2018 Free Agents to Target

[Half Empty]

The Pack had Flynn for a game, the Pats had Cassell for a season, the Broncos had that guy who totally bombed, et. al. A shiny new toy will hypnotize one of the 32 teams.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hard for me to fathom after the season we just went through how some people want to downplay the importance of having a quality backup QB. Would the Packers have been playing in the Super Bowl this year had Keenum or Foles been their backup QB when Rodgers went down? Maybe, maybe not, we will never know. However, I sure would have liked their chances of winning more games before handing the reins back to #12 with one of those QB's, than the job Hundley did. So if that isn't worth the money that Keenum or Foles were paid and you would rather spend that money on a middle of the road free agent CB or OLB and have an unproven or unreliable backup at QB, so be it. Yes, the team needs to get better at other positions, but they still can't ignore the fact that a season can be completely derailed by a poor choice as your #2 QB.

 

[Mondio]

of course it can, it can be derailed by all sorts of things. Right now the common theme with every back up QB that is seemingly doing well is the entire team is strong around them. Even with our poor defense and struggling back up, Hundley made enough plays that if guys just catch the ball there's a good chance we beat the #2 seed in the NFC near the end of the season. Hundley wasn't great, will never say he was, but look around the league. There are a lot of bad QB's. Lots of teams looking for a decent starter even. How much are you going to invest in a guy you hope never plays? If the Packers go and pay 7, 8, 9 million or more for a back up they better have Hundley as their starter on 700K and Rodgers in retirement.

These backups are taking these teams nowhere, they're along for the ride. We do not have Philly's defense or the Vikings. We also have 20 million invested in a QB, the Eagles have what? 10 million invested this year? there's a big difference in situations. If your thought process is you plan on losing your starting qb, then you better not be paying him 20 million a year. AND he's going to be getting a raise soon.

We've seen DB's not have the depth, Oline, but then it did, WR's, RB's OLB's and now we need 2 starting QB's. There is limited players, limited cap. Pick your battles, you can't have them all. It's the nature of the beast. Keenum came on a million dollar contract basically, he's not coming that cheap again, add 9 more to that probably and he is not much more than Hundley. Thielen was going up and making spectacular catches on crap balls in that Saints game. Hundley couldn't put the ball any better to Allison, Clark, Jordy or Kendricks and they still wouldn't catch it for some reason.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You seemed to be resigned to the fact that no matter what the team does, their #2 QB is destined to suck? I think we saw better than sucky play out of a number of backup QB's this year in the NFL, just not in Green Bay.

The Packers were 4-1 before #12 went down. Sure AR was the strength of the team and no matter who takes over for him, the team isn't going to be as good. However, had the Packers had a better backup QB, they may have won a few extra games along the way. Those games put you into the playoffs with #12 and as we have seen in the past, anything is possible with #12 at QB.

If the Packers were headed into week 17 sitting at 13-2 and Rodgers went down and wasn't available for the first playoff game, who would you have wanted taking over as QB, Hundley or Foles?

 

[Mondio]

Foles has had 2 recent games, actually a game and half that have been very good. But let's not pretend he's been this good all year. before the playoffs he was 56% with a 79 rating in 5 games. This is with a superior defense and running game compared to GB. just for comparison Hundley was 60% for a 70.6 rating

and I'm resigned to the fact that our team around Rodgers needs to get better. We don't need to invest 5 million or more into a back up QB when the rest of the team isn't capable of carrying him anyway. The vikings did have that defense. The Eagles do have that team. They haven't won much recently. Good for them. We'll see if the Eagles invest 5 million dollars into a back up QB after they have to pay Wentz in a couple years. The Packers would be fools to invest 5 million dollars into a guy that will just be along for the ride anyway. and Foles or Hundley, doesn't matter. If Kendricks can't catch 2 perfect passes for 1st downs, what does it matter? If Jordy isn't going to make his usual catches, what does it matter? If Clark can't catch a perfectly thrown ball what does it matter who's throwing it to him? Hundley wasn't great, he also didn't have many guys that should have stepped up, helping him out either. In fact some guys regressed rather than step forward.

Foles with St. Louis was 56% for 2000 yards in 11 games and a whopping 69 rating.
His last stint with Philly he was 59% and a better 81 rating

I'm resigned to the fact that Hundley wasn't as bad as it seemed and there are a lot of bad QB's out there. A LOT. and they're starting. Unless we invest 6-7-,10 million in a back up, we're not getting anything different than what we have and probably getting worse. Bring in a vet, sure, but he better not be getting 6 million dollars a year. Foles would be at home with a defense playing like we had this year. That's a fact.

