They have 3 QBs every year. Rodgers, a backup and one on the PS. Probably be the same this year.

If Rodgers gets hurt, they put in Flynn and move the PS player to the game day roster and start looking for a scrap heap QB. If Flynn goes down, you put in the PS player until you get the scrap heap player up to speed.

Last year wasn't a disaster. It was the way they planned to deal with injuries. No team is going to win a lot of games if they are down to their 3rd QB. It would be an over reaction to change what they do. You can't keep 3 starting quality QBs on a team.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

Eligibility

Practice squads are considered to be for developmental purposes. Therefore, veterans are not eligible to be signed to the practice squad. In fact, players with more than one year of accrued NFL service are not eligible. Here is a closer look at the eligibility requirements.


•A player is eligible if he does not have an accrued season of NFL experience. Players gain an accrued season by being on the active roster for at least six games.
•If a player has one accrued season, they can still be practice squad eligible if they were on the 45-man active gameday roster for less than nine regular season games.
•A player is deemed to have served a season on the practice squad if he remains on the practice squad for at least three weeks. Players are eligible to be on the practice squad for two seasons.
•Players can be eligible for a third practice squad season if their team maintains no less than 53 players on the active/inactive list at all times.

If you don't consider a 2-5-1 record a disaster after going 5-2 what would you call it? A success? By the way, I did not use the word "disaster". I said they got burnt which they certainly did. Every QB they used prior to bringing Flynn back burnt them. QB ratings of 70.5,65.7,85.2,51.9 and 69.6 in their losses were hardly encouraging. The 95.6 and 113.1 in the wins was.

Scott Tolzien is a 4 year vet according to the Packer website. This being his 4th year. He is long past the time to be on the PS. GB may well keep only 2 QB. But then they will have to decide between Tolzien and Flynn and let the other walk.


FYI-

Originally Posted by: wpr 

I'm almost certain flynn isn't eligible for the p.s.
And I think tolzien's eligibility is close to maxed as well. Also, dangling relatively established qbs on a practice squad is risky. I don't know that tolzien would last a season there w/o being picked up.

Originally Posted by: musccy 

They have 3 QBs every year. Rodgers, a backup and one on the PS. Probably be the same this year.

If Rodgers gets hurt, they put in Flynn and move the PS player to the game day roster and start looking for a scrap heap QB. If Flynn goes down, you put in the PS player until you get the scrap heap player up to speed.

Last year wasn't a disaster. It was the way they planned to deal with injuries. No team is going to win a lot of games if they are down to their 3rd QB. It would be an over reaction to change what they do. You can't keep 3 starting quality QBs on a team.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

I would say name one team that won't have a drop off like that with a 3rd string QB in the line up. It is a disaster that we had the injuries. Who we had for backup QBs isn't what got us burnt.

I know Tolzien is not PS eligible. There is really no reason to keep him. We have a viable 2nd string QB and we need one for development. It is a waste to put a developmental QB on a 53.

Other than being a former Badger, I don't see a lot of upside for Tolzien. They could get as much out of Rettig and he is PS eligible.

The only way a team doesn't have a major drop off when their starting QB goes down is when their starting QB sucks. Like when Cutler got hurt and the Bears actually got better. Having the 3rd QB come in and play and thinking he will be above the average for a starting NFL QB is a pretty unrealistic expectation. They aren't 3rd string because they are the 16th best QBs in the league.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

Neither is PS eligible.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

If you think for one instant I was saying that the Packers #2 QB or #3 QB was among the 16th best QB in the league I guess we have nothing to talk about. What I was saying that who GB had as their #2 QB was wrong. It took so long to get a replacement who was up to speed they missed out on a huge portion of the season.
.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

It seems to me you are expecting them to win more than half their games when you keep referring to their record with the backups in. You even posted their ratings like you expect 3rd string QBs to have a better rating.

What do you think the record of any team that is playing with it's 3rd and 4th QBs for 6 games is going to be? I would say they were guaranteed 6 losses on top of 2 they had when the starter went down.

Besides, there were 28 other players not named Rodgers that were injured. The Packers had over 300 combined games missed due to injuries. Houston and Atlanta who were both picked to be Super Bowl contenders had fewer injuries and won 2 and 4 games.

The Bears had a third as many games missed and we beat them for the Division title. The media couldn't stop talking about how decimated they were by injuries. With a third as many.


They didn't get burned by their backup QBs. They got burned by injuries, buy weathered it better than any other team.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister