Cory's Corner: McCarthy finally lets Hundley be comfortable

It took the egotistical coach five games before Brett Hundley was allowed to be himself.  

It’s about time Packers coach Mike McCarthy figured it out.

It took the egotistical coach five games before Brett Hundley was allowed to be himself.

Which of course, begs the question, who exactly is Hundley? Well, for starters, Hundley cannot throw the ball down the field accurately. And he is still having trouble getting comfortable in the pocket.

But there is one thing Hundley can do very well, and that’s run the read option. Now, there are two reasons that McCarthy was against this. First, he thought he could turn water into wine and second, the Packers have the receiving personnel to be a passing team.

So after seeing Hundley register three games where he tallied a sub 90 passer rating, it was time for a change.

And McCarthy and Hundley delivered. Hundley looked like he was still playing in the Pac-12. He was sidestepping defenders and actually looked relaxed as the Packers won ugly with a 26-20 overtime win over Tampa Bay.

How ugly? Well, Hundley had 84 passing yards against the worst passing defense in the NFL. It wasn’t just bad. It was downright dreadful.

“I don’t really care how we got it done, but we got it done,” Hundley said, who is now 2-4 as a Packers’ starter. “That’s all that matters.”

But give McCarthy credit. He saw that things weren’t going well through the air for Hundley. So he dialed up a little read option. Say what? That doesn’t usually happen in the NFL because teams don’t want their quarterbacks to take unnecessary shots.

But Hundley has a different poise as runner. He ran for 66 yards, including three runs of at least 10 yards. You may have felt like you were watching the game in black and white with the way the Packers were running the football with a whopping 199 team rushing yards. It was also the fewest passing yards in a win since Brett Favre threw for 82 in 1994.

“Whether you need to run it or pass it, I’ve always felt that you need to do both and frankly since Aaron (Rodgers) was injured and whether it was the day of or the day after, I made it clear that all three phases need to play better or play different,” said McCarthy. “And that was different today. And at the end of the day, we did what we had to do to win the game.”

And getting the win was important. Many people were saying that Hundley was leading a high school offense. What difference does it make? The Packers got a win and still have a playoff heartbeat.

That says a lot for a team that appeared to be dead and buried after a 23-0 home loss to Baltimore two weeks ago.

The Packers aren’t quitting.

It showed what they are willing to do in order to scratch out a win. It’s a week-to-week league and the Packers have a mountain to climb by winning all four of their remaining games.

But at least they don’t care what it looks like. 

-------------------

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (81)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
sheppercheeser's picture

December 05, 2017 at 06:14 am

I don't buy into Hundley's read/run option. GB beat a terrible team that had an injured QB and it took overtime to even do THAT! I just don't see a future with Brett. I still think we've seen enough of Hundley to give Callahan a shot.

0 points
0
0
Archie's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:47 pm

Taysom Hill shall be a name that lives in Packer infamy. It would take an idiot HC and GM to let him go when the best you had behind 12 is BH. Man, reeks of stupid.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 05, 2017 at 03:00 pm

Only to a very select few Packer fans.

Pretty soon, he'll be remembered on the same level as Ronnie McAda or Jay Barker

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

December 06, 2017 at 05:36 am

Is this the same Archie that vehemently argued to me several years ago on ALLGBP that Morgan Burnett was a horrible player? His player assessment skills haven't improved much.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:22 am

This board needs an "eye roll" emoji.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 05, 2017 at 05:40 pm

Best comment by far

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 05, 2017 at 06:43 am

"The Packers aren’t quitting."

This is no doubt true. And that is why I give McCarthy credit. His teams never really quit on him and often play some of their best football when their back is against the wall.

But he gets no credit from me for anything regarding Hundley. Hundley stinks and the mess falls on him to at least some degree. If he tried to convince TT someone else was necessary, he didn't try hard enough.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:22 am

"If he tried to convince TT someone else was necessary, he didn't try hard enough."

Thompson is in charge of building the team, McCarthy is in charge of coaching. That's not to say McCarthy doesn't have some influence, but Ted's the man. If I have any question about this I just think back to the end of the 2015 season at McCarthy's press conference. If you recall McCarthy had to go public with his plea to get a damn TE for his offense. Thompson FINALLY heard him and signed Cook for 2016 (3 1/2 years after Finley was injured BTW..But hey, what's the hurry).

Cook in 2016 showed exactly what a speedy, big, athletic TE could do with a QB like Rodgers in MM Offense and Ted let him walk. Thompson did try and go out a give McCarthy even more in 2017 but why did he even mess with it in the first place?

Thompson does what he wants no matter what, period. Now we're seeing the results of what Ted wants.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:41 am

Yes ,a TE position that is in even worse shape than before Finley. Maybe worst ever.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 05, 2017 at 03:18 pm

Yes, Nick, I understand that you blame TT for everything, including the cold front that hit Wisconsin today. You don't really need to say it anymore. I'll just assume it. Ok?

Other people that look at the fact that TT has a large staff of subordinates, including MM, and draw the more logical conclusion that those people probably serve a purpose beyond drawing a paycheck and occupying an office. They probably give him advice, reports, anecdotes and other tidbits of info. And he acts upon it. Or not.

