis was widely considered a massive bomb here in Ninerland up until late last year (roughly after Singletary booted him off the field for being a bonehead). I realize that's not a statistical analysis or anything, but that was the overriding impression.

I disagree with you.

Being able to block KGB doesn't prove for
one second that Davis is a good run blocker.
ANYONE in the NFL could run block KGB.
He was solely ONE dimentional.

Actually he did nothing vs. Jenkins
(who was then a back-up) after that.

Many QBs who are not that good look to their
TE's for completions because the throws are
shorter and they are covered by LBs and Ss.
I believe this disproves your excuse that he
has had a poor QB throwing to him.

You actually believe he is the 3rd best overall
TE in the league??
He's played ARI,SEA,STL,MIN,ATL
with TD's against MIN(2) and STL.
Despite losing to ATL by 35(they were in passing mode)
he only caught 5-50-0.

He's 12th in catches, 11th in yds,
and (t)5th in TDs.
Sorry I just don't see a top 3 TE.

Of course his coach is going to compliment his run blocking!
What's he going to say?
The 49ers are 16th in yds rushing and 15th in ypc.

Sorry but I can think of at least 10 TE's I would rahter have.

I do agree he's playing better than his first 3 "bust" years.
And I only say bust because he was such a high draft choice.

He pales in comparison to the very "steady"
but unspectacular play of Hawk.

Go Pack!!

I take it back, I do not agree that Hawk was in the bottom ¼ of the top 12.

I’d say these 6 have panned out better:
Williams, Bush, Ferguson, Whitner, Cutler, Ngata

The remaining 6 are:
Young, Hawk, Davis, Huff, Sims and Leinart

Of the remaining 6, I do not see anyone who is clearly a better player than Hawk. Davis is the only one that even seems debatable. Even more than Hawk, I am surprised by how far Sims has fallen off since a promising start.

Hawk will likely end up with another team, but I think he will re-emerge as a betterplayer when he does.

He fits the 4-3 outside better. His falloff came because of playing behind a weak left side of the line in 2008, followed by a switch to the 3-4 this year.

He clearly won't go down in history as a graet payoff for a number 5 pick, but he's not ryan leaf, tony mandarich or any other of the multitude of high round picks that fail to make a team.

He's not a 10 million a year player, but he will be sought after at a reasonable price.

What's interesting about that is I remember thinking at the time that it was one of the better draft classes I'd seen for top 10 talent... Shows what I know.

Are you serious?

Concerning the first, the obvious implication was that TT could have traded up.

Concerning the latter, the implication was that you could have traded Cutler for much more than Hawk turned out to be worth. This happens all the time on draft day. Or a bit later. For example, Michael Vick. (BTW, what did Cutler eventually go for?)

Concerning the last, I clearly stated, that you could have picked up Maroney by trading down and then having another draft pick to chose another prospect with. In other words, TT picked the worst option in my view.

You really should read things more closely before you reply.

PS As per your other post, Matt Leinart is going to be a good QB in the NFL. And good QB's are worth much more than average linebackers. No comment about Davis vs. Hawk. That was already dealt with at length. A TE with that type of blocking and catching ability is worth more than an average LB.

Per the other comment about Davis' blocking ability--via Pats4--go argue with Singletary. He is the one who said Davis is one of the best blocking TE's in the NFL. But, guess you've watched more film than him. Ask him for a job then.

Your sarcasm is wearing thin here....Debate like an adult.....

I don't think its wearing at all.

Clearly that was the implication of the original post. And the last supposition was not implied, it was stated.

And I was quoting Mike S, who should know. This last BTW, was the only one of the comments meant to be sarcastic.