Had they both been available, would you have picked Manziel or Garoppolo?

AzPatsFan said:

Both Manning and Rodgers have had a losing season. Brady has none. I'm sorry but when I lived in NE and I had Season Tickets for a decade and a half and ached for a mere .500 season. I know what losing is like, and I don't feel any apologies are due when the Pats rebuild, while going 12-4 or better.

Grow Up son. After the Pats 13 consecutive seasons of winning under Belichick, the next longest consecutive season winning streak is only four, 4, f-o-u-r, the number after 3 and before 5. You don't know what you have until its gone, I guess.

Click to expand...

Belichick has 11-13 record in games not started by Tom Brady during his Patriots tenure, and had a losing record in his time in Cleveland, so you attributing most of the success to Belichick and failing to see the significance of the QB position and how much having Tom Brady has done for this team is a fail. People lean on 2008, in reality they took a team that Brady led to an undefeated regular season and a Super Bowl appearance to an 11-win season and missed the playoffs. That is 5 wins less without Brady year-to-year, shave 5 wins off the team this year and we would be 7-9, Tom Brady is the #1 reason that this team succeeds, so if you think things will transition with Garopollo or any other QB you are nuts.

Like I said in my last post the Patriots have not gone through a rebuild, a rebuild consists of changing the most important player on the team, not just some of the pieces around him. Every team has had similar changes to their teams over the past 13 seasons, and outside their first seasons as starters Manning and Rodgers have never had a losing season either.

As far as you telling me to grow up, you might want to take your own advise because you are the one being so childish that you are getting bent out of shape during a football conversation on an internet forum. As far as not knowing what you have until it is gone, I agree I just disagree with your assessment that Belichick is the key piece, I attribute more of the success to Tom Brady, which is why I would be doing the things to win now with him, not worrying about life after Brady. If we could win 1-2 more Super Bowls with Brady over the next 4 years I would gladly endure a few losing seasons as we actually rebuild.

Bill Is near finishing this generational rebuild. It should be good for another 5-7 years, like the first. The Team is very young and behind the handful of aging stars, there are already high picks being groomed. (Actually, I think it was virtually done last season, and then the deluge of significant injuries and arrests struck.)

This edition of the Patriots is the most talented and deepest of all Belichick's efforts, I believe. Plus he has squeezed it comfortably under the CAP; and hasn't spent forward, the next two years CAP, either. So he won't have to tear it down next off season unlike some "go for it all" SB contenders do.

I look forward to enjoying this season.

RayClay said:

Imagine a spot where we were picking and both were available.

Click to expand...

I would have chosen Manziel...but i think the Pats would have traded out of the spot

Brady6 said:

Belichick has 11-13 record in games not started by Tom Brady during his Patriots tenure, and had a losing record in his time in Cleveland, so you attributing most of the success to Belichick and failing to see the significance of the QB position and how much having Tom Brady has done for this team is a fail. People lean on 2008, in reality they took a team that Brady led to an undefeated regular season and a Super Bowl appearance to an 11-win season and missed the playoffs. That is 5 wins less without Brady year-to-year, shave 5 wins off the team this year and we would be 7-9, Tom Brady is the #1 reason that this team succeeds, so if you think things will transition with Garopollo or any other QB you are nuts.

Like I said in my last post the Patriots have not gone through a rebuild, a rebuild consists of changing the most important player on the team, not just some of the pieces around him. Every team has had similar changes to their teams over the past 13 seasons, and outside their first seasons as starters Manning and Rodgers have never had a losing season either.

As far as you telling me to grow up, you might want to take your own advise because you are the one being so childish that you are getting bent out of shape during a football conversation on an internet forum. As far as not knowing what you have until it is gone, I agree I just disagree with your assessment that Belichick is the key piece, I attribute more of the success to Tom Brady, which is why I would be doing the things to win now with him, not worrying about life after Brady. If we could win 1-2 more Super Bowls with Brady over the next 4 years I would gladly endure a few losing seasons as we actually rebuild.

