Pats not trading Garoppolo - Schefter

[hornetfb85]

Wait we may still be listening to offers....

 

[deroc5050]

Perfect spot but what will san francisco give us in return.

The #2 pick and a 2nd rounder next year.

Edit: I have no idea

 

[PatriotsPimp136]

The #2 pick and a 2nd rounder next year.

Edit: I have no idea

I might take that offer. Browns might take trubisky with the first pick lol

 

[patfanken]

So basically after 23 pages (so far) and almost 450 posts (so far) this thread comes down to this "the Pats won't trade Jimmy Garapolo......unless, of course, they do. " to the extreme

 

[bormio]

Sure, teams would know Pats need to trade Garoppolo if they keep him another year.

That doesn't mean they will let him go cheap to another team if they think he will solve their QB problems.

They are not paying Brady AND giving JG $20 mil to hold a clipboard

 

[TomPatriot]

So there is 1 and he is one of the greatest of all time. As I said there can't be too many.

And it's a rather obvious one. Tony Romo hardly played at all for his first two years. He was 25 when he got his first start. Matt Cassel, who was played beyond his ability for a few years, hardly played in his 4 years of college and first 3 years in NE. I think using number of passes thrown in recent years as a predictive method is flawed.

 

[TomPatriot]

....and Roger Staubach threw under 100 passes a year in 3 of his first 4 seasons and he kinda had an OK career

Good point! I forgot about that!

 

[Huckleberry1]

True, but even immediate past is not always prologue. He's 40 and could be injured or in significant decline by next year. Or he could bang out another great year or three. It's impossible to tell and I only give him the benefit of the doubt because he's Tom Brady.

Ok Max.

 

[slash83]

Just listened to a podcast where Florio from PFT believes Schefter is working with the Pats in trying to drive up the asking price for Jimmy G.

To me personally from the Pats prospective in all this it never made sense saying no matter what he wasn't going to be traded.

 

[Huckleberry1]

It's mind boggling.

"He could be the next Steve Young" - He got one Super Bowl which happen to be the last 49er SB trophy.

"He could be the next Aaron Rodgers" - One Super Bowl in 8 years. Great googly moogly.

Or we could keep Brady until he's done because I know he knows how to win a Super Bowl.

Agree completely, half of his detractors here are using the same " he's going to drop off a cliff" argument Kellerman used, and all Brady did was To go 14-1 and lead the greatest comeback in NFL history. The other half are using the " he could get hurt" argument, when it was the guy they want who only lasted 5 1/2 quarters of live action who they want behind center.

Absolutely NOTHING in Brady's play indicates any drop off whatsoever. He takes better care of himself than any player ever has and it shows in his play and his ability to rebound from playing. A week after the Super Bowl he was skiing and told King he felt great, so it's pretty clear that his body is not listening to the clock it's listening to how he treats it. Brady will be the QB for at least 4 more years and will get them at least one more Lombardi, if not more. Talk of getting rid of him so his back up can play is literally insane.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Good point! I forgot about that!

There are dozens of QBs who did nothing of substance or rode the bench early in their careers but went on to be very good players later on.

Steve Young and Rich Gannon are others that come to mind

 

[patsfan13]

Brett Favre rode the Pine and had an OK career. But Jimmy G will not be the Pats QB of the future.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Brett Favre rode the Pine and had an OK career. But Jimmy G will not be the Pats QB of the future.

IIRC Favre rode the pine for only one year in ATL then was a starter Year 2 in GB.

I don't understand why people think just because Jimmy carried a clipboard for 3 years he won't be a star.

Do people know who the 1st string QB here is??

 

[Ring 6]

And it's a rather obvious one. Tony Romo hardly played at all for his first two years. He was 25 when he got his first start. Matt Cassel, who was played beyond his ability for a few years, hardly played in his 4 years of college and first 3 years in NE. I think using number of passes thrown in recent years as a predictive method is flawed.

2 years is not 3
If garoppolo turns into matt cassell whoever he is playing for will be very disappointed.
It's not a "predictive method" it's a detriment to success.

 

[Sfpat]

There are dozens of QBs who did nothing of substance or rode the bench early in their careers but went on to be very good players later on.

Steve Young and Rich Gannon are others that come to mind

Steve McNair didn't play at all his first two years

 

[MainePatsFan26]

He can do that, I will most likely stop following football if he does. Anyone who just wants to root for the laundry is welcome to do that, that's not me and never has been. Belichick has the responsibility to do what he thinks is best for the team, I'm not bound by that, I'm a fan and I've never seen any player in any sport do more for their team than Brady has. Brady has routinely set aside millions and millions of dollars to give the Patriots the leeway to build championship teams, no one does that, he's special and as long as he's playing really good football I want him in NE. And while you can mock those of us who feel that way you are also talking about getting rid of the GOAT for a player who couldn't make it through two games, and that's idiotic imo.

Q: Is Brady better than Jimmy G. next season? A: Yes.

