Packers arguing amongst themselves?

[Timinator 0]

Minneapolis' KFAN Radio is reporting a family feud within the Packer ranks. I guess things are gtting pretty heated at 1265 Lombardi Avenue. Anybody know anything to add?

[Sho Nuff 719]

Minneapolis' KFAN Radio is reporting a family feud within the Packer ranks. I guess things are gtting pretty heated at 1265 Lombardi Avenue. Anybody know anything to add?

 

Who is the fighting between?

 

And Minny radio reporting that does not automatically sound like credible source IMO.

[hoffdaddy 1]

Minneapolis' KFAN Radio is reporting a family feud within the Packer ranks. I guess things are gtting pretty heated at 1265 Lombardi Avenue. Anybody know anything to add?

 

I have something to add. Don't listen to KFAN. That'll clear it up.

 

If they do make a move for Arrington, then drafting Davis makes some sense. If not, it has to be defense doesn't it?

[kristv 0]

I have something to add. Don't listen to KFAN. That'll clear it up.

 

If they do make a move for Arrington, then drafting Davis makes some sense. If not, it has to be defense doesn't it?

 

That's what I'm thinking. If they sign Arrington, they take Davis. If no Arrington, Hawk is the right pick at #5.

[Timinator 0]

I have something to add. Don't listen to KFAN. That'll clear it up.

 

KFAN is pretty good about Packer reporting. They get ripped by listeners for not being more 'homer' to the Vikes. They even have their own Packer show during the NFL season.

 

The supposed disagrement is between McCarthy and Thompson/DC. I don't doubt there is a disagreement at Packer headquarters about who to draft. I'm sure there were people in Green Bay who wanted Barry Sanders over Mandarich too. I'm sure this happens every year.

[PackerAaron 0]

Hawk is in no way worth the #5 pick.

 

You don't take a guy at #5, and pay him the coresponding contract, when he won't even be on the field on third downs. That is not getting vaule from the pick. If last year taught us anything, Thompson stays true t o his board, If one of the Big Three QBs make it to #5, he'll take one. If Ferguson slips, he'll take it. If he gets an amazing offer from someone looking to trade up, he'll pull t he trigger. And yes, if Davis is there, I think he takes him in a heartbeat. The WCO can be devestating with two good TEs, as we saw with Jackson/Chmura. On top of all this, a miracle could happen and Williams could slip to 5.

 

Any of these could happen, and I would be happy. But taking Hawk just doesn't make any sense to me.

[CurleyQ 0]

I heard Hawk was a 3 down player. If so, why wouldn't he be worth that draft slot? The TE crop seems pretty deep to me, but............

[BUCKEYES 0]

Hawk is in no way worth the #5 pick.

 

You don't take a guy at #5, and pay him the coresponding contract, when he won't even be on the field on third downs. That is not getting vaule from the pick. If last year taught us anything, Thompson stays true t o his board, If one of the Big Three QBs make it to #5, he'll take one. If Ferguson slips, he'll take it. If he gets an amazing offer from someone looking to trade up, he'll pull t he trigger. And yes, if Davis is there, I think he takes him in a heartbeat. The WCO can be devestating with two good TEs, as we saw with Jackson/Chmura. On top of all this, a miracle could happen and Williams could slip to 5.

 

Any of these could happen, and I would be happy. But taking Hawk just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

 

 

Why do you think Hawk isn't a 3rd down guy? I have watched all of his college games and he's been terrific in passing situations. The guy can do it all. He can be a marquee player for years to come. From what I've heard, the Pack is really hurting at linebacker

[hoffdaddy 1]

I heard Hawk was a 3 down player. If so, why wouldn't he be worth that draft slot? The TE crop seems pretty deep to me, but............

 

LB is deep too, hence the issue here. There are plenty of guys who aren't quite as good as Hawk, but still damn good who will be there in round 2.

 

Nice problem to have if you're Green Bay.

[PackerAaron 0]

Why do you think Hawk isn't a 3rd down guy? I have watched all of his college games and he's been terrific in passing situations. The guy can do it all. He can be a marquee player for years to come. From what I've heard, the Pack is really hurting at linebacker

 

So you're saying he'll play the middle? He's an outside 'backer. Barnett playes the middle and stays in on third down, relgating Hawk to the bench. Linebacker is arguably the deepest position in the draft. The Pack can find a good outside backer later on the first day. No need to take one at #5.

[gemynd 0]

Hawk is in no way worth the #5 pick.

 

You don't take a guy at #5, and pay him the coresponding contract, when he won't even be on the field on third downs. That is not getting vaule from the pick. If last year taught us anything, Thompson stays true t o his board, If one of the Big Three QBs make it to #5, he'll take one. If Ferguson slips, he'll take it. If he gets an amazing offer from someone looking to trade up, he'll pull t he trigger. And yes, if Davis is there, I think he takes him in a heartbeat. The WCO can be devestating with two good TEs, as we saw with Jackson/Chmura. On top of all this, a miracle could happen and Williams could slip to 5.

 

Any of these could happen, and I would be happy. But taking Hawk just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Have the Packers soured on Aaron Rodgers already? They picked him 1st round last year and he did not start a game (played minimally as well). I have heard from a few people that Aaron may not be their future, but why? What has he shown that makes you throw away a 1st round pick prior to even really testing him?

 

I do not mean to hijack the thread, so to stay on topic, I haven't heard from anyone that Hawk is not a 3rd down LB.

[jdswan922 0]

So you're saying he'll play the middle? He's an outside 'backer. Barnett playes the middle and stays in on third down, relgating Hawk to the bench. Linebacker is arguably the deepest position in the draft. The Pack can find a good outside backer later on the first day. No need to take one at #5.

 

I am confused. Are you saying that the only linebacker that stays in on 3rd down is the MLB? I am not sure what defenses you are watching. Usually, unless there are 4 or 5 WRs you are going to have 2 LB. I am sure, if drafted Hawk is definitely in their top 2. Just because a guy is their MLB does not automatically mean he is the guy that stays in on passing downs either. If Hawk is better on passing downs then he would stay in, not Barnett. I am noat claiming to know he is better, just that it remains to be seen. Terrible point.

[kristv 0]

Hawk is not going to be pulled out on 3rd down. Where did you hear any of this? He is an every down LB. Our LB group is horrendous aside from Barnett, so Hawk would most definitely not be a bad pick here. The guy is an animal and to be honest, why in the world would they sit him on 3rd down anyway after paying all that money? If anything, Mario would not be the right pick for the Pack as HE would come out on 3rd down for KGB.

[swamp dog 0]

i view with suspicion any media report that claims to know what's going on inside a team's war room right now. those places are locked down tight. and info that leaks out leaks out on purpose. for example, it would be in the packers interest for the media to report they have several players in mind and can't figure out whom they will take: that increases the pool of teams who might have to trade up with the packers to get their players on the packers "list of players we can't make up our minds about."

 

even if it's not that conspiratorial, i still have a hard time believing there are "unintentional" war room leaks like this.

[murf74 461]

Only opinion that matters on this is ........Brett Favre.

 

Mr. Favre, which draft pick will make you want to come back for another year.......

 

With the 5th pick of the 2006 NFL Draft, Brett Favre.....uhh eeemmm...I mean the Green Brett Packers.....uhhh emmm...I mean the Green Bay Packers select---------

[Sho Nuff 719]

Hawk is in no way worth the #5 pick.

 

You don't take a guy at #5, and pay him the coresponding contract, when he won't even be on the field on third downs. That is not getting vaule from the pick. If last year taught us anything, Thompson stays true t o his board, If one of the Big Three QBs make it to #5, he'll take one. If Ferguson slips, he'll take it. If he gets an amazing offer from someone looking to trade up, he'll pull t he trigger. And yes, if Davis is there, I think he takes him in a heartbeat. The WCO can be devestating with two good TEs, as we saw with Jackson/Chmura. On top of all this, a miracle could happen and Williams could slip to 5.

