A thought on the Patriots' QB "plans"

2005: Pats draft Cassel. Sign Flutie to mentor him.
2006: Cassel starts season as QB2. Pats sign Testaverde late in season as QB3 because, well, he's available, and he could help mentor Cassel, too.
2007: Cassel is QB2, and UDFA Gutierrez is QB3
2008: Cassel enters last year of his rookie contract. Pats draft O'Connell. Cassel ends up starter, O'Connell his backup, and Gutierrez sticks an extra year as QB3.
2009 (what should have been): O'Connell becomes QB2, and sticks around.
2009 (what actually happened): O'Connell regressed, gets cut; UDFA Hoyer impresses and wins QB2.
2010: Hoyer is QB2, there is no QB3.
2011: Hoyer enters last year of his contract. Pats draft Mallett. Hoyer sticks as QB2, Mallett is QB3.
2012: Hoyer is released, as they don't want to pay him $2M to be QB2/QB3. Mallett is QB2, there is no QB3.
2013: Mallett is QB2, there is no QB3.
2014: Mallett enters last year of his contract. Pats draft Garoppolo.

The pattern here seems to suggest two things.
(1) As long as Mallett justifies his salary, he'll be a Patriot. But if someone offers a high enough pick and Garoppolo continues to impress, Belichick might be comfortable enough to make the trade. [Note that his salary for 2014 is only $777K, so the Patriots will save <$300K if they release/trade him.]
(2) If Garoppolo continues to impress, the Patriots are not likely to spend a high pick on a QB until 2017.

I have no problem with the Patriots keeping 3QB's this season. I can see the pattern here and I agree with your assessment. Garoppolo may or may not be the heir apparent, but right now he seems to be playing like his hair is on fire and picking up the system pretty quickly. Mallet will stick around as the 2QB because he IS familiar with the system and can probably play well enough to NOT lose the game if he is forced to go in. Heck, he might even surprise us all and play as well or better than Matt Cassel did.

Garappolo does need at least a year in the system although as I said he seems to be a quick study. But book learning isn't the same as actually having to perform. It's one thing to memorize your lines for a play, and quite another to deliver them in a believable fashion when you are actually out in front of an audience.

I'm looking forward to seeing how it all plays out.

I don't think salary cap concerns will play much role in the decision to carry 2 or 3 QBs. I think it will be based entirely on the evaluation of Garappolo and roster spots relative to other positions.

hwc said:

I don't think salary cap concerns will play much role in the decision to carry 2 or 3 QBs. I think it will be based entirely on the evaluation of Garappolo and roster spots relative to other positions.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. My point is that there isn't a major cost savings to take into account with Mallett the way there was with Hoyer. If Garoppolo so outplays Mallett that in a (God forbid) 2008 redux they would start Garoppolo over Mallett, then there's no point in keeping Mallett. But if there's any reasonable chance that they would put Mallett in first, then they will keep him.

I see no reason to change from the original plan at this point, which I believe was to carry 3 QBs for the 2014 season.

While JAG has impressed for a rookie, I think he's still a long way off from getting reg season reps should Brady go down for a few games. Mallett has a much better knowledge of the system, and would still be the logical choice in my opinion.

Like many other roster moves, we'll have to see what happens--but I'd still be putting my money on the decision to keep Mallett for 2014.

I see no reason to change from the original plan at this point, which I believe was to carry 3 QBs for the 2014 season.

Click to expand...

What if it comes down to Mallet or Butler? Mallet or Tymes? Mallett or Velano?

Belichick is going to be faced with cutting good somewhere on the roster.

hwc said:

What if it comes down to Mallet or Butler? Mallet or Tymes? Mallett or Velano?

Belichick is going to be faced with cutting good somewhere on the roster.

Click to expand...

First off, I definitely hear what you're saying, and I agree. There will be tough decisions to be made.

I would separate every decision, however. As we know, a guy like Tyms can make it initially, and put that choice off until week 5 due to the suspension. Butler should benefit from Browner's suspension as well, and even then--Butler should have no problem making it as our replacement to Marquise Cole, a ST only player who can add as depth in the CB role.

I think Joe Vellano is a tough choice, and may come down to the injury situations of Siligia and C.Jones. Even then, Vellano may have earned himself a spot again.

I think that JAG has looked good at QB, probably better than we'd have thought. That doesn't necessarily mean that our long term backup Mallett is suddenly expendable, however. I think in a real game setting JAG would be behind Mallett for sure.

hwc said:

What if it comes down to Mallet or Butler? Mallet or Tymes? Mallett or Velano?

Belichick is going to be faced with cutting good somewhere on the roster.

Click to expand...

There might be close to 10 spots like this and even then, QB is by fare the most importent. If Mallett is needed then he stays, BB would rather kick a 4th RB or 6th LB etc.

There are two player team constraints that come into play. First in the salary cap, and the second is the roster numbers. Within those two constraints BB has to come up with a roster. Now this time, I don't believe Mallett's salary is an issue, so it leads us to the first major quesion in this discussion...

1. Does BB mind having just two QB's on the roster. He has done this in the past, including last year, so I would have to say the answer is yes. He gets to keep an extra positional player, which is important if possible. Remember, the backup QB's never see the field, unless there is an injury.
2. If he doesn't mind having two QB's on the roster, and you know one will be Brady, and one will be JimmyG, then the next question is why would he keep Mallett on the team?
3. My guess is he only keeps Mallett if he is significanly better than JG. If he is the same or not quite so good, he is gone.

So if Mallett really is playing better than JG, he will probably be kept for the year. If he isn't, there in no reason to keep him. That isn't even factoring in whether or not another team is willing to give something to the Pats for Mallett.

And the over hype of Jimmy Garapolo CONTINNNNNUUUUUUEEEES. . Don't forget that we are seeing him when teams aren't breaking down his tendencies and game planning for him and the Pats offense. I like what I've seen so far from Garapolo, but if you saw him the first couple of weeks of TC, you'd better understand that this is a progression. He has a very long way to go.

BTW- Compared to Cassell's preseason in 2008, Mallett is light years ahead even with that shaky first game. You could count the number of first downs Cassell's offense produced on one hand for the entire 4 game preseason, let alone any TD's.

As I have stated all along, I believe that New England WILL keep 3 QB's this season. Mallet stays because he knows ALL of the playbook. He can, as he showed last night, be a journeyman QB and not lose a season for us if worse came to worse.

Garoppolo will stay to be given a year to learn the playbook, and get some reps in during the week, maybe just one or two, so he stays focused. He'll be able to watch and learn how the NFL works, the game speed, the way New England's gameplans are built on the other team's strengths and weknesses, etc.

Then, NEXT year, the Patriots can let Mallet go, or trade him, whichever, and have a solid QB for Brady, and, potentially, his replacement in the near term if needs be.

Garoppolo has outplayed Mallett. He deserves to be the backup QB. This isn't rocket science.

I'm sure the Seahawks wished they started the experienced vet in Flynn over the flashing rookie Wilson in 2012.

Gwedd said:

As I have stated all along, I believe that New England WILL keep 3 QB's this season. Mallet stays because he knows ALL of the playbook. He can, as he showed last night, be a journeyman QB and not lose a season for us if worse came to worse.

Garoppolo will stay to be given a year to learn the playbook, and get some reps in during the week, maybe just one or two, so he stays focused. He'll be able to watch and learn how the NFL works, the game speed, the way New England's gameplans are built on the other team's strengths and weknesses, etc.

Then, NEXT year, the Patriots can let Mallet go, or trade him, whichever, and have a solid QB for Brady, and, potentially, his replacement in the near term if needs be.

Click to expand...

Mallett is in his last year of his contract. We can't trade him or cut him go next year as he already is gone.

Marinlik said:

Mallett is in his last year of his contract. We can't trade him or cut him go next year as he already is gone.

Click to expand...

I know, I should have been more clear rather than typing from a "train of thought" process. They can trade him during this season, or anytime before his last day (though by then, I suspect they'd just let him go out of respect for his efforts here).

My bad. It's an off day and I blame the lack of coffee.

jimmy f***ing garoppolo....not the hero that patriot nation deserves.....but the one that we need

look at that stud.....just look at him

hwc said:

What if it comes down to Mallet or Butler? Mallet or Tymes? Mallett or Velano?

Belichick is going to be faced with cutting good somewhere on the roster.

Click to expand...

Let me first confess my unholy love for each summer's bottom of the roster guys.

With that out of the way, I do think there are several young'uns at risk because of currently perceived depth that may not sustain because of future injuries. It's not like we have a proven robustly healthy WR corps and everyone knows the attrition we've faced at DB, etc.

I see the issue as this...can JAG continue to develop this summer as a viable candidate to manage a portion of a game to a couple of games should Brady get hurt? If he's assessed as enough of a game manager for us to go .500 or even .333 for a 3 game stretch we could still contend for the playoffs. Were Brady more seriously injured, we're not going to the SB anyway. So why keep Mallett at the expense of losing someone with perceived promise that just needs time to develop? All this is out the window if BB regards these last cut to the 53 guys as pretty much interchangeable with everyone else's final cuts.

There are plenty of spots for players who are worth keeping. There are even some for those NOT worth keeping now, but might be worth having for some future year.

There are even some for those NOT worth keeping. Period, (e.g. any other LBs than Mayo, Hightower, Collins and Anderson. Ninko is always available for an emergency fifth LB) Darius Fleming might fit into the category of a hoped for someday player, though.

In 10 years the second qb has been needed 1 season. The other nine times he hasn't been used at all. The third string qb has never been needed. So when there are three qb's on the roster, there is a pretty good chance that the third guy will never be needed, and if you get down to that level, you are in pretty serious trouble anyways. If Mallet is much better he will stay, if he isn't much better, he won't.

There aren't too many other slots on the roster that haven't been used in the last ten years.

Moosekill,

You are extrapolating from the Patriots fortunate history. But is NOT typical for the League as a whole. Most years the typical starter has to sit for a game or three, while dinged up. When Brady was younger, he has played through injuries to his fingers, hand, shoulder or leg that others might not be able to do. But he is no longer as young and spry.

Some teams seem to be hit by string of bad luck, and run through QBs in a procession of disabling injuries. For them, three is scarcely enough.