Packers Question of the Day: QB Confidence

After reports surfaced of the Packers trying to pursue quarterback Brian Hoyer before the Patriots brought him back to New England on a three-year deal, Packers fans didn't necessarily take kindly to the news.

In fact, many attacked coach Mike McCarthy for his previous comments on the quarterback room being just fine. He also said the Packers wouldn't bring in a veteran quarterback.

Of course, McCarthy isn't responsible for those decisions when it comes to free agents. But what is your confidence level in Brett Hundley and Joe Callahan?

__________________________

Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (48)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Slim11's picture

November 02, 2017 at 08:43 am

I have more confidence in Hundley than I did in Graham Harrell, Seneca Wallace, Vince Young and Scott Tolzien. Sadly, that says very little for Hundley based on his body of work so far. Callahan is untested.

Hoyer would have provided the veteran presence on the bench. This, reaching out to Hoyer, has to be in the back of Hundley's mind.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2017 at 08:54 am

I think it would be more in Callahan's mind then Hundley's.
It appeared that Taysom Hill was ahead of Callahan until he got picked up by the Saints. And then after getting promoted, a couple of weeks later they talk about a veteran player coming in which would be to replace Callahan.

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

November 02, 2017 at 08:45 am

This article is just looking to start a fight:). How about a "tastes great" vs "less filling" commercial.

Monday night will pretty much make or break Hundley's career. Even if he does well, he will have to repeat that many times for people to believe it wasn't a fluke.

Same might be said for MM. I don't blame him (too much) for publicly praising Hundley even if he is privately less confident. But what he said it correct - he's got 3 years invested in Hundley and if that didn't make him a good enough backup, they should have know that. How - you might ask? I don't know but that's why he gets paid the big $. But he's got a track record of sticking with players. He was right on Crosby. But had Jones 4th on the RB list and let Hill go while keeping Callahan.

Of course, this is GB. Where whatever management there is, doesn't seem to be too keen on winning another SB.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2017 at 08:58 am

For McCarthy what was he supposed to do when asked about his QB's? He has to say what he did. If he says they should go out and get a veteran QB and they don't, what does that tell the guys they do have, and what does it tell the team.

Also McCarthy has seen Hundley in practice. He knows what he is capable of. I think Hundley is a bit hesitant in playing for the first time. Once he gets more comfortable I think we will see him loosening up and making big plays.

"Of course, this is GB. Where whatever management there is, doesn't seem to be too keen on winning another SB."

Thompson was praised for going out and getting veterans and going for the super bowl. Now that Rodgers is hurt they no longer are trying to win a the Super Bowl?

I don't get this take.

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:54 am

That was just this year. And people he brought in haven't worked out too well - specifically Benett.

This could have been his way of trying to go out on top. Why else did he change after all these years? The organization from top down has been a slow to change bureaucracy - BOD, GM, Head coach, etc.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

November 02, 2017 at 11:40 am

When your the only team with a playoff streak that rivals the Patriots you don't clean house. You stay the course and tweak. You're just being salty and delusional if you say management isn't keen on winning another SB. I'm sure they just sit in their office and say I don't want to be successful... grow up

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:38 pm

Gotta luv armchair GMs that praise the winners of each offseason and forget to check how that translates to W/L the following year.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2017 at 08:52 am

I really think we will see a much improved offense this week. I think McCarthy and the coaches took time to come up with an offense to better suite Hundley.

They need to find a way to get the WR's more involved while at the same time getting some easy throws for Hundley. Much like the simple play they ran on the easy pass to Cobb who they faked the jet sweep to. I think we will some different looks as McCarthy will show off some creativity. I can see them using more 2 RB sets to get Montgomery and Jones on the field together.

I would expect to see more read option type of stuff. With young mobile QB's it really helps a lot of them, as it causes defenses to pause.
I think the offense will be much better then against the Saints.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:43 am

The offense was, intentionally or not, as vanilla as it gets against the Saints. I expected more new wrinkles than we saw with the new QB in place. The new wrinkle was, more than anything else, to try to win behind the running game. That's not going to work with this team.

I think the new wrinkles really come out this week in the division game. They've had three weeks to devise them and two weeks (if you include the lead-up to the Saints game) to practice them. If anything is changing, offensively, we'll see it this week. We talk about read option--that might suit an OL that doesn't have guards that are asked to pull very much--but this is something that other teams will be prepared for to some degree.

The biggest change for this team will be if they get some of their players back and closer to full health. Morgan Burnett is the key piece they need to get back on defense, and they need their starting OL. When Burnett is playing, the defense is markedly better (note that I didn't say GREAT or GOOD) and it frees up guys like Jones to do more things. Getting Brooks back would allow the defense to flex CMIII around, too.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:48 am

This defense is Top 5 with Burnett!

Just kidding. But he helps.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:36 pm

Yep. Not great or maybe good, but better. It allows them to mask their deficiencies more.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:32 pm

The game plan going into the game was sound. run the ball, do some play action and try to not make Hundley go out and win a game. The problem was some of the decisions in the game was not very good.

I agree that I think we will see new wrinkles. More with Read option. more Jet sweep type of stuff. More stuff with motion and just different looks.

I personally would like to see more of a traditional West coast offense ran. More slants and stuff that give the QB a good window to throw to.

I agree about the healthy players. Getting Burnett back would provide a huge lift. And Brooks would be a huge help to the pass rush. Fackrell is BAD.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:37 pm

Fackrell is turning out to just be a "run-around" guy. He's just soft. Just about anyone is going to be an upgrade...Brooks, Odom, Biegel?

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2017 at 01:00 pm

I don't get why they haven't played Odom more. If he can't help, then why not go back and bring Elliott back.

Hopefully Biegel will be able to play and help. Also hopefully Brooks can come back and play.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:48 am

I agree, though I don't want Montgomery in the backfield with Jones. I prefer a quality blocker like Ripkowski.

The key is, McCapers can't come out banging away with the run game, since Detroit will pack the defensive front. We need to start aggressive, firing short to mid-range passes (as you wisely suggest) to back off the D. We can't afford early punts, as that would allow Stafford to quickly wear down our suspect defense.

If Hundley isn't the man, we'll lose anyway, so let him be the man right out of the gate. Soften up that defense, then hit them with Jones.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:52 pm

I like having them in the backfield together to create a new look. I'm not saying to run them together 20+ plays but 5 or so they could create some damage together. Ripkowski isn't the threat that Jones or Montgomery are. When they put those 2 on the field together against the Saints the Saints used base defense which was in GB's favor.

I think a healthy mixture of run/pass would help. Can't do run, run, pass on every 3 downs.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:36 am

Ted Thompson made a big mistake releasing Taysom Hill--one mistake of many this past off-season.

I think most of us here shouted "No!" when Hill's name popped up on the cut list (I sure did), because we knew he'd get claimed. But hey, I was equally angered over releasing McCaffrey, and he wound up coming back--so angry fans don't know everything.

Looking at Brian Hoyer isn't a show of no confidence in Hundley, but rather a lack of confidence in our QB depth. That problem would have been lessened had Ted kept Hill.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:44 am

I just don't see how Taysom Hill would make much difference at this point. I don't think we would've seen things turn out differently with regard to a run at Hoyer if they'd kept Hill.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 09:54 am

Hill makes a difference because he easily outplayed the backup we wound up keeping. Right now, we should have Hundley and Hill active, with Callahan providing emergency depth on the PS.

Since we don't have that, we wind up looking at failed retreads like Hoyer.

Ted blew this one, plain and simple. It happens.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 10:10 am

Also, what if Hundley bounces back and finds his groove--keeping Green Bay in the playoff hunt?

Then he'd be a tremendous trade asset leading into the 2018 draft. But without a developing talent like Hill, Ted will have far less safety in moving Hundley.

Ted's mistake with Hill has really hurt this team--both in this regular season and next offseason. And what hurts the most is this was an obvious mistake opposed by many of the fans--not just a minor blunder criticized in hindsight.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

November 02, 2017 at 10:25 am

ALP - I'm happy to see that you have returned to us. Hill did play well in the pre-season but as we have seen with Scott Tolzein and now Hundley, preseason play does not necessarily translate into strong regular season play.

I also felt that Hill should have been retained versus Callahan but my guess is that MM had (at the time) a higher comfort level with Callahan knowing the system versus Hill. Plus we don't know (or at least I don't) what the coaches saw in TC and in practice.

We will probably never know whether releasing Hill was a mistake or not since we will probably never see either (at least I'm hoping) play in Green Bay. Time will tell. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 10:47 am

Hard to tell if McCapers had more confidence in Callahan, since both were released.

Regardless, releasing Hill was indefensible. He dramatically outplayed Callahan, and even looked better than Hundley (though against lesser talent).

Preseason provides no guarantees--as you rightly point out--but why even have a preseason if we're going to completely ignore performances during it? That's what Ted did with Hill, and it's what McCapers did by activating a lifeless Jamaal Williams over a much more explosive Jones.

No, Hill's release was a terrible move by Ted. Many of us--you and I included--opposed it. Over the past few seasons, Ted and McCapers have simply made too many questionable decisions. I've been a defender of theirs, but that's becoming harder and harder to do.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:15 pm

Indefensible?? There are only so many roster spots. You are barking all this off the benefit of hindsight... if Thompson knew Arodge was going down he'd probably done things different but he probably used that roster spot to keep another depth builder on defense where it was needed more at the time.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 03, 2017 at 09:58 am

Not hindsight. I voiced exactly the same concerns when he was released.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

November 02, 2017 at 06:06 pm

There is zero chance 3 QBs would have been on the active roster through the rash of injuries in weeks 1-6. I think there was at least one game with zero healthy scratches. All inactive players on game day were due to injury.

