Speculation on GB's QB targets in draft

[Partial]

I'd be happy with Flacco fairly early, but I just plain do not want Brohm. Not even on day 2. Brohm's a system QB with questionable leadership and questionable intestinal fortitude.

Why would you take a guy from a small school with a lack of competition against a guy who has continually shown up and carried his team in big games? One is from a pro style offense and thrived in it and one isn't. I don't know much about Flacco but I am skeptical because of his small school roots and lack of pro offense experience.

[RashanGary]

Ben Rothlisburger is a guy from a small school who's stock rose in his senior year. That Brett Favre fellow as another.


Who knows if Joe Flacco is the guy, but I'm not about to write him off becasue he's a small school kid that's not in the big schools spotlight.

[cpk1994]

I'd be happy with Flacco fairly early, but I just plain do not want Brohm. Not even on day 2. Brohm's a system QB with questionable leadership and questionable intestinal fortitude.

Why would you take a guy from a small school with a lack of competition against a guy who has continually shown up and carried his team in big games? One is from a pro style offense and thrived in it and one isn't. I don't know much about Flacco but I am skeptical because of his small school roots and lack of pro offense experience.

You know better than to try and say that the big school guy is automatically bett than the small school guy. Greg Jennings and Donald Driver would like to chat with you.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm not talking small school vs. big school. I'm talking about the relatively unknown QB that rose up the draft board after the season ended. You barely heard of him throughout they year, and he ended up going in round 2 or 3. I'm thinking Charlie Frye or John Beck or Kevin Kolb.

[Partial]

Ben Rothlisburger is a guy from a small school who's stock rose in his senior year. That Brett Favre fellow as another.


Who knows if Joe Flacco is the guy, but I'm not about to write him off becasue he's a small school kid that's not in the big schools spotlight.

People knew Big Ben for a year or two prior and he is a physicial specimen. I don't know about Favre because I'm too young, but what is this Flacco kids deal??

[Partial]

I'd be happy with Flacco fairly early, but I just plain do not want Brohm. Not even on day 2. Brohm's a system QB with questionable leadership and questionable intestinal fortitude.

Why would you take a guy from a small school with a lack of competition against a guy who has continually shown up and carried his team in big games? One is from a pro style offense and thrived in it and one isn't. I don't know much about Flacco but I am skeptical because of his small school roots and lack of pro offense experience.

You know better than to try and say that the big school guy is automatically bett than the small school guy. Greg Jennings and Donald Driver would like to chat with you.

Agreed, but QBing is a totally different ball game imo. I think what sort of offense they run is more important than the school size.

[RashanGary]

I'm not talking small school vs. big school. I'm talking about the relatively unknown QB that rose up the draft board after the season ended. You barely heard of him throughout they year, and he ended up going in round 2 or 3. I'm thinking Charlie Frye or John Beck or Kevin Kolb.

Good examples.

It's tough. I'm not going to pretend to know anything about quarterback play and how it will transfer to the NFL.

I know Flacco has a legit rocket, is very accurate and is the prototype tall QB who can survey the field from the pocket. Can he play? His numbers last year would suggest he could, but Frye, Beck and Kolb are good examples of why he might never make it. We really never know.

That said, if Ted thinks Brohm or Flacco are the guy I'm OK with it. We might not know, but Thompson is paid to have a pretty damn good idea. The premise of my pro-QB, pro-Flacco stance is that I'm not sold on Rodgers and if Ted likes another guy then I think it would be the right decision to take him.

[Fritz]

'“If they take a QB No. 1, the position would become more of an open competition, and I don’t think they want to put Rodgers in that kind of situation,” one veteran team insider told PFW.'

That's a ridiculous statement. Absolutely ridiculous. There is not one quarterback in this draft, including Matt Ryan, who could come in and seriously compete with Rodgers. As I said in a previous post, this is not because I think Rodgers is the next coming of Jesus (despite his haircut and beard). It is simply because a rookie QB is a deer in the headlights. No way - no way - a rook can come in and learn the system so well he could actually compete for a number one job at QB.

Who are these Bozos that say/write this stuff?

[Chubbyhubby]

Joe Flacco Stats

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=146278

I found his stats on ESPN check it out....

[Lurker64]

Re: Joe Flacco Stats

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=146278

I found his stats on ESPN check it out....

It's against meagre competition, but it's still a good statline. I'd personally rather have Flacco (who has a cannon for an arm) than Brohm (who has a Pennington-esque noodle for an arm).

[packrulz]

They got videos of Flacco and Ainge on youtube, they look pretty good.

[Rastak]

'“If they take a QB No. 1, the position would become more of an open competition, and I don’t think they want to put Rodgers in that kind of situation,” one veteran team insider told PFW.'

