Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Cory's Corner: DeShone Kizer Must Produce

By Category

Cory's Corner: DeShone Kizer Must Produce

I would not want to be DeShone Kizer.

Here's a guy that threw 42 passes last year, started no games, and finished the season with a pedestrian 40.5 passer rating. That's after he threw 22 picks and 11 toucdowns in 2017 as he went 0-15 as a starter for Cleveland.

Kizer is OK. He has a decent arm, but he still has happy feet thanks to six games in 2017 where he was sacked at least three times.

Here's my problem with Kizer: you cannot count on him to string wins together. If Aaron Rodgers misses three games to injury this season, the over/under on the number of games Kizer will win will be set at one.
Against Houston, Kizer didn't look terrible. His 14-yard touchdown pass to Darrius Shepherd was nice. He avoided the pass rush, made a throw that only Shepherd could make and gave the offense some momentum.

However, Kizer's role is precarious. He will win the No. 2 job behind one of the best passers in the game or be cut. I know that sounds crazy, but I just don't see the Packers keeping three quarterbacks on the 53-man roster.

Rememebr when Kizer was drafted in the second round from Notre Dame? "Finally, the Browns get a quarterback," said Jamey Eisenberg of CBS Sports in 2017. "And this could work out great for them if Kizer does end up better than Mitchell Trubisky, Patrick Mahomes and Deshaun Watson. Kizer might not start right away, but he should be the best quarterback on the Browns roster." Now I'm not the biggest Trubiksy fan, but Kizer is No. 4 among those guys, and it isn't even close.

"I think the next step for me is making sure I can consistently be a guy that they know exactly what they're going to get when I step out on the field," said Kizer after throwing for 102 yards on eight completions. "I've had quite a few outings in a short career so far, and within that we've seen a couple of different guys. We've seen a guy who's run a bunch, we've seen a guy who’s turned the ball over a bunch, we've seen a guy who throws a bunch of a checkdowns and has a high completion percentage in certain games."

The question is, what does Packers coach Matt LaFleur want to see from Kizer? He mentioned after the game that he liked his command of the huddle. That stuff is impressive for a rookie. This will be Kizer's third year in the league. He needs to gradute to making reads at the line of scrimmage, understanding mismatches and knowing exactly where to pinpoint his receivers.

He can work on those things in practice, but he isn't going to win the No. 2 job in practice, it has to happen in a game. And that's why Rodgers will get limited playing time in the preseason. LaFleur needs to know what Kizer can do. He already knows that he can command an offense. Can he consistently execute one?


Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

  • Like Like
  • 1 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (67) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Coldworld's picture

Hopefully neither Kizer, Boyle or anyone else not named Rodgers will have to produce.

If they do have to play, Thursday was a big step forward for Kizer over last season. His problems have been mental. Boyle has promise but still needs promise.

Compared to where we have been since Flynn, we are a lot better off. I’m sure some still recall the Justin Harrell era and the year of the three or four quarterbacks. I see the last occupant if the backup spot continues to thrive in vanilla no read pre season play.

In Boyle and Kizer we have players with an arm, with the ability to advance through progressions. Kizer is also mobile, as he showed in his throw on Shepherds TD, but mainly both stay in the pocket primarily. Both are young and both are developing. Both are better than we have had in years.

That should make us happier, but no, we seem to need to create drama, as do some of the media. Yet there is plenty to focus on in camp this year. This camp has more competition and more potential on the roster than we have in years plus new systems and approaches. Why create drama when there already are real issues of interest and in a position where we haven’t had it this good in ages?

The alternatives outside camp are not really credibly better and mostly possibly worse outside Bradford, whom we can’t and shouldn’t afford in the teams long term interest.

So hopefully both Boyle and Kizer play well enough to cement the spot or a trade. Either one won’t be a bad option for us based on play like that of Thursday.

Cutting either would represent a failure.

jannes bjornson's picture

Two QBs on the 53 makes sense. See what Gutekunst does the next week or two. Maybe he pulls the trigger on a veteran QB who ,at least has some experience moving a team. It wouldn't break my heart to see both of these guys moved.

