Packers not likely to franchise flynn

I see Shefter's statement that the Packers are unlikely to franchise Flynn as such an obvious statement. Myself and a few others said the exact same thing a few weeks back. I could see the Pack working out a sign and trade to keep him out of the conference, but it shouldn't be for much if that occurs. I do think Flynn will get (and deserve) more money than Kolb got. I see him as a much better prospect than Kolb was. I don't see Flynn as a sure thing though. He's not a guy who will be good regardless of the system. I think that if you sign him then you make sure you put him in a similar system and you work at adding play makers around him. That obviously will be easier since he shouldn't cost you a high pick.

 

Agreed! It makes too much sense to sign Flynn and and switch to a WCO. That's why I'm leery Irish might botch this one.

 

Why does that make any sense?

 

Why doesn't it make sense?
We will have a new coaching staff anyway. If they feel Flynn is best option, how does it not makes sense?

 

But they do not have one yet.

 

But they will.
If Ireland has already decided Flynm is a serious option, one of the questions they could be asking HC candidates is their opinion of Matt Flynn.
Whether or not Flynn interests you are not, you can say it doesn't make sense to change the offense. Now is the perfect time to do so, because we are installing a whole new coaching staff anyway.
The more I think about it, the more I want Philbin. It increases the odds we go after Flynn.

 

I do not think it makes sense till they pick the coach.

I do not mind Flynn, however I am not sold.

 

I see what you are saying, I think we a splitting hairs here. I'm saying picking the new coach and changing the offense, may be one in the same.

If not Flynn, what do you want to do at QB next season?

 

I'm still not sold on Flynn. He's a 7th round draft pick who's started only 2 games, losing against the Patriots in December 2010 and winning against the Lions 2 weeks ago. Although his numbers were impressive in both games, his numbers were impressive based soley on the fact he played Joe Philbin's system. Whether or not Flynn's abilities could be transferred to another team and another system is a gamble, trying to roll the hard 6.

The ONLY way I would seriously consider trading for Flynn is if we were to hire Joe Philbin and brought his offensive system to Miami. Other than that, try and use Henne as trade bait for a draft pick, use that and other draft picks to try and move up in the draft for Griffin, or sign a free agent in the of season to compete with Matt Moore, keeping the pressure on him to perform.

I'm not giving up on Matt Moore. He was 6-6 as a starter this season, completing 210 out of 347 for a completion ratio of 60.5% and had a QBR of 87.1. That just under 7.8% completion points lower than Aaron Rodgers, 5.1% points lower than Tom Brady, and 10% points lower than Drew Bees...all without an offseason dedicated to Moore as the starter.

Matt Moore has more of a record to judge future performance on than does Matt Flynn with a mere two games. Getting a haard on for Matt Flynn is kinda like those who had a hard on for Kevin Kolb...and I've never been so happy to be wrong about Kolb.

Let's not travel down that same path of potential disaster again.

 

This is because there are a lot of really good second tier guys this year, I want to stay with Matt Moore for one or two years. Then draft someone who needs some work and work him in. Also take another guy who needs work later in the draft.

My ideal situation would be trading down once or twice(hopefully twice), and then taking an offensive playmaker or Tanninhill or that Brock guy. Then in the 5th or so round pick another quarterback who might be decent.

 

Not sold on Flynn? I understand, but we seen him in 2 NFL games, very, very good teams. I didnt see him buck under pressure. How can anyone say they are sold on Luck or RG3? I am not sold on them, they haven't played 1 NFL game. Everyone in the NFL was saying Alex Smith is a bust, but hey get a good, (can say great coach yet, only 1 year) and see what he has done this year, or are peeps gonna say a 1 year wonder?

What it comes down too, if you get a Good Coach who knows how to mentor a QB then you get results. The Phins never mentored, tutored any QB, we have sucked in that part of it for a few decades. So anyone who says they are not sold on Flynn, cant cant be sold on any QB coming out... All starts at the top.

 

I know I am in the minority here, but going with Moore for 2 more years is essentially saying we won't legitimate playoff contenders for 2 years. Maybe I'm wrong and Matt Moore can lead us to the playoffs, but I'm not convinced.
Trading down for Tannehill or Brock Osweiler would be nice, but it may be hard to trade down. Nine may not be a great spot for that.

 

I wish more fans would appreciate this statement. At least Flynn has played at a high level in the NFL, albeit only 2 games. It's better than 0 NFL games!! The key is placing him in an offense where he's set up to succeed. Otherwise we're just wasting a golden opportunity. It was painful watching Henne play in Henning's system. Talk about trying to fit a square peg in a round hole....sheesh!!

 

before you jump all over Flynn think about Fitz and the Bills, he played well for 5 games

 

I think that is crazy. There have been much worse quarterbacks in the playoffs than Matt Moore. Dolphins went to the playoffs with jay Fielder as their quarterback and Moore is much better than Fiedler.

Plus the way Matt Moore played last year with Miami is darn impressive.

 

Unfortunately, that's not saying much.

