Jump to content

The Hundley Debacle: Who's to Blame?


Greg C.

Recommended Posts

There's plenty of blame to go around.  The brass made the decision to back up the franchise qb with an unproven backup qb.  The head coach apparently didn't bang the table hard enough for an established veteran backup because he was sold on Hundley.  Then Hundley gets his big chance to show what he's got and falls pretty much flat on his face.  In the end it cost us a season.  Lets see if they are stupid enough to try that same game plan again in 2018.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Where was the money to sign Foles or Keenum?

Foles wasn't going to sign here, and neither was Keenum.  Both of those guys signed where they did because they knew the teams, got paid and there was a better chance of actually playing.  

This was the year of the backup QB.  This debate never comes up again.  Backup quarterbacks do not play the way they played this year.  All other years, that's why they're backups.  The best offensive coordinator in the league last year took over for the Rams, turned Goff into a pro.  Eagles OC went and got a wad coaching job.  Same thing for Keenum's.  Maybe if we didn't have an under qualified offensive coordinator, Hundley wouldn't have sucked quite so bad.  Or maybe if we had Burton and Ertz instead of Rodgers and Kendricks.  And on and on an on.

Going into this season...

We had literally zero reason to expect Hundley wasn't capable of being a competent backup.  By the time we realized he wasn't, it was too late.  Period.  End of discussion.  Anything else is revisionist history at best, lies and whining at worst.

You're right. "We" (as in us fans) had no reason to expect Hundley wasn't capable, but what about the coaches? They're pros, NFL coaches, the best of the best. They see the players in practices that are closed to the public. Shouldn't they (MM, etc.) be able to make the determination if a player is capable? I think it was a combination of MM's hubris and his stubbornness. MM's statement right after Rodgers was hurt that Hundley was his man, three years invested, no one else inside or outside the organization would be considered, still sticks in my head. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Fussnputz said:

You're right. "We" (as in us fans) had no reason to expect Hundley wasn't capable, but what about the coaches? They're pros, NFL coaches, the best of the best. They see the players in practices that are closed to the public. Shouldn't they (MM, etc.) be able to make the determination if a player is capable? I think it was a combination of MM's hubris and his stubbornness. MM's statement right after Rodgers was hurt that Hundley was his man, three years invested, no one else inside or outside the organization would be considered, still sticks in my head. 

Series of questions for you:

1. Is it or is it not possible for a player to perform better in preseason and practice than on the field?

2. Is it or is it not possible for a coaching  staff to tell when a player will perform far better in preseason/practice than in regular season games?

3. Did the coaching staff or did it not have the opportunity to see Hundley in meaningful game action before this season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

There's plenty of blame to go around.  The brass made the decision to back up the franchise qb with an unproven backup qb.  The head coach apparently didn't bang the table hard enough for an established veteran backup because he was sold on Hundley.  Then Hundley gets his big chance to show what he's got and falls pretty much flat on his face.  In the end it cost us a season.  Lets see if they are stupid enough to try that same game plan again in 2018.

Why would McCarthy bang the table for a different backup QB last offseason?  How much capital should we spend on this position when we have arguably the best player in the game?  Because there is a chance he gets  hurt?   You have to decide where you are going to put your money.   Nobody complained about Ted signing all those vets last summer even tho not one of them was a QB.  Perhaps they will get a vet QB this time but if another position gets hammered by injury we can't grouse about Gutey failing to bolster that position in FA if we end up paying a veteran QB instead.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

You're right. "We" (as in us fans) had no reason to expect Hundley wasn't capable, but what about the coaches? They're pros, NFL coaches, the best of the best. They see the players in practices that are closed to the public. Shouldn't they (MM, etc.) be able to make the determination if a player is capable? I think it was a combination of MM's hubris and his stubbornness. MM's statement right after Rodgers was hurt that Hundley was his man, three years invested, no one else inside or outside the organization would be considered, still sticks in my head. 

What else was MM gonna say, my backup sucks and we are screwed?  Who should have Ted tried to get at that point in the season?  #12 got hurt in week 6 and unless we made a trade there wasn't anyone out on the street other than Kaep that was better than Hunldey and nobody wants to bring that headache to poison their locker room.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't the VAST amount of training camp, practice reps get taken by QB1, aka Aaron Rodgers?  It's not a stretch to think that in the limited opportunities that Brett Hundley got to practice with the first team he looked decent and looked better playing with the twos and threes.  How about blaming the CBA that limits the amount of time players spend practicing thus back ups getting less opportunities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Series of questions for you:

1. Is it or is it not possible for a player to perform better in preseason and practice than on the field?

2. Is it or is it not possible for a coaching  staff to tell when a player will perform far better in preseason/practice than in regular season games?

3. Did the coaching staff or did it not have the opportunity to see Hundley in meaningful game action before this season?

1. yes

2. yes

3. no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Dubz41 said:

Cop out argument.  Neither of those teams had the money invested in their 'starter' like we did.  They could afford a better backup.

HZ is asking WHEN were we suppose to know that Hundley couldn't do the job and WHEN were we supposed to replace him with WHAT?

Your reply is inane.

