JSn

OK, this doesn't fit the other threads as I'm not leaning one way or the other.

What I'm proposing here hinges entirely on there being genuine uncertainty about Brady's health. I'm only wondering about this based on that hypothetical. I'm absolutely in the Brady stays camp if he's good to go.

On to the scenario.

----------------------

Franchise Cassel, let him sign it.
Build through the draft.
Extend important pieces where possible, and maybe grab a couple of JAG FA's for competition. The assumption here is that The Pats are in good shape to do some nice FA deals in the uncapped year, unless the draft proves solid and last year's pick up's show improvement.

This allows a proper evaluation of the QB's and proper time to decide on a trade opportunity and maybe even which QB to trade (based on inside knowledge). Whichever one was traded would result in cap relief and further ability to negotiate with our own FA's.

----------------------

I'm taking the heart out of the equation and just looking at sensible options. The Patriots have to consider their spending power in an uncapped year (not that they have to go hog-wild, but can they if needs-be). They also need to decide which QB best represents the future interests of the franchise based on skill, durability, longevity, and what can be gained from trading.

In that perspective, it's really just a value break-down.

So I'm wondering, if Brady is at all uncertain, do you franchise Cassel and keep him on the roster, deferring trade musings in spite of teams ripe for the picking who need a QB? Is that more important than getting picks and putting Tom out there if he's not quite ready?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

dhamz

I see that as possible.

If Brady isn't ready to go, I'd be surprised with any situation except Matt Cassel as the starting QB for the Patriots on opening day 2009 playing under the 1 year franchise tender.

Sicilian

All kind of depends on the actual cap numbers which we don't know. I feel like, barring further major injuries, they could probably compete just as well if not better than this year without any big moves. It doesn't give us the BEST chance to win, but trading Cassel and not having Brady healthy would certainly send us the other way.

What happens to the cap number on Cassel if he's traded at the deadline? Like, keep him for the first three or four weeks, then when Brady is ready deal him. Are we still on the hook for all of his $14m franchise number?

ctpatsfan77

Since the franchise tender is a guaranteed salary, the Patriots would be on the hook for 1/17 of the franchise tender for each week he's on the roster. Once he's traded, the remainder of the salary would come off the cap.

The other factor that's missing from JSn's assessment is Kevin O'Connell. Physically, he's a Cassel or maybe even a Cassel+, but where is he in terms of football IQ?

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Synovia

capwise, I think so. No one is going to have $14M open. He's gotta be traded before the season starts, or hes staying.

If Brady isn't ready to go, and Cassel is the starter at the beginning of the season, its going to be his job to lose.

Tunescribe

I say: get the picks for Cassel while we can. Between Brady, O'Connell and possibly a journeyman veteran game-manager type, things still have a good chance of shaking down suitably at QB without Cassel, even if Tom is not 100 percent in August. I really do believe that O'Connell could be a good one.

Synovia

Yeah, and physically, Kyle Boller is better than all of them. The physical is so small of a percentage of what makes a QB successful. The mental is much more important, and much harder to judge. Cassel looks to have it, whereas despite the fact that O'Connell has looked decent, its more than likely he doesnt (just because most guys drafted at the position dont)

JSn

Yeah, there just isn't much to go on, and Cassel might be a good measuring rod for the value of keeping a rookie on the bench for a few years under a great QB. To my knowledge that was kind of status quo in earlier times in the NFL.

There is something to be said for Kevin being #2 all along, despite being a rookie. Maybe Bill will drink some crazy stuff and deal BOTH Cassel and Brady and start Kevin.

Man, I'd have to drink some crazy stuff too, to cope with news like that. lol

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

BradyManny

I don't think we can afford to keep Cassel on the roster.

There's a larger point that no one has really brought up b/c we were all so thankful for Cassel's great play during the season - and that's how big a drop off there would be between Cassel and O'Connell. It's all about value.

While Cassel's play was admirable, the drop off from the preceding record setting season was otherwise unprecedented. A loss of 12 points per game, 5 more losses, 29 less TDs, 3 more INTs, 1200 less passing yards, QB rating drop of 28, 5% drop in completion percentage, 13% more of the yardage coming from YAC.

What I'm saying is that Cassel's value is perhaps a little inflated right now. There's no doubt he's shown he has strong decision making, strong accuracy and will make a good starting QB somewhere in the league. But given the cast of weapons this offense has, is the drop off between Cassel and Kevin O'Connel worth 14 million dollars?

Tag Cassel, trade him, get the picks, deal with the 2009 QB situation without even considering him. The guy earned the right to start in the league anyway, so its win win if we deal him.

JSn

Yeah, if said to you "meet the greatest QB of all time"...

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.