Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Thompson/McCarthy Backup QB Experiment to Blame
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="El Guapo" data-source="post: 525086" data-attributes="member: 5830"><p>I take issue with several premises in the article:</p><p></p><p>1) Calling it a QB experiment is wrong. Did they do something exotic going into training camp? They tried to develop their backups, realized that they failed, and moved on. Oh how the same people would have complained about TT and MM sticking with "their" guys. Accountants have a term called sunk costs. You don't sit around stewing about what you've already invested. You analyze the situation and seek the best outcome moving forward. I think that they tried once it became clear that neither Harrell nor Coleman could lead this team if Rodgers went down. So not an experiment, just recognizing a failure and moving on.</p><p></p><p>2) The whole Kansas City Chiefs argument? Really? Is this a pro sports writer at Packers Insider? Does he not understand the basic concept that Young (our 4th string QB) was facing the Chiefs 3rd and 4th string players in the final preseason game? Those are NOT the same guys who went undefeated until last week. As of today, KC has <strong>one</strong> player on injured reserve and <strong>one</strong> player on their injury report. That is a big reason why they are still so good. Those final preseason guys that stuffed Young, half of them aren't on the team and the other half have barely seen the field. VY looked bad against nobodies.</p><p></p><p>3) The author tries to bolster his weak argument by saying that Green Bay should have picked up Jason Campbell. Again, seriously? Here is a quote from the author, "His career has not gone as planned, and he’s bounced around teams from Washington to Oakland and Chicago last year." How is that ANY different than Seneca Wallace who had done the same thing, except the GM had actual first-hand experience with Wallace. I would have gone with the guy I knew if looking at two relatively equal backup QB options.</p><p></p><p>4) Sign Hasselbeck. Brilliant! The Colts signed him for $8 million. Imagine how the same writer would have crucified the Packer brass for signing a high-dollar backup QB when we had Rodgers and Matthews contracts to sign, and many holes that need to be filled.</p><p></p><p>5) Tebow? That's how you cap off a backup QB argument? You can't make up how absurd this guy's thinking has become. Tebow is terrible. TERRIBLE. Yes he made a great completion in overtime to beat the Steelers, but the Broncos running game and defense were superb that season. It had little to do with Tebow...</p><p></p><p>I can buy the argument that the Packers should have recognized that both Harrell and Coleman were failures sooner. That's pretty clear to all right now. The arguments by the author are mostly ridiculous though</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="El Guapo, post: 525086, member: 5830"] I take issue with several premises in the article: 1) Calling it a QB experiment is wrong. Did they do something exotic going into training camp? They tried to develop their backups, realized that they failed, and moved on. Oh how the same people would have complained about TT and MM sticking with "their" guys. Accountants have a term called sunk costs. You don't sit around stewing about what you've already invested. You analyze the situation and seek the best outcome moving forward. I think that they tried once it became clear that neither Harrell nor Coleman could lead this team if Rodgers went down. So not an experiment, just recognizing a failure and moving on. 2) The whole Kansas City Chiefs argument? Really? Is this a pro sports writer at Packers Insider? Does he not understand the basic concept that Young (our 4th string QB) was facing the Chiefs 3rd and 4th string players in the final preseason game? Those are NOT the same guys who went undefeated until last week. As of today, KC has [B]one[/B] player on injured reserve and [B]one[/B] player on their injury report. That is a big reason why they are still so good. Those final preseason guys that stuffed Young, half of them aren't on the team and the other half have barely seen the field. VY looked bad against nobodies. 3) The author tries to bolster his weak argument by saying that Green Bay should have picked up Jason Campbell. Again, seriously? Here is a quote from the author, "His career has not gone as planned, and he’s bounced around teams from Washington to Oakland and Chicago last year." How is that ANY different than Seneca Wallace who had done the same thing, except the GM had actual first-hand experience with Wallace. I would have gone with the guy I knew if looking at two relatively equal backup QB options. 4) Sign Hasselbeck. Brilliant! The Colts signed him for $8 million. Imagine how the same writer would have crucified the Packer brass for signing a high-dollar backup QB when we had Rodgers and Matthews contracts to sign, and many holes that need to be filled. 5) Tebow? That's how you cap off a backup QB argument? You can't make up how absurd this guy's thinking has become. Tebow is terrible. TERRIBLE. Yes he made a great completion in overtime to beat the Steelers, but the Broncos running game and defense were superb that season. It had little to do with Tebow... I can buy the argument that the Packers should have recognized that both Harrell and Coleman were failures sooner. That's pretty clear to all right now. The arguments by the author are mostly ridiculous though [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Capitol 8805
CarryTheG14
Latest posts
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: tynimiller
39 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: CarryTheG14
Today at 11:42 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Badgers Football 2025-2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 10:10 AM
Wisconsin Badgers Forum
Movies and TV shows Thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 10:09 AM
Movies and Entertainment
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 9:48 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Thompson/McCarthy Backup QB Experiment to Blame
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
