Where will we draft?

[HardRightEdge]

Actually the reason given - at the time, anyway, not sure about now - for being pessimistic about his chances of returning this season was something about tissues in the shoulder used for throwing. Apparently there were concerns his throwing motion, speed or velocity would be negatively affected. Apparently those concerns were put to rest by Michele Tafoya, who reported he was throwing during pregame warmups despite being on injured reserve.

I saw him throwing on the sidelines. That tells me nothing about his ability to return or the risks that the principles are willing to take.

 

[swhitset]

I did not type one. Those were quotation marks.

On topic, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks we should not be discussing top 20 picks yet.

There is no apostrophe used in the post you were referencing either lol.... so

 

[HardRightEdge]

FYI "Steelers loss" means the opposite of "loss to the Steelers."

The rules of the forum state we are not to quibble about such things when the meaning is clear.

[How did I do, mods?}

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I see no reason for AR to come back at all. Lets continue the tank and hope for a 15th Overall Pick at best. No need to risk the Franchise when the Defense will probably still get us bounced out in the Divisional Round.

I have a hard time understanding any Packers fan accusing the team of tanking after the way they performed at Pittsburgh.

Hundley right now is auditioning for his future as a starting QB elsewhere. Eli Manning just got benched, the Jags will look to move on from Blake Bortles, Denver is just looking for anyone who can at least manage a game, and the Cardinals are bracing for Carson Palmer's retirement. Hundley is showing some ability right now. Lets see if Thompson can fleece someone for hopefully at least a 4th or 5th Round Pick to invest in the Offensive Line.

There's no reason for the Packers to trade Hundley for a fourth or fifth round pick next offseason as the team would most likely receive a similar compensatory pick if he signs as a possible starter with another club in 2019.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

I have a hard time understanding any Packers fan accusing the team of tanking after the way they performed at Pittsburgh.

Forgive my choice of words.....the "proverbial tank" if you will, considering our initial aspirations for the season.

There's no reason for the Packers to trade Hundley for a fourth or fifth round pick next offseason as the team would most likely receive a similar compensatory pick if he signs as a possible starter with another club in 2019.

Key words: "Similar". I believe you have to ride the wave. Hundley looks better than a lot of back ups in my opinion, and we know for a fact that the NFL is starved at the QB position. Why settle for a 5th-6th when I can possibly fleece a desperate team for a 4th, or even a 3rd? Teams are going to ask about him leading up to the Draft; especially if their targeted QB in the Draft doesn't fall to them. If they want him, I make them pay.

 

[Poppa San]

If they want him, I make them pay.

Which is most likely why he is on the roster this season. No one met TTs price last off season.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Which is most likely why he is on the roster this season. No one met TTs price last off season.

Right, and I totally agree. But now, teams have a larger sample size on Hundley in games that actually count. Even though the Steelers game was a loss, Hundley made some plays and kept the team in the game. There's going to be some GMs and HC that are going to say to themselves, "Our backup QB can't do that...." Some teams in particular might say, "Our starting QB can't do that...." Perhaps the team(s) that was interested in Hundley last year that deemed Thompson's asking price too high might be more willing to play ball this year depending on their own QB situation and the first 10 picks of the 2018 Draft.

 

[swhitset]

The rules of the forum state we are not to quibble about such things when the meaning is clear.

[How did I do, mods?}

lol I assumed someone would

The rules of the forum state we are not to quibble about such things when the meaning is clear.

[How did I do, mods?}

Except that is exactly the point. The meaning was not clear. An argument was made that the two statements meant exactly the opposite of what was ASSUMED to be the intention. Forum rules or not ... the lack of an apostrophe in the word "Steelers" makes the sentence ambiguous and telling the original poster that his meaning was incorrect was in itself most likely incorrect because of it.

 

[HardRightEdge]

lExcept that is exactly the point. The meaning was not clear. An argument was made that the two statements meant exactly the opposite of what was ASSUMED to be the intention. Forum rules or not ... the lack of an apostrophe in the word "Steelers" makes the sentence ambiguous and telling the original poster that his meaning was incorrect was in itself most likely incorrect because of it.

See, you're doing it again. You knew what he meant in the first place and told him so.

The only question that remains is why I bothered.

 

[swhitset]

See, you're doing it again. You knew what he meant in the first place and told him so.

The only question that remains is why I bothered.

You are clearly confused... my correction is to the second poster that corrected the original poster. My claim is that his correction was incorrect and yes probably in violation of forum rules. So while I guess I could have just done As you did and said hey...that's a rule violation... but I furthered it by saying actually the correction is wrong.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You are clearly confused... my correction is to the second poster that corrected the original poster. My claim is that his correction was incorrect and yes probably in violation of forum rules. So while I guess I could have just done As you did and said hey...that's a rule violation... but I furthered it by saying actually the correction is wrong.

Evidently. And I regret all of it, the post where I was confused and the one where I wasn't. In fact, I regret this post.

 

[swhitset]

Evidently. And I regret all of it, the post where I was confused and the one where I wasn't. In fact, I regret this post.

lol for the record ... I'm just having fun with you... being intentionally obtuse.

 

[HardRightEdge]

lol for the record ... I'm just having fun with you... being intentionally obtuse.

I know. I regret that too. You get a "like" for the use of "obtuse". It always reminds me of the Tom Cruise line from "A Few Good Men". I think. If the reference is wrong, I regret that too.

 

[TouchdownPackers]

I have a hard time understanding any Packers fan accusing the team of tanking after the way they performed at Pittsburgh.

There's no reason for the Packers to trade Hundley for a fourth or fifth round pick next offseason as the team would most likely receive a similar compensatory pick if he signs as a possible starter with another club in 2019.

There is a significant difference when it comes to pick numbers. Compensatory picks are at the end of each round. A fifth round CP is much lower than a fifth round pick determined by team records. Would you rather get a CP next year or a future pick that is among the first 32 in the same round? If the team who wants Brett Hundley is in New York, the answer is obvious. The only question is what you would rather have, a higher pick in that round or a quarterback who already knows the system.

 

[HardRightEdge]

There is a significant difference when it comes to pick numbers. Compensatory picks are at the end of each round. A fifth round CP is much lower than a fifth round pick determined by team records. Would you rather get a CP next year or a future pick that is among the first 32 in the same round? If the team who wants Brett Hundley is in New York, the answer is obvious. The only question is what you would rather have, a higher pick in that round or a quarterback who already knows the system.

So, after suffering the growing pains of Hundley's on the job training you'd be willing to start all over and trade a year of Hundley's services to get a pick in the top of the 4th. round instead of the bottom?

That's pretty silly in my book.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If Hundley finishes the season well, there will be some teams inquiring about a trade with the Packers. The Packers would be silly to trade him and the one year that is left on his rookie contract for anything but a high pick (1-2) or a decent player. Trading him away at the end of the season would require the Packers to find a suitable replacement for him and I don't see Callahan or a rookie being suitable. Hundley could end up being much more valuable to the Packers next year, then a mid round draft pick, which they will get anyway, when they let him walk in Free Agency.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Hundley is sitting on a 1-5 record and a 73 passer rating. It is premature to discuss trade value. If he continues his up and down ways and doesn't win any more games his value will be zilch. If he finds consistency and wins some games then there will be something to discuss. It will take a dramatic, nae, miraculous improvement over multiple games to see an offer that would make it worthwhile.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hundley is sitting on a 1-5 record and a 73 passer rating. It is premature to discuss trade value. If he continues his up and down ways and doesn't win any more games his value will be zilch. If he finds consistency and wins some games then there will be something to discuss. It will take a dramatic, nae, miraculous improvement over multiple games to see an offer that would make it worthwhile.

Agreed. My comments were strictly based on "Hundley continuing to improve", which with more game experience, you would hope that he would. Silver lining in what will probably go down in history as a disappointing season, Brett Hundley finds himself a career and the Packers benefit from all of the snaps he is getting. Or he is selling used cars next year. Time will tell.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

There is a significant difference when it comes to pick numbers. Compensatory picks are at the end of each round. A fifth round CP is much lower than a fifth round pick determined by team records. Would you rather get a CP next year or a future pick that is among the first 32 in the same round? If the team who wants Brett Hundley is in New York, the answer is obvious. The only question is what you would rather have, a higher pick in that round or a quarterback who already knows the system.

EXACTLY!!!! A pick at the top of the 4th Round could be a player with possibly a late 2nd or 3rd Round Grade who slides for any number of reasons, versus the compensatory route which may be a guy who really does have 5th-7th Round talent and we pick him simply because he'll be gone by the time we pick again in the 6th also due to a number of reasons.

So, after suffering the growing pains of Hundley's on the job training you'd be willing to start all over and trade a year of Hundley's services to get a pick in the top of the 4th. round instead of the bottom?

That's pretty silly in my book.

If we had an OL that wasn't letting Pro Bowl LBs get a free shot at AR we wouldn't have to worry about "starting over" or "enduring" Hundley's lesser talents. I'd trade Hundley's "services" for TT going all in on the OL like he did at RB this past year and drafting a OT at the top of the 4th Round, an OG in the 6th, and a C in the 7th. It typically doesn't matter at the NFL level who you have throwing back there, if they've got 5-7 seconds to throw the ball.....

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

EXACTLY!!!! A pick at the top of the 4th Round could be a player with possibly a late 2nd or 3rd Round Grade who slides for any number of reasons, versus the compensatory route which may be a guy who really does have 5th-7th Round talent and we pick him simply because he'll be gone by the time we pick again in the 6th also due to a number of reasons.

Your point can be taken either way for any pick, in any round. You can get a dud in and round and any position in that round. A draft pick gives you the rights to a guy. That guy may turn into Pro Bowler some day or washing cars before the season starts. Of course it's better to have a "higher pick" but nothing in the draft is a guarantee.

What you do have to look at is what are you giving up by trading Hundley. You could be losing a guy who by next year is a capable #2 QB. AR isn't getting any younger. I would much rather delay the loss of Hundley for 1 year and lose 10-50 positions in the draft, then just trade him away and have to refind another backup. I think we can all see from this year, just how important that position is to the Green Bay Packers.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If we had an OL that wasn't letting Pro Bowl LBs get a free shot at AR we wouldn't have to worry about "starting over" or "enduring" Hundley's lesser talents. I'd trade Hundley's "services" for TT going all in on the OL like he did at RB this past year and drafting a OT at the top of the 4th Round, an OG in the 6th, and a C in the 7th. It typically doesn't matter at the NFL level who you have throwing back there, if they've got 5-7 seconds to throw the ball.....

As much as I was pissing and moaning about a lack of depth on the OL at the beginning of the season, the hit that knocked Rodgers out for the season, wasn't because of a crappy OL. Rodgers rolled out, probably held the ball too long and exposed himself to a LB that made a very good play.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'd trade Hundley's "services" for TT going all in on the OL like he did at RB this past year and drafting a OT at the top of the 4th Round, an OG in the 6th, and a C in the 7th.

You have a peculiar notion of "all in".

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You have a peculiar notion of "all in".

I think you "credited/discredited" the wrong guy for saying that

Definitely not my words or thoughts LOL

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think you "credited/discredited" the wrong guy for saying that

Definitely not my words or thoughts LOL

Sorry, man. I had some other stuff in the edit window and deleted the wrong part. I've fixed it.

I regret everything, as usual.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

As much as I was pissing and moaning about a lack of depth on the OL at the beginning of the season, the hit that knocked Rodgers out for the season, wasn't because of a crappy OL. Rodgers rolled out, probably held the ball too long and exposed himself to a LB that made a very good play.

Now you have to eat your own words. QBs, with the exception of Michael Vick freakish speed QBs, rarely will leave the safety of the pocket without good reason to. If you watch the replay, the line gave way roughly about 1.5 seconds after the ball was snapped. Rodgers was simply doing what he had to do by extending the play. A better OL should have made that just a simple 1-2 step drop and throw for the deep slant route to Jordy for an easy first down. Jordy was open after about 2 seconds and while I can't see the Safety, I'm willing to bet with all the LBs crashing down AR could have led him to an open spot with the ball.