Actually you are wrong. Aaron Rodgers had a 20.3 million dollar salary cap hit this past year. Hundley and Callahaan had less than a million combined. Sam Bradford had a 18 million salary cap hit and Keenum and Bridgewater were both over 2. Now I get it Hundley was suppose to be better than he was, but we never brought in competition for him. And we should never have cut Taysom Hill, that just added to the mistake of not knowing how Brett isn't a ready NFL backup that can start some games for you. New England paid Tom Brady more than we paid Aaron this past season and they still somehow managed to bring in Brian Hoyer. It’s hard to fathom losing Aaron Rodgers to a significant injury for a second year in a row, but as was the storyline throughout 2017: Without Rodgers, this team falters. Unlike Philadelphia or Minnesota, the Packers fans saw their starting quarterback couldn’t consistently find ways to score points. The chances Rodgers gets knocked out for extensive time again are rare. Even so, the Packers need to be better prepared in the event Rodgers goes down for a game or two.  And without googling Shaun Hill and Rober Griffin never were signed last year were they? You asked for names, I gave you two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

You're right. "We" (as in us fans) had no reason to expect Hundley wasn't capable, but what about the coaches? They're pros, NFL coaches, the best of the best. They see the players in practices that are closed to the public. Shouldn't they (MM, etc.) be able to make the determination if a player is capable? I think it was a combination of MM's hubris and his stubbornness. MM's statement right after Rodgers was hurt that Hundley was his man, three years invested, no one else inside or outside the organization would be considered, still sticks in my head. 

I couldn't agree more. Actually I remember a game that Hundley came in and all he did was handoff in a blowout or something. I remember saying a couple years ago when this happened that they should have run the offense instead of just handing off, a great practice, observation and scouting chances were all missed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

1. yes

2. yes

3. no

Okay, not following here.  It's possible for a player to be better in preseason and practice than in regular season games, and it's possible for a coaching staff to know for a fact how well or how poorly a player will play in regular season games without seeing them in regular season games.  How is that possible? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Series of questions for you:

1. Is it or is it not possible for a player to perform better in preseason and practice than on the field?

2. Is it or is it not possible for a coaching  staff to tell when a player will perform far better in preseason/practice than in regular season games?

3. Did the coaching staff or did it not have the opportunity to see Hundley in meaningful game action before this season?

You are asking the wrong questions. Life is shades and colours, not monochrome.

Question 1 would have to be answered yes by anyone, so it isn't much of a question. If the odds (of this being true) were 100 to 1 on (bet £100 to win $1) or if they were a billion to one against, the answer is the same. Too black and white to be of any real use.

For question 2, the answer is not a yes or no answer, because it is time dependent. For the Packers to stil be unaware of a players capabilities (at the most important position) when he is in his third season, I find that hard to credit. The most important part of a coaches job (McCarthy said) is to be teachers. If a school teacher was unaware of a pupils ability, after having him in class as long as the Packers had Hundley, they would be deemed incompetent, especially as the Packers have a HC and coordinator to oversee the offense, including what the 'pupil' is doing when the position coach is teaching.

Question 3. All action is meaningful. Classroom teaching and viewing videos of onfield work, practice and coaching on the field, scrimmages, preseason action. All of this builds a coaches view of what a player can do well, and what he does poorly. It is not only 'meaningful games' that tell the story, it is everything. By season 3, the coaches should have had enough information to have a very good idea of how Hundley would perform, if Rodgers went down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OneTwoSixFive said:

You are asking the wrong questions. Life is shades and colours, not monochrome.

Wrong.  You just don't like the questions because they don't fit your argument.

Question 1 would have to be answered yes by anyone, so it isn't much of a question. If the odds (of this being true) were 100 to 1 on (bet £100 to win $1) or if they were a billion to one against, the answer is the same. Too black and white to be of any real use.

Wrong.  It's a simple question, and it's a yes or no question.  All your rambling and evading the question won't change that.  Truth is, it is a fact that players can perform better in practice than on the field.  Happened with Hundley, happened with Jones, it happens.  Period. 

For question 2, the answer is not a yes or no answer, because it is time dependent.

No, it's a yes or no answer.  You're really doing a whole lot of complaining over this one issue.  It literally isn't possible for a coaching staff to know how a player will perform in regular season games if they have never played in regular season games.  Literally.  They can guess and speculate, but they can't know.  Based on everything management and our coaches knew about Hundley, he was capable of performing.  He didn't perform.  Period. 

Question 3. All action is meaningful. Classroom teaching and viewing videos of onfield work, practice and coaching on the field, scrimmages, preseason action. All of this builds a coaches view of what a player can do well, and what he does poorly. It is not only 'meaningful games' that tell the story, it is everything. By season 3, the coaches should have had enough information to have a very good idea of how Hundley would perform, if Rodgers went down. 

It's ironic that you say this because all of that "onfield work, practice and coaching on the field, scrimmages, preseason action" that you mentioned, Hundley thrived in.  Where is the disconnect here in your mind that makes you write this paragraph immediately after writing the other paragraphs?  Based on all of that information, Hundley was not only capable of doing well, but thriving.  Leading into this season, there was so much hype from our staff and from Packer writers that Hundley was going to fetch us a first or second round draft pick.  That hype doesn't happen if he's throwing turds in practice or showing incompetence. 

The bottom line is that you want to blame the coaching staff and management when there's no blame there.  Hundley was incapable of performing in meaningful action after showing through three years that he was capable of doing well in practice and preseason.

Our coaching staff did not miss this throw to Jordy Nelson.

DN_lqdnUIAAPq1P.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OneTwoSixFive said:

Rigged questions are like rigged elections, they don't give a real result.

I'd love to see you try to come up with an argument for:

1. Who we were supposed to have gone to instead of Hundley.
2. When we were supposed to have gone to them.
3. What that would have cost us.
4. How they would have done any better than Hundley.
5. How our coaching staff was supposed to know heading into this season that Hundley wouldn't be perfectly capable of performing well after performing well in practice for three years and three seasons worth of preseason playing time.

I'd really love to see arguments for all of those things instead of one sentence bickering posts where you refuse to acknowledge the very valid points I'm making and instead use roundabout logic to insinuate my points aren't valid without any logic or reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...