Bills grab Brohm off the practice squad

[Smidgeon]

We've been going along with our 3rd QB as the back-up for two years now. It's time to stop the madness, get a back-up QB and get real.

Except by now, that 3rd QB knows the system as well as anyone else out there. He is the 2nd QB now.

But you can't say he knows the job. Sure he's our back-up, but can he be an effective replacement for AR over a mulitple game stretch? Nobody knows, including one Ted Thompson.

I don't want to turn this into the same 'ol anti-TT-pro-TT rant thread, but in some areas, Thompson's approach has not been sound and time has proven that.

His overall philosophy is fine, but in some areas, his failure to add quality players by his rigid approach is biting us in the ass.

I didn't say he could be an effective replacement for AR over a multiple game stretch by any stretch of the imagination. I'm saying that for being in GB's system for 2 years now, he knows GB's offensive scheme better than a FA would. Also, I think if you're confident a veteran FA QB who wasn't good enough to win a starting position in another city would be able to effectively fill in for any significant stretch of time, then you'd be in for a rude surprise. I wouldn't be shocked at all if all (or the vast majority) of the successful backup QBs who took over and finished a year or several stretches of games successfully were young QBs with their first real opportunity. In which case, they either become "the QB of the future" (Kolb), are traded to another team (Cassel), or take over starting immediately (a la Favre). I don't have data on that--it's speculation--but I think "veteran" QBs are overrated when it comes to their ability to do more than play one or two effective games.

[rbaloha1]

Disappointed. The Packers attempted to match. Good opportunity for BB. Chance to be a decent pro qb. I also felt BB would be a good pro qb.

[KYPack]

We've been going along with our 3rd QB as the back-up for two years now. It's time to stop the madness, get a back-up QB and get real.

Except by now, that 3rd QB knows the system as well as anyone else out there. He is the 2nd QB now.

But you can't say he knows the job. Sure he's our back-up, but can he be an effective replacement for AR over a mulitple game stretch? Nobody knows, including one Ted Thompson.

I don't want to turn this into the same 'ol anti-TT-pro-TT rant thread, but in some areas, Thompson's approach has not been sound and time has proven that.

His overall philosophy is fine, but in some areas, his failure to add quality players by his rigid approach is biting us in the ass.

I didn't say he could be an effective replacement for AR over a multiple game stretch by any stretch of the imagination. I'm saying that for being in GB's system for 2 years now, he knows GB's offensive scheme better than a FA would. Also, I think if you're confident a veteran FA QB who wasn't good enough to win a starting position in another city would be able to effectively fill in for any significant stretch of time, then you'd be in for a rude surprise. I wouldn't be shocked at all if all (or the vast majority) of the successful backup QBs who took over and finished a year or several stretches of games successfully were young QBs with their first real opportunity. In which case, they either become "the QB of the future" (Kolb), are traded to another team (Cassel), or take over starting immediately (a la Favre). I don't have data on that--it's speculation--but I think "veteran" QBs are overrated when it comes to their ability to do more than play one or two effective games.

I tell ya a guy who can do that job and would have been a good fit here. There are several back-ups around, but people say hell no all the time for reasons I can't fathom. You want a guy like Kitna. Not only could he fill in for a stretch, He can help the team. Firstly he can be a mentor to the starter. helping him read the D and spotting places where some plays can work. He can also teach the young boys that are holding the clipboard. he did that for the Bengals and helped grow Carson Palmer from a green kid to one of the league's top QB's.

The way Thompson structured it, we had a starter and two green kids. Now we are down to one green kid who maybe can play and maybe can't. This is lame. We've had two years to come up with a better situation and we haven't done it.

That ain't hacking the program.

[Smidgeon]

We've been going along with our 3rd QB as the back-up for two years now. It's time to stop the madness, get a back-up QB and get real.

Except by now, that 3rd QB knows the system as well as anyone else out there. He is the 2nd QB now.

But you can't say he knows the job. Sure he's our back-up, but can he be an effective replacement for AR over a mulitple game stretch? Nobody knows, including one Ted Thompson.

I don't want to turn this into the same 'ol anti-TT-pro-TT rant thread, but in some areas, Thompson's approach has not been sound and time has proven that.

His overall philosophy is fine, but in some areas, his failure to add quality players by his rigid approach is biting us in the ass.

I didn't say he could be an effective replacement for AR over a multiple game stretch by any stretch of the imagination. I'm saying that for being in GB's system for 2 years now, he knows GB's offensive scheme better than a FA would. Also, I think if you're confident a veteran FA QB who wasn't good enough to win a starting position in another city would be able to effectively fill in for any significant stretch of time, then you'd be in for a rude surprise. I wouldn't be shocked at all if all (or the vast majority) of the successful backup QBs who took over and finished a year or several stretches of games successfully were young QBs with their first real opportunity. In which case, they either become "the QB of the future" (Kolb), are traded to another team (Cassel), or take over starting immediately (a la Favre). I don't have data on that--it's speculation--but I think "veteran" QBs are overrated when it comes to their ability to do more than play one or two effective games.

