By Category

Packers Need a New Plan for Backup Quarterback

When looking at the Philadelphia Eagles run to a Super Bowl championship, there are a lot of lessons to be learned. One in particular the Green Bay Packers need to learn is how valuable a quality veteran backup can be.

Obviously, the Packers felt before the season that Brett Hundley would be a solid backup. Otherwise, why would they stick with him so long or turn down trade offers for him during the 2017 NFL draft?

Yet at this point, the Packers need to realize that they were wrong on Hundley. He’s not a good backup, he will never be a starter and after the way he played, he has basically no trade value.

If Green Bay was smart, it would consider cutting bait with Hundley. As the Eagles and Vikings both showed, losing your preferred starting quarterback isn’t an excuse not to win games. The Vikings won the NFC North and made the NFC championship game with a backup. The Eagles won a Super Bowl.

Green Bay, on the other hand, went right down the tubes. Yes, Hundley kept them in contention by beating the Bucs, Bears and Browns. However, outside of his play against Pittsburgh, he didn’t play well when the competition was tough.

The Packers were dominated twice by Minnesota and Detroit. He also looked really bad in a loss to a Ravens team that was far from elite. That should tell you all you need to know about Hundley. He’s a good kid, he’s just not a good quarterback.

Therefore, the organization needs a better plan at backup quarterback. It needs to sign a veteran capable of keeping the team afloat should Aaron Rodgers suffer another injury. Hundley is not that guy and if the Packers go into the 2018 season with him as their backup, it will be a colossal error in judgment.

It’s easy to see why the Packers want Hundley to be their No.2. Having a good, young and inexpensive backup is the ideal scenario. But after what happened in 2017, the Packers must come to grips with the fact that they will need to invest in a veteran, even if it costs $5-6 million a year to do so.

Another option would be using an early draft pick on a quarterback, but do the Packers really want to go down that road again? It’s a risk-reward proposition. If you hit on the guy, it’s the best way to go, especially when figuring in the financial implications.

Rookie contracts are cheap, especially compared to the money given to veteran backups However, watching the Vikings and Eagles survive and thrive following injuries to Sam Bradford and Carson Wentz, should force the Packers to put themselves in a position to do the same. 

Rodgers is getting older and after breaking his collarbone twice, he is even more susceptible to injury. As Anthony Barr showed last season, one big hit and one awkward landing, is all it takes to effectively end a season.

Green Bay has a lot of things to accomplish this offseason. It needs to upgrade the defense, while also making tough decisions on guys like Clay Matthews, Morgan Burnett, Jordy Nelson and Randall Cobb, among others.

But if this team really wants to be a Super Bowl contender, it needs a quarterback other than Rodgers who can win games consistently. Injuries are a reality in the NFL. You can’t just hope they don't happen, instead, you assume they will and plan to overcome them.

The Eagles and Vikings both did that and were rewarded. The Packers attepted to do the same thing and failed. Now they need to adjust.

So that means the Packers must be prepare to play without Rodgers at some point, even if it’s just for a few games. Keeping Hundley won’t cut it in that regard.

Green Bay can sell Hundley’s development all it wants. But unless it upgrades at backup quarterback, it will remain one freak injury away from being an also ran. And in NFL, when the difference between winning and losing is so narrow, that’s simply not acceptable.


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

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (69) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Packer Fan's picture

Well yes, Hundley should be cut unless the new QB coach can fix him. Doubt it. Get a veteran backup and draft a QB in rd 5 or higher.

tincada's picture

Agree with picking up a veteran. Wouldn't bother drafting in addition. The Packers have plenty of other holes to fill thanks to Terrible Ted's team management.

Handsback's picture

It's not that Hot Rod Hundley didn't play's because he had a ton of prep time and failed to play like an average QB. If he was a would be viewed in different light, but he should have been ready to roll and instead the Packer's were rolled!

Savage57's picture

"I like where our quarterback room is."

Impertinent Mike, when asked about bringing someone in other than Hundley. You can appreciate a coach being loyal to his guys, but only to a point.

Hundley has got to go. He had his chance, and he showed he has nothing. In 11 games all he did was reinforce all of the knocks on him coming out of college.