MM is the guy that was in the best position to know all about Hundley. He was the QB guru. So he takes the bulk of the blame for his awful performance with me. You're welcome to be consistent and blame Thompson. It's what you do. It's not what I do.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 06, 2017 at 02:12 am

So, by logical extension, Whitt was in the best position to know whether Casey Hayward could play boundary CB at a high level. Presumably, he and Dom Capers advised TT when Hayward became a FA. [Hyde and Peppers are really different situations. Hyde was solidly behind Dix and Burnett. Peppers probably just wanted to play his final season at home. Plus, he is now playing as a 4-3 DE, a better fit than as an interior DL, and Carolina's front 7 is both very talented and has been remarkably healthy: the starters in the front 7 have missed just one game. These things might explain why Peppers is having such a fine season. I also note that Carolina's two CBs and Safeties have missed just 5 games total so far.]

I just don't have access to enough information to make an informed judgment about whether the primary fault lies with position coaches, coordinators, the HC, or TT, for Hundley and Hayward, and it appears since it is unclear, blame never focuses on one party. Yet something is rotten on this defense; I think the talent has holes at OLB and CB. Many suggest that others have done more with less, but I don't know if I buy that for the pass rushers. Of the OLBs, only Perry has pass rush as a strength to his game (when he isn't wearing a club most of the time).

I try, like I think you do, Hank, to consider each case on its merits. I, like you, blame MM for the Hundley love, but I don't know for sure. I just don't have enough information to know for sure. When blame gets off the merry-go-round this off-season and attaches itself to some person or persons, I probably won't "know" if the aim was accurate. I might have an opinion or feeling, but I won't know.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 06, 2017 at 06:21 am

I'm not sure how much logic there is in extending the same weight to the CBs coach as the Head Coach when it comes to the GM making roster decisions. Further, the Hayward, Hyde and Peppers situation were more directly about cap management in addition to assessing the players ability to play.

I suppose signing a veteran QB to replace Hundley would have cost them some cap so there are indirect cap ramifications. But really, I think the answer is they need to cycle through more QB draft picks ala Wolf/Holmgren. Wolf picked a QB in 7 of 9 drafts, He spent a 1 to trade for Favre. TT has picked one in 5 of 13 drafts, including 3 of his first 4 (Rodgers, Ingle Martin, Brohm & Flynn). Since then, it was just BJ Coleman and Hundley. The lack of emphasis on drafting a steady flow of QBs is something I put on Thompson at the same time I put the belief that Hundley was an acceptable backup more on McCarthy. Like you said, each case has different merits to consider.

Still, I do agree that that it is mostly about opinion, especially considering how tight-lipped the Packers organization is when it comes to these types of things.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

December 06, 2017 at 06:06 am

No need to get nasty Hank, I've never gotten nasty with you even though you refuse to place any responsibility for the shape of the Packers on Thompson. Ted T is the General Manager of the Packers. Unlike the the Chiefs or Seahawks for example he has FINAL say over ALL roster decisions, McCarthy really has very little to do with it IMO. Like I mentioned above just look at the TE position or how about the RB position before Eddie Lacy? Thompson has a history of priors of leaving this team basically bare at certain positions.

I have a new one for you too. If you want to see a mess waiting to happen just look at the WR position NEXT YEAR. It was obvious Nelson had seemed to lose another step this season even when Rodgers had played. He was his typical awesome self in the Red Zone but he was averaging under 10 YPR even with Rodgers. Lets assume D Adams is resigned. I ask you then what will they do? Obviously the Packers can't keep 3 WR making $10 million plus on the roster at once. Of those 3 are any even Top 15 in the NFL? The Packers are getting ready to extend the best QB in the NFL right? Well who in the hell is he throwing the ball to? No TE, maybe one top 15 WR. Can Nelson pick up where he left off with Rodgers once he turns 33 next season? That is a mess just waiting to happen and one that's been developing for two years.

It's not just me placing the blame on TT either. Turn on talk radio, sports TV, or read any number of football sites and they've all placed a huge amount of the blame on Ted Thompson. I'm sure Ted has a plan to surround Rodgers with a team he won't have to CARRY by HIMSELF real soon. Just like he has for the last few years.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 06, 2017 at 07:08 am

Nick,

Like I said, you don't need to tell me how you think everything TT touches turns to crap. I certainly didn't need to read about a "new one". I could have easily guessed it on my own.

BTW..I do listen to sports talk radio. And I hear what I consider to be a much more balanced opinion about TT. Despite the words you put in my mouth, I am well aware that he makes mistakes. He does some good things, too.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 06, 2017 at 07:57 am

Interesting, Hank. What we know now is that Hayward can play boundary CB at a high, maybe elite, level. This isn't the Hundley situation either: GB had Hayward for 4 years AND was able to watch him play real NFL regular and playoff games. It is a colossal mis-evaluation of talent by SOMEBODY. Probably by multiple people, but I don't have enough information. Remember, GB did have Hayward play boundary, but he got displaced by Randall, and was moved to the slot, where the coaches gave Hyde more snaps than Hayward. I watched part of the Cleveland-LAC game: I wouldn't have recognized Hayward if not for his name on his jersey. When Capers demoted Hayward to backing up or splitting snaps with Hyde in the slot, I infer things from that.

