We don't have to be in the room to know what happened. What happened was they decided to go with Zach until they basically buckled under external pressure. Sometimes a duck is a duck.
saleh said "we thought worse case scenerio was zach would have to start a couple games, we didn't expect to lose rodgers in the 1st week for the season" and once again, all backup QBs suck, thats why there are backups. there isn't starter quality Qbs sitting on the bench somewhere and even if there was, no team would give them up. there was like 4 old washed up options to sign nobody wanted. we signed 1 of them. they all suck. whats the difference. All this "he should have done more" but yet nobody can say what more is or what he did actually do. you just want to be angry and irrational so be angry and irrational if it makes you feel better. i'm sure you think you'd do better too
My friend, the simple answer is that they invested a lot of time money and resources showing that they felt he was NOT the best option.
funny point. who remembers last year in the NFC championship game when the niners had to put an injured QB back in who couldn't throw the ball and then just had to run out the clock and give the game up. they didn't catch much shit for that though. why was nobody on their GM for not having a 3rd guy who can throw the ball, even if it was a WR or RB or somehting. most teams have an "alternate kicker" in case kickers get hurt in game that can at least make an XP why was their best option giving up?
the best option was rodgers. they went and got him. after he got hurt zach was the best option. the whole offense is inept, the reality is the focus on zach alone is a very lazy take from an angry fanbase. hackett has done nothing to adjust the game to make life easy for him knowing his limitations. the o-line has been so beat up we have 0 run game to help take pressure off him and create positive yards. lazard has been a huge disappointment and the only reliable WR we have is GW and even he had a couple of bad games. the team has taken turns negating most of the very few good plays we've had with dumb penalties. no QB outside the top caliber ones would be playing well in this situation.
So two years, an off-season where they did everything they can to replace a guy in Wilson, versus a rookie who had shown absolutely zero concerns at all who suffered a freak injury - and you want to compare the situations? That's embarrassing. I will now not respond to any further posts on this subject. Enjoy your day my man. Until the next debate.
Whatever dude, they said all they needed to say about Wilson in the off-season, and then ignored that and went with him anyway. Like betting all your money on 2-5 off suit and not jumping in on a rebuy.
Saleh also said Zach was supposed to sit and learn this season lmao - it's semantics whether you put it in quotations or not. ZW barely is a backup QB is the point. There are many to fault for this including Zach himself, it is what it is. A competent backup QB(With the offensive line injuries) could have won last week's game and the Raider game. Backup QBs suck, but there are plenty that can win games when you have a "Championship defense." Look around the NFL The team didn't want to "threaten" Zach by bringing in a competent backup. Playoffs were still a reality when Rodgers went down but we decided to punt the season.
i'm saying they didn't have a backup plan for the injuries. that simple. fans hold their team to unrealistic standards that are against the norm of other teams in the NFL. you can't have a roster that accounts for any little thing that happens. it's simply not possible.
they replaced him as the starter. he started 2 years and wasn't good enough which is fair for a rookie. doesn't mean they don't consider him a competent backup.
yes that was the plan. for wilson to get to learn behind rodgers and worse case scenario maybe start a game or 2. they didn't expect to need him to start weeks 2-18. when was the last time a top QB lost his season 4 snaps into game 1?
OK, I lied, one more response: Josh Johnson was the back up, he also got hurt. Are you saying that teams should have an infinite supply of quarterbacks on the roster to account for injuries?
Exactly, and then left him in as the starter when they could have gone and found someone else. And decided not to. Mic drop, out.
there was nobody to get better. IDK why that point is so hard for people to understand. why do you think great QBs fall off trees? in a perfect world every team would have 3 mahomes on their roster but it's not reality. there isn't enough good QBs for every team to have 1
Yes, QBs don't get hurt 4 snaps into the season-we're on the same page there. That isn't the point haha Our Front Office and Coaching staff have had enough time to evaluate ZW and were confident that he could be a competent backup QB-that is the problem.
couldn't be more incorrect there were many players available on Sept 12th, via free agency, practice squad or trade. Certainly a lot more than 4