So keeping Hill would have meant cutting Hundley. Not that I'd have any problem with that given what we've seen from Hundley to date.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 03, 2017 at 10:00 am

I disagree, since we've had some completely unproductive players taking up roster spots (ie. Fackrell, Williams, Rollins). There were opportunities aplenty for carring an extra QB this season.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:40 pm

I think we're romanticizing Taysom Hill a little too much.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

November 02, 2017 at 12:42 pm

Happens every year... some preseason player gets adored by the fan base and doesn't turn out to be a large contributor:
Jayrone Eliot
Frank Zombo
Vic So'oto
Tayson Hill
Charles Johnson

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

November 02, 2017 at 01:25 pm

Almost forgot about So'oto, he and Travis Jervey to the naked eye looked like the perfect size/speed combinations for their positions playing with reckless abandon the coaches love besides. I believe Jervey scored 1 NFL touchdown in his career but had some longevity on special teams. Thanks for the memories.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 03:44 pm

The Saints would strongly disagree with including Taysom Hill in that list.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

November 02, 2017 at 03:37 pm

That was obvious the minute it was called a "big" mistake to let him go.

At best he might possibly a be slightly marginal upgrade over Hundley now. Even that is far from a given. Starring in the preseason against a bunch of guys soon to be bagging groceries is far different than having regular season success. But he sure as heck wouldn't be saving the season as a rookie replacement to Rodgers. We'd just be talking about a different QB elevated to starting status that is no Rodgers.

And Rodgers will still likely be around until Hill hits FA, when he'd leave if he was any good. And if not, who cares?

It might have been a small, relatively insignificant mistake to let Hill go. But not one worth commenting much about.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 03:42 pm

Oh, I disagree. My points as to why he should have been kept stand. He far outplayed other options and was picked up when we released him. The Saints love him. And now, we're in bad shape if we trade Hundley next year.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

November 02, 2017 at 05:57 pm

The Packers are in worse shape if they keep Hundley, IMO. Based on what we've seen so far, they'll be lucky to get a bag of used practice balls for him in trade. This after they said they love him.

Which shows the folly of believing what a team's braintrust tells the press.

I don't have any interest in Taysom Hill so I'm good agreeing to disagree on him. It's all Crystal Ball reading anyways. it's possible yours is better than mine, I suppose.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 03, 2017 at 10:06 am

My crystal ball was better on keeping Hill and playing Jones right away at halfback, but worse on keeping McCaffrey for the opening 53. Like most fans, it's a mixed bag.

But the Packers brass isn't composed of fans and bloggers like us. These are supposed to be professionals, and lately their batting % has been too weak.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

November 03, 2017 at 10:38 am

For what it's worth, I agree completely on Taysom Hill, and expressed my disappointment at the time. They tried to slip him through waivers and I had a feeling that wasn't going to work. I honestly think they'd be in far better shape right now if they had him. The Saints managed to keep him on the roster all year, so he must be showing something.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 03:39 pm

Not romanticizing. Evaluating. He far outplayed other options, then was released and snagged by another team. This set us up worse going forward.

0 points
0
0
Office@twitterrealityshow.com's picture

November 02, 2017 at 10:00 am

Every team must have a DEEP THREAT on 3rd down if they wish to flow offensively

PASS RUSH Just not there

I don't understand what the Packers are doing. They move in increments as opposed to the Patriots who do what is necessary

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

November 02, 2017 at 10:16 am

At this point it is difficult to have a high level of confidence in either Hundley or Callahan. We all knew going in that Hundley was never going to be Aaron Rodgers but that's OK because no one else is going to be either.

Hundley has demonstrated that he has the physical tools to play well. The questions is when will the game "slow down" enough for him to begin to apply his tools and allow him to play well. Reaching that point is different for every QB.

Brett Favre came in and played well almost from his first game leading a comeback win versus the Bengals in 1992 and then winning his first start against the Steelers.
However, Brett had a better defense and OL than Hundley has today and a better HC.

The Packers went 6-10 in 2008, Aaron Rodgers first season as a starting QB. IIRC, Aaron first stated that the game "slowed down" for him during the 2010 campaign.

Maybe It will begin to better for Hundley by Monday evening maybe not. It would certainly help if the OL plays solidly and the defense makes some stops and/or creates a few turnovers.

