Mike McCarthy: Who follows the Green Bay Packers coach?· Page 3

beast
Select Member

9 years ago

I'm not saying Hundley is a lock, I'm saying he's got a high ceiling.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I agree that Hundley has a very high potential ceiling, but also a very low floor... he could boom or bust. I think he's going to need at least two years (really I'm thinking 3 years) to develop at the very least... of course it didn't it take Rodgers two years?

But the Packers history with Mike McCarthy as head coach of drafting QB hasn't been good (Rodgers was before Mike McCarthy got here) and Mike McCarthy reportedly was part of the group that got the 49ers to draft Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers because he saw their skills as about equal and thought Smith could move better/faster.

nerdmann
Premier Member

9 years ago

#22

Originally Posted by: beast

Aaron wasn't shit before Mike got here. Ted hired Mike BECAUSE he needed him to develop Aaron.

I mean Ingle Martin? Really? lol

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

beast
Select Member

9 years ago

#23

Aaron wasn't shit before Mike got here. Ted hired Mike BECAUSE he needed him to develop Aaron.

I mean Ingle Martin? Really? lol

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

You missed the point... MM's then team (49ers) could have drafted Rodgers, Mike McCarthy has admitted he wanted Alex Smith more... now Mike McCarthy has joined the Packers and other than Flynn all the drafted QBs have sucked...
Mike McCarthy might be a good developer but he also might be a poor scouter.

Fans seem to question most position picks, unless Packers have proven success (WR position under TT) but I don't get why QBs get thought of as such a sure thing of success when most of them have busted including one in the second round (TT's best round)

As far as Hundley/Martin comparison, they have more in common than you might think. Both are about 6'2.5", 223 lbs, ran about a 4.64 in their 40 yard dashes and lit up the combine events as their athletic potential (at least for a QB) is great... and both their biggest questions are more about their the mental side to the game and can they mentally adjust or not.

I don't know if mentally Hundley can adjust or not, but seems like a lot of athletic QBS go bust for some reason. .. hopefully Hundley will buck that trend and become great for the Packers.

nerdmann
Premier Member

9 years ago

#24

You missed the point... MM's then team (49ers) could have drafted Rodgers, Mike McCarthy has admitted he wanted Alex Smith more... now Mike McCarthy has joined the Packers and other than Flynn all the drafted QBs have sucked...

Mike McCarthy might be a good developer but he also might be a poor scouter.

Fans seem to question most position picks, unless Packers have proven success (WR position under TT) but I don't get why QBs get thought of as such a sure thing of success when most of them have busted including one in the second round (TT's best round)

As far as Hundley/Martin comparison, they have more in common than you might think. Both are about 6'2.5", 223 lbs, ran about a 4.64 in their 40 yard dashes and lit up the combine events as their athletic potential (at least for a QB) is great... and both their biggest questions are more about their the mental side to the game and can they mentally adjust or not.

I don't know if mentally Hundley can adjust or not, but seems like a lot of athletic QBS go bust for some reason. .. hopefully Hundley will buck that trend and become great for the Packers.

Originally Posted by: beast

Maybe I'm wrong, but I never looked at Ingle Martin as a serious potential starter. Never thought he had the arm. Thought he had more potential as a punter.

Hundley could very well wash out, but imo he's got a high ceiling.

Mike did recommend the Niners to take Alex Smith. There were issues with Aaron coming out in the draft. But even though Aaron was arguably the weaker of the two prospects, look what Mike has subsequently done with him.

It wasn't just Mike who liked Alex Smith better. Remember what happened to Aaron in that draft?

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (5m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (25m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (34m) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (45m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (4h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (5h) : Packers will get in

beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS