PDA

View Full Version : The hype of Matt Flynn


Texecutioner
01-11-2012, 12:17 PM
This just might end up being the most chaotic overreaction to one game in a very very long time.

I keep hearing Flynn's name getting tossed around as this next franchise QB for all of these teams after one freaking game against the LIONS DEFENSE!

I'm not calling Flynn a bust or trying to say that he can't or won't be successful or anything once he becomes a starter somewhere, but this has gotten out of hand. The Detroit Lions have been giving up points to teams all season long on defense. They're terrible. Flynn gets tossed into a game 16 with a plethora of weapons as his disposal and folks are ga ga over this guy just off of that.

How many QB's over the years have we seen have big games or even big seasons for that matter and then turn right around and do absolutely nothing? We've seen a lot of those.

I'm pretty astonished over the thousands of prisoners of the moment that are heralding Matt Flynn as the next big thing all because of one huge game against a team that is arguably the worst defense in the league in the last game of the season in which neither team even had to win. People seem to completely forget about what happens to a lot of QB's once teams get film on them and are able to study their habits and their intangibles where teams are able to find ways to stop them.

The Matt Flynn hype has gone crazy.


Matt Schaub wasn't ever even this hyped from what I remember when we picked him up. He had some hype as a back up that could be a good starter, but Schaub had two or three seasons where he came in games and played well. Flynn has had "one game" against the Lions. Lol!

The1ApplePie
01-11-2012, 12:41 PM
Can't hate on a guy for getting a Kevin Kolb payday

Dutchrudder
01-11-2012, 12:46 PM
I dunno about the 'hype' as I haven't really seen his name mentioned much at all, but I do think a QB needy team could give him a decent incentive laden deal next year. He certainly showed more poise and capability in that one game against Detroit than Kevin Kolb ever has in his career, and the Cardinals gave him a five-year $63 million extension.

As I said in the other thread, I think Flynn would be a great signing for the Jags, as they are rebuilding and would be wise to spend their high pick on a LT for the future to protect whoever they get for QB. Next year they could wind up drafting Barkley or Jones, so it's no imperative that they get Flynn, just an option.

infantrycak
01-11-2012, 01:03 PM
I keep hearing Flynn's name getting tossed around as this next franchise QB for all of these teams after one freaking game against the LIONS DEFENSE!

The Matt Flynn hype has gone crazy.

Agreed with your overall point but it is more than just one game. He did pretty well in spot duty last season as well. But he is a huge risk. Playing in spot time for what might be back to back SB teams isn't the same as trying to lead a rebuilding team.

Matt Schaub wasn't ever even this hyped from what I remember when we picked him up.

Wouldn't know how to judge the hype-o-meter but reports were more than one team offered the Falcons 1st and additional picks the off-season before we got him. As much as people moaned about two firsts, the Texans got lucky Atlanta was wanting to ship Schaub out of town to quell the QB controversy which was developing.

As I said in the other thread, I think Flynn would be a great signing for the Jags, as they are rebuilding and would be wise to spend their high pick on a LT for the future to protect whoever they get for QB. Next year they could wind up drafting Barkley or Jones, so it's no imperative that they get Flynn, just an option.

I think the Mularkey signing eliminates the Jags as that looks like a move to hire someone to develop Gabbert.

Texecutioner
01-11-2012, 01:18 PM
I dunno about the 'hype' as I haven't really seen his name mentioned much at all, but I do think a QB needy team could give him a decent incentive laden deal next year. He certainly showed more poise and capability in that one game against Detroit than Kevin Kolb ever has in his career, and the Cardinals gave him a five-year $63 million extension.

As I said in the other thread, I think Flynn would be a great signing for the Jags, as they are rebuilding and would be wise to spend their high pick on a LT for the future to protect whoever they get for QB. Next year they could wind up drafting Barkley or Jones, so it's no imperative that they get Flynn, just an option.

Kolb played in quite a few games in the middle of the season against teams that were trying to make their season still. Flynn has started one game against arguably the worst defense in the league and I've been hearing his name non stop as a guy that will develop interest from all of these teams. Kolb had shown in several games that he could move the ball up and down the field even though he had some poor showings here and there.

For all people know Flynn could have played another game and not played all that great.

I'm not saying that Flynn might not be the next best thing, but one great game against the Lions damn sure doesn't suggest that.

Goldensilence
01-11-2012, 01:26 PM
Agreed with your overall point but it is more than just one game. He did pretty well in spot duty last season as well. But he is a huge risk. Playing in spot time for what might be back to back SB teams isn't the same as trying to lead a rebuilding team.



Wouldn't know how to judge the hype-o-meter but reports were more than one team offered the Falcons 1st and additional picks the off-season before we got him. As much as people moaned about two firsts, the Texans got lucky Atlanta was wanting to ship Schaub out of town to quell the QB controversy which was developing.

Hate to nitpick, but we switched firsts and gave up 2 seconds for Schaub. I think the hype is pretty similar if you ask me, I remember a lot of people asking Gary and Rick to pull the trigger on a big move and they did.


I think the Mularkey signing eliminates the Jags as that looks like a move to hire someone to develop Gabbert.

Yeah, I think the Jags will be hard pressed to pull the plug on Gabbert so soon. Really, I thought it was a dumb move to cut Garrard and throw Gabbert out right away. As measureables goes he scored well in the combine and such, but I never got the impression he was NFL ready from the start. Bad for him, good for the rest of the division.

infantrycak
01-11-2012, 01:51 PM
Hate to nitpick, but we switched firsts and gave up 2 seconds for Schaub.

Good catch although none of the three players involved is even with their original team and we still got to pass on Willis.

:mariopalm:

Yeah, I think the Jags will be hard pressed to pull the plug on Gabbert so soon. Really, I thought it was a dumb move to cut Garrard and throw Gabbert out right away.

I can't see them giving up this quickly either. I'll assume the Jags knew something was wrong with Garrard otherwise they were plain stupid.

NitroGSXR
01-11-2012, 01:59 PM
If the Texans were thinking about trading Schaub or Yates, I would have to believe that their trade values plummeted after Flynn's superb game. The QB markets look like they may be plentiful over the next couple years. I hope this means that we would be able to keep them both. Especially Schaub. I am a fan.

Goldensilence
01-11-2012, 02:58 PM
Good catch although none of the three players involved is even with their original team and we still got to pass on Willis.

:mariopalm:

Thanks for the brutal reminder. I have a friend who is a San Fran fan and reminds me every chance he gets he's so grateful we passed up on him. I'm honestly debating one swift quick in the groin in exchange for never mentioning it again.

I can't see them giving up this quickly either. I'll assume the Jags knew something was wrong with Garrard otherwise they were plain stupid.

Maybe something was wrong with Garrard. I don't recall him catching on elsewhere. Either way it seems to me like he would've made a much better placeholder for a year than any other option they fielded this year to give Gabbert time.


If the Texans were thinking about trading Schaub or Yates, I would have to believe that their trade values plummeted after Flynn's superb game. The QB markets look like they may be plentiful over the next couple years. I hope this means that we would be able to keep them both. Especially Schaub. I am a fan.

Umm why the the Sam Hell would they trade either? If I remember right Schaub has one year left on the 3 year option the Texans signed on. He will recover just fine from surgery.

TJ Yates signed a 4 year rookie contract. He has showed some nice potential but, I'm not sold on him as a full-time starter over Matt Schaub.

Hell, even Matt Leinart is under contract til 2013.

NitroGSXR
01-11-2012, 03:07 PM
Umm why the the Sam Hell would they trade either? If I remember right Schaub has one year left on the 3 year option the Texans signed on. He will recover just fine from surgery.

TJ Yates signed a 4 year rookie contract. He has showed some nice potential but, I'm not sold on him as a full-time starter over Matt Schaub.

Hell, even Matt Leinart is under contract til 2013.