The pages of the history of the NFL is littered with guys who couldn't make the jump to NFL caliber QB and keeping Hundley is just going to be an exercise in writing another page listing the reasons why.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Disagree. No way would I support paying a third of our salary cap space for a Back Up QB. Find someone in the $2.5M to $3.0M area, or just keep Hundley and roll the dice. Now, if the FO frees up some money from Cobb, Nelson, CM3, then I'd consider some diversion of resources to back up QB.

dobber's picture

Keenum, Moore and Henne all made less than $3MM last season. That salary range should be do-able.

Bearmeat's picture

That's the route we need to go. A cheap, low ceiling backup QB who wont sink the season if he has to start 4 games.

But I have to point out, the Eagles and the Vikings had the strongest teams in the league outside of the QB situation this year. I mean, Foles isn't great, but he looked great with an all star OL, WR corps, and a stud TE (not to mention an excellent defense).

We didn't have that. I don't think any backup QB could have played really well with our team. Not Hundley bad, but I'm not sure the playoffs would have been in the cards regardless.

Dzehren's picture

Great point. Fitzpatrick would fit this bill as well

flackcatcher's picture

Hundley played well in away games, but at home he was awful. Even with a stripped down offensive scheme he could not execute at the home field. Down right strange. Packers have no real choice other to keep him with the limited cap space they have, and hope the return of Joe Philbin as OC kicks starts Mike McCarthy out of the rut he's been in as a play caller. (One of the untold stories is how little time these backups get in practice under the CBA. Hundley is a perfect example of a guy who only gets snaps in preseason to work on his craft. Otherwise, QB1 sucks everything else up in prep time. Biases toward a veteran backup, which does cost more, and being a older player, means having another younger QB ready to go in case of injury, which takes a roster spot away.)

Bearmeat's picture

Actually, they do have some cap options - Cut either Jordy or Randall, and give the other a paycut. Cut Bulaga and extend CM3 to lower his cap hit. That is a VERY large part of their current cap issues.

If they can find average performers for those roles, they're going to be fine without those vets. Now, that said, it will take a GM with tremendous stones to do that and I'm not sure Gute can pull it off with this power sharing structure. MM would be very unhappy.

Riverboy's picture

Derek Anderson would be a good fit. He's about the same age as Rodgers and has performed well at Carolina when called upon. Cap hit wouldn't be too bad. Crosby's $5.25M salary would just about pay for Anderson's contract.

WKUPackFan's picture

You're going to eat a $2.5 million dead cap hit if you cut Crosby, and find a kicker that performs as consistently.

Riverboy's picture

A $2.5M dead cap hit is no excuse to keep an overpaid kicker. Bulaga's dead cap hit is $3.2M but everyone wants to cut our starting RT? Crosby's $5.25M contract is ridiculous. It's nothing personal. I think Mason Crosby is a great guy and a really good kicker. He's just not worth a $5.25M cap hit. You should be able to get a consistent NFL kicker for under $1M per season. Gute needs to get our contracts in line with appropriate market value for each position. He should start by cutting Crosby and Cobb, both of whom are grossly overpaid for the positions they play. That would save $12M on two overpaid players. Sign a rookie kicker for about $650K and use the rest of the cap savings to upgrade the defense. The Packers need to stop hanging on to overpaid players who do not really make a difference. Only #12 is irreplaceable. The sooner the Packers realize this, the sooner they will get back to a Super Bowl.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

McCarthy has 3 years invested in Bubble gum Hundley!

The TKstinator's picture


Tundraboy's picture

Now this should be a good one.

Slim11's picture

What's even more infuriating is the team's (MM's?) refusal to play Callahan for anything other than garbage time in the final game of the season. There was nothing to lose.

The belief that Hundley needs all the development opportunity he can get is horse manure! Anyone here remember Ken Anderson? He was D3 QB and did pretty well with the Bengals.

If MM really "believed in" all the QBs on the roster, giving Callahan a half, or a quarter, with the starters against Detroit should not have been a problem.

tincada's picture

Couldn't agree more. If you despise Joe as much as MM apparently did what was he doing on the bench period.

stockholder's picture

History :Brohm and Flynn were drafted in 2008. Even though Arron Rodgers was the starter. With all the projected draft picks. I'm going to say a QB will be taken. And we should see 2 taken again.

4thand1's picture

This whole dam team fell apart when AR went down. IMO, the team knew they sucked as a whole and mailed it in right away. The o-line was a mess, secondary was a mess, no pass rush, and the running game took time to develop. I don't believe any back up would have helped. Screw the back up QB for now, we had T Hill and let him walk, major f-up on MM. MM was going on practice and pre season with Hundley. WTF, anyone could have signed Nick Foles but they didn't. Keenum helped the queens to the playoffs, so what, they got hammered in Philly. We have a lot of good draft picks coming, BAP and pick up a FA or two.

Point Packer's picture

But MM invested three years in a QB who may have a shot as a backup in the CFL? What a joke that was. Go find a proven backup. #12 goes down for a few games, find someone who is capable. That’s not Brett Showtime Hundley.

Razer's picture

...But MM invested three years in a QB who may have a shot as a backup in the CFL?...

Totally agree. Not having a good backup is one thing. Not knowing what you have at backup is the real failure here.

tincada's picture

Yeah, I just cringed when I heard MM say our QB room is set. Season over stick a fork in it I said to myself.

Royalty Free GM's picture

If the Green Bay PACKERS wants to win 2 Superbowls in the next 4 years they need to do this:

The Great Aaron Rodgers inks a “team friendly” 25mil/year long term deal plus a lucrative tv ads AND he wins 3 Superbowl MVPs.
He will play 5-8 more years and needs a fresh offensive WR weapon right now. Imagine what he can do with speed.

2018 Aaron’s OFFENSE:
1st round draft WR !
Draft Ridley or Sutton or Washington. One of these will be available at 14th. If they want a particular player for sure, they need to trade up. Combined with the skills of Aaron, one of them becomes a star receiver. Who will it be?

Scenario1: Adams, Ridley/Sutton/Washington, Nelson (restructured, plays 1-2 years, wins 1 SB and retires)
Drop: cobb.

Scenario2: Adams, Ridley/Sutton/Washington, Richardson(FA)
Drop: cobb, nelson.

TE Rodgers is good enough this year with these WR combos. With a healthy Ty, RB combo will do their jobs.
With these offensive weapons, Arod will deliver TDs.

2018 Pettine’s DEFENSE:
Scenario1: 2nd round draft CB
Sign a very good veteran FA pass rusher

Scenario2: 2nd round draft Pass Rusher
Sign a very good veteran FA CB

Let DC Pettine figure out what to do with Clay&Burnett(keep or drop) plus what to get with 2nd AND 3rd AND 4th round picks(CB/Pass Rusher) and veteran FA signings (CB/Pass rusher).

If Pettine can build an average performing D# or better, Packers will win Superbowls with a healthy Aaron Rodgers.

Draft/sign quality not quantity. WR, CB, Pass Rusher. Aim to get THREE very good players.

If they can hit anything productive from 5th and later draft rounds it is considered as a bonus but not necessary to win.

You can’t have it all: Signing a very good veteran TE? Signing better QB protection? We should have better special teams? Don’t spend money or higher draft picks on backup QB.

Packers will rise or fall with Aaron, that’s it.
Go Pack Go

-Downvote if you agree-

EddieLeeIvory's picture

Love your passion, amigo.

Free agency should be used to fill the big holes at TE & CB.
Then in the draft, BPA really....that's how u can find guys like JJ Watt, Randy Moss, Ed Reed etc after the top-10 is gone....

Plenty of good deals available on CBs & TEs in FA, who will be HUGE upgrades over the carcass we saw last year & 2016. Guys who don't need to be taught what pro football is all about.

Royalty Free GM's picture

I’m not so familiar about available cap space. Do you know how much cap space we free if e.g. Cobb or Nelson or Matthews are cut?

How much we could realistically save by restructuring Matthews and Nelson contracts?

Can we then afford for:
CB Trumaine Johnson 11-12M?
WR Paul Richardson 6-7M?
Pass rusher OLB Nigel Bradham 6-7M?
TE How about Darren Fells ! 1-1.5M?
Total about 24-27.5M?

We have now 19M cap space?
If we cut Cobb, do we get 12M more cap space, total of 31M ??

Nick Perry's picture

If we cut Cobb we gain about $9.5 million in cap space. ($3.25 million in dead cap)

If we cut Nelson we gain about $10.2 million. ( $2.3 million in dead cap)

If we cut Matthews we gain $11.3 million in cap space. (No dead money.

The dead money is deferred money from the signing bonus they received when they signed. If they did this that's an additional $32 million in cap money. IMO there's no way they'd cut all 3, no way.

I'd be in favor of extending them all if the players were willing. Nelson would be I believe and maybe Matthews but Cobb I'm not so sure.

stockholder's picture

If I represented the players union, I'd file a grievance! Why do you think the players are pushing for more guaranteed money? Cutting all three players because you want cap money? Just Gone. And No veteran would come to GB . Keep cutting players that still can play ? RESULTS: A strike will happen sooner than later. Not to mention this all ending up in court.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Off the top of my head, I'd say that GB has the fewest cap casualties regarding players still under contract. We've let some guys who played out their contract leave. Also, NE has not been kind to some of its players and they're doing fine.

This might be an issue in the next CBA, but doesn't seem to apply to GB, imo, at present.

Royalty Free GM's picture

Thank you Nick Perry about cap info.

-I would cut Cobb. (gain 9.5M in cap space)

-If Nelson takes a hefty paycut (33-50%) keep him otherwise cut him. Try to sign WR Richardson.

-If Matthews takes a hefty paycut (33-50%) keep him otherwise cut him. Try to sign OLB Bradham.

Nelson & Matthews paycuts would gain 7-10M? cap space.

But what to do with Bulaga? Can we sign someone better with less money?

Colin_C's picture

Here's the problem. Just because you draft someone high, doesn't guarantee they'll make the jump to the next level. The mid rounds (2-4) is where you build a great team. I'm with you 100% on adding more dynamic offensive guys, but we absolutely need to draft a TE, preferably two.

I agree also that we need to look at WR's in the draft, but I'm not sure round one is where I'd look. Outside of Ridley, I'm not enthralled with the other projected first rounders this year. Washington is one of my most overrated prospects right now. Wouldn't consider him until the 3rd even. My favorite WR prospect is Anthony Miller, and right now he's projected anywhere from fringe 1st to mid 3rd. I just don't think any of the guys this year warrant 14th overall. In hindsight someone will, but I can pretty much promise that he'll be taken after the first round. Now once we get to rounds 2-4, that's when I'd pull the trigger on a WR. Here's a few names that should be around then and have a lot of potential:

Anthony Miller
DJ Chark
Steve Ishmael
Deontay Burnett
Auden Tate
Christian Kirk
DJ Moore

All these guys were playmakers in college, and have a lot of upside.

On defense, low/mid level FA signings and excellent mid round drafting is key. There will probably not be any superstar pass-rushers to sign this offseason, and even if there were, Rodgers contract is looming large. Same goes for CB's really. Taking flyers on guys coming off injury, talented but under produced, and cap casualties is how I'd plug holes for the short term. The draft is the long term solution. One or two mid-level FA signings is fine, but the cap can't sustain much more than that. Right now, I'd make those two guys a TE and an EDGE player.

For me, sometimes the pre-draft offseason is almost as fun as the regular season :-)

EddieLeeIvory's picture

Rueben Foster just arrested again. Many of us wanted him last draft. Teddy don't bring in known-criminalz.....

Colin_C's picture

Saw that as well. Likely means the 49er's will be much more interested in Smith or Edmunds now. Unfortunate for us...

Royalty Free GM's picture

Does anybody know how much cap space we free if e.g. Cobb or Nelson or Matthews are cut? Is it Cobb -9M, Nelson -10M, Matthews -11M, Bulaga -5M?

How much we could realistically save by restructuring Matthews and Nelson contracts? 1/3-1/2? 7-10M?

Aaron Rodgers new contract will add about 5-10M?

Can we then afford for:
CB Trumaine Johnson 11-12M?
WR Paul Richardson 6-7M?
Pass rusher OLB Nigel Bradham 6-7M?
TE How about Darren Fells ! 1-1.5M?
Total about 24-27.5M?
Plus Aaron contract 29-37.5M?

We have now 19M cap space? (Spotrac)
If we cut Cobb, do we get 9M more cap space, total of 28M ??
Restruck Nelson and Matthews contracts 7-10M, total of 35-38M cap space?
So this would give enough to all listed new FA acquisitions?

And maybe cut Bulaga -5M to acquire better TE? Maybe not?

Colin_C's picture

If he can be had on the cheap (which he should), I'd campaign for bringing in RGIII. Saw an article about it today, and it really makes sense to at least give him a look.

Handsback's picture

I mentioned RGIII before and glad to see other people realize that he's a viable option. He's a great athlete and needs to learn more about the QB position. In spite of Hundley's failure...I think MM could bring RGIII into the fold and make him a great #2 option.

I'm almost sure he would throw a TD at home games!

stockholder's picture

The packers have been talking with JT Barrett Ohio st. IMO 2 QBs will be taken this draft.

dobber's picture

I think the number of QBs drafted will have a lot to do with whether or not they sign a vet in FA. But I agree that we'll likely see a minimum of one...

Colin_C's picture

Yeah, I still can't believe that Hundley never threw a home TD. In today's passing league, that's pretty crazy.

Riverboy's picture

RG3 would be an interesting pick up. I also think Derek Anderson would be a good fit. He's about the same age as Rodgers and has performed well at Carolina when called upon. Cap hit wouldn't be too bad. Crosby's $5.25M cap hit would just about pay for either one.

croatpackfan's picture

Chris, can you please explain what is the cost Eagles has to pay for Carson Wentz?

Do you know how much Vikings paid for Bradford, and how much they are paying for Keenum and Bridgewater? How many 1st and 2nd rounds they gave for Bradford?

When you answer those questions, start to think again about what you wrote... And come with new proposition. Or you want to say that Packers need no FA help at pass rush, CB, TE and ILB position? And that Packewrs should not extend Aaron Rodgers this offseason?

Nick Perry's picture

The Vikings paid $18 million for Bradford in 2017 and another $4 million for Bridgewater and Keenum. That's $22 million for the QB position in 2017 for the Vikings.

The Packers paid about $22 million for Rodgers, Hundley, and Callahan in 2017 so it's pretty much identical Croat.

BUT the Eagles only paid about $8 million to the QB position in 2017 between Wentz, Foles, and Sudfeld. That's a huge advantage plus they received a 1st and 4th round pick from the Vikings for Bradford.

croatpackfan's picture

Thank you, Nick.

To explain logic behind my post. You helped me in that. I will not pay attention to the Eagles, as I asume everybody understands wonderful position Eagles was in 2017 (and will have good position in 2018!).

But, I wil now ask what will Vikings do? They may sit down and do nothing, or they can reach FA market and hire another experienced and good middle level QB, offer Teddy Bridgewater better contract and hope he will take over the position in 2019/2020. Or they can keep Bradford for 18 mil and proceed with Teddy Bridgewater as backup with fatter contract (again, we are looking 22 mil). Or they can pay Case Keenum (at least 20 mil per year) and let Bradford and Bridgewater go, trade for Hundley (let say 6th rounder) and we are talking about 22 mil again... Or they may do something else... I see no win situation for them and if I'm Vikings fan, I would be pretty concerned about that situation...

On the other hand, we are talking about guaranteed 30 to 35 mil to Aaron for 2018 and for future per year... How much wouild you additionally spend on QB position?

Fordham Ram's picture

With the new three way system of management, I doubt if the arrogant McCarthy will give the nod. It would be a stain on his reputation to dump Hundley after grooming him for 3 years. The argument for keeping Hundley would be he has experience now, has a contract that is as cheap as it gets and with an improved OL he will do better as well. The coach we have is quite stubborn. They will save the money, keep Hundley and use the savings to pick up a quality FA in the defense or at TE. Don't see McCarthy changing course, despite the evidence.

tincada's picture

Geez I hope like hell you're wrong.

Lphill's picture

Talk of cutting Clay always comes up but believe me when I say the Packers defense is better with him than without him.

Johnblood27's picture

Please, just move him to ILB.

He is a better playmaker from the ILB position.

Michael Hughes's picture

Eagles budget was not built around a franchise QB so they could afford foles. Ours is so if rodgers goes down, we arent winning the superbowl so I cant agree with spending up to 6m on a backup who in reality is incredibly unlikely to be the difference between winning it and not. Would much rather spend it on depth on a player who may well make the difference.

Sure look for alternatives but they must be cost efficient. Spending a lot on a backup maybe gives us a better chance of getting to 8-8 if rodgers goes down but that isnt the aim of the game.

If your strength is your defence or running game then its important to have a solid backup who can keep them going if your starter goes down. That isnt us.

Dzehren's picture

Ryan Fitzpatrick... need a Developmental QB on practice squad as well not named Callahan.

navydisposaleer's picture

What happens during the week must translate into Sunday. I'm sure what the Packers were watching during practice made Hundley the backup. What the Packers did during the draft time for Hundley was to IGNOR what the scouts were saying. Hundley won't work in the NFL. He's not a pocket passer and runs way too much. It was obvious during 2017. Green Bay ignored a bunch of QB's that way for almost 30 years before Wolf grabbed Favre. The whole bunch of failing QB's included Don Horn, David Whitehurst, Scott Hunter, Jerry Tagge, Randy Wright, John Hadl and others. 1971, passed on Lynn Dickey, Ken Anderson & Joe Theismann. 1973, passed Ron Jaworski, Dan Fouts. 1974, Danny White.

The list goes on and on. Failure to pick first class QB's during the years from 1970-1992, when they traded for Brett Favre. Now, since 2005, the Packers have chosen a bunch a failed 2nd stringer's. However, during the Favre years, they selected a number of good QB's that went on to become starters in the league.

Thompson did a miserable job of drafting QB's. He sat on his draft picks only to select many failed players. Sorry to say, we had to put up with that way too long.

dobber's picture

"Now, since 2005, the Packers have chosen a bunch a failed 2nd stringer's."

Not entirely true: Matt Flynn turned out to be a pretty good 2nd stringer for the Packers, and the only other QB (beyond #4 and #12) that MMs system seemed to work for (as indicated by his inability to win a starting gig with other teams).

"Hundley won't work in the NFL. He's not a pocket passer and runs way too much."

Hundley is/was a typical QB project. Where they took him was about right for a guy with his potential...but the light hasn't turned on for him to play within the confines of the Packers offense. This is in part on Bennett and MM: they didn't adjust the offense to make it more Hundley-friendly. The one game where they played to his strengths (Tampa, I think) they put the ball in his hands on the move in the second half and it paid off. They never committed to doing that again. I'm not saying that Hundley was a victim, but what I am saying is that he could have been better than he showed.

fastmoving's picture

,,,the good backups from the Favre years never that was a nonevent. other than that: I thought TT drafted AR?

Spock's picture

Getting a quality veteran QB sounds good, but realistically how many want to sign with GB and sit behind Rodgers with zero (outside of injury) chance of ever being the starter? I like the thought of RGlll because he might be okay with being a backup now. It's difficult for the Packers to attract a really good backup because they all know Rodgers will be "the man". I wonder how soon we will be seeing movement on contracts; I would expect Matthews to be one of the first to be extended to lower his cap hit. He might not be the "young" CM3 but he is still a valuable piece on the defense IMHO.

dobber's picture

Whatever veteran they bring in is going to clock a lot of preseason snaps, which might help a guy like RGIII who was out of football last year (and beyond) show that he can still play. I think most guys like him are going to only ink one-year deals. The Matt Moores and Chad Hennes--who aren't likely to be competitive for starters jobs--might get you two years.

worztik's picture

DOB... I wouldn’t mind bringing RG3 to camp to see what, if anything, he has left in his tank! I’m not positive he even wants to play but, if he’s had an arm amputated in the past year (even the throwing arm!), he’d still be better than Mr. Bubblegum!!! Hell, Manzell would put Hundley to shame... playing drunk!!! (He apparently quit drinking and is on BiPolar meds...). Now I’m reading how we NEED so much help on D! We don’t need to turn our whole D over and start fresh. One of the draft mags for the year we drafted Fackeral said he COULD BE the best pick, at his position, of the entire draft class!!! Maybe it hasn’t been the players but, the coaches??? The addition of draft picks and FAs is, and always will be, a crap shoot or just plain crap if TT’s making the moves!!! A big name pass rushing OLB or CB or rush DE... ALL 3 is really what we need!!! I still advocate for drafting a QB really HIGH (not buzz worthy) but, ahead of #14 is the way to go!!! Ron Wolfe drafted 3 CBs and one, Mike McKinzie, made it big! As I said, a crap shoot!!!

Since '61's picture

I would try to sign Josh McGown. He played well for the Jets in 2017 and I believe he would come for a reasonable price. He would accept a backup role and could mentor a QB that we pick up in the draft.
Chuck Hundley and Callahan. Move on and get better players. Thanks, Since '61

dobber's picture

I'll disagree in that McCown will likely still be looking for a chance to start. He's getting up there and has had a propensity for injury, but has shown enough in recent years that he'll get more than the Packers will want to pay from a needy team with issues in their starting QB.

worztik's picture

If we’re gonna draft a QB, it had better be AROD’s future replacement!!! The old adage of next man up doesn’t hold true if we have a 5th round pick as our backup!!! Someone told me that we recently tried that... WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS!!! We’re drafting at 14 and while it’s higher than we normally pick, we need to put together a package to move up, if necessary, to get the player we like at QB!!! I don’t know enough about the QBs in this draft but, from what’s being written, there may be a couple real game changers available. (Or at least very capable developmental prospects or backups...) Rodgers was picked 24th... that’s a fluke and won’t ever happen again!!! We wasted a 2nd rounder on Brian Brohm and how’d that work out? I said pay AROD 25 M a year as long as he’s in GB... it was parroted earlier today... so maybe we’re tired of putting all our eggs in one player’s basket. As long as teams continue this crazy course of paying to stroke egos, we’re gonna have a great player and a bunch of JAGs... just sayin’!!! GO BIG OR GO HOME!!!!! Garappolo was a 2nd rounder... how’d that work out??? Not too well for Billy B (PISSED ABOUT THE TRADE. What I’m saying is we NEED great evaluators and we can’t rely on luck or the past . We need to be aggressive and get rid of the warn out status quo... we deserve better!!!

fastmoving's picture

"Rodgers was picked 24th... that’s a fluke and won’t ever happen again!!!"

.........just ask Brady.

worztik's picture

What year was he drafted??? Rodgers was a fluke because he was rated as the 1st or 2nd best player in the draft that year!!! Where was Brady ranked??? You speak with forked tongue my friend!!!!

stockholder's picture

2005, And Flynn and Brohm in 2008? Very surprising. HUH! Even though I think you have an argument to draft a QB. People won't agree with you. Why - Huge need on Defense. 2. Wr speed and wanting to reduce cap money. 3. Draft picks sitting the bench. 4. A-Rod has the packer fans heart. But I believe two will be chosen. 1. JT Barrett in the 6-7rd. 2. Mason Rudolph ! Why Mason Rudolph. Pocket passer that can hit the long pass. He will not make it by the packers if he lasts into the 2nd.

Royalty Free GM's picture

Arod might be staying in Green Bay for the next 5-10 years. I’m not so sure about MM. No need to rush finding QB successor now, because Arod is not declining anytime soon.
Get some waterboy to sit at bench dressed as a QB :)
Save draft picks and money on something else.

DD's picture

I feel we need to restructure Nelson, Cobb, Matthews, and Baluga. If not, trade or release all of them. Also, release all TE's based on production, speed. This would free up big money. Now , if they draft a rookie QB in late rounds that has raw skills and has a high learning curve behind Rodgers, then do it, as Hundley clearly lacks this after his time spent with offensive genius MM to learn. MM has contributed to our failure too by sticking with no learn Hundley for to long. Remember preseason this year, Hill? Point made. Also remember, Hundley was a 5th round choice and 6th rated best QB for a reason. Watch Hundleys college film, same mistakes. If not a raw, talented, smart rookie QB, go for a veteran backup for sure. There's plenty out there!

Hawg Hanner's picture

I agree we need to go in a different direction than with Hundley, but its far easier said than done to bring in a veteran backup. Who is available? Mike Glennon?

gene klug's picture

The coaching staff should have cut him after his poor preseason performance. I was shocked when they kept him! Taysom Hill outperformed him and yet they let him go and kept Hundley. This tells you something about the coaches lack of recognizing talent. Could have been the OC's fault or the QB coach but in the end the blame lies with McCarthy.

John Kirk's picture

Johnny Manziel is clean, supposedly, and wants back in.

I don't care about the media circus ramifications because I don't think it'd be all that bad. Why not add him and see what he has in OTAs and TC/pre-season? He'd fit one of our top considerations which is the financial part. He'd be a min deal. Cheap, cheap, cheap.

Honestly, who would you rather have? Juicy Fruit Hundley, Joe Callahan or Johnny Manziel? Some guys like Cris Carter are able to get it and become Hall of Famers. His odds are long but he's cheap and he has ability. Being around 12 would be great for him. Who'd he have to look up to in Cleveland? Josh McCown?

Give me Manziel over the two we have right now and any camp arm we'd bring to town.

I'd also be good with a QB anywhere in this draft. I like Lauletta, Mike White and love Benkert from UVA.

Chuck Farley's picture

Hundley avg 8 yards a pass, led team in rush tds, led league in being sacked, and his long pass game was inaccurate. That is what you got drafting him and after 3 years nothing changed

tincada's picture

I would take a look at Mike Glennon. although I don't know the $.

sonomaca's picture

Not sure Hundley can’t be the guy. Foles and Keenum comparisons not really fair because both those teams had elite defenses. I’d give Hundley one more year as backup.

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