Cassel was looking fine until Moss got the dropsies. An incomplete pass to Moss on 3rd and 2 from the Pitt 11 meant that the Patriots had to settle for a field goal. Big Ben drove Pitt down for a TD. Cassel then answered for the Patriots by driving them from the Patriots' 27 down to the Pittsburgh 9. 3 incompletions to Moss later, Gost missed a field goal. That was, basically, the end of the half.
To start the second half, Cassel led the team from the Patriots 24 to a 2nd and 1 on the Pitt 31. Cassel was then sacked and taken out of field goal range. Pitt went on a 7 minute drive that ended in a FG. That was followed by Slater's fumble and touchdown which made it 20-10. The very next offensive play was the sack/fumble on Cassel, which lead to another FG, and the beating commenced. How that's supposed to be Cassel not looking comfortable to that point is something I just don't fathom. Prior to the Slater fumble/Cassel fumble combination, it was just a good game between an excellent defense and an improving offense with Moss' bad hands being the main difference in Pittsburgh's favor.
Cassel misfired on 20 passes, threw for 169 yards and had two picks. The fact stands that he didn't have a very good game against an elite defense, no matter which way you cut it. After that, he didn't face another one for the rest of the season. Put Brady up against Seattle, Oakland, Arizona in a blizzard, and Buffalo and he'd look like an all star too.
You're equating numbers with performance as if it's a 1 to 1 thing when it's not. Furthermore, Cassel's numbers in the second half of last season were just fine on their own.
Yes they are. How else are we supposed to determine a quarterback's production? It's one thing to measure a team's production with adding up wins and losses, but a quarterback's production is determined by the overall numbers that he puts up and which defenses he does it to. And yes, Cassel's numbers were just fine on their own. My argument was never that Cassel's numbers sucked in any way. However, Brady's numbers are better and against better competition on defense.
Yeah, I don't agree with much of this, other than the O-line playing better at the end of last season than it has this season, although it's been generally fairly solid in the passing game. Brady's been wildly inconsistent at the key moments this season, and Brady had Galloway on his team, but couldn't find a way to make that work. Galloway, even at 38, was a better player than any other WR3 Brady's played with before, and that includes Gaffney.
So you don't agree that if the O-Line has played better this season, Brady wouldn't have more time to throw? That Brady wouldn't have extra targets in Watson and maybe Baker because they wouldn't be helping out in the blocking game as much? I'm not sure I'm fully understanding that statement. And no, it hasn't been solid in the passing game lately. Drives ended in the second half of the Colts game because Brady was getting hit by Robert Mathis when he practically took the third step in his dropback. Against the Jets, Ryan even admitted that they only showed blitz in the first half and then brought it in the second half. The results? Drives once again stalled and Brady was once again getting hit/on his back. In the first half of the Saints game, the O-Line looked very good when it was healthy. Brady was able to stand upright. Exit Stephen Neal and Brady was once again on his back. When the O-Line has been healthy, it has looked great. When injuries occurred, our lack of depth has showed thus having to take Watson and Baker and place them in blocking situations more often and thus taking weapons out of the passing game that Cassel had last year.
Gotta say I agree about Galloway. I wish the team would have been more patient with him because I believe that it would have been paying dividends right now. I wouldn't put the blame for him being off the team on Brady so much as on the coaches, though neither you nor I will ever know what went down behind the scenes. However, I have to disagree, respectfully, with the fact that he could have been the best WR3 that Brady's ever played with before. I would rather have Stallworth back over Galloway. But that's just me.
Gaffney caught 38 passes last season. Edelman's already caught 26 passes this season, and he's missed games due to injury. It's time to put the myth of Gaffney as the difference maker to bed.
First, Edelman is not the WR3 on this team. He hasn't been all season. That title goes to Sam Aiken. Edelman is the WR4 on this team and that will only change if he comes back healthy and is inserted into Aiken's spot on the other side of Moss. Furthermore a chunk of those catches were made in the Jets game when Welker was out of the line-up. Secondly, I never said Gaffney was a difference maker. My argument is that he was the better WR3 than Aiken currently is.
I think the team should have kept Galloway and designed plays that allowed him to run more standard routes. I think that failing to make the system flexible when there wasn't a better option was a mistake.
I agree.
But it's not as if Edelman, Maroney and Aiken haven't made up for Gaffney, because they have. They just haven't made that 3rd option a clear upgrade, which it could have been had the team found a way to make the Galloway option work.
The jury's still out on that for me. Obviously, there's time left in the season to make that statement true. Edelman has been very good when he's been in. But he has been injured this year and has missed a good amount of time. As I've said before, Maroney didn't start catching passes until just recently and hasn't exactly set the world on fire when doing it. However, if they use him in the passing game more as the season goes on then that could change. Aiken was given every open look possible against one on one coverage against the Saints and never really made them pay for doubling up on Moss and Welker. He put up some decent numbers though. However, aside from that game, he hasn't really done much else this season except for one catch against Tampa Bay and some good blocking when we execute screen plays. Like I said, the jury is still out though. Hopefully these guys make us all forget about letting Galloway go and also make us forget about the likes of Gaffney and Stallworth.
Also, you're using the full season from last year. That's not what the poll was asking about. It was asking about the team at the end of last season. Pats1 has already put up some numbers about it. I consider the switch point to be the Jets game, myself.
Maybe I'm not fully understanding you, but the poll is asking about the worst Pats team since 2004. It only seemed right to use the full season to try to make the point. I used the numbers since Week 5 of this season only to try to make the sample size as similar as I could.
