Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Roster Depth

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roster Depth

    The Packers, for a change, now seem to be blessed with great depth - at every position but quarterback, and Flynn's shoulder injury (any word on severity yet?), along with Brohm's poor progress, only underscores that fact.
    Brohm as the next line of defense after Rodgers could really derail a bright season.
    Do the Packers cut bait now and sign a vet? Have they seen enough?
    Who's available?
    Who Knows? The Shadow knows!

  • #2
    Flynn says his shoulder is fine via Pelissero's twitter.

    Comment


    • #3
      M3 said when they checked it out, it appeared to be just muscular.
      "Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg Jennings

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Roster Depth

        Originally posted by The Shadow
        Do the Packers cut bait now and sign a vet? Have they seen enough?
        I think they wait till the final cutdown to do their catch and release.

        Comment


        • #5
          I feel a little better about hearing this about Flynn's shoulder. Brohm looked a little better tonight but he has a long way to go. Even if TT and MM wanted to bring in a vet QB, who is out there worth bothering with?

          Comment


          • #6
            Brohm is a nightmare. But so was A-Rod back in the day! :P

            Comment


            • #7
              Rodgers wasn't even close to as bad as Brohm--even in his rookie year. His first year he kind of looked like Flynn now. He wasn't there, but you could see potential. He improved each of the next two years. By his second preseason, I think a lot of people thought Rodgers had a chance. By his third, there were a lot who thought he looked pretty darn good.
              "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                Rodgers wasn't even close to as bad as Brohm--even in his rookie year. His first year he kind of looked like Flynn now. He wasn't there, but you could see potential. He improved each of the next two years. By his second preseason, I think a lot of people thought Rodgers had a chance. By his third, there were a lot who thought he looked pretty darn good.
                A-rod was pathetic in year one. (Recall the underthrows?) Year two was slightly better. Year 3 the light came on. Now we have a pro bowler.

                BB is improving but not at a pace ready to be a legitimate number two.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by rbaloha
                  A-rod was pathetic in year one. (Recall the underthrows?) Year two was slightly better. Year 3 the light came on. Now we have a pro bowler.

                  BB is improving but not at a pace ready to be a legitimate number two.
                  ARod had a 101.1 passer rating in his second preseason. I'm not sure where people get that he sucked his second preseason. He wasn't as good as his stats, but he certainly flashed ability. He went 9 of 11 for 124 yards in preseason game #1 that year. Then, he went 3 for 6 for 111 yards with 2 TDs in preseason game #2 that year. He had a poor 3rd game, but playing against Tennessee's 1st team with mostly 2nd teamers he went 8 for 15 for 81 yards with 1 TD and 0 interceptions in the final preseason game.

                  In 6 preseason games, Brohm hasn't had one game with a passer rating above 68.8.
                  "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                    Rodgers wasn't even close to as bad as Brohm--even in his rookie year. His first year he kind of looked like Flynn now. He wasn't there, but you could see potential. He improved each of the next two years. By his second preseason, I think a lot of people thought Rodgers had a chance. By his third, there were a lot who thought he looked pretty darn good.
                    I've broken it down for you before, his 2nd preseason wasn't nearly as good as his QB rating would display.

                    He was terrible his first preseason. He was Brohm like bad. He was slightly better than Flynn is now in his second. His third he was great.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Partial
                      I've broken it down for you before
                      I think I'll trust my own opinion, but thanks for the effort.
                      "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        IF Flynn's shoulder is okay, and Brohm is indeed showing improvement, even if it's slight, it would seem strange to cut Brohm now. If he goes backward in the next two weeks and coaches are convinced he's not NFL material, then sure, cut him.

                        But otherwise, keep him. If Flynn is healthy then Brohm can sit one more year as the #3. Then next summer we'll see if he's NFL-worthy and if so, at what level.
                        "The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."

                        KYPack

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                          Originally posted by Partial
                          I've broken it down for you before
                          I think I'll trust my own opinion, but thanks for the effort.
                          Ignoring facts as usual

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think the roster depth will make special teams a great strength this year.
                            Swede: My expertise in this area is extensive. The essential difference between a "battleship" and an "aircraft carrier" is that an aircraft carrier requires five direct hits to sink, but it takes only four direct hits to sink a battleship.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I wonder how this new ban on the wedge on returns will affect special teams.
                              "The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."

                              KYPack

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X