Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="all about da packers" data-source="post: 208555" data-attributes="member: 227">Re: Are the Packers better off not having a #3 QB on the rosI agree Zombie, but from the way Nall performed this year when given time I don't think there is a point in keeping him as a #3.I think getting someone like a Paul Thompson, someone young with potential, on the PS as a QB would be better than spending a spot on the active roster. Get a rookie/1st year QB that you can store on your PS and let him learn the playbook that way as well as go through practice reps. Then if something should happen, you call the guy up to serve as an emergency QB. Of course assuming the QB is claimed by any other team, which is always a big risk.At this point in time, no I don't think Bodiford is better.But whenever I hear Bodiford's name, the words "great upside/potential" are following close behind. So if the Packers think Bodiford has such potential that they'd spend a roster spot on him when we didn't need him, I have to think he has the chance to develop into a solid player.That's why I'd rather use the extra roster spot on a player like Bodiford, or a CB like Bodiford that is young but has tremendous potential. Maybe even a rookie CB if all three of Bush/Williams/Blackmon make the roster next year.</blockquote>

Total: 182 (members: 1, guests: 181)