Don Banks agrees with the haters

[spacecrime]

Why is anyone surprised that a guy who didn't even play in college sucks

Are you referring to Antonio Gates or Stephen Neal? Or Willie Gault?

 

[primetime]

Are you referring to Antonio Gates or Stephen Neal? Or Willie Gault?

None of which are even remotely the same situation.

Unlike those guys, Cassel played in college. He just didn't play.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Bill talked a lot today in his PC about how they make decisions here based on a body of work that includes daily and sometimes multiple daily film review of performances in every practice - as well as what most of the geniuses here think they see on 4 pre season games if they even got to watch them...



I don't think Cassel is one of the best backup prospects in the league, but I'm not convinced he isn't the best backup prospect on our roster. And I'm also not convinced based on his track record with veterans that BB is remotely comfortable bringing in somebody else's cutdown to take a flyer at that position at the 11th hour. There are lots of guys who were mentioned here over the course of the preseason who were readily available had he wanted to even kick their tires. A few remain available on the eve of the season, and as far as I know he hasn't even sniffed 'em... Maybe that just means BB's a moron, but I really doubt that.

 

[patchick]

Re "the haters":

There are plenty of us who loved the potential we saw from Cassel early on, and have become progressively concerned as he hasn't shown signs of realizing it. That's not carrying a hater grudge, it's just what we see.

We understand that the cast around Cassel has done him no favors. We understand that the o-line has been porous. We understand that the Patriots don't gameplan in exhibition games. We understand. We just don't accept that those circumstances make it impossible or inappropriate to look at the QB's performance.

At some point, you need more than excuses why looking bad isn't his fault; you need positive evidence that he's growing into an NFL quarterback, or that he's capable of throwing outside when the defense takes away the middle. I'm 100% open to persuasion if somebody can give me positives to look at, rather than just excuses for negatives.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re "the haters":

There are plenty of us who loved the potential we saw from Cassel early on, and have become progressively concerned as he hasn't shown signs of realizing it. That's not carrying a hater grudge, it's just what we see.

We understand that the cast around Cassel has done him no favors. We understand that the o-line has been porous. We understand that the Patriots don't gameplan in exhibition games. We understand. We just don't accept that those circumstances make it impossible or inappropriate to look at the QB's performance.

At some point, you need more than excuses why looking bad isn't his fault; you need positive evidence that he's growing into an NFL quarterback, or that he's capable of throwing outside when the defense takes away the middle. I'm 100% open to persuasion if somebody can give me positives to look at, rather than just excuses for negatives.

Well, I guess the bottom line then is if Bill decides to keep him you may have to assume that the evidence exists on tape you as a fan or the media simply don't have access to that is being reviewed by personnel who actually know what each players performance and responsibility was intended to have been and how or if that impacted the overall performance. And if he doesn't that will be a pretty clear indication it did not.

 

[fgssand]

Re "the haters":

There are plenty of us who loved the potential we saw from Cassel early on, and have become progressively concerned as he hasn't shown signs of realizing it. That's not carrying a hater grudge, it's just what we see.

We understand that the cast around Cassel has done him no favors. We understand that the o-line has been porous. We understand that the Patriots don't gameplan in exhibition games. We understand. We just don't accept that those circumstances make it impossible or inappropriate to look at the QB's performance.

At some point, you need more than excuses why looking bad isn't his fault; you need positive evidence that he's growing into an NFL quarterback, or that he's capable of throwing outside when the defense takes away the middle. I'm 100% open to persuasion if somebody can give me positives to look at, rather than just excuses for negatives.

OK, you presented a better case than I did for what we think we have seen. You presented facts not excuses.

Given everything Cassell has faced and looking at his numbers, of course their is room for improvement, there always is, but it is nowhere near as bad as it seems, not by a longshot.

I do not agree with your conclusion, even Tom Brady would have had serious problems shining within this set of circumstances.

 

[spacecrime]

None of which are even remotely the same situation.

