Cassel is starting by design

[mdhprime]

How anyone can think that bringing in another starting QB, in Week Two, veteran or not, who hasn't an inkling of what the Patriots system is like, is unfathomable. I agree that they will probably bring in a third QB at some point but I believe that such a player would be a last resort. Cassell is obviously the best choice considering his time spent in NE and the coaches' choice of him over any of the available veterans before Brady even got hurt. Culpepper was so rejected by most teams he retired. Other options just do not seem to make any sense. Cassell, from the team's perspective at least, is the best choice to step in and I think he is the right choice.

 

[Tunescribe]

Of course there are a lot of factors. The money factor is inconsequential to me because we had the money, still have cap room, and spent heavily on other backups as well.
The end result to me is that BB wanted Cassel as his backup QB, and starter if Brady went down, over EVERYONE ELSE HE COULD HAVE GOTTEN.
Bill Belichick believed while building his roster that there was not a better option out there that gave the team a better chance to win if Tom Brady got hurt than Matt Cassel. That is as factual as factual gets.
I also think we know BB well enough to know he didn't mangle the decision by forgetting that Brady could get hurt just because he hadn't yet.

I'm not sure it's as black-and-white as you suggest. BB simply could've decided it was worth a gamble to keep the cheaper, less-experienced Cassel vs. spending more on a veteran backup during the offseason who could do a better job out of the chute. Or, perhaps he really WANTED a veteran backup but couldn't find the right fit in terms of the system and/or money. On WEEI's Dale and Holley this afternoon, they had guest analyst/NFL scout Chris Landry (who worked with BB in Cleveland) openly question BB's choice to not have a vet backing up Brady. He put the utmost premium on game experience in successfully executing play at QB. Check out what he had to say:

http://audio.weei.com/m/audio/20879804/9_9_08_chris_landry_fox_sports.htm?pageid=967

Like I said, I haven't concluded that BB's decision was wrong, but it definitely is controversial and open to question, ESPECIALLY since this is a championship-caliber team. I certainly hope that Cassel proves the naysayers wrong and BB's choice for Brady's backup was yet another genius move. At this point it's sink or swim with Matt, as no street veteran can be brought up to speed quick enough to do the job.

 

[fourthandmiles]

So who is the 3rd QB? A little risky going into the game with 2.

 

[mdhprime]

So who is the 3rd QB? A little risky going into the game with 2.

I believe the Colts went all last season with 2 QBs. It is not common but not unheard of either.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I agree with the premise of this thread. BB has the guy he wanted over anyone else available this spring. I argued against bringing in a vet during training camp when Cassel and Gutz played poorly. I knew that BB would cut Gutz and keep Cassel. The vets are proven failures while the young-uns like Cassel must have demonstrated potential to the coaches, never mind the 'minor' detail that they know the complex read & option system the Pats offense runs.

That being said now that Brady is out, I am concerned with just raw O'C as the potential sub this season. I now feel that there might be a vet, maybe a Rattay, out there who could spend the next 6 weeks learning the BASICS of the system should Cassel get knocked out of a game. And yes, I agree that all these vets have baggage and resumes of failure; that's why I only want one as a temporary fill in. Those convinced that O'C is an even faster learner and better talent than year one Brady should object.

 

[bucky]

For the most part, I'd have to agree with Andy and I'm quite interested in seeing what Cassell can do. Guardedly optimistic, I would say. I do have a couple of issues with the logic though:

1) You can't really argue that BB "knows" what to expect from Cassell. Sure, he's been practicing for 3+ years - and I'm sure making progress. But that doesn't mean you know what to expect from him after he's been smacked in the mouth 3 straight times by blitzing LBs, or that you know how his decision making process will be in the last 2 minutes of a game when he has to make a play. And there are probably 10 or 20 other scenarios that can't possibly be predicted, or even projected with any degree of accuracy.

2) I wouldn't go so far as to say that all "poor result" experience is bad. Fact of the matter is that QBs often take the blame for poor team performance. Some QBs try to do too much on bad teams. Sure, some are just bad QBs, or perhaps too old. But the reality of the situation is that ALL QBs (even Brady) have strengths and weaknesses. If you take a guy like Pennington or Leftwich - whose strengths and weaknesses you know - you can try to game-plan around their weaknesses and to their strengths. The key, obviously, is to find the guys with the qualities you can live with at a price you're willing to pay.