Click to expand...

Because /of course/ the 49ers had zero success after they moved on from Montana .

Brady6 said:

Belichick has 11-13 record in games not started by Tom Brady during his Patriots tenure,o.

Click to expand...

2000 5-11
2001 0-2 (Bledsoe starts)
2008 10-5 (Brady started game vs KC)
15-18 by my calculation.......(same as 11-13 ,both are 45% winning)

Brady6 said:

As far as a glaring need, I would love for you to explain that to me, we have the best QB in the game, and Ryan Mallett who is a capable backup, a glaring need is the an absurd assertion to make regarding the Patriots QB situation.

Click to expand...

Mallett is gone after the 2014 season. There is no way the Pats could resign him. Thus, they would go into the 2015 season with a 38 year old starter and no backup. Given the salary cap, the rookie wage scale, and the vagaries of the draft, they had to draft a QB this year. It was a glaring need that had to be addressed.

A well run NFL franchise basically always has to be rotating in backup/development QBs on rookie contracts, just like they rotated in Mallett four years ago. They can't afford Brady's contract AND paying $5 million a year for a good free agent backup. It would have been insane for the Pats to not reload at QB in this year's draft, even if the plan was to also sign some aging JAG veteran backup next year. They need a backup in 2015 and they have to start placing some bets on Brady's successor.

I thought they might go Mellenberger in the later rounds, but having seen Garoppolo's quick release, Brady-esque mechanics, and obvious poise, I'm not surprised they took him in the second round.

you mean Mettenberger, right?

AzPatsFan said:

I didn't think the depth of college DLs was very great. So I wasn't surprised that they didn't take another DL, and I thought they still had Armistead.

The OLs were pretty good, but the ones I liked were snapped up early in the second round. Still Stork and Fleming, I thought would make a nice C and RG combination and it appeared to me that Belichick traded and positioned to take both of them. Halapio was a surprise to me, and apparently to Belichick too. I still suspect Fleming doesn't have the feet for tackle, but he can certainly move people when he drive blocks. Drive blocking Right Guard beckons.

Click to expand...

You're probably right in that I expected the second pick to be either OL or DL. Both lines were/are in serious need of establishing quality depth.

Joker said:

you mean Mettenberger, right?

Click to expand...

Whatever.

Look at it from the cap standpoint. If the Pats had to go to the free agent market for QB next year, you'd want them to get someone at least as good as Cassell, right? Well, the going rate for Matt Cassell is 2 years/$10 million.

Grappolo's deal is 4 years $3.5 million.

That's a pretty significant cap savings for drafting and developing your own QB. The Pats had to draft a QB in 2014 if there was somebody they liked.

hwc said:

Mallett is gone after the 2014 season. There is no way the Pats could resign him. Thus, they would go into the 2015 season with a 38 year old starter and no backup. Given the salary cap, the rookie wage scale, and the vagaries of the draft, they had to draft a QB this year. It was a glaring need that had to be addressed.

A well run NFL franchise basically always has to be rotating in backup/development QBs on rookie contracts, just like they rotated in Mallett four years ago. They can't afford Brady's contract AND paying $5 million a year for a good free agent backup. It would have been insane for the Pats to not reload at QB in this year's draft, even if the plan was to also sign some aging JAG veteran backup next year. They need a backup in 2015 and they have to start placing some bets on Brady's successor.

I thought they might go Mellenberger in the later rounds, but having seen Garoppolo's quick release, Brady-esque mechanics, and obvious poise, I'm not surprised they took him in the second round.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I think these patterns have been there for awhile now in terms of how they play this situation. It's also for this reason why I've never once expected Mallett to be traded or cut.

I also expected a mid round pick at QB like you were saying, but I expected Metterberger to go a little higher around the 4th.

Brady6 said:

Don't get me wrong I think the thread is a fun concept I'm not knocking it in the respect of it being enjoyable for all of us. I just don't think we can conclude what Manziel and Garopollo are going to be right now. Manziel has some personality defects giving the finger to another teams bench is completely unacceptable. We had a sociopathic murderer on this team that knew better than that.

Click to expand...

Thank you brother, that's all it is.

Brady6 said:

I I think Belichick has done a great job overall but I am conscious of the fact that P Manning, Rodgers, Brees, and Roethlisberger the other QBs widely considered to be top 5 in the NFL have all won a Super Bowl in the past 10 years and Brady has not. There have been some questionable personnel moves, particularly in the 2008-2011.

Click to expand...

but, if all it takes is a great QB, wouldn't he win super bowls regardless of the players around him?

Both players seem to exhibit contrasting levels of class and character. Manziel continues to do things that exhibit bad behavior and lacks class. Which is not the kinda of role model you want for your team or society. However, he may mature with time or he may not. So we will just have to see how Manziel develops as a person and as a player. One could only hope that he matures as a player and as person for the better. On the other hand, Garoppollo carries himself in a very classy way and seems to exhibit high character which is great for the patriots organization and society.

There are many conclusions that we could jump to in regards to both Garoppollo or Manziel's NFL prospects. However, I don't think It would be wise to make any conclusions on Garoppollo or Manziel's NFL prospects based on what little we have seen of them on the field. Overall, Manziel seems to be questionable on and off the field while Garoppollo only seems to be questionable on the the field.

Christiancat said:

I don't think It would be wise to make any conclusions on Garopollo or Manziel's NFL prospects based on what little we have seen of them on the field. Overall, Manziel seems to be questionable on and off the field while Garopollo only seems be questionable on the the field.

Click to expand...

I think that's always a decent place to start. I think, while there are rare examples of players who have questionable work ethic/attitude who have excelled, the majority of players who show positivity in these categories are going to have a much higher chance of seeing success. Of course, one hopes to find that balance of positive attitude/work ethic PLUS football talent. I think we've seen some examples where just having one or the other doesn't equate to "enough" in the eyes of the scouts, coaches, and GMs.

In the case of Johnny Manziel, I think he has what the N.England scouts referred to as good "FBI" (football intelligence, I am assuming), yet a very questionable work ethic and many instances of attitude problems.

The rumor written in many articles is that he's had a very easy life growing up, as both his parents and grandparents have spoiled him greatly. Often that does not work out very well. As you said, it's still possible that he can learn from his experiences and grow up.

rochrist said:

Because /of course/ the 49ers had zero success after they moved on from Montana .

Click to expand...

Brady6 said:

Belichick has 11-13 record in games not started by Tom Brady during his Patriots tenure, and had a losing record in his time in Cleveland, so you attributing most of the success to Belichick and failing to see the significance of the QB position and how much having Tom Brady has done for this team is a fail. People lean on 2008, in reality they took a team that Brady led to an undefeated regular season and a Super Bowl appearance to an 11-win season and missed the playoffs. That is 5 wins less without Brady year-to-year, shave 5 wins off the team this year and we would be 7-9, Tom Brady is the #1 reason that this team succeeds, so if you think things will transition with Garopollo or any other QB you are nuts.

Like I said in my last post the Patriots have not gone through a rebuild, a rebuild consists of changing the most important player on the team, not just some of the pieces around him. Every team has had similar changes to their teams over the past 13 seasons, and outside their first seasons as starters Manning and Rodgers have never had a losing season either.

As far as you telling me to grow up, you might want to take your own advise because you are the one being so childish that you are getting bent out of shape during a football conversation on an internet forum. As far as not knowing what you have until it is gone, I agree I just disagree with your assessment that Belichick is the key piece, I attribute more of the success to Tom Brady, which is why I would be doing the things to win now with him, not worrying about life after Brady. If we could win 1-2 more Super Bowls with Brady over the next 4 years I would gladly endure a few losing seasons as we actually rebuild.

Click to expand...

I don't want to see losing seasons, I've had more than my fill. Nor is it necessary. BB has already done the heavy lifting. The only ballplayers left from the Super Bowl dynasty are Tom Brady and Vince Wilfork. I'd say replacing 51 out of 53 players constitutes a Rebuild. What is your definition?

