Brett Hundley traded to Seattle

[Norm]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

I mean, I wouldn't even say it's that.  It's more about getting a potential long-term asset for someone you weren't planning on re-signing.  It's been clear since last year's draft that the Packers viewed Kizer significantly higher than Hundley, and they weren't going to re-sign so might as well open up a roster spot and get another pick.

Gute will just draft a guy who doesn't ever show up. 

[FinneasGage]

im such a gute fan 

[MacReady]

Just now, packfanfb said:

I couldn't care less about misleading QB ratings. Fact is, anyone who watched Hundley saw how below-average he played the position...to the point where Mike McCarthy, the king of flattery towards his own players, was forced to admit that Hundley "was not prepared" to be out there, a disconcerting statement from the guy who had been grooming you the last 3 years to provide servicable play when needed. 

For the love of God, if it's a "fact," as you say it is, there should be an excess of pure, unadultered, unarguable, cold hard facts to back this statement.  So do it. 

Instead of telling me I'm wrong as everyone wants to do here, prove it. 

Show me 50% of NFL backups who are clearly, indisputably better than Brett Hundley over the past 7 years.  Don't cite Nick Foles, one out of 32.  Don't cite Jimmy Garroppolo, 2/32.  Show me 16 players from ANY YEAR who were better at the backup QB position than Brett Hundley was for us.  Hell, go by last year.  Last year should be the easiest year in recent memory to be able to prove it.  You had Garroppolo and Nick Foles as gimmes.  So list 14 backup quarterbacks last year who were indisputably better than Brett Hundley.

PROVE IT.

[Norm]

2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

Was so worth it taking up that roster spot for Callahan, why not do it again?

Boyle****ingmania son

[TheOnlyThing]

7 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

 IF the Packers traded away Brett Hundley for a Day 2 pick before the 2017 draft, you have to replace him.  

Agreed.

And for those who believe Hundley's time in GB = success, I can see why they'd be against trading him at any time.

As for me, I could not agree more with Gute, it was time for Brett to go be a "success" somewhere else.

Great trade Gute.

[Norm]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

When did losing Taysom Hill become some big deal?

When he become an ESPN sensation

[Norm]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Now, what is your prediction for what's going to happen at WR?

We draft one in the first round next year then win it all! 

[Joe]

Go back to the Final 53-man predictions. I totally called this trade in my first rendition.

[Norm]

37 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

You could argue Hundley had no business making it this long either........but, I guess we don't need to go there. I'm just happy Seattle bit and gave up the pick. 

You really couldn't though.

[Packerraymond]

9 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

For the love of God, if it's a "fact," as you say it is, there should be an excess of pure, unadultered, unarguable, cold hard facts to back this statement.  So do it. 

Instead of telling me I'm wrong as everyone wants to do here, prove it. 

Show me 50% of NFL backups who are clearly, indisputably better than Brett Hundley over the past 7 years.  Don't cite Nick Foles, one out of 32.  Don't cite Jimmy Garroppolo, 2/32.  Show me 16 players from ANY YEAR who were better at the backup QB position than Brett Hundley was for us.  Hell, go by last year.  Last year should be the easiest year in recent memory to be able to prove it.  You had Garroppolo and Nick Foles as gimmes.  So list 14 backup quarterbacks last year who were indisputably better than Brett Hundley.

PROVE IT.

It's not worth it, all these people know is Favre and Rodgers. Anything normal in the realm of backup QB play is going to seem like garbage.

[Norm]

15 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I couldn't care less about misleading QB ratings. Fact is, anyone who watched Hundley saw how below-average he played the position...to the point where Mike McCarthy, the king of flattery towards his own players, was forced to admit that Hundley "was not prepared" to be out there, a disconcerting statement from the guy who had been grooming you the last 3 years to provide servicable play when needed. 

At no point in his career would he have been cut and been out of the league already. You're just wrong.

[packfanfb]

1 minute ago, Norm said:

At no point in his career would he have been cut and been out of the league already. You're just wrong.

You don't know that. Some teams give up on players faster than GB. We'll see how long he lasts in Seattle and whether he's still in the NFL after that. 

[Mr. Fussnputz]

1 hour ago, Beast said:

Yes, (and thank you for pulling those quotes of mine), Boyle is a very good 3rd QB. He's shown that he's willing and able to give WRs a chance at the ball even when his ball isn't on the money which is HUGE and way better than the over rated arm strength, which he just happens to have as well.

And I hate making huge comparisons, but there were too plays in the 1st preseason game where he reminded me of Kurt Warner, because he showed Warner-like trademark toughness, as a in-front blitzer was rushing towards him with no blockers between them and he stood high in the pocket and delivered a darn good strike pass even knowing he was about to get nailed. But Boyle maximum potential might up there like Warner's was... BUT he is not yet even close to maximizing that potential... and a lot of players never live up to their full maximum potential. I don't want this seem like I'm declaring him a the next Warner, just that he has the future potential if things work out just right (small percentage, but like he's passes, there is a chance to catch it and that's the most important part).

 

Earlier I also worried that cutting Boyle was possibly cutting the next Warner. Wow, did I get railed on for that! Not saying he's the next Warner, but so far he's shown the potential to be a solid NFL QB. 

[packfanfb]

13 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

For the love of God, if it's a "fact," as you say it is, there should be an excess of pure, unadultered, unarguable, cold hard facts to back this statement.  So do it. 

Instead of telling me I'm wrong as everyone wants to do here, prove it. 

Show me 50% of NFL backups who are clearly, indisputably better than Brett Hundley over the past 7 years.  Don't cite Nick Foles, one out of 32.  Don't cite Jimmy Garroppolo, 2/32.  Show me 16 players from ANY YEAR who were better at the backup QB position than Brett Hundley was for us.  Hell, go by last year.  Last year should be the easiest year in recent memory to be able to prove it.  You had Garroppolo and Nick Foles as gimmes.  So list 14 backup quarterbacks last year who were indisputably better than Brett Hundley.

PROVE IT.

It's hard to "prove" things that aren't measured by statistics like complete lack of pocket awareness, lack of ability to read a defense, lack of ability not to drop your head when your first option is taken away, etc. Hundley struggled badly at all of these observable things and really failed to improve on any of them throughout the season. No one expected him to step in and everything be status quo, but you'd expect some improvement. 

This is all supported by GB's actions this off-season. GB had zero reason to target Kizer in a trade if they had any confidence in the further development of Hundley. IMO, when they made that trade, Hundley, baring injury to Kizer, was done in GB. They simply waited, played him No. 2 all pre-season and hoped to find a team to bite, which just happened. GB simply did not see a guy that was worth keeping around and, as many people here have preached over and over again, you don't get rid of players who you think are developing in the right direction. 

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

You don't know that. Some teams give up on players faster than GB. We'll see how long he lasts in Seattle and whether he's still in the NFL after that. 

IDC about what he does after. That's not my argument. He was good enough to make it this long. Always was. He was not lucky to be in the NFL still based on play. Even if he isn't good.