Brian Brohm

[Partial]

I'd love to get this guy in the 2nd somehow. I've known he was a star since I watched him against Miami many moons ago. He has "it". I don't know how someone went from the consensus #1 pick to a 2nd rounder when he improved his numbers.

Thoughts?

[BallHawk]

I'd make sense, in some ways, but I can't see Ted spending a 1st day pick on a position that he has "full trust in." Spending a pick on a QB....what type of message does that send to A-Rod? I'm not saying we should treat Aaron like child, but he's waited his turn for this. Let's see how he does and if he falls flat then we can bring in a vet or a camp cut.

[Lurker64]

I don't want him. Brohm showed me a lot last year, and not a bit of it was good. I'd much rather have a "lower tier" guy like Woodson, Ainge, or Brennan than Brohm. Brohm faced adversity last year and completely folded in the face of it. I don't want a player like that anywhere near the helm of my football team.

[The Leaper]

Say NO to any QB in the first 120 picks.

[pittstang5]

Say NO to any QB in the first 120 picks.

I agree. I just don't see TT picking a QB on the first day. They'll stick with Rodgers (obviously), Nall, a veteran (who, I have no idea) and draft someone in the later rounds (I'm thinking 5-7) to develop or potentially put on the PS squad.

[Partial]

I don't want him. Brohm showed me a lot last year, and not a bit of it was good. I'd much rather have a "lower tier" guy like Woodson, Ainge, or Brennan than Brohm. Brohm faced adversity last year and completely folded in the face of it. I don't want a player like that anywhere near the helm of my football team.

Such as what? Completing 65% of his passes in a pro offense? Carrying a team on his back being the only star player?

I think you're crazy if you look at wins and losses without taking into account the talent around him. Jay Cutler had WAY less success in college and he turned out ok.

[run pMc]

IIRC, Cutler had a better arm than Brohm. Cutler also played in the SEC and had even less surrounding talent than Brohm.

I think Brohm should have come out last year; the lack of surrounding talent hurt him and maybe exposed some flaws.

Personally, I don't see the 'it' factor you claim he has. He's just OK. Has had some great games and a few stinkers. I wonder if he'll succeed on the pro level...doubtful if he goes to a bad team.
If he's the BPA and TT is up, I could see him trading down. No way does TT touch a QB in R1. This year's group doesn't have me thinking there will multiple All-Pro QBs getting drafted in the first 2 rounds, anyway. I could see a late round flyer on somebody to develop.

TT will give Rodgers the keys to the offense and sign a veteran to back him up. If the QB's go to absolute sh_t GB this year he'll find a replacement. You gotta give Rodgers his chance, though...maybe next year too. It usually takes about 2 seasons for the light to go on. Hopefully with 3 yrs on the bench it won't take as long for Rodgers.

I do agree TT needs to address the QB position, but drafting a QB in R1 or R2 would send a bad message. The costs of drafting Brohm or another QB early might not be worth it. Besides, there are other areas of need.

[The Leaper]

I'm not a big fan of Brohm...or really any other QB for that matter this year. Grab a guy after the 3rd round to develop in the #3 slot...and grab a vet for the #2 role who gets cut after June 1.

[Fritz]

There's a line in today's JSO article on the Packers drafting a backup QB that just kills me.

It says something about the Packers drafting a QB to backup - and possibly challenge - Aaron Rodgers.

All I can say is "yeah, right" about the challenge part.

A rookie QB is basically a deer in the headlights. They are freaking lost out on the field during a game. They don't know where the rush is coming from, they can't read defenses well yet - in short, very, very, very, very rarely can a rookie challenge even a tired veteran for the starting job. Not, at least, for the first half of a season, and only then if a team is floundering and has an odor of desperation.

So too I don't understand you posters who seem to think that drafting a rook in the first round would somehow be a "signal" that Aaron Rodgers might interpret as an indictment, or that Rodgers' fragile self-esteem might be damaged, or anything of the like. A rookie just isn't going to come in and beat out Rodgers, not because Rodgers is the second coming, but because the rookie QB would be - well, a rookie QB.

The logical extension of my thinking, though, also dictates that I am slightly uncomfortable with a rook being the second string QB. Rodgers, so far, has shown a dispensation toward physical fragility, and if he gets hurt, I don't see a rook coming in and being a big plus. Thus I also am annoyed by the line in the JSO article that claims a veteran backup like Holcomb or Culpepper coming into a game is akin to throwing in the towel. I think even a decrepit vet is more useful in the short-term than a wild-eyed rook.

[twoseven]

Just my opinion, but if we are using either of our first two picks on a QB I'll be pissed. Our needs at corner, TE, and the possibility that Stewart slips to #30, or even the OL are what I am hoping are addressed with those earliest picks. We could have picked any number of capable cheap clipboard holders in the last month and a half to backup AR, and should have, AR should be the man after all this time behind Favre.

[Partial]

If we nab Stewart at 30, no one will be more pleased if TT breaks from the mold and trades up for Brohm with the two seconds. I will be happier than a clam and shouting from the roof tops while doing the happy dance.

[DonHutson]

I'm not sold on Brohm either way, but I posted a week or so ago that I think this could be a possibility. IF Ted thinks Brohm is a top 15 type QB, then this would be similar to the Rodgers situation in that Brohm would likely be the best player available. He's also arguably the most ready to play if you're drafting a QB with the idea that he needs to be the #2 right off the bat.

I'd prefer to wait until later to pick up a QB. I think Kevin O'Connell from SDSU seems to have the most tools to work with out of the guys that would be around in the 4th or 5th round.

I'm also very intrigued by Josh Johnson from San Diego. He reminds me of Mark Brunell. However, it sounds like he's moving up into the 2nd or 3rd round range, so we'd likely have to spend one of our #2s on him.

And I agree that Rodgers' feelings should have no bearing on the situation. As Fritz said, there is unlikely to be any real competition this year. If Rodgers isn't confident he can win the job over some rookie, then that's a problem. As long as Rodgers does the job, the team will be behind him as the starter. Down the road, if they both prove to be starting caliber then one will have to go. By that time Rodgers would be well established and thus it's unlikely he would be the one to leave.

As long as Rodgers produces, he's fine. If another QB keeps him on his toes, so much the better.

[dissident94]

Anyone who doesn't think QB is a need on this team is in denial. The truth in the NFL is you need 2 guys capable of starting. We have been spoiled for too long not thinking like this. If a QB falls to us in our first 3 picks you take him.
Rodgers is no sure thing. Either is drafting someone. No hurt in bringing in a high draft QB.
I think TT will take best player no matter who it is. INcluding RB or WR.

[twoseven]

Passing on Brady Quinn in the first round last year only to go after Brohm in the first round this year would shock me if we're supporting the idea that you need two young capable QBs on the team at the same time fighting it out for the job.

[Charles Woodson]

If we nab Stewart at 30, no one will be more pleased if TT breaks from the mold and trades up for Brohm with the two seconds. I will be happier than a clam and shouting from the roof tops while doing the happy dance.

Thank God your not the GM...

Simply put, Brohm doesnt have IT. And besides the fact that we dont NEED a qb like we NEED a CB.

I would much rather take a QB on the 2nd day