Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Should Think Long and Hard Before Trading Brett Hundley

By Category

Packers Should Think Long and Hard Before Trading Brett Hundley

The Green Bay Packers have made some unexpected moves this offseason as general manager Ted Thompson has been more aggressive signing veteran free agents.

Thompson signed not one, but two starting caliber tight ends in Martellus Bennett and Lance Kendricks, as well as cornerback Davon House, guard Jahri Evans and defensive lineman Ricky Jean-Francois.

Compared to most years, Thompson has been extremely busy. However, rumor has it, he and the Packers might have another big move to make.

Since the end of the NFL draft, there have been whispers about the Packers trading backup quarterback Brett Hundley, who the team acquired in the 2015 draft after trading up in the fifth round.

Hundley, who was once thought to be a first-round pick while at UCLA, has developed nicely under head coach Mike McCarthy and generated interest around the league after a solid preseason last August.

At 6-3, 227 pounds, Hundley is a specimen. He has a strong arm and has improved his accuracy. He also runs 4.63 in the 40 and like Aaron Rodgers, is a multi-dimensional threat at the quarterback position.

Hundley hasn’t played much in the regular season and has attempted just 10 passes. But he has impressed in the preseason the last two years, which admittedly, doesn’t mean much.

Yet, last year, the young quarterback made big strides in his management of the offense. Things ran smoothly with him under center and he made quick, sound decisions with the football.

In short, Hundley looked like a pro quarterback and it seems that NFL teams took notice.

While we don’t know what the Packers were offered or who was interested, Pro Football Talk reported shortly after the draft that Hundley was nearly traded.

There have also been rumors about him heading to the Jets for Sheldon Richardson, although I highly doubt there is any truth to those. Yet, a potential deal for Hundley could still be possible.

Sources close to the Packers state the organization feels it can get back much more than the fifth-round pick it used to draft him. Truthfully, the team is probably right, but it doesn’t necessarily mean trading Hundley is the right move.

There’s a good chance, that with another strong preseason, Hundley could fetch a second or third-round pick from a QB needy team next spring. But even if the Packers could get a third-round pick for him now, I’m not so sure they should do it, 

It would be nice to add a player or a draft pick. But on the other hand, Hundley provides Green Bay with a quality backup at a cheap rate. And even if he leaves as a free agent following the 2018 season, he will bring back a compensatory selection in return for his departure.

Green Bay is a team that is built to win now and part of that, is having a backup quarterback capable of winning if Rodgers goes down.

People may be high on Joe Callahan, but I don’t know if he’s that guy --  Hundley appears to be.

To me, that’s pretty valuable. So if the Packers are thinking about trading the third-year pro, they should think long and hard before pulling the trigger.

Good backup quarterbacks don’t grow on trees and the Packers know better than most, how one injury, can put an entire season (2013) in jeopardy.

Guarding against that by keeping Hundley around, even if it costs Green Bay a couple rounds in draft-pick compensation, seems well worth it.

There are no excuses for losing in the NFL and with Hundley around, even an injury to Rodgers wouldn’t excuse the Packers from finding the win column.


Chris is a sports journalist from Montana and has been blogging about the Packers since 2011. Chris has been a staff writer for CheeseheadTV since 2017 and looks forward to the day when Aaron Rodgers wins his second Super Bowl. Follow him @thepackersguru

  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (81) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

4thand1's picture

The Packers think long and hard about every decision, especially when they read the fall out on these blogs.

DThomas's picture

Thanks for the laugh.

TheVOR's picture

They should think long and hard, and them promptly trade him in a millisecond! Anything better than a 5th round pick, and or a decent player and it's bye bye time! Callahan and a new rookie would be just fine! MM likes the rookie Hill already. Make a trade for a solid Defensive Lineman or another journeyman OL. Make the trade in a millisecond.

