Flynn or Scott who is it

[longtimefan]

Getting ready for the big news..

 

[longtimefan]

@TomSilverstein: #Packers are keeping both Flynn and Tolzien, according to a league source.

 

[IluvGB]

Wow! Good news I would think...but I'm sure i'll hear otherwise...

 

[ivo610]

Interesting

 

[longtimefan]

Rumor is more than expected ir players which left open another spot

 

[Poppa San]

My guess is someone wanted a trade but wouldn't meet TTs price. Hoping to get someone else or try to wait him out.

 

[Poppa San]

Rumor is more than expected ir players which left open another spot

Something doesn't fit. You cut Banjo AND Rolle and most likely another baller or two and open up a 3rd QB spot?

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's simple. You must have 3 QBs in the domain that have at least familiarity with the system. #3 might actually have to play.

Rettig was a stiff.

It's too late to sign a guy to the practice squad; he would not be able to play this year for lack of training.

 

[Forget Favre]

Better safe than sorry, I guess.

 

[longtimefan]

TT and MM have proven to be emotional in the business as they have repeatedly stated that cutting players is tough for them. That's probably why will still have a terrible DC as well.

If true then the whole Brett thing never would have happened

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm fine with keeping both Flynn and Tolzien. Hopefully none of them will get any meaningful snaps.

 

[Poppa San]

It's simple. You must have 3 QBs in the domain that have at least familiarity with the system. #3 might actually have to play.

Rettig was a stiff.

It's too late to sign a guy to the practice squad; he would not be able to play this year for lack of training.

Last year Tolzien was signed to the PS after last cuts. Wallace went to the 53. How different would the season have been if Wallace isn't injured in his 1st start so that Tolzien doesn't HAVE TO play? Say Wallace bombs out after 3-4 games. Would Flynn have been brought back in the off season? TT then draft a QB in rounds 6 or 7? Or say Wallace is competent for 5-7 games. He get resigned?

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's not that simple. That's not true for how the Packer roster has been built in the past. If it's not for a trade then it's an overreaction. It's as simple as that. TT and MM have proven to be emotional in the business as they have repeatedly stated that cutting players is tough for them. That's probably why will still have a terrible DC as well.

Please cite an example where the Packers' #3 QB was a practice squad guy picked up at the last minute, consequently having no experience in the system and little in the league on the eve of week 1.

 

[Poppa San]

Please cite an example where the Packers' #3 QB was a practice squad guy picked up at the last minute, consequently having no experience in the system and little in the league on the eve of week 1.

See previous post or think aaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllll the way back to last season. Scott Tolzien ring a bell?

 

[TJV]

TT and MM have proven to be emotional in the business as they have repeatedly stated that cutting players is tough for them. That's probably why will still have a terrible DC as well.

There is an obvious difference between being objective in setting up the roster and then being emotional in letting players go who you have come to know and have seen work their **** off. If Thompson and McCarthy were emotional in making roster decisions it would follow that they would repeatedly have one of the oldest rosters in the league. Instead of course, they repeatedly let older players go and repeatedly have one of the youngest rosters in the league. And that’s Thompson’s philosophy – build through the draft – which he is as disciplined and objective in following as any GM in the league.

 

[TJV]

Well, they've kept Kuhn, Bush, and Driver longer than they should've IMO. They offered Jennings something like $9 million/year, Raji was offered $8 million/year, etc. They kept Flynn who they have a history with when they really didn't need Tolzien and Flynn IMO. So I would argue that they do have a history of keeping players longer than they should. The length of time they kept J. Harrell and Sherrod is questionable as well. MM has repeatedly stated that cutting down to 53 is the worst part of his job, which shows emotion is involved.

I don’t favor keeping Kuhn but because they did doesn’t mean their decision was based on emotion; he knows the offense as well as anyone on the roster with the possible exception of Rodgers. Bush is still a STs ace and can provide “deep” backup at CB and S. He also excels at blitzing. IOW, there are objective reasons to keep them even if fans disagree. They did offer Jennings a multi-year deal but they also refused to go higher to keep him. They determined his value to the team and unemotionally let him walk. Raji wanted more than they offered and when he was ready to come back to the team, they unemotionally took that offer off the table and made him earn his next payday. Keeping Flynn and Tolzien is just smart and it’s relatively low cost. As HRE points out, they almost always go into a season with two backup QBs who have been trained in their system. Usually one is on the PS but that option isn’t available this year. Keeping Harrell and Sherrod “too long” had/has nothing to do with emotion – toward the end of each player’s contract it became a low risk proposition – the big money was already spent. Both were first rounders, at that point may as well see if they begin to fulfill their potential.

I also don't agree with your line of logic. Obviously there are many factors. Sometimes guys have to be cut because of money. Also, they can be emotional about older players and yet still want to keep younger players because they enjoy giving young players opportunities. You made the fallacy of offering only two options, either the Packers keep players because they are emotional or they aren't emotional, when those aren't the only two options that exist.

You’re kidding, or you should be. Here are your words I responded to:

It's not that simple. That's not true for how the Packer roster has been built in the past. If it's not for a trade then it's an overreaction. It's as simple as that. TT and MM have proven to be emotional in the business as they have repeatedly stated that cutting players is tough for them. That's probably why will still have a terrible DC as well.

There is no nuance about “many factors” in the bolded sentence. And that Thompson has stated more than once for a reliance on youth is it’s a young man’s game and they prefer players who haven’t been taught bad habits from other NFL teams. And it’s cost and cap friendly. There are logical and unemotional reasons for all of your examples and the big picture remains unchallenged by you: Staying one of the youngest teams in the league means saying goodbye to vets more often than other teams. Because they have to deal with players on a human level does not mean they are emotional about making roster decisions. Thompson's philosophy of draft and develop, discipline in sticking to his draft board, and maintaining one of the youngest rosters in the league speak to the opposite.

 

[HardRightEdge]

See previous post or think aaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllll the way back to last season. Scott Tolzien ring a bell?

You win the prize for the correct answer!

And how do you think that worked out?

Not 12 months have passed since the Packers had to go 3 deep at the position with a PS player without off season work with the team, with clearly unsatisfying results.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

A lot of comments about players being kept for "emotional" reasons. I don't buy that. This is a business they are in and the business is winning. TT believes draft and develop is the best way to do that. The Packers consistently are one of the youngest teams in the NFL. That doesn't happen if you keep players just because you like them and can't let them go. It also makes sense to maintain a certain amount of leadership on the team, and I think that better explains why they keep some players - Hawk and Driver come to mind.

 

[60six]

For instance, they easily could've drafted a FB to replace Kuhn, but they stayed attached to him and didn't draft one. And IMO, that was an emotional decision. We'll never know the real answer for sure one way or the other.

Disagree.......a FB is a blocker, nothing more......and Kuhn is good at what he does. Why waste a draft pick on just a blocker.

The FB postion has been fazed out in the NFL......the staff played it right, bring in a FA and see how it plays out in camp

 

[TJV]

You make a lot of claims about how MM and TT are making unemotional decisions, but they are just that: Claims. You have no supporting evidence. And for that, you have your opinion and I have mine. You don't see some of the decisions as emotional and I do. For instance, they easily could've drafted a FB to replace Kuhn, but they stayed attached to him and didn't draft one. And IMO, that was an emotional decision. We'll never know the real answer for sure one way or the other.

Here's a concept you have struggled with more than once during your brief participation on this board: The person advancing an idea has the responsibility to back it up. You initially brought up the idea of emotion but it is you that hasn't backed it up. For each instance you claimed they did something out of emotion, I posted a reason emotion played no part in it. What you haven't and can't address is the big picture. As Joe Nor Cal Packer echoed what I posted above, a GM can't have trouble emotionally letting players go and repeatedly have one of the youngest rosters in the league.

BTW, what Kuhn brings that no rookie could is his vast knowledge of the offense.

 

[El Guapo]

I like that Wolf and Thompson have some emotion when they were the GM. It's the Green Bay Packers not the NY Giants.

 

[ivo610]

jennings and raji "offers" were rumors. No solid proof.

 

[ivo610]

There is pretty solid documentation out there from both sides admitting the offers.

link from the packers confirming offer?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I disagree. Many FB's can run and catch. Kuhn has has a long history of running FB dives in our offense. It's very common to draft a FB. Remember Quinn Johnson? A team can spend a 6th or 7th round pick and have a FB for a decade. The alternative is to draft something like a WR and likely not have that player stick.

I don´t like the Packers to spend a draft pick on a fullback. A team can pick up a FB off the street and have a reliable player at the position for years. Just take a look at how the Packers acquired Kuhn.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I think Flynn has more value here than on another team. And Tolzien is just too good to just discard. Couple more years in the GB QB school, and he could be very good. Either way, I like 3 QBs on the roster. Favre, Hasselbeck, Brunell. That was a good feeling. Even if Favre never missed a game, and the two were never needed, it was nice comfort zone.