With Love entering his third season as QB1, he has the opportunity to define his trajectory as a NFL starting quarterback.

I hope he's invested wisely, putting in the work needed to refine his skills and sharpen his insights. He's displayed some moments of Favrian and Rodgersesque "Did you see that?!" in his first two seasons, along with some moments of "WTF?" to go along with them.

I'm cautiously optimistic year three will produce the improvement he and the Packers need to deliver on the promise of their potential, and validate the Packers Way of developing their QB's.

You have listed the reasons why its good. Now the flip side. We will never catch lightning in a bottle with a team that can afford to pay stars at multiple positions because we have a QB playing on a rookie deal. And even though our QBs had 3 years of practice time, we still had to watch them go through growing pains the 1st couple of years. Every coach will point out that practice and game day are at different levels. There are merits and detractions to both avenues. This would be a completely different discussion if Rodgers or Love busted. I know, I know, they didnt. But for every Rodgers and Love that sat before starting, you have a J.P. Losmam, Brady Quinn, Paxton Lynch. 1st rounders that also sat at least 2 years, but didn't come out prepared and successful. Just playing devils advocate. Because to say this is the "Blueprint" is looking only at a 2 player small sample size.

~~~
I think I remember reading this article last summer.
~~~ (sarcasm marks)

"The Packers Are Playing The Long Game With Quarterbacks"

Letz hope the Long Game is aka the Love Connection.

I love you,
Pantz " don't back baby in a corner" Burp

If the Packers have 'the blueprint' to what makes a QB successful, why do so many QBs /teams, that don't have this 'blueprint' have more SB wins/appearances than the Packers?

The Packers have a way of doing something, not a blueprint, because blueprints suggest many others follow it. It seems that most that don't have greater success, though that can be argued, as the number of those that achieve the greater success are limited from that larger pool of non-blueprint users.

Yes, this blueprint has done a good job for GB, and if success is topped by a playoff participation trophy, they certainly have a master plan blueprint in their hands.

Perhaps I'm wrong here, but wasn't this blueprint developed with Rodgers, since Favre wasn't drafted by GB, and he didn't sit for three years after trading for him. So, can you honestly call it a successful blueprint when the second QB under its design hasn't done what his predecessor has, though he can prove it more legitimate if he wins the SB this year.

Yes, GB is playing the long road with the QBs, a road that took 14 years between Favre and Rodgers (if Favre is deemed the first of the blueprint) and now another 14 years between Rodgers and Love, if the prophecy of the blueprint holds true, while other non'believers of the blueprint hoist Lombardi's, or make the SB, and GB waits 14 years for each foundation to set, and hopefully secure a Trophy of real value, based on the timeline established by the blueprint.

Let's win it this year, if to keep the blueprint alive that makes us wait 14 years each time.

"The Packers Are Playing The Long Game With Quarterbacks."

I read the headline and thought, oh man, not another article about Taysom Hill.

Let's look at this from another direction.
How many teams would jump at the chance to switch QBs with GB by Division?
NFCN-
Min, maybe, I'm not sure if they think that highly of Love.
Det, no.
Chi,no, invested in Caleb.
NFCS-
TB maybe, but Mayfield has grown on them.
Atl, no. They got Penix.
NO, yes, they have nobody.
Car, likely.
NFCE
Dal, no, too stupid.
Wash, no Daniels.
Phi, no Hurts.
NYG,likely.
NFCW
Rams,if Stafford was gone.
Sea, likely.
SF, no, Purdy.
Ari, maybe, but unlikely.
AFCE
NE, no, Maye.
Buf, no.
NYJ, absolutely.
Mia, maybe.
AFCS
Ten, likely.
Ind, likely,
Hous, no, Stroud.
Jac, possible.
AFCN
Bal, no.
Cin, no.
Cle, yes.
Pit, likely.
AFCW
KC, no.
LAC,no.
Den, no.
LV, likely.

How many of these teams would think the GB blueprint makes Love a must change, and where does that place Love on the ranking list when I see 19 teams that wouldn't, a few likely, and a couple possibles, and three absolute yes.

How is Love a top ten QB when near 2/3 of the league wouldn't, especially when you see the difference in performance of those who didn't sit and the one that has with 5 years under the belt, not to ignore the salary differences, less few. Remember, Rodgers was the top QB for years, and remained a top ten, close to his entire career.

I understand fan think, but unless Love, and the blueprint comes up SB big, don't expect this list to change for the better. It isn't a blueprint if the second one is a failure. Well, one SB doesn't make it a thriving success either.

Just trying for a conversation. It is the dead season after all.

Love's talent would shine with an authentic WR #1 and 2. And, he would shine even more with elite protection.
It's not Love, it's the GB receivers, protection and play-caller.
If Love hit the open market, I think there would be a feeding frenzy.

What I said was Love needs elite protection

It just happened to work out that way. If they didn't have Rodgers and they draft Love that early, he's starting that season, he's not sitting. You learn by doing, not by sitting there watching. With the money they demand coming into the league, they should expect to have to step in and play to some extent. Sure, hopefully they're going to develop and improve, but they'll do that by getting out there against starting caliber opponents and playing the position. Love sat there for a few years and when he got in he looked bad. He got better by playing. Hopefully he proves he was worth it this year.