I tell ya a guy who can do that job and would have been a good fit here. There are several back-ups around, but people say hell no all the time for reasons I can't fathom. You want a guy like Kitna. Not only could he fill in for a stretch, He can help the team. Firstly he can be a mentor to the starter. helping him read the D and spotting places where some plays can work. He can also teach the young boys that are holding the clipboard. he did that for the Bengals and helped grow Carson Palmer from a green kid to one of the league's top QB's.

The way Thompson structured it, we had a starter and two green kids. Now we are down to one green kid who maybe can play and maybe can't. This is lame. We've had two years to come up with a better situation and we haven't done it.

That ain't hacking the program.

Personally, I think McCarthy is better than any veteran QB. He has a respectable roster of QBs he's trained up. Kitna can't provide anything that McCarthy isn't.

[KYPack]

McCarty is a great QB coach.

But the input of a coach and help from a teammate are two vastly different things.

McCarthy can't suit up and go in and play, for instance.

We need one of them guys.

[Smidgeon]

McCarty is a great QB coach.

But the input of a coach and help from a teammate are two vastly different things.

McCarthy can't suit up and go in and play, for instance.

We need one of them guys.

And how do you know Flynn isn't better than Kitna?

[Waldo]

His overall philosophy is fine, but in some areas, his failure to add quality players by his rigid approach is biting us in the ass.

It is the philosophy of the self sustaining system. It is biting us in the ass this season.

Unfortunately for impatient fans, Ted's approach can never yield results fast enough.

Wolf's system was not sustainable. It is the same approach Mn is taking. Like a giant star, it is a short but bright lifetime. Sherman was left with the dregs of Wolf's approach. Face it, Wolf didn't exactly leave the best situation for Sherman.

Sometimes the way to win at poker is to push all your chips in the pot. Other times you slowly build your pile until it dwarfs the rest.

When you look at the team building model that Ted is using, the teams that do it that way, you have to go back to the 90's to see the establishment of their current successes. Indy, Pit, and Philly have been essentially doing it this way for more than 10 years. Rare, but occasional free agent acquisitions, drafting their team, and being ruthless with 3rd contracts, only giving them out in the rarest of rarest circumstances unless at bargain basement prices at a position devoid of talent. They each are more than a playing career past the establishment of the system. Each always has holes that they get around to eventually, much too slow for fans tastes typically.

We are one of the most pilfered teams out there. Our cuts become treasure. We are always near the tops yearly in # of players claimed after camp cuts, our PS is regularly raided, and midseason cuts tend to be quickly claimed. Other teams GM's obviously have a ton of respect for the players that Ted brings to the Packers. Hardly any of his draft picks in his time in GB aren't currently on an active NFL roster. Two other teams that stand out like that as well are Indy and Pit, their ex-players that simply weren't good enough for them at their price are everywhere.

Ted's approach is getting close (2-3 years). The gap has to cycle into the 3rd contract area. The only Sherman players (the gap) that stand a chance at a 3rd contract are Barnett and Jenkins. By then the Wolf era will be gone, and Teds first 4-5 years will be in their prime, the next generation of kids will be coming in, with a younger, but very experienced, veteran core.

It took Pit almost 15 years to get a SB trophy using this approach, and 10 years for Indy. Philly has been at it 10+ years and they still haven't made it.

[Smidgeon]

It took Pit almost 15 years to get a SB trophy using this approach, and 10 years for Indy. Philly has been at it 10+ years and they still haven't made it.

Nice post. Reinforces the faith I have that patience will pay off.

Continual prominence will be nice. I prefer that. Quick question: those dynasties all have their share of continual Pro-Bowlers and potential HOFers. Who on the Packers has the potential to reach that level? I was thinking about that when I thought back to the Super Bowl team of '96. Except for Favre and White, I'm not sure another player will make the HOF (am I missing someone obvious?). The dynasties of the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 00s all have three, four, or more players in the HOF. Does GB have anyone on their roster with the potential to rise? Or are we still waiting for someone(s) special? (Personally, I think AR has that potential, and maybe our two 1st round picks. Maybe.)

[Waldo]

Longevity is a huge part of the equation for the hall, as is success.

It is a chicken/egg question in reference to Superbowls. Do the HOF players create the SB, or does the SB create the HOF players?

Woodson is playing at a HOF level. But he really needs a ring to have a chance. He earns a ring and plays a huge role in getting it, chances are he's got a shot.

SB's create the QB's chances as much as anything else. A ring is worth a couple MVP's. Two rings for a starting QB almost assures a bust in Canton.

Clay's father's career, with a couple of rings, and he's probably a HOF player. A career on the Browns, playing just as good, no dice.

Most of our players are too young to even approach the question.

[pbmax]

It took Pit almost 15 years to get a SB trophy using this approach, and 10 years for Indy. Philly has been at it 10+ years and they still haven't made it.

Nice post. Reinforces the faith I have that patience will pay off.

