I know this is a very unpopular thing to say, but I firmly believe the Pats would be a better football team right now with Matt Cassel at QB. Brady's long admired accuracy and pocket awareness have been missing this season. I recorded the Ravens and Broncos game and have watched both several times, and Brady missed many open receivers that would have kept drives going or scored TDs. I don't know if anyone has noticed or mentioned it, but Matt C has almost the exact same QB rating with 1 more TD than Mr Brady. He is doing that with a patchwork OL and a horrendous WR crew. A lot of the posters on this board look at the D, the OL or the defensive play calling, but I truthfully believe the sub-par play this team has shown so far lies on the right shoulder of Tom Brady. The entire offense revolves around him. The OL is designed as a pass blocking unit, which hurts the running game. The team has no true #3 WR (Aiken couldn't crack Buffalo's sorry WR crew) because in the past Brady has made below avg WRs look decent when playing with him. Maybe he will get it back, but he has shown nothing but avg to below avg play so far. I don't remember if he won one of the parking spots this offseason, but if he did not, I find myself wishing he would have put in the time he used to. I know it is crazy, but I cannot, with 100% confidence, say I am totally happy we traded Matt C and kept Brady. I think about what he would have brought NE in a trade, combined with the progress Matt C showed last season, and I can't help but be curious about how strong of position this team would be in moving forward...3 2nd rd picks next season, Oak's 1st rd pick in '11 and whatever Brady would have brought in compensation combined with the open cap room that would have allowed for major FA signings. I know I may get laughed off this board, but I just wonder if the Pats would be in a stronger position right now if the trade had been different.