 

Any of these could happen, and I would be happy. But taking Hawk just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Davis will be there...but who is to really say Hawk will not be in there on 3rd downs?

 

Hawk fills a glaring need at LB and a possible vocal leader in the future for that defense.

 

I am confused. Are you saying that the only linebacker that stays in on 3rd down is the MLB? I am not sure what defenses you are watching. Usually, unless there are 4 or 5 WRs you are going to have 2 LB. I am sure, if drafted Hawk is definitely in their top 2. Just because a guy is their MLB does not automatically mean he is the guy that stays in on passing downs either. If Hawk is better on passing downs then he would stay in, not Barnett. I am noat claiming to know he is better, just that it remains to be seen. Terrible point.

 

If they go dime you get one LB...nickel generally you have 2.

 

But to say they will go dime every 3rd down and Hawk will only play 2 downs is ridiculous...

 

And not every 3rd down is a passing situation where you go straight to a dime coverage.

[miket7 0]

How about this...

 

Instead of pointless arguing, how about some Packers fans chime in with some usefull information?

 

 

- What position do you think they need worse, offense or defense?

- What are they saying the chances are that Green Bay signs LaVar Arrington?

- What is the deal with Bubba Franks?

- Have they already given up on Aaron Rodgers? To me, that sounds premature...

[PackerAaron 0]

Davis will be there...but who is to really say Hawk will not be in there on 3rd downs?

 

Hawk fills a glaring need at LB and a possible vocal leader in the future for that defense.

If they go dime you get one LB...nickel generally you have 2.

 

But to say they will go dime every 3rd down and Hawk will only play 2 downs is ridiculous...

 

And not every 3rd down is a passing situation where you go straight to a dime coverage.

 

You're right. It's not. But more often than not, 3rd down is a passing down. (Insert joke about the Packers defense here) And usually the middle linbacker stays in when the team goes to dime.

 

I understand everyone who says Hawk is a 3 down LB. I'm sure he is. And maybe Ted Thompson projects him to the middle. But he has a high floor and a very low celing, while Davis has an incredibly high celing with a somewhat low floor. You want a difference maker at #5. Hawk will be a solid player for years to come. However, he's not an Urlacher or Lewis. Look at the Bengals draft last year. Their second round LB was outstanding. You can find excellent LB talent much later this year. Meanwhile, Davis has the chance to be beyond special. The upside is so much greater.

 

Sorry I hijacked the thread. I just hate the idea of Hawk at #5.

[BigSeXXXy 0]

How about this they (Packers) are trying to put out misinformation.

[kristv 0]

You're right. It's not. But more often than not, 3rd down is a passing down. (Insert joke about the Packers defense here) And usually the middle linbacker stays in when the team goes to dime.

 

I understand everyone who says Hawk is a 3 down LB. I'm sure he is. And maybe Ted Thompson projects him to the middle. But he has a high floor and a very low celing, while Davis has an incredibly high celing with a somewhat low floor. You want a difference maker at #5. Hawk will be a solid player for years to come. However, he's not an Urlacher or Lewis. Look at the Bengals draft last year. Their second round LB was outstanding. You can find excellent LB talent much later this year. Meanwhile, Davis has the chance to be beyond special. The upside is so much greater.

 

Sorry I hijacked the thread. I just hate the idea of Hawk at #5.

 

 

I wouldn't say you hijacked the thread. I think you've actually stayed right on subject. We'll just have to agree to disagree, because I would be very happy with Hawk at #5 not that I would be unhappy with Davis though, if that is the pick. I think these two guys are the safest picks in the draft in that both are athletic freaks and I believe both will have great careers in the NFL. I wish we could have both.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

Packers should pick the best player AND athlete available. Hawk may fit a need, but Davis is the far better player and athlete at that pick.

 

How many TE's have there been with that type of size, speed, and ability? I can't think of anyone at all.

 

Davis is a freak of nature. Hawk is solid, but Davis can change a game on offense.

[Sho Nuff 719]

How about this...

 

Instead of pointless arguing, how about some Packers fans chime in with some usefull information?

- What position do you think they need worse, offense or defense?

- What are they saying the chances are that Green Bay signs LaVar Arrington?

- What is the deal with Bubba Franks?

- Have they already given up on Aaron Rodgers? To me, that sounds premature...

 

As far as the first round...defense at the #5 pick is more of a "need".

With Lavar looking more to NYG, I see little chance GB signs him...especially near his asking price where I would not want them to sign him for that anyway.

Bubba is under contract after signing before last season. He blocks well and is a great redzone target but is basically non-existant in the passing game between the 20s.

No, they have not already given up on Rodgers, that is pure speculation by many people. He has seen very limited action. Favre was 0-5 in this rookie year with 2 INTs.

 

Packers should pick the best player AND athlete available. Hawk may fit a need, but Davis is the far better player and athlete at that pick.

 

How many TE's have there been with that type of size, speed, and ability? I can't think of anyone at all.

 

Davis is a freak of nature. Hawk is solid, but Davis can change a game on offense.

 

And Hawk can make a big difference on defense as well.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

As far as the first round...defense at the #5 pick is more of a "need".

With Lavar looking more to NYG, I see little chance GB signs him...especially near his asking price where I would not want them to sign him for that anyway.

Bubba is under contract after signing before last season. He blocks well and is a great redzone target but is basically non-existant in the passing game between the 20s.

No, they have not already given up on Rodgers, that is pure speculation by many people. He has seen very limited action. Favre was 0-5 in this rookie year with 2 INTs.

And Hawk can make a big difference on defense as well.

 

If Walker gets traded, that doesn't leave Favre nor Rodgers many options in the passing game, which was a really big issue last season (the injuries). I think most would agree the Packers are in a rebuilding mode and should assemble as many studs on the roster as possible.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Hawk is solid. However, I believe Davis has unbelievable skills, and has more to offer in the long term.

 

Either way, they really can't go wrong.

[Sho Nuff 719]

If Walker gets traded, that doesn't leave Favre nor Rodgers many options in the passing game, which was a really big issue last season (the injuries). I think most would agree the Packers are in a rebuilding mode and should assemble as many studs on the roster as possible.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Hawk is solid. However, I believe Davis has unbelievable skills, and has more to offer in the long term.

 

Either way, they really can't go wrong.

 

 

To me you rebuild like TT has been doing so far...on the defensive side of the ball. Then on the Oline(which needs to be addressed as well if the youngsters are not ready to step up ...Coston and White).

 

The Dline is pretty well taken care of (except maybe another DE to go with Kampman and KGB). Secondary could use another corner. Safety is set for now. LBs need bit time help.

[jdswan922 0]

I still think you look at the old saying...

 

Offense wins games, defense wins championships.

 

Just my opinion. Though, statistically, the Packer D was pretty good, that is more a result of playing 6 games against NFC North offenses I think. They can still improve that D a lot.

[onejayhawk 3]

It's about time the Packers woke up and smelled the coffee. MOst years, Hawk would be a no brainer at pick 5. This is not most years. Instead, there are options available, and GB needs to explore them.

 

For one thing, the bizarre might happen and two QB's might go in the first 4 picks. That means that either D'Brick or Mario will still be on the board. The Pack is not overly interested in Ferguson because of their long history of doing well with lower round picks. However, there are a half dozen teams that would be willing to trade up to get him, and possibily pay extra for the priviledge.

 

Further, Vernon Davis grades out as a better player than Hawk. Its close, but the edge is there. With the curent state of their WR's another weapon would be very welcome. Yes Hawk fills a crying need, but they struggled throughnlast year without him, and can do so again. This is not a team shaking out for a playoff run.

