Flynn -- Tolzien

He may have; there was one play where he rolled out right, gathered all his strength and heaved it downfield... underthrowing Jordy Nelson.

He also led five consecutive TD drives on the road vs Dallas

 

 

My words not good enough?

Did you say something?

I'm not familiar with the PS restrictions.  I'll take your word for it.

 

Either way, I think Flynn gives this team the best chance to win a few games in the event of an emergency.   If Tolzien had talent that was worth developing so he could be traded later, I would be in favor of taking on that risk.  IMO, he doesn't

Whatever happened to ammo?

Sorry, ammo, I didn't see them.

Who's ammo?

I don't know either, Ded. I had to look it up, and I still can't give a definitive answer.

 

...A player is eligible if he does not have an accrued season of NFL experience. Players gain an accrued season by being on the active roster for at least six games.

• If a player has one accrued season, they can still be practice squad eligible if they were on the 45-man active gameday roster for less than nine regular season games.
• A player is deemed to have served a season on the practice squad if he remains on the practice squad for at least three weeks. Players are eligible to be on the practice squad
• Players can be eligible for a third practice squad season if their team maintains no less than 53 players on the active/inactive list at all times for two seasons.

Additionally, he would be exposed to waivers if he is eligible, as well as the risk of being signed by another team. Which opens up a whole 'nother can o' worms...

Or Rick Mirer

or Dave Klingler

or Aaron Brooks

or Ronnie McAda

or Danny Wuerffel

or Ben Sankey

or Marcus Crandell

or Cleo Lemon

or Jonathan Beasley

or Bill Joe Tolliver

or Craig Nall

or Henry Burris

or Josh Heupel

or Marcus Brady

or Jose Fuentes

or Zak Kustok

or Akili Smith

or Tim Couch

or Scott McBrien

or Ingle Martin

or Todd Bouman

or Tom Arth

or Brian Wrobel

or Paul Thompson

or Jerry Babb

or Chris Pizzotti

or Noah Shepard

or Nick Hill

or Matt Brown

or Vince Young

........... all QBs who have passed thru GB in one way or another according to my records since 1998 and not previously mentioned in this thread.  So maybe we should not focus to much on this.  There are 31 other teams that would like to upgrade as well.  If it were so simple to have a backup QB, who gets limited reps every week, and probably not with the starters, come in and play like your starter, why would it not happen more often?  And you would think that one of the 30 names above would have made it.  The reason(s) I believe is that 1) there has to be a good fit between QB, scheme, and coaching, 2) QBs have to be developed - most don't come ready to go, 3) QBs have to want to develop - something I am not convinced happens a lot.  That is a lot to happen for any QB.  Other reasons I believe it doesn't happen are that the coach is fired before a QB develops, or the coaches give up to soon, or the QB in question just doesn't get it in spite of everyone's best efforts.  So how does all this affect our current QB situation?  I don't know because I am not involved enough to know.  But I am amazed that in my life, GB has had 3 really good QBs - Starr, Favre, and now Rodgers.  And all the while we had just one of those, Favre, the Bears had something like 24 starters.  Are we blessed or what. 

        Too busy clicking "like" to notice what the actual posts say. 

Mr. S$C and Idiots Out Wandering Around would probably quit following the Packers if Tolzien wins the job over Flynn.  Oh the horror. 

Let the best player win the job

Too bad neither of them will make us forget about A Rod

Flynn doesn't have the successful college background that Tolzien does, that Champs Sports Bowl game win and Rose Bowl appearance are top notch. All Flynn has is a Chick-Fil-A Bowl win and a measly National Championship win. I see what you mean! 

Tim Tebow won a national championship too.  Do you want him as AR's backup? 

Does he have any Ross Bowl appearances?

Back on page 1 I said that there are some people here who like Matt Flynn because Tolzien played at Wisconsin.  I probably should have added that there are people who like Flynn because he played in the SEC. 

Figured I might as well dust this off for another week of debate.

It's still interesting that we see the same plays/players differently, and I suppose it's possible that personal prejudices influence our thoughts.

With all that said, I still think Flynn is a better QB than Tolzein, and I think he is better suited to fill the back-up role. Either of them would have a tough time beating the better ("elite") defenses, but I doubt Tolzein could win a game against anybody.

Also, if he had to play for an extended period of time, the development of the young guys stalls, if not completely craps out. That's not to say they would flourish under Flynn, but he would offer a better chance to maintain status quo.

this week I vote for Flynn. Not as good an arm but seems to run the offense better.

10 points for Rodgers, 11 for Flynn, zzzzzzzero for Tolzzzzzzzien.

 

To be fair, Rettig also put up 0 while running out the clock.

Tolzien was good after that first series. He has a much stronger arm than Flynn, but Flynn   senses pressure much better.

I vote for Flynn, but would take either. It is nice to see two back ups actually playing well in the pre-season.

It looked even to me. Both had good and ehhh moments. Tolzien put that one deep sideline pass on the money but the camp fodder dropped it. That took pit me off the board.

Shepard also dropped a perfect pass from Flynn at the goal line.  Equals out.  Flynn had the more effective evening.  Still close, but Flynn has my vote as of now.

I think Tolzein would be more likely to get picked up by another team if he were cut.  Flynn has made the rounds and teams know what he can and can't do. I doubt he'd garner too much interest.  Tolzien is still developing and a team carrying 3 QBs might think he could develop while sitting behind two QBs on a depth chart.

People keep saying "well Flynn is a system QB who only works in GB" like it's a negative. I don't care how well he works elsewhere, he works here and that is what is important. He can run the offense efficiently and doesn't make huge mistakes here. NFL.com now lists TD% and INT% which is TD/Attempt and INT/Attempt. Flynn's TD% is 4.2% and his INT% is 2.9, Tolzien's TD% is 1.1 and his INT% is 5.6. We argue his readiness to play all day long but to me what I comes down to is who does a better job not losing you the game. Tolzien's stats reflect that he isn't careful with the ball while Flynn clearly is much more careful and efficient. It might have been worth it if Tolzien was throwing more TDs than INTs (ala Bert Farve), but when your TD:INT is 1:5, that is not worth it. He has to show he can take care of the ball.

Great Post GD.

 

And it's a heck of a dilemma. Bet we only keep 2. And I agree Flynn probably would win more for us this year than Tolzien. But if we kept Tolzien, I think Flynn wouldn't be picked up and if worse came to worse and we lost both AR and Tolzien, Flynn would still be available in November. Roll of the dice every way you look at it.

 

Could be worse, we could have the whiners backup QB's

Or even a prick like Kaepernick.

Yup!!! I'm just not a fan of that Sqidward looking douche

That would have been on a very cold December day with a roaring cold wind behind him.

Rams interested in Mark Sanchez & not Flynn?!?!

 

How can this be possible? How can the Rams want Sanchez over Flynn?

 

Now, especially with injuries to Raji & Tretter, forget keeping 3 QB's. It's stupid to do so. Dare I say....Sherman-esque.

 

Flynn will be available IF we need him. Cut him as we get down to 53

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Whatever.....just don't keep 3 QB's!

You want to cut the best option at backup QB because "you know" no one else will pick him up.   All this because "you know" he will be able to step in with little or no practice and right the ship if we need him.

 

I would rather we kept 3 Qb's after the train wreck we went through last year.

 

zzzzzzzzzz even has more value right now than Thronton or Bradford

 

 

and "you know" Flynn is the best option at backup QB.

 

I'd rather we kept the best 53 & to do that we can't keep 3 QB's

I have video evidence from last season - live bullets game action Flynn is way better than a color blind zzzzzzzzzzzzz

Since zzzzz will be in such high demand - I am sure we can get a draft pick for him.

Right...got it. So last season "tape" tells us all we need to know about how both QB's can & will perform this season in 2014. 

 

Ok, Got it.

 

It's called improvement & development. Game #4 of the pre-season will tell all

I am fine with keeping 3 Qb's

 

And I am ok with that #3 being zzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

I am not ok with keeping guys on the 53 that have not earned it.

 

If zzzz can indeed fix his color blind issue -  he will be our backup in 15

 

This is a championship caliber team.   No time to zzzzzzzz at the wheel.  

 

Just like the dumdums wanting the great $herrod to be starting at LT over buckcherry 

 

 

I don't know why we're still arguing this. Picking among our backup QBs is like picking the fastest kid at fat camp. If our backup QB has to play then were screwed anyway. I'm not sure what the fascination with "developing" a backup QB, you really don't want a guy who will eventually be a really good backup for the long term as your backup QB now. You want a cagey veteran backup who is ready to play right now and gives you a chance. As I said though, if we have to play our backup QB then we're SOL. Because of that it's honestly the least interesting position battle right now that is shockingly generating a lot of discussion.

I haven't seen anyone post they "want" $herrod to start over Bakhtiari. I know I, for one, would like to see $herrod improve to the point of being a capable starting LT.