Am I Nuts Or Does Bob Have This Backwards A Bit?

Tyler Dunne ‏@TyDunne 1h
Here's @BobMcGinn on the #Packers learning from 2013 and keeping three quarterbacks ... http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/

Quote:

---

On this day a year ago, Thompson released Vince Young and then, three days later, B.J. Coleman. Tolzien was added to the practice squad Sept. 1 and Seneca Wallace to the 53-man roster Sept. 2.

Flynn was brought back Nov. 11 after Wallace suffered a season-ending groin injury.

---

Do the Packers have 3 QBs on the roster because they were working the waiver wire last year OR because they had better QBs throughout the offseason?

It's because we have QBs worth keeping now.

I've seen better polls at tigerbeat.com
pbmax, don't try this at home

Jason Wilde says that they were leaning to keeping 2 until the late season-ending injuries. Not sure his source.

what smuggler said

IMO the main reason we have 3 QBs right now is Mike wanted to keep working with Tolzien - he must see something in this young man - and didn't want to risk exposing him to waivers. For now Flynn will be #2. I doubt we'll bring in another QB to the PS at this juncture.

What can Tolzien's future be other than as trade bait? If not now, then in a year. Two years at most.

This is good. Draft picks are good.

Can I select both options? Because the backup situation was a clusterfuck to start with in training camp...and that kind of started the ball rolling into the regular season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harlan Huckleby

What can Tolzien's future be other than as trade bait? If not now, then in a year. Two years at most.

This is good. Draft picks are good.

---

Exactly. The roster worked out with room for both, and I expect TT will gladly listen to trade offers for either one right up to the trade deadline, unless one of their 3 QBs goes down with injury. Tolzien is likely the one that would be of interest to most teams.

Tolzien and Flynn are both free agents after this year. I think TT kept both because he thinks Tolzien is potentially better, but he could lose Tolzien in free agency to a team that will give him a shot at being a starter. So he's keeping Flynn for insurance in case he loses Tolzien. If he's able to sign Tolzien as his future backup, then I think Flynn will be gone next year.

I don't understand the 2nd option in the poll.:huh:

I thought Tolzien has this year and next on his contract? :cnf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugger

I thought Tolzien has this year and next on his contract? :cnf:

---

He signed a 2 year contract last year. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay...scott-tolzien/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

Tolzien and Flynn are both free agents after this year. I think TT kept both because he thinks Tolzien is potentially better, but he could lose Tolzien in free agency to a team that will give him a shot at being a starter. So he's keeping Flynn for insurance in case he loses Tolzien. If he's able to sign Tolzien as his future backup, then I think Flynn will be gone next year.

I don't understand the 2nd option in the poll.:huh:

---

Yeah Harlan was right, its kind of murky. My opinion is that Bob has gleaned another "lesson" learned by the front office that is complete garbage.

Knowing you need a solid backup for Rodgers is obvious. Having three QBs on the roster doesn't guarantee a capable backup.

The 2013 Packers found themselves in that position at cut down day last year. No matter how many spots they designated for QBs, they had squat for backups.

This year, due to some better luck and planning, they had two guys worth keeping that you might want to start ahead of BJ Coleman and Seneca Wallace.

The second choice was supposed to convey the idea that 2013 wasn't a problem because of the number of QBs on the roster on cut down day. It was doomed when they decided to roll with Coleman and Harrell.

One of the great mysteries of life is what in the hell did MM and company ever see in Graham Harrell? Was he one of those guys who is good in practice but sucks in games? :cnf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugger

One of the great mysteries of life is what in the hell did MM and company ever see in Graham Harrell? Was he one of those guys who is good in practice but sucks in games? :cnf:

---

I don't know, but I think they're done with guys named Harrell.

I agree with Smuggler, the guys we have now are a lot better. However, I wouldn't rule out going into the season or at some point during the season trading Flynn. Tolzien clearly stood out IMO as too good to part with; Flynn also looked damn good too - maybe they figured it was worth a roster spot to keep him around and hope to get maybe a 4th-6th rounder from somebody instead of just giving him away.