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

Interesting piece from this mornings National football post

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by wizard 87, Sep 30, 2008.

  1. wizard 87

    wizard 87 Old Enough To Know Better

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Messages:
    540
    Ratings:
    +11
    Thoughts...I tend to agree :
    FROM TOM SILVERSTEIN OF THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL… According to McCarthy, Rodgers did not suffer any structural damage in his right shoulder during the Packers’ 30-21 defeat to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers Sunday at Raymond James Stadium. But his shoulder remains sore and it will be at least Wednesday before his status for this week becomes clear. Depending on Rodgers’ progress, McCarthy and general manager Ted Thompson might be forced to make a decision on whether to sit Rodgers for a home game against the Falcons in the hopes that he would be available for a pair of difficult games to follow: at Seattle and at home against Indianapolis. “I think Wednesday’s practice will be a pretty good indicator for us,” McCarthy said. “It’s just something we’ll have to continue to rehab and see where we are Wednesday.” Thompson said there were no plans to sign another quarterback this week, meaning McCarthy and his staff will prepare rookie Matt Flynn for action just in case Rodgers can’t play. Thompson, when asked whether there were any indications his quarterback could be out for an extended period of time, didn’t rule it out. “They’re still trying to make sure what is the right decision for us and for Aaron,” Thompson said. “For everybody.”

    I don’t get it. I don’t understand how Packers GM Ted Thompson can be so stubborn and not bring in a veteran quarterback. Even Joey Harrington would be better than what they have right now for backups. It is one thing to be careful about taking risks, but it is an entirely other thing to be so close-minded and stubborn. This is not about Brett Favre, this is about giving all those veteran players and their coaches an opportunity to win this year. Aaron Rodgers has an injury history that seems to follow him and not providing at least one veteran backup is not only risky, it is careless.
     
  2. tkpckfan

    tkpckfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Messages:
    326
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm not really worried about it. How do we know Flynn wouldn't come in and do good? we don't. If they have the confidence in those 2 rookies to back up Rodgers then I support the decision.
     
  3. Veretax

    Veretax Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    596
    Ratings:
    +6
    He's right, what if Flynn turns out to be better than even rodgers with a full week of practice to prep him? Now that would be a twist :/
     
  4. DonnieCash

    DonnieCash Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    101
    Ratings:
    +0
    There is a chance that Flynn can come out and be awesome. But still, ow he looks in practice and how he plays when the pressure is up are two completely different things.

    To have no experience what so ever in the Quarterback position is completely counter productive. Especially in a league that is based about Quarterback play.

    Look what happened to New England.
     
  5. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,478
    How can you be so stubborn to think that they HAVENT contacted ones out there??? So I guess you sit in on meetings and phone calls, and emails to agents?

    They offered Culpepper a contract before the start of the season and he turned them down

    Tired of these people that think just because it isnt online or reported the team is not making phone calls...

    It has been proven in the past when things like this happen, calls are made and agents contacted..But most of the time it isnt leaked to the media
     
  6. angryguy77

    angryguy77 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    384
    Ratings:
    +2
    I'll let you in ona secret....TT is not very good at what he does. wouls bet my house that they haven't contacted anyone because if they wanted a vet qb they would have had one before the seson started. That should have been at the top of the list, but I guess putting all your faith in a glass body and back him up with 2 rookies is what smart GM's in the NFL do. I love the optimism of the fans on this site. Have you seen flynn play? He needs more than one week of practice to be effective.
     
  7. GBstock

    GBstock Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    34
    Ratings:
    +0
    Angry guy...you are right on. Some people here seem to get defensive if you criticize Ted. The fact is after 1/4 of the season gone that it was a major mistake getting rid of Favre but it was downright irresponsible and arrogant to not have some sort of experience backing up Rodgers.
     
  8. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    Wouldn't it be absolutely insane if Rodgers starts but can't finish the ATL game due to re-aggravation of the shoulder injury, GB is down by 2 TDs in the 4th quarter & Flynn (or Brohm) enters the game & leads GB to victory? Against ATL?

    Seriously, at this moment in time, a rookie with full knowledge of the playbook is a better short-term option than Joey Harrington or Daunte Culpepper. It doesn't surprise me that TT isn't hitting the panic button & reaching for a vet to take a roster spot away from some arguably promising draft picks.

    This isn't to say I don't fault TT for not getting a vet into camp early enough to make a difference in '08. Knowing Rodgers isn't exactly the sturdiest of athletes & still entering '08 with rookies to back him up had more than just Packer fans wondering what possessed our GM to tempt fate.
     
  9. GBstock

    GBstock Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    34
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree...not much he can really do now, but everybody was screaming for him to get someone with experience to back up Rodgers once he got rid of Brett. Totally irresponsible. He didn't have to boot promising rookies either.....Flynn could have been placed on the practice squad and nobody would have bothered him.
     
  10. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,478
    move on nothing to see ;)
     
  11. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,478

    Again they offered DC a contract, Rodgers even had lunch with him right after or right before the draft..

    Is it YOU didnt like DC as the option, or did you forget he was offered a contract?

    But no one can say they didnt bring anyone in, because they did

    I for one hated the fact they offered DC a contract..I HATED it...But what else was out there? Nothing really at least it was a q/b that was in the league and can do somethings..
     
  12. angryguy77

    angryguy77 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    384
    Ratings:
    +2

    One guy offered a contract doesn't really make it an all out effort imo. If this matter is so obvious to us fans who are not experts, then why is it our genius gm didn't see this comming? Make a trade, do something other than try to prove a point TT.
     
  13. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,478

    So again they offered one guy a contract means they never brought in someone else, or called about someone else?
     
  14. grandtkd23

    grandtkd23 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +0
    I did find it odd that TT did not pick up a vet backup for Rodgers, even though he did try with DC as was pointed out earlier. As of now we basically are stuck with what we got. Especially considering that they will have to learn our play book in the course of a week or two doesnt seem like a good idea. Plus look at the QB free agents right now..Bruce Gradkowski, Tim Hasselbeck, Jared Lorenzen, Jamie Martin , Brian St. Pierre , Chris Weinke, Craig Nall...Seriously?? I would take a young up and coming Qb in Flynn or Brohm anytime.
     
  15. packerbackerinin

    packerbackerinin Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    27
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think more so than the QB position at this point they should be concerning themselves with getting the best DL on the market. I think the QB's will be fine, but if you can't put pressure on QB's in this no matter who they are you are in trouble. Receivers will eventually get open even not so good ones. GO PACK GO!!!
     
  16. angryguy77

    angryguy77 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    384
    Ratings:
    +2
    If they really wanted a vet they would have found one. They have a pile of money they coule have used to get DC, but they were obviously not that worried about it. Like I said in other posts, TT gambled this team chances away and fans supporting him will have to wonder what could have been.
     
  17. sundown

    sundown no cheese

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    27
    Ratings:
    +1
    I wish the packers had a veteran Qb as a backup but having said that I think that matt flynn will do Ok if he has time. On the other hand from what I have seen ,if he does not have time the Pack is in real trouble.Flynn is a good prospect but he does not have the kind of talent that Aaron Rodgers has that is for sure and he has hardly any experience so I hope AR can go.
     
  18. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    Everything I've read about the offer to Culpepper leads me to believe it was a million dollars to be the back-up to Rodgers, not an offer to come in & compete for the starting job. If they wouldn't let the NAME come back & compete why would they do differently for Culpepper?

    I'm certain DC felt he was a better QB than Rodgers. He wanted an opportunity to prove he could still play, not a cushy paycheck to ride pine. He stated "it wasn't good for either side", which suggests he wanted to compete, not accept a back-up role.

    Keep in mind DC visited GB April 23rd, left without a deal & no mention was ever made again of what transpired until DC himself made it public in June. Were other QBs given serious consideration before or after that? No other QBs were ever mentioned visiting GB so if TT did have intentions of acquiring a vet QB it wasn't worth bringing them in for a workout. Besides the GBPG would have been all over that scoop.

    If TT & MM wanted a veteran back-up & were confident enough in Rodgers ability to maintain his #1 QB status in the face of real competition, then a veteran QB would be on the roster. The sad truth is only one realistic offer was made before the NAME decided he wanted to come back. So by my count that's twice TT & MM dodged having any sort of QB competition for Rodgers, which belies all logic for a professional sports franchise.

    I actually held hope that the NAME was already being considered by the team as ending his short retirement & being the starter, & that's why there was no urgency to get a vet QB. Most if not all hope faded when Brohm and Flynn were drafted.

    After the trade it was far too late to bring in anyone else. The first pre-season game was days away & the 2 rookies were already more than two months into MM's playbook. By then it was clear the direction the team had chosen & any sudden shift without warrant (significant injury) would be out of character for this GM.

    I've always felt TT used '05 as a mulligan. Is it possible the NAME suspected as much & was more reckless than usual, resulting in the bulge in INTs? Is TT again taking a partial mulligan in '08 so as not to enter '09 facing the possibility making a hasty decision about Rodgers future in GB?
     
  19. sundown

    sundown no cheese

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    27
    Ratings:
    +1
    No,don't agree,Rodgers is a very good Qb he would have beaten out DC,Dc is worthless unless he has all day to find his target, if he gets rushed he throws INT's.he has done just that time and time again.
     
  20. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    From '00-'04 Daunte Culpepper threw 69 INTs, a little more than 12 per season. By contrast in the same time span he threw 124 TDs & rushed for 26 more. Worthless, you say? He only averaged 30 total TDs per season. There's no pleasin' some people.

    To be fair he started out '05 (first season without Moss) 6 TDs & 12 INTs before tearing up his knee, & then played with loser MIA in '06 & actually did OK in a couple of games for OAK in '07. In those 3 seasons the talent level had dropped off considerably around him so it's not an apples to apples comparison. It was a good match for him to come to GB this season with the WR talent they have.

    It would have made Rodgers a better player to have Culpepper to compete with. Isn't that what football is about? Competition making everyone a better player? Not according to TT & MM. They're mavericks who don't have to follow conventional football wisdom.
     
  21. RobJohnson

    RobJohnson Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    19
    Ratings:
    +0
    TT should have gone after Chris Simms. He was available for quite a while.

    He would be better than Brohm or Flynn, at this point!
     
  22. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,478

    ooohhhh he tried trust me ;) and it was before the "official trade talks took place"
     
  23. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,478
    move on nothing to see ;)
     
  24. ARod2GJ

    ARod2GJ Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Flynn is easily a better choice at least for this weekend.. you can't just go out and sign a veteran and expect him to magically learn the playbook in 1 week.. Flynn knows the playbook better than any other veteran we could sign

    Now, if Aaron was to be out the rest of the season, then yeah, sign a veteran
     
  25. Veretax

    Veretax Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    596
    Ratings:
    +6
    These "rookie" QBs haven't played an official game in the regular season. Preseason is at a different level frankly.
     

Share This Page