Good one. I have no clue how good Matt Flynn can or will be, but as you say basing something on one game can absolutlely go horribly wrong. There's a huge difference in being "the" guy and the backup, I remember Holcomb who looked incredible going in for a game or two but when given the job showed everyone why he was a career backup. I think Kolb was Matt Flynn last year, he didn't exactly set the world on fire before his injury and was no better than John Skelton at all for AZ. There were even whispers this year Vince Young should be the Eagles starter by some (Skip Bayless!) when he went into game 1 in NY and beat the Giants...then he kept playing more games!!

Besides Rodgers, I'm not sure who else didn't play for the Packers. Take nothing away from him, he did a great job. But for the most part Flynn was still driving a Ferrarri type offense. I think a lot of times guys get contracts (other places) based off these performances and get stuck driving ang struggling with Toyota type offenses.

Starting WR (Jennings), Starting RB (Starks), two starting O-Linemen and 5 starters on D (not that that affected Flynn at all)

Obviously it was a once in a lifetime performace, but Flynn has been getting accolades from guys for several years about what he does in camp and during practices. And I still think his start aganist the Pats on the road LY was more impressive than Sunday. Stat wise, no, but that was a much tougher situation he was thrown into on the road in NE. No QB can make a talentless team a playoff team, but in the right situation..hello Jets, Hello Dallas.. I think he would be an upgrade.

I personally don't think those teams are/should be addressing the QB situation.

I think of teams like Washington, Jacksonville, Miami and dare I say Denver who could use an immediate upgrade.

As an aside..I didn't know Romo wil be 33 next season

What Flynn did Sunday, in my opinion, solidifies why Brees is MVP.

I will happily take Flynn as a Cowboys fan. He would do very well there I think.

You don't think Flynn would have done the same thing for New Orleans last Sunday?

Brees lost to Tampa Bay and St Louis ( I think)...and Rodgers...

Yeah..he finished strong, but..

Perhaps he would have but I doubt it. Brees is that offense (though his guys do make him look good with some amazing grabs) and I do not think anybody could be put in and perform the way he does. Which is what Flynn did in GB on Sunday, he put up Rodgers numbers and did it in the same fashion.

colin cowherd said the other day that he thinks romo will turn out well. i said he's running out of time! but he's a poster boy for that entire team, they're always more well-thought of than they should be. always over-hyped.

as for flynn, i'm not sure he'll turn out to be a franchise qb, but i'd love to see him in d.c. god knows beck and grossman aren't the answer.

You won't find a bigger Cowboy hater than me but I'll be the first to admit that Romo was not their problem this year. He was actually REALLY good for the final 8 games they played this season.

Their problem is on defense. Rob Ryan is all fluff, yet his unit has a horrible secondary. They created very little pressure on the QB and that was exemplified by the pitiful performances against Eli Manning.

On offense, they are victimized at times by Garrett's play calling. When DeMarco Murray was healthy they had good balance on offense. However, he has a tendency to get very pass happy and that's when Romo makes mistakes.

If they bring in someone to call plays, firm up the secondary and add a physical DE that can complement DeMarcus Ware they will be very dangerous going forward. They could also fire their GM and a big difference will be seen.

Isn't Jerry Jones the GM?

EDIT: Here's the answer..............

http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/...iving-gm-title

So much for getting rid of him.

yes, he is..and he needs to be fired!

and yeah, romo wasn't the biggest problem on the team...but he was an issue at times. i think their problems are far greater than individual players. i think their biggest issue by far is their owner. you know, like the skins!

romo may have improved the latter part of the season, but all 16 games count. he hurt them early, others hurt them late.


and speaking of needing to be fired, i can not believe norv and aj will be back for another year. and i thought being a washington fan was tough; glad i don't root for the chargers.

Brady makes mediocre receivers look much better than they are. Rodgers receivers are all good, and would be without Rodgers.

Hernandez & Gronkowski are mediocre.:rolleyes:

This was a fitting last post and you guys ruined it.

While breaking the passing yards record, Brees had 657 pass attempts, getting 8.2 YPA. That's lower than Eli Manning's 8.4 and miles away from Rodgers' 9.2. Brees threw 14 picks to Rodgers' six, and the Saints didn't even get a first-round bye.

As good as Rodgers' setup is, I'd easily prefer a dome, Sean Payton as head coach, Darren Sproles and a tight end that can catch.

Brees has 8 more turnovers than Rodgers. Brees has more yards, but far more attempts as well. Rodgers leads in passer rating and yards per attempt. Running game is much better in NO than it is in GB. Brees has only one more TD than Rodgers but played in one more game. Rodgers beat Brees. Your argument for Brees as MVP is that Matt Flynn had a career game against a terrible/overated Detroit Lions team in a meaningless game. To me there is only one award that matters and it is not who is MVP, but Rodgers should win the MVP.

Take Rodgers away and the Pack scores 40+ against the Lions. Take Brees away and the Saints look like the Colts.

That is an assumption until you'd actually see the Saints without Brees.

MVP awards are mostly dumb and both are deserving, but I'd give it to Rodgers.