Jump to content

What to do at QB?


What is your preference for the QB spot?  

51 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your preference for the QB spot?

    • Keep Drew Lock as the starter for 2021
      19
    • Draft a rookie in the 1st round and make him the starter
      13
    • Trade for/sign an established vet (Stafford, Wentz, Ryan)
      13
    • Trade for/sign a journeyman vet (Fitz, Tyrod) to compete with Lock
      6


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Cutler06 said:

You obviously don't get the meaning. Your organization doesn't care about it's players, they only do what they think the organization wants to do. Many organizations will try to accommodate players wishes as long as it doesn't conflict with their own. Packers (and it appears it's fans as well) only care about themselves, 

 

And lets start with Super Bowl 32, if you want to directly compare our two organizations....hugely favored, the Packers CHOKED THE CHICKEN there, I enjoy that EVERY TIME I RE-WATCH IT !!

Yeah, that is what they said about the Packers then Reggie White signed there. You are arguing like a 12 year old to be honest. It's a grown man's business and you do what is right for the organization. If that aligns with the players wishes so be it. If it doesn't that is life.

You are trying to compare your team to the most storied team in NFL history. Good luck with that one! LOL

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

Yeah, that is what they said about the Packers then Reggie White signed there. You are arguing like a 12 year old to be honest. It's a grown man's business and you do what is right for the organization. If that aligns with the players wishes so be it. If it doesn't that is life.

You are trying to compare your team to the most storied team in NFL history. Good luck with that one! LOL

 

I love how you often have to throw in a little personal attack into your arguments, just show immaturity IMO. I do agree this is a business but it also has a societal interest in that players have national impact. Granted, most teams will trade for the best offer, it will rarely trade where that impact will be directly against their own teams, just smart business. However, trading him tow a place where his personal interest best serves him without that detrimental impact is BETTER business. You Packer fans don't seem to get that aspect. This is just building animosity between the organization and the player, it hasn't got nasty yet, but that's clearly ahead.

 

And what the heck does Reggie White have to do with this, that he was a great player to sign with the Packers for a boatload of money ?? Well, so did Peyton Manning for this organization. And honestly, your organizations storied history happened mostly before the 1970's, at best, you were probably in diapers when those stories happened. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Cutler06 said:

I love how you often have to throw in a little personal attack into your arguments, just show immaturity IMO. I do agree this is a business but it also has a societal interest in that players have national impact. Granted, most teams will trade for the best offer, it will rarely trade where that impact will be directly against their own teams, just smart business. However, trading him tow a place where his personal interest best serves him without that detrimental impact is BETTER business. You Packer fans don't seem to get that aspect. This is just building animosity between the organization and the player, it hasn't got nasty yet, but that's clearly ahead.

 

And what the heck does Reggie White have to do with this, that he was a great player to sign with the Packers for a boatload of money ?? Well, so did Peyton Manning for this organization. And honestly, your organizations storied history happened mostly before the 1970's, at best, you were probably in diapers when those stories happened. 

You changed your tune to exactly what Packer fans have been saying all along. You trade Rodgers to where you can get the most value. If that happens to be where he wants to go, OK. If not, oh well. LOL. 

The Reggie White thing was about you saying what a ****ty organization the Packers have. Since Reggie went to GB, we've had no problem attracting free agents. We are one of the best run organizations over the past 30 years and our record proves it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

You changed your tune to exactly what Packer fans have been saying all along. You trade Rodgers to where you can get the most value. If that happens to be where he wants to go, OK. If not, oh well. LOL. 

The Reggie White thing was about you saying what a ****ty organization the Packers have. Since Reggie went to GB, we've had no problem attracting free agents. We are one of the best run organizations over the past 30 years and our record proves it. 

So you cherry pick ONE free agent and it makes the Packers great ? And in the last  thirty years, the Broncos have had THREE Championships to the Packs two, and one of those was against the Packers And when you compare the quality of QB play the Pack have had over those 30years, I'd call that an EPIC underachievement. 

I haven't changed my tune, you take the best offer. I've always stated no team has better trade assets than the Broncos. You try to twist words to fit your pathetic plea, just don't see it happening. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Old Guy said:

OK, we will see, but I believe Rodgers is in camp at the start. 

If he is it’s because the Packers accommodated him.  Which is a win for Rodgers and the Packers.  Trading him for multiple 1s and young players is a win for Rodgers and the Packers.  The losing scenario for the Packers, and the one I’ve heard most from Packers fans is just don’t trade him….that’s the spite scenario where the Packers are the biggest losers, maybe the biggest in NFL history. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

You changed your tune to exactly what Packer fans have been saying all along. You trade Rodgers to where you can get the most value. If that happens to be where he wants to go, OK. If not, oh well. LOL. 

The Reggie White thing was about you saying what a ****ty organization the Packers have. Since Reggie went to GB, we've had no problem attracting free agents. We are one of the best run organizations over the past 30 years and our record proves it. 

But he dictates where that value is.  That’s what you aren’t grasping.  They’ll get value no matter what.  But the Packers won’t be trading him to the damn Bears for 25 straight 1st round picks because Rodgers would never go there.  

You’re a Packers fan.  I get it.  I honestly hope the Packers just don’t trade him and set a precedent, but your organization has no leverage.  Again, the best they can do is our if spite not trade him, which hurts themselves. 

