Put up or Shut up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smidgeon

I agree with you. I was thinking in general about all the hubbub around the interwebs about this. Most people aren't being even handed.

---

Well that doesn’t sound like the internet at all.

Originally Posted by Harlan Huckleby View Post
Sort of like Arod.

BTW, am I the only one who notes the strong facial resemblance between Rodgers and Alex Smith. Shit, they look like twins to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esoxx

I've always thought they bear an uncanny resemblance to each other.

---

I agree that they look much alike.

Quote Originally Posted by MadScientist View Post
No, if Hundley plays really well, they'll just say MM lucked into another great QB. After all Brady was a 5th round pick as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugger

I know what you are trying to say but Brady was taken in the 6th if memory serves.

---

http://www.myk104.com/dede/wp-conten...n-laughing.jpg

Using Brett Hundley in the same sentence as Tom Brady...the obvious reaction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodbuck27

Using Brett Hundley in the same sentence as Tom Brady...the obvious reaction.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/B]

---

weak

If Hundley plays as poorly against the Lions then they should put Callahan in for part of the game.

I don't expect him to play any better, but at least it well send the right message.

This also assumes MM can game plan better with two weeks preparation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teamcheez1

If Hundley plays as poorly against the Lions then they should put Callahan in for part of the game.

I don't expect him to play any better, but at least it well send the right message.

This also assumes MM can game plan better with two weeks preparation.

---

well, he was 12-25, meaning there were 13 incompletions. I don't have the full analysis of those, but I'm betting they aren't all on him. It's not a huge repertoire of passes, really, so I'm not sure he was as awful as people are making him out to be. The most worrisome thing is whether the hints from Stubby suggesting he needs the playbook further simplified are a reflection on Hundley's lack of prep and capability, the bad o-line, or both. No way to know that until the next game.

I'm guessing Callahan autoparts won't be much better at this point, but someone had to call for the backup after just one week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mraynrand

well, he was 12-25, meaning there were 13 incompletions. I don't have the full analysis of those, but I'm betting they aren't all on him. It's not a huge repertoire of passes, really, so I'm not sure he was as awful as people are making him out to be. The most worrisome thing is whether the hints from Stubby suggesting he needs the playbook further simplified are a reflection on Hundley's lack of prep and capability, the bad o-line, or both. No way to know that until the next game.

I'm guessing Callahan autoparts won't be much better at this point, but someone had to call for the backup after just one week.

---

I don't really think Callahan is any good. I just need Hundley to play better. Part inexperience, part play calling, part game plan. All or some of those reasons factor in.

Throwing for under 50% and less than 100 yards can be done by any QB off the street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teamcheez1

Throwing for under 50% and less than 100 yards can be done by any QB off the street.

---

You ever watch/read "The Paper Lion?" :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mraynrand

well, he was 12-25, meaning there were 13 incompletions. I don't have the full analysis of those, but I'm betting they aren't all on him. It's not a huge repertoire of passes, really, so I'm not sure he was as awful as people are making him out to be. The most worrisome thing is whether the hints from Stubby suggesting he needs the playbook further simplified are a reflection on Hundley's lack of prep and capability, the bad o-line, or both. No way to know that until the next game.

I'm guessing Callahan autoparts won't be much better at this point, but someone had to call for the backup after just one week.

---

Of course, I can get a hell of a good look at a T-Bone steak by sticking my head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mraynrand

You ever watch/read "The Paper Lion?" :)

---

Yup. Interesting comparison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by denverYooper

Of course, I can get a hell of a good look at a T-Bone steak by sticking my head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.

---

I can take a dump in a Packers uniform and call it a quarterback, I've got time. But then all you've got is a uniform-covered piece of crap.


I guess I just don't think that describes Hundley. I could easily be wrong, but I still think there's more there. Hope to see more next week.

Yoop feisty tonight :D

The part I worry about with Hundley is that he looked like a pocket thrower versus backups and with his WR (the second and third teamers) two years ago. He could move and run*. He could throw a slant or slant and go to Janis. That seemed solid for a spread offense guy who was always in the gun in college doing pre-snap reads.

In his first start, he looked like a guy who wasn't good at post-snap reads with receivers out in a pattern no matter where he took the snap. Even when McCarthy ran a bunch or a (gasp!) crossing route, he didn't find open receivers easily.

So was two years ago a mirage or was he always just shy of skittish and unsure?

I HOPE McCarthy means he's going to take out the ARod part of the offense and simplify the QB reads until his new guy is steady and has learned the nuances of his starting WRs going against starting DBs.

McCarthy said he did not do a good enough job making Hundley comfortable in the pocket so he could make a play. That could mean almost anything, but with Hundley changing formations and the receivers then running identical routes, I think it means less pre snap stuff for the QB to call and more time to read the D.

I hope it works.


*Though I don't remember him looking brilliant on running and throwing, which Rodgers excels at. In the future, we could abbreviate "Not As Well As Rodgers" as NAWAR to save time.

I think Callahan has a shot to be a decent QB. He showed some arm strength and moxie in college. Always thought he had potential.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

Yoop feisty tonight :D

The part I worry about with Hundley is that he looked like a pocket thrower versus backups and with his WR (the second and third teamers) two years ago. He could move and run*. He could throw a slant or slant and go to Janis. That seemed solid for a spread offense guy who was always in the gun in college doing pre-snap reads.

In his first start, he looked like a guy who wasn't good at post-snap reads with receivers out in a pattern no matter where he took the snap. Even when McCarthy ran a bunch or a (gasp!) crossing route, he didn't find open receivers easily.

So was two years ago a mirage or was he always just shy of skittish and unsure?

I HOPE McCarthy means he's going to take out the ARod part of the offense and simplify the QB reads until his new guy is steady and has learned the nuances of his starting WRs going against starting DBs.

McCarthy said he did not do a good enough job making Hundley comfortable in the pocket so he could make a play. That could mean almost anything, but with Hundley changing formations and the receivers then running identical routes, I think it means less pre snap stuff for the QB to call and more time to read the D.

I hope it works.


*Though I don't remember him looking brilliant on running and throwing, which Rodgers excels at. In the future, we could abbreviate "Not As Well As Rodgers" as NAWAR to save time.

---

I was just playing off of the Callhan auto parts line :).

In this case, though, M3 is the butcher and I'm taking his word for it that Hundley's the guy until he isn't. I saw some nice throws mixed with some iffy ones. The long sideline throw to Cobb looked bad as a bang-bang play but when they showed the replay it looked like he did give Cobb a chance to get it. He actually seemed to be comfortable going Cobb so I wouldn't be surprised to see more stuff designed with that in mind.

He didn't seem to miss high as much as he did against Minny. And the next time they give him a deep shot, they should send Janis out... just make sure Janis practices his defensive maneuvers as well.

I think you are right about pre-snap responsibilities. I don't know that he was skittish exactly, but after throwing 3 INTs last week he might have made an overly conservative mental adjustment to the speed of a starting defense.

That deep shot to Cobb was a decent throw, especially since no one else was open.

Both Janis and Davis should be used as deep threats. Why not 5-10 snaps. But the underthrow on the deep ball to Nelson off the play action makes me a little skeptical about Hundleys arm strength and/or deep accuracy.

I always thought Callahan looked better than Hundley.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustinHarrell

I always thought Callahan looked better than Hundley.

---

Well, I didn't always think that. But after one flat performance by the starter, I'm certain the backup is better. (Not JUST mocking you, I actually do suspect Callahan might be a steadier presence. Time to rally the fan club...)

I'm going to revisit my theme of put up or shut up. So far there has been ZERO put up from Hundley. I can excuse the coming in cold against minnesota. I can forgive MM for pampering him in N.O. This is the must put up game though. Coming off a bye week against a familiar opponent, MM MUST have Hundley ready. If he turns in a clunker than forget draft and develop. Its time for a new HC, GM and definitely DC. We need to win or be in it with less than 5 minutes to go. Hundley has to look serviceable. If not, heads should roll.

The Packers could lose out and there is a 0% chance MM is not the coach next year and TT isn't the GM if he wants to be. Capers... now that's another story and he would almost certainly be let go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by call_me_ishmael

The Packers could lose out and there is a 0% chance MM is not the coach next year and TT isn't the GM if he wants to be. Capers... now that's another story and he would almost certainly be let go.

---

We can only hope. Perhaps he'll "retire"?