2018 Playoffs

[pbmax]

Using the word decent to describe a 27-2 td int season with a pro bowl appearance, then using the word dreck to describe the rest of his career....truly shows the ridiculous bias and spin you use to promote your narratives.

Signing replacement level talent isn't a strategy I am very fond of that is true.

Foles has worked out OK for an Eagles team playing great ball, but until today I did not see him win the games.

We'll see what the Patriots find in his now four weeks of film.

Signing Foles is just garden variety shuffling of dreck. Developing Hundley promised much more. The failure for the Packers was the latter, not the former. Though I'll admit losing your starting QB in Week 14 makes a veteran backup look more attractive than a young vet making his first start.

[mraynrand]

Signing replacement level talent isn't a strategy I am very fond of that is true.

Foles has worked out OK for an Eagles team playing great ball, but until today I did not see him win the games.

We'll see what the Patriots find in his now four weeks of film.

Signing Foles is just garden variety shuffling of dreck. Developing Hundley promised much more. The failure for the Packers was the latter, not the former. Though I'll admit losing your starting QB in Week 14 makes a veteran backup look more attractive than a young vet making his first start.

I agree with most of this except for the fact that you did have evidence of Foles playing well in a collection of actual regular season NFL games. That of course you address by your critique of the Packer staff thinking that Hundley was ready (did they really believe this? Or were they just crossing fingers that Rodgers didn't get hurt/didn't want to put money and time into a vet QB).

Either way, you're kinda wasting time replying to Yeti. His first troll post was a strawman. People here who acknowledge TT's indisputable top 5 GM performance over his career don't dispute that there are other ways to build successful teams.

[pbmax]

I agree with most of this except for the fact that you did have evidence of Foles playing well in a collection of actual regular season NFL games. That of course you address by your critique of the Packer staff thinking that Hundley was ready (did they really believe this? Or were they just crossing fingers that Rodgers didn't get hurt/didn't want to put money and time into a vet QB).

Either way, you're kinda wasting time replying to Yeti. His first troll post was a strawman. People here who acknowledge TT's indisputable top 5 GM performance over his career don't dispute that there are other ways to build successful teams.

I think the question about the backup QB is pretty fascinating. Packer writers might be obsessed about veteran depth at CB, which I find to be a red herring, but the QB spot is a different matter.

Developing a younger player has risks as we saw this year and in the other year of the collarbone. Having Rodgers and Flynn succeed while Harrell, Coleman and Hundey failed is about as good an illustration as you could have of the risk/reward.

But just as with any FA, the hit rate on vets is still going to be 50%. Keenum and Foles are working now (or were up until 7 PM on Sunday) but history suggests they will fall back to earth. I have no feel for Hundley's prospects.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Signing replacement level talent isn't a strategy I am very fond of that is true.

Foles has worked out OK for an Eagles team playing great ball, but until today I did not see him win the games.

We'll see what the Patriots find in his now four weeks of film.

Signing Foles is just garden variety shuffling of dreck. Developing Hundley promised much more. The failure for the Packers was the latter, not the former. Though I'll admit losing your starting QB in Week 14 makes a veteran backup look more attractive than a young vet making his first start.

Wolf used to sign "seasoned" vets of NFL wars to back up Favre (McMahon, Bono, Mirer, etc.). Sherman signed Akili Smith and Tim Couch, but for reasons beyond logic, those signings failed to blossom. Ideally, you want a Hostetler, a Reich, a Foles, and a Keenum backing up your star QB. But any seasoned vet worthy of an inspiration would do just fine.

The Hun showed some kung fus as a rookie. But they weren't actually kung fus, but instead, illusions. Bluntly put, Hundley can't play. In the last TC, Hundley was outplayed by a 27 year old rookie free agent. Todd should've signed a seasoned vet to backup A-Rod. Someone like Kap.

[Joemailman]

Wolf used to sign "seasoned" vets of NFL wars to back up Favre (McMahon, Bono, Mirer, etc.). Sherman signed Akili Smith and Tim Couch, but for reasons beyond logic, those signings failed to blossom. Ideally, you want a Hostetler, a Reich, a Foles, and a Keenum backing up your star QB. But any seasoned vet worthy of an inspiration would do just fine.

The Hun showed some kung fus as a rookie. But they weren't actually kung fus, but instead, illusions. Bluntly put, Hundley can't play. In the last TC, Hundley was outplayed by a 27 year old rookie free agent. Todd should've signed a seasoned vet to backup A-Rod. Someone like Kap.

Probably because they sucked.

[MadScientist]

Wolf used to sign "seasoned" vets of NFL wars to back up Favre (McMahon, Bono, Mirer, etc.). Sherman signed Akili Smith and Tim Couch, but for reasons beyond logic, those signings failed to blossom. Ideally, you want a Hostetler, a Reich, a Foles, and a Keenum backing up your star QB. But any seasoned vet worthy of an inspiration would do just fine.

The Hun showed some kung fus as a rookie. But they weren't actually kung fus, but instead, illusions. Bluntly put, Hundley can't play. In the last TC, Hundley was outplayed by a 27 year old rookie free agent. Todd should've signed a seasoned vet to backup A-Rod. Someone like Kap.

Wolf also had draft guys like Brunell and Detmer and Hasslebeck as backups. Also 3 QB's was the norm back then, allowing for a vet backup and a promising qb to develop.

[mraynrand]

Ideally, you want a Hostetler, a Reich, a Foles, and a Keenum backing up your star QB.

As long as we're talking ideally - Ideally, I'd like to trade for Steve Young from Tampa Bay to follow my HOF QB. Or draft all the long-shot all-pros in the late rounds. Like Tom Brady and Terrell Davis. But the Packers never do these things because they just want to make the playoffs and not win the Superbowl. So long as people are paying to sled at Packer Park, leadership just doesn't give a shit whether the Packers win or lose.

[pbmax]

Wolf used to sign "seasoned" vets of NFL wars to back up Favre (McMahon, Bono, Mirer, etc.). Sherman signed Akili Smith and Tim Couch, but for reasons beyond logic, those signings failed to blossom. Ideally, you want a Hostetler, a Reich, a Foles, and a Keenum backing up your star QB. But any seasoned vet worthy of an inspiration would do just fine.

All of these vets, as backups, were worse than Wolf's QB draft picks with the exception of Hosteler and Reich. You could throw Don Strock in there. Detmer was probably terrible but we never got a chance to find out in GB.

Foles has been his terrible self and his good self in the last month: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/page...ack-nick-foles

If you find a QB worth developing, he almost has to backup on the active roster. After his rookie preseason, he would have been claimed like Taysom Hill was.

At that point, to carry a 3rd vet QB on the roster will cost you in a game. With only two QBs the Packers have run short of RBs more than once.

The question remains who the hell was wrong on Hundley and are they still collecting a paycheck?