GatorJason's picture

"Thursday was a big step forward". I did not see that. Deshone Kizer has a lot of tape from ND to Cleveland and has not shown significant growth. He's not smooth. He's mechanical, indecisive, eyeballs receivers and throws inaccurate, risky passes when he is pressured and cannot run away. Even the touchdown pass to Shepherd was overthrown and almost got him killed. I starting quality QB does not hang out his receivers like that.

The Packers have one starting QB and a two or three third string QBs competing to fill the 2nd string position. It would be a mistake to keep three QB on 53 when they can keep two and have one of the remaining two on the PS. To keep three means the Packers are keeping a player who may never see the field over another player at another position who can provide depth at a position that will see the field. Keeping both Kizer and Boyle on the 53 would be a mistake. One of them needs to step up and win the job outright and the other cut/traded. Then the Packers can draft a new QB in 2020 to develop unless they believe their PS QB shows enough promise to become a starting level QB.

Nick Perry's picture

I'm not the biggest Kizer fan, BUT in his defense, he IS learning his 3rd offense in the last 3 seasons.

So he starts and loses 15 games for a Browns team that was one of the worst in NFL history as a ROOKIE and only 20 years old. Next, he comes to GB to play for a HC who's offense was best suited for 10 years earlier. Now barely 23 he's in his 3rd NFL offense at a position that's the hardest in football to learn.

Since the Packers don't have a ton of cap space to spend on a back-up QB, and Kiser is playing for a REAL QB Guru, let us see what he can do after more than a few OTA andTC practices and one preseason game. Since MLF does have a history with Kiser and the Packers have done nothing to bring in any other QB's, perhaps MLF and Gute see something they can get out of the kid who clearly got bad advice and came out WAY to early. Lets give him some TIME in this system.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Nick I have said the same thing multiple times but probably not as eloquent as you. Thumbs up!

Nick Perry's picture

Thanks Bud, I know you have and I'm sure it was just as "eloquent"!

It's just the kid has a rocket of an arm, is BIG, mobile, AND since he's not done much the Packers could probably afford to extend him IF he begins to show progress. Sitting behind Rodgers and learning with a coach like LaFleur might just be what he needs. Considering what we gave up for him it's worth a try IMHO.

Barnacle's picture


“Considering what we gave up for him it’s worth a try IMHO.”

IMHO we got a bad deal from Cleveland and we should NOT compound it by keeping a bad player. Sunk costs should not be a factor in any business decision.

Tarynfor12's picture

" I'm not the biggest Kizer fan, BUT in his defense, he IS learning his 3rd offense in the last 3 seasons. "

I'd argue he hasn't learned any of the offenses and his play in even the ' vanilla ' versions in preseason have shown this argument to be true, thus acting as an eraser toward any defense of his being the backup QB.

If you believe he would not get 2 wins out of 4 games if needed, then you have the wrong backup QB. Boyle needs his chance since Kizer has used the many he's been given.

TheVOR's picture

"Here's my problem with Kizer: you cannot count on him to string wins together. "

String wins together? Wins Together! Wins Together? String.. Wins...? Playoffs? Playoffs? Play.. what..Playoffs, did you say Playoffs! Playoffs?

You do realize he's never won an regular season NFL football game he's played in, right? What do you mean string wins together? If it quacks like a duck, it's probably duck. Forget about the systems he's playing in. Look at the football player. He's exactly the same guy he's always been, inconsistent, and consistently "Bad"! He's never going to be a legitimate NFL QB in any role, be it starter or backup. The Packers need to launch this dude. If he had the IT factor, you'd have seen it by now. He doesn't have "IT". Need to see more Boyles playing with the 2's, it's time to see if Tim can play. We already know Kizer can't..

Coldworld's picture

Yes, the Browns would have won the Super Bowl that year if he was halfway decent. Aaron was a world beater from his first practice of year one.

