The Packers picked two quarterbacks in last weekend's NFL Draft. Was two too many?
Cheezhead said 05/01, 06:14 PM
Yes. They only needed to draft one quarterback. They had other needs to fill and getting a second one at the end of the Draft was a bad move. With that second-quarterback pick they could have filled many other needs.
Green Bay doesn't need two rookie quarterbacks. If Rodgers does bad, they have Brohm to fill in. But they don't need another guy for backing up Brohm. They could just get a free agent if they really need a third-stringer.
Drafting two quarterbacks was a bad move for the Green Bay Packers.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox said 05/01, 06:26 PM
The Packers are on the hunt of their next franchise QB. Rodgers is certainly no sure thing, hence the need to take Brohm, who was a solid pick in the 2nd round. Still, are you willing to bet one of those two can QB this team for the next 10 years? Heck, they are a team coming off a 13-3 record with playoff aspirations and don't have a proven QB.
Flynn was a 7th round pick. They weren't going to fill any needs with that pick that they couldn't address in UDFA after the draft. He's likely nothing more than practice sqad fodder, but who knows when you might land the next Tom Brady taking a flyer with a late round pick.
Desperate times call for desperate measures and the Packers have no known quality at the most important position on the field. They need as much raw talent at the position as they can get until someone steps up and proves to be capable of replacing a legend
The most important position on the field is also their most glaring weakness right now. Not only was drafting two QB's a smart move for the Pack, but they should be bringing a couple of free agent arms to camp as well
As a Cowboys fan I'm painfully aware of the need for as many arms as possible in that situation.
Cheezhead said 05/01, 06:36 PM
Okay, let's start from the top.
They are looking for their next franchise quarterback. And Green Bay seems to think they already found him in Aaron Rodgers. They are hoping he plays like he did against Dallas consistently. It can happen.
So, yeah, what if that game was a fluke? Well, they have Brohm. He's the fall-back for Rodgers. It looks pretty certain that one of these two guys will do at least an average job. Most likely above average.
But what you are saying is what if Brohm is a bust? Well, do you honestly think that a lower-drafted player that is also a rookie and never played an NFL game yet will do any better than Rodgers OR Brohm? Probably not. They don't need a third-stringer with a 2nd quarterback pick in the draft when a free agent can do the same practice squad business and can be more reliable.
With that pick, and yes it was 7th round but like you said they could find a Tom Brady, they could have filled other needs. And who says you can't find a late-Draft Tom-Brady-ish pick in just the quarterback slot? They could have found a dream player in an other position that they need drafted.
One quarterback was the smart move, two is too many.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox said 05/01, 06:53 PM
The Packers obviously are NOT convinced Rodgers is their QB of the future, else they wouldn't have used a 2nd round pick on Brohm. You are assuming one of those guys will be an above average QB. Between the two of them they have what? 3 quarters of NFL experience?
You've got a lot of "coulda's" and "shoulda's" here but with nothing substantial to back it up. Exactly which player would you have taken ahead of Flynn? You haven't even defined a POSITION they "should" have taken ahead of another QB. Simply put, you're calling drafting Flynn a bad move only because he's a QB, and for some reason you believe the QB of the future is a lock to come from one of two guys with virtually zero NFL game experience.
Flynn is obviously a guy they liked, and several other teams liked as well. By taking him with a 7th round pick they assured they would have no competition in trying to sign him as a UDFA.
As I mentioned in the comments, Tony Romo was an UDFA that Dallas, Denver, and GB all wanted. He chose the Cowboys over higher contract offers because he thought they were the best fit for him. Don't ya think Green Bay and Denver are wishing they had used a 7th rounder on him, about now?
Faces at the U.S. Open
Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines.
© 2008 STATS LLC
Comments (14)
I agree. Too many to draft, but I guess they have a 2nd and 3rd string QB now. Possibly a fourth. Let's see what CCC has to say...
Dyhard -- Badgers vs Marshall | 05/01/08, 06:19 PM
Report Offensive CommentThey could have easily sighned another undrafted QB if they needed to
GeorgiaFan1000 | 05/01/08, 06:20 PM
Report Offensive CommentNO.... Ted Thompson is from the OLD era of GM's where you stock pile QB's like a squrrile hoards nuts
Goodell: Welcome Back Peters! | 05/01/08, 06:20 PM
Report Offensive CommentIf I'm right, this is our 5th throwdown against each other (I counted 3-1, me).
Cheezhead | 05/01/08, 06:23 PM
Report Offensive CommentNO.... Ted Thompson is from the OLD era of GM's where you stock pile QB's like a squrrile hoards nuts
Goodell: Hardy har har.... | 05/01/08, 06:20 PM
I agree. Plus, we seem not to sign people in the free agency market. The only one that I remember is Woodson.
Dyhard -- Badgers vs Marshall | 05/01/08, 06:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment"They could have easily sighned another undrafted QB if they needed to"
Not much difference between 7th round and UDFA except by drafting a player in the 7th round, nobody else can sign them away from you.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox | 05/01/08, 06:27 PM
Report Offensive CommentNot much difference between 7th round and UDFA except by drafting a player in the 7th round, nobody else can sign them away from you.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox | 05/01/08, 06:27 PM
You don't know that. There are a ton of late-Draft picks that have become superstars.
Cheezhead | 05/01/08, 06:29 PM
Report Offensive CommentRight on C-C-C.....
The 7th round is for you to get those "UDFA's" you dont want anyone else to get
Goodell: Welcome Back Peters! | 05/01/08, 06:30 PM
Report Offensive CommentFlynn was taken because he fits the West Coast offense very well. It was the right pick.
DCsunDfour21 | 05/01/08, 06:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment"You don't know that. There are a ton of late-Draft picks that have become superstars."
Sure. Plenty of UDFA's too. Look at Tony Romo. Dallas, Green Bay, and Denver all wanted him. Denver offered far and away the most money, but he went to Dallas because he figured that was his best opportunity to compete for the job. Bet Green Bay and Denver wish they'd have used a 7th rounder on him that year, now.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox | 05/01/08, 06:35 PM
Report Offensive CommentPending
djroxalot loves TD'ing | 05/01/08, 06:36 PM
Report Offensive CommentHeck, UDFAs might have a better success rate than 7th rounders. I know I could make a better team with them.
Lifer: Metallica Sucks! | 05/01/08, 07:27 PM
Report Offensive CommentAlso, it's always good to take a QB in the 7th, if you need a franchise guy. You never know, really, at worst it's a waste of a bottom-rung pick.
Lifer: Metallica Sucks! | 05/01/08, 07:27 PM
Report Offensive Commentactually the packers are probably happy to not have picked romo, hbe might play well in the reg season, but the last two years he's choked in the playoffs.
favre04 | 05/02/08, 01:42 PM
Report Offensive CommentAdd a comment
Remember to keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed. More Guidelines