A completion rate of 60% (according to NFL stats the #15 QB is at 64%. I ignored the first 6 who had 1 pass/ 1 completion.)
A QB rating of 90. Same issue. The mid-line is 91.5 and I rounded down.
Avg 200 yards per game. He's off to a slow start but the bar is set so low that he should be able to do it. # 28 QB is Jacoby Brissett and he is at 201.3
Avg 1.5 passing TDs a game.

Who's with me?

I think Hundley is gonna meet the above criteria, and that barring injury, the team will be 9-7 or better.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Not with you. I think the Hundley experiment is going to fail for same reasons Trubisky struggles in Chicago. Our WRs aren't very good at creating separation just like Chicago's. Deshaun Watson would have trouble excelling in our O. He's the hottest QB in league because he has speed at WR. Pair a great QB with a great speedy WR and you get Watson and Fuller. Pair an average to below NFL QB and WRs with average speed and you get Hundley and GB WR corps.

Yes , beast, I'm just thrilled this is how it is. Only been screaming about need for speed at WR forever. That lack of speed is going to doom us in the step down to Hundley. The GOAT was truly making chicken salad out of chicken "crap".

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

The routes and play calls is the biggest reason for "lack of separation". Packers are mainly along the sidelines/backshoulder and verticals with deep crosses. Getting open deep has been a result of double moves not speed.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

If you believe the above, how do you explain Watson and his WR's torching Seattle at Seattle and Aaron Rodgers barely moving the offense vs. Seattle here at home? If you're going to attribute it to it being Week 1... show me a game the Packers have played out in Seattle recently where we remotely had that kind of offensive performance? Watson just that much better than Rodgers...or...could it be SPEED? The speed of the Texans vs. the pedestrian nature of our WR's in the speed department?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

How do you explain when the Vikings beat the Packers, Bears beat the Vikings, Detroit beats the Bears and Packers beat the Lions? Some teams match up better to other teams.

McCarthy's play calling has been somewhat predictable. And as I stated it is a lot of verticals with deeper crosses. A lot of sideline routes. A lot of bubble screens. He depends on players beating the guy across from them, not scheming guys open. I would also ask, how much of the Packers passing success has been the result of Free plays, and busted plays where Rodgers scrambles to create time.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

When it comes to the first paragraph... How? Match ups. Some teams match up better with others just like you noted...but...why? WHY is the most neglected word on a Packers forum. Nobody seems all that interested in that word and it's everything.

Houston matched up great with Seattle's secondary due to mobile QB who has speedy WR's. Ever seen any QB do to them what he did in Seattle? I watched most of that game. It was UNREAL. Watson SHREDDED them as if they were even worse than our secondary. It was a thing of beauty. Will Fuller can fly. Our WR's can not fly. Makes it very easy for Legion of Boom when they face us. That's the matchup. The SPEED differential.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

The Legion hasn't won in GB. Speed works on turf. On natural grass not so much.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins