Brett Hundley Round 5

[Labs1983]

I will say I don't understand trading up for a player you hope never takes the field

This is my first of hopefully many posts on the Forum. One aspect of Hundley being drafted, that has not been discussed, is having Hundley as the scout quarterback gives the defense a better simulation of Wilson, Kapernick or Newton than Flynn or Tolzien could ever produce. It's not THE reason Hundley was drafted but it will be a nice perk.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This is my first of hopefully many posts on the Forum. One aspect of Hundley being drafted, that has not been discussed, is having Hundley as the scout quarterback gives the defense a better simulation of Wilson, Kapernick or Newton than Flynn or Tolzien could ever produce. It's not THE reason Hundley was drafted but it will be a nice perk.

Welcome to the forum Labs and a good posting to start your first of 1,000's

I agree with you, a QB that can simulate what those QB's you listed do in actual games will be handy.

We had Graham Harrell at one time to simulate the way Cutler played (panic throws to other team) but he is long gone!

 

[TJV]

This is my first of hopefully many posts on the Forum. One aspect of Hundley being drafted, that has not been discussed, is having Hundley as the scout quarterback gives the defense a better simulation of Wilson, Kapernick or Newton than Flynn or Tolzien could ever produce. It's not THE reason Hundley was drafted but it will be a nice perk.

Welcome! It hasn't been discussed in this thread but it was here:

Enter Hundley. He has the physical tools, but having played in that spread offense, he has a lot to learn. I doubt he'll leap frog Tolzien in 2015. But he has a solid chance to move to #2 in 2016 with Tolzien's contract up. In the mean time, Hundley can bring spread/option offense concepts to the scout team in preparing for those pesky teams that like to run this stuff. We do play Seattle and SF this season, after all, with QBs that have a history of giving us fits.

https://www.packerforum.com/threads/draft-themes.60008/#post-609057

 

[Half Empty]

We have some tweeners in this draft. Montgomery could be placed as a #4WR and #3 RB..... Cobb or Kuhn running the ball is an option too, should one of our big two RBs were to get hurt....
The rookie DBs, coupled with Hyde, seem to be able to cover multiple positions.
Mathews still moving around.
Guion, Neal can play multiple positions. A lot of mid-range D-linemen. We might have to drop one or two, if Rookie Ringo comes in and plays great.
We have two top TE's too. I bet we only keep 3 total?

The final cuts are going to be painful IMO.

When is the last time you remember any Packer forum NOT agonizing over the last few cuts?

 

[OldSchool101]

I hope I can be open with everyone when I say due to my aging and my short term memory waning with the moon, that I'm just elated we are back to 2 QBs named Brett and Matt. It's so much easier this way

 

[RRyder]

I hope I can be open with everyone when I say due to my aging and my short term memory waning with the moon, that I'm just elated we are back to 2 QBs named Brett and Matt. It's so much easier this way

Flynns not signed and prolly wont be so your stuck with a Aaron, Scott and a Brett. No Matt. Sorry

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Flynns not signed and prolly wont be so your stuck with a Aaron, Scott and a Brett. No Matt. Sorry

The Packers have signed Matt Blanchard who played for UW-Whitewater. He's a long shot to make the team though.

 

[ivo610]

http://www.espnwisconsin.com/common/page.php?feed=2&id=21011&is_corp=1

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

I'm with the posters here who believe Hundley was too expensive (two draft picks I believe) to move up for. Usually TT does the reverse. The only thing that makes sense, at least to me, is that this is a vote of "no confidence" for Tolzien.

And then Blanchard comes along and plays surprisingly well. But will TC and pre-season play be enough for the Packers to cut Hundley and go with Rodgers, Tolzien, and Blanchard? That seems very unlikely absent a trade. What seems likely, if Blanchard continues to play well, is that they hope Blanchard clears waivers and stash him on the PS. Seems Blanchard has a better chance of clearing waivers than Hundley. And in any case, I don't see TT cutting a guy he traded up for?

I think TT is not convinced Tolzien is the guy to backup Rodgers. Thankfully, as Captain points out, Rodgers has been very durable since staring. But backup QB is critical to this team as we saw two years ago. I think in the next year or two the backup will be Hundley or Blanchard, not Tolzien. I'm sure that will draw some forum fire, but it's just me speculating.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hopefully we won't have a repeat of 2013 when Rodgers went down and the 2 guys behind him (Wallace and Tolzien were ineffective). I have more confidence in Tolzien now then I did then and I have to believe that was why Flynn was let go. I don't think Hundley or Blanchard are even near ready to run the offense, so keep our fingers crossed that both AR and ST stay healthy during pre-season. If not and Flynn heals up, we may see him back in GB as insurance at the #3.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm with the posters here who believe Hundley was too expensive (two draft picks I believe) to move up for. Usually TT does the reverse. The only thing that makes sense, at least to me, is that this is a vote of "no confidence" for Tolzien.

And then Blanchard comes along and plays surprisingly well. But will TC and pre-season play be enough for the Packers to cut Hundley and go with Rodgers, Tolzien, and Blanchard? That seems very unlikely absent a trade. What seems likely, if Blanchard continues to play well, is that they hope Blanchard clears waivers and stash him on the PS. Seems Blanchard has a better chance of clearing waivers than Hundley. And in any case, I don't see TT cutting a guy he traded up for?

I think TT is not convinced Tolzien is the guy to backup Rodgers. Thankfully, as Captain points out, Rodgers has been very durable since staring. But backup QB is critical to this team as we saw two years ago. I think in the next year or two the backup will be Hundley or Blanchard, not Tolzien. I'm sure that will draw some forum fire, but it's just me speculating.

Rodgers actually has been injured quite often during his time with the Packers and it's only been two years since he missed half of the season. The Packers completely messed up the backup QB situation in 2013 and it seems they learned their lesson.

IMO Tolzien is a decent backup and selecting Hundley doesn't necessarily mean Thompson doesn't have any confidence in him. Most likely there's no way Hundley makes it to the practice squad, so the Packers will keep him on the 53 with Blanchard the odd man out

As I've posted repeatedly I didn't like Thompson giving up two picks on Hundley.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

Rodgers actually has been injured quite often during his time with the Packers and it's only been two years since he missed half of the season. The Packers completely messed up the backup QB situation in 2013 and it seems they learned their lesson.

IMO Tolzien is a decent backup and selecting Hundley doesn't necessarily mean Thompson doesn't have any confidence in him. Most likely there's no way Hundley makes it to the practice squad, so the Packers will keep him on the 53 with Blanchard the odd man out

As I've posted repeatedly I didn't like Thompson giving up two picks on Hundley.

Captain earlier you posted Rodgers has only missed 8 games and has not been injury prone. Above you say he's been injured quite often. Which is it, seems kinda contradictory.

I do agree that trading up for Hundley was a bad move.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Captain earlier you posted Rodgers has only missed 8 games and has not been injury prone. Above you say he's been injured quite often. Which is it, seems kinda contradictory.

It´s true that Rodgers has been injured quite often during his time with the Packers compared to other elite QBs as he suffered a broken foot in 2006, two concussions in 2010, a fractured collarbone in 2013 and a calf injury last season. In my opinion aside of the calf injury there was no way of preventing any of the others though and with none of them having reoccurred over time he shouldn´t be labelled as being injury-prone.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

It´s true that Rodgers has been injured quite often during his time with the Packers compared to other elite QBs as he suffered a broken foot in 2006, two concussions in 2010, a fractured collarbone in 2013 and a calf injury last season. In my opinion aside of the calf injury there was no way of preventing any of the others though and with none of them having reoccurred over time he shouldn´t be labelled as being injury-prone.

