The argument to keep only two quarterbacks....

[SeanBruschi54]

There has been a ton of discussion on whether or not we should bring in another vet or go with Cassel as our backup and find a Vet.

I say we go with two quarterbacks during the season and here is the reasons why.

-Brady is a machine so far in his career. He has not been hurt and has taken hits very well. He plays to win and at high caliber and doesn't let little injuries here and there get in his way of his ultimate goal. Winning. Brady has shown he can play through pain well and has not missed a game since i can remember.

-The offensive line has been incredibly bulked up this off-season with depth and size. In past years Brady has been rushed and sacked do to injuries in the line. This off-season the Patriots main goal was making sure that line stays big and in tact so if one guy were to go down the next would step up and plug right in. Thus trying to make sure the injury bug if it hits is well prepared for. Especially its significant help to the running game.

-If Brady were to go down in a game Cassel could come in and do a very respectable job. Better than most vets out there but not better than guys that just wander around as backup QB's besides if Brady were to go down its not like Cassel would get hurt in that game too. The chances of that happening are so slim its staggering.

-Then people would start saying well what if Brady is out for an extended period of time? Well then all you have to do is send one of Bramlet or Mortenson (whichever is better) to the PS and call them up when and if that happens. Its not like someone is going to drop an experienced vet in the middle of the season and no i don't want Kerry Collins on this team to play backup starter whatever. That's insulting to every patriots fan in the world.

-The only other thing 3rd string QB's would do is be the opposing teams QB to help the defense in practice. Solution there have another player do it. Players like Kevin Faulk, Don Davis and Bethel Johnson (of all people) have done it in the past why not one of those guys (minus BJ) or a coach.

In all I'm basically saying why waste a spot on a dead position on this team when you can keep and extra DB, LB, OL or DL? Its just smart team managing is all I'm trying to say. It helps with depth gives the defense, or offense, more depth and helps the team overall.

JMO feel free to disagree or try and change my mind.

 

[BelichickFan]

I agree with everything you said. And although you touched on it I would like to emphasize that we have Dillon and Maroney to stay fresh now with Faulk around too compared to last year when, at times, we had none and most of the time only had one. The OL should help the running game but just having those running backs fresh (and talented) should add to the difficulty defenses will face coming after Brady as herd as they have in the past.

 

[BradyisGod]

I'll probably get crucified for this, but I agree with your point on one premise. If Tom Brady goes down for an extended period of time, the team isn't going anywhere anyway. So why waste a spot?

 

[SeanBruschi54]

I'll probably get crucified for this, but I agree with your point on one premise. If Tom Brady goes down for an extended period of time, the team isn't going anywhere anyway. So why waste a spot?

Exactly, your next best shot is Cassel. Unless you can get Tim Rattay and make him Tom Brady 2.

 

[BelichickFan]

I'll probably get crucified for this, but I agree with your point on one premise. If Tom Brady goes down for an extended period of time, the team isn't going anywhere anyway. So why waste a spot?

I am on the 2 QB side but it's a little short sighted to say we're done if Brady gets hurt. If he breaks a leg, sure. But the 3 QB areguement would be that if he misses one game, would we have been better off with a Fiedler (when he was a UDA) or Kerry Collins or Cassel ? And that one game could make the difference in seeding and HF.

 

[BradyisGod]

I am on the 2 QB side but it's a little short sighted to say we're done if Brady gets hurt. If he breaks a leg, sure. But the 3 QB areguement would be that if he misses one game, would we have been better off with a Fiedler (when he was a UDA) or Kerry Collins or Cassel ? And that one game could make the difference in seeding and HF.

that's why I said extended...

 

[BelichickFan]

that's why I said extended...

Well you should have bolded it or something, you can't expect me to read every word

 

[TPL]

I asked the same question on the other board but:

Is Flutie a viable option if required?

 

[Patriots4Ever]

well said.I agree.I think if Brady and Cassell both go down.at that point.does a third QB really matter all that much...Granted,we do need to get the ball down the field but at that point,lets lean on the running game.

 

[BelichickFan]

I asked the same question on the other board but:

Is Flutie a viable option if required?

He'll be announcing college football games so I think he's pretty much moved on.

 

[SeanBruschi54]

I asked the same question on the other board but:

Is Flutie a viable option if required?

Nah he's passed on. Not dead, but dead in the pro football leagues.

 

[TPL]

Don't count me as one of the huge Flutie backers....and we all know we are in it deep if Brady goes down for any length of time.
But even if Cassell is injured in preseason or regular season practice (or drops a mirror on his big toe) it would be nice to have someone come in as a back-up who has some experience with the system.

Sorry if this question may have been asked before.
Why not have another QB taking snaps, at least in the preseason?

 

[SeanBruschi54]

Don't count me as one of the huge Flutie backers....and we all know we are in it deep if Brady goes down for any length of time.
But even if Cassell is injured in preseason or regular season practice (or drops a mirror on his big toe) it would be nice to have someone come in as a back-up who has some experience with the system.

Sorry if this question may have been asked before.
Why not have another QB taking snaps, at least in the preseason?

We have 4 QB's right now. Brady, Cassel, Mortenson, Bramlet. They will all have snaps moreso the later guys mentioned. Is that what you were asking?

 

[TPL]

We have 4 QB's right now. Brady, Cassel, Mortenson, Bramlet. They will all have snaps moreso the later guys mentioned. Is that what you were asking?

Yes, sorry.
I was meaning to say why not another vet taking snaps.
I guess it will be as you mentioned one of the other two will be brought up if required.

 

[patsox23]

Vinny T is Tommy goes down or if Cassel shows he's not quite ready in pre-season games.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Vinny T is Tommy goes down or if Cassel shows he's not quite ready in pre-season games.

The nice thing about Shadow or Stealth roster players, is that they don't take a spot on the 53, or count against the cap unless needed. Both Vinnie T and Douggie F know the Patriots system and plays already as well.

 

[mgteich]

The general attitude seems to be that if Brady breaks a leg, we're done for the season. The second attitude seems to be that it is OK for Brady to play hurt as he has in the past. If this is our attitude, then we don't need a veteran.

On the other hand, some of think that we have a team, not just Brady and his offense (I think there is another club that has that situation). Many teams in the past have been able to overcome not having the league's premier QB out for a few games. So, for me, I'd rather have the veteran. A veteran works with the scout team, with the coaches, can call in plays, and if necessary run the team for a few weeks. I did feel better when we had Huard! And a #3 QB does NOT take up a Game Day roster spot, just one of the 53. An inactive deelopmental LB or DE could be placed on the PS instead of on the inactive squad each week.

 

[Welker83]

NO WAY THEY KEEP 2!

Who knows about the 3rd QB rule?

In a game the team must list 45 "active players"...the other 8 are not activated for that week and are not elligable to play... According to NFL rules you can list your 3rd QB as non-active BUT he can then play in the game for that week. The drawback is that once the third string guy goes in your other 2 QB's are no longer elligable to play.

This is the reason why Pennington's ARM is messed up...he and the team wanted him to be able to go back in so after fielder went down instead of going to bollinger who was inactive they put pennyarm back in and he worsened the inury to his arm.

So basically there isn't much of drawback having a 3rd QB since he doesn't count against the active roster...AND if brady somehow does get hurt for a week or 2 who will be behind cassell if he goes down? And how good will they be if they are trying to learn the system AND play during the same week...


Thats just not smart football...

 

[pats1]

NO WAY THEY KEEP 2!

Who knows about the 3rd QB rule?

In a game the team must list 45 "active players"...the other 8 are not activated for that week and are not elligable to play... According to NFL rules you can list your 3rd QB as non-active BUT he can then play in the game for that week. The drawback is that once the third string guy goes in your other 2 QB's are no longer elligable to play.

This is the reason why Pennington's ARM is messed up...he and the team wanted him to be able to go back in so after fielder went down instead of going to bollinger who was inactive they put pennyarm back in and he worsened the inury to his arm.

So basically there isn't much of drawback having a 3rd QB since he doesn't count against the active roster...AND if brady somehow does get hurt for a week or 2 who will be behind cassell if he goes down? And how good will they be if they are trying to learn the system AND play during the same week...


Thats just not smart football...

I'd rather keep somebody like an Eric Alexander on the roster instead of keeping a Bramlet or Mortensen.

Just not smart football?

3 of the top AFC teams started 2005 with only 2 QBs. Pittsburgh, Indy, and Denver.

 

[Mike the Brit]

Last time we had this thread I thought that I was making a joke when I said that we were waiting for Rohan to be cut.

But think about it.

The Patriots were once prepared to have Rohan at number 2. In Arizona, he's behind Warner, Leinart and another guy (John Navarre?) Surely the Cards cut him or, at least, trade him cheaply.