Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by KDPPatsfan85, Feb 13, 2013.
Dont shoot the messenger(me)
Matt Cassel - Kansas City Chiefs - 2013 Player Profile - Rotoworld.com
I would only sign him for vet min or slightly more. Given that he's made huge money over his contract, I don't know if he'd want to keep playing for that little money.
It might be interesting to have him play TE or something in addition to backup QB. Maybe give him some incentives for that. All for the team. Test his loyalty.
I don't think this will wash. At this point the Pats have to be thinking about making sure TFB's replacement is on the roster. I don't think his replacement will be Matt Cassell, who proved in KC that he can't carry a team. I think the Pats hold onto Mallett, continue to groom him, and if he's that good, continue to go with only 2 QBs on the roster.
This presupposes some other team would want Mallett over Cassel.
Umm -- why would they?
Wouldn't you want Mallett over Cassel at this point? It's the promise of a QB who might be great (although he hasn't shown anything yet) vs. one you've seen and would rather not see any more of.
Youth. Potential. Improvement from one Pre-season to the next. Mallett was talked about as a 1st rounder for a reason. He fell because of "character" rumors. Rumors that turned out to be false.
Cassel is damaged goods right now. He's confidence is shot because of the number of hits he was taking behind the poor KC O-line the last few years. And because of his injuries.
I could see the Pats adding Cassel even if they keep Mallett.. From the standpoint that he excelled under McDaniels.
of course they would....cassel sucks
Most of Cassel's problems in KC were Pioli's fault.
did pioli draw up the plays? did he force cassel to look stupid? pics of his mom or something?
No tape is better than putrid tape.
Because Cassel has been a borderline Pro Bowl QB when he's had a decent offensive line in front of him, and Mallet's been a borderline #2/#3 QB, but Cassel's probably looked at as damaged goods after last season. His confidence seemed shot almost from the beginning.
Mallet, on the other hand, can throw the ball really hard.
Because Cassel sucks and Mallett might not?
No, but he saddled Cassel with a terrible head coach (Haley) and OL, and then when he finally got an OC who could work with Cassel (Weis) he let his terrible head coach drive Weis to the NCAA.
I am not joking here when I say that while I find Mattie to NE intriguing, I would want him to commit to spending extended sessions with a good sports psychologist as part of the deal. The KC experience damaged what was a career at its start.
One guy made the Pro Bowl (even if that's as sketchy as Pro Bowl invites get), and hasn't gotten wrecked PHYSICALLY since then, doesn't have addiction rumors about him, etc. The other has never accomplished much on an NFL field even in preseason, and nothing when the NFL games count.
If money's the same, I go with the guy who's played well in the past.
I'm not going to shoot you, but I am going to follow to the original link and see what is up, in order to attempt to gain a bit of context.
New England Patriots Mailbag: Who to target in free agency - ESPN Boston
Q. Mike, why would the Pats possibly trade Ryan Mallett? Tom Brady has two years left at most! -- rezadude (San Diego, Calif.)
A. The idea would be that if a team would give the Patriots a valuable draft chip, it would be worth it because Mallett has just two years left on his contract and would leave anyway after the 2014 season to pursue a starting job. Making the trade would also align with the thought that Brady has more than two years remaining to play at a high level, and that the backup job could be filled through other avenues (e.g. Matt Cassel, if released by the Chiefs).
So what we have is Mike Reiss responding to the often asked question about trading Ryan Mallett, and throwing Cassel's name out there as someone the Pats might look to sign if indeed Mallett were to be traded.
Rotoworld is a wonderful site for compiling a lot of links to specific teams and players all in one place, but the analysis they add in sometimes leaves a bit to be desired. When you read the original column it is obvious that Reiss was just throwing a name out there if - if - Mallett were to be traded - and not genuinely speculating that Cassel would be returning to the Patriots.
More telling is an explanation on the very next question as to why Mallett is unlikely to fetch enough value in return to make it worth trading him.
Perhaps a better question would be whether or not Cassel would want to return to New England? Would he see himself as a possible successor to Brady? Or would he prefer to go to another team where he had a better chance to play sooner?
I love the idea. Not sure what it would cost and if he would come cheap enough for me to still like it but from a pure back up stand point he is a very good option. As the eventual replacement for Tom hell no (maybe you can compete for the spot if your still around).
IMO what you should be looking for in a back up QB is one of two things a developemental guy like Mallet or a vet with some experience who you think could give you at least .500 winning percentage so you could tread water for a 4-8 week period if your starter went down. It would be great to have better but then he would be starting somewhere.
I dont see the need for Cassel to be QB3 so this would likely include a Mallet trade which if you assume a better pick then the 3rd rounder we originally invested than this is not a bad move.
Brett Favre hadn't accomplished anything on the field when he was traded. In fact, all Favre had accomplished was throwing 2 interceptions and being sacked once.
Mallett is sitting behind one of the greatest (if not THE GREATEST) QB to have ever played the game. And now, that is somehow a detriment to him? Because he hasn't surpassed Tom Brady?
The fact that Belichick only went with TWO QBs, one of them being Mallett, when he's typically gone with 3, shows a level of confidence in Mallett that you rarely see from Head coaches, particularly ones with Belichick's pedigree.
I would love to have Matty back. I know he's had struggles in KC, but he did have a Pro Bowl season there. He's a solid QB in a tough situation.
If Brady were to get injured, you would have to feel much better about the team's chances with Cassel than the raw and unproven Mallet. Cassel played well with a similarly talented group of weapons in a similar offense in 2008. Granted we do not have Randy Moss to take the top off the defense, but otherwise, the offense attacks defenses in a similar way.
Until you know what you have in Mallett, I'm not sure how you could conclusively make this claim.
Separate names with a comma.