You overestimate Tolzien IMO
It's not a given San Fran grabs him
There will be other QB's cut with higher upside
Printable View
Well, the good news is we'll have our answer in six days or sooner. I'd hate to have to wait much longer for that crow to be served. The taste and taunting are more bitter when fresh.
After his flops elsewhere, does Flynn have any value outside of the Packers? If not, would he will still be available even if they cut him? I suspect that they go with Tolzein and keep Flynn on their speed dial.
I'm starting to think it's 50/50 for Flynn. Tolzien may have shown enough to think he could be a solid backup, and he has more potential. I still think back to last year, and I'm not sure the brass is ready to go through that again. Both guys have shown they belong on an NFL roster.
I'm with Joe on Tolzien. He needs to prove he can put points on the board. Notwithstanding the outstanding grab be Gillette - after the gift unsportsmanlike gave them another set of downs after the play in which the field goal team was coming on the field - I'm not sure he's shown that he can consistently deliver that yet. Maybe he has in practice. Flynn didn't play great last game but he was hurt by a drop at the goal line by Adams and going back to st. Louis one by Dorsey as well on a couple good throws in the red zone.
Drive for show and putt for dough.
Flynn has shown he can win games, Tolzien has yet to do that.
How much upside do we need in a back-up QB?
But Ted always throws us for a loop come cut downs, history shows; 3 fullbacks anyone?
Agreed. I'll take a calm, proven performer with somewhat less potential over the unproven player with a potentially higher ceiling for my back up QB that I hope to never play.
3 fullbacks and 5 TEs were interesting, to say the least. But I'm not sure he can ever top the brief period of no backup QBs that he gave us last year at the end of camp!
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.
All that work with the GameBooks out the window.
He does have three accrued seasons, so the GameBook adventure wasn't a total loss, but he has never had a qualifying number of games on the Active roster in one of those seasons.
Demovsky: http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-pa...e-squad-statusQuote:
Citing that rule, a league spokesman said: "Tolzien is eligible to be on the practice squad. … While Tolzien does have three accrued seasons, he's never been on an active roster for nine or more games in any of those three [seasons]."
Tolzien has been on the 46-man game-day roster for 11 career games, but it was broken up over two seasons. He dressed for eight games last year with the Packers and three in 2012 with the San Francisco 49ers. Tolzien was on the 49ers roster for all of 2011, but was inactive for all 16 games that season.
Wes Hodkiewicz @WesHod 4m
Tolzien made it by one game. He was active for 8 with a single-season maximum of 9. His 8 weeks on PS counted as 1 of his 3 eligible seasons
Last year, Tolzien was in the same situation as Breno Giacomini at one time, I think, going to a PS after two years on regular rosters. The Packers kept Giacomini on their 53 man roster for two years, then cut him his third season and signed him to their practice squad, only to have the Seahawks offer him a regular roster spot a few weeks later.
Do you have a source that makes it clear the exact roster designation of a player?
Because to determine his accrued seasons, I had to dig into six game books each for the 49ers for two seasons. Once I got to six, I stopped looking. To figure out he was NOT on the PS by that method, I would have had to look at all 16 games.
Most teams, including the Packers, have all of their transactions listed on their websites going back a lot of years. It's easy to see all signings to their regular rosters and practice squads. It's easy to search a player name and see eveything for him on that team I couldn't find that for the 49ers, so I searched news releases, and found one from when they released him last year that said he had been on their regular roster the full seasons of '11 & '12, but mostly inactive. I took them at their word, and since he was on GB's PS last year....
Thank you. When I always try to know what I am talking about. When I use bold type, I'm pretty sure.
But my point has two big questions:
1) Can he clear waivers (not be added to an active roster)?
2) Would Ted pay him enough cap money to stay on the Packers practice squad during the season?
Ted has made enough gutsy calls in the past (like cutting AJ Hawk) that I think he can get away with it.
Tolzien will not know another teams playbook so his value to them is diminished.
The counter argument is he would be running someone else's scout team and maybe Seattle keeps him for a week or so for scouting.
Paying him is not the problem. Getting him past waivers is. There are three teams, Texans, Titans and Jets that he might be their starter. Though the Jets might be beholden to Vick first. And would you be surprised to see Oakland (Schaub/McGloin) take a flyer on him?
Have to admit, Tolzien looked good last night. It won't surprise me in the least if he is the pick for #2, but I still lean toward Flynn's experience. If the idea is to keep the best 53 players regardless of positions, both should be kept. It just seems that a 3rd QB does so little to help you in a typical season that it is a waste to keep one on the 53 man roster. The chances of him playing a single meaningful snap are really quite small.