Brett Hundley is auditioning to play somewhere else in Packers preseason

The Green Bay Packers already know what Brett Hundley looks like if pressed into duty as the starting quarterback in relief of an injured Aaron Rodgers. Three wins in nine tries plus more than half of the Vikings game in which Rodgers got hurt. Two ugly shutouts Authentic Kevin King Jersey , no touchdown passes at home in five games, twice failing tobreak 100 yards passing, and five times unable to get to 200.Despite some moments of brilliance — several clutch plays and a number of quality scrambles — Hundley wasn’t good enough. It seems obvious in retrospect (if it wasn’t at the time), a veteran option would have been better. Is there any evidence Hundley would function materially different in this offense in 2018? Part of answer may lie in what happened during the offseason. In his first move as general manager, Brian Gutekunst unloaded former first-round pick Damarious Randall for DeShone Kizer, the Browns starting quarterback last season, and two pick swaps. Netting Kizer, one of the only long-term starters last season with uglier numbers than Hundley, shouldn’t necessarily be seen as the death knell for Hundley’s tenure in Green Bay, but it was close. From a pure talent standpoint, Kizer boasts a bigger frame and stronger arm, and at 22 years old likely possesses more upside. At the very least, he’s had less time to reach his potential. Hundley, a former fifth-round pick who struggles mightily with his processing and decision-making last season, should have been in position to succeed. He’d been in this system, played with these players under these coaches. At 25 years old, he’s been in the league long enough to know what it takes to study, practice, and perform. He’s a veteran. On the other hand, Kizer has more career starts and more experience game-planning as the starter. He’s clearly the more raw prospect,but he should be. Instead of declaring after his junior season, Kizer should have gone back to Notre Dame to polish his skills and play enough season with his Packers teammate Equanimeous St. Brown. Such a move likely would have helped the draft stock of each player. More to the point, the reason to keep Hundley over Kizer wouldn’t be based on talent or developmental upside. On that, Kizer earns a smooth victory. Hundley would be the preferred No. 2 simply because the Packers believe he’d play better than Kizer if Rodgers again went down for an extended period. Here’s the problem: we’ve already seen Hundley falter in that scenario. We don’t know the same is true of Kizer. Moreover, keeping a player the team knows can’t be relied upon as a starter ahead of a more talented player on the depth can stunt the growth of your developmental player. In other words, every rep Hundley takes is one Kizer isn’t getting and Green Bay should want him to be the one getting that critical experience. Kizer remains a work in progress. His footwork needs to be refined. He’s still learning to play under center and clearly doesn’t know the offense as well as Hundley. He couldn’t possibly. But that’s not the question here. When Hundley’s contract is up at the end of 2018, Green Bay almost certainly won’t re-sign him. He’s not the long-term backup for Rodgers and the Packers. So if Rodgers were to get injured and Hundley played six or eight games let’s say, he’d only be taking developmental snaps away from a player who might actually be the preferred No. 2 for the next several years. Even if Hundley were to be marginally more prepared to play (and that’s not at all obvious) http://www.greenbaypackersteamonline.com/david-bakhtiari-jersey , putting him in over Kizer sacrifices long-term development for perceived marginal short-term gains. Keeping three quarterbacks could be an option, but the Packers already have an issue with too many receivers worth keeping, questions at offensive line, and decisions to be made in the secondary. The difference between Hundley’s readiness in 2018 compared to Kizer’s shouldn’t be prioritized over keeping a rosterable player at another position. That gap simply isn’t big enough. With nearly no trade value after an abysmal season in 2017, Hundley could only be pushed out via cuts, but it doesn’t make sense to cut him now. Perhaps he could recoup some value with a stellar preseason slate and end up netting the Packers a conditional pick or a bag of footballs or something in return. Keeping Hundley through training camp and preseason simply because they can is a hedge for the Packers against injury. If Kizer goes down, they still have Hundley. But when Sept. 1 rolls around, Green Bay has too many talented players at other positions to fit on this roster to justify keeping three quarterbacks, especially when they know one can’t play. Hundley’s career in the NFL isn’t over, but it looks to be coming to a close in Green Bay. If he’s going to play in 2018 for someone, it likely won’t be for the Packers. The Green Bay Packers beat the Buffalo Bills badly on Sunday, but no one was happy with the offense and with good reason. Six of those 22 points came on long field goals, and McCarthy seemed to settle for another long field goal attempt on the first drive, though Jamaal Williams was unable to gain sufficient yardage on a third-down play to try it.McCarthy settles a lot, and that’s becoming big problem because it costs the team possessions. There are two major philosophies about picking up first downs. The first, older philosophy captures the NFL standard for most of the 1980s and 90s, which holds that first and second downs are to be used to make 3rd down easier.A few four-yards runs on the early downs will give the team flexibility to either run or pass on 3rd and short, making for an easy conversion. The new philosophy holds that offenses are now so good (and defenses so restrained) that it’s more efficient to give yourself as many opportunities as possible to gain ten yards on an individual passing play, and that the vast majority of the time, any quarterback will complete a 10-yard pass before they are forced to punt.While you do need to run sometimes, just to prove that you might, the latter philosophy is far closer to optimal. We know that, on first down, a successful play must pick up at least 4 yards, and in reality that number is probably closer to 5. Your subsequent 2nd and 3rd down plays are really only successful if they pick up the first down, which means that if your first down play fails and leaves you with six yards to go or more, running is almost always a bad idea because runs don’t generally pick up big yardage. Smart teams know this.For instance, let’s look at the Rams http://www.greenbaypackersteamonline.com/davante-adams-jersey , who are currently the cream of the crop in terms of football smarts. On 2nd or 3rd down, with 6 yards or more to go, and when the game is within one score, the Rams have passed 87% of the time. They have only run in this situation four times all season. It’s just not something they do. In the aggregate, their plays have been successful 52% of the time, while their passing plays have been successful 60% of the time. The Packers, on the other hand, still strive for balance in these scenarios. They have passed only 68% of the time and run 32% of the time. Those runs have only succeeded 1/3 of the time, and overall in these situations, the Packers only succeed 38% of the time. We tend to focus on 3rd down efficiency, but the Packers are basically pissing away plays and drives every time they do this. Despite the fact that the Packers have an all-time great quarterback, only seven teams pass less than the Packers in this situation, which is insane. On their first drive against the Bills, the Packers faced 2nd and 10 from the Buffalo 40-yard line. Either McCarthy or Rodgers called a run to Jamaal Williams, the worst Packer runner, that lost a yard. Incredibly, on 3rd and 11, they went back to the same well, and Williams was stoned for no gain. Even if Williams hadn’t been completely stuffed, the best case scenario for those play calls was a slightly shorter but still long field goal attempt, which is hardly an ideal outcome. It is these pointless plays and drives that seems designed specifically to not score, which cause the offense such problems. The Packers then did this again in the 3rd quarter when up 19-0. The team faced 3rd and 10 and called a run to Ty Montgomery, which was stuffed for a loss of one. The Packers were forced to punt from their own 18, and the defense was fortunate to preserve the shutout.The fact of the matter is that smart teams don’t operate this way. They pass more frequently and with more success when a first down is still in doubt. The actual plays that were called against the Bills were not half bad, and the second drive of the game — which resulted in a touchdown — was a thing of beauty. But the problems with the offense are deeper than individual play design. They show a fundamental lack of football understanding. McCarthy’s focus on execution has always been about the trees, but much of the rest of the NFL now runs a hyper-efficient forest, and Mike just doesn’t see it.