Packers Huddle

I'm not sure what to take away from that performance last night.

Sure, most starters didn't play on either side of the ball but, jeebus, those who did play looked woefully outclassed. Vanilla schemes? Sure, but blocking and tackling still sucked. Neither QB looked ready to step in should Love get injured. The O-line allowed penetration all night long. The DL got gashed repeatedly. Opposing WRs running free on numerous plays.

An all around ugly performance that followed what had reportedly been an ugly scrimmage featuring the starters on Friday. I know Sean Payton is known for scheming up pre-season games to make his teams look good, but, ugh, that was ugly.

APB wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 06:37

I'm not sure what to take away from that performance last night.

Sure, most starters didn't play on either side of the ball but, jeebus, those who did play looked woefully outclassed. Vanilla schemes? Sure, but blocking and tackling still sucked. Neither QB looked ready to step in should Love get injured. The O-line allowed penetration all night long. The DL got gashed repeatedly. Opposing WRs running free on numerous plays.

An all around ugly performance that followed what had reportedly been an ugly scrimmage featuring the starters on Friday. I know Sean Payton is known for scheming up pre-season games to make his teams look good, but, ugh, that was ugly.

LaCoach sucked last night. I blame LaCoach.

APB wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 06:30

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2024 22:35

I might give the offense credit for not fumbling a snap.

I'm guessing you missed the opening offensive play from the Packers.

Oh I missed or forgot that. Ok.....the entire offense sucked then.

The LB #59 seems to be in the running to make the team.

not having a real backup, when so many "backups" are available every year is a...choice.

No wonder kurt bencke is butt hurt

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 08:51

not having a real backup, when so many "backups" are available every year is a...choice.

No wonder kurt bencke is butt hurt

I get the frustration but who among this "so many" is a viable option? Feel free to provide any other name not on the list.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents ... ract_value

APB wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 06:37

I'm not sure what to take away from that performance last night.

Sure, most starters didn't play on either side of the ball but, jeebus, those who did play looked woefully outclassed. Vanilla schemes? Sure, but blocking and tackling still sucked. Neither QB looked ready to step in should Love get injured. The O-line allowed penetration all night long. The DL got gashed repeatedly. Opposing WRs running free on numerous plays.

An all around ugly performance that followed what had reportedly been an ugly scrimmage featuring the starters on Friday. I know Sean Payton is known for scheming up pre-season games to make his teams look good, but, ugh, that was ugly.

the poor showing of starters in that scrimmage bothers me more then the mismatch of talent last night, Payton played starters and schemed some very good plays, Lafleur and Guty meanwhile held talent evaluations, not exactly a level playing field, still our backups didn't play well, and the score reflected it

we tend to start slow every season, so hopefully that was also reflected in that scrimmage Friday

This might be the first year ever since probably age 10 I probably won't watch a single practice or pre season game.

APB wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 08:59

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 08:51

not having a real backup, when so many "backups" are available every year is a...choice.

No wonder kurt bencke is butt hurt

I get the frustration but who among this "so many" is a viable option? Feel free to provide any other name not on the list.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents ... ract_value

Would take some planning before training camp started, but yes...all of those guys are more viable options for backup qb than what we are witnessing now.

You really want a guy who can win maybe 2 games if lets say...Love misses a month.

We are currently looking at 4 losses if Love missed a month

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 09:31

APB wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 08:59

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 08:51

not having a real backup, when so many "backups" are available every year is a...choice.

No wonder kurt bencke is butt hurt

I get the frustration but who among this "so many" is a viable option? Feel free to provide any other name not on the list.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents ... ract_value

Would take some planning before training camp started, but yes...all of those guys are more viable options for backup qb than what we are witnessing now.

You really want a guy who can win maybe 2 games if lets say...Love misses a month.

We are currently looking at 4 losses if Love missed a month

Nobody on that list is winning us anything, save maybe Tannehill, if Love goes down. Fan's thoughts that most backup QB's are real people/players is laughable. You don't win with backups QBs in most cases. Here are the current #2 QB's per Ourlads. Crap, new draft picks, failed recent draft picks, or journeymen that actually costs real money.
MITCHELL TRUBISKY
Mike White
Drake Maye
TYROD TAYLOR

JOSH JOHNSON
Jake Browning
JAMEIS WINSTON
Justin Fields

Davis Mills
JOE FLACCO
Mac Jones
Mason Rudolph

Jarrett Stidham
CARSON WENTZ
Aidan O'Connell
Easton Stick

COOPER RUSH
Drew Lock
Tanner McKee
MARCUS MARIOTA

Tyson Bagent
NATE SUDFELD
Sean Clifford
Nick Mullens

Michael Penix
ANDY DALTON
Jake Haener
Kyle Trask

Clayton Tune
Stetson Bennett
Joshua Dobbs
Sam Howell

I'm not worried about the backup QB position at all. If Love gets hurt the chances of winning anything is small. At that point you lean on your running game and defense and hope for the best. Then come Monday you sign a vet looking to get his shot back into the league ala Kurt Warner with the Cardinals. No reason to prepare for $%@# when no matter what when you losing a starting Quarterback you are screwed.

