Packerraymond Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, RoellPreston88 said: Do you think they would have scored less than 0 points today? I think we would be 1-3 with them. So points are irrelevant, but to please you In think we might've scored today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoellPreston88 Posted November 19, 2017 Author Share Posted November 19, 2017 Just now, Packerraymond said: I think we would be 1-3 with them. So points are irrelevant, but to please you In think we might've scored today. So if a playoff spot came down to total points like it did for the Packers in 1999, do you think not getting shut out by Baltimore would help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, RoellPreston88 said: So if a playoff spot came down to total points like it did for the Packers in 1999, do you think not getting shut out by Baltimore would help? The hairs you're trying to split are so incredibly fine, yet make you think that is a big enough deal to dismantle an organization? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoellPreston88 Posted November 19, 2017 Author Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: The hairs you're trying to split are so incredibly fine, yet make you think that is a big enough deal to dismantle an organization? Huh? I just want a competent back up QB who can keep the team afloat for a few weeks. .500 or so. Yet despite many teams still staying alive w/o their backup QB thought the league, this request is too large for TT stans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, RoellPreston88 said: Huh? I just want a competent back up QB who can keep the team afloat for a few weeks. .500 or so. Yet despite many teams still staying alive w/o their backup QB thought the league, this request is too large for TT stans And I'm telling you unless you signed one in March one was not available, and you didn't want to sign one in March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, RoellPreston88 said: Huh? I just want a competent back up QB who can keep the team afloat for a few weeks. .500 or so. Yet despite many teams still staying alive w/o their backup QB thought the league, this request is too large for TT stans What teams are .500 missing 40% of their starters? Including their franchise player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, RoellPreston88 said: Huh? I just want a competent back up QB who can keep the team afloat for a few weeks. .500 or so. Yet despite many teams still staying alive w/o their backup QB thought the league, this request is too large for TT stans Because that was CLEARLY something that TT and MM should have known, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoellPreston88 Posted November 19, 2017 Author Share Posted November 19, 2017 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Because that was CLEARLY something that TT and MM should have known, right? As soon as Rodgers got hurt they should have signed ir trades for a veteran. He would have had 2-3 weeks to learn the offense while they saw what Hundley has. If Hundley turned out to be good, then we have a solid backup. If Hundley turned out to be bad, then the vet has had a fair amount of time to learn the offense, and could have moved the ball better than Hundley did today. Its too late to sign a vet now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, RoellPreston88 said: As soon as Rodgers got hurt they should have signed ir trades for a veteran. He would have had 2-3 weeks to learn the offense while they saw what Hundley has. If Hundley turned out to be good, then we have a solid backup. If Hundley turned out to be bad, then the vet has had a fair amount of time to learn the offense, and could have moved the ball better than Hundley did today. Its too late to sign a vet now. Who trades a good vet backup? You wanted us to have a great security blanket for losing Aaron by having a team give up the great security blanket they have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 1 minute ago, RoellPreston88 said: As soon as Rodgers got hurt they should have signed ir trades for a veteran. He would have had 2-3 weeks to learn the offense while they saw what Hundley has. If Hundley turned out to be good, then we have a solid backup. If Hundley turned out to be bad, then the vet has had a fair amount of time to learn the offense, and could have moved the ball better than Hundley did today. Its too late to sign a vet now. So...you're telling me that you KNEW before Hundley played a meaningful snap that he would fail as miserably as he would? I trust MM's evaluation that he believed that he saw enough from Hundley that they felt comfortable with And how does a "veteran" QB help us right now? We're 5-5. Realistically, we're going to need to be 9-7 and own tiebreakers in order to make the playoffs. Which "available" backup QB do you think can realistically lead us to a 4-2 record down the stretch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 1 minute ago, RoellPreston88 said: As soon as Rodgers got hurt they should have signed ir trades for a veteran. He would have had 2-3 weeks to learn the offense while they saw what Hundley has. If Hundley turned out to be good, then we have a solid backup. If Hundley turned out to be bad, then the vet has had a fair amount of time to learn the offense, and could have moved the ball better than Hundley did today. Its too late to sign a vet now. I know what you are saying but decent QBs - both starters and backups - are valuable and hard to come by. I have a feeling the price we'd have to pay another team to induce them to part with a serviceable QB would be ridiculous. More than likely other teams aren't gonna trade to us their decent backup and find themselves in a similar bind as we are in right now. It is a shame it turned out Hundley isn't what we all hoped he would be. Let's face it - this season is toast. We'll have to address this position this offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoellPreston88 Posted November 19, 2017 Author Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, CWood21 said: And how does a "veteran" QB help us right now? We're 5-5. Realistically, we're going to need to be 9-7 and own tiebreakers in order to make the playoffs. Which "available" backup QB do you think can realistically lead us to a 4-2 record down the stretch? I literally said it’s too late to sign a vet QB now. but if we had signed one, he could have come in down 13-0 and at least give us a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Just now, RoellPreston88 said: I literally said it’s too late to sign a vet QB now. but if we had signed one, he could have come in down 13-0 and at least give us a chance. So...if there was no reason to sign a vet QB back March, and there's no veteran QB available that the Packers should sign now, when exactly were the Packers supposed to sign a veteran QB? And which one were they supposed to sign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoellPreston88 Posted November 19, 2017 Author Share Posted November 19, 2017 Just now, CWood21 said: So...if there was no reason to sign a vet QB back March, and there's no veteran QB available that the Packers should sign now, when exactly were the Packers supposed to sign a veteran QB? And which one were they supposed to sign? Can you read? I said as soon as Rodgers went down. and Kaepernick was and still is available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Just now, RoellPreston88 said: Can you read? I said as soon as Rodgers went down. and Kaepernick was and still is available. You're pushing boundaries, if you want to keep breaking forum rules I'll just issue you a warning. Stick to discussing football. What makes you think Kaepernick makes that much of a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.