No player ever improves. Upside is a myth. Cut them all. Glad we cut Adams, Jordy, Driver, J. Jones etc. because they obviously showed their ceiling when we wasted picks on them.

I don’t need to see what players can do now. I know what they did before and that’s all there is.

Sarcasm pool drained ...,

Mark Gaedtke's picture

I believe MLF is an established QB guru and I'll trust in his judgement on who can play in his system and who cannot. If what we have can't do the job maybe something will fall from the Rams or 49er's tree when they make cuts. I assure you, if MLF deems it necessary, Gutey would be all over that. For the first time in a long time, I'm not worried about the QB position.

Jonathan Spader's picture

"I believe MLF is an established QB guru"

-Based on what exactly? How has MLF shown that he can develop QBs? MM was known as a QB guru and how did Kizer/Hundley develop under him? In Cleveland Hie Jackson was known as a QB guru. The term gets thrown around A LOT and never substantiated.

Preaseason game 1 is in the books. Kizer looked better. Can't we all just be happy with that and look forward to seeing Kizer and Boyle in Preseason game 2 against the Ravens who just destroyed Jacksonville?

jeepingmakooi's picture

I'm sure they are looking at his time with Matt Ryan and his best season he ever had... His time in La and the dev of Goff and then having a QB that couldn't feel his hand and dealing with a back up and still getting some wins.

Mark Gaedtke's picture

And don't forget the Washington Redskins Rookie of the year season for Robert Griffen III under QB coach MLF. I'm not making this stuff up. He's got a history of bringing the best out his QBs. There's a reason the packers picked him over the field and it's built on merit.

Jonathan Spader's picture

The reason Murphy stated he hired MLF was that MLF nailed his interview. That MLF stood out more than the other candidates. MLF will build his merits based upon his success or failure as a HC. For now I'm optimistic but really sick of hearing about "the relationship between MLF and Rodgers". Once the regular season begins and the Packers start winning everyone will quiet down.

Handsback's picture

Boyle has the arm, same as Kizer, and makes quicker reads. At this point neither guy can win....but which guy can win games next year? That's the decision, and from what I see it's Boyle.

Big Moe's picture

I agree, Boyle looks like he belong out there, Kizer has always looked lost, or at least a speed or two slower.

jannes bjornson's picture

Start Boyle next week and see how he does with the first stringers on the field on the field. Speed of the game , reaction and leadership ability can then be evaluated.

jannes bjornson's picture

Start Boyle next week and see how he does with the first stringers on the field on the field. Speed of the game , reaction and leadership ability can then be evaluated.

jannes bjornson's picture

Start Boyle next week and see how he does with the first stringers on the field on the field. Speed of the game , reaction and leadership ability can then be evaluated.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Backup Quarterback is such a frustrating topic.

Brett Hundley looks great with the Cardinals. And, we have Kizer who we traded a quality DB for, who has never won an NFL game and probably never will because he's just not very accurate or consistent.

I like BG but I don't care for his moves around backup QB.

Old School's picture

Handley looked great in the preseason for us. Throwing 18 passes against scrubs is not the same as being the guy.

Can’t lead the team to the end zone. That’s pretty obvious to me. Boyle is going to have to show me more too before I crown him.

Like you, I’m not happy with the backup situation. By my calculations, there’s a better than 50% chance Rodgers will mss games and/or be significantly hampered by injuries this season.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Yep and that single game has playoffs implications. There's also about a 40% chance it will come against a division opponent which has even more impact on the playoffs.

Old School's picture

I never really thought about that, but you’re right. And that’s ONE game, not 3 or 5.

I don’t understand these people who are like “we’ll just give up if Rodgers is hurt”. I think it’s unfair to the rest of the team who are busting their tails to have the best possible season.

We all know that QB is the most important position, but we don’t want to spend resources on a guy that we HOPE doesn’t see the field. I don’t want to spend money on auto insurance when I HOPE I don’t have an accident but I’m damn glad I have it when it’s needed.

Coldworld's picture

He looked good here when progression wasn’t required and offense was vanilla.

Bo Hunter's picture

Boyle gets my vote. Dilly Dilly !

stockholder's picture

I Liked Gute's trade. My Browns friend laughed. He said he was not a good QB. I said I believe MM will straighten him out. And we needed a back-up. MM is gone. Watching Kizer, I wanted to make excuses. Coaching won't help. My Browns friend was right. We need to move on. He's doesn't have that something that makes a winner. It's his arm. It's just not accurate enough for me. It's like his mind and arm can't throw the same ball more then once. He may show heart. But he's going to break mine if we count on him. Kizer is a Cut.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Looking back it's hard to blame Randall for being pissed at the Packers Coaches. Obviously he handled it poorly. But 8 weeks later AR was revolting against thier disfunctional ways too.

I like a lot of BGs moves, but it was a terrible trade.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Randle had talent but was a cancer in the locker room and disruptive on sidelines. When the team Captain's went to the front office asking the team to get rid of him that is unheard of (this is what I recall reading). The team was lucky to get anything for Randall.

Glad to have Kizer and at 23 years old I'm hoping he keeps improving with an upside. He has the physical talent but like Cold says there is a disconnect so far. It appears with Kizer it is more mental than physical (aka Moore). If he doesnt keep improving cut him.

Even though I am defending Kizer I have to admit I am very curious about Boyle. Was incredibly upset he never got to play at end of last year (same with Tonyan).

I'm hoping one of these 2 QB's vastly improve so we can focus on a legitimate OT next year in round 1.

jannes bjornson's picture

Kizer exhibits poor fundamental, footwork. He is a guy that doesn't fight for the down. He's more worried about the pass rush. Gutekunst made the del and he has to move Kizer off the list if he continues to plateau. Thems the breaks.

Guam's picture

I am not a big fan of either Kizer or Boyle, but I think Kizer might be a better fit for MLF's offense. MLF runs a move the chains, west coast offense and that requires a QB that completes a high percentage of short passes. That describes neither QB, but Kizer has the pocket mobility that better suits a west coast offense. Boyle's strength is his deep ball and that is something a west coast offense doesn't use often.

Which ever QB can complete the higher percentage of short passes will likely win the QB2 job and I suspect that might be Kizer based on his experience and mobility.

Coldworld's picture

Here is the good news. Gute is not afraid to cut bait if a player doesn’t measure up at a point in his career where he thinks he should have.

If either or neither are adjudged inadequate and there is a better option available in the eyes of the Packer personnel dept, then I have no doubt Gute will move.

That said, just as with departing stars much of the discussion here is rooted in play from prior seasons, so is this one.

Kizer performed decently on Thursday. Doesn’t mean he will next Thursday, but so far 1 game one performance. All I read about is how bad he was last year or in Cleveland. What he did or didn’t do then. It reminds me strongly of the Favre fan’s treatment of Rodgers in his first years, and there were some definite issues initially.

Point being, look at what’s now not then. Small sample size so don’t prejudge, let it play out. Same for Boyle. Then you have to trust the pros to decide who is the best now, for next year, and whether that is good enough.

The let’s grab a back up in FA argument that comes up is a dead end. Do you really think any free agent out there is affordable and interested (Bradford) or any better? The rest are not better and next year we would be in the same boat or worse.

I think both Boyle and Kizer have potential. If Kizer is getting over the mental hump and Boyle is refining his touch and technique (remember the last preseason game last year he was flat out bad), I believe either would be a perfectly adequate backup. But it doesn’t matter, Gute makes the choice and he has shown that, if there is better out there, he will go after it.

Instead we seem to have had a collective flight of reason and to want to decide based on history. Preseason is there so that is unnecessary, let’s use it and learn from it.

I look forward to seeing Boyle and Kizer fight it out. I’d like to discuss how that looks in an objective fashion. Sadly, a good portion of what I read is (positive and negative) over exaggerated, false, partially true or out of date rhetoric rather than analysis of what took place in the field.

To the others among you, I enjoy your reasoned insights, favorable or not to mine, thank you for making this blog fun, interesting and sometimes educational. Ultimately none of us are gurus or even pros, we just love football and especially the Packers. Go Pack Go.

egbertsouse's picture

Kizer is Brett Hundley 2.0. They need to move on from him, sooner rather than later.

4thand1's picture

this comment is spot on

dblbogey's picture

But without the incessant gum chewing.

Harlan Huckleby's picture

I can’t see the attraction for Boyle other than he is the next warm body behind a struggling backup. At this point it’s probably Kizer or Bust at backup, and either Kizer improves consistency or backup QB remains a weak link.

Since '61's picture

Our backup QBs include one player who has not won an NFL game and another who has yet to play in an NFL game. That is just not good.

Compare our 2 backups with Webb who is the 3rd string QB for the Texans. Webb can not only play but he can win a game or 2, especially with solid defensive play to support him.

Getting back to our guys Kizer is more athletic and more mobile than Boyle. That would be a positive factor playing against an opponents starting defense. The question for Kizer is can he win a game or two playing with our starting offense and our starting defense? He still looks like the game is too fast for him. That’s a concern as he enters his 3rd NFL season.

Then there is Boyle who we have only seen play during the preseason against scrubs. He throws well but will he be able to adjust to playing at the speed of a regular season NFL first string defense? Hopefully we will never need to find out.

Conclusion: You get what you pay for and Kizer and Boyle are inexpensive options for the roster spots they take up. We are still at the point where if Rodgers goes down for any significant period of time our season is done. I’m hoping that Gute will pull the trigger if a decent backup QB gets cut during the cut downs at the end of this month. We’ll see. As for Wilkins he hands off well. Thanks, Since ‘61

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Brett Hundley's stats compare rather favorably to Joe Webb's in terms of completion %, TD to INT ratio, yds/att, passer rating, and rushing. Webb is 1-2 and Hundley is 3-6, so they have the same winning percentage. Webb looks more comfortable in the pocket, which one might expect from a 9-year veteran.

AJ McCarron signed for $3M, with $2.5M guaranteed. His stats look quite a bit better than Hundley's and Webb's, fwiw.

IDK, McCarron has only played 297 snaps in the NFL, with almost all of them (257) coming from his 2015 season. Webb hasn't played more than 40 snaps in a season since 2013.

Nevermind the above, I agree with your take on Boyle/Kizer in general. GB either has to pay probably $3M plus or hit on a mid-round draft pick to get a decent backup QB.

Since '61's picture

TGR, good post as usual. Appreciate the info on those other QBs. You probably know better than me but I think we have the cap space to sign a backup QB for $3-4 million if a decent one is released during cutdowns. Plus we may release one or two of our guys to create more space. Time will tell. Thanks, Since ‘61

Coldworld's picture

I think $3 million might be on the low side now. There are still teams desperately trying to find a starter, others a back up of any kind.

I’m not convinced that you would get a significant improvement, particularly in months one to two after signing, at least with those I see as free agents or possibly available.

More importantly, if we had to cut Daniels, I sure as hell don’t want to use a chunk of that to buy a mediocre backup QBS when we have key players to retain.

My mind keeps going back to the Deadly Doug year’s. Doug could barely throw ten yards. Never blew a game, but if that’s the height of your ambition when your starter is down, either Boyle or Kizer could do that now with the right conservative calls. But where would that get us? Nowhere.

Lare's picture

It will be interesting to see what QBs are released on the cutdown. Most teams are currently carrying 3-4 QBs now and only keep two on their final roster so there should be some available if Gutekunst decides to go that route.

jannes bjornson's picture

He would have to make a trade before the cut downs if he has a guy targeted.

Coldworld's picture

There will be plenty of QBs after cut down. That doesn’t mean any will be better than what we have. I don't see many if any likely to come free.