That's a ridiculous statement. Absolutely ridiculous. There is not one quarterback in this draft, including Matt Ryan, who could come in and seriously compete with Rodgers. As I said in a previous post, this is not because I think Rodgers is the next coming of Jesus (despite his haircut and beard). It is simply because a rookie QB is a deer in the headlights. No way - no way - a rook can come in and learn the system so well he could actually compete for a number one job at QB.

Who are these Bozos that say/write this stuff?

Two gthings. Rodgers and a rookie would have the same number of NFL starts. I would agree that Rodgers has a huge advantage. Years behind Favre learning and some NFL game experience. It isn't unherad of to have a rookie start although unlikely. If you take a guy number one, how can there not be at least a competition for #1 in the preseason? I guess if Mr Rookie struggles in OTA's, then it might be an open and shut case.

[twoseven]

A QB with our first pick? Please, no.

Are any of the supposed quality QBs that might be available three weeks from now any more touted, able, or suitable than Rodgers was out of Cal at the time we selected him a few years ago?

Personally, I think what Rodgers did at Cal surpasses what most, if not all, of this year's rookie QBs did at their schools.

But now AR might not be as good running our offense as some rookie? That #30 could nab us a quality DB, TE, OL, or maybe RB Stewart. Concerning AR's durablity, I still think you have to weigh our immediate needs at other positions and gamble against Aaron holding up. The corners available at the end of the second round versus #30? I don't want that option. If we're ready to trade the two 2's to move up near #30, fine.

Taking a QB at 30 WITHOUT GIVING AR ONE SINGLE SNAP AS OUR STARTER is a joke IMO. To me it would be like drafting a guy at #30 to challenge Justin Harrell for his spot already.

[Fritz]

'“If they take a QB No. 1, the position would become more of an open competition, and I don’t think they want to put Rodgers in that kind of situation,” one veteran team insider told PFW.'

That's a ridiculous statement. Absolutely ridiculous. There is not one quarterback in this draft, including Matt Ryan, who could come in and seriously compete with Rodgers. As I said in a previous post, this is not because I think Rodgers is the next coming of Jesus (despite his haircut and beard). It is simply because a rookie QB is a deer in the headlights. No way - no way - a rook can come in and learn the system so well he could actually compete for a number one job at QB.

Who are these Bozos that say/write this stuff?

Two gthings. Rodgers and a rookie would have the same number of NFL starts. I would agree that Rodgers has a huge advantage. Years behind Favre learning and some NFL game experience. It isn't unherad of to have a rookie start although unlikely. If you take a guy number one, how can there not be at least a competition for #1 in the preseason? I guess if Mr Rookie struggles in OTA's, then it might be an open and shut case.

Sorry Ras - Can't agree with you here, at all. In fact, I think you contradict yourself - you begin by saying that they'd have the same number of NFL starts - which is true but specious - as you indirectly acknowledge in your very next line - "I would agree that Rodgers has a huge advantage."

I stand by my original post. I guess we just disagree.

[Rastak]

'“If they take a QB No. 1, the position would become more of an open competition, and I don’t think they want to put Rodgers in that kind of situation,” one veteran team insider told PFW.'

That's a ridiculous statement. Absolutely ridiculous. There is not one quarterback in this draft, including Matt Ryan, who could come in and seriously compete with Rodgers. As I said in a previous post, this is not because I think Rodgers is the next coming of Jesus (despite his haircut and beard). It is simply because a rookie QB is a deer in the headlights. No way - no way - a rook can come in and learn the system so well he could actually compete for a number one job at QB.

Who are these Bozos that say/write this stuff?

Two gthings. Rodgers and a rookie would have the same number of NFL starts. I would agree that Rodgers has a huge advantage. Years behind Favre learning and some NFL game experience. It isn't unherad of to have a rookie start although unlikely. If you take a guy number one, how can there not be at least a competition for #1 in the preseason? I guess if Mr Rookie struggles in OTA's, then it might be an open and shut case.

Sorry Ras - Can't agree with you here, at all. In fact, I think you contradict yourself - you begin by saying that they'd have the same number of NFL starts - which is true but specious - as you indirectly acknowledge in your very next line - "I would agree that Rodgers has a huge advantage."

I stand by my original post. I guess we just disagree.

My point, to clarify, is that it isn't at all an outrageous thought to have a rookie QB beat out Rodgers. I am also agreeing that Rodgers has a large advantage. You made it sound like it was inconcievable, and it isn't. It's possible although unlikely.


That was my only point. I'm sure Rodgers would have a natural advantage and coaches bias (they want to give him this shot) in his favor.