He has a point. If they were allowed to hit the quarterback more, it would force teams to shore up their atrocious defensive lines. The NFL needs to bring back real tackling at all positions on the field, though. This habit of throwing oneself at the person's knees in the hope of disrupting their momentum has got to go.

---

This is where you are missing the point. Hawk played NINE plays against The Bengals, how is anyone suppose to produce when they are on the field only 9 times.

He got pissed, and I didn't blame him, now I am guessing if guys didn't get hurt, our crack coaching staff would have never put him on the field, except on base d packages.

Big mistake it would have been, Hawk has showed he should be on the field, whenever possible, let's see how much playing time he gets this weeke
nd. See if the coaches learned anything.

---

I don't think it's fair to assume what was going through the minds of the coaches in regards to limiting AJ's PT. I for one have a different opinion on why they did it than you do. My take on it was that they limited his snaps precisely in order to piss him off, hoping that it would light a fire under his ass and get him playing with a little (or a lot) more fire on the field. Now, just like what you said, this is pure conjecture. But what is not conjecture is that since the Bengals game, AJ has been a different guy on the field than he was before they limited his snaps. Whatever the reason, I'm glad they did it, and I'm glad AJ has responded the way he has.

---

i dig aj, but his music is week !!

---

I dig nyrpack, but his spelling is week !! lol

---

I'm not the one missing the point. Based on his performance in training camp, preseason, practices, and games, the coaches decided that the defense was better with Chillar in the game than Hawk. Hawk was the starter and given every opportunity to outplay Chillar at the position.

That said, I believe if he had performed like he has the last two games that they might not have made the same decision.

I like AJ. A lot. I was happy with the draft pick, I was happy with his rookie performance. I'm thrilled to see him adding "playmaker" back into his description to go along with "assignment sure".

If he continues to perform as he has these last two games you won't see me ever using the words dissapointed and AJ in the same sentence again.

Grading players can be a subjective process. In this case you appear to have a lower expectation for AJ's performance than I do. You were happy with his performance, I was dissapointed. I'm not dissapointed now.

---