If either are taking meaningful snaps, we are screwed. I guess you have to carry one, so Kizer stays. But really, if Rodgers goes down, we can think about drafting a QB with our high first round pick
I'm in the same spot with the backup QB position. It just doesn't matter all that much with what is currently on the roster.
michiganjoe posted:Piece by Tom Oates about what he sees as a problem area in the roster. Other than Matt Flynn backup QB has really been a perpetual problem and the so-called QB guru really failed to live up to his name.
To be fair, I'm pretty sure backup QB is a trouble area for pretty much every team. The best backup QBs in 2018 were:
- Nick Foles
- Ryan Fitzpatrick (part time starter)
- Josh McCown
- Jacoby Brissett
- Teddy Bridgewater
- Tyrod Taylor
- Brian Hoyer
- Matt Schaub
- Colt McCoy
- Chase Daniel
That list debatable, but honestly outside of maybe those first 5 guys I'm not really sure if it matters if you have DeShone Kizer, Tim Boyle or Brian Hoyer. Franchise QBs get paid so much because they're so incredibly necessary for success. We all look at the 90's Packers as a QB factory churning out Favre, Brunell, Brooks, Hass, etc., but did Holmgren ever really develop another QB after leaving? It seems more likely that the "QB guru" label is undeserved for most coaches and it's more about the GM/FO finding the RIGHT QB for THAT system. Belichick isn't a "QB guru" and he is constantly shuffling coaching staff, but he and his FO know how to identify QBs that work for that offense. I think if anyone was expect MM to churn out QB prospects like the 90's you were expecting too much. MM got more out of Matt Flynn than other teams have, probably true for BH and Scott Tolzien as well, but the fact that I'm citing those 3 players as our best backups of the last decade is evidence that TT couldn't find a backup QB for shit.
AR goes down for a relatively significant period and I agree- it really doesn't matter. Backup should really just be a player that can keep the team in contention for a short period of time until the starter returns. No evidence Boyle or Kizer are capable of that and other than Flynn not sure the Packers have a QB that was.
Fair to blame TT but equal blame has to go to Pittsburgh Macho. I'm sure he was reassuring TT that Graham Harrell's extensive talent would emerge with just a bit more patience from the organization.
Sure, I don't think MM is blameless, but I think when people unfairly gave him the the "QB guru" label because he had developed Aaron Brooks once upon a time they expected we would see Brunell, Hass, etc. come through the system. Maybe he was satisfied with Graham Harrell? I don't think we saw a Mark Brunell come through the system because Holmy probably didn't make Brunell a franchise QB, he was a good QB who probably would have been successful regardless of where he went.
Andy Reid is probably the top QB guy in the NFL, arguably, but who was his best true backup QB (meaning not Mahomes 1 season as backup) in his career, Michael Vick? Chase Daniel? It's so rare to hit on a true franchise QB as it is if you aren't picking in the top 10, it's so unlikely to find a backup QB that is competent enough to not lose games. Moral of the story: Kizer is unfortunately probably the best use of our money at backup QB right now. We could overpay for a former starter, but unless he's Nick Foles caliber then we're fukked either way.
And JAX is about to find out how much of a system QB Foles is or isn't. Maybe he was a perfect fit exclusively for PHI.
I'd roll the dice on Boyle over Kizer.
I'd bring in 49 year old Favre over Hundley.
phaedrus posted:I'd roll the dice on Boyle over Kizer.
Ditto. More upside. Kizer was barely a notch above Hundley. At least when Boyle is in there, he shows some promise and has a really nice deep ball. For some reason, MM fell in love with bad backup QBs who had trouble reading a defense and preferred to run at the first sound of a step. Wallace, Young, HUndley, et al.
Backup QB is overrated. You need a guy that can finish a game without blowing a 10 point lead but there's just no room in the salary cap to prioritize a second QB on the roster that is capable of winning consistently. It really falls on the coach to make it work while the starting QB is hurt, not put it on a QB to be great. Unless, of course, you want to spend premium draft capital or pay $6-8m for a good veteran backup.
Put it this way, do you want to draft Drew Lock in the second round and pass up Elgton Jenkins? Not perfect hypothetical since Lock went before, just pretend for a second. Another scenario - would you cut Bulaga and use his $8m cap savings to sign Teddy Bridgewater? That's kind of the choice when it comes to having a good backup - use premium draft capital to get a young guy and develop him, or pay for a veteran backup.
What you're looking for out of the position is mediocrity and anything beyond that is a bonus. Unfortunately, other than Matt Flynn the Packers recently haven't even had that.
Taysom Hill!!!! you dummies! He would have been Steve Young if we hadn't lost him.
Maybe TT got burned on the Brian Brohm pick and decided backup QB wasnât ever worth any more investment than a late round pick or a UDFA? Itâs not like we were cycling through good veterans or draft picks, even for a tryout or an FA visit. Everyone pretty much cycles through the same few average backups like Fitzpatrick, McCown, etc.
Traded up in the fifth to select Hundley. Think TT's mistake was probably trusting MM's opinion on the development of QBs on the roster (Harrell, Hundley etc.).
Maybe, but the sense that I get is that there was a severe disconnect between the coaching staff and the FO, prompting Murphy to make this organizational structure change. I'm not convinced TT was listening to what MM or his coaches wanted all that much in recent years. Based on where guys have gone after they've left our roster, I don't think the issue has been 100% player development. If Brett Hundley had gone to Seattle and started playing well I might agree that it was a development issue, I think TT just sucked at identifying QBs.
Trevor Siemien signed for $2 million. I'd take him over Deshon Kizer every day of the week.
Grave Digger posted:If Brett Hundley had gone to Seattle and started playing well I might agree that it was a development issue, I think TT just sucked at identifying QBs.
It wasn't a developmental issue; it was an issue of MM taking years to figure out his QBs couldn't play.
Under McCarthy, the best we could hope for in a BU QB was someone who wouldn't lose a game already won. ie Able to generate some time consuming offense even if he didn't score.
MMs scheme relied on identifying and exploiting the defensive weakness presented on each play and co-ordinating the reads and responses of the QB and receivers. Too many moving parts for the QB to be plug and play without extensive practice and experience.
A scheme designed to get one receiver open can work for lesser talents.I believe the new offense will more closely align with NE's version, which has proven to be consistent regardless of the name under center. There haven't been many beside Brady but Casell and Garopolo both had unexpected success there.
BrainDed posted:Someone explain to me the logic of keeping 2 turds at backup QB on the roster. Is two turds really better than 1 turd? I don't think so. Just stash that single turd in the corner and hope the rest of the league never sees it.
A turd in the hand? I'll take the Irish turd.