So many people voted stupidly and incorrectly in the first poll that it seems reasonable to try again now that the picture is clearer. We're a nation that believes in second chances.
I previously thought they would keep both, but with mounting injuries, I think the roster spot has gone up in value.
Still don't think the Pack are going to go into the season with only one backup given what happened last year. Tolzien #2, Flynn#3
All hail the Ruler of the Meadow!
Agree with the logic, inverse ranking.Originally Posted by Cheesehead Craig
Both make the original 53. However, If TT finds a waived player from another team worth picking up, Tolzien could be waived.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
Tolzien. They roll the dice and figure Flynn will not get picked up but ST might.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Duplicate post from elsewhere. HH, you need a fifth option:
Score one for CaliCheez
Wes Hodkiewicz @WesHod 6m
I give up RT @RobDemovsky Clearing up Scott Tolzien's practice-squad eligibility. Guess what? He's eligible NFL says http://es.pn/1vStz5b
Feel free to use this testimonial in your business: Whenever I need an interpretation of overly complicated and poorly written bureaucratic rules, I always trust CaliforniaCheez.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
I don't think practice squad eligibility creates an extra option. It might mean the Packers are more likely to cut Tolzien but that's doubtful. TT certainly would not be counting on Tolzien clearing waivers.
The practice squad talk is a psychological crutch for the weak, lily-livered types in our midst who don't want to face making a hard choice. Very sad.
Is "ST" Seattle?
I think either Flynn or Tolzien will get picked-up if they are cut. Tolzien immediately, Flynn later.
ST = Scott Tolzien. I think the Matt Flynn experience from last year argues it would take a lot for him to get picked up. Though, to be fair, he has said he is healthy.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Lets see Tolzien against the #1s because last year he was bad against a few teams' number 1 D.
The problem with the Flynn #2 + Tolzien #3 choice is you won't see Tolzien play this year in all likelihood. So then fall 2015 the team is at same place all over again.
I think the team needs to make a choice. If they don't think Tolzien will be effective in real games, cut him and go with the Flynn security blanket. Keeping Tolzien as a #3 is just a way of avoiding having to make a decision, and that is not worth the price of a roster spot.
Or keep both.
OK. But if you aren't going to promote Tolzien to #2, what is the point? You aren't going to learn anything about Tolzien this year.
Tolzien has more talent than Flynn. That will always be true.
Flynn has more experience than Tolzien. If you aren't willing to promote Tolzien of Flynn, that will remain true.
It is not worth using up a roster spot if you aren't willing to take a risk and promote Tolzien ahead of Flynn.
If Rodgers goes down and Flynn goes down what then?
Flynn. Neither will be good enough to trade for a pick. They're about the same age and price. Tolzien has a stronger arm but hasn't ever shown anything in a game. Flynn has proven he can win. If Rodgers goes down for a game or two, it won't matter either way. If he goes down for 8 games, I don't think it matters much either way if it's Flynn or Tolzien. I tend towards keeping Flynn, personally.
OK, keep 3 QBs. I take it then that the plan is to keep Flynn ahead of Tolzien next year too. Otherwise, what is gained by procrastinating the decision to promote Tolzien?
You are keeping a less talented player buried in the depth chart because you can't bring yourself to take a risk. That same risk will always be there.
Keep Flynn, try to get Tolzien to the PS. If you lose him, don't sweat it. It is unlikely they will need three anyway.
I don't think either one of them will be in that great of a demand on the waiver wire. Not many teams keep three QBs on their regular rosters anymore, and most will go with one they have had through out TC. Injuries, of course, can change that thinking for any team. The "worry" might be SF, if some of you are correct in stating their backups have been bad, since they have experience with Tolzien.
Sign Tolzien to give up his seat on the couch of his living room, or sign some other QB who probably has more actual playing experience than Tolzien.
I wonder if its too easy to dismiss his attractiveness to teams. He was signed by a team with Norv Turner as HC then picked up by Harbaugh for 2 years. Then the Packers came calling. It would be easy to dismiss Norv and AJ Smith (even though they tended to find decent QB prospects) but the other two teams seem to be a good recommendation.
I think he gets picked up if waived and other waiver fodder would be worse. Flynn might get picked up too, if last season was marred by his elbow trouble. Though he would be more likely to last for some time until a team needed a stop gap vet.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
We saw last year what the quality of QBs looks like on the street. Of course Tolzien will find a team if cut, Flynn too in time.
I do think Patler's idea of just going with Flynn makes some sense, given his low evaluation of Tolzien.
I don't see anybody voting for just keeping Flynn.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote