Backup QBs - Hoyer VS Mallet

[RobertWeathers]

Oddly that's what they said about Brady. Turns out arm strength is developable via mechanics and is just the tip of the iceberg as far as things a QB needs at this level. And Bledsow couldn't make it here, on a Belichick team running this offense... Nor anywhere else's once he left here, even though he was just 30 at the time.

Bledsoe's #1 issue was processing information and making adjustments in a millisecond's timeframe. Not saying that he was dumb. He could learn an offense, branches on patterns, etc but once teams caught up to him he was toast. He had some good statistical seasons with BUF and DAL but as you say, because of his shortcomings as a QB he was not a fit for this particular offensive system. Although I'll stop short and say that DB was lazy, but I do think that he was one of those QBs that relied on his physical abilities to overcome the upper-level cerebral qualities that QBs like Brady, Montana, Brees possess.

I don't hate Mallet, just don't see him as a fit for this offense. People like yourself insisted that Brady could never be more than a backup. Same deal for Cassel. I disagreed then, too. I think Bill took Mallet because there wasn't anything else that appealed to him in that slot, which he tried to trade out of but there were no takers, so ala Ron Wolf who advocated taking a QB every year for development and possible trade if not use, he took him. He has 3 years remaining on his contract. If he passes Hoyer on the depth chart next season. Brady has 4 and will likely be around a few years beyond that.

My opinion on Mallett is that I have no opinion. He seems to have the physical skills and if you buy into the Wonderlic tests as a way of processing information quickly, he scored a 26 which is a B+ grade. Not to shabby I guess.

With that said, it all comes down to how much a player loves football and how much they need it and want it to be part of their lives. My belief is that come season's end, Drew wanted nothing to do with any aspect of it- IE it was a job. We can agree that for Brady- it was his life. This time next year, we'll find out if young Ryan Mallett is more like KOC or TFB

 

[RobertWeathers]

so let me get this straight.......you are saying that hoyer has the ability because brady had it? and mallett does not? technically speaking, what do you base your conclusion on? what is it about mallett that you see or don't see?

how many years has hoyer been here? why is his arm still a noodle....you'd figure he'd be strenthened by now if he was taking the same path as brady.

the pats could have taken mcelroy later, or enderle or stanzi.....instead of tossing a 3rd rounder that they could have used on one of the several OG's still available and certainly a need at the time.

I understand the argument you're trying to make, but it's not coming together for you

Hoyer has NFL QB arm strength. If he didn't he wouldn't be here.

You don't need a rocket arm to play QB in the NFL. Chad Pennington, Joe Montana and others all had average throwing arms and had success.

Brady's issue was body strength and mechanics. He had the "upside" people talk about. He's also 6'4" and has long arms which help. Hoyer does not have that body type so to assume that he'll develop the arms strength that Brady has is a bit presumptuous.

 

[IllegalContact]

Hoyer has NFL QB arm strength. If he didn't he wouldn't be here.

You don't need a rocket arm to play QB in the NFL. Chad Pennington, Joe Montana and others all had average throwing arms and had success.

Brady's issue was body strength and mechanics. He had the "upside" people talk about. He's also 6'4" and has long arms which help. Hoyer does not have that body type so to assume that he'll develop the arms strength that Brady has is a bit presumptuous.

in order to execute the offense the pats have, you need that arm strength that hoyer does not have. mallett has it. the only question is whether he has the other tools.

my thinking is that if mcdaniels could turn cassel into what he turned him into, that he should have alot of fun with mallett

 

[MoLewisrocks]

he's underthrown pretty much every long ball I've ever seen him throw here.

you can chalk it up as something else, but I see it as an arm strength issue

That's not what scouts and pundits have seen, so I'd probably chalk your impression up to something else...

Actually the backup some scouts tagged as a weak arm is Flynn...although that was before his week 17 audition this year... Hoyer's weaknesses were reportedly decision making and reads. But coachability and drive were his strengths, and he apparently overcame the weaknesses or he wouldn't have been Brady's lone backup coming off the ACL injury in 2009. He's a kid that NE via Josh and his Ohio connections had landed on the Patriots radar since HS.

 

[RobertWeathers]

in order to execute the offense the pats have, you need that arm strength that hoyer does not have. mallett has it. the only question is whether he has the other tools.

my thinking is that if mcdaniels could turn cassel into what he turned him into, that he should have alot of fun with mallett

I go back to what I stated earlier. If the Pats braintrust of talent evaluators didn't think he could make most, if not all the throws he would not be here. If seen Hoyer in practice, hes thrown outs, 60 yd bombs, etc. will good success. Can he thread the needle like Brady or Mallett? Of course not.

Hoyer does not have the arm strength of Brady but his arm strength is greater than Kliff Klingsbury's

 

[MoLewisrocks]

in order to execute the offense the pats have, you need that arm strength that hoyer does not have. mallett has it. the only question is whether he has the other tools.

my thinking is that if mcdaniels could turn cassel into what he turned him into, that he should have alot of fun with mallett

In order to execute the offense the pats have it's the "other tools" that matter most.

 

[IllegalContact]

That's not what scouts and pundits have seen, so I'd probably chalk your impression up to something else...

Actually the backup some scouts tagged as a weak arm is Flynn...although that was before his week 17 audition this year... Hoyer's weaknesses were reportedly decision making and reads. But coachability and drive were his strengths, and he apparently overcame the weaknesses or he wouldn't have been Brady's lone backup coming off the ACL injury in 2009. He's a kid that NE via Josh and his Ohio connections had landed on the Patriots radar since HS.

what you chalk things up to has not help make your point....are you saying that mallett is not driven or coachable?

 

[MSU]

in order to execute the offense the pats have, you need that arm strength that hoyer does not have. mallett has it. the only question is whether he has the other tools.

my thinking is that if mcdaniels could turn cassel into what he turned him into, that he should have alot of fun with mallett

You must be stuck in 2007, 'cause Brady hasn't had a good deep ball in years.

 

[IllegalContact]

In order to execute the offense the pats have it's the "other tools" that matter most.

and which of those 'other tools' does mallett not have?

 

[IllegalContact]

You must be stuck in 2007, 'cause Brady hasn't had a good deep ball in years.

brady's deep ball is fine......it's the guys they have going for the deep balls (or lack of) that are the problem

 

[DarrylS]

You must be stuck in 2007, 'cause Brady hasn't had a good deep ball in years.

Yea I agree we should get rid of the useless piece of crap..

 

[PatsFanSince74]

It seems to me that the main thing we know about Hoyer (beyond that he's 27 for 43 with 286 yards, one passing TD, one pick and one rushing TD in his three years with the Pats) is that Bill Belichick has kept him as the primary backup to a HOF-bound QB who is in his mid-30's, takes a lot of hits and has already lost an entire season to injury. That's more than enough for me.

All I know about Mallett (beyond that his name is spelled with two "t's," that he has/had some alleged "issues" and that he has a gun attached to his shoulder) is that BB drafted him and has kept him on the roster all year, strongly implying that the young man is learning at an acceptable pace and has behaved himself for the entire season.

In other words, on this topic, "In BB I trust."

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Bledsoe's #1 issue was processing information and making adjustments in a millisecond's timeframe. Not saying that he was dumb. He could learn an offense, branches on patterns, etc but once teams caught up to him he was toast. He had some good statistical seasons with BUF and DAL but as you say, because of his shortcomings as a QB he was not a fit for this particular offensive system. Although I'll stop short and say that DB was lazy, but I do think that he was one of those QBs that relied on his physical abilities to overcome the upper-level cerebral qualities that QBs like Brady, Montana, Brees possess.

My opinion on Mallett is that I have no opinion. He seems to have the physical skills and if you buy into the Wonderlic tests as a way of processing information quickly, he scored a 26 which is a B+ grade. Not to shabby I guess.

With that said, it all comes down to how much a player loves football and how much they need it and want it to be part of their lives. My belief is that come season's end, Drew wanted nothing to do with any aspect of it- IE it was a job. We can agree that for Brady- it was his life. This time next year, we'll find out if young Ryan Mallett is more like KOC or TFB

I agree, although I don't think love of the game is the issue as much as adaptability and drive to become or remain worthy to play it at this level vs. entitlement and a core belief in their inherent talent to carry the day (provided everyone else is as talented or finds a way to perform up to their level). Drew loved playing football. Most gunslingers do. What they don't love is working at it, because they don't see why they should have to. Their talent gets them here, often their arm strength..., and they don't believe they should have to do much more than show up on Sundays and just sling it. The game and success came naturally to them in HS and college and they see no reason why it won't be the same at the next level. Entitlement is their issue. When they fail in their mind it is likely the result of others not performing well enough... Favre was the epitome of the entitled QB. The game had to be fun for him and if you made him think or study film (which gave him a headache) or follow some script or come to off season workouts or training camp, then you were taking the fun out of it. Drew wasn't that self absorbed. But while he went through all the motions once the bell rang he was going to rely on his own talent and perceived instincts over scheme and just sling it. I believe it was a conscious choice. Sometimes though it's unconscious, guys simply cannot become something they never were...which is cerebral students of the game. Manning was the exception to the entitled talent rule because once he determined (around 2002 or 2003) his talent alone or talent alone around him wasn't going to get him where he wanted to be he became almost more cerebrial than talented (he threw some wobblers in between the lasers...but more often than not exactly where they should be).

 

[RobertWeathers]

It seems to me that the main thing we know about Hoyer (beyond that he's 27 for 43 with 286 yards, one passing TD, one pick and one rushing TD in his three years with the Pats) is that Bill Belichick has kept him as the primary backup to a HOF-bound QB who is in his mid-30's, takes a lot of hits and who has already lost an entire season to injury. That's more than enough for me.

All I know about Mallett (beyond that his name is spelled with two "t's," that he has/had some alleged "issues" and has a gun attached to his shoulder) is that BB drafted him and has kept him on the roster all year, meaning that the young man is learning at an acceptable pace and has behaved himself for the entire season.

In other words, on this topic, "In BB I trust."

I think Mo nailed it in an earlier post. BB tried to dump the pick, didn't see the ROI in picks and saw Mallett as a kid who if he can get under control had MAJOR upside and represented great value in either a draft day trade or down the road.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I think Mo nailed it in an earlier post. BB tried to dump the pick, didn't see the ROI in picks and saw Mallett as a kid who if he can get under control had MAJOR upside and represented great value in either a draft day trade or down the road.

yeah, i wasn't taking exception to that. if Mallett wasn't coming along in a way consistent with that perceived upside, he'd be on the practice squad or gone. the only way we know that that's still viable is that he is still here.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I agree, although I don't think love of the game is the issue as much as adaptability and drive to become or remain worthy to play it at this level vs. entitlement and a core belief in their inherent talent to carry the day (provided everyone else is as talented or finds a way to perform up to their level). Drew loved playing football. Most gunslingers do. What they don't love is working at it, because they don't see why they should have to. Their talent gets them here, often their arm strength..., and they don't believe they should have to do much more than show up on Sundays and just sling it. The game and success came naturally to them in HS and college and they see no reason why it won't be the same at the next level. Entitlement is their issue. When they fail in their mind it is likely the result of others not performing well enough... Favre was the epitome of the entitled QB. The game had to be fun for him and if you made him think or study film (which gave him a headache) or follow some script or come to off season workouts or training camp, then you were taking the fun out of it. Drew wasn't that self absorbed. But while he went through all the motions once the bell rang he was going to rely on his own talent and perceived instincts over scheme and just sling it. I believe it was a conscious choice. Sometimes though it's unconscious, guys simply cannot become something they never were...which is cerebral students of the game. Manning was the exception to the entitled talent rule because once he determined (around 2002 or 2003) his talent alone or talent alone around him wasn't going to get him where he wanted to be he became almost more cerebrial than talented (he threw some wobblers in between the lasers...but more often than not exactly where they should be).

Yep. Perfect representation of my views as well. I meant love for the job and not love for the game. Big difference obviously.

 

[IllegalContact]

I think Mo nailed it in an earlier post. BB tried to dump the pick, didn't see the ROI in picks and saw Mallett as a kid who if he can get under control had MAJOR upside and represented great value in either a draft day trade or down the road.

makes for good bathroom reading, but this claim is about as baseless as it can get....really

there were guys available that the pats could have used at that point, so taking a chance on a 'potential attitude problem' at that point doesn't make any sense at all. they had him in, they knew WHO they were getting.

I think when your franchise QB gets to a certain age, you need to have the possibility of the 'next answer' on your roster. hoyer is a career backup, period. he is what friesz was in 2000

 

[IllegalContact]

Yep. Perfect representation of my views as well. I meant love for the job and not love for the game. Big difference obviously.

so, is this what mallett lacks? can you point me towards the proof?

did you guys have any clue at all as to what brady's love for the game was in 2000 at the time?

 

[RobertWeathers]

yeah, i wasn't taking exception to that. if Mallett wasn't coming along in a way consistent with that perceived upside, he'd be on the practice squad or gone. the only way we know that is that he is still here.

With Mallett, that is my belief as well but you never know. KOC was kept for a year and jettisoned in year 2 because the coaching staff didn't believe he was progressing on a number of levels.

 

[IllegalContact]

With Mallett, that is my belief as well but you never know. KOC was kept for a year and jettisoned in year 2 because the coaching staff didn't believe he was progressing on a number of levels.

there's one huge difference between KOC and mallet. KOC was an unknown in terms of ability as it pertains to level of competition. the notion was that KOC might be something, but in terms of the ability to compete at a higher level, SanDiego State was it. The SEC proves a bit more. Even in a pass-happy conference like the WAC, KOC was nothing more than intriguing measurables.