Brett Hundley not yet drafted


Comments
-
Probably because he's terrible.
-
Ask your tree guy his thoughts on Mora.Dennis_DeYoung said:Probably because he's terrible.
-
Hundley > Miles
Tallest midget. -
Tree guy is all SEC all the time
-
My sources are telling me that Hundley rubbed teams the wrong way.
-
Packers traded up to nab him in the 5th. Final confirmation of what many suspected: he made a mistake by skipping his senior year. Still, Hundley is a specimen. He'd have made a nice understudy to Wilson, IMO.
-
Can't wait for someone to trade GB a first round pick for him in 3 years. Then he'll get 25 million guaranteed and suck.
-
DisagreeTTJ said:Still, Hundley is a specimen.
-
SCREEEEECHH!allpurpleallgold said:Can't wait for someone to trade GB a first round pick for him in 3 years. Then he'll get 25 million guaranteed and suck.
-
Disagree.TTJ said:Packers traded up to nab him in the 5th. Final confirmation of what many suspected: he made a mistake by skipping his senior year. Still, Hundley is a specimen. He'd have made a nice understudy to Wilson, IMO.
Rumor has it UCLA is on the brink of implosion. -
What Hundley lacks you can't learn. All the physical tools but can't pull the trigger. And it's not easier to do that in the pro game.
-
You can get away with a ton of flaws in college that can't be masked in the pros. That even goes for the S E C. See Tebone.
-
the whiter jake locker
-
Yeah he's going to be a 3rd string guy in 2015 and maaaybe the #2 guy in 2016 or 2017.
He's going to need a lot of coaching to work on his internal clock and reading defenses...54 percent of his pass attempts were from six yards and in, including 29 percent from behind the line of scrimmage. Hard to imagine anything close to those rates that in the NFL. -
Hundley would likely have gone in round 2 last year and be currently entering his second year of $5-6M/4 years. Staying an extra year seems to be hazardous to the financial health of most well-regarded college QBs.TTJ said:Final confirmation of what many suspected: he made a mistake by not leaving last year.
-
Hundley is twice as good as Jack ever wasSpoonieLuv said:the whiter jake locker
-
If anything he made a mistake returning. Had he left he could have duped a franchise into seeing the upside without another 13 starts of film.TTJ said:Packers traded up to nab him in the 5th. Final confirmation of what many suspected: he made a mistake by skipping his senior year. Still, Hundley is a specimen. He'd have made a nice understudy to Wilson, IMO.
Brett Hundley, much like Jack Lockner, could have been in college for 7 years (they're called doctors) and they would still read and react to defenses slowly and poorly.
-
Hundley was better but played soft. Jake was bad but ran hard. Hard and dumb. It's a push but I still doog for locker.dnc said: -
Hundley was pretty good. He's not an NFL starter, but he was probably the 2nd best QB in the Pac last year. He was way better than Locker, but they do have similarities.
-
If he becomes a very good starter in the NFL, we can probably blame Mora and his staff for sucking on the developmental side of things.
-
Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley -
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
-
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed. -
But how was the quarterbacking in the Pac-12 a fucking dreckfest?RoadDawg55 said:Hundley was pretty good. He's not an NFL starter, but he was probably the 2nd best QB in the Pac last year. He was way better than Locker, but they do have similarities.
-
Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed.
Oh. Never mind. -
SvenFSTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed.
Oh. Never mind.
I'm not talking about the NFL.
-
Yea so... moving the goalposts works for his argument at the time.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SvenFSTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed.
Oh. Never mind.
I'm not talking about the NFL.
Picking and poaching of arguments IS the message board game.
HTH -
You say hth as if I'm not already aware of that.MisterEm said:
Yea so... moving the goalposts works for his argument at the time.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SvenFSTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed.
Oh. Never mind.
I'm not talking about the NFL.
Picking and poaching of arguments IS the message board game.
HTH -
My poont is that if multiple coaches at multiple levels couldn't make him a good quarterback, he probably was never going to be a good quarterback. He chose to pay for Ty after all.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SvenFSTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed.
Oh. Never mind.
I'm not talking about the NFL. -
He had no real coaching until getting to the NFLTierbsHsotBoobs said:
My poont is that if multiple coaches at multiple levels couldn't make him a good quarterback, he probably was never going to be a good quarterback. He chose to pay for Ty after all.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SvenFSTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
SarkBallSacked said:
I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Locker >>>> Hundley.
UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham
UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.
Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
and
Ty Willingham...
case fucking closed.
Oh. Never mind.
I'm not talking about the NFL.
A college coach that just said, "run us to victory, Jack the Lad" was all the coaching he needed
You're right about him being FS and not going to Oregon.
He also kisses his mother on the lips.
WOOF