Pack93z
12 years ago
Why in the hell would the Packers sign Vince Young? I like him as a player more than most, but one thing he is not, he is not built for a timing based, accuracy required offense.

I could see add him as a project, but as a replacement for the primary backup to Rodgers.. makes no sense as it is an ill fit in the short term.

Basically.. I don't know that you can make him an accurate passer period.. let alone expect it to happen in the course of a week.

Young belongs in truly balanced offense that likes to play a primary vertical passing game where the passing windows could be expanded.. but for our type of offense, he simply lacks the accuracy to fit in speaking short term. Not to mention that he really hasn't proven to be a student of the game.. IE.. showing he can break down a defense and read through the progressions of a play making solid decisions.

Unless we are looking at veteran QB's with a displayed accuracy and understanding of defenses / our brand of offense.. I don't see it as a positive move in any sense.

In my opinion, we are married to Harrell for this season, at least the first half of it as the primary backup. I just don't see bringing anyone else in and expecting more than Harrell will provide. In other words, the complexity of this offense, especially with it being heavy passing based, does not lend itself well to just adding a QB and expecting him to be ready in a couple of weeks.. let alone what 2?

I firmly believe that we will see more from Harrell this weekend as the first half he will have improved talent around him.. especially in protection. I think out of the 4 games this preseason.. this is the one that will be more of a litmus test.

Lets review come Friday.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Porforis
12 years ago

Why in the hell would the Packers sign Vince Young? I like him as a player more than most, but one thing he is not, he is not built for a timing based, accuracy required offense.

I could see add him as a project, but as a replacement for the primary backup to Rodgers.. makes no sense as it is an ill fit in the short term.

Basically.. I don't know that you can make him an accurate passer period.. let alone expect it to happen in the course of a week.

Young belongs in truly balanced offense that likes to play a primary vertical passing game where the passing windows could be expanded.. but for our type of offense, he simply lacks the accuracy to fit in speaking short term. Not to mention that he really hasn't proven to be a student of the game.. IE.. showing he can break down a defense and read through the progressions of a play making solid decisions.

Unless we are looking at veteran QB's with a displayed accuracy and understanding of defenses / our brand of offense.. I don't see it as a positive move in any sense.

In my opinion, we are married to Harrell for this season, at least the first half of it as the primary backup. I just don't see bringing anyone else in and expecting more than Harrell will provide. In other words, the complexity of this offense, especially with it being heavy passing based, does not lend itself well to just adding a QB and expecting him to be ready in a couple of weeks.. let alone what 2?

I firmly believe that we will see more from Harrell this weekend as the first half he will have improved talent around him.. especially in protection. I think out of the 4 games this preseason.. this is the one that will be more of a litmus test.

Lets review come Friday.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



I disagree on the count of not being able to bring in anybody better than Harrell because the offense is too complex to pick up in time to be useful. In an emergency situation which will hopefully never happen, such as ARod and Harrell going down (And something happening to Coleman), whoever they'd bring in would work with a simplified version of the playbook. Same thing would happen if they brought in a veteran not used to the Packers system, and if he's much more consistent and reliable than Harrell, I'd say it'd be worth it even if it meant limiting our play options on offense. The best playbook in the universe can't help you if your QB has an inconsistent noodle arm.
Pack93z
12 years ago
I will still contend that he can make most of the throws.. no he is not in Rodgers league.. but few are.

I could mention again the shoddy protection he has been afforded... or him having to move and throw a large percentage of his passes on the move. But we apparently expect everyone to throw on the run like Rodgers.

I will just agree to disagree that he can't make the throws.. we seen him make those throws last preseason.

Not hitting the panic button am I.

And I do not disagree that you could alter the playbook to simple it down for any QB.. that is not the point of a backup though.. to change our offense to the point to fit them. It is to have someone ready to go and running your offense with as little change as possible.. but without Rodgers there is going to be a drop off to almost any other QB.

I have confidence in Harrell until he shows me he can't do it from a clean pocket or at least being afforded a couple beats in the pocket. Wait.. we seen that against the Chargers with the no huddle and him having a bit of time. 🤔
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
PackerTraxx
12 years ago
Personally, it would be nice to see one series with all the ones. Then 1 or 2 series of Harrell with the ones. Let Harrell play through the first series of the second half. Then have Coleman finish it out. JMHO
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
DakotaT
12 years ago
I have no confindence in noodle arm Harrell, or noodle arm Flynn for that matter as a starting quarterback in this league. I've resolved my thinking to that if Rodgers goes down, then that's the season. It would be nice to have a decent backup to attempt to win a few games in Rodger's absence. But we have some pretty hard headed managers on our team, and in our fan base (93Z) who feel Harrell is good enough. I hope we don't need to find out.
Pack93z
12 years ago

But we have some pretty hard headed managers on our team, and in our fan base (93Z) who feel Harrell is good enough. I hope we don't need to find out.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I can agree with you on both parts.. me being hard headed and hoping we don't need to test QB #2 regardless of his name.

I happen to agree as well that if Rodgers goes down.. we are more than likely finished thinking Superbowl regardless.


And no I can't say that I have complete confidence in Harrell.. but I really don't think he has been given much in the terms of opportunity to show it.

Normally I would go into a rant about the inabilities of the offensive line coaching of this team.. notably getting guys ready to play in a timely fashion.. but I tire of it. We are saddled with that boat anchor I fear.


"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
PackerTraxx
12 years ago
I don't think Harrell has the arm either, but I would still like to see him with the ones. Montana didn't have a strong arm either but made up for it with other attributes. I don't think Harrell has enough of those either but I think we should find out. As I have said in other posts, my belief is that before the season is out Coleman will move past Harrell. If Rodgers goes down I agree we're finished for the SB if it's for an extended time or for the playoffs. The same is true for any other team though.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Zero2Cool
12 years ago
Remember when I said to keep in mind Rodgers preseason performances when bashing Harrell?

http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/common/more.php?m=49&post_id=10611 


I still say he should be cut so Colt McCoy and be added. 🙂
Pack93z
12 years ago
That is the point.. and most of that work extends past the QB themselves.

Stand on the fact the Harrell is fine.. in fact I will say he is going to look much improved this week.

“It’s preseason. You’re trying to work on things,” said Rodgers, the NFL’s all-time leader in passer rating who set an NFL record for single-season passer rating last year. “Sometimes you’re going to have real good results and sometimes it’s not going to look as good. But thankfully those stats don’t count, don’t carry over. I’m not trying to be the top-rated passer in the preseason anymore."


"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
dfosterf
12 years ago
Colt McCoy vs. Harrell. I'm taking Colt.

Fan Shout
dfosterf (4h) : Mackelvie
dfosterf (4h) : Michael Macelvie- NFL teams know how to draft- Why don"t they?
dfosterf (4h) : Youtube
Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.
dfosterf (12h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo
Zero2Cool (13h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha
wpr (14h) : Tomorrow is almost here.
packerfanoutwest (14h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?
packerfanoutwest (14h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him
Zero2Cool (16h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : don't care
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?
packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (22-Apr) : now 3
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?
beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.