Chris Peterson's picture

I think Hill has some upside and Callahan does too, but do you really feel comfortable sending out Callahan if Rodgers gets hurt. If Callahan was that good, the Browns, a team that needs a QB more than any team in the league, probably would have found a way to keep him. Or the Saints, seeing as Sean Payton also knows a thing or two about quarterbacks.

trading him for say a 4th round pick in next years draft wouldn't make sense until after the season and player-for-player trades are pretty rare and I can't see GB taking on a big contract. So if you are trading him for a third or fourth, it's better to wait, let him keep developing and see what kind of compensatory pick you can get for him.

dobber's picture

"I think Hill has some upside and Callahan does too, but do you really feel comfortable sending out Callahan if Rodgers gets hurt. "


TheVOR's picture

Boys, if Aaron Rodgers goes down, Hundley's not going to make me comfortable either, nobody behind Rodgers is going to be that proficient. Callahan is a complete Gamer, that dude is so fun to watch! He's a never say die guy, he goes down swinging, or should I say he wins games late, dude has the winning intangible! Also, Cleveland shouldn't even be a consideration in Callahan's assessment, he was brought in for a few weeks due to injuries, and came into the system cold. He's perfect up in GB. There's a reason all the rumors are swirling around trading Hundley, GB is as fine with him, as they are without him, get anything of value, because if he becomes a UFA, he's gone anyway. I can't wait to see our QB's in the preseason, and I don't mean Rodgers.

Nick Perry's picture

Personally I'm curious exactly what the Packers were offered for Hundley. He was lights out 2 years ago in the preseason, played in one game last year in the PS before being injured, and was 2-10 with a pick in the regular season. That's just not much to go on in determining what he's worth.

At this point I wouldn't imagine Ted was offered much more than a 5th round pick, maybe a late 4th in a trade for Hundley. If that's the case then Hundley is worth a lot more than that to the Packers.

2013 was a nightmare and the QB situation was handled about as poorly as a GM could have handled it. They added Seneca Wallace about a week before the season opener and had Tolzien on the PS. They even tried Vince Young that preseason...UGH! Thank God Flynn was finally signed before the season completely went in the toilet. Hundley would give the Packers a chance each week in the event Rodgers was injured. McCarthy can seem to get just about any QB ready with a week of preparation. Just look at what he did with Flynn, and Hundley is way more talented than Flynn. IF Hundley was traded Ted best have a solid "Plan B" in place. No need to relive 2013 and be totally unprepared.

hodge555's picture

Whilst it may be true that McCarthy can get a QB ready with a short prep (I suspect it's much harder than that) it's also true that Flynn had been with the team for a few years previously so was already familiar with the system.

Nick Perry's picture

Exactly what I was trying to say. MM can/could maximize Flynn's or anyone else when given a week to do so.

Nick Perry's picture

" McCarthy can seem to get just about any QB ready with a week of preparation, just look at what he did with Flynn."

Actually we said something very similar, I just said it about 5 plus hours earlier...Plus a whole lot more..... LOL..What a D***!!!

Nick Perry's picture

...Sorry guys

worztik's picture

Nick... there are some people (me too at xs) that just come in with an attitude some days. Then, there are those that are just plain unhappy with everything anyone says, because they didn't think of it first! Or maybe, they're not capable of a creative thought and need to reword what someone else has said! It's funny because it's usually the same commenters...
Just sayin' Nick!!!

Nick Perry's picture


KamThomps's picture

Actually, it is close. You presumed he was referring to prepping Flynn rather than preparation for games, including game-plans.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

You pretty much said what I was going to say NickP. I think even a third round pick is not a good trade, NOW. However, if that was offered when said third rounder was on the clock in the draft, that would be different, since you'd actually know who you were getting/drafting.
A third rounder THIS year would have been pretty good--like a second rounder most years-- since it was such a deep class.
I think that a big part of the issue is that the Packers like and trust Callahan as a backup, but there really isn't room on the roster for three QBs when there are so many quality, young guys this year. Callahan honestly looks like a BETTER (by a hair) Matt Flynn: a VERY solid backup, and if Taysom Hill looks like a decent practice squad're burning too many roster spots.
I'd like to keep Hundley this year, because I honestly think he is/will be good enough to win a championship, but the cost-benefit ratio says "trade him" if the deal is good enough.

dobber's picture

I think you're on the right track: I don't know that he could carry them through the playoffs and win a title, but I'm optimistic that he could fill in 2-4 games if needed and not ruin the Packers season.

Chris Peterson's picture

Yea I don't think he could do that either, at least we have no idea if he could. But I think it's safe to assume he could win a few games if needed, especially against mediocre or poor teams.

Chris Peterson's picture

I know Callahan looked good last year but the Browns and Saints both had him last year and they both let him go, so what does that tell you. I say just keep Hundley for two more years and maybe try to pay him top backup money. He's the best backup Rodgers has had in my mind and think they need to keep him as long as possible.

dobber's picture

In my uneducated opinion, the Browns letting him go says more than the Saints letting him go. Still, his ceiling seems to be that of a backup who is active on Sundays...when you need a roster spot and someone needs to go...

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I concur: it seems highly unlikely that Hundley would sign a 2nd contract with GB if it means being AR's back-up.

fthisJack's picture

i hope he has an outstanding camp and preseason. his value will skyrocket and they could get a sweeter deal in next years draft than what he is worth now. or add a solid veteran in a trade. anyway it will be nice to have him as a backup this year.
anyone know how next years draft outlook stacks up? is it deep and what positions....or is it too early to tell?right now, the Packers may have 11 picks! and with Hundley a possible could be a year to trade up and get a blue chipper!

Donster's picture

Keep him for this season if possible. See how Callahan has progressed this preseason. See how Hill looks, if he picks up the offense easily, and can operate it. Stash Hill on the practice squad. Keep Callahan active. Now if a starting QB goes down during the season, then TT might have an advantage to trade Hundley during the season for a starting caliber LB or DL, or a three pick in next seasons draft. But only trade if Callahan progresses and how comfy Hill looks. I don't see GB keeping three QB's though. Is Callahan still eligible for the practice squad? I would wonder if they would risk losing him again.

Handsback's picture

Two points that need to be considered;
First off, Hundley will not stay long enough in Green Bay to take over the signal calling position. Unless Rodgers has a major injury or retires, he will be elsewhere when Green Bay needs to look at the QB position.

Second point, the decision to trade Hundley and get something for him will be around the time before the NFL draft. I can't say for sure, but my feelings is that TT sent out a message this year to prospective teams that "Hundley will be available and you might want to consider him as your starter".

I don't think TT really thought he could get a great deal for him in this year's draft. He planted the seeds and now he's seeing if those seeds will bear fruit in the next few years. Let's face it, he's a great prospect and will make a team think about passing on his availability if he shows this pre-season what he did two years ago.

hodge555's picture

I think you're correct on both points.
Plus the rumour I heard was that the offer was a 5th rounder and I can understand TT not taking that.

Bearmeat's picture

If the Jests really would offer Richardson, I'd take it in a heartbeat. If ARod is hurt, the team isn't winning it all anyway, and I'd bet Callahan could guide the team to 7-9 just the same as Hundley.

What is holding the team back from Title #14 is the defense. Richardson is one of the best DL against the run and pass in the league. We are weak at OLB, meaning the DL has to pick up the slack.

If not for a very good defensive player right now, then it'd better be for a 2nd round pick next year. Which means we have to hope Hundley plays lights out in the preseason again.

Nick Perry's picture

If the Packers traded for Richardson which would probably never happen with TT in charge, there's a few snags that could get in the way. He's already been suspended once for 4 games in 2015 (Drug Policy Violation) and 1 game in 2016 (Conduct Violation).
He's due $8.1 million in 2017 and then will be a FA. Even after the terrible 2016 season Richardson had he still wants a contract around $100 million. Wanting and getting are 2 different things but it sounds like a nightmare to me.
If the guy played like he did 2014 or even 2015 he might be worth a one year rental if the Packers really believed he could get them to the SB. If he had a great season I doubt the Packers could afford him beyond this year, not with Rodgers coming up for a contract extension and others due a 2nd contract like Lindsey, Adams, and HHCD to name a few.

Nononsense's picture

If Richardson plays well and prices himself out of GB, then they would probably get a high comp pick when he leaves in free agency. So getting a one year rental on Richardson who could help this defense right away and possibly a 3rd round draft pick in 2019 for Hundley seems like a good enough deal to me. Especially if Richardson improves a struggling defense.

Even if Hundley plays lights out again in the preseason, not having much regular season experience will make teams leary about trading a high pick for him. If all anyone will offer is at best a a 2018 3rd rounder than keeping him around is the better move because he could fetch up to a 3rd round comp himself when he becomes a UFA, (not likely but possible).

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I hadn't thought about the improved comp pick Richardson would bring. Good point.

dobber's picture

A draft-day trade of Hundley likely would have meant that they would need to invest a pick on a new developmental guy. Maybe part of the issue was that they couldn't identify anyone later on that they wanted...

worztik's picture

Nick... we can afford CMIII... just sayin'...

The TKstinator's picture

"Just sayin'"...?

stockholder's picture

Doesn't do his homework. Trade him.

stockholder's picture

dobber's picture

"Doesn't do his homework."

Really? I hadn't heard anything like this about him in GB. Where does this come from?

Ferrari Driver's picture


When a post makes me laugh, I give a thumbs up!

dobber's picture

I sometimes do the same thing when I grade exams...

PackEyedOptimist's picture

"Doesn't do his homework"? That rings completely false. Hundley is well-known as a football junkie. It's one of the reasons I was impressed with him. I think you'd have to MAKE him not study.

vj_ostrowski's picture

Man, you're a piece of work, shareholder.

stockholder's picture

Eat some Do Do. Just look at the stats and the fact of the INTs. Get real. Sorry to rain on your parade of superiority thoughts again. But he was better when drafted. I'd take the pick before he's free. Better to have the ammunition for a better arm. You guys think A-Rods going to be around for ever! The packers gave up a year of winning, to make A-rod their man over Favre. He is no A-rod!

Bert's picture

Do not trade Hundley unless Ted and MM are convinced he just isn't good enough to win game or two if called upon. Forget the damn draft picks and try to win a SB!! If Hundley can come in and maybe win a couple games if needed then keep him and worry about the draft next year. Rather win a SB than the draft.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I wouldn't want to trade Hundley this season, but I would for a strong offer--and here's why:

This team needs talent.

With an average QB, Green Bay would be lucky to win 4 games. Rodgers knows this, which is why he made more noise about acquiring talent this year. Looking at NFC rosters like Dallas and Atlanta (to name a couple), we're playing catchup against superior rosters.

Knowing this, Ted has spent the past couple drafts finally focusing on athleticim, counting on coaches to teach up guys with rougher skills. It's helping, but we need more.

If someone offers a 2nd, I'd jump at it. A 3rd? Maybe, but not until after the season.

Since '61's picture

I would prefer for the Packers to keep Hundley. If they can afford to keep him why not keep a reliable backup even beyond his rookie contract. Look at the Pats keeping Garafalo. They know that he can play and win if Brady is injured. Admittedly, we don't yet know if Hundley can win but I would prefer him over Callahan or Hill if AR were injured. Callahan couldn't stick with the Browns so he is nothing more than a stop gap to me. Hundley needs more regular season snaps but if there is high demand for his services then he should be able to step in and competently run the offense. If we trade Hundley we go back to 2013 as far as our backup QB status goes. I hope no one wants to go back to that. I vote for keeping Hundley and for continuing to develop him. We might need him after 2018 if Rodgers decides to sign with another team when his current contract is up. Thanks, Since '61

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I wouldn't put too much stock in Callahan's struggles elsewhere. He's like Flynn; a system guy who requires comfort with the roster to perform.

Fact is, he outplayed Hundley last preseason by a wide margin. This doesn't mean he's better than Hundley--it's quite the opposite for most NFL teams. But with this roster and system, Callahan just looks much more decisive and commanding than Hundley.

Honestly, it wasn't even close last preseason. Between the two, had Rodgers gone down, I would have wanted Callahan put in.

That will change, but will the disparity be enough to turn down a strong offer for Hundley--one that would help our overall talent level for Rodgers' late-career SB push?

Not for me. This team needs athletes.

Since '61's picture

Callahan outplayed Hundley because Hundley missed most of the preseason due to injury. Even with that the Packers chucked Callahan. Secondly and more importantly we're talking about preseason performances which means less than nothing for both of them or any other players for that matter. Having said that Callahan looks like a newer version of Doug Flutie. He runs all over the place looking desperately to make some kind of play. Hundley at least looks like he can play and be successful from the pocket. That is a key starting point for any young QB. If Callahan manages to stay in the league he will probably end up like Scott Tolzien, a perpetual journeyman backup. Hundley may not end up any better but I think that he has more raw talent to work with and until we see more of both of them play in an actual NFL game I would prefer to go with what little I have seen of Hundley over Callahan. There are reasons why guys(at any position) play and look good during the preseason and why starters start and play during the regular season. Preseason performances mean nothing. Protect the starters and let the fodder get injured during the meaningless games. Thanks, Since '61

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

First, your "preseason means nothing" comment goes dead against the opinion of coaches. For them, it's a critical time of evaluation. Though I'm sure you're a fine blogger, I'll go with their approach.

Second, while I too feel Hundley is the superior talent, Callahan outplayed him so badly in similar conditions that the coaches initially tied up a roster spot with the unheralded rookie FA.

Third, if you watch the tape--which I did--you'll see Callahan didn't leave the pocket until it collapsed; which was often. I'm sure staying in and taking sacks would have impressed you with his poise, but I think he showed quick, decisive action.

Fourth, Hundley looked just as indecisive and inaccurate in his few regular season snaps as in preseason. He completed 2 of 10.

And fifth, this team needs more talent. If someone offers a 2, jump at it. If they offer a 3, hesitate.

dobber's picture

"Third, if you watch the tape--which I did--you'll see Callahan didn't leave the pocket until it collapsed; which was often. I'm sure staying in and taking sacks would have impressed you with his poise, but I think he showed quick, decisive action."

...or a lack of feel for the pass rush. Which--if it weren't for having what was (with Lang) the best pass-blocking lines in the league--might still get him killed on Sundays.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Again, the tape said otherwise. He took off when he had to, not out of panic.

Since '61's picture

Absolutely correct DPF! Hundley has much more upside than Callahan. In fact Hundley probably could have started for the Browns in 2016, while they chucked Callahan after a few weeks. Thanks, Since '61

Since '61's picture

Andrew - If pre-season performances meant anything and Callahan performed so much better than Hundley why did the Packers chuck Callahan 3-4 weeks into the season? The Packers let Callahan play because Hundley was hurt, which you seem to selectively overlook and to give him a shot at being picked up by another team, which he was by the Browns, who chucked him as well and the Browns QB situation was a catastrophe at best in 2016. Then he went to the Saints where Sean Peyton who knows a little about QB play chucked him as well. You are correct that the coaches value pre-season for evaluating players. But just about any blogger here at CHTV can name 40-45 Packers who will return from last season's team. At most 10 rookies/UDFAs will make the Packers final 53. Again most of us here can be pretty confident that our first 5 draft picks will probably make the team barring injuries or some off field stupidity. Now we're down to a remaining 3-5 roster spots at the most. So if you're telling me that four meaningless pre-season games are important for that OK, I'll give you that, but the coaches probably know even before the 1st preseason game who has the best chance to fill those remaining spots, again barring injuries and/or a particular player significantly surprising the coaching staff in a big way. After going through all of that during the 2016 pre-season and placing so much value (according to you) on Callahan's pre-season performances (which was so much better than Hundley's again, according to you) the Packers chucked Callahan in October when Hundley was fully recovered from his injury. What does that say about Callahan? and what does that say about the importance of his pre-season performances? It says that Callahan played well (to a degree) against opponents 85-95% of who were going to be cut in 2-3 weeks. It also says that the coaching staff didn't think that Callahan's pre-season performance justified keeping him. Conclusion - preseason performances mean nothing. Evaluate players, yes. Predicator for future performance or results, not even close. Thanks, Since '61

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Too long and angry a post for full response, but I'll hit a few points:

First, they kept Hundley over Callahan because Hundley has more upside--which I've made clear before.

Second, once again, I'll point out Callahan is a system guy who requires comfort and chemistry with his targets. In Green Bay, this works for him. In Cleveland and New Orleans, this wasn't the case.

Third, I've never overlooked Hundley being banged up in last year's camp. I just didn't note it because I was already pointing out several things, and had no desire to write novels covering every conceivable factor. I'd already said he has more upside.

Fourth, the biggest point isn't about Hundley at all; it's about our roster. This team needs more talent, and if someone offers a 2nd-rounder or strong veteran for Hundley, this would help the Packers win more games.

Finally, you're missing the point that while Callahan played against backups, he also played WITH backups. His line was disintegrating almost immediately after he took each snap, but he still showed remarkable poise, leadership, and accuracy under fire. For a team lacking talent to occupy a roster spot with him so other teams would further commit to their own backup QB's...

...well, that said an awful lot.

Preseason is simply a gauge of performance under set conditions--one used and valued by coaches. Callahan flourished in the only opportunity afforded him, and the team is clearly interested in seeing more.

I don't think Hundley is going anywhere, nor would I trade him for peanuts like a 4th round pick. But a second round pick from a weak team would really help Ted improve the roster surrounding Rodgers.

sonomaca's picture

If there's a major injury at QB (think Bridgewater), another team might be desperate enough to hand over a 2nd.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Then I'd jump at it.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture


RCPackerFan's picture

My guess is if Hundley has another really good preseason, they will trade him next offseason. I personally wouldn't trade him before though.

As Rodgers gets older the importance of having a good backup QB increases. While they may get a decent draft pick for him now, having a good backup I think is more important at this time.

Since '61's picture

RC - I agree completely. Keep Hundley at least until we know if Rodgers re-signs with the Packers. If Rodgers stays then we begin a serious search for Rodgers eventual replacement, which may or may not include giving Hundley a serious shot at it. Thanks, Since '61

dobber's picture

Just to play devil's advocate: what if Hundley is lights-out this coming preseason and the coaching staff and management decides he's "special" (in the good way, of course)?

Then what do you do?

You'll never get true value for him in trade, but if you're convinced he's going to be a star, do you move ARod? The cap relief and the compensation for ARod in trade might fuel a second renaissance for MM and this team. But if you're wrong...?

Just as a "what if"?

Since '61's picture

Dobber - good point and excellent question. However, I agree with DPF. You stick with Rodgers who has succeeded in the playoffs and the regular season to the point of being a future HOF and a generational player. Hundley has only played in preseason games against players who would be cut in 2-3 weeks in most instances. Hundley has yet to earn the actual NFL game "capital" to let Rodgers go and keep him. However, Hundley may be worth keeping as Rodgers backup, like NE has kept Garafalo, if it is financially feasible and if Hundley wants to remain in GB. Thanks, Since '61

DThomas's picture

I think the only way a trade of Hundley makes sense now (before next offseason) is if a team just wows the Packers by offering them a starter on the defensive side of the ball. Since that's EXTREMELY unlikely I expect Hundley will be traded next offseason.

I agree Hundley won't sign another contract in Green Bay. As much as I'd like that, from his point of view I don't think he should since he wants to start. What would it say about him if he were content to remain a backup until his late 20's?

Next year's draft should be a very good one for the Packers. If the Packers trade Hundley as expected, the pick they get for him along with the now tradeable comp picks could give them ammunition to trade up into the first round or perhaps trade up to get 5 picks in the top 100.

Since '61's picture

DThomas - if a team is willing to give us a quality defensive starter we should consider the trade but remember that the player we're getting probably has a pretty hefty contract and the Packers would need to consider the cap considerations of taking on the contract. That's why you don't see too many trades in the NFL any longer. When you get into trading quality, experienced, veteran players the contracts and resulting cap implications usually become the deal breakers. Thanks, Since '61

DThomas's picture

First, I did write it's EXTREMELY unlikely, but not because of the cap consequences. It's a little difficult getting a read on the Packers cap situation because the roster is at 90 players, but overthecap and spotrac have the Packers cap room at more than $18M with regard to the top 51 and more than that counts once the season starts. But my guess is they have room for one more hefty contract. And remember when a player is traded, only his yearly salaries come with him, not consequences from his prorated signing bonus. But this is so unlikely it's hardly worth spending much time on.

croatpackfan's picture

"People may be high on Joe Callahan, but I don’t know if he’s that guy -- Hundley appears to be."
So you claim that that trade Brett Hundley for draft picks is mistake, but you DO NOT KNOW. Your conclusion that trade would be mistake is based on your observation that something appears to be and on the basis that you DO NOT KNOW!

worztik's picture

Croat buddy... at least with Hundley we know what we have! Just think if the draft pick we receive turns out to be a player like Marcus Williams... Whoa baby!
That would be very sad indeed... I hope that was his name... the #1 QB pick for the Raiders that you could play better than!!! I'm having a GEEZER MOMENT and doubting my memory right now... Just sayin'...

