Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Cory's Corner: What's else does Brett Hundley have?

By Category

Cory's Corner: What's else does Brett Hundley have?

Mike McCarthy took the training wheels off and opened up the playbook on Sunday. He treated Brett Hundley as if his wings were fully developed; yet we all saw that Hundley fell flat on his face as soon as he left his locker room nest.

The Ravens whipped the Packers 23-0 — the first time Green Bay hasn’t scored a point since losing to New England 35-0 in 2006.

“We’ve got too much talent on offense to go out there and put on a display like that,” said Davante Adams, who led all receivers with eight receptions for 126 yards. “I mean, zero points. There’s no reason we should have zero points whoever we’re playing. I don’t care if it’s the ’86 Bears. I don’t even know who played on the ’86 Bears, but we should score on them.”

Hold your horses Davante. It’s obviously embarrassing losing this way, even if your personal numbers have risen since Hundley took over.

But the crux of the problem is Hundley. Who exactly is he and why has he regressed so much from just a week ago?

The scary thing is he has no pocket presence. None. The strength of the Packers’ offensive line right now is on the interior with the guard-center-guard. And when Hundley smells the scent of pressure, he quickly floats backwards and off to either side, which is usually into the teeth of the opposing pressure. Of the six sacks he took, four were the result of hanging on to the ball too long or getting happy feet from a clean pocket.

We are at a crossroads right now. Not because Hundley’s body of work will never resemble Aaron Rodgers’. But because Hundley has now started four games and came into the league with questions about his questionable pocket presence. Yet, general manager Ted Thompson picked him in the fifth round of the 2015 draft. He has been involved in three of Mike McCarthy’s Quarterback Schools. He has backed up and studied behind one of the best passers to tighten a chinstrap.

Last week I gave a glimmer of hope that Hundley might be getting better. I was wrong. What else does Hundley have left to learn? He has a 69.39 passer rating as a starter and the Packers are now circling the drain.

So what’s next? If the Packers are really starting Hundley with hopes that he will be traded, they are sorely mistaken. Hundley only has one passing touchdown. Heck, Jordy Nelson only has 10 targets in the last four games, rendering him useless.

Unless McCarthy opts to run the spread like he ran at UCLA, then it’s time to insert Joe Callahan. I think it’s apparent that the Packers made a mistake by not keeping Taysom Hill, who would’ve pushed Hundley for the No. 2 job.

So Adams can complain about the amount of weapons on the offensive side of the ball, but it doesn’t really matter when the quarterback has a rating 19 points worse than the erratic Jay Cutler.

McCarthy said after Aaron Rodgers was injured that Hundley and Callahan were his quarterbacks. He even got testy when Colin Kaepernick’s name was brought up. The Packers didn’t win the Brian Hoyer sweepstakes and are now settling with a quarterback that isn’t comfortable doing something the Packers have groomed him to do.

The Packers cannot keep looking to the future if they aren’t going to respect the present. 


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

  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (68) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

croatpackfan's picture

Right on spot, Cory.

Only, I do not put a lot of hope on Joe, either... But I have little doubts that he would be better than Hundley...

TheVOR's picture

Hundley is a Jag, as is the GM, Coaching Staff, and President. We're officially "Rebuilding", we need to take this opportunity to Flush the toilet, hire a new president, GM, and coaching staff, and move forward. We need to put a real team around Arron Rodgers, and start quickly winning championships before this opportunity os OVER!

Exactly what this GM has demonstrated, is he is unable to build a championship roster around this amazing HOF QB, Period.. This injury has also demonstrated that this GM has rested in not being "Ron Wolf" smart enough to have a true QB draft and school running thru GB constantly. He's been an absolute JAG sitting their believing his coaching staff and backup Ted Thompson drafted QB was so amazing. Ted Thompson needs to be promptly FIRED, as does this staff and President. Time for the Packers board to step in and do their job..

mnklitzke's picture

Perfectly said!! Many thumbs up!!

PETER MAIZ's picture

well, you know how bureaucracies work, I don't see it happening, but it would be for the better.

Hematite's picture

It's astonishing to see that the "quarterback guru" and the "great GM" have watched this kid for three years and never recognized that he didn't have "it" .

Nick Perry's picture

Wow....Talk about a comment that deserves a "Thumbs Up". IMO it really puts the Hundley debacle in perspective, and it IS a debacle.

I've never understood the QB Guru myself. Okay he got Brett Favre to play smarter in 2006 and 2007 but we ARE talking about a 1st ballot HOF QB already. He helped mold Rodgers I suppose but the kid should have been the #1 overall pick so obviously the talent was there already. The only other QB semi successful was Flynn. Now lets not forget Flynn was throwing to DD, Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Cobb, and Finley. The Packers were unstoppable then because there wasn't a team in the NFL who could match-up against that many good to great WR's. Grandma could have had a QB rating of 80 plus.

I commented here several times in the past the 2017 season was going to be a down year and maybe even beyond 2017. I looked at the FA coming up in 2016 and 2017 back then and took into consideration the work of Ted Thompson and the writing was on the wall. This team isn't good enough at some positions, has ZERO depth at others, and gotten old or lost players in FA at the rest. Thompson has a QB like Rodgers yet has let the WR grow thin. He's completely blown retooling the O-Line and STILL doesn't have a F'ING TE!!!!!

Hundley is a truck, he's a Peterbilt plain and simple. Thompson and McCarthy have done him NO FAVORS with the team they have around him. Rodgers can take a rag-tag bunch to 4-1, Hundley would struggle with the 2011 WR Group.

Hey Guys...I KNOW I take every topic and turn it into a MM and TT bashing and for that I apologize. But I've never been quiet about my dislike for Thompson and IMO ANY topic ultimately comes back to him.

HankScorpio's picture

"I commented here several times in the past the 2017 season was going to be a down year and maybe even beyond 2017. I looked at the FA coming up in 2016 and 2017 back then and took into consideration the work of Ted Thompson and the writing was on the wall"

Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back. Prior to Rodgers getting hurt, the Packers were 4-1--through the harder part of their schedule and a rash of injury that at one point left them playing OTs #5 and #6.. The notion that they would have nosedived with Rodgers like they have without him is laughable. They be sitting at 7-3 or better with a healthy Rodgers. 7-3 assumes a home loss to NO or Det, which is a pretty sketchy assumption. Heck, they might have won both AND beaten Minny on the road to be sitting at 9-1.

Nick Perry's picture

"The notion that they would have nosedived with Rodgers like they have without him is laughable"

I said NO such thing and it's really not a pat on the back either. What I do is take a look at upcoming FA on the Packers in the coming years (Normally next 2) and take a educated guess on what TT might do. For example it wasn't difficult after the 2014 season to figure out Sitton and Lang would probably be gone (What do you know). The old fart calling the shots has a LONG history of getting rid of players approaching or around 30 years old.

Please stop with the "Playing their #5 and #6 OT's". The number #3 and #4 OT were HORRIBLE too. During the preseason Spriggs and Murphy had their asses handed to them on just about every play. Just about everybody here and on any other "Football" publication thought the Packers should go and sign a veteran OT or two because Spriggs and Murphy was SO TERRIBLE. Thompson dropped the ball with the O-Line depth from the get go. If you don't remember just how BAD Spriggs was go back and watch ANY game he played in.

HankScorpio's picture

You did say that 2017 would be a down year for the Packers. That only happened because of the injury to Rodgers. The departure of Sitton and Lang didn't matter. That the backup OTs sucked in preseason didn't matter, even tho both starters got hurt for regular season games. In fact, the 4-1 start was accomplished with the crappy backups OTs playing a very prominent role.

With all that, and anything else you want to add, they were 4-1 with Rodgers and shaping up somewhere between 11-5 and 13-3 had he stayed healthy. That's not a down year. So unless your forecast for 2017 included Rodgers going on IR, it was looking pretty far off the mark. If you did see the injury to Rodgers coming, there would be no need to mention the irrelevant details you did. Just cut right to the real reason...that star QB goes down and the backup sucks.

RCPackerFan's picture

In all honesty. If Rodgers doesn't get hurt they would most likely be 9-1 or 8-2.

Everyone wants to complain about the roster and whatnot. The truth is the entire roster is built around Rodgers. The offense is made to work around Rodgers. He is the Sun in our solar system.

The OL while was very hurt, but they were good enough with Rodgers. Hell they played the Bears who have a good defense with 4 Guards and a Center. And the Packers blew them out with Rodgers...
The Packers WR's are better with Rodgers, the TE's better with Rodgers, the RB's better with Rodgers, the OL better with Rodgers.

We can sit here now and knit pick the team but the truth is taking away Rodgers is the one move that this team can't over come.

Should they be better then what they are now, I think so. I place the blame on Hundley/McCarthy. Hundley simply is not ready to play. He is over his head. He isn't seeing the field well enough and is making rookie mistakes. He has missed wide open WR's. If he plays average to slightly above average I think they have at least 1 more win.

But again the truth is if Rodgers is still playing we are talking about this team as a Super Bowl caliber team, and we are all excited about this team.
He is that good.

HankScorpio's picture

All very true, RC.

And it swings both ways. Given that they are a QB-centric team with the whole looking better than the sum of the parts with Rodgers as the QB, it is equally true that horrific QB play like we've seen from Hundley will make the whole look WORSE than the sum of the parts.

Put a competent QB on the field and last week is a win, making them 2-2 without Rodgers. And .500 with a backup QB replacing a HoFer ain't all that bad.

RCPackerFan's picture

Completely agree Hank.

The really sad part is, if we have decent QB play we probably win 2? more games. I think they would have beat the Saints had the QB play been better. They were in the game until 5 minutes left.
I also believe they beat the Ravens with decent QB play. Hundley had 2 interceptions and they had a fumble on the first 3 drives. At that point they were only down 3-0. The next 2 drives they punt and at half time were only down 6-0. The Ravens drive on the first drive of the 2nd half get a TD and were still only down 13-0.
Those 2 games alone they had their chances had the QB play been better.

To show the difference that Rodgers makes look at the numbers that Nelson and Cobb had with Rodgers and with Hundley.

With Rodgers - not including Vikings game. (4 games)
Nelson - 19 catches - 230 yards, 6 TD's
Cobb - 23 Catches - 218 yards, 1 TD

With Hundley - not including Vikings game. (4 games)
Nelson - 10 catches - 92 yards, 0 TD's.
Cobb - 13 catches - 159 yards, 0 TD's.

These guys proved they were play making players with Rodgers. They still are, but Hundley simply doesn't get them the ball. He hesitates and doesn't throw when he needs to.

Another amazing stat that is crazy. Nelson hasn't had a TD catch since Dallas in week 5. Yet he is tied for 4th in the league with 6.

HankScorpio's picture

It seems pretty clear that MM did recognize that Hundley wasn't any good. The game plans via Det, NO and Chicago spoke more loudly than his press conference proclamations of love.

The failure comes in MM not convincing TT that they needed to add someone else, like in 2013 after Graham Harrell flopped as the backup. That year, TC showed Harrell wasn't working so they turned to Seneca Wallace, who got hurt before we could see if he was a viable backup.

I don't know if MM didn't tell TT what he saw in Hundley or TT didn't listen. I'd love to know which it was. Either way, there needs to be better communication and more trust between the coaching staff and personnel dept.

Jersey Al's picture

Not to defend any of the coaching staff, but it's difficult to know if a guy has "it" until he gets a chance when things really count and everyone is going all out (i.e., not preseason). How many of us thought Rodgers had "it" until he got his chance to start? Note that for me all it took was Rodgers' first game for me to say to myself, "we're going to be just fine without Favre." But until that happened, we had no idea. So again, I'm not in the habit of defending Mike McCarthy, but fair is fair.

PETER MAIZ's picture

Jersey Al, think about this: critical thinking should give you a plan B, maybe even a plan C. I think MM is a fine play caller but the coaches aren't blind and they should have a good plan B in case Aaron goes down. Just look at what the Vikings are doing with McNab, a journeyman quarterback. If you don't clean house, don't expect the house to be clean.

Since '61's picture

Who is McNabb?

billybobton's picture

this may be true for you but for MM and TT it is revisionist history
both of them are on record, along with others that they KNEW Rodgers was it prior to the first game

Finwiz's picture

He played against Capers pass defense, so probably looked OUTSTANDING in practice, and since Capers is an outstanding football coach, that was good enough for them.

It's called delusion.

Savage57's picture

Hundley's defects and shortcomings (inability to progress through reads, slow mental processing, hesitation, staring down receivers, inability to make some throws, failure to climb the pocket, panicked bailouts) have been on display for almost five games now.

It's a decent sample size and a reasonable examination of the evidence suggests that most of these issues might be incurable.

What Packers fans are seeing on display were the same knocks on him coming out of UCLA and why he was a 5th round pick.

It's not a knock on the guy, but he just doesn't have the punkin' to process information at the speed the QB position in the NFL requires. There've been legions of guys who had the same limitations, the difference being they're out of the league, not holding onto a position they're incapable of performing.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Well, I hope he has the bulk of the $1.798M GB has paid him through 2017 saved in a bank.

Razer's picture

You are right. Unless a light bulb goes on, he isn't long for this league.

Razer's picture

If you don't have a strong innate pocket presence and you can't read defenses you shouldn't be in this league as a QB. It is pretty late in the game to be realizing these deficiencies. This is on the GM and coaches - not on a great young man who is trying as best he can.

In light of this, the Packers should be using him more like all those QB's who torched us with their legs. Mix in more runs. Teams are dropping a bunch in coverage or crowding the box. Let Hundley drop back then block for him to take off. He can run and he gets results running. Force teams to guard one of his talents. If his hamstring is broken then he needs to sit.

TommyG's picture

Unfortunately opposition isn’t dropping into coverage an creating areas in which to run. They are creating pressure to make him role put and throw poor passes. Hundley has played into the defensive scheme rather than defeating it. Unless his arm becomes a viable weapon there will be no for him to be successful in this league.

carusotrap's picture

Ironic that Hundley seems to possess the same athletic skill set you would get if you signed Kaepernick, albeit without the football IQ. Options.
Scrambling. (Say what you will about Kaepernick, but he's not stupid. If he had an arm, he'd be OK.) Unfortunately, the coaches seem to be forcing a Hundley-shaped peg into a Rodgers-shaped hole.

Razer's picture

Exactly. It is the Packer way to take someone and reshape their skillset. Many of our defensive draft failures have suffered this same thinking.

Okay, Hundley is not a Rodgers pocket passer but he is a good runner - better than Kaepernick. Design some offense around this potential. Christ, we are trying wildcats with Cobb, the least we could do is tune this up for a running QB.

nigrivasilayesrej's picture

The answer would be, "not much". Locks onto Davante nearly every play & can't get through his progressions. Hangs onto the ball too long. Happy feet when the pocket starts to shrink even the slighest. Can't roll out to his left. Lacks in-game awareness, in many situations, of down & distance.

All of that said, Mashed Potato Mike has done him no favors. Playcalling, after the first 10-15 scripted plays, is hot garbage. QB guru, my ass.

dobber's picture



nigrivasilayesrej's picture

Great song; Santana can really strum that guitar.

dobber's picture


Jersey Al's picture

at my age? LOL.

nostradanus's picture

The Packers are a Quarterback driven team, I mean when you have had the luxury of Favre-Rodgers for over a quarter century the downfall when they are gone is going to be dramatic. It's not like they can just turn into a grind the ball with the running game and maul the other team. There is no relief, Callahan won't be any better either. We are just going to have to endure this season with Hundley and regroup next year. The problem with Hundley is confidence and McCarthy not putting him in a good position to make plays. Obviously reading Defenses in the NFL, pocket presence and accuracy are not his thing. Will he ever be anything more than a back up QB? No. Does Hundley have some skills? Yes. McCarthy has refused to "dumb down" the Offense, create more run options, slants, screens, draws and plays to get the ball out of his young QB's hands quickly and build the kids confidence. Sundays game would have been the perfect game to as McCarthy has said in the past "establish the run" using Hundley as an option in that running game as well while also including guys like Janis & Davis on Jet Sweeps, end arounds, bubble screens. These are who are two of their fastest guys and they have not been used. When a season is on the brink of disaster that is when the Great Coaches innovate and use every tool in the tool box, New England did this with a crappy backup when Brady got hurt years ago.
McCarthy is too stubborn or too clueless to see this and he is losing his team because of it. Injuries are part of the NFL and a Coach who refuses to adapt and innovate is doomed. Should be an interesting off-season.
Rant complete.

TommyG's picture

You want to go back to the game plan used against the saints?

carusotrap's picture

"It's not like they can just turn into a grind the ball with the running game and maul the other team."

But you see, they could; McCarthy isn't going to do that, though. Grinding on the ground means you don't get the "beautiful play." That 3½ yards per play brand of football has no elegance, and McCarthy is simply not wired that way. His philosophy is that "my plan will work because all week it has worked that way in my head." McCarthy thinks you get extra points for style, which is why he calls 40 yard back shoulder sideline passes on 3rd and 2 but then runs straight up the middle on 4th and 1. He calls what he is sure should work, but his definition of what should work is simplistic and predictable. He's playing checkers while the Belichicks of the world are playing chess. When you've got Rodgers, who cares. When it's Hundley; well, we've seen the results.

RCPackerFan's picture

IMO, the biggest problem with Hundley is he hesitates and doesn't release the ball when he should. His timing is off. McCarthy eluded to that during his last press conference.
IMO, the next biggest problem Hundley has is he doesn't step up in the pocket. He doesn't trust his OL and ends up moving backwards. His pocket awareness simply hasn't been what I thought it would be.

Before the Ravens game I thought Hundley was making progress. Each game he was getting better. While the entire game is not on Hundley, he simply can't make the mistakes he made and expect to win. The first int, I thought was simply a great play by Smith. Normally the CB would have went with the WR, but he went to the corner. That to me looked like a DB who studied the tape and knew what they were going to do there based on tendencies.

I also don't really blame him for that fumble he had. He was scrambling and went to throw it but got hit from behind. The OL struggled a quite a bit in this game.

I thought Hundley was making progress. It will be interesting to see what happens in this next game. If Hundley struggles mightily in the first half, do they decide to pull him in favor of Joe?

Razer's picture

...The OL struggled a quite a bit in this game...

Thank you for saying that. I thought that our O-line played poorly as well. Most of us have been howling about Hundley and have failed to recognize that neither tackles played well and there was a fair amount of pressure because of failures on the line.

dobber's picture

Baltimore ran right over the top of the Packer OL for most of that game. Even #12 would've struggled to get the ball out on many of those plays. It looked like a college game at times.

RCPackerFan's picture

It's easy to throw Hundley under the bus and toss all blame on him. But the truth is you have to look at the players around him. And since I only see what happens on TV, i don't know how open the WR's really are. And when they are open does Hundley have time to throw to them?

I saw Hundley under pressure a quite a bit. Some of it was due to him, but I thought a lot of it was from the OL struggling. For the 2nd week in a row I saw a blitz right between Evans and the RT running freely to Hundley. There aren't many QB's that can avoid a sack on that.

What I would love is someone to tell me on each play, what is the primary read, is it open. Whats the 2nd read and is it open. I'd love to see break downs of each play.

Donster's picture

Four starts for Hundley and one win. Last outing, looked terrible, as we all know. There was no reason not to insert Callahan in the fourth qtr. You had nothing to lose at that point and time. You have to see how he can play. Maybe he has the ability to step up into the pocket instead of panicking and retreating 15 yards. Maybe he can look off a defender. Maybe he can not lock onto just one receiver. How in the hell are you going to know if you don't give him a chance? Let Hundley start against P-burgh Sunday night. When the game is out of hand, give Callahan a few reps. Then give him the start at home against Tampa Bay. I am not saying he will be any kind of savior, but you have to look at him to see what you have. MM is so damn pigheaded that he just won't change. That is the big problem with MM.

The coaching staff needs to be gutted. TT must be forced to retire.

What I would like to hear from the readers here is other than the little Wolf for GM, who is on your lists for head coach, offensive and defensive coordinators?

cuervo's picture

What does he left???...maybe the writer that recently wrote an article that he'd take Hundley over Flacco can tell us?

The current situation pretty much proves the belief that MM is an average or below average coach.

Without Rodgers his record is now 3-9-1....thats a record that deserves being fired...unless your Marv Lewis.
.You can blame TT, but it's McCarthy that has left the team so ill equipped to handle a Rodgers injury. MM obviously didn't learn from 2013, and the fact he couldn't tell Hundley sucks just throws more dirt on the grave.

It took me awhile to get here, but it's very very evident that MM needs to be canned. This season is lost, play the younger guys, get them experience, see what they have so the next Coaches and maybe GM know what they may have. A general house cleaning is in order with the multiple high paid low performing players (Cobb, Matthews, etc) on the should be an entertaining off season.

TommyG's picture

Can’t read the D, can’t progress through WR, and leaves the pocket too early. Hundley is a liability on defense.

Still, he will be and should be the starter against Pittsburgh.

When the game is well out of hand, Callahan should be given some reps.

The hope of trading off hundley is gone so we must now work on making Callahan a trade option.

TommyG's picture

Liability to the offense. I do my best proofreading after I hit post.

HankScorpio's picture


Don't beat yourself up over proofreading. You got it right the first time.

Hundley is so bad, he IS a liability to the defense, even though he plays offense. The string of quick 3 and outs doesn't give them the breathers on the sidelines that they need.

PETER MAIZ's picture

A liability to the defence too, these guys get tired being on the field all game!

RCPackerFan's picture

Why not make Callahan as a viable backup? Why trade him?

Everyone wants to keep trading people. No one would be trading him to be a starter, unless he completely explodes on teams.

If Hundley struggles in the first half against the Steelers, I'd love to see McCarthy make the switch at halftime. While I wouldn't expect great results, you wouldn't know until you put him in. We honestly had no idea how good or bad Hundley would be until we seen him play. So far its been more bad then good.
We won't know about Joe until he gets in the game and plays. Perhaps he could spark the team. Maybe Callahan would play well enough to keep the team in the game. If that were to happen, he could become a really good backup QB to keep behind Rodgers.

dobber's picture

I expect that by halftime Sunday's game will be well out of reach. That means Callahan would see softer defenses and second/third stringers. Might be the place to try to see what he could do.

RCPackerFan's picture

It very well could happen.

Maybe the light bulb goes on with Hundley and he has a game too... I would say its not likely, but we never know.

RCPackerFan's picture

Can we stop talking about Taysom Hill? This article just mentions him, but I am seeing it everywhere about people talking about Hill.

First off while I liked him, we have to remember he was going up against 2nd, 3rd and 4th string players. Many of which aren't in the league anymore. Also he was going against very vanilla defenses. Yes he did look great during that time, but lets also remember that many fans and media said the Packers shouldn't keep 3 QB's.

Maybe Hill would have been better then Hundley. We will never know. But he is no longer on the team, so there really isn't any point of talking about what he would do with the team right now.

If anyone is going to replace Hundley it will be Callahan.

The thing about Callahan from what we have seen of him is that he makes people miss in the backfield and extends plays and keeps his eyes downfield. He has great pocket awareness while keeping his eyes downfield. That seems to be one of Hundley's biggest issues right now.

Callahan doesn't have the measurable's. He doesn't have the strongest arm or is the tallest or the fastest. But he plays with heart. You can see that when he is on the field.
If Hundley continues to struggle I think at the very least it would be nice to see Joe get some game action so they can determine if he could be their backup next year.

Razer's picture

Based on Hundley's performance, we probably will get to see Callahan. Most people see him and Tayson Hill as the greener grass yonder. I can't fathom that MM and the coaches, who see Callahan everyday, haven't already determined that his deficiencies are greater than Hundley's. On the other hand, 3 years with Hundley hasn't helped their assessment skills much either.

It would be a shame if the other QB in the team was equally as bad as the current option.

dobber's picture

At some point, the coaches have to do something. They can't keep trotting Hundley out there if he's going to keep playing like this and expect to maintain the locker room in any way.

They could trot Callahan out there mid-game and likely go back to Hundley again without losing face (if there's any left), but the minute they sit Hundley as a starter they have to be committed to moving on...which means rostering another QB.

RCPackerFan's picture

The truth is though that Hundley was improving each game until the Ravens game. And in that game he made 2-3 really bad decisions.
On the first drive he severely under throws Adams. If he throws it to the endzone Adams has a TD. My question with that play, was did the wind slow the ball down? And on the free play then I question if he hesitated to throw to Nelson?

I think the coaches need to look at themselves more and have to question if they have done everything they can do schematically to fit what Hundley does best. And are they doing enough to beat what teams are doing to them? They have to realize they simply can't run the exact same offense as Rodgers.
I watch other teams and it seems like WR's are WIDE open. They do it schematically. When is the last time we have seen the Packers WR's getting WIDE open? I don't see enough of this in the Packers offense. It's different with Rodgers. He can throw WR's open. Hundley can't.

RCPackerFan's picture

Its like many fans that a week ago were ripping on McCarthy for not playing Mays. I saw one comment that said if Mays runs for 100+ yards that they would question McCarthy even more. Well Mays had 3 carries and 2 fumbles.
Sometimes we have to have faith in the coaches and trust why certain players don't get the playing time.

The thing about Callahan that I don't think can be denied is that he is a gamer type of player. Some players simply don't look great until they are put into the action.

The truth though is that the Coaches don't 100% know how good or bad a player is until they get onto the field in real action. They can't simulate the game speed. Perhaps Hundley looks great in practice but when the lights go on, he simply struggles? Some players look great in practice and are average in games, whereas some are average in practice and great in games.

dobber's picture

"Can we stop talking about Taysom Hill? "

It's very easy to build up a player who isn't around anymore. Hill moved the football in TC, but so did Callahan the year before, and so did Hundley the year before that. Hill never had to run the offense. He played by the seat of his pants and was all improvisation...who knows, maybe he WOULD be decent in this current role. My suspicion is that he'd get his head handed to him and we'd be in exactly the spot we're in right now.

"He doesn't have the strongest arm or is the tallest or the fastest. But he plays with heart. "

I'm not convinced that this isn't what this team needs more than anything else at the moment. They need a leader...someone to rally behind. An average QB could have likely pushed this team to being competitive for a W on Sunday. The other elements were all there.

That said, I don't think it matters who they put under C on Sunday, this team is going to get reamed by Pittsburgh.

RCPackerFan's picture

I liked Hill. But there is no way of knowing how good/bad he would be right now. Hundley was playing against 1st-2nd string players most of the preseason, where as Hill was against 2nd, 3rd and 4th string players.

I agree with you on where we probably would be with Hill running it.

I agree that they need some heart. Not saying that Hundley doesn't have it, you just see with the way Callahan plays.

I would normally agree with you that this team will likely get hammered. But, this year is so weird that who knows. Steelers should have hammered a lot of teams and they struggled with them.

carusotrap's picture


Joe Montana
Russell Wilson
Drew Brees
Doug Flutie
Fran Tarkington

Now, Callahan ain't none of these guys, but I don't care about measurables. With this dumpster fire of a season, are we really going to not put him in there because of measurables?'s Mike McCarthy. Of course we're not. Question withdrawn.

RCPackerFan's picture

Exactly right!!!

That is kind of what my point is with it. People look at his size/speed and whatever and right him off. But honestly you can't measure his heart. He plays with heart. You can see from all the preseason games he played in.

Callahan could be the type of player we need. He might provide the spark that is needed.

If Hundley continues to struggle, they could be making the switch soon enough.

HankScorpio's picture

Hundley looked good in the preseason action vs the back of the TC roster as a rookie. Those situations are all about raw ability. As it progresses to playing preseason games with more guys that stand a realistic chance at making the final roster, things change to force the QB to display a better command of the offense and more traditional QB skills.

Obviously, Hundley is not capable of that transition. The Packers had to know. They saw the guy every day. But there is no reason to assume that Hill would do any better.

dobber's picture

"Unless McCarthy opts to run the spread like he ran at UCLA, then it’s time to insert Joe Callahan."

I think that's the best way to sum up how things must move forward.

Packer_Pete's picture

"What's else does Brett Hundley have?" - Nothing. He has no pocket presence, a relatively weak arm, runs like a water buffalo, and cannot read NFL defenses. Sorry, but not enough to play in this league.

It is amazing that after having 2 sure HOF QBs, the Packers and their self-described "QB guru" not once developed a viable NFL starter. There are other teams whose starting QB went down, and the backups they play then are at the very least serviceable.

Three and Out's picture

"What's else does Brett Hundley have?"

Not much of a proofreader, eh?

tlc1123's picture

The offensive line did have problems with one of the best defenses in the NFL. However, Hundley made it harder for them to protect him by not using the pocket.

We can't excuse defensive players running free in our backfield, but we also can't excuse a quarterback who doesn't know how to use the protection he does have.

As for getting rid of McCarthy, who would you replace him with and you better plan to be facing him soon because he won't be jobless for long. Maybe this is a situation like Philly with Andy Reid. He got stale in Philly, but has been very good in KC. I don't know the answer but, I don't want to go through the 70s through mid 90s again. I would rather have a team that wins regularly but doesn't get to the SB than a team that wins infrequently and has constant turnover at GM and coach.

Razer's picture

I am not a fan of dumping our HC for 'who-knows-what'. I do think that we need a new OC that has fresh ideas and can help redesign the offense to include a TE, fashion a consistent run game and better utilize our abundant WR corps. Sorry, our offense is too stale and too predictable. Beyond that we need to demote or move out Bennett. I haven't heard one thing from his pressers that indicate he does anything out than get the guys lunch.

On defense, we are two years past Capers release date. I am not sure who fills these shoes but the defensive philosophies on this team need to change. I am sure that I see AJ Hawk out there every Sunday.

al bundy's picture

Hey in MM's mental pea brain, he is the offensive genius. He calls the plays, manages the clock, calls the red flags and decides what the O is going to do, punt, not punt, etc. The O coordinator may run the practices is all.
I'm one who does not beleive in the above. You need to have a head coach over seeing the game in total and not in the fray of play to play activites. Case in point, the vikes always always always have at least two time outs left for the end of the game action. Mike fritters away at least two of them needed thinking time and decision time. Never having a safety net for end of the game comebacks.

PETER MAIZ's picture

I'd replace him with the new coach in Philly or even Mike Zimmer in a New York second.

Since '61's picture

What Hundley has left is time. The game is still too fast for him right now and will probably remain too fast for the remainder of the season. Will he ever become a good NFL QB who knows, maybe not. Hundley has as much as admitted himself after the Ravens game that everything is just blurs and movement.

Part of this is the current CBA. Less practices means less reps for the backups in practice. I don't know if it is true for the Packers but on some teams the Backups don't get any reps during the week.

We are in a situation where the defense knows that all they need to do is force Hundley to try to beat them. Stop the run and rush the passer, especially if they have a secondary that can play one on one successfully. The OL will continually be overwhelmed in those situations.

All of this just gets worse when we fall behind because the defense can ignore our running game completely. Couple that with our defense which can't keep us in the game and Hundley is facing the worst of all situations for any QB. Even if Hundley accidentally plays well it probably would not affect the outcome.

As I posted late last evening this is at least partially the result of lacking quality players at many positions. Regardless of who is playing QB we need better RBs to sustain the ground game, we need a game break WR who can stretch the defense and has the speed to run away from defenders. An NFL TE would be nice. We need better OLs on the right side and better OL depth. On defense we need at least one preferably 2 pass rushers. Better DLs after Daniels and Clark. A shutdown corner to play opposite King and overall better tackling on defense.

So is there an answer? We're stuck with Hundley whether the game slows down for him or not. Yes, we can try Callahan in a mop up role but that just takes snaps from Hundley and Callahan has never taken an NFL snap so why throw him into the current mess.

I've posted for years that we need better players and the fact is that we still do on both the offense and the defense. TT has been a very successful GM but it is time for him to retire and for the Packers to move on to a new approach to building the team. Capers and his staff need to go and we need a new defensive scheme with some better players as I noted above. I would keep MM for continuity and for his relationship with Rodgers. AR may want to move on as it is but he may not want to play for another HC in Green Bay.

Pittsburgh game might be really ugly. A steeler win coupled with a Raven loss just about seals the division for the Steelers plus they have a legit shot at the AFC #1 seed so we will probably get their A game. Tough days for Packer fans. Thanks, Since '61

Tarynfor12's picture

I remember getting blasted for wanting Callahan instead of oh my.
Now,regretfully, Callahan playing and not winning enough to make a Rodgers return to capture that great award of Division Champion or at a wildcard entry will have many here calling for him to be disposed of like chum.
I did and do believe that Callahan was the better backup all along and would have at least gave us 2/2 record to date and a chance of being better than .500 when Rodgers could return but that has been erased the moment McCarthy made his " I believe in Hundley " statement.
This team is likely beyond saving unless Rodgers comes back in two weeks instead of 4 and even that may still have us looking at no playoff spot.

al bundy's picture

Decided to do two things: look at his college stats and find a pre draft analysis to see if it matches up with his current play.

1. Based on his overall stats of 3 yrs at ucla, his record was pretty decent and he took the team to the bowl games three years in a row with a 67% pass completion. Only 25 interceptions and lead his team in rushing td's. Thus a Ted T could look at just these stats and say wow, what a steel in the 5th.

What I noticed about his stats though, his passing yards avg was 8 yards a pass. So he made his mark passing for short yardage.

Analyst had this to say about his overall play. Tends to roam out of the pocket where he takes a lot of sacks being indecisive.
Does a poor job evaluating his progressions and tends to run a lot when in doubt.
Cannot read defenses very well and hesitates too much causing him to be sacked way too much.
At best a development guy but not a backup. Needs to learn a lot.

The analysis to me confirms what we are seeing from him that nothing has changed in the last three years. He is playing ucla ball and not comfortable throwing long.

Razer's picture

Thanks for the leg-work. It is good information and explains a lot of what we see. Could you pass this along to MM so that he can stop pretending that Hundley has the tools.

Dzehren's picture

starting Callahan @ Pittsburg is not a good idea. Stick with Hundley and play Callahan at home VS Tampa Bay

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."