I hope to never find out, but I would wager a penny or two that the Pats would win 10+ games with Mallett and be about .500 with raw Polo. The rest of the team is now that good, just like 2008 with Cassell.

This team is young and ready to win.

supafly said:

Agreed. I think these patterns have been there for awhile now in terms of how they play this situation. It's also for this reason why I've never once expected Mallett to be traded or cut.

I also expected a mid round pick at QB like you were saying, but I expected Metterberger to go a little higher around the 4th.

Click to expand...

This is confirmed by Schlecter's revelation that it wasn't that no other team wanted Ryan Mallett. It was that BB told everyone the Pats needed him for their SuperBowl run, and he wasn't for sale. Maybe not even for a number 1 pick, either.

They will lose him next year, but expect a Comp 3 or better from a trade after the post season.

They will lose him next year, but expect a Comp 3 or better from a trade after the post season.


Not to take away from the main point, but one minor correction: once the trading deadline passes on October 28, the Patriots will not be able to deal Mallett to another team. He will be a free agent at the same time that teams can once again make trades, when the new league year begins in March. The only way the Patriots can trade him in the off-season is if they sign him to a new contract first.

Joker said:

you mean Mettenberger, right?

Click to expand...

That's "Meatheadburger" to you, Lt. Scheisskopf.

t

Brady6 said:

Belichick has 11-13 record in games not started by Tom Brady during his Patriots tenure, and had a losing record in his time in Cleveland, so you attributing most of the success to Belichick and failing to see the significance of the QB position and how much having Tom Brady has done for this team is a fail.

Click to expand...

The pure won/lost record doesn't come close to telling the story. BB took over in Cleveland in 1991 at age 39. The 1990 Browns were 3-13 and 27/28 in PF/PA, arguably the worst team in the league (there were 28 teams in 1990). By 1994, in BB's fourth year they were 11-5 and 11/1 in PF/PA. Improvement is NOT coaching failure. And let's not forget that the Browns were 1-8 after Carpetbagger Modell announced the move to Baltimore.

I have long believed that 2000 (5-11) was one of BB's finest seasons, because he was willing to take the hit in order to clean up an ill-conceived roster of overpaid underachievers. This set the stage for the 2001 championship run which had far more to do with BB's coaching prowess than the play of an effective but inexperienced and limited QB.

Brady6 said:

People lean on 2008, in reality they took a team that Brady led to an undefeated regular season and a Super Bowl appearance to an 11-win season and missed the playoffs. That is 5 wins less without Brady year-to-year, shave 5 wins off the team this year and we would be 7-9, Tom Brady is the #1 reason that this team succeeds, so if you think things will transition with Garopollo or any other QB you are nuts.

Click to expand...

In Brady's first 7 seasons as starter (2001-2007), the team averaged 12.3 wins per season. In his last five (2009- 2013), they averaged 12.2. The drop off in 2008 to 11 wins was in large measure due to Brady's absence but was also highly predictable reversion to the mean. And why did the team drop to 10 wins in 2009 after Brady's return?

Brady6 said:

Like I said in my last post the Patriots have not gone through a rebuild, a rebuild consists of changing the most important player on the team, not just some of the pieces around him. Every team has had similar changes to their teams over the past 13 seasons, and outside their first seasons as starters Manning and Rodgers have never had a losing season either.

Click to expand...

Strongly disagree. There was a 4 win pick up in 2003, a 6 win pick up between 2005 and 2007, and a 4 win pick up in 2010. Same QB, so something else was going on. Something called Rebuilding on the Fly.

The truth is that BB is a better coach because of Brady and Brady is a better player because of BB. I don't think either of them would argue that point.

The contention that BB is otherwise a lousy coach is the kind of in depth analysis that is perpetrated by intellectually lazy commenters on Florio's website and it just doesn't stand up to any meaningful scrutiny.

Maybe I'll write about this in more detail later. Thanks for the idea.