Q: Is Brady better than Jimmy G. two years from now? A: Yes.

Q: Is Brady better than Jimmy G. three or more years from now? A: Maybe.

Investing in Jimmy G. as a potential starter is a fool's errand with how Brady is playing. Barring injury *fingers crossed*, Brady will be easily better than his understudy for the next two seasons. In a third season, Brady's body may begin to feel the effects of father time more acutely. With his regimen and body, who can honestly say how long he can keep this up. The point is that Jimmy won't be a better investment than Brady for at least three seasons. If we keep Jimmy for more than this upcoming year, we have to pay him 15-20 million per season in my estimation. That means losing a ton of players. If Brady isn't one of them, then we saddled our team with two quarterbacks and no Super Bowl prospects. That isn't sensible.

I suspect this "we're not looking for a trade" is code for we'll keep Jimmy all the way up to the trade deadline to deal to a team who lost a quarterback. And hopefully we squeeze them dry like a lemon. And with Jimmy's frame and tendency towards injury, I think they'll have a lemon of their own to deal with. I like a lot of what he brings to the table, but I can't help but see a Tony Romo type of player whenever Jimmy has the ball: agile and competitive, but made of glass. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd rather keep Brady as long as possible -- even into decline -- to close out his and Bill's legacy. At that point, run the team into the ground, hire a new front office, ship everyone decent away for picks, and get a new, hungry head coach with a potential high draft pick the next season. The run can't continue forever, but let's enjoy it while it lasts: Brady is a proven winner and might get another ring; Jimmy G. is a complete unknown and not worth destroying this team's cap space over.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Steve McNair didn't play at all his first two years

Yep. He was drafted high but needed time under I think it was Chris Chandler to learn an NFL offense. He went to some backwater school. I forget where.

 

[Ring 6]

Staubach started 10 of 14 games in year 3
McNair threw 213 phase in his first 2 years and was full time starter by the end of year 2
Favre sat 1 year
Steve young started 2 years in the usfl then started for Tampa before going to sf

As I said sitting for most of 3 years is not a positive thing for a QB. That is why you are very few cases of QBS who were largely idle for that long bursting into the scene as a star.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Q: Is Brady better than Jimmy G. next season? A: Yes.

Q: Is Brady better than Jimmy G. two years from now? A: Yes.

Q: Is Brady better than Jimmy G. three or more years from now? A: Maybe.

Investing in Jimmy G. as a potential starter is a fool's errand with how Brady is playing. Barring injury *fingers crossed*, Brady will be easily better than his understudy for the next two seasons. In a third season, Brady's body may begin to feel the effects of father time more acutely. With his regimen and body, who can honestly say how long he can keep this up. The point is that Jimmy won't be a better investment than Brady for at least three seasons. If we keep Jimmy for more than this upcoming year, we have to pay him 15-20 million per season in my estimation. That means losing a ton of players. If Brady isn't one of them, then we saddled our team with two quarterbacks and no Super Bowl prospects. That isn't sensible.

I suspect this "we're not looking for a trade" is code for we'll keep Jimmy all the way up to the trade deadline to deal to a team who lost a quarterback. And hopefully we squeeze them dry like a lemon. And with Jimmy's frame and tendency towards injury, I think they'll have a lemon of their own to deal with. I like a lot of what he brings to the table, but I can't help but see a Tony Romo type of player whenever Jimmy has the ball: agile and competitive, but made of glass. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd rather keep Brady as long as possible -- even into decline -- to close out his and Bill's legacy. At that point, run the team into the ground, hire a new front office, ship everyone decent away for picks, and get a new, hungry head coach with a potential high draft pick the next season. The run can't continue forever, but let's enjoy it while it lasts: Brady is a proven winner and might get another ring; Jimmy G. is a complete unknown and not worth destroying this team's cap space over.

I agree with you on Brady being better than Garrapolo for the next three seasons but I disagree on burning the house down and starting over after that. What Belichick has created that other franchises have not been able to create successfully is a program, and they have done at every level of operation, from scouting and drafting to pro player evaluation and cap management, to the structure and expectations they have for their coaches, trainers, and game day operations. They have a successful and integrated system in place for every aspect of the franchise. And while it's difficult to imagine them being this successful when Brady and Belichick retire I think they will be able to pass the torch and will maintain the systems and structures they have in place that make them so successful as a franchise. They won't be able to duplicate the success they have with the two respective GOATS but Caserio and MacDaniels or Caserio and Patricia will still run a really organized franchise and maintain the program they have developed for years to come, and someday that may ultimately be the greatest aspect of Belichick's legacy.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Just listened to a podcast where Florio from PFT believes Schefter is working with the Pats in trying to drive up the asking price for Jimmy G.

To me personally from the Pats prospective in all this it never made sense saying no matter what he wasn't going to be traded.

That's really disrespectful to Schefter. I think he's reporting what his sources are telling him but he's in no way in cahoots with the franchise. And I don't agree with what Schefter has reported.