I think I'd stick with what we have with the 2 rooks and keep building this young team.

I have complete and total trust in what the Packers are doing and the path that they have chosen to take.

There is a reason I was not interviewed for the Head coach or G.M. job in Green Bay.

Although, they should have hired me to handle the media/PR instead of that White House Hack.

R.P.

"PackOne"

"RaiderPride"There is a reason I was not interviewed for the Head coach or G.M. job in Green Bay.

Did it involve Canadian Club?

I would advise you not to answer that question, rather direct it to the Chinese Media Commission for a statement.

"eap33"We could always pick up Craig Nall again ;)

Or Tim Rattay. Think of guys who have run the Packers (mcCarthy System) they very likely could get a call during the season.

"zombieslayer"
I completely disagree with you.

Rodgers goes down, the season's lost.
Put Brohm in there.
Have him learn.
See what he's made of.

I keep Rodgers, Brohm, Flynn.
Don't want a Vet.
Only Vet I'd want is Jeff Garcia and he's staying put.

You disagree with me.. how dare you.. :lol: (*edit.. to make sure it is clear.. disagree with me often.. I make plenty of misreads)

What I am saying is just this.. we have the pieces in place to make a deep run into the playoffs.. but it all hinges on Arod...

My opinion.. is you minimize the risk of ruining your season on the loss of one single player.. regardless of position. By relying on completely unproven players behind your starter is a huge risk.. by signing a veteran a couple weeks/months ago that could have minimized your dependency on rookies would be a fair move to the rest of your ball club.

To hammer home the point, that move a couple weeks ago may not have been a former QB.. if I was pretty confident that relationship was beyond repair I would have moved on acquiring another option for the club.

In my business I design everything with a failsafe redundancy option.. two rookies behind a first time starter doesn't equal that in my book. Again.. just my opinion.. but the dragging out the summer drama has put us in a bit of a bind here.. but again.. what is in the best interest of the club needs to prevail.

And RP.. I have faith in the leadership of this club.. however this is a risk that doesn't have much room for error. Name another club out there with only 3 QB's on the roster going through camp?


As a fan of this club, I see nothing wrong with questioning the soundness of this QB strategy we are deploying.

"pack93z"
You disagree with me.. how dare you.. :lol: (*edit.. to make sure it is clear.. disagree with me often.. I make plenty of misreads)

What I am saying is just this.. we have the pieces in place to make a deep run into the playoffs.. but it all hinges on Arod...

My opinion.. is you minimize the risk of ruining your season on the loss of one single player.. regardless of position. By relying on completely unproven players behind your starter is a huge risk.. by signing a veteran a couple weeks/months ago that could have minimized your dependency on rookies would be a fair move to the rest of your ball club.

To hammer home the point, that move a couple weeks ago may not have been a former QB.. if I was pretty confident that relationship was beyond repair I would have moved on acquiring another option for the club.

In my business I design everything with a failsafe redundancy option.. two rookies behind a first time starter doesn't equal that in my book. Again.. just my opinion.. but the dragging out the summer drama has put us in a bit of a bind here.. but again.. what is in the best interest of the club needs to prevail.

And RP.. I have faith in the leadership of this club.. however this is a risk that doesn't have much room for error. Name another club out there with only 3 QB's on the roster going through camp?


As a fan of this club, I see nothing wrong with questioning the soundness of this QB strategy we are deploying.

Good argument.

My counter:

We got rid of Brett Favre, so, the new strategy is building for the future rather than try to win it all now.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's my understanding of what we're doing.

I don't think anyone who's sober can tell me with a straight face that Aaron Rodgers is a better QB than Brett Favre.
But, TT/MM's lines of reasoning are Rodgers has upside, Favre has downside, and instead of having the Sherman strategy of damning our future for a shot to win it all now, we are planning to be good for a very long time.

Now, if you're planning to be good for a long time, you want 2 good QBs.
You have Aaron Rodgers, your starter, and you train Brian Brohm to be his backup.
If you put a Vet in there, the Vet becomes #2, we lose Flynn completely (who may be a long-term project), and Brohm never sees the field.
Do you really want to sacrifice our long-term QB development for a win now approach?

Stay with the current group. If The Rodgers goes down then were doomed.
What other choice do we have at this point? No good vets out there right now unless Johnson is cut loose.
I think Culpepper would be trouble. I believe he would keep pushing for the starting position and cause a rift in the locker room if Rodgers doesn't tear it up the first couple games.

