According to Adam Schefter Tweet.
Printable View
According to Adam Schefter Tweet.
Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter 4m
QB Matt Flynn reached agreement with the Packers.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
Ted, you crazy FA spending nutcase.
I guess he had enough arm strength to sign a contract.
Man he is like Snyder now!!! Ugh TT signing washed up Vets and not building through the draft!
I hope this goes down as the most unnecessary move of the offseason.
To be fair, the Pack would only receive a compensatory pick for Flynn if he signed elsewhere. So TT very well could have given up a compensatory 7th rounder or given up nothing to sign Flynn. There goes the next BJ Coleman, Lawrence Guy, CJ Wilson, Brad Jones, or Matt Flynn.
I thought, because he is a mid year signing, we wouldnt get anything?
For what he brought to the Pack last season, I'm giving up a 7th in a heartbeat. And considering the FA rampage TT has gone on this year, the Pack is not likely to get any compensatory picks at all next year!Quote:
Originally Posted by Smidgeon
Seriously, this is a pretty low risk signing. They can still bring in Tolzien, and if they like him better by the end of camp they can let Flynn go - I assume his signing bonus is sub 6 figures, so the cap impact would be pretty minimal.
Just like the Brad Jones signing, just like the Raji signing, it isn't so much about the money. It's about the fact that the Packers would be better off without Flynn than with him. Hopefully, Tolzien gets at least as many reps in camp as Flynn and wins the job. Hopefully they can still cut Flynn if that happens. It will be a damn shame if Flynn is just awarded the backup job over Tolzien.
Not sure how we would be better off without Flynn, I'm guessing you didn't watch one game last season after Rodgers went down?:cnf:
Tolzien is a scrub btw, I hope we draft a rookie to replace him if we do keep 3 QBs.
I've said several times, Tolzien with a full training camp is a MUCH better option than Flynn. Hopefully Rodgers stays healthy, and this is all irrelevant, but if we did have a situation like last year, having Flynn play would be worse than having a well trained Tolzien or some other physically better QB with adequate training to play. Signing Flynn makes the bad more likely than the good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon494
Tolzien had a whole camp with SF. He didn't start until week 8 and looked terrible when he did get in. He was inaccurate. He made bad decisions. Flynn had 2 weeks of practice with the team after signing and looked light years better. I have no idea if Tolzien will get better, but currently he is much much worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by texaspackerbacker
Getting another QB for camp may happen, but Tolzien flat out stunk last season.Quote:
Originally Posted by texaspackerbacker
Flynn saved our bacon by keeping the team alive til Rodgers could come back.
Did they beam the Packers games into Texas last season, er what?
I figured these references were all aimed towards "forcing themselves to get better" instead of keeping the same ol', same ol'. I get that angle for Flynn, but not so much the others. Flynn's a back up. Let's force them to improve their backups. Keep the starters. If you find someone better, make that "starter" a former starter.Quote:
Originally Posted by texaspackerbacker
Smart move by TT. Darft a QB late if a heartthrob drops into the Packers lap and see how the chips fall. If he gets cut so what.
The Packers have not signed any players that would impact the comps they would receive for next year's draft. They'll be getting some kind of compensation for James Jones, EDS, and CJ Wilson. They won't get anything, more than likely, for either MD Jennings or Newhouse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiness
I could see the NFL taking away one of the Packer's picks for unloading Outhouse on Cincy.Quote:
Originally Posted by smuggler
For those who thought the story about Flynn talking with the Giants was smoke his agent was blowing, the Giants are now reported to be near a deal with Josh Freeman. This just came up after the Packers signed Flynn, so it would be a good guess that the Giants moved to Freeman when Flynn was taken off the market.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ose-to-a-deal/
Adam Caplan @caplannfl 14m
Interesting sidenote: The #Packers had strong interest in signing Freeman had Matt Flynn signed with the Giants.
Just a Giant game of chicken.
Flynn's going to end up like co-owner of a franchise with all the FA money he's been collecting.
I guess a GM might still look at Freeman as a young guy who was Pro-Bowl not all that long ago, but the wheels fell all the way off last season after 2 mediocre seasons. You have to be looking at him and seeing Vince Young at least a little. I'm happy the Pack got Flynn instead of him. Lower ceiling, but much higher floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax
I think I would have preferred Freeman. Yeah, the wheels fell off, but they fell off in a dysfunctional franchise who publicly decided they didn't want him anymore. He has the physical tools Flynn doesn't have and would have been able to right his ship without the pressure of being the face of a dysfunctional franchise. Tutelage under M3 would have done him wonders, I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiness
He could not crack the lineup when Cassel and Ponder were in front of him. Scott Tolzien would have started in front of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smidgeon
I think that was less because he was capable and more that the Vikings rushed him in without enough time to learn the offense, then stayed away to save face. I think with a full offseason, he'd be a good backup QB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Oday
BS. He failed. Did not put in the work in the film room or practice.
I think his head was a mess after TB released him, then he's supposed to play against the NYG under the bright lights of MNF a few weeks later...that's not easy. True, he played terrible, but he has the physical tools you want -- it's a matter of whether M3 could work with what's between the ears. The Internet rumors about that are all over the board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Oday
Freeman can't carry a team on his own a la Rodgers. A team with some good supporting players and a coach who can figure him out could make noise.
I think they'll give Tolzien every opportunity to beat Flynn as top clipboard holder. Flynn's a gamer with experience in the system and respect of his teammates so that won't be easy.
Good to have Flynn back as a Plan B. Makes it less likely they draft a QB, especially early, but I wouldn't be shocked if they took one R6/R7 or grab a UDFA and put him on the PS.
It really is hard to believe Freeman is now permanently as bad as he showed in that awful, awful MNF game. #freshstart
I like signing a backup QB 4 months before opening day much more than signing a backup QB 6 days before opening day.
QFT...I think the team was playing with fire with the way they handled the backup role the last few years. Harrell got a sniff from the Jets after the Packers released him, but now would seem to be out of luck. I know most teams, save for the Cowboys and perhaps another team I can't think of are willing to pay their backup handsomely, but you have to at least have one be competent, if not well paid. They just needed to bring in Harrell's competition this time last year. At least they took care of the need now. Good to have Flynn back. He's a Packer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Jeff
Last year McCarthy and company handled the QB backup situation about as poorly as you could. :-| Lord knows why they stuck with Harrell for as long as they did. He must have been one of those players who is great in practice but is overwhelmed and sucked in games. By the time they finally figured out GH and Coleman didn't have it there wasn't much to choose from. We'll never know if Wallace could have salvaged a couple of games while Rodgers was out last year. If we recall Flynn wasn't available for a while last year either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Jeff