If Matt Flynn were the Packers qb this season (1 Viewer)

[AmosMoses]

sho nuff destroyed Dr Awesome's thread. I thought it was a good topic

 

[sho nuff]

sho nuff destroyed Dr Awesome's thread. I thought it was a good topic

He destroyed it all on his own.He had the choice to make it about the topic...or about me.He chose to continue to make it about me (along with a few others).I see you want to do the same.Or do you care to actually try to discuss the actual topic?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

sho nuff destroyed Dr Awesome's thread. I thought it was a good topic

He destroyed it all on his own.He had the choice to make it about the topic...or about me.He chose to continue to make it about me (along with a few others).I see you want to do the same.Or do you care to actually try to discuss the actual topic?

You were one of those kids that got spit-balled in the school cafeteria weren't you?

 

[Dr. Awesome]

sho nuff destroyed Dr Awesome's thread. I thought it was a good topic

He destroyed it all on his own.He had the choice to make it about the topic...or about me.He chose to continue to make it about me (along with a few others).I see you want to do the same.Or do you care to actually try to discuss the actual topic?

You are right. Clearly I made this all about you by having to gall to ask how Flynn would have done if he had started for the Packers. That was a mistake on my part - I should realize I cannot post anything Green Bay related without secretly meaning I'm talking about you. There is no question it is everyone else who is out to get you and you are not the common problem here.

 

[SWC]

could you jackalopes stop having a sissy fight and go check and see if your laundry is done or pm eachother about what purse you should accessorize with tomorrow i only get so much time on the internet every day and reading through threads about good topics where a bunch of sally mccrankypants whining ninnies cant just stop arguing about who is right over who is meaner to eachother is not very excellent being so please lets all have a new spirit for the new year and be nice to eachother and get along and help eachother win the dineros in our ffleagues every year so that we can get rich take it to the bank get along gang style brohans

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Again, as the other two people you have quoted have stated "it is relevant".You're definition of capable backup QB is different from mine. It would be nice for you to state who's capable.

You state its relevant, and a poster who has been more interested in bashing others rather than posting on topic say it is...so that should make it relevant.Why can't you even state why its relevant? Because Multiple Scores says so is not a valid reason here.

You avoid stating anything because you care so much about being right, not about finding the correct answer.I've stated repeatedly that YOU and I have different definitions of a capable backup QB. So by you listing who's a capable backup QB, I would better understand YOUR definition. If you don't list your capable backup QB's(which Hanie/McCown aren't, but Flynn is for you so far) then I would know where you're coming from in this topic.

Yes, we have different definitions of capable backup QBs...but it appears to be you who wants to be right so you keep on pushing.You can't handle that we just don't agree here. So you push more irrelevant junk spinning away from what the actual conversation was about.And yeah, i was about to just let it go, so this response is really just for the person who continues to think he needs to make comments on my profile that he knows I will just delete....to him I say again, grow up.

Aka you're too scared to post anything factual or do any research. You'd rather wait for someone else to say something and then cut it down. I get it now, carry on.

 

[Reepicheep]

Hey sho,

Its obvious to me that fair or not there are some here who just enjoy giving you a hard time. That said, you made this thread about yourself when you accused the op of fishing before he had so much as stated his opinion, dragged some past dispute into it, then refused to simply say "my bad for derailing the thread."' You started it bro. Just own up to it and move on, whoever is "in the wrong", you always seem to be the common element to every pissing match in the Packers topics around here. Major lack of excellence by a lot of posters here lately. Let's make it better.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

sho nuff destroyed Dr Awesome's thread. I thought it was a good topic

He destroyed it all on his own.He had the choice to make it about the topic...or about me.He chose to continue to make it about me (along with a few others).I see you want to do the same.Or do you care to actually try to discuss the actual topic?

You are right. Clearly I made this all about you by having to gall to ask how Flynn would have done if he had started for the Packers. That was a mistake on my part - I should realize I cannot post anything Green Bay related without secretly meaning I'm talking about you. There is no question it is everyone else who is out to get you and you are not the common problem here.

At this point you can see Sho Nuff operates on a different level than everyone else. You're not going to get out of him what you want, an actual debate without bias, or him saying anyone is correct but himself. Sad little world he lives in.