Right now my confidence level (On a scale of 0-10, 0 = none and 10 = Aaron Rodgers) in Hundley is 2 -4 out of 10 and my confidence level for Callahan is 0. Hopefully those numbers for Hundley will improve after Monday evening's performance. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

November 02, 2017 at 10:54 am

Hundley reminds me a lot of Alex Smith. It took a few years before the game slowed down for Smith, but once it did, his arm, athleticism, and high IQ took over.

I expect similar things from Hundley, though to what degree is uncertain. My prediction is we'll see vast improvement if McCapers doesn't put Hundley in deep holes with conservative game plans.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

November 02, 2017 at 11:09 am

IMHO it is way, way, too soon to get a read on how good (or bad) Hundley will be as the starting QB. I'm just going to watch the game (finally, one that's actually shown in AZ!) Monday night with guarded enthusiasm and excitement to see my team playing. Here's hoping Brett has a great game and the comments section on Tuesday becomes much more positive! There's so much negativity in the "real" world right now we could use some uplifting moments watching our favorite game and team. I'm going to stay optimistic and believe we see a lot of those moments from the Packers. Go, Pack, Go!

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

November 02, 2017 at 11:32 am

You have to expect coming out of the bye week the offense with all 5 offensive lineman back and more practice time with the skill players and Hundley they can expand the offensive game plan and score more points. The real key is the defense, the Lion's QB without being pressured can light the scoreboard up. Silverstein''s article "Clock Ticking on Dom Capers Packers Defense" today indicates Capers and the defense are at a cross roads.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2017/11/01/silverstein-...

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

November 02, 2017 at 04:32 pm

What a pathetically AWFUL defense. Totally uninspiring. (read article)
Stats just confirm what my eyes have already told me.

I'm not the least bit excited about the rest of this season.

0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

November 02, 2017 at 11:58 am

This QB thing is just another example of TT and MM not being on the same page. MM offense relies on passing, TT drafts a bunch of RBs. TT signs a couple of TEs, MM doesn't target TEs much and one sits on the bench. MM says we have our QBs, TT goes out and looks for another. Same old stuff, different season.

0 points
0
0
Couch Cleats's picture

November 02, 2017 at 02:18 pm

Who cares if the Packers contacted Hoyer? The personnel department gets paid to do exactly that every day. Hundley is on the last year of his deal and if he moves on we will ned another QB anyway for the future. If they sign Hoyer they probably don't need to use a draft pic on a QB next year. Makes total sense to me.

There are plenty of other questions I'd rather have answered. Like "How much longer are we going to keep the same defensive scheme and leadership when we keep losing in the exact same ways every year?"

AR has been dragging Caper's defense into the playoffs every year. We don't beat a team with a good offense unless we win in a shootout as time expires due to AR magic.

Now everyone can finally see what our team looks like with a developing youngster or any other mortal playing QB. Is this a surprise to anyone? Did we really need video proof?

Hundley deserves his chance to learn and make mistakes before people throw the towel in on him. This is what football looks like to the rest of the NFL.

If we had put a solid defense around Rodgers years ago we would have been playing the Patriots in the SB every year. If we had a typical owner MM would have been told to dump Capers years ago. I've seen enough. If MM wants to stay devoted to DC then his chair should open too.

0 points
0
0
TXCHEESE's picture

November 02, 2017 at 04:27 pm

I think Hundley will be fine. He's hardly had a chance to get his feet wet. Is he going to play lights out week in and week out? No. As stated above, this is what the majority of teams deal with every few years. We've been blessed as fans to have back to back HOF QB's.
As far as defense is concerned, Capers can and should simplify his schemes with so many young players. He can add throughout the season, but expecting rookies and inexperienced players to be completely smooth with all the personnel packages etc, is asking for trouble..

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

November 03, 2017 at 06:02 am

Hundley has had 3 years , if he isn't ready now then he never will be . Hill showed some promise but Hundley is the guy, this is his audition now , Monday night football , Lambeau , it's now or never.

0 points
0
0
Donster's picture

November 03, 2017 at 08:10 am

I hope Hundley has a good game against Detroit. We tend to forget the pressure he is dealing with trying to fill the shoes of Aaron Rodgers, with little game experience, and to keep the team in the playoff hunt. Then add that this next game is on MNF with a national audience watching. He has an extreme uphill battle, especially with a supporting cast on defense that is just not very good. MM needs to step up and be the coach he is supposed to be with QB's, and put Hundley in a position to be able to have any success. But Hundley has to keep his wits about him and do the job that he is getting paid to do.

I think it will help Hundley having Rodgers on the sideline to help him.

And I don't believe that Hundley was drafted to be AR's replacement. Just to be a solid backup. The results are not in yet. We just have to wait and see. Monday night will show us a lot about the kid, and about MM too.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 03, 2017 at 11:55 pm

My head says you're exactly right, Donster. My gut says there is something really wrong. I am just not sure whether it is with MM or Hundley.

0 points
0
0