Continual prominence will be nice. I prefer that. Quick question: those dynasties all have their share of continual Pro-Bowlers and potential HOFers. Who on the Packers has the potential to reach that level? I was thinking about that when I thought back to the Super Bowl team of '96. Except for Favre and White, I'm not sure another player will make the HOF (am I missing someone obvious?). The dynasties of the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 00s all have three, four, or more players in the HOF. Does GB have anyone on their roster with the potential to rise? Or are we still waiting for someone(s) special? (Personally, I think AR has that potential, and maybe our two 1st round picks. Maybe.)

Waldo, no one has a 15 or even 10 year plan. Pittsburgh made the Super Bowl in '95 versus the Boys. Cowher was hired in 1992. Colts were perennially in the playoffs after 1999. Polian was hired at the end of the 1997 season. Those franchises were patient because there was success, if not Super Bowls, right away. Eagles same way with Reid. Hired in 1999, and after his first year, playoffs five straight years. No one expects the Patriots, but with Rodgers, he doesn't have the excuse most GMs do.

I like his approach, but we are taking the longer road to the playoffs.

[mraynrand]

Wolf's system was not sustainable. It is the same approach Mn is taking. Like a giant star, it is a short but bright lifetime. Sherman was left with the dregs of Wolf's approach. Face it, Wolf didn't exactly leave the best situation for Sherman.

If Wolf hadn't had that absolutely stellar GM year in 2000, the Packers would have been in the shit in 2001 or 2002 instead of 2005. But he was much better at the pro-player personnel aspect than drafting. But dealing for other teams' players ultimately leaves your roster pretty thin.

[mission]

We've already signed the replacement QB.

Mike Reily from Central Washington via Pittsburgh's PS ...

Highly productive college career, good size, great upside...

source: another Packer forum :X

[Waldo]

It took Pit almost 15 years to get a SB trophy using this approach, and 10 years for Indy. Philly has been at it 10+ years and they still haven't made it.

Nice post. Reinforces the faith I have that patience will pay off.

Continual prominence will be nice. I prefer that. Quick question: those dynasties all have their share of continual Pro-Bowlers and potential HOFers. Who on the Packers has the potential to reach that level? I was thinking about that when I thought back to the Super Bowl team of '96. Except for Favre and White, I'm not sure another player will make the HOF (am I missing someone obvious?). The dynasties of the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 00s all have three, four, or more players in the HOF. Does GB have anyone on their roster with the potential to rise? Or are we still waiting for someone(s) special? (Personally, I think AR has that potential, and maybe our two 1st round picks. Maybe.)

Waldo, no one has a 15 or even 10 year plan. Pittsburgh made the Super Bowl in '95 versus the Boys. Cowher was hired in 1992. Colts were perennially in the playoffs after 1999. Polian was hired at the end of the 1997 season. Those franchises were patient because there was success, if not Super Bowls, right away. Eagles same way with Reid. Hired in 1999, and after his first year, playoffs five straight years. No one expects the Patriots, but with Rodgers, he doesn't have the excuse most GMs do.

I like his approach, but we are taking the longer road to the playoffs.

Did we not have early success? I seem to recall a pass in overtime that still make me wince.

Are we out of the playoffs this year? By my reckoning we're tied for a WC spot with 7 weeks to go. Certainly in the mix.

Polian already had 2 young HOF players on the roster when he got there. The cupboard looked bare at the time, but the existing roster quickly blossomed.

I believe that Pit was much the same way.

For Philly, just like Indy, the most important player, the QB, came early.

Brett was a fairly major early roster building impediment. While Mn shed all their contracts and pushed money forward, we had some leftover giants, especially Brett, that ensured a much slower building process. I wasn't until this season that Mn passed GB in the 3 big money areas, OL, DL, and QB. Mn's team of today was paid for during their lean years a couple years ago. They were lean for us also, but our team also cost 20-30M more per year than Mn's, the cumulative effect of a few years of all that pushing forward and frontloading vs our pay as you go is the reason that Mn has the concentration of talent they have today

[Lurker64]

Brohm's Practice Squad spot was filled by former Central Washington QB Mike Reilly, who was signed as a UDFA by Pittsburgh. Apparently he's got a marginal arm, but he's big and athletic. Prior to the draft, Ron Jaworski said about Reilly: "I just saw an NFL quarterback. This is a guy who has (Tom) Brady-like attributes."

No word on Jake Allen's roster spot.

[Partial]

Waldo, here are some snippets.

Bill Cowher

In Cowher’s 15 seasons, the Steelers captured eight division titles, earned ten postseason playoff berths, played in 21 playoff games, advanced to six AFC Championship games and made two Super Bowl appearances. He is one of only six coaches in NFL history to claim at least seven division titles.

Sure, they did the things you said, but they also had a ton of talent throughout the Cowher years and have had continued success under Tomlin. I don't think you can look at our time since TT has been here and say it's comparable or there is any indication we'll get to that level.



Eagles:

The Eagles have been to 5 conference championships in 9 years and the divisional round of the playoffs or better 6 times. All signs do not point to replicating this success.


What say you?