clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Position Analysis: Quarterbacks

Ok, so this is an easy one. Here's what I wrote about QB Aaron Rodgers last week:

But if 2008 was just a typical season that we should expect from him in the future; 4000 yards, 28 TDs and 13 INTs for the next decade, I'll gladly take it. QB is the most important player on any team and he's clearly a good one that they can build around for the future.

Some web sites have been making a story out of who should be the backup QB. I noticed Kevin Seifert wrote about it on Tuesday at his NFC North blog. It's not something I've weighed in on because we'll have to wait and see how they both play during the preseason. But here's what I know so far.

Both backup QBs looked bad as rookies. I don't think the Packers would have had any chance to win if either of them had to start last season. It's all about how they play in the 2009 and 2010 preseasons.


QB Matt Flynn. He was the No. 2 QB for all of 2008, so he has the slight edge. The only reason he won the backup job was late in the last preseason game, he led the offense on a TD drive, and he didn't look awful. That was the highlight for the two rookie QBs. He looks like a decent Gus Frerotte/Sage Rosenfels type backup QB; it's clear he should always be considered only as a backup, but he could win a game or two if you are forced to start him.

QB Brian Brohm. He's still the more highly regarded QB with the higher ceiling. During the running back analysis, I mentioned that Wynn and Lumpkin were prized college recruits who never lived up to the expectations. Brohm was the prized college recruit that was a huge college success. He can't be written off after one bad preseason, although his NFL learning curve is going to be steeper than I initially hoped.