Thanks Captain that's a good recap. Yeah his injuries have been one-off things - foot, clavicle, calf - there's no pattern there. I guess it could be contrasted with players who seem to have chronic problems with a hamstring, like Hayward. That might not be the best example. But as you point out with ARod, a player can have suffered a number of unrelated injuries over time without being injury prone. Thanks.

As far as chronic injuries, it seems like hamstring comes up a lot and not just for GB. I've had problems with that, and Achilles tendinitis and the best preventive measure was stretching. A lot of players are benefitting from that. Still I don't know why hamstring injuries have become more prevalent. And maybe I'm overstating it. But a strained or partially torn hamstring is a big deal as far as time missed. I think Hayward missed nearly a whole season. Would be interesting to know what preventative measures are in place.

Anyway back to backup QB, yeah Tolzien will be the guy. I'm looking forward to his play in PS games now that Flynn's shadow is gone. As far as third QB, seems more likely it will be Hundley and hopefully Blanchard makes it to practice squad. Thank God the Seneca/Vince days are gone. That was a nightmare season and very un-TT.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Thanks Captain that's a good recap. Yeah his injuries have been one-off things - foot, clavicle, calf - there's no pattern there. I guess it could be contrasted with players who seem to have chronic problems with a hamstring, like Hayward. That might not be the best example. But as you point out with ARod, a player can have suffered a number of unrelated injuries over time without being injury prone. Thanks.

I think Perry is a prime example of a player being injury-prone.

As far as chronic injuries, it seems like hamstring comes up a lot and not just for GB. I've had problems with that, and Achilles tendinitis and the best preventive measure was stretching. A lot of players are benefitting from that. Still I don't know why hamstring injuries have become more prevalent. And maybe I'm overstating it. But a strained or partially torn hamstring is a big deal as far as time missed. I think Hayward missed nearly a whole season. Would be interesting to know what preventative measures are in place.

A lot of players have taken up yoga over the last few seasons to get more flexible.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

I think Perry is a prime example of a player being injury-prone.



A lot of players have taken up yoga over the last few seasons to get more flexible.

Perry is the poster child for injury prone.

 

[Croak]

I hope I can be open with everyone when I say due to my aging and my short term memory waning with the moon, that I'm just elated we are back to 2 QBs named Brett and Matt. It's so much easier this way

How cool would it be if we got back to 2 QBs named Bart and Zeke?

 

[Robert Mason]

What's the plan for Hunley ? The Packers don't usually keep 3 QB's on the 53 man roster.

 

[vince]

It looks like they'll need to this year. He looks like he could have a future. If he shows any more of the mobility, arm strength and command that he flashed in the first preseason game (and there's every reason to believe he'll only get better), he'd be gone quicker than the Vikings in the playoffs if they tried to slide him through - which they won't.

The Jets and a few other teams are wishing they had him right now.

 

[Robert Mason]

It looks like they'll need to this year. He looks like he could have a future. If he shows any more of the mobility, arm strength and command that he flashed in the first preseason game (and there's every reason to believe he'll only get better), he'd be gone quicker than the Vikings in the playoffs if they tried to slide him through - which they won't.

The Jets and a few other teams are wishing they had him right now.

Good insights.......Hundley could also be trade bait.

 

[vince]

Yeah but not this year yet. His value is the lowest it's likely to ever be right now. Give him a year or two to mature physically and develop an understanding of how to play QB at this level, slot him into #2 QB after Tolzien moves on next year, let him flash some more next preseason and in real games mopping up, let the scouting fraternity gush over the young QB who's endowed with all the tools one could want, and who's been schooled under the best in the business and coached up by the best in the business, and he could command some real value down the line.

That's a lot of speculation of course, but in any event, now's not the time to trade him IMO.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

What's the plan for Hunley ? The Packers don't usually keep 3 QB's on the 53 man roster.

The Packers kept three QBs on the 53 last season and they will do it again this year.