 

[C-Lee]

Crazy how the two teams in the nfc championship game were using backup QBs, foles for the eagles and keenum for the vikes, just kinda shows how important that backup qb spot actually is.

Both teams also have terrific defenses and the Packers stink without Rodgers

 

[Dantés]

The Packers were bad without Rodgers, it's true. But Hundley also turned in bottom 3 level QB play for their losses with him. I believe a better backup could have kept them afloat to the point that they wouldn't have been in total desperation mode when Rodgers got back.

 

[Mondio]

The Packers were bad without Rodgers, it's true. But Hundley also turned in bottom 3 level QB play for their losses with him. I believe a better backup could have kept them afloat to the point that they wouldn't have been in total desperation mode when Rodgers got back.

He had some real stinkers, no doubt, he also had some moments where he did really well, and times when he was just ok and nobody around him wanted to help him out. They definitely need to bring people in to compete for that spot. Now how much do you want to spend?

Of course a better back up would be better. Now where do you get one? Keemun isn't any better than Hundley. He had the good fortune of not needing to make any plays and only make them when they were there. He's not that mobile, he doesn't make great decisions, he throws the ball up for grabs at times. He doesn't have a very strong arm either. When there was actually pressure on him to perform in these last 2 games he stunk. He's lucky he didn't have 4 more into to his name in 2 games alone.

Sure a better qb might have won is a game or 2 more and put us in the playoffs. Just like having a defense perform like Philly or MN would have allowed Hundley to stay within himself and the team to withstand the loss of Rodgers too.

I know I have zero interest than anyore than minimal money at this point going to a back up QB until the team around the qb position is stronger.

 

[Dantés]

He had some real stinkers, no doubt, he also had some moments where he did really well, and times when he was just ok and nobody around him wanted to help him out. They definitely need to bring people in to compete for that spot. Now how much do you want to spend?

Of course a better back up would be better. Now where do you get one? Keemun isn't any better than Hundley. He had the good fortune of not needing to make any plays and only make them when they were there. He's not that mobile, he doesn't make great decisions, he throws the ball up for grabs at times. He doesn't have a very strong arm either. When there was actually pressure on him to perform in these last 2 games he stunk. He's lucky he didn't have 4 more into to his name in 2 games alone.

Sure a better qb might have won is a game or 2 more and put us in the playoffs. Just like having a defense perform like Philly or MN would have allowed Hundley to stay within himself and the team to withstand the loss of Rodgers too.

I know I have zero interest than anyore than minimal money at this point going to a back up QB until the team around the qb position is stronger.

Keenum is lightyears better than Hundley. Drastically superior. I posted this a few days ago in a different thread:

Yes, they went 3-7 in Brett Hundley starts. In those 7 losses, this is what they were getting out of the QB:

125/223 for 1,275 yards, 5.7 YPA, 56% completion, 5 TD, 11 INT, 2 rush TD, 4 Fumbles, 22 sacks

Basically, he was among the dregs of the league in every statistical category. If you just told me that Team X had QB play like that ^ and lost about twice as much as they won, I would have no idea what to think about the rest of the roster. It's near impossible to win when that's what you're getting out of the most important position.

All we really know at this point is that the team is a contender with elite QB play and can't overcome horrendous QB play. We don't really know much about how the roster would do with anything in between. Personally, I think with league average QB play they're an 8-10 win team. With Rodgers, they're a SB contender.

As for how they can improve on the backup situation, Fitzpatrick, Anderson, and Moore are all guys who should accept backup money and would be big upgrades on Hundley.

 

[rodell330]

I think moving Randall to free safety is very interesting. He is a ball-hawk DB and could be valuable in nickel and dime packages. Depending on him as a full time CB isn't feasible. Plus, having him switch positions saves GB money when its "contract time" as the CB position is a premium position.

Have you ever seen him tackle? If you pair him with HCD you have by far the worst pair of tackling safeties in the league. Teams would run all over us.

 

[Dantés]

For reference:

QB's to start meaningful amount of games with...

-Lower YPA than Hundley: Joe Flacco
-Lower YPC: Joe Flacco
-Lower yds/game: Brian Hoyer
-Lower 1st Down %: DeShone Kizer
-Lower TD %: DeShone Kizer, C.J. Beathard
-Higher INT %: DeShone Kizer, Trevor Siemian
-Net Yards Per Attempt (factors sacks): Dead Last
-Lower QB Rating: DeShone Kizer, C.J. Beathard

Absolutely horrendous.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

For reference:

QB's to start meaningful amount of games with...