 

[Reepicheep]

could you jackalopes stop having a sissy fight and go check and see if your laundry is done or pm eachother about what purse you should accessorize with tomorrow i only get so much time on the internet every day and reading through threads about good topics where a bunch of sally mccrankypants whining ninnies cant just stop arguing about who is right over who is meaner to eachother is not very excellent being so please lets all have a new spirit for the new year and be nice to eachother and get along and help eachother win the dineros in our ffleagues every year so that we can get rich take it to the bank get along gang style brohans

This is what I meant to post.

 

[sho nuff]

Again, as the other two people you have quoted have stated "it is relevant".You're definition of capable backup QB is different from mine. It would be nice for you to state who's capable.

You state its relevant, and a poster who has been more interested in bashing others rather than posting on topic say it is...so that should make it relevant.Why can't you even state why its relevant? Because Multiple Scores says so is not a valid reason here.

You avoid stating anything because you care so much about being right, not about finding the correct answer.I've stated repeatedly that YOU and I have different definitions of a capable backup QB. So by you listing who's a capable backup QB, I would better understand YOUR definition. If you don't list your capable backup QB's(which Hanie/McCown aren't, but Flynn is for you so far) then I would know where you're coming from in this topic.

Yes, we have different definitions of capable backup QBs...but it appears to be you who wants to be right so you keep on pushing.You can't handle that we just don't agree here. So you push more irrelevant junk spinning away from what the actual conversation was about.And yeah, i was about to just let it go, so this response is really just for the person who continues to think he needs to make comments on my profile that he knows I will just delete....to him I say again, grow up.

Aka you're too scared to post anything factual or do any research. You'd rather wait for someone else to say something and then cut it down. I get it now, carry on.

As if you claiming Hanie and McCown are capable backups is factual and required any research.We are posting opinions here...me listing who I consider capable would not be factual, it would be my opinion. You would disagree...and this would keep going on and on and on.Nothing changes what Rodgers has done this year, or that Flynn is a quality backup for the Packers and will likely be a starter somewhere else next year.And guess what, the Packers have another backup who has been improving too, and he has not even been through a full offseason and McCarthy's QB school yet.

 

[sho nuff]

Hey sho,Its obvious to me that fair or not there are some here who just enjoy giving you a hard time. That said, you made this thread about yourself when you accused the op of fishing before he had so much as stated his opinion, dragged some past dispute into it, then refused to simply say "my bad for derailing the thread."' You started it bro. Just own up to it and move on, whoever is "in the wrong", you always seem to be the common element to every pissing match in the Packers topics around here. Major lack of excellence by a lot of posters here lately. Let's make it better.

I take responsibility for one comment.No doubt about that.I did as much early on admitting that.From there though, I have been responding to the bashing that comes my way (notice Max also got the same treatment).There are a select few on this board who enjoy posting crap in order to piss off Packer fans...they have admitted as much.And don't buy into Dr. A's excuses...his intentions are quite obvious given how "Bob" posts elsewhere and the things he has said about me and other Packer fans.If this whole thing was about one comment, I would agree with you...but this goes beyond one jab I threw compared to the numerous that come the other way.

 

[sho nuff]

sho nuff destroyed Dr Awesome's thread. I thought it was a good topic

He destroyed it all on his own.He had the choice to make it about the topic...or about me.He chose to continue to make it about me (along with a few others).I see you want to do the same.Or do you care to actually try to discuss the actual topic?

You are right. Clearly I made this all about you by having to gall to ask how Flynn would have done if he had started for the Packers. That was a mistake on my part - I should realize I cannot post anything Green Bay related without secretly meaning I'm talking about you. There is no question it is everyone else who is out to get you and you are not the common problem here.

At this point you can see Sho Nuff operates on a different level than everyone else. You're not going to get out of him what you want, an actual debate without bias, or him saying anyone is correct but himself. Sad little world he lives in.

What is biased about saying the Matt Flynn is a capable backup?What is biased about thinking that Rodgers is that much better than Matt Flynn? They are both Packers...if I was so biased, Id be claiming Flynn is the 2nd best QB in the league.Im fine with actual debate...which is why I have said over and over...does Dr. A want to discuss the topic? Or just continue talking about me because I threw out one line towards him a few days ago?