 

J

[kristv 0]

I just don't believe that the Packers can go wrong with either pick. If both players are there at #5, I will be happy with either player. The reason why I would prefer Hawk (only slightly) is because while the defense is okay, it needs an identity with Favre leaving soon. I believe Hawk could be the face of the Packers for years to come, while I think Davis would be more just a part of the offense. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the Pack needs an identity and I believe Hawk would bring that to them.

[PackerAaron 0]

I just don't believe that the Packers can go wrong with either pick. If both players are there at #5, I will be happy with either player. The reason why I would prefer Hawk (only slightly) is because while the defense is okay, it needs an identity with Favre leaving soon. I believe Hawk could be the face of the Packers for years to come, while I think Davis would be more just a part of the offense. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the Pack needs an identity and I believe Hawk would bring that to them.

 

"Just part of the offense'? Davis could blow Gates and/or Gonzalez out of the water if he reaches his potential. That's a bit more than just 'part of the offense'.

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

If Favre stays he remains the face of the team they go V. Davis, make the trade with Denver of Walker to the Broncos for Lelie and their 2nd they just picked up from the trade with the 49ers. Then take best LB and best guard available in round 2.

 

Then they'd have Ahman in the backfield, V. Davis and B. Franks in a double TE set to go with Lelie and Driver. Tons of weapons for Favre.

 

If Favre retires they should maybe consider Hawk at 5th to become the new face of the team just like Urlacher is for the Bears. Without a marquee name on the team you can't market yourself nearly as well and can't make as much $$$. Plus, Hawk is the perfect blue collar fit for Green Bay. I'd love to see him in a Packer uniform. Then they could still make the trade of Walker for Lelie and a 2nd rounder to get the best TE and guard available in the 2nd.

 

Yes?

 

No?

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

"Just part of the offense'? Davis could blow Gates and/or Gonzalez out of the water if he reaches his potential. That's a bit more than just 'part of the offense'.

 

Exactly. Davis could impact a game like Shannon Sharpe did in his prime years in Denver. With his size and speed, he cannot be covered by a linebacker. Cover him with a safety or corner, you have a huge mismatch.

 

Hawk's a good player, but I don't see how he'll affect and change a game like Vernon Davis is capable of doing.

 

When you're rebuilding a team, you have to collect as many stud players as possible.

[hoffdaddy 1]

Interestingly, I think they can still get an impact linebacker in round 2. I think the LB class is deep, and picking Davis might open it up for them on offense. Heck, they got a round 2 starter on defense last season didn't they?

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

If Favre stays he remains the face of the team they go V. Davis, make the trade with Denver of Walker to the Broncos for Lelie and their 2nd they just picked up from the trade with the 49ers. Then take best LB and best guard available in round 2.

 

Curious, but where did you see this rumored trade of Lelie/2nd round pick for Javon Walker?

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

Curious, but where did you see this rumored trade of Lelie/2nd round pick for Javon Walker?

 

 

FBG

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

FBG

 

If that's the case, GB should make this trade ASAP. With two second round picks, they can still get quality defenders, or package the picks to move up and get an Ernie Sims or Demeco Ryans.

 

Denver's crazy for making that trade. Rod Smith is like 100. If Walker is unable to come back 100% this year, and Rod Smith completely breaks down, they have no shot at a SB, much less a playoff berth.

 

I still believe Walker's gonna wind up in Philly. Reid wanted him in the draft, just like he wanted Darren Howard. Well, the chance was there to get Darren Howard in FA, and now, he's wearing Midnite Green.

 

The Eagles have picks, so Green Bay has every right to raise the asking price (unless Denver is not really interested in getting him). Besides, I would think a team like Denver would be more interested in a guy like Charles Rogers.

[kristv 0]

"Just part of the offense'? Davis could blow Gates and/or Gonzalez out of the water if he reaches his potential. That's a bit more than just 'part of the offense'.