-Lower YPA than Hundley: Joe Flacco
-Lower YPC: Joe Flacco
-Lower yds/game: Brian Hoyer
-Lower 1st Down %: DeShone Kizer
-Lower TD %: DeShone Kizer, C.J. Beathard
-Higher INT %: DeShone Kizer, Trevor Siemian
-Net Yards Per Attempt (factors sacks): Dead Last
-Lower QB Rating: DeShone Kizer, C.J. Beathard

Absolutely horrendous.

So what you are saying is....."Hundley could have been worse"?

 

[Dantés]

Dolphins prepared to move on from Matt Moore as their backup.

 

[Mondio]

Keenum is lightyears better than Hundley. Drastically superior. I posted this a few days ago in a different thread:



As for how they can improve on the backup situation, Fitzpatrick, Anderson, and Moore are all guys who should accept backup money and would be big upgrades on Hundley.

Keenum wasn't taking this team anywhere either. the second the pressure is on the offense and you put him under pressure it's over. It was clearly on display the past 2 games. Pass on Fitzpatrick, seen enough to know he can lose a game all on his own, many times. I can't claim to have watched Moore. anyway, if any of them want to come compete for a million bucks or less, bring 'em on board. 5+ million a year, better put that money elsewhere.

 

[Dantés]

Keenum wasn't taking this team anywhere either. the second the pressure is on the offense and you put him under pressure it's over. It was clearly on display the past 2 games. Pass on Fitzpatrick, seen enough to know he can lose a game all on his own, many times. I can't claim to have watched Moore. anyway, if any of them want to come compete for a million bucks or less, bring 'em on board. 5+ million a year, better put that money elsewhere.

Keenum isn't some world beater, but there is no argument that he was vastly superior to Hundley in 2017.

Completion %:

• Keenum: 67.6
• Hundley: 60.8

YPA:

• Keenum: 7.4
• Hundley: 5.8

YPC:

• Keenum: 10.9
• Hundley: 9.6

TD%:

• Keenum: 4.6
• Hundley: 2.8

INT%:

• Keenum: 1.5
• Hundley: 3.8

Avg. Air Yds:

• Keenum: 5.9
• Hundley: 4.7

AYA (Net yards - sacks):

• Keenum: 7.03
• Hundley: 3.71

Now stats aren't everything, but the eye test confirmed all this and more. And this is really a resounding edge in Keenum's favor-- it's not like these are small margins. And while Keenum no doubt had the better defense to bolster the unit, Hundley had plenty of offensive support. Green Bay's offensive line is better and their pass catchers are good. Their running game was above average in 2017, and had their best moments while Hundley was starting. He had help; he just wasn't good enough to do anything with it. Keenum had help and was good enough to make the whole thing go.

I would certainly sign off on a veteran backup at ~5M+ for the next two seasons before Rodgers' next extension would kick in. If AR should miss a few games again, I don't want to see the entire season in peril because his backup is turning in the worst QB play in the NFL. If they don't go that route, they had darn well spend a pick somewhere in the top 3-4 rounds on a guy to push/replace Hundley.

 

[Mondio]

his numbers were better, I don't think he's that much better. He doesn't move well, he doesn't have a strong arm and he doesn't make great decisions. I'm not arguing that Hundley is the answer so I'm done with the argument before I start to sound like that's my position. But if it's Fitzpatrick for 5 million or roll with Hundley, i'll take Hundley and hope they put a better team around him and Rodgers doesn't get hurt. I'm sure someone is going to be brought in to compete with Hundley, i'll be disappointed if there is not. and we do have good pass catchers, but they didn't always catch it for Hundley either.

 

[gemoran4]

If the Broncos acquire Kirk Cousins, I wouldn't mind seeing if we could acquire Paxton Lynch for peanuts. I know he's been about as underwhelming for a 1st round pick as you can get, and supposedly hasn't exactly been popular in his locker room. But I do think he has talent, and for his $1.3 million salary i believe next season it might not be a bad idea to stash him as a cheap reclamation project. Siemian would be too expensive, and frankly I wouldn't touch Osweiler with a 50 foot pool. Granted this wouldn't ease my worry one bit if Rodgers were to go down, but still just spitballing.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Sometimes you get what you pay for and that can hold true for the QB position. I'm still less disappointed in Hundley himself than I am with the Packers for not having a better understanding of what he was or wasn't capable of.

It will be up to the Packers to decide if Hundley's play can be improved and his ~$700K salary is satisfactory for the #2 spot in 2018. If TT was still calling the shots, I could see him drafting a QB late rounds or finding an UDFA and staying "pat" on Hundley. It will be interesting to see what Gute does.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Crazy how the two teams in the nfc championship game were using backup QBs, foles for the eagles and keenum for the vikes, just kinda shows how important that backup qb spot actually is.

Those teams made it to the NFCCG because the roster around their backup quarterbacks is vastly superior to the Packers'.

Hard for me to fathom after the season we just went through how some people want to downplay the importance of having a quality backup QB. Would the Packers have been playing in the Super Bowl this year had Keenum or Foles been their backup QB when Rodgers went down? Maybe, maybe not, we will never know.

I'm absolutely convinced the Packers wouldn't have made it to the Super Bowl with either Foles or Keenum starting.

I would certainly sign off on a veteran backup at ~5M+ for the next two seasons before Rodgers' next extension would kick in.

I agree with Mondio that there's no reason to spend $5 million on a backup quarterback with the team in desperate need of improvement at various other positions.

 

[Dantés]

Those teams made it to the NFCCG because the roster around their backup quarterbacks is vastly superior to the Packers'.



I'm absolutely convinced the Packers wouldn't have made it to the Super Bowl with either Foles or Keenum starting.



I agree with Mondio that there's no reason to spend $5 million on a backup quarterback with the team in desperate need of improvement at various other positions.

I don’t think the one is to the exclusion of the other.

 

[Mondio]

I'd love to have a better back up QB, i'm just not sure where he comes from. Draft or unknown, we're going to be in the same position as we were with Hundley. Odds are that even if good, they need experience and growing pains before we see it. That doesn't help much. Go with a Vet? more cost and most have shown they can't get it done well either. I've seen all these guys single handily lose games for their teams. Even Foles took a few games before he got comfortable and luckily for them, they had a strong team around him to keep them going or maybe they drop a couple and aren't playing at home for the Playoffs of have a bye week to get him ready for the next game, which BTW, seemed to really get him going as they were able to take a break see what he did well and not well and build a new game plan around that for the playoffs.

The problem with GB this year, and like other years, it always seems to be something. Defense could play acceptably at times, Hundley even played acceptably in a few games, but then other people or positions would fail. We got a running game, then the running back got hurt. It took williams a game or so and he came on and then we'd fall behind or we lost every other RB to injury for the game and you can't run the ball 30 times when you have 1 RB available for a game. Or the defense, or pass catchers couldn't catch, or Hundley just couldn't put a ball where it needed to be.

When playing with a backup, any back up, the team has to step up. They didn't. I'd say the Run game and oline seemed to, but there were still issues within that. But outside of those 2 units everyone else seemed to step back.

anyway,

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm absolutely convinced the Packers wouldn't have made it to the Super Bowl with either Foles or Keenum starting.

I was referring to the difference of having Foles/Keenum VS. Hundley during the time Rodgers was out. Either one of those QB's may have helped the Packers to win a few more games, which would have put them in the Playoffs with Rodgers back at QB. Would the Packers team have been good enough, even with Rodgers back to have gone on and still be playing next Sunday? I doubt it, but few gave them a shot in 2010 to go all the way through the playoffs on the road.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don’t think the one is to the exclusion of the other.

With the salary cap in place it's not smart to pay a backup quarterback $5 million while having a starter making more than $20 million.

 

[Dantés]

With the salary cap in place it's not smart to pay a backup quarterback $5 million while having a starter making more than $20 million.

I see that argument, but they had better either bite the bullet and do that or spend a top 100 pick on a QB to replace Hundley. If Rodgers should happen to miss time again, it is unacceptable to burn another season because his replacement is the worst starting QB in the league for those weeks.

My thought was that a two year deal on a veteran would be tenable, as a Rodgers' extension and higher cap number would not necessarily kick in until 2020.

 

[Mondio]

Either can work if the situation calls for it. At this point, this team would have won a few more games with Hundley and a better supporting cast too. Better around the QB will make this team better for whoever is playing QB. I see them needing to draft and plug well this next year, we'll be in the mix, but really push for it next year. If they can continue to get development from some young guys and hit on a 2 picks at important positions, Pass Rusher, DB on defense or another lock down tackle on offense, let the older contracts expire and hit the FA heavier next year or keep that vet QB then when this team is actually in position to win it all, go for it. This year? I'm just not seeing it. Our team needs to have changover and grow with some offensive and defensive guys. We aren't drowning in cap, but we don't have a lot of funds to be tossing around either.

Get this team in position with the right choices and growth this year, spend some more next year. Until this team is more solid all the way around, and with 11-12 draft picks to pick, move, bundle and trade whatever, we should be able to get some really solid players picking in the top half the draft for the first time in a long time. see what we have, then get the FA's after they know what they've picked. A season like this in the NFL, we'll compete for a Super Bowl next year, but i'm not expecting it. We could really position ourselves well, balanced on both sides with a year of work.

I just don't see any backup taking this team as it sits very far, but if everyone else is better, maybe.