Quarterback situation

[Pat the Pats Fan]

OMG, he's that old. Cut him now, he's surely on the decline. Or maybe we can pick up a late round pick from some unsuspecting team for him......


And on a similar topic, how many years did Roger pitch effectively after the Sox got rid of him?[/QUOTE]

Are you serious? For as many years as Macnamee could inject him without being caught.

No, I wasn't serious, entire post was sarcastic, guess I should have inserted one of those emoticons at the end.....

 

[fester]

I think that starting in a couple of years, the Pats should start drafting a QB in the 5th or 6th round every year and see which one rises to the top rather than putting all your eggs in one basket with a 1st or 2nd rounder that rarely pans out as predicted and has buried numerous franchises.

Not a bad plan, and it is one that I think the Pats have already been engaging in for the past couple of years (Kingsbury, Cassell). 5th through 7th rounders are cheap, low probability, high reward picks if they turn into a quasi-competent starting quarterback as either the Patriots 2014 starter or as trade bait. Most of them will max out as good clip-board holders, but the payoff is high for the price.

 

[tedylb]

I think the Pats are always on the lookout for the next Tom. Who knows when he'll go down? But the next Tom (if that's possible) will be a second day pick or an undrafted free agent (like so many of today's best QBs), not a cap buster.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Just to save some time:

Bart Starr was 30 in 1964
Otto Graham was 30 in 1951
Johnny Unitas was 30 in 1963
Joe Montana was 30 in 1986
Terry Bradshaw was 30 in 1978

Carry on.

I think Jesus was 30 in 30 A.D.

I say Brady is only turning 8 since it is now 8 A.D.P.

(After the dynasty of the Pats) :rocker:

 

[Fanfrom1960]

Just to save some time:

Bart Starr was 30 in 1964
Otto Graham was 30 in 1951
Johnny Unitas was 30 in 1963
Joe Montana was 30 in 1986
Terry Bradshaw was 30 in 1978

Carry on.

So, Montana won his two MVPs at age 32 and 33; Elway won super bowls at 37 and 38, one of them a super bowl MVP. 30 is just mid career for a great QB if he stays healthy.

 

[Gicksauce]

It seems to me that good QBs nowadays are far from exclusively great college QBs. Drafting high on QBs seems to be a complete crapshoot and you are just as likely to get a franchise QB in the later rounds. I think that starting in a couple of years, the Pats should start drafting a QB in the 5th or 6th round every year and see which one rises to the top rather than putting all your eggs in one basket with a 1st or 2nd rounder that rarely pans out as predicted and has buried numerous franchises.

You all talk like there have been a lot of Tom Bradys. He was a complete fluke and complete luck on the part of Pioli. You're obviously much more likely to get a good QB in the first couple rounds.

 

[Tommysgirl]

You all talk like there have been a lot of Tom Bradys. He was a complete fluke and complete luck on the part of Pioli. You're obviously much more likely to get a good QB in the first couple rounds.

Tony Romo says hi...just sayin

 

[desi-patsfan]

Tony Romo says hi...just sayin

I dont know, i am still not sold on Romo.

 

[Tommysgirl]

I dont know, i am still not sold on Romo.

I don't think he's phenomenal, but he's a lot better than a lot of first rounders the last few years.

 

[Doctor DDS]

Do not disagree that getting someone of Brady's ability was a fluke especially in round 6. It's also a fluke in round 1. Brady is one of the 10 best QB's to ever play the game. They do not come around that often. The likelihood that we get a replacement anywhere near his level is minscule. We will be in a major rebuilding mode upon his departure unfortunately. That's why we need to ride this wave as long as we can.

 

[bradmahn]

You all talk like there have been a lot of Tom Bradys. He was a complete fluke and complete luck on the part of Pioli. You're obviously much more likely to get a good QB in the first couple rounds.

But when you already have the best quarterback in the league it is foolish and stupid to use a top pick on a developmental player to take his place four years from now (at the earliest, barring any horrendous injuries). Marc Bulger, Tony Romo, Derek Anderson, Brady, etc., you can name a lot of good quarterbacks who are going to give their teams a chance of winning that came out of the latter part of the draft (just as you can the early part of the draft, but picking a quarterback can very much be a crapshoot and selecting one early can have horrendous consequences if that player is not successful). While I have the utmost confidence in Belichick and Pioli to be able to get a very good quarterback in the first few rounds (pending availability), I don't think that is what they need to do considering Brady is only thirty and has several years left playing at a phenomenal level.

