Too good to not get a QB

[QuinielaBox]

Maybe the defense should learn who to stop the single wing offense. I think we might have lost the game yesterday even if Brady started.

Jeez that was embarrassing.

Say hello to a 5 and 11 season.

 

[Leave No Doubt]

The OL is no worse than many QB have won playing behind. We have three pro-bowlers.

I remember when we had hardly any Pro Bowlers- back in 01 maybe? I'd have to look that up. Anyway I do remember lots of Pats fans either complaining that we 'got no respect' because of it and/or complaining about Pro Bowl elections in the first place-popularity contest,etc. Obviously that's because we didn't have too many at that time- not even Brady got voted in. I guess what I'm saying is I'm not sure how much of a measure the Pro Bowl really is,or if we've just turned it into one. It's an interesting question though

What it does remind me of is that some of our OL guys have been together a long time, and it's a tough job. Somebody should have knocked Joey Porter on his a*, that much I know. There was a time he would have been rendered more or less useless.

 

[Deus Irae]

The OL is no worse than many QB have won playing behind. We have three pro-bowlers.

When that OL with those three bowlers stunk it out against the Giants in the Super Bowl, how many points did Brady put up?

 

[AzPatsFan]

Garcia is more then enough.The guy will have the weapons here and has an arm to get it to Moss and throw beyond 15 yards.The guy can scramble also for his age.

Garcia easily would have put up 250 yards or more today.

And what exactly would 250 yards have meant? Zero, Nada, Nothing, Zippo.

The Defense lost this game. The age and slowing of Tedy and Rodney were exploited, unmercifully. BB at least recognized that an Guyton was playing before too long.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Matt was not great, but anyone who thought there were not going to be growing pains was just deluding themselves.

What was a quarterback going to do about the horrendous defense?

I come to this board this morning, and the first page is full of posts about the OL and the QB. Is anyone else even just a little concerned about the fact that what we saw out of our defense in the preseason games seems to be what they are? Or at least yesterday gives you a nagging suspicion. All preseason, when the first string defense was out there, we could see they weren't very good. Yet, all I read on this board -- and I admit I drank the kool aid -- was that they were playing "plain vanilla." I still kept asking, "why is the middle of the field always so wide open?" Well, now two games in the regular season, I'm asking the same question. Favre wasn't disciplined enough to stick with it, but the middle of the field was open all day long against the Jets, and now the middle of the field is wide open again, which just opened the running game like the red sea once the Pats tried to correct it.

This is a way bigger problem than QB.

 

[PJM]

Let's break this down:
1) will changing the QB help if the team plays like it did yesterday? No. we can all agree on that.

2) Does the team owe Cassel more time? No; he is not a talented rookie, he is a veteran backup. He has had years to learn the offence. He is either ready or not. You can't argue against a new QB as he would need time and then demand that Cassel be kept until he gets it.

3) Can Cassel be improved upon? This is the main point of disagreement. I don't believe he will be more than a game manager and this team is not built to win like that; we lack the pounding running game and the dominant defence. If we can get a better QB I'm for it.

4) Who? There's the rub: there are not a lot of good veteran QBs out there. Garcia is the only option - which will increase his price. As an ignorant fan I favour getting Garcia but if BB doesn't like him I'll bow to his superior knowledge and support Cassel. I think that the other names I've seen (Culpepper, Simms, etc) are bigger risks that sticking with Cassel.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Is anyone else even just a little concerned about the fact that what we saw out of our defense in the preseason games seems to be what they are? Or at least yesterday gives you a nagging suspicion. All preseason, when the first string defense was out there, we could see they weren't very good. Yet, all I read on this board -- and I admit I drank the kool aid -- was that they were playing "plain vanilla." I still kept asking, "why is the middle of the field always so wide open?" Well, now two games in the regular season, I'm asking the same question. Favre wasn't disciplined enough to stick with it, but the middle of the field was open all day long against the Jets, and now the middle of the field is wide open again, which just opened the running game like the red sea once the Pats tried to correct it.

This is a way bigger problem than QB.

I agree.
I let the low scoring in the 1st 2 games assuage my doubts.
Reportedly, Big Sey said on WEEI that "We were running around like chickens with our heads cut off out there". An apt description that speaks ill of the coaching and I'm sure is not a welcome comment to BB's ears.

With all the talent on the front seven, Sunday's run fest was the bigest shock to this longtime fan's expectations.

 

[Absurdly Metro]

What position does Brady play on defense? If Tom had played today, the Patriots would still have lost. I would have liked some calls for throwing the ball downfield and also to use Matt's running ability ( just enough to keep the defense honest).

I'm not so sure about that. What happens if Brady takes us down the field and scores a TD on that first possession? And the next? Maybe the Fins start to feel pressure that they have to score on every possession to compete with us? As a result, maybe they abandon the run early and we never see the Ronnie Brown show? Maybe with them in a throwing mode our pass rushers can tee off instead of the defense being back on their heels having to worry about the run? Maybe mistakes are made and we get a few turnovers?

IMO, I could see it turning into a Pat's rout just as easily with Tommy Boy in there. Brady changes the whole complexion of a game. He is scary good in this offense. IMO, he masks many of the defenses deficiencies.

OTOH, with Cassel teams know they are going to be in the game. They can be more comfortable knowing their margin for error is greater. There's less pressure on them to be perfect and it opens up the whole playbook. Hence the potential for the things we saw yesterday.

 

[D-Money]

People are getting on the defense and with great reasons to.I think this was just a horrible game and hopefully one to forget.I expect the D to play better but seriously, is this team gonna score over 20 points with Matt Cassel?

 

[DW Toys]

Let's break this down:
1) will changing the QB help if the team plays like it did yesterday? No. we can all agree on that.

2) Does the team owe Cassel more time? No; he is not a talented rookie, he is a veteran backup. He has had years to learn the offence. He is either ready or not. You can't argue against a new QB as he would need time and then demand that Cassel be kept until he gets it.

3) Can Cassel be improved upon? This is the main point of disagreement. I don't believe he will be more than a game manager and this team is not built to win like that; we lack the pounding running game and the dominant defence. If we can get a better QB I'm for it.

4) Who? There's the rub: there are not a lot of good veteran QBs out there. Garcia is the only option - which will increase his price. As an ignorant fan I favour getting Garcia but if BB doesn't like him I'll bow to his superior knowledge and support Cassel. I think that the other names I've seen (Culpepper, Simms, etc) are bigger risks that sticking with Cassel.

Good comments sir.
Here is my opinion in a nutshell. Too many fans are trying to say, "look what happened to Brady the first (actually second) game against the Finns in 01. We won the SB".
Big difference here is that Brady had confidence and swagger and Cassel does not. There was a reason he sat on the bench at USC. This experiment proves that Cassel is no Brady. If we are going to tank the season (and I believe that the insertion of Cassel the remainder of the season would be just that "lets develop our #2 guy for 2009 and beyond".
If there is a QB in the NFL who looks the most unprepared to play this game it is Cassel after four years (mind you) as "THE BACK-UP QB". Bill and Scott, we believe in you but unless we get someone who can put some points on the board, we are in for a long season. Playoffs????????Playoffs???. The Patriots fans pay for a good product, well then give us one. I think our "boy wonder" OC had hit his peak last year(should have taken the job, Josh). He is not equipped for this type of crisis. I wasn't happy with his play calling at the end of last season either (see SB).
No, I am not a fair weather fan, just a truthful one. Our "D" was bad yesterday. TB would have helped our defense out by putting points on the board. The oppositions" game plan then changes. All you smart guys know that would have stopped their "single wing" because it would have made Chad put it up. Different outcome. Yes our "D" was bad, but we had a few of those last year.
If we are no offensive threat whatsoever, it keeps other teams in the game K.C.? Please! Miami...Yikes. Cassel? No mas!
Letter to the F.O., Does Matt Cassel really give the N.E. Patriots the best chance of winning in 2008? We all agree this is still a Playoff caliber team. Should we be on the phone today rounding up some of the usual suspects during the BYE?
I am not a Culpepper fan, but he gives us a better chance that Cassel. You are lying to yourself if you disagree with this. My first choice would be Garcia pending trades, CAP etc.
The Pats do not play well for Cassel. Does anyone disagree with that? Is it chemistry? Who knows? I have never seen a pro football player with such a lack of confidence. Some of those sacks yesterday were not the O-Lines fault. I d' fine him a thousand per sack and now let's see if he flings it. And I do agree that Kaczur has to get his head out of his rectum. He had digressed since last year big time.

It's confidence. Cassel has no feeling for if he can make the throw so he eats it. Yes, a few of you have to readjust your thinking. Garcia, a Holcombe or even Culpepper gives us a better chance to win.

Visualize this. Each game is a multi-million dollar production. How many "productions" should an inferior product or a "bad part" be allowed to proceed? Shouldn't we seek alternatives or should we wait until we are 2 and 5 or 6 to say, "oops?!". If I hear the words "manage the game" one more time...... Are we playing not to lose or to win....That is the question here. Cassel can throw 3 TDs next game and he is still not the right part for our team.
DW Toys

 

[Carpentier]

What about the Washington Redskins backup Todd Collins? He played pretty well last year when he started.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

but the middle of the field was open all day long against the Jets, and now the middle of the field is wide open again, which just opened the running game like the red sea once the Pats tried to correct it.

A question for which I don't have an answer--is that because of the players, or the defensive playcalling, or some combination of both?

 

[40yrpatsfan]

I'm of 2 minds about this:

- the offense and Cassell were not the problem yesterday, it was the D. We got 13 and should have had 16 points, which should have been enough to win. They didn't look great, obviously, but how do you know how much of that wasn't the OL? If you try to fix QB when the problem is OL, you make things worse

- Otoh, Pennington picked things up in about 4-5 weeks for Miami, so you would think that a Garcia would be about the same.