Moreover, sign a QB at the end of camp and one pretty much has to keep 3 to start the season while the new guy gets up to speed. Typically weeks if not month 2.

If I’m going to carry 3, that negates part of the argument, namely keeping 2, while the delay in effective readiness undermines the value of any improvement due to not having it for a period.

Old School's picture

Or spend a first round pick, like we did for Rodgers, who sat for 3 years.

Coldworld's picture

Although i’d Rather spend it on a tackle at this point, with what Gute has done to retool the roster and depth, that could be an option next year. I’m told the QB class is expected to be deep in 2020.

blacke00's picture

The question is can Kizer make the jump? His first preseason was ok. He hasn't impressed me and I'm skeptical he ever will.
For Boyle I'm more optimistic. Looks more in control. Has a better "snap" on his throws. So far he hasn't been given the same chance as Kizer.
Now let's be serious here. Kizer is Gute's guy he traded for him. Gute wants him to succeed. Boyle was a free agent. Likely scouted by the staff and was given a chance...surprise..surprise Boyle isn't bad but he's still a FA signing and will not given the the privilaged attention a high draft would be given. There's a limited number of snaps for a QB. Other positions get many more snaps at practice and in a game. It just is what it is.

I think Boyle should be the first guy off the bench for this next game and give him the chance to compete (in a game setting) as Kizer. Then we will be comparing apples to apples. Just my opinion

Coldworld's picture

I think so too, though if Rodgers plays for any period it won’t have that effect unless they keep started in for an extended period. As Rodgers is supposed to play next game (and I believe that in view of the new system he and the ones need game snaps), that opportunity may not come until game 3, if the Raiders stick to the traditional playing starters for the longest in that game.

As an aside, that’s looking like being a strange game in Winnipeg. Less than 10k tickets sold last I heard. Unless the discount heavily off the $140 min prices and up, that will be a strange atmosphere indeed.

fthisJack's picture

Thursday's game will tell us a lot about these 2 QB's. If Kizer goes against the Ravens #1 D and does well, then maybe the game is slowing down for him. The same for Boyle but he may be playing the #2 and #3's. this competition will go until the end of camp and whoever plays better in the games will come out on top IMO.

4thand1's picture

Keep 12 upright.

Bure9620's picture

I have seen no growth from Kizer, he seems to make the same mistakes. Boyle has passed Kizer imo. He has shown growth and pocket presence.

murf7777's picture

Bure...see my post below, if u watch in slowmo you will find a QB in difficult situations to start the game and make wise decisions. NO happy feet or forced action. IMO that is smart playing. He also had an impressive 3rd and especially 4th possession. He really read the D well. Will it continue is the big question

Bure9620's picture

I understand what you are saying, but I guess to my eye he is not getting through his progressions fast enough. Maybe to his second read. Just thought his development would be faster, I was in favor actually of the Randall trade. Boyle is pushing him and he looks more decisive.

murf7777's picture

You could be right, but I saw improvement from last year soo far.

ShooterMcGee's picture

Can we flip him for any kind of draft pick in 2020? Seattle gave us a 6th for Hundley.

Coldworld's picture

That is the hope. Neither of these should leave this year unless as the result of a trade ideally.

Brandip's picture

There are teams in the NFL struggling to find a starting QB. I think that has something to do with "supply and demand" at this position. For the most part, we see a QB coming out of college getting drafted if he has any talent. For example, Josh Rosen. He was drafted by the Cardinals. He played one year, and was promptly traded so the Cardinals could draft yet another quarterback. The common theme here? Draft capital. I think the NFL has a higher demand for the QB position than supply. I can see the Packers obtaining a solid back up by drafting one. Until that happens, Deshone Kizer is the backup. The Packers addressed Defense this year in a deep class. In my humble opinion, the Packers are primed to draft offensive weapons next year. Aaron Rodger is locked up through 2020. Is it time to draft a QB knowing how he will fit into the new offense? It seems to me, not many teams have more than one starting caliber QB. In summary, I am of the opinion that the best way to obtain a backup is through the draft. I too, am tired of abysmal backup QB play. Ask yourself: What is more important, QB1 or a QB2? Thanks guys. GO PACK GO!

murf7777's picture

Kizer showed improvement from last year. 1st series he starts at the 5 due to flag on kick return. Hits Kumerow for a 3rd and long first down. On third down again runs for 20+ yards for an apparNt 1st down but called back for OL holding. Success due to keeping field position from changing after a good punt by Scott. Good play...3rd and 15 doesn’t force it and get 12 yards for better field position.

2nd series...starts on the 8. 3 runs first down...nice holes by action to perfect throw to Kumerow. After short run a RB screen well covered Kizer throws into play. 3rd and 4 throws a quick slant well covered good throw st. Brown drops.

My take...Kizer made very good decisions deep in their zone...threw the ball with certainty and accuracy. I believe he is learning and shows potential for a strong back up.

Coldworld's picture

Your impression matches mine. I was pleasantly surprised. But we don’t need to go on that one game, we have 3 more in which to see if it was a blip for Kizer or those who saw progress from Boyle that I did not were right, or we both are right or both wrong.

I actually don’t care who wins. I liked Boyle’s upside and potential last year. I do care that we get the best for the team at the end of preseason.

The rush to prejudge, to want to jump into a decision based on history or rumor or conjecture or hope or expectations or a mix of all of them is as baffling as it is frustrating when we all know that there are 3 more games designed specifically for honing roster choices.

Lphill's picture

Packers need to find a veteran backup with NFL experience and let Kizer and Boyle battle for 3 rd spot.

Coldworld's picture

How can you keep asking for that without suggesting who that might be? I’d like to upgrade any position on the team in principle. Doesn’t mean the player exists, is available and affordable, so it doesn’t get us anywhere.

Who, what’s the cost and what reason for thinking they’d be better and likely effect on the season?

Bure9620's picture

And whom would that be?

Lphill's picture

My point is nether Kizer or Boyle are the answer , there has to be someone out there better than them . I have nobody in particular in mind but no way can Kizer or Boyle be productive.

jannes bjornson's picture

The Personnel Dept has a few guys circled on their board, no doubt. It depends on the cost of the trade. The Pack has depth at certain positions and teams will start dealing by next weekend. Why settle for incompetence if these guys cannot step up to the plate. It's about winning games, not running a Home for Wayward quarterbacks.

Coldworld's picture

Obviously, I disagree with your contention on then currently both being useless (the only basis for an import other than injury). In my view one or both will be better than last year and both are considerably better on Thursday’s showing to any one who has backed up Rodgers since Flynn and likely before Flynn too. That said, for the sake of argument:

They plan for injury as well so obviously the personnel dept will have targets.

Your argument assumes improvement, however. Unless you have a credibly available target, it amounts to ‘not these but I don’t know who.’ To say but someone else might is no refinement. I don’t want to get worse thank you. No repeat of the Harrel, Tolzein, and beyond year.

If there is a candidate, we can discuss cost, merits and availability. Without that there is no basis for assuming there is an available better option and thus the option is an illusion.

murf7777's picture

They both ended with over 110 passer rating. What do they need to do to change your mind? I have my own skepticism so my thought is two games in a row. Also, would like to see them do that with starters on the field.

Coldworld's picture

To use an MM cliche, keep stacking success over the entire preseason.

A Pickled Packer's picture

For me, one has the look of a confident QB who is not afraid to stay in the pocket and follow his progressions, the other looks like a scrambling fool the minute he feels the heat. Give Boyle more reps against better talent and have our new and improved OL protect him and see what he can do. That's the only way we'll know if he's truly better than Kizer.

Kizer is Guteys guy but to improve the team you have to let the chips fall where they may and move on. We shouldn't spend money we don't have or trade capitol on a QB has been. Now that Oren Burks is out we need to find his replacement focus on that and let our current QB's fight it out.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"