DarkaneRules
6 years ago
Neither QB completely set themselves apart. They all have things that need to be worked on. The pocket awareness is an issue, but I do think he was the most overall consistent QB of the 3, by just a bit. Boyle was not playing against the same level of talent but he made some plays, for sure. Now let's see whose stock rises and falls over the next few weeks.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
beast
6 years ago

Neither QB completely set themselves apart. They all have things that need to be worked on. The pocket awareness is an issue, but I do think he was the most overall consistent QB of the 3, by just a bit. Boyle was not playing against the same level of talent but he made some plays, for sure. Now let's see whose stock rises and falls over the next few weeks.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 



With Hundley, the thing I see as the biggest problems, is that he can't balance looking down the field and pocket awareness, and as soon as he gets hit... he's all about pocket awareness and can't throw the ball.

Before getting hit, Hundley was doing very well, the only problems were that he was throwing behind the receivers so that had to stop and wait on it some to get there but that's not uncommon in a back-up QB and that he had no pocket awareness.

But after the hits, he was being aware of the rushers and kept throwing 10 feet over receivers.

The major problem, is that his first problem (no pocket awareness), leads him to getting hit and focusing on pocket awareness, which leads him to the second problem (not being able to throw a catchable ball for a number of passes afterwards) and the cycle just keeps repeating, because once he can regain focus on down the field, he's lost all pocket awareness again.
UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
6 years ago
All true. Kizer wasn't great though and Boyle made a couple decisions that show his inexperience. The high throws from Hundley were the things that stuck the most to me as far as the bad goes. 3 weeks to sort this out.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
beast
6 years ago
I really like the potential that Boyle showed, it reminded me of Kurt Warner, but I don't think Boyle is ready yet to be the #2 QB (and remember he's going against 3rd stringers at best and maybe not going to make the rosters). But I think Packers.com's Mike Spofford said it best


Kurt Warner played in Mike Martz system which was largely based on deep 7 step drops and deep WR routes, which gives pass rushers more times to get to the QB, which is why Martz's QBs were often injured or struggled or Interception prone. Kurt Warner would stand tall, knowing he was gonna get nailed and throw very good passes. Boyle did that at least twice, where there was fairly clearly a blitz coming up the middle with no blockers left and he stood there and delivered a very good deep pass.

Hundley nor Kizer have shown us that yet. Kizer clearly sees it and runs... IF Hundley sees it... he either runs or throws up a lame duck pass that's going no where.

It's very weird, as far as back-up QBs throwing goes, our current #2 (Hundley) is the most ready to play now, but might have the lowest ceiling of all of the QBs, and our #4 QB (Boyle) might be the least ready now but might have the highest ceiling. Though I think Kizer has great awareness and running ability which help a lot at QB and I think they're still adjusting Kizer's feet or throwing motion or something, because he didn't look as good as he did last year. Or maybe still adjusting to the system.

Edit: Just saw this, which confirms that they're adjusting Kizer's footwork


But it's an interesting question... do you go with most ready now? Or the highest ceiling? Mix of the two?
UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
6 years ago
Yes!!! That's been the struggle. I mean my gosh... how many times has a coach had at least 3 guys and said DAMN if I could just put their strengths together into one player!

Ready now / lower ceiling: Hundley
Still needs a year of development / higher ceiling: Kizer
Highest ceiling / lowest experience: Boyle
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
6 years ago


But it's an interesting question... do you go with most ready now? Or the highest ceiling? Mix of the two?

Originally Posted by: beast 


Highest ceiling. GB has their starting QB so they don't need the most ready QB as their backup.

If Aaron goes down for the season with a QB who is the most ready to play it's a lost season as we saw last year.
If Aaron goes down for the season without a QB who is ready to play it's still a lost season but you have a QB who is moving closer to his full potential.



UserPostedImage
beast
6 years ago

Ready now / lower ceiling: Hundley
Still needs a year of development / higher ceiling: Kizer
Highest ceiling / lowest experience: Boyle

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 


I'm not sure about highest ceiling. As the first preseason game I would agree with Boyle, but Kizer might have an even higher ceiling when he's got his footwork down and has fully adjusted to it. Mike McCarthy said they're adjusting Kizer's footwork and it was completely different than what they teach, which is probably why Kizer looked a lot better last year then he did in the 1st preseason game... IF Kizer can adjust, his ceiling is pretty dang high too.


Highest ceiling. GB has their starting QB so they don't need the most ready QB as their backup.

If Aaron goes down for the season with a QB who is the most ready to play it's a lost season as we saw last year.
If Aaron goes down for the season without a QB who is ready to play it's still a lost season but you have a QB who is moving closer to his full potential.

Originally Posted by: wpr 


Great Point. So I'll probably be choosing Kizer and Boyle in a mock roster.

UserPostedImage
nerdmann
6 years ago
Mike's system works the drop backs and the footwork into the passing game, relative to the play call. It incorporates a ton of fundamentals, uniquely combined in this system. That's gonna take a year for Kizer to really get down. This is the reason Hundley might still make the team, although he clearly seems to have a lower ceiling.

I think Hundley has the skills, he just can't get into the zone. He's still out there thinking too much, just the way Mike taught him.
“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
6 years ago

Highest ceiling. GB has their starting QB so they don't need the most ready QB as their backup.

If Aaron goes down for the season with a QB who is the most ready to play it's a lost season as we saw last year.
If Aaron goes down for the season without a QB who is ready to play it's still a lost season but you have a QB who is moving closer to his full potential.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Well I thought you made a great point... based on what Mike McCarthy said, I think he disagrees with you and is looking for the highest floor as his #2 back-up. Which basically he's saying Kizer and Boyle have a long way to go with their footwork if they want to make it. So I guess (sadly) we're going to be keeping Hundley as the #2 QB.

Maybe like Mike Holmgren went for highest floor cutting a certain future hall of fame QB that wore #12 before Rodgers.

UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
6 years ago

Well I thought you made a great point... based on what Mike McCarthy said, I think he disagrees with you and is looking for the highest floor as his #2 back-up. Which basically he's saying Kizer and Boyle have a long way to go with their footwork if they want to make it. So I guess (sadly) we're going to be keeping Hundley as the #2 QB.

Maybe like Mike Holmgren went for highest floor cutting a certain future hall of fame QB that wore #12 before Rodgers.

Originally Posted by: beast 



No surprise.
1 HCs have a long history of saying one thing and doing the opposite.
2 It's his job that's on the line. If it were mine perhaps I would look at the short run too. Aaron goes down I might want the person who has the best chance to win today.
3 There is more than one reason I am not a HC anywhere.

UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
beast (22m) : 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 (23m) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (34m) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (45m) : 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 (55m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (1h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (1h) : 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 (1h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (2h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (2h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (4h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (4h) : 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 (5h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (5h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (5h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (5h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (5h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (5h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (5h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (5h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (5h) : 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 (5h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (5h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (5h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (5h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (5h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (6h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (6h) : Packers will get in
beast (6h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (6h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (6h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (9h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (9h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (9h) : 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 (19h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
45m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.