Somedumbname's picture

I believe it was JaMarcus Russell you are speaking of. And that certainly would be terrible.

dobber's picture

I dunno...MM is supposedly "the QB Whisperer", after all.

croatpackfan's picture

But it doesn't matter what we know. It is only what MM, TT and rest of the Packers organization knows.
I will give you only one example - let say that Packers find out that Brett Hundley has some serious health risk in near future, that can not be find with regular physical. That problem will make Brett impossible to play football on highest level, as he can now. What to do?
Another example - Packers already make extension with Aaron and already follows young QBs who they will draft in 2, 3 years from know.
Another example - Packers knows that Joe Callahan is already on the same level as Brett, but trading Brett can produce higher pick.
It is OK to discuss and questions some ideas,but claiming that Packers will make mistake if they trade Brett Hundley while you are admitting that this is just how it appears to you and that you do not know what is with Joe Callahan is little bit illogical, isn't it?

worztik's picture

That's absolutely correctamundo... thank you!!! I believe I'm past my geezer moment but, I can never be sure!!! Who in the world could anyone forget that clown... ME!!! Thanks again...

4thand1's picture

1st of all there are a lot of shitty starting QB's in this league. Hundley could start on a lot of teams right now with NFL experience he has. Granted no real game time, but in the Packers system with TC and pro style offensive. Also he has the benefit of not being thrown into the fire right away. He'll get most of the pre season snaps, and if he preforms well, a lot of teams will be interested.

worztik's picture

I just hope that we don't do as we've done with other players at the end of their contract... let them walk without any ROI... too much money is invested to continually take that approach!!! Let's get SOMETHING for the established player, even if he mainly held a clipboard... knowledge is powerful... Just sayin'....

Maria Os's picture

Rodgers is no ironman by any means an the other backups are jokes and will never do more than loose. Hundly is a solid back up with alot of talent. If you trade him for some 4th or 5th rd pick youll never get a decent player or another qb that happend to slip that far down. I mean will never have a D thats strong enough to win games if rodgers goes down. Hundly is good enough to go 2-3 or 3-2 in a 5 game strech and thats enough to keep a team afloat in any scenario. I just dont see any player or pick that will add that much performance to say man but if we had that guy as opposed to if rodgers went down an you put calhoun in or some other joke of a free agent. And if its that bad were still trading a pick or a player for some one elses backup. So leave him be. Hes the next garrapalo or brunnel.

Maria Os's picture

Rodgers is no ironman by any means an the other backups are jokes and will never do more than loose. Hundly is a solid back up with alot of talent. If you trade him for some 4th or 5th rd pick youll never get a decent player or another qb that happend to slip that far down. I mean will never have a D thats strong enough to win games if rodgers goes down. Hundly is good enough to go 2-3 or 3-2 in a 5 game strech and thats enough to keep a team afloat in any scenario. I just dont see any player or pick that will add that much performance to say man but if we had that guy as opposed to if rodgers went down an you put calhoun in or some other joke of a free agent. And if its that bad were still trading a pick or a player for some one elses backup. So leave him be. Hes the next garrapalo or brunnel.

Tundraboy's picture

What's with all the nastiness lately?. Makes me miss Cow. As ridiculous as he could be there wasn't as much mean spirited commentary. We all have opinions but not one of us is Nostradamus.

dobber's picture

CAREFUL! The use of 'strodamus' led to a meltdown just the other day...

zekester's picture

Is Brett Favre still available as a backup to Rodgers..heard he biked 100 miles so he must still be in shape..nothing better to stir up a boring offseason than bring back Favre him against the Browns just for the fun of it and give everyone something to laugh about..Browns might give us a 2nd rounder for the old interception king!

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

There seems to be really just two basic scenarios here: keep Hundley through his rookie contract and accept the comp pick, or trade him earlier.

I think it takes a lot of extrapolating at this point to assume that the comp pick will be a 3rd rounder. It seems far more likely to me that the comp pick is a 4th to 6th rounder, but I certainly can't rule out the possibility that he'll bring a 3rd rd. comp, especially given the inflation in QB salaries for marginal starters. Keeping him through 2018 means we retain the value of his play if he is forced into service and we get some peace of mind with him on the roster - a real benefit that needs consideration.

Trading Hundley while he is still on his rookie deal has several component issues. The 1st is balancing what the pick (or player) offered is vs. what TT thinks the comp pick would be (97-107 for a 3rd, 138-144 for a 4th, 176-184 for a 5th, etc.). Depending on the projected strength/depth of the draft in question, I'd want the pick offered to be 30 to 40 slots better than the comp pick I'd expect to get, and it would probably have to a 2nd or a 3rd. I would not accept any trade offer of a 4th to 7th for Hundley. Had someone offered pick #73 in 2018, and I expect to get #103 in 2019, that would be tempting. [Players available at 73 in 2017: Willis, Rivers, Wormley, Godwin, Anzalone, Foreman, Hunt, Moreau, Stewart - IDK what talent will be like in 2018 though.]

2nd issue is replacing Hundley. I'd be watching Hill and Callahan closely. Is there a Vet FA QB out there for $2M? Tolzien becomes a FA in 2018 and is currently playing for that kind of money. Are my coaches telling me that Callahan/HIll aren't viable back-up QBs, and I need to draft a QB or buy an expensive one?

3rd Issue is retention. GB almost certainly will carry AR and Hundley on the 53. Will I be able to get Hill and/or Callahan on the PS? This only is an issue if Hundley really shines in preseason and some other team with QB issues makes an offer this August. Obviously I would know what happened with Hill and Callahan if we are talking about next March.

TL/DR: accept a 2nd at any time; probably accept pick 64 to 84 next March. Not interested in trading Hundely for less than pick 85 or so if I expect to get a 3rd rd. comp pick in 2019, or pick 115 if I expect a 4th rd. comp pick in 2019.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Thanks. If I am thinking straight, Hundley is under contract for this season (2017/18), and 2018/19. The comp pick would be for the 2020 draft, no?

Side note: The CBA runs through the 2020 season. No idea what that portends, just something I keep in the back of my mind.

KamThomps's picture

I am an ardent but amateur fan, as far as the intricacies of the game is concerned. I am just beginning to really educate myself about it. I concede this. That said...

My dream deal is for Ted to call a team looking at their QB situation (in my head it is Cleveland), and offer them the duo of Brett Hundley and Jeff Janis. They play well together. They have some experience. And, I think Janis could have a stellar career. Just not in Green Bay.

It could be worth something.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

The prevailing opinion seems pretty clear: If someone offers a 2nd round pick, take it. If they offer a 3, maybe. Anything lower, forget it.

Seems reasonable. And since I don't see anyone offering a 2, I'd say Hundley stays through this season.

MarkinMadison's picture

Hundley's value might be higher now than it will be next spring. I know to some that will make no sense, but hear me out. As strong as the total draft was this year it was a miserable year for QBs. In contrast, next year's QB class looks pretty good. How big a difference? Next year's headliner Wyoming's Josh Allen, likely would have been the first QB off the board this year, but he opted to stay in school because he only has ONE SEASON as a starter under his belt. So let that sink in for a second. Plus, trading for Hundley now gives someone two years on his rookie contract instead of one. If I'm sitting in Denver or Houston, I'm picking up the phone. If I'm sitting in Green Bay, I'm answering the phone. And if you don't trust Callahan or whoever to be the backup, Kaepernick is still on the street, and would probably take $2M at this point.

dobber's picture

Wow...I'm impressed that invoking the name "Kaepernick" didn't immediately garner you a avalanche of "thumbs down".

MarkinMadison's picture


Snake Plissken's picture

#1 "(Hundley) generated interest around the league after a solid preseason last August."
No he didn't.
He barely played last preseason before getting hurt.... TWO preseasons ago he played well,... but ya know,... what's a YEAR?
#2"Yet, last year, the young quarterback made big strides in his management of the offense."
No he DIDN"T. He missed the PS and went 2-10 with an interception..... in NO WAY backing your conclussion, "Things ran smoothly with him under center and he made quick, sound decisions with the football."....
What alternate football universe do your games come in on?

#3: "In short, Hundley looked like a pro quarterback and it seems that NFL teams took notice."
In short nobody knows what Hundley looks like as a pro QB.... and we know you sure don't know.

If Hundley has a great PS we get to trade him at the end of next year. That's best case. Buy you ought to at least know what year you're writing about

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

Packers Tickets, Ticket King


"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."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"