 

[alamo]

Anyone drafted now would long be a free agent before Brady declines significantly.

Plus, you can never tell, great QBs tend to play longer than you think they will. Wasn't Arron Rodgers drafted by GB in 2005 to be Favre's successor? His rookie contract may run out before he gets the chance.

 

[patsfan13]

You all talk like there have been a lot of Tom Bradys. He was a complete fluke and complete luck on the part of Pioli. You're obviously much more likely to get a good QB in the first couple rounds.

Well if you were a Pats Fan you would know that BB/SP have had a lot of 'flukes' and 'lucky picks' over the years. BTW Guiterrez has looks like he could develop.

In the mean time we have another 3-4 SB's to look forward to with TB.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

I dont know, i am still not sold on Romo.

I'd take him over some other recent 1st rounders, like Boller, Rivers, Young, Eli.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

But when you already have the best quarterback in the league it is foolish and stupid to use a top pick on a developmental player to take his place four years from now (at the earliest, barring any horrendous injuries). Marc Bulger, Tony Romo, Derek Anderson, Brady, etc., you can name a lot of good quarterbacks who are going to give their teams a chance of winning that came out of the latter part of the draft (just as you can the early part of the draft, but picking a quarterback can very much be a crapshoot and selecting one early can have horrendous consequences if that player is not successful). While I have the utmost confidence in Belichick and Pioli to be able to get a very good quarterback in the first few rounds (pending availability), I don't think that is what they need to do considering Brady is only thirty and has several years left playing at a phenomenal level.

just look at the Packers having wasted a #1 on Aaron Rogers. He's been a benchwarmer for waht 4-5 yrs now ?

 

[unoriginal]

just look at the Packers having wasted a #1 on Aaron Rogers. He's been a benchwarmer for waht 4-5 yrs now ?

By most accounts the Packers are pleased with Rodgers' progress.

It seems to me that good QBs nowadays are far from exclusively great college QBs. Drafting high on QBs seems to be a complete crapshoot and you are just as likely to get a franchise QB in the later rounds. I think that starting in a couple of years, the Pats should start drafting a QB in the 5th or 6th round every year and see which one rises to the top rather than putting all your eggs in one basket with a 1st or 2nd rounder that rarely pans out as predicted and has buried numerous franchises.

This is inaccurate. You are three times more likely to find a good quarterback in the first round than in any other round of the draft.

 

[Flying Fungi]

Brady is 30. He only has a couple more years of play on the same level.

How soon do the pats need to start looking to draft his eventual replacement?

This is a funny post.

You're a funny poster Gick.

Brady sets records, runs a team that sets records, and apparently is on the verge of a precipitous drop in his skills, health and performance.

That's it ladies and germs. Tom Brady is made of GLASS!! :bricks:

 

[Gicksauce]

This is a funny post.

You're a funny poster Gick.

Brady sets records, runs a team that sets records, and apparently is on the verge of a precipitous drop in his skills, health and performance.

That's it ladies and germs. Tom Brady is made of GLASS!! :bricks:

All I'm saying is that he'll be 31 next season. Beginning to think about who will replace him is very reasonable.
I know BB values consistent greatness over a prolonged period of time; the team will not continue its dynasty if there's a huge dropoff as Brady ages.

 

[Disco Volante]

Super Bowl's won by QB's older than the chosen one...

31
Terry Bradshaw
Ken Stabler

32
Joe Montana
Phil Simms
Doug Williams

33
Bart Starr
Joe Montana
Steve Young
Jim Plunkett
Joe Theismann

34
Brad Johnson
Bart Starr
Len Dawson

35
Roger Staubach

36
Jim Plunkett

37
John Elway
Johnny Unitas

38
John Elway

I usually never say this because I feel it’s snobbish and unnecessary but this occasion calls for it…dumb topic.

 

[Flying Fungi]

All I'm saying is that he'll be 31 next season. Beginning to think about who will replace him is very reasonable.
I know BB values consistent greatness over a prolonged period of time; the team will not continue its dynasty if there's a huge dropoff as Brady ages.

And I think that this is what most of us are keying on--the assumption that there will be a huge dropoff. The way this team is built, a huge dropoff for Tom Brady would render him Chad Pennington, and Chad Pennington would have gone at least 12-4.

There is no existing evidence or logic that leads me to believe that Tom Brady will experience a huge dropoff in the next 5 years.