 

 

Yes, just part of the offense. Who is the face of KC or San Diego? That's right, the running backs. Who was the face for the Broncos when Sharpe was there? Elway. I am not playing down Davis' potential or the fact that he will be an impact player, but he would not be the face of the team like Hawk would be. Who is the face of the Bears right now? That's right, Urlacher. Hawk has the same thing going for him as far as I can see. I would love to have Davis on the team, believe me. But if I had to choose between the two, it would be Hawk at this point.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

Yes, just part of the offense. Who is the face of KC or San Diego? That's right, the running backs. Who was the face for the Broncos when Sharpe was there? Elway. I am not playing down Davis' potential or the fact that he will be an impact player, but he would not be the face of the team like Hawk would be. Who is the face of the Bears right now? That's right, Urlacher. Hawk has the same thing going for him as far as I can see. I would love to have Davis on the team, believe me. But if I had to choose between the two, it would be Hawk at this point.

 

No offense, but what does "the face of the team" have anything to do with wins and losses?

 

BTW, you're arguing against your own points.

 

Who's gonna be the face of Green Bay?

 

1. Brett Favre (until he retires)

2. Ahman Green (when Favre retires)

3. Aaron Rogers

 

How many outside linebackers in the NFL are the "face of the team"?

[PackerAaron 0]

Yes, just part of the offense. Who is the face of KC or San Diego? That's right, the running backs. Who was the face for the Broncos when Sharpe was there? Elway. I am not playing down Davis' potential or the fact that he will be an impact player, but he would not be the face of the team like Hawk would be. Who is the face of the Bears right now? That's right, Urlacher. Hawk has the same thing going for him as far as I can see. I would love to have Davis on the team, believe me. But if I had to choose between the two, it would be Hawk at this point.

 

Do you really think a NFL GM sits around wondering who the 'face' of his team is going to be? Hell no. He wants to find the best talent he can, at least if he's any good at his job. I don't mean to direct this just at you, because several other people have made the 'they need a face-of-the-team' argument. It's absurd. They need a great football player, period. I think Davis has a chance to be great, while Hawk will be solid, but not great.

 

(Again, hope I'm not coming across too argumentative towards you. We've managed to keep this incredibly civil, which is a pleasant change from the usual exchanges on this here forearm. )

 

No offense, but what does "the face of the team" have anything to do with wins and losses?

 

BTW, you're arguing against your own points.

 

Who's gonna be the face of Green Bay?

 

1. Brett Favre (until he retires)

2. Ahman Green (when Favre retires)

3. Aaron Rogers

 

How many outside linebackers in the NFL are the "face of the team"?

 

Since when do we agree on something?

 

[krokus 0]

Minneapolis' KFAN Radio is reporting a family feud within the Packer ranks. I guess things are gtting pretty heated at 1265 Lombardi Avenue. Anybody know anything to add?

 

news flash for KFAN, the Packers are a business not a family and arguments occur everyday in business or at least they should when it comes to multimillion dollar decisions.

[kristv 0]

Do you really think a NFL GM sits around wondering who the 'face' of his team is going to be? Hell no. He wants to find the best talent he can, at least if he's any good at his job. I don't mean to direct this just at you, because several other people have made the 'they need a face-of-the-team' argument. It's absurd. They need a great football player, period. I think Davis has a chance to be great, while Hawk will be solid, but not great.

 

(Again, hope I'm not coming across too argumentative towards you. We've managed to keep this incredibly civil, which is a pleasant change from the usual exchanges on this here forearm. )

 

 

Like I said, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I will be happy with either player, as I believe they are both worth the #5 pick. Here's to hoping the Pack at least take one of them!

[t.j 35]

How many TE's have there been with that type of size, speed, and ability? I can't think of anyone at all.

 

Davis is a freak of nature. Hawk is solid, but Davis can change a game on offense.

 

Does Davis have the kind of skill Hawk has, though? Athletic ability is important, and Davis certainly has more than enough of it, but it's not everything. Do Davis' catching and blocking skills compared to Hawk's tackling and block-shedding skills? And how do the guys compare from a toughness and work ethic standpoint?