Why would you say this? What if they continue to look the way they have since Hundley has been playing and don't win another game? At that point, differentiating between the Packers and the Browns in just splitting hairs. Let's hope that doesn't happen.
Originally Posted by: DoddPower
The Browns are 0-7, averaging 14.7 points/game scored and 24.1 points/game allowed
In 2016 the Browns were 1-15 with 16.5 points/game scored and 25.3 points/game allowed.
The Packers lost the last game by a score of 26-17. This is 2.3 points scored over the Brown's average scored this season and 1.9 points allowed over the Brown's average this season. With a sample size of one, the Packers are outperforming the Browns with possibly the worst performance this team has put up this century. This is status quo for the Browns.
The only possible way you can say that the Packers will be as bad as the Browns is if you expect this exact same performance from the entire team (not just Huntley) for the rest of the year, and for this to carry into subsequent seasons under the hypothetical scenario where Huntley stayed starter the entire time and into next season. I don't feel like I should need to explain any further why this hypothetical is ludicrous and even if nothing changed on the roster or coaching staff and we continued to play like we did last week, how the Packers would outperform the Browns in every meaningful metric.