With a guy like Cassell, you might know that he's better at throwing pattern A than B or that he can make certain adjustments and reads correctly. But until it all comes out in real game conditions, it's all just an educated guess.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm not sure it's as black-and-white as you suggest. BB simply could've decided it was worth a gamble to keep the cheaper, less-experienced Cassel vs. spending more on a veteran backup during the offseason who could do a better job out of the chute. Or, perhaps he really WANTED a veteran backup but couldn't find the right fit in terms of the system and/or money. On WEEI's Dale and Holley this afternoon, they had guest analyst/NFL scout Chris Landry (who worked with BB in Cleveland) openly question BB's choice to not have a vet backing up Brady. He put the utmost premium on game experience in successfully executing play at QB. Check out what he had to say:

http://audio.weei.com/m/audio/20879804/9_9_08_chris_landry_fox_sports.htm?pageid=967

Like I said, I haven't concluded that BB's decision was wrong, but it definitely is controversial and open to question, ESPECIALLY since this is a championship-caliber team. I certainly hope that Cassel proves the naysayers wrong and BB's choice for Brady's backup was yet another genius move. At this point it's sink or swim with Matt, as no street veteran can be brought up to speed quick enough to do the job.

I am not saying it isnt subject to quesitoning. Im not saying it isnt contoversial.
I am saying that Bill Belichick has had at least 3 years to find a better backup QB than Matt Cassel and has not been able to.
You keep talking about the cost, and ignoring that we have cap room left, that we spend more on backups at other positions than it would take to get a backup QB.
You seem to be trying to pigeon hole this into BB waking up yesterday and learning that backup QB has to start sometimes.
He has been ''working on'' the backup QB position for all of his 8 years here, just like all the other positions.
There simply is no argument that BB feels Matt Cassel was the best he could get for a backup QB.

There is certainly a ton of room for debate about whether that was a good personell decision or not.
I think that someone who wants to debate that should, and BB should be held accountable to that decision. Whether or not someone walked in the door, or what cap shape was is irelevant because you can trade, you can cut other players, etc, etc. In the best interest of the team, Matt Cassel was chosen as the backup QB.

It is not reasonable to discuss the quality of that decision while at the same time distancing BB from accountability with comments like he thought Brady wouldn't get hurt or there was no one available.

You can cite 10,000 comments on the value of experience.
And I will continue to say, if a player is good, experience is helpful/
If all the expereince gained was gained while playing badly, and that experience did was show all of the guy can't do the job.
IMO, 'experienced' QBs who were 'successful' are about impossible to come by.

I will gladly take the guy without expereince (esp when the coach supports him) over the guy who has played before but always lost.

Example:
You go to a minor league baseball game. One starter is 1-18 with a 9.65 ERA. The other was just picked up, and has never pitched at this level.

Who would win? I'll take the rookie, because I know the other guy is horrific, at least I have a shot with my rookie.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

So who is the 3rd QB? A little risky going into the game with 2.

At this point it doesn't matter. If Matt Cassel stays healthy all season and never misses a snap, a chance at Lombardi is a long shot.

If we lose Cassel and OC in the same game against the Jets, it really ain't gonna make a big whoppie doo who the third string qb is, we aint going to the SB. So we take the chance and worst comes to worst Wilfork gets his first shot at QB.

So why waste BB's time and energy on a 3rd QB when he needs to get Cassel ready for his first start in 8 years.

 

[vyrago]

I think no matter who steps out there, the Pats are done. 9-7 at best. Good luck making a wild card now. KARMA is catching up with the Pats.

I smell something funny. Does anyone else smell something funny? kinda rancid, rotten egg-like, hurl-worthy?

The Yoda must have gone off.

 

[Tunescribe]

I am not saying it isnt subject to quesitoning. Im not saying it isnt contoversial. I am saying that Bill Belichick has had at least 3 years to find a better backup QB than Matt Cassel and has not been able to.

And, he's STILL trying. I present to you exhibit A, which suggests that BB has not been as thoroughly "sold" on Cassel as you claim:

http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/09/09/patriots-ahead-of-their-time-again/

You seem to be trying to pigeon hole this into BB waking up yesterday and learning that backup QB has to start sometimes. He has been ''working on'' the backup QB position for all of his 8 years here, just like all the other positions. There simply is no argument that BB feels Matt Cassel was the best he could get for a backup QB.

