Matt Moore
- Thread starter ivo610
- Start date
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I´d rather bring Tolzien and/or Flynn back.
Really? Flynn? Tolzien I see the argument for but Flynn seems to be god terrible every time he steps on the field
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Flynn stinks in preseason. He looks bad in occasional mop up duty. One report out of Seattle had playing more ping pong than studying the playbook. But he's demonstrated the ability to beat bad-to-mediocre teams in money games.
Tolzien has demonstrated the ability to lose games 27-13.
I have seen Tolzien progress and I have seen Flynn regress. Tolzien was known as the smartest guy on the team in college.
But Matt moores numbers in a much less offense weren't terrible. Of the 3, he would be the best imo
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Moore has thrown a total of 29 passes during the regular season over the last three seasons, his stats being pretty comparable to Flynn's last year.
I agree that Tolzien has more upside than Flynn. In regards to Moore I would rather have a guy with knowledge of the system as a backup in Flynn than a newcomer who doesn't seem to be a significantly better passer.
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
I am higher on Tolzien than Flynn and hope the Packers keep him around because I'll be very interested in seeing his progress after being immersed in McCarthy’s QB school and the Packers offense for a full offseason. Evaluating him on his play in 2013 comes with a huge caveat IMO. Here’s a quote from a jsonline article titled, “Packers backup quarterback Scott Tolzien waits for chance” from November of last year:
That quote makes two points IMO. First, there’s reason to expect Tolzien to be better and two, it’s one piece of evidence which contradicts those who minimize McCarthy’s impact on the development of Aaron Rodgers.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...n-waits-for-chance-b99390500z1-282666101.html
That quote makes two points IMO. First, there’s reason to expect Tolzien to be better and two, it’s one piece of evidence which contradicts those who minimize McCarthy’s impact on the development of Aaron Rodgers.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Moore had a couple of partial seasons that were not half bad, but it's hard to muster much excitement for him.
Flynn's bound to be cheaper, given his miserable past anywhere but in Green Bay.
Flynn's bound to be cheaper, given his miserable past anywhere but in Green Bay.
How could you see Tolzien progress when he hasn't played? Beware preseason games against 2nd. and 3rd. stringers.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
The difference with Rodgers, according to his own telling, is the mechanics the Packers taught were his mechanics up to the point he arrived at Cal where he was instructed to c*ck the ball at the ear. According to Rodgers, it was an easy transition getting back to where he was.
With Tolzien, you've got a guy 3 1/2 years in the league at the time of that quote. He was waived out of SF after a year with a pretty fair coach of QBs in his own right. This is a 27 year old QB project they're trying to rebuild.
I see a lot more to be concerned about in that quote than I find encouraging:
In closing, Van Pelt said, "It's hard for anybody to change their throwing mechanics this far along in their career. It's difficult." There's even the possibility the mechanics changes could make him worse if the light bulb does not go on and he has to think his way through the throws.
As for the "QB camp", it is not what it once was prior to the 2011 CBA. There's 12 days of OTAs and minicamps, and a 5 day period for vet QBs prior to the official opening of training camp at the clubs option during the rookie week. None of these activities is devoted exclusively to QBs. With McCarthy stepping back (or up, as it were) to a position of overall team management with less offensive focus, that implies less on-field practice focus on the QBs.
And there there's the cautionary tale of Harrell and Coleman, guys who were progressing until the weren't, released at the 11th. hour. McCarthy has been prone to making positive comments about QBs under development. I can't blame him. Confidence is half battle; it's a requirement on the road to quick decision making, field presence and command of the huddle. Dampening that confidence with critical public comments cannot be of any help.
I'd be particularly concerned about the absence of any confidence inspiring sentiments in that quote from Van Pelt.
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
We disagree about McCarthy's effect on the development of Rodgers.
I agree about how the current CBA affects not only McCarthy's QB school but other off-season activities. It disproportionally affects draft and develop teams like the Packers. It will be tough for Tolzien to correct his mechanics and get to the point where he doesn’t have to think about it. But from everything I know about him, he will work as hard as anyone to get it done. That, and their relative arm strength provides a stark contrast to Flynn IMO.
I agree about how the current CBA affects not only McCarthy's QB school but other off-season activities. It disproportionally affects draft and develop teams like the Packers. It will be tough for Tolzien to correct his mechanics and get to the point where he doesn’t have to think about it. But from everything I know about him, he will work as hard as anyone to get it done. That, and their relative arm strength provides a stark contrast to Flynn IMO.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Maybe I'm one of the only ones but I actually liked what I saw from Tolzien as a starter in 2013. Of course I'm not talking about his TD-INT ratio but I attribute this to him not being familiar with the system as he was brought in after training camp.
His arm is NFL-caliber (which I'm not sure with Flynn anymore) and he seems to be a relentless worker. With him being familiar with the offense as of now I think he could step in for some games and win some games for the Packers.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Beware the advantage of lack of tape on the guy. It eventually catches up, as does the poor mechanics.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Hard work is not enough. The difference in raw material between Rodgers and Tolzien is an out-of-bounds comparison.
Tolzien's been working hard for an extended period over several of his most recent 27 years and they're still trying to rebuild him. And that quote you produced was after he'd been more than a year into the program. If this were a rookie who suffered from bad coaching or a spread/option college system, I'd be more inclined toward a blank slate view based on the physical attributes. That's not the case here.
I fully expect the Packers to bring in a 4th. QB, one way or the other, who's more than the anonymous camp arm last year who's name we've already forgotten. Tolzien will be competing for a job. That's assuming he actually gets signed.
Flynn is a gamer. When the coin gets flipped he comes to play. And the team gets behind him. That's something that cannot be underrated.
Last edited by a moderator:
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
HRE, c'mon the difference in raw material between Rodgers and Flynn is even more out-of-bounds than Rodgers and Tolzien.
BTW, I'd like to see both Flynn and Tolzien back to battle it out for #2 with the loser sent packing in favor of a rookie #3.
BTW, I'd like to see both Flynn and Tolzien back to battle it out for #2 with the loser sent packing in favor of a rookie #3.
Agree with u on this. I thought Tolzien got a raw deal in his evaluation 2 seasons back. He was basically signed off another teams roster and got thrown into one of the more complex offensive schemes as a replacement starter for a most likely HOFer a few weeks later. No wonder he looked lost. I was hoping he'd get some mop up duty last season but not much chance to show his progress when all you do is hand off late in a blowout. And he didn't even get that much.
