wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago

They have 3 QBs every year. Rodgers, a backup and one on the PS. Probably be the same this year.

If Rodgers gets hurt, they put in Flynn and move the PS player to the game day roster and start looking for a scrap heap QB. If Flynn goes down, you put in the PS player until you get the scrap heap player up to speed.

Last year wasn't a disaster. It was the way they planned to deal with injuries. No team is going to win a lot of games if they are down to their 3rd QB. It would be an over reaction to change what they do. You can't keep 3 starting quality QBs on a team.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



If you don't consider a 2-5-1 record a disaster after going 5-2 what would you call it? A success? By the way, I did not use the word "disaster". I said they got burnt which they certainly did. Every QB they used prior to bringing Flynn back burnt them. QB ratings of 70.5,65.7,85.2,51.9 and 69.6 in their losses were hardly encouraging. The 95.6 and 113.1 in the wins was.

Scott Tolzien is a 4 year vet according to the Packer website. This being his 4th year. He is long past the time to be on the PS. GB may well keep only 2 QB. But then they will have to decide between Tolzien and Flynn and let the other walk.


FYI-


Eligibility

Practice squads are considered to be for developmental purposes. Therefore, veterans are not eligible to be signed to the practice squad. In fact, players with more than one year of accrued NFL service are not eligible. Here is a closer look at the eligibility requirements.


•A player is eligible if he does not have an accrued season of NFL experience. Players gain an accrued season by being on the active roster for at least six games.
•If a player has one accrued season, they can still be practice squad eligible if they were on the 45-man active gameday roster for less than nine regular season games.
•A player is deemed to have served a season on the practice squad if he remains on the practice squad for at least three weeks. Players are eligible to be on the practice squad for two seasons.
•Players can be eligible for a third practice squad season if their team maintains no less than 53 players on the active/inactive list at all times.


UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
9 years ago
After the Titans game, I have my eyes on Pennel backing up Raji at the NT position. He's looking like a real solid addition to our squad so far.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
beast
9 years ago
I'm sure it's still going to change before the season is here... but if I had to say right now, I'd say cut the 3rd QB, worst LB and add two of the following RB Neal, WR Dorsey, WR Harper, CB Rolle. (maybe think about cutting S Banjo for CB Rolle, maybe...just maybe)


The rest I don't disagree with... not even the Boykins at 3rd WR which I know is seriously bothering some of you [palm]
UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
9 years ago

If you don't consider a 2-5-1 record a disaster after going 5-2 what would you call it? A success? By the way, I did not use the word "disaster". I said they got burnt which they certainly did. Every QB they used prior to bringing Flynn back burnt them. QB ratings of 70.5,65.7,85.2,51.9 and 69.6 in their losses were hardly encouraging. The 95.6 and 113.1 in the wins was.

Scott Tolzien is a 4 year vet according to the Packer website. This being his 4th year. He is long past the time to be on the PS. GB may well keep only 2 QB. But then they will have to decide between Tolzien and Flynn and let the other walk.


FYI-

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I would say name one team that won't have a drop off like that with a 3rd string QB in the line up. It is a disaster that we had the injuries. Who we had for backup QBs isn't what got us burnt.

I know Tolzien is not PS eligible. There is really no reason to keep him. We have a viable 2nd string QB and we need one for development. It is a waste to put a developmental QB on a 53.

Other than being a former Badger, I don't see a lot of upside for Tolzien. They could get as much out of Rettig and he is PS eligible.

The only way a team doesn't have a major drop off when their starting QB goes down is when their starting QB sucks. Like when Cutler got hurt and the Bears actually got better. Having the 3rd QB come in and play and thinking he will be above the average for a starting NFL QB is a pretty unrealistic expectation. They aren't 3rd string because they are the 16th best QBs in the league.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Dexter_Sinister
9 years ago

I'm almost certain flynn isn't eligible for the p.s.
And I think tolzien's eligibility is close to maxed as well. Also, dangling relatively established qbs on a practice squad is risky. I don't know that tolzien would last a season there w/o being picked up.

Originally Posted by: musccy 



Neither is PS eligible.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

They have 3 QBs every year. Rodgers, a backup and one on the PS. Probably be the same this year.

If Rodgers gets hurt, they put in Flynn and move the PS player to the game day roster and start looking for a scrap heap QB. If Flynn goes down, you put in the PS player until you get the scrap heap player up to speed.

Last year wasn't a disaster. It was the way they planned to deal with injuries. No team is going to win a lot of games if they are down to their 3rd QB. It would be an over reaction to change what they do. You can't keep 3 starting quality QBs on a team.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



I tend to agree with you except I'd much rather it be Tolzien we keep instead of Flynn.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago

I would say name one team that won't have a drop off like that with a 3rd string QB in the line up. It is a disaster that we had the injuries. Who we had for backup QBs isn't what got us burnt.

I know Tolzien is not PS eligible. There is really no reason to keep him. We have a viable 2nd string QB and we need one for development. It is a waste to put a developmental QB on a 53.

Other than being a former Badger, I don't see a lot of upside for Tolzien. They could get as much out of Rettig and he is PS eligible.

The only way a team doesn't have a major drop off when their starting QB goes down is when their starting QB sucks. Like when Cutler got hurt and the Bears actually got better. Having the 3rd QB come in and play and thinking he will be above the average for a starting NFL QB is a pretty unrealistic expectation. They aren't 3rd string because they are the 16th best QBs in the league.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



So funny I was thinking of Da bares as I was reading this.

If you think for one instant I was saying that the Packers #2 QB or #3 QB was among the 16th best QB in the league I guess we have nothing to talk about. What I was saying that who GB had as their #2 QB was wrong. It took so long to get a replacement who was up to speed they missed out on a huge portion of the season.

I am not Badger fan so I could care less about Tolzien himself. I do think as of today he has more to offer than Retting. Maybe by Jan 1, 2015 Retting will be a better option. How the heck would I know that? I do expect Packers Inc to know and make the right call. Personally I would prefer to have only 2 QBs on the 53 roster. All we are doing right now is playing what if guessing games. It seems to me that Uncle Teddy and Mike are not going to want to give away 5 games while they try and figure out what the heck to do 2 straight years. I am guessing they will opt to be more conservative than what they usually are. If I guess wrong no big deal. We are not betting any money on this game.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago

Neither is PS eligible.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



I sure wish I would have said that. [grin1]
UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
9 years ago


If you think for one instant I was saying that the Packers #2 QB or #3 QB was among the 16th best QB in the league I guess we have nothing to talk about. What I was saying that who GB had as their #2 QB was wrong. It took so long to get a replacement who was up to speed they missed out on a huge portion of the season.
.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



It seems to me you are expecting them to win more than half their games when you keep referring to their record with the backups in. You even posted their ratings like you expect 3rd string QBs to have a better rating.

What do you think the record of any team that is playing with it's 3rd and 4th QBs for 6 games is going to be? I would say they were guaranteed 6 losses on top of 2 they had when the starter went down.

Besides, there were 28 other players not named Rodgers that were injured. The Packers had over 300 combined games missed due to injuries. Houston and Atlanta who were both picked to be Super Bowl contenders had fewer injuries and won 2 and 4 games.

The Bears had a third as many games missed and we beat them for the Division title. The media couldn't stop talking about how decimated they were by injuries. With a third as many.


They didn't get burned by their backup QBs. They got burned by injuries, buy weathered it better than any other team.



I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago

It seems to me you are expecting them to win more than half their games when you keep referring to their record with the backups in. You even posted their ratings like you expect 3rd string QBs to have a better rating.

What do you think the record of any team that is playing with it's 3rd and 4th QBs for 6 games is going to be? I would say they were guaranteed 6 losses on top of 2 they had when the starter went down.

Besides, there were 28 other players not named Rodgers that were injured. The Packers had over 300 combined games missed due to injuries. Houston and Atlanta who were both picked to be Super Bowl contenders had fewer injuries and won 2 and 4 games.

The Bears had a third as many games missed and we beat them for the Division title. The media couldn't stop talking about how decimated they were by injuries. With a third as many.


They didn't get burned by their backup QBs. They got burned by injuries, buy weathered it better than any other team.


Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 


It is a wonderful thing to have a great QB but believe it or not teams actually win without one. The offense may have struggled but the defense is what let them down time after time,

If they had a solid OL and a good RB they would have moved the ball. Lacy did all he could almost all on his own. If they had a strong defense they could have won most of those games. They didn't.





UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (27m) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (10h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (17h) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (18h) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (19h) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (22h) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Hip drop is not. Super confusing. Referees job is harder
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Swivel hip drop is banned
dfosterf (25-Mar) : The hip drop enforcement will be in the form of fines, etc. Not flags
dfosterf (25-Mar) : A major foul will be enforced on the offense if there are offsetting penalties in a change of possession situation
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

22h / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.