I don't know if Whitt was screaming bloody murder that he could get Hayward to be a star, or if he said that he couldn't reach/coach Hayward up. IDK if Capers moved Hayward based on his actual production in games but still had a high opinion of his talent. I do think that if TT didn't at least ask MM, and particularly Capers, and probably Whitt since he is supposedly a highly valued, highly respected, long-tenured coach, a CB guru, for their opinions on whether to re-sign Hayward, TT should probably be fired right now. Perhaps he should speak with his director of pro personnel and/or Russ Ball. This isn't some gigantic, extremely hierarchical organization: I assume if Whitt or Capers felt strongly about a player about to become a FA, they could get a word in edgewise into TT's ear. I assume that happened. It better have happened. If not, if TT sits in his ivory tower not taking input from those most closely involved with the player, that would be a black mark in my book.

I don't think anyone should be fired for one personnel mistake. Very few players have gone to other teams and excelled. I don't know what a GM is to do if his coaching staff to a man tells him that they can't get any more production out of Hayward, that he's reached his ceiling in GB. His choices would be to fire some or all of the coaches, or make a decision on the player with that advice, the GM's own opinion, and the cap in mind. And due to lack of information, I can't put the demerit in any one person's personnel file (except perhaps TT's, who makes the final decision), because the blame-merry-go-around is a moving target.

0 points
0
0
nostradanus's picture

December 05, 2017 at 06:44 am

This should have been the plan from the start. Anyone who watches pre-season football could see that Hundley is not a pocket passer and is surely not Aaron Rodgers.
Hundley is a nice kid, smart, athletic and suited well for the read option, so why not. If McCarthy wasn't so stubborn the Packers might be at 8 & 4 instead of 6 & 6 with their season on the brink. Great coaches put players in the best position to succeed, they do not try to fit a square peg in a round hole. Many of us have called for this from the start, it was very obvious what Hundley's talents are and McCarthy should have adapted sooner.
Also the decision to keep Callahan who has absolutely no upside, over Taysom Hill who is a supremely talented athlete is one that may haunt the Packers for years to come. Sometimes these GM's and Coaches have such ego's they are blinded by it.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:01 am

They did not keep Callahan over Hill. They didn't want to keep 3 QBs on the active roster so they cut both of them. Hill was claimed on waivers, Callahan was not. So they re-signed Callahan to the PS.

That decision is not haunting them now nor is it likely to haunt them in the future. They'd be facing the same problems with Hill as with Hundley. Except they'd be doing so with an older player.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:14 am

<<Thumbs up>>^10

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:20 am

Hank is right about the post training camp series of events. If Mike and Ted were a little sharper they would have cut Hundley and Callahan and kept Hill on the active roster as the backup. It sickens me to hear Sean Payton say that they have their future QB in the building. Meanwhile we are realizing the potential that took 3 years to groom as our plan B. Total fail.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:36 am

People are making waaaaaaay too much out of this "New Orleans loves Taysom Hill" thing. Virtually every coach and every team is going to say how much they love "their guy." Heck, the Packers said it about Brett Hundley, but that didn't make it true. Yet somehow everyone takes it for granted that Taysom Hill is a sure-fire Hall of Famer, no questions asked.

Anybody else remember when half of the posters on this board were suggesting that GB could trade Hundley for a first rounder and maybe even more?

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:49 am

I'd be willing to put $5 down right now that says Taysom Hill is a FA at some point between now and week 1 of 2018.

0 points
0
0
Slim11's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:27 am

I'm not so sure.

Hill is doing something to increase his value to the Saints by playing STs. Joe Theismann played STs with the Redskins before getting a legitimate opportunity to play QB. It worked out pretty well for him. It might work out for Hill.

If Sean Payton is serious about Hill, they won't let him go.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:45 am

"If Mike and Ted were a little sharper they would have cut Hundley and Callahan and kept Hill on the active roster as the backup."

That's easy to say in hindsight. People keep saying that they should have known that Hundley didn't have it. The question is, how? He had one outstanding preseason and one average one, missed another with injury. That's still a more thorough resume than either Hill or Callahan.

People say that they see him in practice every day, why haven't they figured this out? Well, nobody said he CAN'T throw the ball in practice. Maybe he looks really good there...there's a term for this in baseball: the 3-o'clock hitter. He's the guy who looks really good in BP but can't hit a lick when facing live fire. Remember also that the #2 QB usually gets only about a quarter of the practice snaps once the regular season starts...and ARod is someone who, aside from collarbones, always plays. Assessing your backup QB becomes more complicated.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:16 am

So you are saying it is unlikely that with 3 years of training camp and practice to assess whether a guy can effectively play in this league.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:32 am

What I'm saying is that I can envision HOW a player, who didn't get live snaps in regular season games, could make it this far without revealing what he really was. The other side of the coin is that the coaching staff hasn't done him many favors since he was forced into action.

Really, I'm trying to understand it myself.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:58 am

Fair enough.

0 points
0
0
Archie's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:53 pm

If 3 years of watching a QB train isn't enough to give you a good idea of his strengths and weaknesses, then no amount of time is and I just can't believe that. Hell, MM liked Alex Smith better than AR. That tells you everything you need to know. And TT tried his best to trade the pick away rather than draft him. Clean house time in GB.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 06, 2017 at 02:48 am

Brees has $18M in dead money that accelerates into 2018 for NO doesn't re-sign him. I think their QB is indeed in the house, and it is Brees.

I don't know how much NO likes Hill, but it seems somewhat more likely to me than not that he never throws a pass in an NFL regular season game than that he does.

As for Hundley, the more preseason games he played, the less I liked what I saw. By cutdowns, I wrote on this site that Hundley might fetch a 6th round pick, and that I would not give a 5th for both Hundley and Callahan.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

December 06, 2017 at 06:07 am

It is interesting that a quixotic attempt to promote Taysom Hill caused Archie to resurface. Could Archie's real motivation be that he just really does not like seeing an African-American quarterback on the field? Seems likely.

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:04 am

Hundley is a qb who can't throw the ball. He gets lucky every now and then. What's he doing as AR's backup for 3 years?

I doubt saving the read option for the end of the game to surprise Tampa was in the game plan. MM probably couldn't risk having Hundley get hurt until it didn't matter anymore. But it worked. Will it work this week against Cleveland if they put a spy on him? I doubt MM will call read options unless they get desperate again.

Don't tell Cleveland but the Packer game plan will be - all receivers run deep to clear as much field for Hundley/Williams/Jones to run. If this was any other team besides Cleveland, Hundley would have nowhere to go. Williams and Jones getting the opportunity of a lifetime. If only the defense stepped up a bit more, I could see getting a little excited to make the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:26 am

The aggregate stats show that Cleveland is decent stopping the run (6th in yards allowed) and 17th in passing yards allowed. Total defense? They're 10th in yards allowed per game. In terms of points allowed, they're 26th, but that's because they have a TO-prone offense that puts them in bad situations (last in +/- at -19) and a defense that just doesn't force TOs.

"Don't tell Cleveland but the Packer game plan will be - all receivers run deep to clear as much field for Hundley/Williams/Jones to run."

If I were the Browns, against Hundley (not having watched them a lot, so admittedly not knowing their tendencies), I would play a lot of man coverage, single high safety, and load the box. I wouldn't care if the Packers were running go routes all day because they haven't shown a propensity to complete those passes with #7 chucking it. If I'm the Packers, I'm running out of the gun or the pistol all day with 11 or 10 personnel and spreading the field.

I'm expecting an ugly grinder of a game on Sunday, but if the Packers don't turn the ball over, they've got a reasonable chance of winning because Cleveland will turn the ball over.

0 points
0
0
JLab3's picture

December 05, 2017 at 06:59 am

Hundley is all over the place for sure but the fact remains the Packers defense is not anywhere near playoff quality. We've been watching this for years and despite a number of high draft choices it never seems to improve. The idea that Rogers can return and vault this team to anything other than "one and done" playoff status seems far fetched given our consistent inability to stop the opposition.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:05 am

The problem with the read option is if they over do it teams will figure it out and that too will become stoppable.
Also defenses have started to take legal shots on QB's when they run the read option. It opens your QB up to extra hits.

I think moving forward they need to do it a little more read option, but can't live and die with it. The run game is the best part of the offense currently. Its the most reliable. They need to focus on the run game and playing off of that. Doing some read option, doing misdirection type of stuff.

They had a great play late in the game where they crossed the RB's and Hundley threw it to Williams which turned into a pretty nice gain. The reason why Williams was as open as he was, was due to the misdirection which caused the LB's to hesitate.

Creating open receiving options for Hundley is something McCarthy has to do. Hundley isn't good enough to throw receivers open nor is he able to anticipate WR's getting open.
McCarthy has his work cut out for him trying to get the most out of Hundley.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:27 am

"The problem with the read option is if they over do it teams will figure it out and that too will become stoppable."

I don't think they'll have to overdo the read option for teams to adjust. My bet is that Cleveland will be ready for it and game-planning to stop it. They're remarkably good against the run, but that might also be because they are pretty lousy stopping QBs. Whatever the case, the Packers surprised Tampa with the read option this week. It's about all they really did to gain chunk yardage. As long as #7 is the QB, the R-O isn't going to surprise any of the remaining teams on their schedule.

"Doing some read option, doing misdirection type of stuff."

This is where the coaches earn their money. Can they figure out something clever to do based on the likelihood that teams will be looking for the R-O?

I hate R-O football, by the way.

"Creating open receiving options for Hundley is something McCarthy has to do. "

They will have to throw this week to beat Cleveland and Hundley needs to figure out how to throw the ball downfield without throwing it up for grabs. I just don't see them winning on the legs of their run-game. They need to make things automatic for him...in the days of QBs playing under C, it was the old 'three step drop and chuck it' style of play. Keep the ball down. Move the chains.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:39 am

Yeah, i think teams are going to prepare hard for the read option now.

Honestly Hundley just has to make good the throws he needs to. And take off running when he needs to. He has to hit wide open WR's. Like the one to Allison. He has to make that throw.

I think McCarthy has done a decent job of adjusting the offense. But they need to do more. Scheming guys open would help Hundley a ton.

While they may not be able to run for hundreds of yards, they need to stick with it. Keep the defense honest.

On a sidenote I saw your profile picture.

http://www.lifeasan.asker.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Keep-calm.png

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:02 am

"On a sidenote I saw your profile picture."

OH, YEAHHHHH!!!

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:07 am

I think there are two takeaways from this season:

1) First off, Hundley isn't a NFL backup QB. Can he be developed into one is the bigger question.

2) The Second observation from this season is that the Packers don't have the talent they need to win a SB. When you realize that their injuries point to a situation where they are depending on UDFAs to win....it's not a good thing.

This next year the Pack has to reload and get better in the WRs, Oline, OLBs, and in particularly the CBs. Take the starting oline as an example, they are good. Two injuries and they have UDFAs playing and trying to keep their QB up and functioning.

Green Bay needs better starters and better depth for them to be considered SB contenders. Rodgers has shown how he can take this team to the next level. What the management needs to show is how they can add better players to this team.

So the best scenario would be for the Packers to win out with Hundley at QB. I don’t think anyone thinks that could happen. If Rodgers comes back and wins out and stays healthy, will the Packers progress beyond the first round? The most important question is the team healthy enough to protect Rodgers if he can possibly come back this year?
I saw what happened to Tony Romo when he came back from his collarbone break….another break and it took a while before he could put his normal zip on the ball. I would hate to see that so my opinion, not that it matters, is ride the season with Hundley and build this team into a contender with depth and new blood.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:42 am

Going into next year I think they need pass rush and CB's. King I think is good and will be good. House has been ok, and Randall has played really well since his benching. But if they can get an upgrade that would do the defense wonders. Also adding more pass rush help would really help. They need an explosive edge rusher. They could also use a blitzing ILB. Martinez is more of a coverage LB. He isn't great at blitzing. One of the reasons why our 2010 defense was as good as it was, was because they had Bishop who was a great blitzing ILB.

After pass rush and CB's I think adding OL depth, more speed at WR and another TE are needs for the offense.

I brought it up yesterday but it is really hard to evaluate the WR and TE position right now with Hundley as the QB. But adding to each position is needed regardless.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:05 am

"They need an explosive edge rusher. They could also use a blitzing ILB. "

Look at the OLB snaps from Sunday's game (76 defensive snaps, reported from APC)...CMIII (on a bad wheel) 56, Perry 56, Fackrell 31, Brooks 29. Vince Biegel was active but didn't record a snap on defense (did play virtually all special teams snaps, though) and Chris Odom was inactive.

Brooks is on a one-year deal and I suspect won't be back. Nagging back injuries are the death knell of an NFL career. Fackrell showed signs of life against a terrible OL on Sunday...we'll see if he can reproduce it against a Cleveland OL missing Joe Thomas. Tampa was doing their best to neutralize #53, which let CMIII run loose.

Finding even one, quality outside rusher allows this team to do two things:
1. rotate their OLBs to keep them fresh
2. supply pass rush from the inside by moving CMIII or even Vince Biegel inside on passing downs.
With his injury Biegel is really only, at this stage, at what we would normally consider week 1 of the regular season. The Packers won't know what they have in him until next season. I think the bottom line is that the cupboard at OLB really is only 2 pass-rushers deep right now: Perry and CMIII. They need effective bodies there desperately. It would be a tremendous help if Fackrell finally found his footing and Brooks got his back right, but I'm not holding my breath on either.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:47 am

In all honesty. I really don't see why they kept Odom. Perhaps he has a future, but he has done nothing for the team this year. They honestly should have kept Elliott. He at least provided a good special teams player.

Fackrell has made plays each of the last 3 weeks. Perhaps he is gaining some confidence and there is hope.

I would like to see Biegel get more opportunities.

I completely agree about finding another quality pass rusher.
In all honesty, I think they need to plan next year as if they don't have Brooks, and don't have one more guy. Meaning they need to get 2 OLB's.
I would like another inside rusher as well. Adams maybe that guy but like Biegel they really won't know what they have in him till next year.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:04 am

"They honestly should have kept Elliott. He at least provided a good special teams player."

I thought that, too, when he was cut loose and Perry was playing with the club, but the fact that the Packers didn't bite on him and nobody else has is pretty telling.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:52 am

People are holding their breath. I am. He does not have the NFL arm. But I've seen a lot of QBs with less. The timing just isn't there. Throwing deep are prayers. TT will take a QB with the first selection, if we don't make the play-offs. TT will also rely on A-Rod for who he takes again. If Adams gets signed, don't look for a WR before the 4th round. What you will see is a DT! And the defense will be still intact if Capers comes back. If this team makes the playoffs, I'll bet they don't Fire, or replace anyone. Sorry no cBs. Were staying with Randall, King, Rollins and House. The Lbs and that pass rusher. Not happening. I say this is what TT will do. QB/DT, #2 OL #3 TE

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:09 am

now way we take a qb with first pick

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:37 am

The only way that happens is if a stud of ARod proportions falls in their lap. In today's QB-starved NFL, they'd be better off trading that pick and reaping a few day 1-2 picks, and potentially moving back up if they see what they want.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:35 am

House might be back, but he's shown that he's someone who will need a safety shading his side of the field regularly. They're still going to need a DB. Randall is best in the slot, Rollins isn't built to play the outside. Hawkins is still a work in progress. My bet is that Burnett is allowed to walk. They'll have to have a DB, probably on day 1 or day 2. IMO a pass-rusher is priority 1.

