Hawk rumor, bad news...

D_it_up · 04-24-2006, 07:47 PM

I'd much rather have Hawk than Williams

BiggPoppaFro4 · 04-24-2006, 07:51 PM

Williams = luxury pick up

Hawk = need pick up

we'll see I guess, but now I'm starting to wonder how far the FO is willing to drop in a trade.

Euphoria · 04-24-2006, 09:08 PM

screw all that I am for trading down and getting Brick... When you wanna build a wall its good to start with brick.

patdog · 04-25-2006, 09:05 AM

How could anyone say Hawk wouldn't make it off the bench. The guy is a bonafide starter and will be a allpro in a few seasons. If the saints trade down they got to take HAWK.

FatiusJeebs · 04-25-2006, 09:46 AM

Ya know......with Simmons, Fujita, Buckwoldt, and Hawk......Payton could still be thinking about....THE AWESOME.....FEARSOME.......3-4 DEFENSE!!!!!

(Offenses beware......its the second coming of the dome patrol!!!!)

Well....It would be nice if it happenbed ya know?

saintswhodi · 04-25-2006, 10:16 AM

I hate the 3-4. I KNOW that's where we had all our defensive success in the late 80s and early 90s, but we had four stud LBs too. ALL OF THEM. And some damn good interior linemen. ALL The linemen we have now are 4-3 linemen. And our LBs are solid, but not 4 studs like we had back then, even if we took Hawk. I look at Dallas, and how their switch to a 3-4 totally negated the play of Ellis and Glover, and ended up with Roy williams getting burned deep repeatedly cause they weren't getting pressure. Ware was a feak early, but he faded towards the end. It's not easy as just flipping a swich to go to a 3-4, and I would hate for us to try, even with Hawk.

FatiusJeebs · 04-25-2006, 11:41 AM

Why whodi? Why are you always PICKING ON ME?!?!?!?!?

LOL.....seriously though.....I simply like the amounf of coverage and pressure that it provides.

saintswhodi · 04-25-2006, 11:49 AM

I wasn't picking on you man. The 3-4 is fine if you have the personnel, we don't. That's all I was trying to say. Even if we took Hawk, we don't have the ends or DTs for it. Or the LBs. We are well suited for a 4-3. Now they might start drafting players this year and next, and bringing in FAs who move us toward that, but as we are currently constituted, I hate the 3-4, for us. As a defense, it has a track record of being successful, but there is also a reason it all but vanished a few years back. I just don't see it for us, and would especially hate for us to try this year.

BrooksMustGo · 04-25-2006, 12:48 PM

5 of the last 6 super bowl winners operated in the 3-4 scheme.

I agree that we don't have the DE's at present to run it. The Grimace is a liability. If we were to take The Immortal Mario Williams, we could be ok, provided we could pick up a decent NT somewhere.

The best case scenario would be to deal The Grimace to Green Bay and take The Immortal Mario Williams and either Hawk, Bunkley, or Ngata at #5. Presto! Instant 3-4 defense.

saintswhodi · 04-25-2006, 01:22 PM

3 of those were NE, who was just better than everyone else. Seattle was in a 4-3 and made the Superbowl. Also Tampa Bay won the Superbowl in a 4-3. Rams won in a 4-3. Baltimore won in a 4-3. Giants made it in a 4-3. Raiders made it in a 4-3. Philly went in a 4-3. What's the argument here? I said it has a track record of being successfulm and that we don't have the personnel for it, unless we dedicate this year's draft and next year's as well as FAs to it. And I really can't take you seriously with all this Mario BS. I haven't seen anyone this blinded since the Brooks lovers, and we see how that turned out for them.

04-24-2006, 07:51 PM	#12
BiggPoppaFro4 100th Post Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 231	Williams = luxury pick up Hawk = need pick up we'll see I guess, but now I'm starting to wonder how far the FO is willing to drop in a trade.
BiggPoppaFro4 100th Post Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 231

04-25-2006, 09:46 AM	#15
FatiusJeebs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 973	Ya know......with Simmons, Fujita, Buckwoldt, and Hawk......Payton could still be thinking about....THE AWESOME.....FEARSOME.......3-4 DEFENSE!!!!! (Offenses beware......its the second coming of the dome patrol!!!!) Well....It would be nice if it happenbed ya know?
FatiusJeebs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 973

04-25-2006, 11:41 AM	#17
FatiusJeebs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 973	Why whodi? Why are you always PICKING ON ME?!?!?!?!? LOL.....seriously though.....I simply like the amounf of coverage and pressure that it provides.
FatiusJeebs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 973

04-24-2006, 07:47 PM	#11
D_it_up Faqda Falcons Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Ruston, Louisiana Posts: 3,465 Blog Entries: 3	I'd much rather have Hawk than Williams

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-24-2006, 09:08 PM	#13
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	screw all that I am for trading down and getting Brick... When you wanna build a wall its good to start with brick.

04-25-2006, 09:05 AM	#14
patdog 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: westwego La Posts: 194	How could anyone say Hawk wouldn't make it off the bench. The guy is a bonafide starter and will be a allpro in a few seasons. If the saints trade down they got to take HAWK.

04-25-2006, 10:16 AM	#16
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	I hate the 3-4. I KNOW that's where we had all our defensive success in the late 80s and early 90s, but we had four stud LBs too. ALL OF THEM. And some damn good interior linemen. ALL The linemen we have now are 4-3 linemen. And our LBs are solid, but not 4 studs like we had back then, even if we took Hawk. I look at Dallas, and how their switch to a 3-4 totally negated the play of Ellis and Glover, and ended up with Roy williams getting burned deep repeatedly cause they weren't getting pressure. Ware was a feak early, but he faded towards the end. It's not easy as just flipping a swich to go to a 3-4, and I would hate for us to try, even with Hawk.

04-25-2006, 11:49 AM	#18
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	I wasn't picking on you man. The 3-4 is fine if you have the personnel, we don't. That's all I was trying to say. Even if we took Hawk, we don't have the ends or DTs for it. Or the LBs. We are well suited for a 4-3. Now they might start drafting players this year and next, and bringing in FAs who move us toward that, but as we are currently constituted, I hate the 3-4, for us. As a defense, it has a track record of being successful, but there is also a reason it all but vanished a few years back. I just don't see it for us, and would especially hate for us to try this year.

04-25-2006, 12:48 PM	#19
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	5 of the last 6 super bowl winners operated in the 3-4 scheme. I agree that we don't have the DE's at present to run it. The Grimace is a liability. If we were to take The Immortal Mario Williams, we could be ok, provided we could pick up a decent NT somewhere. The best case scenario would be to deal The Grimace to Green Bay and take The Immortal Mario Williams and either Hawk, Bunkley, or Ngata at #5. Presto! Instant 3-4 defense.

04-25-2006, 01:22 PM	#20
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	3 of those were NE, who was just better than everyone else. Seattle was in a 4-3 and made the Superbowl. Also Tampa Bay won the Superbowl in a 4-3. Rams won in a 4-3. Baltimore won in a 4-3. Giants made it in a 4-3. Raiders made it in a 4-3. Philly went in a 4-3. What's the argument here? I said it has a track record of being successfulm and that we don't have the personnel for it, unless we dedicate this year's draft and next year's as well as FAs to it. And I really can't take you seriously with all this Mario BS. I haven't seen anyone this blinded since the Brooks lovers, and we see how that turned out for them.