 

I'm not sold on Flynn, Luck or Griffin! The only reason I made mention of Griffin was to place pressure on Moore. Playing two games in the NFL doesn't automatically make you prepared to take the helm of another NFL team.

Matt Cassel hasn't produced in Kansas City as they had hoped.
Kevin Kolb hasn't produced in Arizona as they had hoped.
Rob Johnson didn't produce in Buffalo as they had hoped.
Scott Mitchell didn't produce in Detroit as they had hoped.

The list of examples is endless. Just because you as a back-up played great games doesn't relagate you to being a starting NFL quarterback. Matt Moore for that matter may not be the quarterback our team needs, but he is here...he's played our system...he was 6-6 as a starter with zero OTA's dedicated to him as a starter. Moore has a record IN Miami. Flynn hasn't. Flynn has only 2 games under his belt and under a system he's been trained with and grew up with in Green Bay.

There's NO WAY to guarantee trading for him would result in success in Miami. As I stated, the only way I would condone us trading for him would be if Joe Philbin became our head coach and brought HIS offensive system here. Then Flynn would be playing in a system he's already accustomed to...but that doesn't even guarantee success.

 

Yea, because AJ Feeley, Gus Frerotte, Daunte Culpepper, Joey Harrington, Trent Green, Cleo Lemon and Chad Henne have brought so much more to the table than Fiedler did, huh?

 

I guess so.
it's just when I think Matt Moore - starting QB, I don't envision Super Bowl or even playoff success.

 

Why????

Eli Manning, Rex Grossman, Matt Hasselbeck, Donavon McNabb, Jake Delhomme, Rich Gannon, Trent Dilfer, Steve McNair, Chris Chandler, Neil O'Donnell, Stan Humphries, Brad Johnson...all quarterbacks who either played in or won a Super Bowl...and I dare to say Matt Moore is better than just about every quarterback on that list.

It's the TEAM that gets you to the Super Bowl, not the quarterback

 

It is saying that Miami is not giving up.

 

I am not anti-Matt Flynn, however the best people have by saying he is better than Matt Moore is that he is unknown.

 

Matt Moore isn't even in the same stratosphere as Eli Manning.

 

He is unknown. Matt Moore is known. And IMO opinion, is not a top-tier starting QB. He's a great back-up who can come in and win you some games.
We don't know what Flynn is. But I don't understand the rationale of not signing him because we don't know how good he can be.

 

Because then you do not try to draft someone better.

You cannot take a quarterback with the first round pick and sign Matt Flynn. You can keep Matt Moore and draft a first round quarterback. If that first round quarterback isn't ready to start year one or year two, then you still have Matt Moore who can play and win games. Matt Moore might not be a top-tier starting QB, however he could easily be a 2nd-tier quarterback and the 49ers and the Texans proved you can make the playoffs with a 2nd tier quarterback(or the Giants if that is your opinion). In fact if Matt Schaub was playing there could be a chance that the Texans could be playing in the Superbowl.

 

Outside of Andrew Luck there is no QB I want to draft in the first round instead of signing Matt Flynn.

 

That is where we are different then.

 

You're thinking of Eli Manning of today, but do you honestly think the Eli Manning that won the Super Bowl is the same Eli Manning that he's become today? I wouldn't say Eli Manning then was any better than Matt Moore is now and it was the TEAM that won the Super Bowl.

BTW, nice deflection on all of the other names I listed.

 

Who do you like?

 

To be honest with you, I stopped reading the list as soon as I read Eli Manning.

After looking at the list, most of the names as so dated (at least a decade old) that there is no comparision anymore. The NFL is a QB league now, much more than it was when most of those guys made their Super Bowls.
Of the 4 that are recent, 2 were much better than Moore is now when they got to their Super Bowls (Hasselbeck, McNabb), One was carried by great defense, which we don't have (Grossman), and one is the execption to the rule (Delhomme).
If you want to hope Moore is the next exception to the rule that's fine, but I personally would rather have better solution than that at QB.

 

I'm all for building around Moore at this point...unless some miracle trade that cost virtually nothing for RG3 can happen. Its just the most logical sound option. Fix the ****ing line, add the tools, get a passrusher and FS, and lets play some ball. I think our HC / OC will determine the fate of moore at this point, but I think he has the tools to do it. Everything else is just gambling way too much of the future, and we have too many holes to be trading away boat loads and boat loads of picks. Strengthen the team as a whole for next year, and if Moore doesnt get it done like we hope, you can always ship away all your picks for a young QB next year.

Sure, it might be more of the same old same old, but it certainly beats mortgaging 2-3 years of your future...let alone the implications of losing out on all those pics. With the protection our QBs were sometimes afforded in some games this year, noone will succeed. End of story.

 

Out of the QB's you mentioned, only 3 have rings. Out of those 3, 0 have more than one ring.

So basically, you want us to emulate teams that have just been to the SB, when we want to emulate teams that WIN multiple SBs. Those are built on QBs. Sure I know you can name Bradshaw and the Steelers, but I can name Montana/Young, Aikman, Brady, etc. Any era, multiple SB winners have HOF QBs.