This is probably why but also getting value for the dollar. Schaub's contract vs us resigning Foster, Williams or Joe Schlub. I'm not saying they would consider a trade... just if they were... It is ultimately a business isn't it?

steelbtexan
01-11-2012, 03:42 PM
If you would be happy with a more mobile Matt Schaub then Flynn's your guy.

He's a NC game winner, who I beilieve is from Tyler. The stage isn't to big for Flynn.

If RG3 doesn't fall to the Browns at #4. I could see the Browns switching places with the Packers in the 2nd and giving the Packers a 2012 4th + a 2013 3rd.

Dutchrudder
01-11-2012, 04:01 PM
If you would be happy with a more mobile Matt Schaub then Flynn's your guy.

He's a NC game winner, who I beilieve is from Tyler. The stage isn't to big for Flynn.

If RG3 doesn't fall to the Browns at #4. I could see the Browns switching places with the Packers in the 2nd and giving the Packers a 2012 4th + a 2013 3rd.

I don't think that could happen. Flynn is an unrestricted free agent this year, so the Packers could only trade him if he signs a deal with them or they franchise him. Somehow I don't think they will take a $15 million dollar gamble on franchising him to trade him. The Browns, or any team for that matter, will wait for him to hit free agency and the Packers will get nothing for him.

infantrycak
01-11-2012, 04:11 PM
Maybe something was wrong with Garrard.

He had spine surgery shortly after being released. It's weird. No injury settlement was reported but for most if not all the season he was in rehab from the surgery.

gary
01-11-2012, 04:15 PM
Being that Garrard did not play at all this season then I think the Jags knew something ahead of time.

thunderkyss
01-11-2012, 04:35 PM
Yeah, I think the Jags will be hard pressed to pull the plug on Gabbert so soon. Really, I thought it was a dumb move to cut Garrard and throw Gabbert out right away. As measureables goes he scored well in the combine and such, but I never got the impression he was NFL ready from the start. Bad for him, good for the rest of the division.

I'm sure they knew something was wrong with Garrard. But the plan was for McCown to carry the torch while MJD carried the load. I'm sure they were just as surprised about their defensive turnaround as we were, you'd think that would have led to more wins.

Looking back on it, If I told you the Jags were going to have the leagues leading rusher & a top 5 defense, wouldn't you think they'd have more than 5 wins?

gary
01-11-2012, 04:47 PM
I'm sure they knew something was wrong with Garrard. But the plan was for McCown to carry the torch while MJD carried the load. I'm sure they were just as surprised about their defensive turnaround as we were, you'd think that would have led to more wins.

Looking back on it, If I told you the Jags were going to have the leagues leading rusher & a top 5 defense, wouldn't you think they'd have more than 5 wins?So much for defense winning championships.:mariopalm:

Goldensilence
01-12-2012, 01:22 PM
I'm sure they knew something was wrong with Garrard. But the plan was for McCown to carry the torch while MJD carried the load. I'm sure they were just as surprised about their defensive turnaround as we were, you'd think that would have led to more wins.

Looking back on it, If I told you the Jags were going to have the leagues leading rusher & a top 5 defense, wouldn't you think they'd have more than 5 wins?

Yeah I would've thought at least hovering around .500.

Of course throwing a rookie QB into the mix was a terrible idea.

Texecutioner
01-12-2012, 01:53 PM
I'm sure they knew something was wrong with Garrard. But the plan was for McCown to carry the torch while MJD carried the load. I'm sure they were just as surprised about their defensive turnaround as we were, you'd think that would have led to more wins.

Looking back on it, If I told you the Jags were going to have the leagues leading rusher & a top 5 defense, wouldn't you think they'd have more than 5 wins?So much for defense winning championships.:mariopalm:

They really didn't have a top 5 defense though. NFL rankings for top defensive and offensive units are a joke. They just measure a bunch of meaningless stats that don't mean anything really with yards being one of the biggest indicators. PPG given up is what is the truest indicators of how effective their defense was. That's what matters.

thunderkyss
01-12-2012, 01:56 PM
They really didn't have a top 5 defense though. NFL rankings for top defensive and offensive units are a joke. They just measure a bunch of meaningless stats that don't mean anything really with yards being one of the biggest indicators. PPG given up is what is the truest indicators of how effective their defense was. That's what matters.

They're 11th (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&season=2011&seasonType=REG&role=OPP&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=1&d-447263-p=1&conference=ALL&defensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&d-447263-s=TOTAL_POINTS_GAME_AVG) in ppg allowed.

They couldn't win games, because they couldn't score points.

steelbtexan
01-12-2012, 04:15 PM
I don't think that could happen. Flynn is an unrestricted free agent this year, so the Packers could only trade him if he signs a deal with them or they franchise him. Somehow I don't think they will take a $15 million dollar gamble on franchising him to trade him. The Browns, or any team for that matter, will wait for him to hit free agency and the Packers will get nothing for him.

Before FA the Packers will agree to a trade with say the Browns. Then the Browns will negotiate a deal with Flynn ($$$$) Then the trade between the between the Browns and Packers will be consumated.

This is what the Pats and Chiefs did in the Matt Cassell trade.

BTW, are you going to watch the game with us at Bubbas? PM me and let me know.

Texecutioner
01-12-2012, 04:19 PM
Before FA the Packers will agree to a trade with say the Browns. Then the Browns will negotiate a deal with Flynn ($$$$) Then the trade between the between the Browns and Packers will be consumated.

This is what the Pats and Chiefs did in the Matt Cassell trade.

BTW, are you going to watch the game with us at Bubbas? PM me and let me know.

How in the world do we know if Matt Flynn is better than Colt McCoy? Why would the Browns make a costly trade for Flynn based off of one game when Colt showed a lot of promise early on. The Browns have absolutely nothing to work with as far as skill players are concerned. Flynn looked great in a good system with guys like Finley, Jennings, Nelson, and company playing. That's a huge difference right there. Put Flynn on the Browns and let him play the Ravens and the Steelers twice a year and you'll notice a huge difference.

gary
01-12-2012, 04:43 PM
Before FA the Packers will agree to a trade with say the Browns. Then the Browns will negotiate a deal with Flynn ($$$$) Then the trade between the between the Browns and Packers will be consumated.

This is what the Pats and Chiefs did in the Matt Cassell trade.

BTW, are you going to watch the game with us at Bubbas? PM me and let me know.Who is all going? Mind if I pop in?

Dutchrudder
01-12-2012, 05:22 PM
Before FA the Packers will agree to a trade with say the Browns. Then the Browns will negotiate a deal with Flynn ($$$$) Then the trade between the between the Browns and Packers will be consumated.

This is what the Pats and Chiefs did in the Matt Cassell trade.

The Pats franchise tagged Cassel weeks before trading him.

On January 4, 2009, ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported that the Patriots would franchise Cassel.[31] The Patriots made it official on February 5, 2009, the first day of the 2009 franchise period,[32] and Cassel agreed to the tender two days later.[33]
[edit] Kansas City Chiefs
[edit] 2009 season
Cassel (#7) scrambles away from pressure during a game against the Browns in December

On February 28, 2009, the Patriots traded both Cassel and OLB Mike Vrabel to the Kansas City Chiefs for the No. 34 overall selection in the 2009 NFL Draft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel

The big difference is that Cassel's body of work was 15 games of starting, versus Flynn's which is 1 and change. There were plenty of GMs who took notice of Cassel throughout the season and there was real demand. I don't think that's the case with Flynn right now, he's a nice pickup in free agency but not a guy you give up multiple picks for. I don't think the Packers will franchise him because it's too risky to get stuck holding a 15+ million dollar hot potato with hopes of getting a 2nd round pick.

BTW, are you going to watch the game with us at Bubbas? PM me and let me know.

Dunno yet, my friends want to go to the Tavern on Milam for steaks and the game.