Brettlax3434
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2009
- Messages
- 632
- Reaction score
- 41
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I would have laughed my buddy out of the room if he tried that on me, come on now man.
So I'm talking to a friend today about the Cassel situation and his argument is more of the same old same old about the "wisdom" of keeping Cassel as insurance against Brady not being 100% next fall. I then bring up SB 42 and Brady not being 100% for that game and ask him if, in hindsight, he thinks Cassel would have given us a better chance at victory that day than a hobbled Brady against the NY front seven.
To his credit he qualified his answer by admitting that the 2007 Matt Cassel would not have given us a better chance to win. Then he says, "But the Matt Cassel we saw at the end of this season would definitely have given the Pats a better shot to win."
My question to Pats fans (and especially to the "Pats should not trade Cassel crowd") is simply this; Do you agree?
The whole question was my attempt to paint him in a corner over his insistence that it was "crazy" to trade a "proven commodity" like Cassel when there is so much uncertainty surrounding Brady's knee.
IMO a one legged TB is still better than a two legged MC and even if TB is not back to full speed by next September and has to gut through some games until he's 100% again (ala Peyton Manning this season), I'd still say he gives us the best chance to win the most games.
He, of course, did not agree. That's when I drew the corollary between that scenario and if he would start this season's MC over a hobbled Brady in SB 42. It was astonishing to hear an otherwise rational Patriots fan squirm his way into saying MC would have given us a better shot to win SB 42 simply to avoid having to admit that trading Cassel is the only logical thing the Pats can do with him.
I couldn't wait to post this conversation tonight because I've read so many good posters on here saying the same things he does about the need to keep Cassel as insurance (not to mention the loons who have created the Monster thread posing the question of actually trading TFB). I'm actually surprised none of them are on here arguing as my friend did. Perhaps they've come to their senses by now.
Off-season boredom/insanity?why did i read this thread?
2008 vs Steelers and SB 42 had one thing in common - Matt Light meets Burnination.
There was more to that SB loss than QB play, for sure. Defense and O-Line collectively sucked that day. Brady gave us a better chance.