"thats a critical penalty - *adopts promo voice* well, coming up on the Visa halftime report, Curt, Terry, Howie, Michael and Tony, look on graphic for final two bullet points."
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
"thats a critical penalty - *adopts promo voice* well, coming up on the Visa halftime report, Curt, Terry, Howie, Michael and Tony, look on graphic for final two bullet points."
Maybe he meant the 4idiots and Tony will look on the graphic for the bullet points
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
0
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
edited October 2017
al michaels just issued a vague on air apology and they just said "and we'll just move on" so i went and looked up what he said
I don’t know if I’d rather see Kaep leading Green Bay to the playoffs or Kaep destroying the NFL in a lawsuit.
In an ideal world, both occur.
I could see us picking him up as a backup but right now our backup QB is not really the problem. The porous offensive line and lack of running game are going to be the huge factor for if we can do much or not. I was worried all year so far that our O line was going to get rodgers crushed and sure enough it happened.
I think Kaep probably could fit in decently with our playbook as he was used to running the west coast offense but we may be better off spending money to get more/better o line folks to bolster that.
There is nothing really wrong with Hundley anyway. If GB were to try for Kaep, in this instance it would be better as a first choice starter. If their intent will be to win, and there is no reason not to try, then they should.
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
I'm not convinced Kaep is a significant upgrade over Hundley. He'd need several weeks at a minimum to learn the playbook and develop rapport with the offense. Better to give Hundley a shot and see if he can develop into something special. We aren't winning the Super Bowl with Kaep and this defense. Almost certainly not with Hundley either, but you never know until you give the guy a shot.
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
+1
Element BrianPeanut Butter ShillRegistered Userregular
I'm not convinced Kaep is a significant upgrade over Hundley. He'd need several weeks at a minimum to learn the playbook and develop rapport with the offense. Better to give Hundley a shot and see if he can develop into something special. We aren't winning the Super Bowl with Kaep and this defense. Almost certainly not with Hundley either, but you never know until you give the guy a shot.
Yeah I'm not hung up on GB giving the dude whose been in the system 3 years a solid chance to play before looking elsewhere
it's not like he has a proven track record that he's completely incapable of playing unlike other people who have gotten the start this year.
Seems pretty clear if a team has the tiniest fig leaf to hide behind not signing Kaepernick they'll use it. Every QB in the league could be on IR and I'd expect random dudes getting hired from grocery stores because "Kurt Warner was working at a grocery store!" before kap gets a look.
At this point, Kaepernick is better off not getting an offer from anyone.
Talent wise he's obviously better than the Matt Cassel's of the world, but we're already a 3rd of the way through the season, and in an unfamiliar system he'd be set up for failure.
Which is why I'm expecting the NFL to pressure one of their sad sack franchises into signing him now, if only to make the lawsuit go away. Throw him out there with minimal practice reps on a shitty team like Cleveland, ensuring that he has a bad game. Then they can cut him and say that they were right.
The Packers have a third-stringer though who will now become their primary backup.
They aren't paying the vet minimum salary to that third-stringer is the thing. But yeah, Kaep would be an upgrade over whoever the fuck we just promoted off the practice squad.
It's beyond obvious that Kaep is a top 64 or whatever QB, I'm not arguing against that. Just saying it's probably not worth it for the Packers at this point.
Sir Landshark on
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
0
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
Hell, Kaep could be starting for the 49ers right now. Hoyer just got benched for Beathard (snicker).
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
The Packers have a third-stringer though who will now become their primary backup.
They aren't paying the vet minimum salary to that third-stringer is the thing. But yeah, Kaep would be an upgrade over whoever the fuck we just promoted off the practice squad.
It's beyond obvious that Kaep is a top 64 or whatever QB, I'm not arguing against that. Just saying it's probably not worth it for the Packers at this point.
I believe that if Rodgers goes on IR (?), his salary cap space is freed up anyways.
It wouldn't go away, but it would make it harder to prove any previous collusion against him.
It's already an uphill battle. Unless Jerry Jones was drunk enough one night to send a mass email to the 31 owners saying, "don't hire this guy", it's going to be virtually impossible.
0
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
The Packers have a third-stringer though who will now become their primary backup.
They aren't paying the vet minimum salary to that third-stringer is the thing. But yeah, Kaep would be an upgrade over whoever the fuck we just promoted off the practice squad.
It's beyond obvious that Kaep is a top 64 or whatever QB, I'm not arguing against that. Just saying it's probably not worth it for the Packers at this point.
I believe that if Rodgers goes on IR (?), his salary cap space is freed up anyways.
Yeah but if I'm TT I'm thinking why waste that space now when I can roll it forward into next year. As long as we still have Rodgers, the goal is always going to be a Super Bowl. I don't think that's on the table this year with how our Defense has been playing, so it's best to just cut our losses I think.
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
So...what's the burden of proof he has to meet to prove collusion? Because my instinct is that the NFL doesn't have to do anything because its far more likely that most teams just decided that a mediocre QB who's going to piss off a chunk of their fanbase isn't worth it over a slightly worse than mediocre QB who their fanbase is going to ignore, and never bothered to talk to each other about it. Maybe 5 or 6 racist owners got together and agreed not to sign him, but I have a feeling that most teams just made the individual decision to not sign him.
PSN|AspectVoid
0
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
So...what's the burden of proof he has to meet to prove collusion? Because my instinct is that the NFL doesn't have to do anything because its far more likely that most teams just decided that a mediocre QB who's going to piss off a chunk of their fanbase isn't worth it over a slightly worse than mediocre QB who their fanbase is going to ignore, and never bothered to talk to each other about it. Maybe 5 or 6 racist owners got together and agreed not to sign him, but I have a feeling that most teams just made the individual decision to not sign him.
You've listed a thing that would count as proof of collusion.
So...what's the burden of proof he has to meet to prove collusion? Because my instinct is that the NFL doesn't have to do anything because its far more likely that most teams just decided that a mediocre QB who's going to piss off a chunk of their fanbase isn't worth it over a slightly worse than mediocre QB who their fanbase is going to ignore, and never bothered to talk to each other about it. Maybe 5 or 6 racist owners got together and agreed not to sign him, but I have a feeling that most teams just made the individual decision to not sign him.
You've listed a thing that would count as proof of collusion.
Right but the question is does Kaep need to demonstrate that the owners colluded or can he just claim that he's better than the 64th best QB in the league
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
He needs actual evidence, yeah. But if the case is accepted that means they get to do discovery on a LOT of owners and execs, and it only takes a few people being fucking idiots.
Hundley looked solid in preseason get him some actual practice snaps and fix our freaking O line so he is not getting murdered I think he could get the job done.
Hundley looked solid in preseason get him some actual practice snaps and fix our freaking O line so he is not getting murdered I think he could get the job done.
ain't nobody fixing an oline midseason these days. there is zero talent at the position, it was all moved into DTs. you make more money there and are more popular.
Posts
3DS Code: 5043-2172-1361
Xbone Tag: Salal al Din
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
"thats a critical penalty - *adopts promo voice* well, coming up on the Visa halftime report, Curt, Terry, Howie, Michael and Tony, look on graphic for final two bullet points."
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
I don’t know if I’d rather see Kaep leading Green Bay to the playoffs or Kaep destroying the NFL in a lawsuit.
In an ideal world, both occur.
Maybe he meant the 4idiots and Tony will look on the graphic for the bullet points
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
holy shit al
oh ok that was a joke someone was making. what he said was something like "[broncos] are having a worse week than harvey weinstein"
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Of all of the weirdness of this NFL season, I really wish that one of the weird things was "Browns are undefeated."
As it is, they remain the one sane constant in this crazy year.
I could see us picking him up as a backup but right now our backup QB is not really the problem. The porous offensive line and lack of running game are going to be the huge factor for if we can do much or not. I was worried all year so far that our O line was going to get rodgers crushed and sure enough it happened.
I think Kaep probably could fit in decently with our playbook as he was used to running the west coast offense but we may be better off spending money to get more/better o line folks to bolster that.
Yeah I'm not hung up on GB giving the dude whose been in the system 3 years a solid chance to play before looking elsewhere
it's not like he has a proven track record that he's completely incapable of playing unlike other people who have gotten the start this year.
Arch,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_goGR39m2k
Talent wise he's obviously better than the Matt Cassel's of the world, but we're already a 3rd of the way through the season, and in an unfamiliar system he'd be set up for failure.
Which is why I'm expecting the NFL to pressure one of their sad sack franchises into signing him now, if only to make the lawsuit go away. Throw him out there with minimal practice reps on a shitty team like Cleveland, ensuring that he has a bad game. Then they can cut him and say that they were right.
They aren't paying the vet minimum salary to that third-stringer is the thing. But yeah, Kaep would be an upgrade over whoever the fuck we just promoted off the practice squad.
It's beyond obvious that Kaep is a top 64 or whatever QB, I'm not arguing against that. Just saying it's probably not worth it for the Packers at this point.
I believe that if Rodgers goes on IR (?), his salary cap space is freed up anyways.
It wouldn't go away, but it would make it harder to prove any previous collusion against him.
It's already an uphill battle. Unless Jerry Jones was drunk enough one night to send a mass email to the 31 owners saying, "don't hire this guy", it's going to be virtually impossible.
Yeah but if I'm TT I'm thinking why waste that space now when I can roll it forward into next year. As long as we still have Rodgers, the goal is always going to be a Super Bowl. I don't think that's on the table this year with how our Defense has been playing, so it's best to just cut our losses I think.
So...what's the burden of proof he has to meet to prove collusion? Because my instinct is that the NFL doesn't have to do anything because its far more likely that most teams just decided that a mediocre QB who's going to piss off a chunk of their fanbase isn't worth it over a slightly worse than mediocre QB who their fanbase is going to ignore, and never bothered to talk to each other about it. Maybe 5 or 6 racist owners got together and agreed not to sign him, but I have a feeling that most teams just made the individual decision to not sign him.
You've listed a thing that would count as proof of collusion.
Right but the question is does Kaep need to demonstrate that the owners colluded or can he just claim that he's better than the 64th best QB in the league
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
like filing suit and losing because you didn't have any good evidence isn't going to help you at all
so i think it's pretty certain that they have at least SOMETHING they can use to prove collusion
Arch,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_goGR39m2k
who the fuck drinks a beer with a straw
Arch,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_goGR39m2k
They tried to prove collusion on artificially holding down player salaries a few years ago and failed
I don't think the act of filing is reflective of how confident they are or arent
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
Either we eek into the playoffs and get a decent trade from him, or we crash and burn and get some better draft picks.
ain't nobody fixing an oline midseason these days. there is zero talent at the position, it was all moved into DTs. you make more money there and are more popular.
it's a real problem for the nfl.