At this stage, we're still waiting to see which underclassmen declare for this draft. We don't have the best picture of where the true strength in the draft will be. Given that the Packers are desperately in need of high-end talent at most positions, I have a hard time predicting what they'll pick.

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:41 am

"House might be back but he's shown that he's someone who will need a saftey shading his side of the field regularly." I agree and I have noticed House will often give up his guy to the saftey and all too often the saftey isn't there. Dix has earned the nickname HaHa, his play this season has been a joke. And he has 2 more years on his contract. It is in TT's m.o. to let Burnett walk, leaving. Jones, Brice and Evans, is there a starter in that group? It will be interesting to see what GB does with the secondary this off season.

0 points
0
0
Pauly's picture

December 05, 2017 at 04:40 pm

Don't forget, Packers have 12 picks with 10 of them in first 5 rounds. Hopefully TTT (Tedious Ted Thompson) does some trading up to top 3 rounds,, top 90 player talent pool to reload.
(Better yet,, after TTT's fiasco on the Findley wait for a TE and also keeping Lindsey Pipkins on 53 instead of QB Hill,,,,, encourage TTT take an early retirement before FAgency and Draft day.
I would like to see a fast WR, 2 pass rushers, 1 CB, 1 expensive FA TE, to start with.
Then Jordy retire back to Kansas farm to raise his 3 young kids while healthy.
Cobb cut, with TY replacing him bigger, stronger version.
CMIII take a pay cut to move to ILB for a few years.

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

December 05, 2017 at 11:24 am

Best reply yet by "stockholder" in regards to NFL arm strength, thank you. A perfect example was Detmer with an average arm but Ty had what Hundley currently does not have and that is anticipation. Where as Favre had to drill the long pass on a rope to guys like Freeman in between the defensive levels, Detmer had the ability to drop it in with timing and anticipation. Hundley has a much stronger arm than Detmer had and the real question that has to be answered is "can he acquire the timing he needs through game experience" to be accurate. It has happened but in most cases you have it or not right out of the gate. An example is Jones natural ability to see the hole and hit it without hesitation, that cannot be taught. We should have the answer on Hundley by seasons end.

0 points
0
0
OrganLeroy's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:28 pm

That's highly delusional, Ted won't be drafting a QB #1 but he needs to draft a legitimate talent around the 4th or 5th round. We'll probably get an additional 3rd & 5th comp pick so IMO, with our 1st 4 picks we need, 1. OLB 2.TE 3a.CB 3b. WR/OLB 4. OL . 5a. QB/TE 5b. QB/TE

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:41 am

...1) First off, Hundley isn't a NFL backup QB. Can he be developed into one is the bigger question.

2) The Second observation from this season is that the Packers don't have the talent they need to win a SB...

Good summary Handsback. I too don't think team has the talent to do much beyond a gallant fight. And, I do want the Packers to keep my attention and hopes going for the rest of the season. My fear is that we finish off this season somewhere in the middle, slap ourselves on the back and get lost in self-scout that reveals a need for a younger team.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:11 am

"... the fewest passing yards in a win since Brett Favre threw for 82 in 1994."

So, another Brett had a win with even fewer passing yards than Hundley? I was not aware of that.

And we all knows how the story with original Brett finished...

0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:24 am

Croat - the 82 yards thrown by Brett Favre was in a game played in a monsoon against the Bears in Chicago during the 1994 season. It was a Monday night football game and the conditions were terrible for throwing the football. In spite of the limited passing yards the Packers won the game 33 -6 IIRC. The difference between Favre and Hundley is that Favre could play brilliantly from day one. He went 8-5 as the Packers starter in 1992, his first season in GB and 1-0 as a backup in '92 in week 3 after the Majik Man went out with an injury.

Also, and probably more importantly in 1994 the Packers defense was much better than any of the Packers recent additions. Plus the '94 team had Mike Holmgren as their HC and Fritz Shurmur as their DC. I hate to say it because I like MM but the reality is that Mike Holmgren and Fritz Shurmur were much better coaches than MM or Capers. Plus Ron Wolf was the teams GM and he actually knew what he was doing in bringing the Packers back to relevance in the NFL.

If it were possible to still have that trio the Packers would be the team with 3 -5 SB since 2007. The Mike Holmgren Packers would demolish the MM Packers if they ever could play each other and it wouldn't be a close game. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

December 05, 2017 at 11:26 am

Since, thank you for information. I really knew nothing regarding that game...

And I was joking. Of course that we can not compare two Packers Bretts... I really think that.

Regarding who would demolish who, I think it first depends of which rules would be applied for that game, those from 2017 or those from 1994.

Also, as I can remember, Homgren, Favre, Shurmur, Wolf had 7 years to win another SB. They didn't win. And that says something about winning all, by my humble opinion...

0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:09 pm

Croat - I'm happy to provide the background. Remember that Wolf and Holmgren took over a terrible team in 1992. It took until 1995 for the Packers to field a team that could play for the SB. They made the playoffs in '93, '94, '95, won the SB in '96, lost in the '97 SB and made the playoffs in '98. Then Holmgren left for Seattle.

The rules in '94 were pretty close to the rules we have now although the Helmut to Helmut rule did not exist along with other safety rules. Also the officials did not call defensive holding on every other pass play. It doesn't matter, the Wolf/Holmgren Packers had better players at RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, LBs, CBs and Safeties. Aaron Rodgers and the young CM3 were the only players who could start for the Holmgren Packers. Some of the other current Packer starters could be second string. The rest would be gone.

Ron Wolf did a better job of signing FAs especially when the Packers needed to fill a hole in the team. I think that most of us who watched both teams would agree that Holmgren was a better head coach then MM, especially during the game. Holmgren was a brilliant play caller and Shurmur's defense was tough. They rarely allowed an opponent back into a game, especially late in the game. That defense could be trusted to hold a lead and get off the field. Just watch a tape of the '96 SB and you'll see how the defense completely shuts down the Pats in the 4th quarter, and that is just one of many examples.

The point is the Holmgren Packers had better players. Although we rarely saw him play in Green Bay, Doug Peterson was a better backup QB than Brett Hundley. And you can see the Holmgren influence with the job Doug Peterson is doing as the Philly head coach all these seasons later. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:17 pm

I'd argue they had a better head coach (Holmgren), and a much better defensive coordinator (No blitz Fritz Shurmer) in 1995 too.

I'd love to see what Holmgren could do with this team. Wish we had an NFL simulator so we could plug those players in and see what a great coach could do.

0 points
0
0
OrganLeroy's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:33 pm

Also Holmgren wasn't only a brilliant play caller, he was very creative with his game plans and was the best in the league at in game adjustments, of course, Brett being Brett drove him crazy with the game plans but it ultimately ended well.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 06:54 pm

With a front consisting of Sean Jones, Reggie White, Santana Dotson and the gravedigger, why would he ever need to blitz?

0 points
0
0
Steve Cheez's picture

December 05, 2017 at 05:08 pm

"Aaron Rodgers and the young CM3 were the only players who could start for the Holmgren Packers. Some of the other current Packer starters could be second string. The rest would be gone."

'61, I was going to dispute that statement, then I started going through all of our current positions and I believe you are correct.

Dang, that's depressing...

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 12:30 pm

"It was a Monday night football game and the conditions were terrible for throwing the football."

That is one of my favorite Packers games ever. Brett Favre rambling down the sideline for the TD...players so grungy you couldn't tell who was who.

0 points
0
0
Steve Cheez's picture

December 05, 2017 at 01:11 pm

I also remember Holmgren calling a timeout at the end of the first quarter so we could punt with the wind (the previous punt against the wind had gone about 8 yards). As an aside, that was the type of thing you would expect Holmgren to do, and would be shocked if MM ever thought of it.

It was also cool because that game had a big halftime ceremony for Butkus, funny seeing his little raincoat flapping all over the place.

0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

December 05, 2017 at 01:59 pm

Steve, yes I remember Butkus out there on the field in that downpour during halftime. I actually felt bad for him because he was one of the greatest ever. I also remember the Holmgren time out prior to the punt at the end of the quarter. I have nothing against MM, I support him and I think he is a good head coach but he is just not as good as Holmgren and of course not even close to Lombardi, but then again no one is close to Lombardi. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:04 pm

Dobber - it's one my favorite Packers games as well. I still have the tape of the game. It's like a throwback game to the 50s/60s with 2 teams battling each other plus the weather. Play on grass with no domes, lots of mud, can't really pass the ball just one on one, man against man, let the best team win stuff. Football as it should be. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
OrganLeroy's picture

December 05, 2017 at 02:35 pm

And in those bad weather mud games the Packers had the best bad weather mudder RB in the league, the Bear killer, Edgar Bennett!

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

December 05, 2017 at 01:48 pm

Since '61, if I could give you 5 likes on your post I surely would.

0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

December 05, 2017 at 01:55 pm

rdent, I appreciate your thought. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:13 am

Maybe McCarthy can run some more play calls that result in Pick 6 and blocked punts, too. Those two led to 14 points. The Packers offense scored 12 without the benefit of those two things, including the OT TD.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 06, 2017 at 03:13 am

I wondered if anyone would point that out. Cleveland isn't very good, but they might be one of the best 0-12 teams in memory.

0 points
0
0
nostradanus's picture

December 05, 2017 at 07:32 am

I would also like to see the Packers finish the season with Hundley at QB and running (ok, a few select read options) and pounding the rock with Williams & Jones.
There is no need to bring Rodgers back if there is any chance he is not completely healed from injury. We all know the Packers doctors error on the side of caution, just ask Marty Bennett (haha pun intended)
But seriously; if the Packers can finish strong while developing the run game and a Defensive mentality then next season with a 34/35 year old Rodgers at the helm, it would take so much pressure off of him to pull games out of his (azz) every week. The only way the Packers are getting back to the Super Bowl is by developing a total team around Aaron Rodgers. Balanced Offense, Strong Defense (FIRE CAPERS) and excellent Special Teams.
Of course they also need a great draft and are set up to do so and most likely will draft right in the middle of the Pack. There will be about 4 QB's most likely drafted before the Packers turn comes along which means a pretty darned good position player should fall right into their lap.
To me its worth sacrificing this season (which we all know isn't going anywhere) to get a couple more Lombardi Trophy's in Titletown USA.
Rambling Rant Complete.
GO PACK!

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:10 am

Do you remember Bobby Douglass. I do. Doesn't Hundley remind you of him? 4 qbs gone before Packer's pick. Right if they make the play-offs. Now look who might be there == A couple of DTs. - Daniels is getting older. The depth at DT/NT/DE in the 3-4-4. DT Would be the BPA!

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 06, 2017 at 03:17 am

I remember Bobby Douglas from his days with the Bears and then the Packers. Way more arm strength than Hundley, way less touch. Accuracy wasn't his strength either. Douglas was more of a pretty good running FB rather than the HB that Hundley represents.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:36 am

Wow I could not agree more with a lot of you on Hundley. Just for the halibut, I looked at his col stats. Pretty impressive, for a college player. That's the problem.

His avg pass was 8 yards. Short ball.
He led the team in rush TD's.
He ran as much as passed.
Lead league in being sacked.
Had poor long passing stats and trouble with progressions.
In essence he lived off the quick pass and ran when unsure of the coverage.

To be that is exactly what you have now, 3 years no change. This is not pro material.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 08:52 am

As Al Bundy points out, Hundley is exactly as Hundley was in college. Why it took us 3 years to find this out is beyond incompetence.

Still, work with what you have. Mike keeps trying to make him a pocket passer, hoping that he'll work through a bunch of progressions and hoping that the vertical route concepts are going to work. If our coaches weren't so stuck trying to fit people into their schemes, we could have won two more games with Hundley. Sprinkling in more run, spread and option concepts would have gone a long way to making this offense under Hundley more potent.

It is not too late to get something out of this misguided experiment.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:11 am

As much as I hate to say it, the Packers need to look to Seattle and their gimmicky, college-type offense for inspiration as to what to do with Hundley. Seattle used to run R-O more before Wilson got paid, but they do a pretty significant amount of misdirection, throwbacks, reverses/jet sweeps, and they do it with a QB who doesn't have a high-end arm or isn't very physically imposing and an OL that limits what they can actually execute.

I'm not saying that Hundley is the on-field leader that Wilson is (which is one of his strengths) or that he has the recognition skills and vision that Wilson has, but there are things there that diversify the offense and make it very difficult for a defense to gang up on one phase of the offense or a particular look. Maybe that will make it too complex for #7, who knows.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:23 am

...but there are things there that diversify the offense and make it very difficult for a defense to gang up on one phase of the offense or a particular look...

I too am not a big fan of read option style of offense but it is the wrinkle that we can exploit in the near term. It is not like this offense has been fooling people these last years. Until the league catches up to our new variant...let's run with it.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

December 05, 2017 at 09:19 am

Why was Hundley drafted in the first place? Made no sense then and still makes no sense now..even less so.

0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:34 am

In the NFL you need a QB who can pass effectively from the pocket. There is a very long line of mobile/running QBs who were never successful as NFL QBs.

Kaepernick is the most recent example. NO team has signed him because he is a terrible pocket passer. If he were any good he would have been signed even with all his "kneeling" baggage. He is just not good enough for a team to deal with all the baggage he brings. RG3 is another example. Steve McNair, Randall Cunningham etc...

If you can't throw successfully from the pocket the QB won't win games and he won't last very long taking to many hits while running.

If Hundley ever gets good in the pocket he will have a chance in the NFL. If not he will not have much of a career left. For now let's hope he gets the Packers past the Browns this week. Of course there is always the possibility that our defense gets run out of the park by the "vaunted" Browns offense. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 05, 2017 at 12:33 pm

Some were calling for the Packers to sign Kaepernick when #12 got hurt....turns out Hundley IS Colin Kaepernick.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

December 06, 2017 at 03:30 am

Actually no, dobber, Hundley is nowhere near as good as Kaepernick. The true silliness of this entire thread is that it's built on the premise that Brett Hundley is an exceptional runner. He isn't. Its not really even close. Mike Vick was other-worldly. Colin Kaepernick had plenty of juice to make the Packers D look stupid. But Brett Hundley is not even in the same conversation as those guys.

As '61 points out, it's really difficult to build an offense even around an extraordinary running QB. What will happen if you try to build your game plan around a so-so, mediocre runner like Hundley? In sports terminology, it's called forfeiting. In real life it's called suicide.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 06, 2017 at 07:46 am

Tips hat...

0 points
0
0
Ferrari Driveer's picture

December 05, 2017 at 10:51 am

Will likely be more difficult for Hundley to make yardage on the ground if the Browns' DC looks at the tape and elects to simply shut down the run. Fortunately the Browns stink and are perhaps one of the few teams in the NFL that are less talented than we are (without Rodgers of course).

It's amazing what the best QB in the NFL can do to elevate a team. Luckily he belongs to us.

0 points
0
0
4zone's picture

December 05, 2017 at 12:56 pm

That would be 7 games, not 5.

0 points
0
0