 

[sho nuff]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

 

[SWC]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

cool man way to take the high road now we can get along and discuss this on to the topic i think flynn is a starting caliber qb and would probably have won about 12 games this year he is just good and has a nice touch and torched the DET lions who i respect and am glad to see do well because det needs all the help it can get in the form of a pick me up over there its all gone to hell and people are looking for work and that team means as much to that city as the saints to NOLA so if he can torch them when they are carrying around a whole citys good will he would probably do pretty good against teams that dont even care like seatle or blaine gabberts poop cleaners the jags

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

 

[sho nuff]

The thing with Flynn and Rodgers (once he became a starter) that shocks me is how far they have progressed from when they were drafted.

They both looked pretty bad early on. Arm strength was not great on some out passes. Floated balls a bit. Flynn was never seen as a strong armed guy from what I remember of watching him at LSU.

 

[sho nuff]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

Then start a topic about it.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

Apology accepted.

 

[Reepicheep]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game." Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

 

[sho nuff]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game." Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game." Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

I may have been off in that Hanie is a capable backup and you're correct in that it's hard to construct a premise of "capable". I would think an interesting research would be the W/L record of backup QB's, also the overall numbers per game that they produce. My hypothesis would be that backup Qbs they lose 2/3rds of games they start as well as throw twice as many INT's to TD's. Given that(again nothing proven, but I could do it if I had time), capable backup would be a guy that keeps a team in a game and delivers a TD/INT ratio close to 50%. Or am I off base?Will it have relevance to Flynn? Perhaps, I think we all can agree he is more than capable at this point. I just thought it would be an interesting discussion, rather than the constant bickering.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

 

[Reepicheep]

So...lets end it.Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game." Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

I may have been off in that Hanie is a capable backup and you're correct in that it's hard to construct a premise of "capable". I would think an interesting research would be the W/L record of backup QB's, also the overall numbers per game that they produce. My hypothesis would be that backup Qbs they lose 2/3rds of games they start as well as throw twice as many INT's to TD's. Given that(again nothing proven, but I could do it if I had time), capable backup would be a guy that keeps a team in a game and delivers a TD/INT ratio close to 50%. Or am I off base?Will it have relevance to Flynn? Perhaps, I think we all can agree he is more than capable at this point. I just thought it would be an interesting discussion, rather than the constant bickering.

I agree it would be really interesting to know the backup/starter splits for win % and TD/Int ratio. Defining which games to count would be really difficult, e.g. Trent Green was technically the starter for the Rams in '99 before blowing his ACL in the preseason, how many of Warner's '99 games would count as "backup" performances?Maybe only count games where an established starter goes down? I dunno.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Sho Nuff could use another hobby. I hear the first 20 levels of World of Warcraft is free, you and Max should give it a try. lol

 

[sho nuff]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

 

[Reepicheep]

Sho Nuff could use another hobby. I hear the first 20 levels of World of Warcraft is free, you and Max should give it a try. lol

I mean this in the most objective, non-personal way possible: I really don't understand how you still have posting rights here.

 

[Reepicheep]

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

I know it started as something different between you two, but I think it's fair to wonder how backups have performed historically . . . if we knew it would give some context to answering the hypothetical question.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Sho Nuff could use another hobby. I hear the first 20 levels of World of Warcraft is free, you and Max should give it a try. lol

I mean this in the most objective, non-personal way possible: I really don't understand how you still have posting rights here.

Yes. This post was the most offensive post ever. Objective, my rear end.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

Why are you always defensive?

 

[sho nuff]

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

I know it started as something different between you two, but I think it's fair to wonder how backups have performed historically . . . if we knew it would give some context to answering the hypothetical question.

I agree, and just think it deserves its own thread...which is why I suggested it and don't think it really has a bearing on what Flynn would do.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

Why are you always defensive?

"I'm not being defensive! You're the one who's being defensive! Why is always the other person who's being defensive? Have you ever asked yourself that? Why don't you ask yourself that?"

 

[sho nuff]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

Why are you always defensive?

So I guess you don't really want to discuss QBs and backups?

 

[AmosMoses]

Why do mommy and daddy always fight?

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

Why are you always defensive?

So I guess you don't really want to discuss QBs and backups?

Seriously you're annoying. I've asked in a nice way(saying please, it would be nice, etc) for you to list capable backup QB's for multiple posts and you refuse. You think this is a game/ trip and then when someone calls you out on your bias/attitude/annoyance you become defensive. Get a clue/life.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

I know it started as something different between you two, but I think it's fair to wonder how backups have performed historically . . . if we knew it would give some context to answering the hypothetical question.

I think it would give some good context as to expectations for Flynn moving forward/is it a system thing in GB/what is a fair expectation for a backup QB(this is in W/L and passing #'s).

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I think it's an interesting question to ask how Kolb would have looked as the Green Bay backup instead of Flynn.

Threads evolve.

 

[Sabertooth]

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

I know it started as something different between you two, but I think it's fair to wonder how backups have performed historically . . . if we knew it would give some context to answering the hypothetical question.

I think it would give some good context as to expectations for Flynn moving forward/is it a system thing in GB/what is a fair expectation for a backup QB(this is in W/L and passing #'s).

Off the top of my head, the following were backups. Start here.Drew BreesTom BradyAaron RodgersEli ManningPhillip RiversTony RomoRyan FitzpatrickMatt HasselbachMichael VickTarvaris JacksonMatt SchaubKevin KolbChristian PonderMatt Cassell

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I think it's an interesting question to ask how Kolb would have looked as the Green Bay backup instead of Flynn. Threads evolve.

This thread hasn't evolved enough for you already?

 

[Reepicheep]

I think it's an interesting question to ask how Kolb would have looked as the Green Bay backup instead of Flynn. Threads evolve.

This thread hasn't evolved enough for you already?

 

[sho nuff]

So...lets end it.

Dr. A. Im sorry I called you out in my first post, no matter my intentions or how I justify it, it took the focus of a few away from the actual topic at hand.

Now, anyone care to discuss the topic?

I'd like to discuss what a capable backup QB consists of with whomever would like to discuss it.

From my point of view the word "capable" is meaningless without context: capable of what? In the simplest sense they are NFL quarterbacks, so "capable of playing the quarterback position well" seems reasonable. But the difficulty is that there are not 32 starting QBs that are capable of playing well, so this is a pretty high bar to set for a backup. A more lenient definition might be "capable of not derailing the season of a winning team if required to play for 3-4 games". This is where the Hanie falls short. The only way I see Hanie as a capable backup is if you broaded the term to mean "capable of sometimes not being the primary reason the team lost the game."

Personally, it makes sense to have a definition of "capable" that encompasses a fairly small number of backup QBs. There aren't enough capable QBs to go around, so the ones that are won't be warming the bench for long. Either way I think it would be a fool's errand to try to contruct a binary list of capable/not capable backup QBs in the league. There just isn't enough information about most of them.

All that said, I'm not sure what bearing this has on the discussion about how many wins Flynn would have had as a starter this year.

Pretty close to spot on here...especially the last line .

I thought you agreed to "drop it" from a few posts ago, put your damn sword away.

I simply agreed that his last line that it does not have bearing to this discussion.As suggested, why not start another thread about it.

Why are you always defensive?

So I guess you don't really want to discuss QBs and backups?

Seriously you're annoying. I've asked in a nice way(saying please, it would be nice, etc) for you to list capable backup QB's for multiple posts and you refuse. You think this is a game/ trip and then when someone calls you out on your bias/attitude/annoyance you become defensive. Get a clue/life.

And I, and another have stated it really does not have relevance in this thread.That it is a valid topic and if you would like to start that topic to go ahead.

But thanks for slinging the insults at the end.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I think it's an interesting question to ask how Kolb would have looked as the Green Bay backup instead of Flynn. Threads evolve.

This thread hasn't evolved enough for you already?

If you take out sho nuff's hijack and the ensuing posts we haven't had a great deal of actual discussion.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

What's the post count on Sho in this thread?

 

[sho nuff]

What's the post count on Sho in this thread?

 

[cheese]

I have no idea. I know the system is good. I know a lot of people can put up big stats in a shootout against the Lions. I know his stats in week 17 were amazing. I think he's a pretty good QB that fits in well with the GB system. I think Aaron Rodgers is on another planet from most including Flynn.

Here are the unknowns...

Just how good is Matt Flynn.

How much of a dropoff is there in terms of leadership and running the team?

Would Flynn make the Oline injuries more of a problem? How durable is he?

How good is the surrounding cast that flourishes with Rodgers... Jordy, Finley, Jennings, Jones, Grant, etc.

and maybe the biggest unknown-

What would this defense be like if they were scoring a few less points on offense?