Cory's Corner: Don't Take QB2 For Granted
The Packers are rolling the dice at backup quarterback as we enter the 2026 season.
Since 2018, nearly half of the quarterbacks who started Week 1 did not make it through the entire season as the unquestioned starter.
That’s not an anomaly. That’s the modern NFL with 17 regular season games and soon to be 18 games.
And yet, for a league that understands quarterback fragility better than ever, the Packers continue to treat the backup quarterback position like an afterthought.
This offseason has only reinforced that contradiction.
Green Bay quietly explored the idea of adding a veteran like Kirk Cousins — not to challenge Jordan Love, but to insure him. That alone tells you everything: the Packers know the risk. They’ve seen it firsthand. Love has missed four games due to injury over the past two seasons. Not devastating, but enough to swing a playoff race.
And still, there’s no clear plan.
Instead, the Packers appear content to wait until after the draft, carefully navigating compensatory pick formulas and marginal cap savings. It’s a calculated approach — one that might make sense on paper — but it ignores the most obvious lesson the league has been teaching for years.
Quarterbacks don’t make it through seasons anymore.
“Backup quarterbacks took almost 2,500 more snaps last year,” said Giants general manager in 2024.
What makes this decision even harder to justify is who they let walk.
Malik Willis, now with the Miami Dolphins on a three-year deal, wasn’t just a placeholder. In his time in Green Bay, he proved to be steady, adaptable, and capable of keeping the offense functional under pressure. In a franchise that has rarely needed to rely on backups, Willis built a case as arguably one of the most reliable No. 2 quarterbacks the Packers have ever had. When you say Packers backup quarterback, the first names you should think of are Doug Pederson, Matt Flynn and Willis, who turned around his career after throwing for 972 yards, six touchdowns and no picks in two seasons in Green Bay.
He didn’t need to be great. He just needed to give them a chance.
And he did.
That’s what makes the current approach feel less like strategy and more like a gamble.
Across the league, teams are increasingly treating QB2 as a luxury — something to address late, cheaply or not at all. It’s a mindset rooted in optimism: our starter will stay healthy, our system will hold, our season won’t hinge on a contingency.
But history says otherwise.
Every year, playoff races are shaped by injuries under center. Every year, teams that survive are the ones that planned for it. The difference between a capable backup and a replacement-level one isn’t subtle — it’s the difference between staying afloat and sinking.
The Packers should know this better than most.
They’ve built a roster that suggests contention. A young quarterback in Love. A coaching staff in its competitive window. A front office threading the needle between sustainability and urgency by doing what this organization never does by trading a pair of first round picks for an elite pass rusher.
And yet, the most fragile link in that chain remains unresolved.
Waiting until after the draft might preserve a future pick. It might save a few million dollars. It might even land a serviceable option.
But it doesn’t change the reality the NFL has been shouting for nearly a decade: your starting quarterback probably won’t play every game.
The question isn’t if you’ll need a backup.
It’s whether you’ll be ready when you do.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
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
__________________________
Comments (28)
Guam
April 04, 2026 at 07:56 am
This author's premise isn't a bad one, but connecting it to the Packers is more than a little shaky. Yes, modern quarterbacks often don't play all 17 games in a season. Injuries and an increased league awareness of the dangers playing while injured (particularly with concussions) have all but eliminated the ironman QBs like Favre. However to claim the Packers aren't doing enough about this is absurd.
The Packers have had arguably the best backup QB in the league the last two years in Malik Willis. Unfortunately they couldn't keep him because Miami wanted him as a starter and were willing to pay low end starter money ($22.5MM AAV) which no one can afford for a backup. The Packers kicked the tires on Cousins but couldn't sign him because Oakland paid him to be a one-year starter (effectively a one year, $20MM contract) while they break-in purported draftee Mendoza.
Now the Packers backup QB is Desmond Ridder, a former third round draft choice and starting QB for the Atlanta Falcons. Is Ridder the right guy to be the Packer backup QB? Did anyone think Malik Willis was the right guy when the Packers traded for him? Willis had far fewer qualifications than Ridder to be the backup QB in Green Bay and yet that worked out pretty well. I have often been critical of Matt LaFleur, but his work with quarterbacks is undeniable. If Lafleur is okay with Ridder, so am I.
The Packers have a plan and while it remains to be seen how good Ridder will be, I will trust LaFleur and the Packer FO on this one.
dobber
April 04, 2026 at 08:49 am
I agree in that Cory-bot has an initial idea that is a reasonable starting point, but seems to meander and lose its focus. It's a stir-the-pot, "uh, oh!" article and as usual, there's no "here's a possible solution" to the issue. Deadline met.
A quick look at last year's numbers showed that half the league's starting QBs started every game or 16 (and in two of those 16 cases, they sat the QB because game 17 was meaningless). In some cases where the starter missed time or didn't play a full season, iffy starting QBs were benched FOR their backups due to ineffectiveness and not due to injury. That would've been an important part to include here, too, because the quality of the starter is an important piece.
Agree on Ridder: he's inexpensive and has played and won games in the NFL. The biggest knock on him appears to be that since he left Atlanta, he hasn't stuck anywhere. My guess is that some of that is his choice, too, as he looks for a chance to play. He's about what you'd expect, profile-wise, in a backup.
The Packers fell into Malik Willis...maybe we can argue it's great pro scouting but the Packers experience with Willis raises unrealistic expectations in fans. Your better backups are going to gravitate to situations where they can compete to start. Expecting your backup QB is going to be starter quality--especially when your starter is pretty good--is likley to leave you disappointed...unless you find a faller in the draft--which just doesn't happen much for QBS, or mine a diamond in the draft.
Guam
April 04, 2026 at 09:52 am
I agree that Willis raises unrealistic expectations. Diamonds in the rough are great, but they are also few and far between. I give the Packer FO props for finding Willis and LaFleur for coaching him up. I don't expect that to happen again any time soon.
I do hope LaFluer can buff some of the rough edges off Ridder and get him to be more turnover averse. Ridder has lots of good tools and could be a good one, but he needs to be more protective of the football - both fumbles and interceptions. If he can minimize his turnovers, the Packers should have a decent backup.
LambeauPlain
April 04, 2026 at 10:01 am
Cory's penchant is to pick a topic to poke around to try to create "another" urgent need and then offer scant solutions to meet it. Sizzle, no steak.
Cory: "What makes this decision even harder to justify is who they let walk."
What decision? Not retaining Willis on a $20 M + deal to be QB2? I don't even understand the context to this question.
So what is the solution? Demand a QB be drafted in the 2nd or 3rd round? Bring Rodgers back? How does/can Ridder fit as QB2? No discussion about how his or even McCord's abilities to succeed as QB2.
I had a policy when sales reps would call me and complain about an issue. I would ask questions, listen, then ask "Tell me what you think we should do?" I had a few who would reply "I don't know." That was frustrating. I would tell them to think about the problem some more to give me a place to start...or do we really have an problem that needs solving?
Guam
April 04, 2026 at 10:24 am
Yeah, Cory loves to point out "issues" but rarely has a solution. I think every person who has ever been in management is familiar with employees who complain but never have any idea how to fix the issue. These employees think their answer is to drop the problem on your desk because you should have all the solutions. And people wonder why management gets to be cynical SOBs over the years........
marpag1
April 05, 2026 at 06:24 am
"It seems to meander and lose its focus"
Focus is not something that this particular author-bot, who is the Swiss Army knife of lame cliches, lame like Micah Parsons who blew out his knee like a birthday candle, and that’s why former Packers DT Bob Kuberski, whose birthday is today, April 5, really needs to …. um…. really needs to…. well, anyhow, I think you get my point.
Every time I think these articles can’t possibly get any dumber….
PeteK
April 04, 2026 at 09:04 am
I might be in the minority, but I like Ridder as a backup: experienced, young, has mobility, good size, and low price tag. Yes, has a propensity for turnovers, but positives outweigh the negatives.
dobber
April 04, 2026 at 09:16 am
I'd be fine with Ridder as the backup, too, but he doesn't seem to have great pocket feel. As I recall, his high number of fumbles is from strip sacks and how he carries the ball. Add those fumbles on top of some of his decision making and TOs become a real issue. Those things, you'd think, would be correctable, and that you could belay some of those issues by getting the ball out fast.
Coldworld
April 04, 2026 at 09:59 am
It just seems contrived to be having this conversation this often. For the vast majority of the time since Favre established himself we’ve had pretty weak backups. There have been rare exceptions, but the two most recent ones were unheralded on arrival (Matt Flynn and Willis).
In Ridder (and arguably McCord) we have, on paper, one of the stronger QB pools we have had in the off season roster in the last 2 decades right now outside of a couple of years each with Willis and Flynn . I suppose anything to do with back up QB gets clicks?
LambeauPlain
April 04, 2026 at 10:11 am
I am looking forward to Ridders camp, PeteK. THE issue for the offense will be the strength of the OL. Ridder needs this even more than Love...who has good escapability and can perform on the move...but Jordan needs a solid OL to maintain his climb to his ceiling.
I can only imagine the solutions a good to great OL would bring to Love (and Ridder) and the entire offense's success after a few seasons of sputtering late in games.
golfpacker61
April 04, 2026 at 10:53 am
There is alot to like about Ridder including the price tag. The truth is most of his turnovers came when he was thrown to the wolves in Atlanta his 2nd year before he was ready for NFL game speed. Positives for him from that year were almost 3000 yards and 64% completion %.
His running ability has not been used enough and is a real wildcard for him because he has 4.5 speed. There is the most potential in GBs QB room since Rodgers/Love years ago.
McCord is a real talent also, not that far below Mendoza and he would have given him a run for the Heisman if McCord's senior season would have been last year.
All 3 last college season stats
Mendoza- 3535 yards 41 TDs 6 Ints 72%
Ridder-3334 Yards 30 TDs 8 Ints 65%
McCord- 4779 Yards 34 TDs 12 Ints 66%
GregC
April 04, 2026 at 02:17 pm
Let's all calm down about Ridder, he was out of the league for most of last season. Nobody even wanted him on their practice squad. The Vikings had him for awhile but wouldn't let him play in spite of having the worst QB situation in the league. Maybe Matt LaFleur can save him, but I don't know what the problem is. He's in a much worse place than Malik Willis was when the Packers got him.
Coldworld
April 04, 2026 at 04:36 pm
That’s not strictly true. The Vikings signed him on September 16, 2025 following an injury to J. J. McCarthy. He had been released by the Bengals when they preferred to go with Joe Flacco as QB2, as a veteran mentor figure for Burrow (of course he ended up starting due to injury). By that point Ridder was on the Vikings roster.
Ridder was waived by the Vikings once their health improved, on October 4, but brought back again on their PS on November 27, after McCarthy entered the concussion protocol for a week. By that part their season was over. We then picked him up in December.
The Vikings paid veteran Wentz but really wanted to see what they had in not only McCarthy but Brosmer (who, for a game or two, looked promising to some). Wentz was largely unimpressive and Brosmer lost ground fast after an initial flash, it is true, but that filled the gaps in McCarthy’s availability. That’s why Ridder was insurance, as it turned out for most of the season without getting a start.
WD
April 04, 2026 at 10:01 am
I did not know the Packers had Desmond Ritter, That is great news! He will be a perfect backup QB as he can run and be a dual threat.
His 40 time was in the 4.5 range.
GreenandBold
April 04, 2026 at 08:44 am
Maybe back up QB is the new Packers after thought starting this season replacing special teams . Maybe not there’s still plenty of time to work something out . You don’t replace a Malik Willis easily . When I think of back up Packers QBs I think of Zeke Bratkowski . Now he was a back up !
golfpacker61
April 04, 2026 at 08:58 am
"The Packers have had arguably the best backup QB in the league the last two years in Malik Willis. Unfortunately they couldn't keep him because Miami wanted him as a starter and were willing to pay low end starter money ($22.5MM AAV) which no one can afford for a backup." That whole post is a great response Guam.
The bottom line is money, and there isn't enough to go around. Maybe the NFL should designate a special salary cap provision that provides teams with an additional $15 million just for backup QBs, the league can surely afford it. The thing is even if that money was available, great backup QBs aren't hanging on a tree waiting to be picked. QBs aren't the only players that miss time due to injuries, the gameday rosters needs to be increased to 60 players, Again the NFL can afford it.
I wish I had copied the article I read 2 days ago that ranked all NFL teams and their QB room & backups. This will blow up Cory's article but Green Bay's QB room was ranked as the 7th best out of 32 teams. 2 years ago we traded for a QB labeled as a bust and turned him into a 3rd round comp pick. Ridder has also been labeled a bust in some people's minds but he has actually had as much NFL success as a ton of backup QBs combined. He has actually won double digit NFL games. Can he be better, yes, and he is with the best team of his career and will get better, proven QB coaching and development. I am happy Ridder is a Packer too.
Many posters and draft "Gurus" think GB should spend a late pick on a 'Developmental" QB. Kyle McCord was a way above average college QB and if he was in this draft he would be the 2nd best QB in it. He played major college football @ Syracuse and threw for just under 5000 yards his last year with 34 TDs and 12 Ints, 66% completion. We won't find anything close to him in the draft after the 2nd round. He is a perfect QB to hang onto and coach up to be a Packer. Spend the picks on players who have a chance to play in the NFL.
dobber
April 04, 2026 at 09:12 am
"Kyle McCord was a way above average college QB and if he was in this draft he would be the 2nd best QB in it. "
I agree in that McCord would be the equivalent of that developmental, late-round QB you stash on your PS. He's got a college track record, and is the same age or younger (23) than several QBs that will be drafted at the end of the month. He can spin it, and ran up huge yardage numbers and a ridiculous number of attempts, and he really didn't turn the ball over (12 INTs relative to 600 attempts isn't awful). Hard to say what he can do yet.
As for this draft, my "sentimental" favorite that I'd like to see in camp who could be had as a UDFA due to his height is Diego Pavia. He's a fighter.
Coldworld
April 04, 2026 at 10:09 am
McCord had a surprisingly bad camp last summer for a QB who was thought of as a very good processor and technician. He seemed to struggle picking up the new offense in fact. Perhaps he just needs time to grasp things before it all comes together. He could yet have considerable upside if he does.
My one reservation with him as a developmental 3rd QB here is fit in a LaFleur offense. He’s not mobile. He lives or dies in the pocket to a degree that reminds me of Peyton manning. I’m not sure that’s a great fit for a LaFleur offense (even one with a much better OL). Then again, I think that, to really fire, LaFleur’s O design needs a mobile QB. Therein lie other reservations about our wider direction, of course.
golfpacker61
April 04, 2026 at 11:02 am
"As for this draft, my "sentimental" favorite that I'd like to see in camp who could be had as a UDFA due to his height is Diego Pavia. He's a fighter."
He is also a major tool dobber. He has real talent and almost led his Vandy team to a comeback win against my Hawkeyes. That's saying something because Iowa always has a Top 15 defense. We pretty much shut down Mendoza and almost beat Indiana this year. I think Pavia is a good teammate but acted like a total bad loser when he came in 2nd in the Heisman voting. You are right, he is pretty small too.
dobber
April 04, 2026 at 11:29 am
Yeah, Pavia didn't put his best foot forward there.
"That's saying something because Iowa always has a Top 15 defense."
...and an offense almost as bad as Wisconsin's...
golfpacker61
April 04, 2026 at 12:18 pm
The last 5-8 years the only reasons Iowa has won the games they have is because of great defense and special teams. It's uncanny how we have turned 4-star QBs into terrible players. Small wonder we have had so many QBs & WRs transfer out because of Ferentz being so stubborn. We have good QBs and WRs on the team now, and had a very productive transfer portal and the coaches are optimistic, they will have to prove it by example.
When Wisconsin got Luke Fickell I was worried the Badgers could get even better. They had a hell of a run of great coaches with Alvarez(who you poached from Iowa), Bielema(another Hawkeye), and Paul Chryst. The Fickell experiment has been very surprising, I would have never guessed he would struggle after his run at Cincinnati.
Guam
April 04, 2026 at 10:06 am
The salary cap insures questionable backup QBs. You can't have a $20MM backup QB without blowing several other holes in the rest of your roster. The backup QB issue is all about money. Your idea of a special category for backup QBs is interesting. Maybe the next CBA would consider that.
Evaluating QBs is still a major crapshoot even with today's "measure everything" scouting. The failure rate of first round QBs is remarkably high. I do like GB's philosophy of drafting and slowly developing QBs. I think too many young QBs are thrown into the fire too fast and lose their confidence. I note with interest the Raiders plan on drafting Mendoza but signed Cousins to be their presumptive starter while they develop Mendoza. They are clearly taking a page from the Packers plan with Rodgers and Love.
lou
April 04, 2026 at 10:03 am
Watching Tune play just one game reinforces the value of an NFL Quarterback. Best of luck to Wilis, he was outstanding even in his first game action with just a couple weeks prep, you could see how shell shocked the Bears were when he came into the game, no way they were prepared for a mobile QB with underestimated arm strength and accuracy.
Coldworld
April 04, 2026 at 10:40 am
To be fair to Tune, LaFleur hung him out to dry. There was neither an offensive game plan generally nor a plan to use him individually to exploit his mobility (he’s got a RAS over 9 with decent speed and excellent agility and explosion).
In effect he was thrown into a preseason offense with mostly backups who hadn’t practiced together that week, similar to, but perhaps less favorable than late preseason games. This was against a rival who had prepared a game plan in regular season mode and wanted to win. I don’t know of a scenario more likely to destroy a potential career. Just for the record, I say that never having been a fan of Tune.
It was even crueler than Love’s first start when he had no practice beforehand and was just told to play the Rodgers game plan when Rodgers was finally officially ruled out (despite that being known to be an almost certainty). It certainly not like Willis’ first start. Heaven only knows how Willis would have fared had he been treated as Tune was.
golfpacker61
April 04, 2026 at 11:13 am
Tune was a solid college QB Cold. Unfortunately for Tune and most young QBs, they only get about 2 chances to show they belong and then they are sent packing. We have 2 younger backups with very solid potential.
In response to this weak article by Cory, I read another Bull$hit article today saying since we missed out on Cousins, we should definitely call the Broncos and offer a mid-round pick for Jarret Stidham. I know they have a quota of articles to come up with, but very few are the experts they think they are. Their recommendations and rumors are usually 90% wrong.
This is Stidham's illustrious career and why they say GB should trade for him.
21 games played
59% completion rate
8 TDs
8 Ints
1422 yards
12 fumbles-4 lost
His disastrous showing in the AFC Championship reinforces why we should not be interested. We are way ahead with our 2 backups.
PackerBackerAZ
April 04, 2026 at 12:52 pm
And yet, the most fragile link in that chain remains unresolved.
The only sentence that makes any sense in the whole article. Because it doesn't point to lack of a viable nose tackle and starting caliber cornerbacks doesn't mean it's not true. It just points out the inability of the author to accurately assess the most fragile link in the players chain.
A backup quarterback that can come in and provide competent play is really hard to have. A team either has to get lucky in the draft or pick a player that has failed elsewhere and get him to be successful with a new system and coaching staff. No coach will ever really know what the backup can do until the first time comes for him to replace the starter. They might find a Willis or they might find a Hundley.
WD
April 05, 2026 at 10:07 am
If the Packers go to a 3-4 defense what will the starting defense look like assuming Parsons will be healthy?
Since'75
April 05, 2026 at 11:34 am
When Malik Willis was called to duty,,,,
He gave the Packers offense a pulse, sometimes even more than Love would give on occasion.
That is why he got the contract he did with Miami.
The Packers didn't let Malik go.
They had no choice in the matter for obvious reasons.
Some here are good with Ridder as back up.
Love has been fairly healthy, missing only 4 starts in 3 seasons.
So i don't think a lot about it.
But i will say this about Ridder.
When you are a QB in the NFL, and you have signed with 6 teams already at the age of 26. right or wrong, that is a pretty big flag to me.