Brett Hundley depreciation thread

[TransientTexan]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

If TT had so much cap space, why didn't he sign a competent, veteran backup QB to protect the modern game's most important position? It looks like TT's model is to go with two QBs, with the backup being a young developmental type. He's been burned twice now. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" seems to apply to TT here.

Because he already spent it on other positions as previously mention. You have to actually look at the numbers instead of just assuming they have billions more space. 

And say they can squeeze in one yr of QB cap hit by squandering all the one-time-use rollover $. What happens the year after that? Same vulnerability & ppl are moaning that we wasted all this money on a QB that sits on the bench instead of a starting position that could help Arod win a SB. The realities of scarcity of resources in this league require taking gambles here and there. Sometimes they fail. It’s not abnormal.

[TheOnlyThing]

The rest of you can DEPRECIATE Brett Hundley all you want, but Mike McCarthy believes in Brett Hundley: 'This kid has it'

http://packerswire.usatoday.com/2017/10/26/mike-mccarthy-believes-in-brett-hundley-this-kid-has-it/

[Mr. Fussnputz]

Just now, NormSizedMidget said:

We did the old veteran guy thing last time this happened.

It's not about not having a veteran or having one. Neither time we had a good player. That's the issue. Not that have to be old or young.

I'll concede that point. Don't care about the age, so long as he's competent enough to play .500 ball if Rodgers has to go out for any reason.

[Norm]

Just now, Mr. Fussnputz said:

I'll concede that point. Don't care about the age, so long as he's competent enough to play .500 ball if Rodgers has to go out for any reason.

I get the logic. The veteran would likely have played pro ball enough that you'd know what they were more or less. I'm totally fine if the guy back there is still developing as long as he isn't a bum like Hundley. Both can work. That's where I was going with that is all.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

3 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

Because he already spent it on other positions as previously mention. You have to actually look at the numbers instead of just assuming they have billions more space. 

And say they can squeeze in one yr of QB cap hit by squandering all the one-time-use rollover $. What happens the year after that? Same vulnerability & ppl are moaning that we wasted all this money on a QB that sits on the bench instead of a starting position that could help Arod win a SB. The realities of scarcity of resources in this league require taking gambles here and there. Sometimes they fail. It’s not abnormal.

And I'll concede the point about cap space too. But I won't concede the fact that QB is NOT the position to gamble with in the modern, passing heavy NFL.

[Pugger]

1 minute ago, TheOnlyThing said:

The rest of you can DEPRECIATE Brett Hundley all you want, but Mike McCarthy believes in Brett Hundley: 'This kid has it'

http://packerswire.usatoday.com/2017/10/26/mike-mccarthy-believes-in-brett-hundley-this-kid-has-it/

What the hell else is he gonna say publicly, my QB sucks?   Ted and Mike thought they could mold him into a serviceable backup but they couldn't.  Big freaking deal!  It isn't like we drafted this guy in the first or second round.  

[Norm]

Just now, Pugger said:

What the hell else is he gonna say publicly, my QB sucks?   Ted and Mike thought they could mold him into a serviceable backup but they couldn't.  Big freaking deal!  It isn't like we drafted this guy in the first or second round.  

These guys get so triggered when Mike doesn't call people out publicly

As if he just watched that game and went wow he's a great QB!! I hope they don't really believe that. You'd have to be awesome stupid to do so.

[Acrid Josher]

2 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

The rest of you can DEPRECIATE Brett Hundley all you want, but Mike McCarthy believes in Brett Hundley: 'This kid has it'

http://packerswire.usatoday.com/2017/10/26/mike-mccarthy-believes-in-brett-hundley-this-kid-has-it/

It's called "Handling the Media." Coach's job isn't to tell you and I and the rest of the fans and media the truth. Hold him accountable for Hundley and the product on the field all you want, but let's not pretend we think he's giving us his real opinions at the podium. He doesn't, and frankly we shouldn't want him to.

"Well it's ******* donkey balls, Jason. Do you expect us to make the playoffs with a backup? Any backup? I sure don't!" "Really, Tom, you think I'm happy going from a Hall of Famer to the nice guy in the meeting room who hasn't started a meaningful game in the NFL? This kid isn't ready to salvage an NFL season, let alone with more than a game or two in half a season without big help from everyone else. Hell, I prayed every night his day would never come but here we are with no choice."

[TheOnlyThing]

Just now, Pugger said:

Ted and Mike thought they could mold him into a serviceable backup but they couldn't.  Big freaking deal!  

I agree Ted & Mike failed to mold Hundley into a serviceable backup.

And, if the goal is to win NFL games, I also agree that their failure has turned into a "Big freaking deal!" in 2017.

[TransientTexan]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

And I'll concede the point about cap space too. But I won't concede the fact that QB is NOT the position to gamble with in the modern, passing heavy NFL.

Not starting QB. We’re talking backups. It’s a luxury, regardless of position.

[Norm]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

And I'll concede the point about cap space too. But I won't concede the fact that QB is NOT the position to gamble with in the modern, passing heavy NFL.

Maybe not you. But if we spend IDK 5+ million on a true established backup QB and then Rodgers doesn't get hurt all the cry babies will point to what FA we could have had instead that could have helped on offense or defense.

 

[Norm]

1 minute ago, TransientTexan said:

Not starting QB. We’re talking backups. It’s a luxury, regardless of position.

The genius Patriots just traded theirs. Granted the got a vet..a ****ty vet but a vet.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

2 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said:

I get the logic. The veteran would likely have played pro ball enough that you'd know what they were more or less. I'm totally fine if the guy back there is still developing as long as he isn't a bum like Hundley. Both can work. That's where I was going with that is all.

Yes, that's the key. Hundley was a gamble, because he had no track record. Keeping him on the 53 (as a game day inactive) as a development player, I would have no problem with, so long as a competent backup (young or old) was also kept. I think someone earlier said competent backup QBs were expensive. There's a reason for that. They're valuable. Why are they valuable? Look at the Packers' record over the last four games. Now look at the Vikings (my most hated team!). They have invested in Case Keenam, Teddy Bridgewater, and Sam Bradford. They have suffered numerous injuries at the QB position, BUT they are leading the division.

[Pugger]

3 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

I agree Ted & Mike failed to mold Hundley into a serviceable backup.

And, if the goal is to win NFL games, I also agree that their failure has turned into a "Big freaking deal!" in 2017.

It isn't the end of the damn world our backup QB isn't what we all thought he was.  Now we can address this position going forward.  Thank the good lord we still have our HOF QB waiting in the wings to return in 2018.  There are a couple of teams out there that are in much worse shape than us.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

2 minutes ago, Pugger said:

It isn't the end of the damn world our backup QB isn't what we all thought he was.  Now we can address this position going forward.  Thank the good lord we still have our HOF QB waiting in the wings to return in 2018.  There are a couple of teams out there that are in much worse shape than us.

Hopefully what has been learned by TT is to get a backup with a proven track record. It shouldn't be too hard to find one with a better track record than Hundley's. I had such great hope for Hundley.