The quoted comment was:

Why is anyone surprised that a guy who didn't even play in college sucks

This could be applied to Neal, Gates, Gault, etc.

Reading with comprehension can be a wonderful thing. You should consider trying it.

Start with Post #21.

 

[spacecrime]

Well, I guess the bottom line then is if Bill decides to keep him you may have to assume that the evidence exists on tape you as a fan or the media simply don't have access to that is being reviewed by personnel who actually know what each players performance and responsibility was intended to have been and how or if that impacted the overall performance. And if he doesn't that will be a pretty clear indication it did not.

Solid logic!

 

[patchick]

Well, I guess the bottom line then is if Bill decides to keep him you may have to assume that the evidence exists on tape you as a fan or the media simply don't have access to that is being reviewed by personnel who actually know what each players performance and responsibility was intended to have been and how or if that impacted the overall performance. And if he doesn't that will be a pretty clear indication it did not.

Can't argue with that! But just waiting until final cuts makes for a pretty quiet board.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

OK, you presented a better case than I did for what we think we have seen. You presented facts not excuses.

Given everything Cassell has faced and looking at his numbers, of course their is room for improvement, there always is, but it is nowhere near as bad as it seems, not by a longshot.

I do not agree with your conclusion, even Tom Brady would have had serious problems shining within this set of circumstances.

Just like he did in the Superbowl... Though as I recall there were some here after that debaucle who wanted to point fingers at the QB, the OC, Ellis Hobbs... anywhere but at the Metaphors. And that was just with Neal out.

For any team it all starts (or ends) in the trenches at the LOS. When they are all healthy and playing reasonably well, Brady makes this OL look better than it truly is. When it falls apart or struggles due to injuries, even Brady has a hard time compensating - and he's a first ballot HOF'er...

I really don't know what some people expect... perhaps beyond perfection from every player who sets foot on the field here. That's not realistic, let alone for any guy who gets limited regular season snaps over the course of 2-3 career because he's being asked to "play" behind a guy who almost never sits.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Can we please retire the term "haters" or at least use it correctly? It implies irrationality or bias. The worst you can say about people who "hate" Cassell stinks is that they have a bias against crappy quarterbacks.

 

[primetime]

The quoted comment was:

This could be applied to Neal, Gates, Gault, etc.

Reading with comprehension can be a wonderful thing. You should consider trying it.

Start with Post #21.

I had no problem understanding what the quoted comment was saying. Cassel was on a team in college. He did not play. Neal, Gates, Gault, etc. were not on a football team in college, so they couldn't have played. Neal was an All-American wrestler, Gates a talented basketball player, and Gault a world-class sprinter. Cassel was a football player who did not do any playing. The comparisons are silly, especially since none of those players are quarterbacks.

 

[JSn]

Either Cassel gets cut or he doesn't. I think that's the bottom line. Sounds obvious, but it really isn't. Cassel sticks, we carry three (not sure how #3 and #4 shake out, Gut's might be building momentum), Cassel gets cut, we carry three. I just don't see it being any other scenario.

I think we forget the intricacies of even completing a pass. It's not playing catch with a Football, after all. Only the coaches can account for all factors (five-six blockers, however many receivers running correct routes against varying levels of coverage, QB movement and adjustment, quality of the snap, looking off, weather, and a million other conditions) and I suspect when they make decisions, they're doing a LOT more than counting completions.

I have a hunch Cassel is done, but I haven't got a hope in Helsinki of being able to account for the variables that need to be known to make a proper evaluation. So the only shocking moves that could happen on cut down are the cutting of Brady or O'Connell, really. And that ain't gonna happen.

The RB and WR battles are MUCH more interesting discussions imo, or for that matter, which of the youngblood chameleons makes the roster.

 

[Rob0729]

There is no way these three things happen, so I must mock you yet again, sir. There is a chance for one of those three to occur. It is extremely unlikely that ANY two of them will happen. As for all three as you state, Mock Mock.

Mock mock.

