Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="McKnowledge" data-source="post: 1038675" data-attributes="member: 11543">That's a fair point, but it also illuminates a flaw with the philosophy that Green Bay has bought into for decades. How many games over the past 25 years, have been lost due to the inability for a backup QB to when games, one half, quarters, and/or possessions? The flaw, for me, has always been the mindset to develop a backup QB within the organization in the name of continuity; but continuity doesn't equal success.The bottom line should be...if needed can this backup QB come in and win this game? Drafting and developing QBs while already having a franchise QB comes across as thrift and conservative vs maximizing a championship window. I would argue, that in the event Love would be unable to play, this roster is playoff contending at worst. Why not...spend the capital to shore up any weaknesses? No loss of a draft pick, just a 1-year commitment, with minimal guarantees, doesn't seem outrageous. Tannehill or White is an upgrade over the current options, as I would imagine either QB would nudge the needle more towards winning.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 1,051 (members: 0, guests: 1,051)