"zombieslayer"

"pack93z"
You disagree with me.. how dare you.. :lol: (*edit.. to make sure it is clear.. disagree with me often.. I make plenty of misreads)

What I am saying is just this.. we have the pieces in place to make a deep run into the playoffs.. but it all hinges on Arod...

My opinion.. is you minimize the risk of ruining your season on the loss of one single player.. regardless of position. By relying on completely unproven players behind your starter is a huge risk.. by signing a veteran a couple weeks/months ago that could have minimized your dependency on rookies would be a fair move to the rest of your ball club.

To hammer home the point, that move a couple weeks ago may not have been a former QB.. if I was pretty confident that relationship was beyond repair I would have moved on acquiring another option for the club.

In my business I design everything with a failsafe redundancy option.. two rookies behind a first time starter doesn't equal that in my book. Again.. just my opinion.. but the dragging out the summer drama has put us in a bit of a bind here.. but again.. what is in the best interest of the club needs to prevail.

And RP.. I have faith in the leadership of this club.. however this is a risk that doesn't have much room for error. Name another club out there with only 3 QB's on the roster going through camp?


As a fan of this club, I see nothing wrong with questioning the soundness of this QB strategy we are deploying.

Good argument.

My counter:

We got rid of Brett Favre, so, the new strategy is building for the future rather than try to win it all now.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's my understanding of what we're doing.

I don't think anyone who's sober can tell me with a straight face that Aaron Rodgers is a better QB than Brett Favre.
But, TT/MM's lines of reasoning are Rodgers has upside, Favre has downside, and instead of having the Sherman strategy of damning our future for a shot to win it all now, we are planning to be good for a very long time.

Now, if you're planning to be good for a long time, you want 2 good QBs.
You have Aaron Rodgers, your starter, and you train Brian Brohm to be his backup.
If you put a Vet in there, the Vet becomes #2, we lose Flynn completely (who may be a long-term project), and Brohm never sees the field.
Do you really want to sacrifice our long-term QB development for a win now approach?

I think management wants to win now though.
It just doesn't seem right to have 0 experience behind the main guy, especially if you consider Rodgers injury prone (which I don't).
I'm guessing TT does add a vet before the season starts.

edit:
LOL, LOVE THE T T WORD FILTER.

Gotta try that.

TT
TT
TT



Hmmm.......Can't put 3 TT in a row I guess.

"PackOne"

"RaiderPride"There is a reason I was not interviewed for the Head coach or G.M. job in Green Bay.

Did it involve Canadian Club?

Damn Right it did.
Canadian Club on the Rocks.

It is time that I lay it out here. So you know where I am coming from.

Do you remember "Jerry Tagge"
Ok, I was his agent.
I Signed him out of Nebraska after he was MVP of the Orange Bowl in 1971 and 1972.
When Jerry was named Co-MVP of the Hula Bowl we signed a contract with the Green Bay Packers.

When Jerry Tagge came to the Packers Ted Thompson hated him.
Ted was a young man at that time delivering inter office mail in the Packers organization at the time.

Ted would steal the stats in the inter office mail and adjust them so it looked Like Jerry was playing bad when he released the numbers to the press.

Because of a young, vindictive, Ted Thompson, in the mail room in 1972 Jerry Tagge never got a fair shot.
At the time Ted was heard to say in the mail room...
"This is my team, and I want to build it my way."

To make a long story short.
Jerry Tagge and I were very upset.
We decided to go fishing in B.C.
We were shit faced on Canadian Club in a strip bar and we met Vick Rapp the coach of the B.C. Lions and the rest is history.

Jerry Tagge-
He was named a CFL all-star and winner of the Jeff Nicklin Memorial Trophy and runner-up for the CFL's Most Outstanding Player Award. In 1977, he completed 232 of 405 passes for 2787 yards, and in 1978, he hit on 243 of 430 passes for 3134 yards. He played part of the 1979 season before injuries forced him to retire.

See...
Ted Thompson is evil.
Jerry Tagge could have been Brett Favre from 1973 t0 1992.

Ted has to go.
He has an ego.
he had it ever since he worked in the Packer Mail Room as a delivery boy.

Let's all get rid of Ted.

R.P.