Packers Front Office Under Fire

GreenNGold_81

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,355
Reaction score
81
IMO Love would have moved past Boyle pretty quick in the case of an injury to Rodgers. I'll say again, I don't think the FO wanted Love to play a snap last year. Taking the pressure off of his rookie campaign. That all changes this year now that he knows the system and has worked on his mechanics. Nobody will know what we have until we've seen him play this summer. Even then, Rodgers didn't really impress until he was thrown into the Dallas game. Teddy took Brohm as insurance because Rodgers was an unknown.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
12,525
Reaction score
1,152
about all any of us "know" for sure is, no QB overtook Rodgers as the starter so he was obviously the best we had and beyond that we had no need for any other QB to know what was better, who they liked more or who completed more passes in practice or anything.

It is also my thoughts they had zero intention of playing Love last year when they drafted him. It wasn't their plan. Had they needed a backup QB for any length of time, we may have seen that change, but they didn't so arguing about who was 2-3 is pretty fruitless as far as it telling us anything about anyone's ability.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
It's not a trivial thing. It's a bad omen. Love might turn into a decent QB some day but to not be able to beat out a warm body to hold a clipboard is not encouraging.
LOL on "bad omen". My lucky rabbits foot is telling me different. ;)

I will let you guys continue to wring your hands over what I would consider old, inconsequential news, that you seem to refuse to look at all the facts of why it was what it was.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
First - Love wasn't ready to play last year, that's obvious. That's also NOT the same as saying he's a bust.
Second - All those saying the plan was for the "long term" and so it's not a problem that he couldn't beat an undrafted, 3rd year QB are being a little silly because in no way was the front office expecting their first round pick to be behind an undrafted player on the roster.
Third - No evaluation of Love as a player can be made for another year or two.
Four - Rodgers' discontent with the front office shouldn't be a reflection on Love.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,203
Reaction score
461
It's not a trivial thing. It's a bad omen. Love might turn into a decent QB some day but to not be able to beat out a warm body to hold a clipboard is not encouraging.

If Boyle was purely a warm body, he wouldn't have been where he was, nor would Detroit have signed him as fast as they did. He will never be a starter most likely but to be shocked that he beat out a rookie draft pick last year that had limited camp experience given everything and in zero way was needed to be ready yet says more about the person that is "shocked or concerned" than it does Love.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
Third - No evaluation of Love as a player can be made for another year or two.

LOL....yet....you have #1 and #2.

Raise your hand if you have watched Jordan Love take a snap as a Green Bay Packer.

Had their been normal practices and preseason games, I think we would have more information. Had Rodgers got hurt and we potentially see Love take some snaps in year #1, more information. However, neither of those things happened. So yes, no real evaluation can even begin until that part of the process begins.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
LOL....yet....you have #1 and #2.

Raise your hand if you have watched Jordan Love take a snap as a Green Bay Packer.

Had their been normal practices and preseason games, I think we would have more information. Had Rodgers got hurt and we potentially see Love take some snaps in year #1, more information. However, neither of those things happened. So yes, no real evaluation can even begin until that part of the process begins.

You don't need to see a backup play to know he's not as good as the guy actually playing. I can darn well evaluate a player that never plays by concluding he's not very good. E.g., I'm a terrible OG yet you, nor anyone else, has ever seen me play OG in the NFL. Love was a player the Packers traded up for in the first round and wasn't able to pass Boyle on the depth chart, so I didn't need to see Love play to know he was worse than Boyle last year.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
21,956
Reaction score
2,066
Location
Milwaukee
It's not a trivial thing. It's a bad omen. Love might turn into a decent QB some day but to not be able to beat out a warm body to hold a clipboard is not encouraging.
So we know its only because of his ability?

Maybe if rodgers got hurt they didnt want to toss him.

While I agree it looks bad on the surface there could be other reasons why and we shouldnt just stick to one reason
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
21,956
Reaction score
2,066
Location
Milwaukee
You don't need to see a backup play to know he's not as good as the guy actually playing. I can darn well evaluate a player that never plays by concluding he's not very good. E.g., I'm a terrible OG yet you, nor anyone else, has ever seen me play OG in the NFL. Love was a player the Packers traded up for in the first round and wasn't able to pass Boyle on the depth chart, so I didn't need to see Love play to know he was worse than Boyle last year
See my reply in previous post
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
You don't need to see a backup play to know he's not as good as the guy actually playing. I can darn well evaluate a player that never plays by concluding he's not very good. E.g., I'm a terrible OG yet you, nor anyone else, has ever seen me play OG in the NFL. Love was a player the Packers traded up for in the first round and wasn't able to pass Boyle on the depth chart, so I didn't need to see Love play to know he was worse than Boyle last year.
After reading this 2005 article, I am shocked they didn't cut Rodgers. In this reporters eyes, Nall was clearly the "better" QB. :rolleyes: Oh wait, he was saying Nall was at the time, better prepared to back-up Favre.

Backup QB: Not knowing how much longer Brett Favre will continue to play the Packers addressed their future needs at the position by drafting Aaron Rodgers with the 24th pick in the 2004 draft. Rodgers appears to be an exceptional value having fallen from the potential first pick in the draft to the Packers. Rodgers has a strong arm, good accuracy and could potentially take over next year as the Packers trigger man. Despite his long-term potential, it was apparent in training camp that Rodgers isn't ready for prime time yet. As a result, Craig Nall will once again serve as Favre's game day backup.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
After reading this 2005 article, I am shocked they didn't cut Rodgers. In this reporters eyes, Nall was clearly the "better" QB. :rolleyes: Oh wait, he was saying Nall was at the time, better prepared to back-up Favre.

Backup QB: Not knowing how much longer Brett Favre will continue to play the Packers addressed their future needs at the position by drafting Aaron Rodgers with the 24th pick in the 2004 draft. Rodgers appears to be an exceptional value having fallen from the potential first pick in the draft to the Packers. Rodgers has a strong arm, good accuracy and could potentially take over next year as the Packers trigger man. Despite his long-term potential, it was apparent in training camp that Rodgers isn't ready for prime time yet. As a result, Craig Nall will once again serve as Favre's game day backup.
As i said, it’s far too early to conclude anything on Love. That doesn’t mean that, as sports fans, we can analyze every little thing and draw far reaching conclusions from it.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
As i said, it’s far too early to conclude anything on Love. That doesn’t mean that, as sports fans, we can analyze every little thing and draw far reaching conclusions from it.
Thank you....and finally....the truth is in bold! :D I no longer need to respond to "Why was Love behind Boyle?" query...well...until Captain insists it means something relevant. :D
 

GreenNGold_81

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,355
Reaction score
81
After reading this 2005 article, I am shocked they didn't cut Rodgers. In this reporters eyes, Nall was clearly the "better" QB. :rolleyes: Oh wait, he was saying Nall was at the time, better prepared to back-up Favre.

Backup QB: Not knowing how much longer Brett Favre will continue to play the Packers addressed their future needs at the position by drafting Aaron Rodgers with the 24th pick in the 2004 draft. Rodgers appears to be an exceptional value having fallen from the potential first pick in the draft to the Packers. Rodgers has a strong arm, good accuracy and could potentially take over next year as the Packers trigger man. Despite his long-term potential, it was apparent in training camp that Rodgers isn't ready for prime time yet. As a result, Craig Nall will once again serve as Favre's game day backup.

Great point.... The year Rodgers was drafted Nall would have started for sure in the event Favre had an amputated limb... That's what it would have taken for Favre to miss a game back then.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
Great point.... The year Rodgers was drafted Nall would have started for sure in the event Favre had an amputated limb... That's what it would have taken for Favre to miss a game back then.
Full disclosure, Rodgers did start the 2005 season listed as the #2 QB, but that was also after normal camps and a normal allotment of preseason games, which Love did not have. I posted that article, because there wasn't a clear cut #2 between Nall and the rookie Rodgers. I also read that it was really a toss-up and most thought that if Favre went down for any extended time, Nall would probably become the starter if Rodgers didn't immediately look the part.

I think we get to see see rookie QB's play or even be backups, ready to play, on teams that aren't suppose to be vying for a Super Bowl. However, the Packers were 13-3 in 2019, I don't think they wanted to have to hand that team to a rookie QB if Rodgers went down.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
Schefter pulling no punches on how he thinks the Packers will fair with or without Rodgers.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
First - Love wasn't ready to play last year, that's obvious. That's also NOT the same as saying he's a bust.
Second - All those saying the plan was for the "long term" and so it's not a problem that he couldn't beat an undrafted, 3rd year QB are being a little silly because in no way was the front office expecting their first round pick to be behind an undrafted player on the roster.
Third - No evaluation of Love as a player can be made for another year or two.
Four - Rodgers' discontent with the front office shouldn't be a reflection on Love.
Thank you Sunshine.
5th. I don’t put much emphasis on the order of backups on a listed depth chart.
I put emphasis on who’s starting first (nobody in the league is going to start over Rodgers). Then who GB keeps from season to season. If GB thought Boyle was so much better than Love, why would our FO send Boyle packing? Bye bye

I get that people may have disagreed that GB should’ve went QB last draft, heck I was one of them initially I thought it would be later also. But from a purely player perspective, I like this kid. He’s got good vibes and he came on strong in his College Sophomore season and actually outplayed Justin Herbert in their only head to head comparison against Michigan State. Love’s Offense scored 31 points to Herberts 7. That’s impressive.

I also don’t think it was a fluke Lovr threw for 30+ TD’s. Once he gets into a groove for a couple seasons, he’s going to be good. Maybe not Mahomes good or MVP like, but I could easily see him going 25 TD’s 10INT type efficient range. Plus 3-4 rushing TDs by his 2nd starting season. Go look at how Brett Favre Started sometime, it took him several seasons to get rolling. Rodgers also for that matter. Favre was 3rd on the depth chart in Atlanta, now he’s in Canton. What type of draft capital was spent on Favre again?? #33 and #19 overall.
Jerry Glanville says he’d rather crash a plane than play Brett Favre ! His ignorance was the reason he went 27-37 with Atlanta. That speaks for itself.
Depth charts are meaningless in the long term.
 
Last edited:

GreenNGold_81

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,355
Reaction score
81
Full disclosure, Rodgers did start the 2005 season listed as the #2 QB, but that was also after normal camps and a normal allotment of preseason games, which Love did not have. I posted that article, because there wasn't a clear cut #2 between Nall and the rookie Rodgers. I also read that it was really a toss-up and most thought that if Favre went down for any extended time, Nall would probably become the starter if Rodgers didn't immediately look the part.

I think we get to see see rookie QB's play or even be backups, ready to play, on teams that aren't suppose to be vying for a Super Bowl. However, the Packers were 13-3 in 2019, I don't think they wanted to have to hand that team to a rookie QB if Rodgers went down.

Really? I remember reading about how Nall was outplaying him, always felt he got a raw deal and had the potential to start in the NFL (Nall). Then he was a journeyman and didn't do much. What do I know right?
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
127
The points people are trying to make is that it's very unusual and concerning that Love was so unprepared to play in the NFL coming out of the Mt West conference that he couldn't beat out Boyle for the back up position and secondly, why spend so much draft capital on a guy who appears to be such a project ? I hope Rodgers sits out OTA's so the FO and coaches get a better look at Love. If he's a massive bust, it will probably show up in practices. On the other hand, if he looks like another Maholms, then the FO can get more leverage over Rodgers.

Rodgers sat for 3 seasons and was definitely a project. Go back and look at the tedford robot he was at Cal vs what he was by the time he started in 2008...it's unrecognizable. I see no reason Love sitting for 3 years means he's not gonna be good. Or the fact that he wasn't the game day backup
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
Really? I remember reading about how Nall was outplaying him, always felt he got a raw deal and had the potential to start in the NFL (Nall). Then he was a journeyman and didn't do much. What do I know right?
Well I think in 2005, Nall and Rodgers were in a very similar situations as Love and Boyle were last season. You got one guy that was in the Packer system for 2-3 years (Nall/Boyle) and a rookie QB that was passed up by a lot of teams in the first round (Rodgers/Love), but viewed as a potential future starter, to replace an aging veteran (Favre/Rodgers). The biggest difference was that Rodgers had a normal camp and full schedule of preseason games to improve and show the Packers what he could do, Love wasn't given either of those opportunities.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
21,956
Reaction score
2,066
Location
Milwaukee
Well I think in 2005, Nall and Rodgers were in a very similar situations as Love and Boyle were last season. You got one guy that was in the Packer system for 2-3 years (Nall/Boyle) and a rookie QB that was passed up by a lot of teams in the first round (Rodgers/Love), but viewed as a potential future starter, to replace an aging veteran (Favre/Rodgers). The biggest difference was that Rodgers had a normal camp and full schedule of preseason games to improve and show the Packers what he could do, Love wasn't given either of those opportunities.
You are using logic
 

GreenBaySlacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
2,966
Reaction score
163
Rodgers got better every year, to start his career. First couple years McCarthy barely let him throw more than 10 yds down field. 3rd year he almost came back against Dallas, when Favre got hurt. Had his first deep throws completed in front of everyone, and shown some A+ scrambling ability....

So love needs to look better. To keep par.

Also..... Julio Jones was available. And we were not able to try and get him. That sucks. AR would've been sure to come back....

We needed that imo
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top