A thought on the Patriots' QB "plans"

AzPatsFan said:

Playing and even succeeding against scrubs in preseason, is completely different from playing against game-planned, first stringers. Veteran players who have had a week to learn your quirks and weaknesses to exploit. Especially when your repetoire of plays is incomplete, and your ability to diagnose hidden defenses and obscured traps is limited.

Not even TFB, the GOAT, could do so as a raw rookie. And he prepped at a big time college program, University of Michigan, not tiny Div III EIU.

Click to expand...

In the OP I think you tried to sell Mallet on his performance in a preseason game against players who will probably never be NFL players.

EI is not a D3 school. It is FCS and it beat SDSU like a drum, on SDSU turf. SDSU went to a bowl game. It's competitive football. The better FCS schools can play with FBS schools.

Kenneth Sims said:

BB is nothing if not stubborn. He's not going to let Houston get what would be their starting QB just by submitting a waiver claim. Mallet is either traded, or he'll be a Patriot in 2014.

Click to expand...

So you are saying if BB doesn't want to keep Mallet, he will keep him on the roster, at the detriment of the team, to spite Houston.

Yea right. The amazing thing is some people actually agreed.

AzPatsFan said:

Of all the positions on a football team, QB is by far the most important. For that position, you want depth more than anywhere else. Period.

Click to expand...

Damn good argument, heck it is so important to the team I think we should keep 4 qb's, heck maybe 5! Never have enough backups on the team that will probably never play.

BB only keeps three qb's on the team if he has to. He does it when he has a project qb that he doesn't feel is quite ready yet but he believes is the future of the organization, either as a good back up or an eventual starter. Which gets us back to the real question, if BB doesn't feel JimmyG is a better qb right now then Mallet, there will probably be three qb's. If BB believes JimmyG is better there will be two qb's. If it is damn close, or if a trade is offered the scales will probably tip one way or the other.

moosekill said:

So you are saying if BB doesn't want to keep Mallet, he will keep him on the roster, at the detriment of the team, to spite Houston.


Yea right. The amazing thing is some people actually agreed.

Click to expand...

After 2 seasons as the sole backup to Brady, I have no reason to think Belichick doesn't "like" Mallett. Given that, unless someone gives him enough value in a trade, BB isn't going to just cut him allowing him to go to the Texans, so he can keep a JAG on the roster.

And yes, I do believe BB is human and sometimes acts out of his humanity rather than what some of us feel is in the best interest of the team.

Kenneth Sims said:

After 2 seasons as the sole backup to Brady, I have no reason to think Belichick doesn't "like" Mallett. Given that, unless someone gives him enough value in a trade, BB isn't going to just cut him allowing him to go to the Texans, so he can keep a JAG on the roster.

And yes, I do believe BB is human and sometimes acts out of his humanity rather than what some of us feel is in the best interest of the team.

Click to expand...

You are arguing in circles. Just because he disagrees with you he is being stubborn and doing things to the detriment of the team? Acting out of his humanity? Really, Bill?? Do you follow the Patriots at all?

moosekill said:

So you are saying if BB doesn't want to keep Mallet, he will keep him on the roster, at the detriment of the team, to spite Houston.

Yea right. The amazing thing is some people actually agreed.

Click to expand...

Im not sure I agree with the idea, but there is at least some merit to the concept.

Sometimes you win a game by not just keeping the cards that give you the best possible hand but by also keeping in mind what cards your opponent needs.

While I believe it was a mistake to let Welker go.. the bigger mistake might have been letting him go to Denver.

OP, I have no idea how the first post fits into a poll, so I'll ignore that. In my opinion, the Pats want a QB who can play in the league and a developing QB who can start one day.

If Mallet stays around a year, or not, I think they bring in a vet backup who's affordable this year or next. They do not want to rush a division 2 QB who is being groomed to take possibly take over someday, putting him in the position to acquire bad habits, lose confidence etc. etc.

I can't imagine, being a free agent, that Mallet would want to stick around, even if he gets offers for short money elsewhere. There's a reason to keep 3 QB's and allowing one to develop confidence and knowledge and reflexes while another takes on the mantle of responsibility is a great one.

It's instructive that, even when he was more ready than anticipated, Brady was still no higher than third coming out of camp in 2001, assuming Bledsoe was healthy. BB is not going to roll the dice on a QBs readiness, when the downside is a promising player who's shell shocked by being thrust in a pressure situation, and falure, the upside, a roster spot for one year.

Cassel started out shaky as hell in 2008, but had 3 years of practice to draw on to pull it together.

RayClay said:

OP, I have no idea how the first post fits into a poll, so I'll ignore that. In my opinion, the Pats want a QB who can play in the league and a developing QB who can start one day.

Click to expand...

I made two predictions at the end of the post. I was asking if those predictions make sense.

ctpatsfan77 said:

I made two predictions at the end of the post. I was asking if those predictions make sense.

Click to expand...

Sorry CT. Good fodder for a thread, but i found your post confusing. I'll reread.

OK

1. I don't think there's a market for Mallet, but if they trade hi, I expect a veteran qb to be brought in immediately. They aren't going to put all that pressure on Garoppolo.

2. Garoppolo is signed until 2017, while Brady reportedly still wants to play more. That means a new contract for Garoppolo (and Brady, I guess), in that scaenario, so who knows?

Personally, I have always favored carrying 3 quarterbacks: the starter, a vet backup and a prospect for the future.

I would have had a prospect on the 2013 team. That way, we could have considered trading Mallett.

As it is, I think that Polo needs another year to develop. Mallett is inexpensive insurance for this season.
=======
Obviously, if you prospect turns out to be good enough, the team can save a roster spot and carry only 2 QB's after the prospect has had a year of experience. So, I will be fine with carrying only 2 quarterbacks in 2015 and 2016.

moosekill said:

You are arguing in circles. Just because he disagrees with you he is being stubborn and doing things to the detriment of the team? Acting out of his humanity? Really, Bill?? Do you follow the Patriots at all?

Click to expand...

Why the hostility? Who says I disagree with keeping 3 QBs; I don't. My first post was predicated on my belief that the Texans have been playing a waiting game trying to get Bill O'Brien his QB giving up as little as possible or nothing if the Pats should cut him, and that BB isn't going to let that happen.

Yes, I still believe that a very human BB makes decisions based on emotion rather good judgement. It's the only reason I can come up with that Matt Patricia is still the DC. But, that's another argument for another time.

mgteich said:

Personally, I have always favored carrying 3 quarterbacks: the starter, a vet backup and a prospect for the future.

I would have had a prospect on the 2013 team. That way, we could have considered trading Mallett.

As it is, I think that Polo needs another year to develop. Mallett is inexpensive insurance for this season.
=======
Obviously, if you prospect turns out to be good enough, the team can save a roster spot and carry only 2 QB's after the prospect has had a year of experience. So, I will be fine with carrying only 2 quarterbacks in 2015 and 2016.

Click to expand...

Regardless of what we think i think Belichick and MacDaniels like and believe in Mallett, and while garrapolo has looked really good in his two opportunities he is too raw to be the only back-up to Brady. I think they play it out and keep three QB's unless another team gives Belichick a pick worth trading Mallett for, in which case i think he would take the gamble on Brady staying healthy.

Kenneth Sims said:

Yes, I still believe that a very human BB makes decisions based on emotion rather good judgement. It's the only reason I can come up with that Matt Patricia is still the DC. But, that's another argument for another time.

Click to expand...

The patriots had a top 10 scoring defense last season while decimated by injury, Patricia did an outstanding job and that's why Belichick has him as his Defensive Coordinator.

You guys are nuts. Brady's gone this year.

pencilneckgeek said:

I disagree. Your opinion is right. Your recent vacillation is wrong.

I hope this clarifies matters.

Click to expand...

I am not meaning to be indecisive about my thoughts on keeping Mallett for his last year. That has never wavered for one second. I expected the whole time to keep 3 QBs, I believe that Belichick expected to keep 3 QBs, and I feel that this isn't going to change based on a couple of halfway decent performances in limited time from our rookie 3rd string QB.

That said, I could certainly be wrong. Belichick has proven that he's willing to gamble in the past. I am throwing in the fact that I didn't mean for my comments to come directly after such a spirited post, in an attempt to act like I knew any better than he did--that's all. I was simply expecting to add to the thread, and my concern was that I came off trying to look like a "know it all," instead.

Ivan said:

The patriots had a top 10 scoring defense last season while decimated by injury, Patricia did an outstanding job and that's why Belichick has him as his Defensive Coordinator.

Click to expand...

In 2013, Patricia did one of the very best jobs of any coordinator in the league.