Look, I'm not trying to "pigeonhole" anything or anyone. I'm merely pointing out the controversy around BB's decision and floating the idea that BB knowingly took a calculated risk. It's just as possible as your claim that he was dead set on Cassel as the man for the job. In either case, I refer you back to exhibit A.

There is certainly a ton of room for debate about whether that was a good personell decision or not. I think that someone who wants to debate that should, and BB should be held accountable to that decision. Whether or not someone walked in the door, or what cap shape was is irelevant because you can trade, you can cut other players, etc, etc. In the best interest of the team, Matt Cassel was chosen as the backup QB.

And, the "best interest of the team" can be interpreted many ways, considering budget parameters earmarked for the ENTIRE quarterback position including Brady and O'Connell, along with how available veteran backups might or might not have fit the Patriots system.

It is not reasonable to discuss the quality of that decision while at the same time distancing BB from accountability with comments like he thought Brady wouldn't get hurt or there was no one available.

This doesn't make sense. It very well could be that Brady's proven durability over 110-plus consecutive starts plus the pool of available veteran backup candidates were factors in BB's decision to retain Cassel as No. 1 backup. In any case, BB is fully accountable.

You can cite 10,000 comments on the value of experience. And I will continue to say, if a player is good, experience is helpful/If all the expereince gained was gained while playing badly, and that experience did was show all of the guy can't do the job.
IMO, 'experienced' QBs who were 'successful' are about impossible to come by. I will gladly take the guy without expereince (esp when the coach supports him) over the guy who has played before but always lost.

So, how do you gauge if a veteran QB with lots of experience is good or not? A lot of his success depends on his supporting cast, and coaching. For a player to even get significant game experience, he must be pretty good to begin with, wouldn't you agree? But don't take my word for it on the experience issue, give a listen to what Landry had to say.

Once again, I'm backing Cassel and BB on this and am not claiming BB made the wrong choice in not having a veteran backup at the ready to lead a proven Super Bowl contender. I absolutely want Cassel to succeed. I'm just saying, it's not as black-and-white a situation as you suggest and is open to question for valid reasons.

You say Cassel is starting by design, which is possible. I'm saying he just as well could be starting by default.

 

[Fencer]

If you have talent then you have talent,if you don't then you don't - You either can throw the ball on target or you throw wailing passes that get intercepted regardless of how familiar you are with the team - its in the arm and the accuracy of the player not just what the playbook says or how familiar you are with the system,I don't think Cassel has IT and he has something to prove to all of Pats Nation in the upcoming weeks and games.

The next few games should show if Cassel is a leader type of QB or is he a lifetime NFL follower who is only subject to emergency or garbage time QB play time.

You're confusing athletic ability and mental qualities.

Athletic abilities are about the same in practice and on the field. If Cassell kept the job after 4 years of practices, we should give him the benefit of the doubt that he has them. Besides, his first pass Sunday was a pretty long and accurate one.

Mental qualities are what we all should be keeping our fingers crossed about. E.g., locking in on one receiver, getting flummoxed once game plans are designed to specifically confuse HIM, etc. I'll be confident those won't happen -- er, after they don't happen.

 

[stcjones]

I think no matter who steps out there, the Pats are done. 9-7 at best. Good luck making a wild card now. KARMA is catching up with the Pats.

Hopefully Karma (as all you ****y/jealous fans of other loser teams like to call it) catches up with you as well........

 

[stcjones]

It should also be noted that game-planning is in our favour. Opponents don't really have any idea what he will/can do, especially once he gets rolling.

They already know, straight from his own mouth, that the playbook remains the same.

We're all nervous for the same reasons The Jets are: we don't know what this guy can do, but the ice-cold Belichick keeps this guy as the #2 and has made no QB moves. He is unproven, but could very well be a fantastic Quarterback, especially in this system with these players.

You may be right.....But I think opposing DC's know exactly what they are dealing with here.....No one is too high on Cassel......time will tell.....Hope EVERYONE that doubts him....including me....are wrong

 

[JoeSixPat]

Matt Cassel is not our Qb because BB forgot he needed someone if Brady got hurt. He is not our QB because BB just gambled that Brady wouldn't get hurt. He is not our QB because BB while splitting hairs, and bringing in as much competition as humnaly possible for all other 51 rosters spots, just thought 2nd and 3rd QB was a spot to put a mascot or someone you just kinda like.
Matt Cassel is our starting QB now because Bll Belichick has decided, OVER THE LAST FOURS YEARS, that he is the best option out there.

Well, I'm not disagreeing - but it should also be noted that Belichick places a certain value on different players in different roles and has salary slots assigned different players.

So when we say that Matt Cassell was determined to be the best option out there, that doesn't mean he was deemed the best backup QB out there. It means he was deemed the best backup QB value at the price he was commanding for the last 4 years.

Other teams with lesser QBs, or QBs prone to injury, coming off injury etc. would and often do pay more for a more experienced backup QB, knowing that due to poor performance or injury of their starter, there's a good chance that the backup will be called upon (and reportedly, with Brady coming off an injury, BB WAS looking at other veterans - perhaps planning on replacing Cassell when they were more up to speed, though we'll never know for sure).

That wasn't something the Patriots placed a high value on over the last 4 years - and given Brady's track record why would they? Better to invest any additional salary into quality backups at other positions, especially when, with Brady healthy and effective over his entire career, it makes more sense for BB to try to develop a backup QB who could be traded.

Of course, with Cassell in his last contract year, there's no trade value now, so let's credit BB for gambling that Brady WOULD get hurt and letting Gutz go rather than letting his more experienced backup go.

The bottom line is, at the end of the day, of all the backups, Cassell is the most experienced QB in our system on the roster and in the NFL. That's pretty much all that matters at this juncture. There might be better QBs out there, and had they been on the team, say last year, and gained experience in our system, we might be better off today - but one can't second guess the value that BB placed on a backup QB.

Cassell's the man, everyone will rally around him, and with this supporting cast of players, a below average QB can look average, and an average one can look above average - and as we've seen throughout the history of the league, it IS possible to win the Super Bowl with just an average QB.

 

[maverick4]

The intelligent design versus random fate question.

Hmm.. Belichick is pretty god-like...

 

[Ring 6]

And, he's STILL trying. I present to you exhibit A, which suggests that BB has not been as thoroughly "sold" on Cassel as you claim:

http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/09/09/patriots-ahead-of-their-time-again/



Look, I'm not trying to "pigeonhole" anything or anyone. I'm merely pointing out the controversy around BB's decision and floating the idea that BB knowingly took a calculated risk. It's just as possible as your claim that he was dead set on Cassel as the man for the job. In either case, I refer you back to exhibit A.



And, the "best interest of the team" can be interpreted many ways, considering budget parameters earmarked for the ENTIRE quarterback position including Brady and O'Connell, along with how available veteran backups might or might not have fit the Patriots system.



This doesn't make sense. It very well could be that Brady's proven durability over 110-plus consecutive starts plus the pool of available veteran backup candidates were factors in BB's decision to retain Cassel as No. 1 backup. In any case, BB is fully accountable.



So, how do you gauge if a veteran QB with lots of experience is good or not? A lot of his success depends on his supporting cast, and coaching. For a player to even get significant game experience, he must be pretty good to begin with, wouldn't you agree? But don't take my word for it on the experience issue, give a listen to what Landry had to say.

Once again, I'm backing Cassel and BB on this and am not claiming BB made the wrong choice in not having a veteran backup at the ready to lead a proven Super Bowl contender. I absolutely want Cassel to succeed. I'm just saying, it's not as black-and-white a situation as you suggest and is open to question for valid reasons.

You say Cassel is starting by design, which is possible. I'm saying he just as well could be starting by default.

Your 'exhibit A' does nothing for me, we bring players in all the time, arent we beyond the 'handwriting on the wall' comments every time we work out a guy?

I don't know what your argument is.
Cassel starting by design, means this has been BBs plan.
I don't know how you can argue that it wasn't his plan, when it is actually what he did.
He made 4 years worth of decisions that added up to, if Brady is hurt, I'm going with Cassel.

Whether he made a GOOD decision is still to be determined. My point is that BB didn't wake up Monday morning and say "Damn, I need one of those backup QBs, hey Ernie, do we have any of those, I forgot to keep track of it" BB made a CONSCIOUS, well thought out decision about the backup QB position. My post was to point that out since many posts on this board have been along the lines of: Brady is hurt, lets search the waiver wire for our QB.

 

[PatsFan37]

So when we say that Matt Cassell was determined to be the best option out there, that doesn't mean he was deemed the best backup QB out there. It means he was deemed the best backup QB value at the price he was commanding for the last 4 years.

Absolutely right. He could have traded for a better backup. He could have spent a high pick on a better backup, last year, or the year before instead of this year.

He didn't. Cassel was the best bang for the buck.

Heck, everything's a gamble. You can't have top quality at all backup positions, it's too expensive. Cassel may very well turn out to be a decent QB in NFL games. But we don't know that yet. No one does. Not even Bill.

 

[Tunescribe]

Your 'exhibit A' does nothing for me, we bring players in all the time, arent we beyond the 'handwriting on the wall' comments every time we work out a guy?

I don't know what your argument is.
Cassel starting by design, means this has been BBs plan.
I don't know how you can argue that it wasn't his plan, when it is actually what he did.
He made 4 years worth of decisions that added up to, if Brady is hurt, I'm going with Cassel.

Whether he made a GOOD decision is still to be determined. My point is that BB didn't wake up Monday morning and say "Damn, I need one of those backup QBs, hey Ernie, do we have any of those, I forgot to keep track of it" BB made a CONSCIOUS, well thought out decision about the backup QB position. My post was to point that out since many posts on this board have been along the lines of: Brady is hurt, lets search the waiver wire for our QB.

JoeSixPat's post above is another way of getting across the point I've been trying to make.

 

[DW Toys]

Absolutely right. He could have traded for a better backup. He could have spent a high pick on a better backup, last year, or the year before instead of this year.

He didn't. Cassel was the best bang for the buck.

Heck, everything's a gamble. You can't have top quality at all backup positions, it's too expensive. Cassel may very well turn out to be a decent QB in NFL games. But we don't know that yet. No one does. Not even Bill.

All in all cousin, I am in the group that believes I have not seen anything in Cassel for 4 years that deems him better than some other "street" QBs. I hope I am stupidly wrong. I predict he will lose 4 games for the team this year because of major errors INT, fumble, bad throws etc. That is not to say he can't learn from them and make a good QB. That still leaves 12 wins if we are optimistic.

I hope it wasn't a money thing that prevented us in investing in a experienced back up QB. Because we could be paying dearly if this experiment fails as far as playoffs. How would Pennington have looked right now people?

I guess we can start the new nick name for Cassel- MATT "SHANE FALCO" CASSEL.

DW Toys

 

[AzPatsFan]

You wouldn't feel better with the likes of Huard than Cassel? I'm not suggesting Vinny should be brought back, or that a veteran be inserted off the street at this late juncture. I merely was pointing out that a player with veteran experience reading defenses and familiarity with the Pats system probably would've gotten the nod with the season on the line, as now is the case. I guess time will tell if Cassel is more than just a bargain-basement insurance policy. Cassel was a developmental project and remains an unknown quantity -- this will be his rookie baptism by fire. I just hope he can keep his wits because if he starts chucking interceptions and gets rattled, there's nowhere else to turn. I hope they handle him like Brady in 2001 and running game/defense/special teams pick up the slack. It's a very delicate situation.

I for one would not in this situation. Huard is good for a game or two. But Brady is gone for the year. Huard's game is limited, and has proven it. He can be game planned.

Cassel needed several years in on a pro team to make up for the limited play in college. But he was recruited by the biggest of the big college programs. But even though he did not play in college he learned from Pete Carrol's pro system. Better than if he played and ran a wishbone, at Cupcake U, a Div III school.

But today he now has had four years of coaching, learning, and some limited snaps, as well. Belichick paid him a compliment this season, after he beat out Vinny Testaverde last year.

He tested his composure an POISE, by creating a tough job for him, and probably poor success. Bill wanted to see how he would handle adversity. He showed then that he was becoming a trained pro QB, and could execute, and run a pro playbook. He could finally read Defense, and audibilize, correctly. He demonstrated against KC, the real time ability to read a route change, as it was happening, while Moss was doing it.