Jeff Garcia· Page 4 · PACKERSHOME

beast
Select Member

15 years ago

Yeah I'll take in Garcia, as long as Flynn had a chance to demonstrate something and another player is IRed and not cut just to fit Garcia on the roster.

I'd stay away from Harrington though, there's plenty of other mediocre QBs that I have more faith in.

"dfosterf" wrote:

This is the entire point of picking up a Garcia.

Anyone that is still not understanding this....

Rodgers goes down. In comes Flynn. Flynn sucks. (this is scenario, not a prediction)

Now what?

As far as what Garcia wants. I want to have 12 girlfriends, no wives and no one bitching at me.

"TheEngineer" wrote:

As long as we're not cutting anyone I'm okay with bring someone in.... and if it's Rouse getting IRed then I wouldn't mind bringing someone in... but I'd be a little worried in depth at Saftey with no back-up SS.... then again I'm already a little worried baout that.

masseyattack
Registered

15 years ago

#32

There are a few candidates to be cut who the Packers surely wouldn't miss: one of the fullbacks, Dietrich-Smith, Underwood, Brad Jones and Brett Swain. I can see all of the above being inactive come game-day, and the majority of them could be stashed on the practice squad.

Garcia would be a great pickup. The argument put forward that there are plenty of half-decent quarterbacks on the street (thus making it easier to pick up one if Rodgers or Flynn goes down) does not take into account how long it would take Garcia or another veteran to pick up the Packers playbook. Having a veteran on board now would improve the team.

Garcia might not win the Packers a Superbowl, but if Rodgers is out for 3 or 4 weeks in the middle of the season, having Garcia instead of Flynn at quarterback could make the difference between a playoff push (with a returning Rodgers) and a losing season.

blank

xavierlee9
Member

15 years ago

#33

I'd take Garcia over Flynn also. I would even cut Flynn to open a spot for Garcia. He gives us our best chance to win if Rogers had to leave the game.
Plus I have always liked Garcia.

"DGB454" wrote:

Okay honestly.... I think your a little crazy.... or just had a crazy spell or huge man love for Garcia or something....

A 39 year old QB who hasn't been in the Packers system, plus he's injury prone and hasn't play 14 games since 2002

over

A 24 year old QB who has been in the Packers system and has a heck lot of upside and could be the #2 for years.

If your taking cutting Flynn for Garcia I hope your planing on drafting a QB in next year's draft. Because getting rid of Flynn could mess up the #2 for years and if Rodger goes down then (you know when Garcia is retired than the Packers are in huge trouble... can't just think about one year)

"beast" wrote:

Flynn won't want to stay a back up forever. He didn't come into the NFL to back up. We aren't grooming Flynn to take Rodgers spot. We are grooming him as trade bait for the future. Rogers is our future. there is no point keeping 2 young QB's on the staff that have futures as starters.(If Flynn does have a future as a starter.) Garcia can be a reliable back up for a few years.

I would prefer to keep Flynn as our #3 and continue to develop him. Then we trade him.

"DGB454" wrote:

How did he not come to the NFL to back up? He was a seventh round pick for crypes sakes. He'll be lucky to be a career 2.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

15 years ago

#34

I'd take Garcia over Flynn also. I would even cut Flynn to open a spot for Garcia. He gives us our best chance to win if Rogers had to leave the game.
Plus I have always liked Garcia.

"xavierlee9" wrote:

"DGB454" wrote:

"beast" wrote:

How did he not come to the NFL to back up? He was a seventh round pick for crypes sakes. He'll be lucky to be a career 2.

"DGB454" wrote:

I agree. And I would like to get something in return for him, if he keeps being a solid back-up. Maybe when one of our coaches leaves to another team, they'll lobby to get him over there.

That's how we traded Matt Hasselback away to the Seahawks and got something pretty nice in return. Hasselbeck, 17th and 7th round pick in return for the 10th pick and a 3rd rounder. (Which got them Hutchinson and us Reynolds. You win some, you lose some, lol.)

Same goes for Brunell. We drafted him in the 5th and eventually traded him away for a 3rd and a 5th rounder.

If Flynn can show something next pre-season, chances are that we'll be able to trade him away and get quite a bit more in return than just a 7th rounder. If Rodgers does go down, you're in a high risk high reward situation. We could go down horribly or get a Cassel-like season out of Flynn, who will be carried by his receivers. I'm guessing that it'll be somewhere in between.

DGB454
Registered

15 years ago

#35

I'd take Garcia over Flynn also. I would even cut Flynn to open a spot for Garcia. He gives us our best chance to win if Rogers had to leave the game.
Plus I have always liked Garcia.

"xavierlee9" wrote:

"DGB454" wrote:

"beast" wrote:

How did he not come to the NFL to back up? He was a seventh round pick for crypes sakes. He'll be lucky to be a career 2.

"DGB454" wrote:

I forget...Where did Tom Brady come in at? 6th round?
The point is that no one comes into football with the hopes of being a back up. If Flynn continues to develop I'm sure he will want to start somewhere.
We don't know how good he will be but I'm sure he want's to get good enough to start.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

packerfanoutwest (3m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (49m) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (49m) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (49m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (57m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (58m) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (3h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (17h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS