Do we need a veteran back-up at quarterback?

[Lurker64]

Yes, Craig Nall

I'm not sure Nall is ahead of Brohm or Flynn at this point. He's really only in the league at this point because he spent so many years as a Favre-backup and several of those guys have worked out.

Nall hasn't shown anybody anything on the field in years.

[RashanGary]

I like going with two young guys with potential over an old guy who has none. Plugging holes with shitty vets is a sure way to mediocrity.

[Deputy Nutz]

I like going with two young guys with potential over an old guy who has none. Plugging holes with shitty vets is a sure way to mediocrity.

exactly, this season is shot anyways if Rodgers is out any significant amount of time. Who cares who takes the snaps, better some young kid with potential than an aging has been.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I like going with two young guys with potential over an old guy who has none. Plugging holes with shitty vets is a sure way to mediocrity.

exactly, this season is shot anyways if Rodgers is out any significant amount of time. Who cares who takes the snaps, better some young kid with potential than an aging has been.

If Rodgers is out 6 games, winning 3 of them might be just enough to keep the team in the playoff hunt. Having a functional backup QB is critical. From what I've seen, Craig Nall, or a similar vet with some experience, would be light years ahead of our rookies.

[The Leaper]

I'll be happy either way they do it, but the quesion was whether we NEEDED to bring in a Vet. I say we don't need one. I don't feel that they would be markedly better than what we have now.

From Bedard's training camp blog after Thursday...

"Backup QB Brian Brohm didn't really respond well to McCarthy calling him out yesterday with his announcement that Matt Flynn had gained on Brohm. He was shaky again and threw a terrible out pass to Taj Smith that Charles Woodson easily picked off for a would-be touchdown. The pass by Brohm, and it was only about 12 yards, had a vicious, ugly wobble on it.

Flynn also threw an interception to Woodson in 7-on-7 and nearly another to Harris."

Yep...clearly, we don't need a capable backup. Not at all.

[Deputy Nutz]

I like going with two young guys with potential over an old guy who has none. Plugging holes with shitty vets is a sure way to mediocrity.

exactly, this season is shot anyways if Rodgers is out any significant amount of time. Who cares who takes the snaps, better some young kid with potential than an aging has been.

If Rodgers is out 6 games, winning 3 of them might be just enough to keep the team in the playoff hunt. Having a functional backup QB is critical. From what I've seen, Craig Nall, or a similar vet with some experience, would be light years ahead of our rookies.

So with your theory the Packers would have to trade for on of these gems, or would have to pray that a couple of them would be released and then would have enough time to learn and operate the playbook with only getting the reps of a backup at the start of the season. Sure if Rodger goes down week 10 and could be back week 16.

Is Phil Simms kid really going to be that much better than Brohm? At least Brohm has a future with this organization, Chris Simms is well, a guy that got his splean busted open.

[Joemailman]

I guess I'm inclined to give Brohm and Flynn more than 1 preseason game to show what they can do before bringing someone like Nall. No need to bring in someone in the preseason and slow the development of the rookies. Stiffs like Nall will always be available if you feel you need to sign someone at some point.

[3irty1]

If we end up getting one I think Nall is the best guess.

[Deputy Nutz]

Nall has never started a game in his life, he is a great clipboard holder, please I am not trying to take that away from him that would be cruel, but no team in the NFL has intrusted Craig Nall to run their offense for anything more than a couple of series or at most a quarter of a real football game.

[RashanGary]

Brohm is only getting better and so is Flynn. I'd rather have two talented young guys on the rise with high potential than proven garbage.

[SnakeLH2006]

I'll be happy either way they do it, but the quesion was whether we NEEDED to bring in a Vet. I say we don't need one. I don't feel that they would be markedly better than what we have now.

From Bedard's training camp blog after Thursday...

"Backup QB Brian Brohm didn't really respond well to McCarthy calling him out yesterday with his announcement that Matt Flynn had gained on Brohm. He was shaky again and threw a terrible out pass to Taj Smith that Charles Woodson easily picked off for a would-be touchdown. The pass by Brohm, and it was only about 12 yards, had a vicious, ugly wobble on it.

Flynn also threw an interception to Woodson in 7-on-7 and nearly another to Harris."

Yep...clearly, we don't need a capable backup. Not at all.

2 things here...

1) Bedard is one funny bastard with his descriptors of said events...
2) We need someone to play .500 ball when A-rod gets smoked on a blown B-Jack blitz pickup on 3rd down.

I'm high on Flynn as he looked good in that first game, and Brohm looked shaky at best. But....No way either one could put together even a Kyle Orton or T-Jack performance (both have sucked ass up till now in playing time the reg. season) right now as a rook. Sign Feely who at least is competitive (almost beat the Tapepriots last year) for the season and stash one of the rooks on IR...It's not like we are gonna cut one of TT's draft pick QB's so rest easy JH. Rest easy my son.

[Tarlam!]

Brohm is only getting better and so is Flynn. I'd rather have two talented young guys on the rise with high potential than proven garbage.

Brohm is showing signs of pressure. He's had lousy practices according to JSO since his mediocre debut. I'm convinced he'll be fine eventually, but it's not gonna look good on his resumé if he gets pipped by a 7th rounder with only a year at college as a starter....

[MOBB DEEP]

GET CULPEPPER.......!!!!!

You can't be serious... anyone who thinks Culps is a west coast QB that has to actually read a defense is completely insane to me...

wat r u talkn about???

[deake]

Kids gotta learn. Unless they fall completely flat, I say no.

If nothing improves much from the 1st exhibition, then prior to week one I can see it. But limiting throws in camp should be a last concession. I could be persuaded to change my mind if its probable that Flynn could be stashed on the practice squad safely for the year. Or if he's a good enough actor to develop a debilitating season ending hamstring problem, then go on IR and then miraculously recover in two weeks.

Stashing Flynn on the IR would seem to be the best solution because it would help TT justify getting a veteran quarterback. The building for the future etc. questions would become a mute point. He could simply say they needed a third quarterback. The question would be, do they really do that. Fake an injury or at least make it to be more severe than it is to stash players on the IR? Couldn’t that get them in a lot of trouble?

[MJZiggy]

Yes, that could get them in a lot of trouble with the league.