Edited by germ-x
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, germ-x said:

But he dictates where that value is.  That’s what you aren’t grasping.  They’ll get value no matter what.  But the Packers won’t be trading him to the damn Bears for 25 straight 1st round picks because Rodgers would never go there.  

You’re a Packers fan.  I get it.  I honestly hope the Packers just don’t trade him and set a precedent, but your organization has no leverage.  Again, the best they can do is our if spite not trade him, which hurts themselves. 

I think what you meant to type was Rodgers has no leverage. He threw his hissy fit right before the draft. The Packers didn't blink. He skipped OTA's the Packers didn't blink. Rodgers isn't retiring, that is one big smoke screen. 

He's either playing for the Packers this year or he's sitting out, which is not an option for him. He's under contract for 3 more years. He retires we get close to 40 million a year in cap relief. That can acquire you a couple of bona fide studs in free agency. 

Here is the deal, Rodgers knows Love can play and he's trying to leverage guaranteed money to make it impossible for the Packers to get rid of him during Love's rookie deal. Thus, keeping him under center the next three years. Hopefully the Packers aren't that 

 

Best of luck this year to the Broncos. I'm done here. I found out fans here are pretty close to giving the Packers fair market value for Rodgers. That was refreshing. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

“I found out fans here are pretty close to giving the Packers fair market value for Rodgers.”

thank god fans make those types of decisions.

 

ANY WAYS…

Hopefully this can be a make or break for Lock this year. Given that it’s also make or break for Vic I wouldn’t be surprised to see the defensive coach go with the vet in Teddy B. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

Given that it’s also make or break for Vic I wouldn’t be surprised to see the defensive coach go with the vet in Teddy B. 

That's what I've been saying all long, even before we acquired Teddy. Vic will go with the safe and unspectacular vet and 2021 will another wasted season. Barring us landing Aaron, which I still believe is very likely, when camp opens with Drew/Teddy, then I'm looking forward to 2022 with new owner, new HC, new OC and, hopefully, a rookie QB. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

That's what I've been saying all long, even before we acquired Teddy. Vic will go with the safe and unspectacular vet and 2021 will another wasted season. Barring us landing Aaron, which I still believe is very likely, when camp opens with Drew/Teddy, then I'm looking forward to 2022 with new owner, new HC, new OC and, hopefully, a rookie QB. 

Here's what I don't understand about your argument. We won a SB in 2015 with a great defense, solid OL and skill positions and the worst QB in the league. It's not the first time similar formulas have been used successfully.  PM's offensive output of 11 1st downs and a 56.5 rating in the SB are new standards for the poorest performance by a winning QB in the SB.

Now, on paper right now we have a great defense, solid OL and very strong skill positions plus lots of depth across the roster. Either Lock or Teddy are a vast improvement of PM circa 2015.

Why exactly is it a wasted season?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, AKRNA said:

Here's what I don't understand about your argument. We won a SB in 2015 with a great defense, solid OL and skill positions and the worst QB in the league. It's not the first time similar formulas have been used successfully.  PM's offensive output of 11 1st downs and a 56.5 rating in the SB are new standards for the poorest performance by a winning QB in the SB.

Now, on paper right now we have a great defense, solid OL and very strong skill positions plus lots of depth across the roster. Either Lock or Teddy are a vast improvement of PM circa 2015.

Why exactly is it a wasted season?

We had an elite HC who knew precisely how to manage the roster and all the egos on the team and was a spectacular game-day coach. Peyton’s presence and leadership were worth more than what he did on the field. Our defense this year is good, it’s not the 2015 defense. We have the potential for a top-10 defense this year; the 2015 team was an all time top-10 defense. 

Without Aaron, we’re not in the Super Bowl discussion this year, I don’t think we’re even in serious playoff discussion, with Teddy at QB. 

Edited by AnAngryAmerican
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

We had an elite HC who knew precisely how to manage the roster and all the egos on the team and was a spectacular game-day coach. Peyton’s presence and leadership were worth more than what he did on the field. Our defense this year is good, it’s not the 2015 defense. We have the potential for a top-10 defense this year; the 2015 team was an all time top-10 defense. 

Without Aaron, we’re not in the Super Bowl discussion this year, I don’t think we’re even in serious playoff discussion, with Teddy at QB. 

Not to mention even with all of that, that team needed some incredibly timely plays that, if played 100 times over, wouldn't happen again. Ex. Jamal Charles fumble return TD, Browns taking 3 straight sacks in OT, Toussant (PIT) fumble (the only fumble in his career) etc etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2021 at 4:46 PM, Old Guy said:

OK, we will see, but I believe Rodgers is in camp at the start. 

He very well could be, but, in my opinion, it’s if GB makes moves/decisions that Rodgers is requesting.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rodgers isn't happening.

Watson has too much smoke around him. I have seen and experienced sexual assault and abuse. Dead family from it.

So I'd rather hang with Lock. Draft is over, no Fields. Rams have Stafford. Saints are holding Jameis. It is what it is.

 

Edited by Calamity_Cometh
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Calamity_Cometh said:

Rodgers isn't happening.

Watson has too much smoke around him. I have seen and experienced sexual assault and abuse. Dead family from it.

So I'd rather hang with Lock. Draft is over, no Fields. Rams have Stafford. Saints are holding Jameis. It is what it is.

 

So, glass half-empty or just on it's way to being empty ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...