Culpepper in Green Bay Tuesday

Post #1 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 6:59 pm

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/app ... 23104/1058

mnstinks · Post #2 » by **mnstinks** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:35 pm

rollin'

aaprigs311 · Post #3 » by **aaprigs311** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:33 pm

eh, i guess i'd give him a one year contract with an incentive if he doesn't do that rolling thing anymore. there really isn't much of a market for him so he'd probably be relatively cheap.

Post #4 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:50 pm

The MJS finally reported this at 5:08. Once again Jason Wilde scoops them.

rilamann · Post #5 » by **rilamann** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:01 pm

I say sign him,he's a vetran player who could fill in and be decent for a few games if Rodgers gets hurt.

Im not a big fan of drafting a back up,the last thing i'd want to see is the Packers sitting at 8-3 and fighting for the division or homefield and Rodgers goes down and we have to throw some rookie 4th round pick into the fire.

Gotta have a vet back up.

aaprigs311 · Post #6 » by **aaprigs311** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:17 pm

i think it's a good idea. what if tt's best player available approach netted the pack a qb in the first round. what kind of message would that send to rodgers? wouldn't be good for his psyche. by signing culpepper we're getting a solid back up who will probably only be a short term fix. i like this idea.

El Duderino · Post #7 » by **El Duderino** » Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:00 am

aaprigs311 wrote:i think it's a good idea. what if tt's best player available approach netted the pack a qb in the first round. what kind of message would that send to rodgers? wouldn't be good for his psyche.

I have no problem with the Packers drafting a QB on the first day

Rodgers has yet to prove himself as a regular starter or show he can stay healthy. The job has been handed to Rodgers and regardless if we draft a QB on the first day, he'll keep the job so long as he performs.

Quarterback is the most important position for a NFL team, hard to win without at least a decent one. Drafting a second QB pretty high is just attempting to be sure the Packers have a long term solution in case Rodgers does pan out. If though he plays well and stays healthy, Rodgers will have no reason to fear losing his job and the team has a good young backup for multiple years.

notoriousTJ11 · Post #8 » by **notoriousTJ11** » Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:52 am

From what I heard Culpepper really blew TT away far from his expectations. Management has a decent amount of concern about Rodgers staying healthy over the course of an entire season and would like to have a good with starting experience on the team. Daunte did at one point mention how playing against and being in the same division as the vikings has a "definite appeal".

Fort Minor · Post #9 » by **Fort Minor** » Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:41 am

Yuck.

So if Rodgers ends up starting all 16 games, do we get to hear DC ***** about not starting?

Neusch23 · Post #10 » by **Neusch23** » Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:52 pm

I still won't reach for a player at pick 30. If the guy they want isn't there, I would take our pick of QB's left. I personally like Brohm, and I think that it would be a good thing to have 2 young QB's on the team.

If something happens to Rodgers (he has shown to have brittle bones) then we have a future on the bench.

Or Rodgers ends up great, and we have a trade chip for a future pick, like the bolts had with Breeze.

Bucks_Revenge · Post #11 » by **Bucks_Revenge** » Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:44 pm

of all teams you think Culpepper will try to piss off the packers organization and fans....

bigrich88 · Post #12 » by **bigrich88** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:09 am

I think signing Culpepper to back up Rodgers would be better than having a unproven rookie as a backup. And if anything we can sign Culpepper and still draft a developmental Qb such as Colt Brennan to learn from Culpepper just in case A Rod doesn't quite work out as we think he will.

Kerb Hohl · Post #13 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:43 am

I kind of like the idea of Culpepper with the motivation of playing against his old team twice a year even if he doesn't start. I wanted Quinn Gray but Culpepper is a capable backup and as many on here have said would do much better than an inexperienced rookie if Rodgers were to go down.

BucksRuleAll22 · Post #14 » by **BucksRuleAll22** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:22 pm

Culpepper would be a nice back up. Culpepper use to be one of my fav QBs b4 he hurt his leg and everything went downhill from there. I think Culpepper is the best possable backup for the Packers. If Rodgers went down I would have full faith In Culpepper being able to take us into the playoffs.

Post #15 » by **MickeyDavis** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:55 pm

Agreed

crkone · Post #16 » by **crkone** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:13 pm

I would like to see Culpepper work with a good set of WRs like we have and not that garbage in Miami and Oakland. He is just as if not more injury prone than Rodgers so maybe they both can equal 1/2 of a Favre. :dontknow:

Neusch23 · Post #17 » by **Neusch23** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:38 am

I believe this is smoke screen because they are drafting Brohm at 30.

Redbeardwirc0830 · Post #18 » by **Redbeardwirc0830** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:25 am

Neusch23 wrote:I believe this is smoke screen because they are drafting Brohm at 30.

better not...flacco if anyone...but i would rather have culpepper

Post #19 » by **ReasonablySober** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:34 am

Redbeardwirc0830 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

better not...flacco if anyone...but i would rather have culpepper

Why Flacco?

Redbeardwirc0830 · Post #20 » by **Redbeardwirc0830** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:10 pm

not exactly sure like the whole deleware thing sort of southern miss -ish

i think we should get a veteran back up qb...that is not the position to stock up on inexperience