Negatives/Horrible's Ravens vs Packers

Positives:

+ Davante Adams

+ Defense overall played pretty well

Negatives:

- I don't remember a worse offensive game for the Packers in the 40 years I've watched them.  Not only were they shut out, they handed points to the other team.

Positivies:

Defense took care of their run and managed passing really well. The only reason they got to 23 is because of great field position due to our inept offense.

Defense plays this exactly same game with Rodgers and the final score is 31-10 Packers.

Negatives:

Reading the pocket.

Make terrible throws.

Not following through on throws.

Jumping while throwing for no apparent reason.

Throwing ducks so quacky that even Jerry Rice would shutter.

Refusal to step up in the pocket.

Running backwards for no reason to get sacked because ?????

And MM being okay with all of the above because, "Hundley is my guy."

+

Appears Adams is the only receiver Hundley is comfortable going to. 

Defense played well after in spite of all the GB turnovers.

-

MM did a nice job with AR, but the talent was there. He appears to struggle recognizing when it's not and the three-year ongoing disaster at backup QB is inexcusable.

Spriggs appears to a bust, and an extremely costly one.

that was some really ****ty football

Put 17's on Jordy, Cobb, Geronimo and Janis! uni's

free agent

+

I didn't watch a single snap... nothing

-

TT, MM and the supporting clown cast are still employed and undoubtedly will be again for 2018.  

El-Ka-Bong posted:

free agent

Blair Kiel is jealous of that hair. 

3 INTs, TAKES 6 sacks!

not an NFL QB

he will be out of the league next year

YATittle posted:

3 INTs, TAKES 6 sacks!

not an NFL QB

he will be out of the league next year

He blank stared himself into about 4 sacks. 2 were on Spriggs' attempts to block. 

michiganjoe posted:

+

Appears Adams is the only receiver Hundley is comfortable going to. 

Wouldn’t this be a negative?

YATittle posted:

3 INTs, TAKES 6 sacks!

not an NFL QB

he will be out of the league next year

On replay, CBS's Gannon pointed I believe at least twice how Hundley had a WR wide open, in front of his face, and just flat out didn't see him or it was too late and by then he gets sacked or the play dies out.

From his draft profile :

Internal clock is a mess. Has marginal anticipation, and appears to be lacking in ability to read defenses and create a pre-snap plan. Slow getting through progressions, taking 125 sacks in three years

In 3 years and 4 regular NFL games, MM/Van Pelt/Edgar Bennett has yet to fix that.

bdplant posted:

Wouldn’t this be a negative?

 His production was the positive, although the reasons for it certainly were far from ideal.  

Brett Hundley Draft Thread

WEAKNESSES: Poor pocket awareness and presence, struggling to decipher and recognize pressures...drops his eyes early and allows defenders to disrupt his tempo, struggling to manage the pocket and stare down the gun barrel, especially with interior pressures...too easily rattled and doesn't play with consistent confidence in the pocket...needs to develop his internal clock, holding the ball too long and allowing the pocket to swallow him up.

 Struggles to reset his feet and eyes once moved from initial spot...doesn't show much anticipation at this point in his development, usually waiting for his target to come open before delivering...questionable processing speed with gun-shy tendencies, not challenging tight coverages...too methodical at times and doesn't read blitzes to speed up his process...needs to quicken his eyes and expand his vision...downfield ball placement isn't a strength with most of his completions coming on throws under 10 yards on screens, quick slants and swing passes...poor ball security with 29 career fumble the last three seas

There's more of his scouting report when coming out of UCLA.

Positives: We beat the Bears twice-once without Aaron Rodgers! After today it seems like even a more monumental feat....

Negatives---well of course Brett Hundley was mostly terrible..but for me, the truly astonishing thing is how consistently bad Spriggs is---Didn't Ted trade up for this guy?--He's made some errors, but this was his biggest...terrible!

Positives?  None.  Unless they can MM and the coaching staff tomorrow. 

packerboi posted:

I'm done with Ted as well. Not the 1st time he can't find a competent back up QB in the 2 periods we've lost AR. This is bad team without 12 with coaches with no answers

Ted would have been looking for other QBs if Mike hadn't been telling him that Brett Hundley is good enough. It isn't a case of Mike McCarthy "making due" with Hundley. He has invested 3 years in him because he believes in him. He either has a bad eye for QB talent, or he isn't good at developing them. Either way, it's a bad look for a "QB guru" (the damn announcers and reporters call him that every chance they get). He doesn't know squat about QBs, he just lucked into having two Hall of Fame quarterbacks on his roster when he was hired in 2006.

packerboi posted:

I'm done with Ted as well. Not the 1st time he can't find a competent back up QB in the 2 periods we've lost AR. This is bad team without 12 with coaches with no answers.

The perspective I hold to is Rodger's age.

I am at the point where I think erring on the side of caution is blowing the whole thing up.

Clean house.  Put in Eliot Wolf.

It's time.

I did not enjoy this crapfest today.  But I just can't pile on.  I don't think MM is a coaching liability, I think his loyalty is the problem.  He can coach, he just doesn't know when to pull the chute.  I feel better after turning the dumpster fire off after the first poss of the 3rd q.  It is clear that BH is not the answer, but this team is better than just AR - they aren't put into spots to make it happen.  On Off, that is fumbles and BH - MM can't open it up - if he did, there would be a 50 burger put up, easily - its the NFL.  The problem is MM needs to acknowledge that BH is not the answer and make a change, not because he doesn't like BH, but because his team needs a lift, a spark, whatever...same with defense, but there its DC, he's the problem.  So i still believe in MM but he has to change how he rolls, but do i believe that can or will happen, no.

And I’m saying bring in John Dorsey because Eliot has done squat

It's obvious that Joe C is not the answer, if he was thought to be capable he would be given a shot. 

Pikes Peak posted:

It's obvious that Joe C is not the answer, if he was thought to be capable he would be given a shot. 

Don’t forget, you have the great guru making that call

phaedrus posted:

packerboi posted:

I'm done with Ted as well. Not the 1st time he can't find a competent back up QB in the 2 periods we've lost AR. This is bad team without 12 with coaches with no answers.

The perspective I hold to is Rodger's age.

I am at the point where I think erring on the side of caution is blowing the whole thing up.

Clean house.  Put in Eliot Wolf.

It's time.

Coming off a serious injury on his throwing side.

-- MM's fault is loyalty to a fault. He needs to dump Hundley and just try something else. Horrible, horrible QB play and I think it's more because Hundley just reverts to something bad rather than trusting/listening to his coach or AR. Gannon is right; my gosh, there's a guy wide open and BH just doesn't see him or tries to wait until he's five yards wide opener and takes a sack. How could any competent QB allow on fourth down to go backwards 10 yards and then take a sack to top it off? Just try Callahan and see if he deserves a roster spot. It can't hardly get any worse.

-- Clay hurt again. King not playing. Clark out now. Injuries just decimating this team again.

++ HaHa actually had an INT. Defense stood in there for the most part, given the field position BH put them in. Still holes, but any competent QB wins this game.

excalibur posted:

phaedrus posted:

packerboi posted:

I'm done with Ted as well. Not the 1st time he can't find a competent back up QB in the 2 periods we've lost AR. This is bad team without 12 with coaches with no answers.

The perspective I hold to is Rodger's age.

I am at the point where I think erring on the side of caution is blowing the whole thing up.

Clean house.  Put in Eliot Wolf.

It's time.

Coming off a serious injury on his throwing side.

I'd roll the dice with what Rodgers has left instead of the alternative (Packer's life post-without Rodgers).

But, I happen to believe he may be the best QB to ever lace them up.

Fandame posted:

-- MM's fault is loyalty to a fault.

Bob Sanders.

Dom Capers.

Sean Slocum.

Ron Zook (few have paid attention, but once again the Packers are horrible on ST's.)

Tom Clements.

I won't get into players. His one exception that turned out well? Mason Crosby. The rest is a long list of stubborn he's refused to move on from.

Pikes Peak posted:

It's obvious that Joe C is not the answer, if he was thought to be capable he would be given a shot. 

It's obvious that Dom C is not the answer, yet he's still being given a shot.

Fedya posted:

Pikes Peak posted:

It's obvious that Joe C is not the answer, if he was thought to be capable he would be given a shot. 

It's obvious that Dom C is not the answer, yet he's still being given a shot.

While not just about today, Hard to argue with a defense holding a NFL team to 23 points when the inept offense not only can't sustain a drive but turns the ball over FIVE times.

Positives

     There are talented players out there Clark (dam I hope it’s not a knee), Blake, Jones/King, Biegel and Lowry look like keepers, heck Adams is looking real good.

     I don’t think the defense could have done better given the circumstances 

Negatives

     They are not Hundley, Spriggs, Mays, and as somebody said in another thread not the combination of Rollins Randall House Goodson. 

     This team just can not play complementary football.

I DO NOT WANT my boyfriend to come back this year......the Packers are 5-5 

packerboi posted:

YATittle posted:

3 INTs, TAKES 6 sacks!

not an NFL QB

he will be out of the league next year

On replay, CBS's Gannon pointed I believe at least twice how Hundley had a WR wide open, in front of his face, and just flat out didn't see him or it was too late and by then he gets sacked or the play dies out.

From his draft profile :

Internal clock is a mess. Has marginal anticipation, and appears to be lacking in ability to read defenses and create a pre-snap plan. Slow getting through progressions, taking 125 sacks in three years

In 3 years and 4 regular NFL games, MM/Van Pelt/Edgar Bennett has yet to fix that.

Who in their right mind would move up to draft that? He is negative on the essential parts of an NFL QB. 

Negativities

Could not figure what the offense game plan was?  The entire game seemed out of sync.

The 4th and 6 call was an abomination...  Punt the ball!  ie., because then Baltimore gets the ball and the Packers D holds them to a punt...guess what?  the Ravens down the ball on the one inch line (I know the refs reversed the call, but the ball wasn't touched and the Packers got lucky to get the ball at the 20).  So field position was another issue.

Hundley is on the verge of losing this team

Callahan should have had a shot to play

Mayes fumbles...

Adams, for as many great plays that he makes, always seems to drop an easy one here and there.

Vogel had several poor punts

Several K/Os were caught 1-2 yards behind the goal line, yet the tentative Packers  return unit failed to bring out the K/O from the EZ.

As much as Hundley hurt the Packers offensive efforts, I lay the blame on MM for this loss.  At times, his play-calling lent to Hundley's horrific performance.

I think MM may have forgotten how to coach.  Spoiled by too many years of TOG and Rodgers.

Positivities

Fackrell played a good game

No bad long-snaps...oh that's right, no scores or FG attempts

Lambeau Field Turf looked absolutely fantastic during the first quarter and even after the sunset, it looked great.

GBP1 posted:

Lambeau Field Turf looked absolutely fantastic during the first quarter and even after the sunset, it looked great.

 

Are you referring to the literal sunset or the figurative sunset, because the figurative sunset was during the first quarter.

+ GB ran more plays, had more yards, better 3rd down efficiency (though neither team should take their 3rd down conversation rate as a positive), and was near equal in TOP.

- Had 5 turnovers and looked like week 1 pre-season on offense.

GBP1 posted:

Lambeau Field Turf looked absolutely fantastic during the first quarter and even after the sunset, it looked great.

 

imagine how great it would have looked had they not built a monstrous wall on the south endzone that blocks out the sun to more than half the field for late season noon games? 

still pisses me off...  but not as much as watching a guy play QB who has such little pocket awareness, can't see open receivers, does not deliver the ball timely, moves farther backward to take sacks...