There seem to be some people around the NFL trying to talk themselves out of the idea that Green Bay Packers QB Matt Flynn is going to be a good starter. Here's one of the latest example via Pro Football Weekly:
If teams think Matt Flynn is Aaron Rodgers, they are going to be in for a rude awakening. (Flynn) can't push the ball down the field the same way.
It's true: Flynn isn't as accurate down field as Rodgers. However, that's a pretty tough comparison since Rodgers's deep accuracy is phenomenal. If Flynn is average, then he'll still be a good starter. And he will need a good supporting cast, just like every other quarterback in the NFL.
I can understand the reluctance. Most free agent quarterback signings, and most trades for a young starting quarterback, don't work out well. The Cardinals traded for Kevin Kolb last year, and his first season wasn't a success. The Seahawks have traded for a young starting quarterback, and signed a young free agent quarterback, over the last two years, and they should be in the market again next month after both previous moves failed.
But it's unusual when a team has two young quarterbacks who are both good enough to start. Sometimes a team thinks they have two starters, but usually one (or both) turn out to be a mirage. The last time I can recall it legitimately happening was when the Chargers had Philip Rivers and Drew Brees. While Flynn wasn't originally a high draft choice, his situation reminds me more of the Chargers after the 2005 season than any other recent example. After his game against the Lions, Flynn's "realistic floor is Pro Bowler."