Mock mock. IRing Gute is not only NOT counterproductive, it is irrelevant to his status next year. Whether IRed or not, he would still have to beat out O'Connell for #2 next year, and it would NOT have to occur by preseason. It could happen DURING preseason, even as late as Game 3 of the preseason. (Not that I am saying it will happen - it won't. O'Connell will win #2 next year is my guess).

And anyway, even if he didn't beat out O'Connell there is no reason to say his "experiment" is over. He could beat out whoever the Pats draft next year for #3 spot.

NOTE: These are gentle mocks, and should the Pats cut Cassel, add a vet QB and carry four QBs, I will self-mock.

When I say realistic chance that they will carry 4 QBs, I don't mean it is likely to happen. I just don't think it is out of the realm of possibility.

I still think O'Connell gets IRed if they keep three. He still needs to work on a lot of the fundamentals (his biggest knock coming out of college) and would be the one least hindered in his development by getting IRed and he can work on that working out away from the team. Keeping Gutierrez away from the team is counterproductive because he seems to be much farther along in his fundamentals and can benefit from snaps on the practice squad.

Gutierrez needs to develop and show if he is ever going to be capable of a #2 next year. They may keep him around as a #3 next year if O'Connell outshines him if they cannot find another guy to develop at #3, but he will most definitely be cut the following year and the Pats would draft someone else to develop the following year. The Pats don't wait long for back up QBs to develop. If they don't work out, they move onto the next rookie or younger player. The only way I can see an exception to this is if Gutierrez makes a lot of strides, but O'Connell makes a huge jump in his progress.

 

[SoCal Pmen]

Honestly, who cares. Its the most meaningless argument fabricated by ESPN over the last few weeks. Brady is healthy and starting. If he doesn't play, then we can truly evaluate a back up's performance based on the real game situation and plays being drawn up by the coaching staff.

 

[captain stone]

There are lots of guys who were mentioned here over the course of the preseason who were readily available had he wanted to even kick their tires. A few remain available on the eve of the season, and as far as I know he hasn't even sniffed 'em... Maybe that just means BB's a moron, but I really doubt that.

Bill's obviously not a moron, but he's also not infallible. He, and Scott, have made errors in personnel evaluation in the past, and will likely make more of the same in the future. Cassel, sadly, is looking like an error of the present.

 

[spacecrime]

When I say realistic chance that they will carry 4 QBs, I don't mean it is likely to happen. I just don't think it is out of the realm of possibility.

Then we are in agreement. Unlikely to happen but not totally impossible.

I retract all mocks.

 

[spacecrime]

Either Cassel gets cut or he doesn't.

Someone else with whom I am in agreement.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I don't understand why it's even an issue. Forget for a minute that Cassell has played horribly. Gutz's arm strength and pocket presence are both way better than Cassell. You have the best long threat in the game in Moss and the best slot receiver in Welker. Throwing to those guys requires a strong arm which Cassell does not have.

 

[spacecrime]

I had no problem understanding what the quoted comment was saying. Cassel was on a team in college. He did not play. Neal, Gates, Gault, etc. were not on a football team in college, so they couldn't have played. Neal was an All-American wrestler, Gates a talented basketball player, and Gault a world-class sprinter. Cassel was a football player who did not do any playing. The comparisons are silly, especially since none of those players are quarterbacks.

They weren't comparisons. Consult a dictionary or ask an adult. While you're at it, learn the difference between "did not play" and "could not play." HINT: "Did not play," which was the quote, has nothing to do with opportunity or abilty or anything other that did or did not.

I will try recapping one more time. Read slowly:

There was a comment made that players who didn't play in college will suck in the NFL.

That is all that was said by whateverhisnameis. It isn't true. There are a number of players who didn't play in college that don't (or didn't) suck in the NFL. I listed several.

Sorry you can't follow that simple one-two exchange, but there you go.

It was an offhand quote and an offhand reply. No need to get any more anal about it than you already are. Let it go.