66 QBs started games last year.

You have to plan on your starter missing some time these days.

With Clifford, you just fall on the sword and plan to lose those games.

With some others you at least have a chance to believe you might could win.

Better to be in a position where you just aren't automatically forfeiting games when the inevitable happens, imo.

You dont need a great backup, but lets face it...every qb that has played against GB in now 2 preseason games is better than what weve seen from clifford

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 10:22

I'm not worried about the backup QB position at all. If Love gets hurt the chances of winning anything is small. At that point you lean on your running game and defense and hope for the best. Then come Monday you sign a vet looking to get his shot back into the league ala Kurt Warner with the Cardinals. No reason to prepare for $%@# when no matter what when you losing a starting Quarterback you are screwed.

ahhhhhhh, ya want a backup that wont lose games, and one who can help his supporting cast win a few at least, and Clifford has shown me he is not that guy, has the offense ever really moved the chains consistently with him?

he ranks second to last in the league as a backup according to this, and last nights performance supports that ranking, while many on this list wont necessarily win games, they wont lose them either, imo thats what matters most from a backup, Pratt seems like a better option, but he needs more touch on his passes.

https://www.si.com/nfl/ranking-nfl-backup-qbs-2024

Nobody on that list would make me feel good about our chances with them at QB, or appreciably better about them than Pratt, other than Tannehill. I don't feel a need to bring Tannehill in now.

And with Pratt there is upside, unlike the guys on that list.

Plus, new QBs present a unique danger, teams don't have good Intel on them as pro QBs. That can allow them to over perform for a short stretch, which is all you really need from your backup QB. Journeymen like those vets, every team knows their kryptonite.

Yoop wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 12:15

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 10:22

I'm not worried about the backup QB position at all. If Love gets hurt the chances of winning anything is small. At that point you lean on your running game and defense and hope for the best. Then come Monday you sign a vet looking to get his shot back into the league ala Kurt Warner with the Cardinals. No reason to prepare for $%@# when no matter what when you losing a starting Quarterback you are screwed.

ahhhhhhh, ya want a backup that wont lose games, and one who can help his supporting cast win a few at least, and Clifford has shown me he is not that guy, has the offense ever really moved the chains consistently with him?

he ranks second to last in the league as a backup according to this, and last nights performance supports that ranking, while many on this list wont necessarily win games, they wont lose them either, imo thats what matters most from a backup, Pratt seems like a better option, but he needs more touch on his passes.

https://www.si.com/nfl/ranking-nfl-backup-qbs-2024

Every backup loses games. Thats why they arent a starter.

Teams with no super bowl dreams anyways shouldnt worry about back up QB (like last year when we didnt really have super bowl dreams)

Teams with super bowl dreams should have a QB2 that can at least make fans pretend he could keep the ship afloat for a couple weeks.

Tannehill we are not paying what he wants and he does not want to come to us given our situation. If I am Tannehill I want a chance to win a starting job, or I hold out for an injury to a contending team.

The Chiefs had Blaine Gabbert as their backup last year...
The 49ers had Sam Darnold as their backup last year...

Teams with good QBs do not have the so called good backup. It's not a good investment.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 16:01

The Chiefs had Blaine Gabbert as their backup last year...
The 49ers had Sam Darnold as their backup last year...

Teams with good QBs do not have the so called good backup. It's not a good investment.

sam darnold is a starter this year dude lol

both those guys are 10000x better than clifford

Drj820 wrote: ↑

20 Aug 2024 08:22

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2024 16:01

The Chiefs had Blaine Gabbert as their backup last year...
The 49ers had Sam Darnold as their backup last year...

Teams with good QBs do not have the so called good backup. It's not a good investment.

sam darnold is a starter this year dude lol

both those guys are 10000x better than clifford

That Sam Darnold is a starter is an indictment of the Vikings, not a celebration of Darnold's talent...