1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

I'm glad we didn't get a Veteran QB

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Zombieslayer, Apr 29, 2008.

  1. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Right after Favre's retirement, it started. "The Packers need a Veteran QB," the experts said. "No, we don't," I immediately replied. We do NOT need a Veteran QB because we already have one.

    Aaron Rodgers spent three seasons behind the best QB to ever play the game. The first season, he watched a guy who pretty much had little or nothing to do with him. The second season, he continued studying with a guy who started to respect him on a professional level. And in that third season, he studied under a man he considers a friend.

    Three seasons watching a QB who has seen it all. One glaring reason we were able to go 13-3 last season was because Brett Lorenzo Favre studied the game, more so than he ever had before. Today's defenses have become so complex that you have no choice. You can have all the skills in the world, but if you can't learn to read a defense, you're going to throw an interception to a guy you thought would be over there but turned out to be over here instead. Or you won't recognize a disguised blitz and your career will be cut short.

    Aaron Rodgers has seen all that. He has studied. He is ready. He wasn't exactly playing Tetris on his cell phone on the sidelines. He was watching the game, watching the future Hall of Famer execute, and make adjustments against the adjustments the opposing D was making. It was no accident Brett Favre was the runner up MVP candidate. And Aaron Rodgers watched intently on the sidelines, absorbing all this knowledge.

    It turns out I was right. Or at least Ted Thompson, the Packers GM, agrees with me, and drafted two so we didn't have to pick up a Free Agent Vet. If the Matt Flynn falters, we may look into resigning Craig Nall, a man who has backed up Favre twice in his career and knows our Offense. That is, if Nall doesn't mind being 3rd QB, which he probably will decline unless he has no other alternative.

    Even if Rodgers goes down, we do not need a Veteran QB. We are a young team, and will continue to grow together as a team. Rodgers would be on the sideline guiding Brohm until Rodgers is ready to come back onto the field. Brohm can learn from a man who learned from the best, and it will help his career deeply.

    We have a unique Offense. Sure, it's a version of the West Coast Offense, but it's different enough that it would take a Veteran time to learn just like it would take some kid fresh out of college. I'd rather keep this team young, so we can grow together for some time. We have Vets in other positions that can be referenced in a time of need. I prefer to have our starting QB as our most experienced Vet, and it appears from Packers management that that is how it will be in '08.
     
  2. Krazygangsta

    Krazygangsta Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    Messages:
    583
    Ratings:
    +0
    all true Rodgers will be great
     
  3. gopackgo

    gopackgo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    730
    Ratings:
    +0
    The only thing where I would want a veteran QB is if Rodgers gets hurt for the playoffs. I would much rather have someone who has played in the NFL before, rather than a rookie.

    But barring injuries, I think we'll be fine as well.
     
  4. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good points. zombie. I expected Thompson to sign a veteran QB and draft a QB in the later rounds, but what he's doing instead should be okay. Sometimes there is more than one way to do things. I do think that if Matt Flynn craps out in training camp and a decent veteran QB is available, one could be brought in at that point.
     
  5. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think most teams if they had an injured QB in the Playoffs would be screwed. The Chargers could have arguably represented the AFC in the SB had Rivers not been injured.
     
  6. evad04

    evad04 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Messages:
    205
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ohh...the troubles of modernity. The problem today is the desire for the quick fix--in regards to anything from faster computers to faster travel to instant exchange of information to online banking, etc. etc. etc.--WE WANT THINGS QUICK.

    The problem with placing a value on immediacy, though, is that many things simply take time to develop properly. The NFL quarterback--notwithstanding RARE occasions--operates much the same way. Expectations are too high and proper time is rarely given for a quarterback to develop. The same applies to coaches, schemes and players in different positions.

    The Packers did things right in drafting A-Rod--his value was too high at their given pick, and they had a quarterback who was approaching the twilight of his career (although we see now it had nothing to do with diminishment of skills). Now Rodgers has been in the system for a few years. He has studied intensely under Favre, McCarthy, and the other coaches. His injury "problem" is cause for some concern, but his upside is certainly there as well. There's a certain degree of mystery with Rodgers, sure--can he make all the throws? at least MOST of them? how does he handle the big games? the two-minute drill? The thing is, there's still a great deal of mystery with MOST QBs in the NFL. Peyton Manning--as great as he was--wasn't thought to be a big game quarterback because of his "chokes".

    Rodgers SHOULDN'T have to answer all these questions this season. Holding a high standard to your players is ONE thing, but being unreasonable is another. He's had time to develop in the system, but he'll probably need more time to develop to playing on Sundays--AND THAT'S OKAY.

    Expectations are high, I know. We just went to the NFC Championship. We have a good young RB, playmakers at WR and a tough young defense. But we don't have a HOF-caliber QB (to our knowledge) behind center this season.

    It is my hope that people give Rodgers time to find his own rhythm. We can still hold a high standard to our favorite team, but not at the expense of cutting a young QB's career short before he had a chance to start it.

    I know I'm preaching to the choir here. I know that no previous post takes an antagonistic view against A-Rod. I just felt like giving my $.02 for those who give two craps.

    A lot of great things are only so because they were given time to become so. Let's give Rodgers that chance--he's definitely got some good help around him.
     
  7. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
  8. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
  9. Woodson_fan

    Woodson_fan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    79
    Ratings:
    +0
    A friend of mine said he heard on the radio that we offered a contract to Culpeper, but he hadn't accepted or declined yet, any truth to this.
     
  10. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Heh. Maybe it was a "slap in the face" contract.

    "Mr. Culpepper, we'd like to give you this opportunity to play with the Green Bay Packers. It will be minimum wage, but it's a great community and it should be a good learning experience for you."
     
  11. Woodson_fan

    Woodson_fan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    79
    Ratings:
    +0
    I hope so, he's not even worth that. The day I see Culpepper do his little arm spinning TD dance in the green and gold is the day I stop watching football.
     
  12. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    It's true. Reported from NFLN.
     
  13. Veretax

    Veretax Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    596
    Ratings:
    +6
    Unless Rodgers really lays an egg, I mean an utter egg, He probably gets at least two years before his job is in Jeopardy. Does anyone disagree with me on that assessment?
     
  14. TheKanataThrilla

    TheKanataThrilla Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    320
    Ratings:
    +0
    I totally agree. I don't think we have a small window of opportunity with this team. I think we have a realistic shot at getting to the Super Bowl for the next few years if we can stay healthy. My only major concern is trying to lock up Rodgers to a longterm contract so we don't lose him should he perform the way many of us expect him to now that he has been given the starting position.
     
  15. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm under the impression that Rodgers is The Man, unless he gets injured.
     

Share This Page