Packers should get good price for Brett Hundley· Page 3

Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)

sschind
Senior Member

6 years ago

Matt Moore and Ryan Fitzpatrick mentioned as possible backups for Rodgers according to some"scouts" who talked to Pete Dougherty

Originally Posted by: gbguy20

I'd take either one. I'd rather have McCown but he may actually get a chance to be the starter somewhere. Maybe one of these teams drafting a QB will want him to sit for a year and McCown would be a good choice to come in for a year while the rookie learns. Although Moore might be the type of guy you can sign for 3 years at a reasonable price and not have to worry about the position. Draft a rookie this year or next and bring him along slowly...like maybe three years 😉

sschind
Senior Member

6 years ago

#22

Also sam Bradford. We'll see if any of them come cheap enough

Originally Posted by: gbguy20

What's cheap enough? would you rather pay next to nothing and get what you pay for or pay a little more and have a guy who might actually be able to win you some games if called upon. I know the Packers don't have a lot of money to spend but trying to go cheap here may come back to bite them.

Smokey
Veteran Member

6 years ago

#23

At this time, Hundley needs to remain GB's Backup QB and here is why.

1)Even an experienced replacement would need to learn McCarthys System, Hundley already knows it well enough to run the team.

2)The Packers now know what works best with Hundley at QB. Another QB would need to get real game experience before what works best with them could be compiled.

3) Hundley is not a Franchise QB, but very few Backup QBs are. Yet I saw him improve as he was called upon to step up for Rodgers. I could trust him to run the offense if #12 went down for a few weeks.

4)Keeping Hundley and Callihan is less expensive than gambling on another QB.

5)QB is not where GB's focus should be right now, the Packers need an Edge Rusher before anything else.

[nohair]

Cheesey
Preferred Member

6 years ago

#24

Hundley is lousy. Whatever they are paying him, is too much for what they are getting out of him.
I can see a guy having to come in cold after the starter goes down, and not playing great. But playing like crap game after game? Not acceptable in my view.
Like was said, you get what you pay for.
Other teams have decent defenses, and capable backup QBs. We should be able to do that too.
Time for the excuses to end.
JMO of course.

Smokey
Veteran Member

6 years ago

#25

Save for the Eagles Nick Foley, can anyone name a QB (free agent or draft) that GB can get, is =/-than what Hundley cost, and knows GB's System as well.

Hundley did not get the Packers to the Playoffs, but he QBacked the Packers to more wins than the Browns. Franchise GBs are hard to come by, be happy with a backup that can play at a backup level.

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

6 years ago

#26

Case Keenum came into Minny without knowing their system as did pretty good. The key is coaching. Foles didn't know the Eagles system that well and didn't look that great at first, but then they adjusted their offense to Foles' abilities. The same way the Chip Kelly used to use him. I am thinking signing a Fitzpatrick for a 2 or 3 year deal and you will be able to get him fairly cheap. He won a few games I believe this year when Winston went down. He is a bit hot and cold, but he is much better in my opinion than Hundley.

I always liked Chase Daniel. He is available as well. If Taysom is going to be the back-up in New Orleans I am guessing Chase will be available.

Smokey
Veteran Member

6 years ago

#27

Chase Daniel ? I had to look up this unknown superstar QB from Missouri. Yeah at age 31 he could be a real bargain. [confused]

Cheesey
Preferred Member

6 years ago

#28

"Knowing the system" and not being able to actually EXECUTE it is better then having a QB q with actual talent???
Ok....whatever you say....😂

I think the Packers should have given Randall Cobb a shot at QBing last year.

Porforis
Veteran Member

6 years ago

#29

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

I constantly hear people say that our #1 QB won't execute the offense so why does it matter if our #2 doesn't either? 😝

wpr
Preferred Member

6 years ago

#30

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

Sorry Cheesey. Tossing the ball about 100 times in college (Most of them as a Freshman in 2008 before moving full time to a WR) doesn't warrant making the move to NFL QB. That's almost 10 years ago.

Mike isn't stupid. If Randall had shown any aptitude as a QB he would have been given a lot more opportunity since coming to GB. More than likely Cobb wasn't good enough to be the starting QB in college which is why he was moved to WR. The 2 players that were ahead of Randall at KY didn't make it in the NFL either.

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

beast (2h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status

Zero2Cool (2h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : That was terrible.

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.

beast (2h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent

beast (2h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime

beast (3h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing

Zero2Cool (3h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is

Zero2Cool (4h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true

beast (4h) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management

wpr (6h) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.

Mucky Tundra (14h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago

beast (15h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years

Zero2Cool (21h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.

packerfanoutwest (21h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it

beast (22h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done

Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.

Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

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

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS