Report: Browns and 1st rounder for Garappollo (Maybe Yes or No or Who Knows)EDIT

[Huckleberry1]

Anyone bringing Hoyer into this discussion as a positive is a total honk and isn't worth talking to.

I'm glad Tommy isn't having a temper tantrum anymore. It was worth selling the future and getting jack **** in return.

Troll

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

People need to chill with threads.

I see a certain stat in one a thread and someone makes a thread about that stat?

Low hanging fruit people. The trade is done. It's over.

We're on another SB run and have plenty of picks for the draft.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Anyone bringing Hoyer into this discussion as a positive is a total honk and isn't worth talking to.

The one problem with the Pats not having a third QB on the practice squad for much of the last decade is that there were basically only four other QBs with knowledge of the system: Brissett (Colts), Cassel (Titans), Mallett (Ravens), and Hoyer (49ers). So if they shipped off their only remaining backup, their choices were (1) get one of the above QBs, or (2) risk screwing things up badly if Brady missed a game or two.

So, yes, having a team that could use Garoppolo and give them Hoyer back is a positive for the 49ers trade. Moreover, they got the 49ers to eat his contract; trading for him would have cost the Pats their comp pick.

 

[Ross12]

It's real hard finding a crappy backup QB. You know what really would have mitigated the risk? Keeping Jimmy.

Your arguments make zero sense. You line of logic has been “the Pats should have gotten more and Hoyer doesn’t count because he’s bad.” Even if you think Hoyer is bad, there’s a lot of worth in having a guy who knows the system, versus signing some street guy and having to teach him the system mid-year. You’re risking the whole current season just to get a little more draft value. When this is pointed out to you, you say “well you know who would’ve been a better backup, Jimmy!” ... in which case they would get zero draft picks next year and maybe a third round comp pick the year after.

Your argument seems less like an honest opinion and more like trolling..

 

[Ring 6]

It's real hard finding a crappy backup QB. You know what really would have mitigated the risk? Keeping Jimmy.

That would have obviously been a mistake because it turns out he wasn’t needed and you would have had to let him walk for nothing.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

7 SB'S & 5 WINS in under 20 years. But let's talk about Jimmy some more.

 

[PatsDeb]

BB never said they would have tagged Jimmy.

He's talking about the 49ers, in response to my point that Jimmy G. hasn't even signed a long term contract yet, so the 49ers took a big risk in offering their 2nd round pick for a short-term rental (who was unproven at the time).

 

[RobertWeathers]

He's talking about the 49ers, in response to my point that Jimmy G. hasn't even signed a long term contract yet, so the 49ers took a big risk in offering their 2nd round pick for a short-term rental (who was unproven at the time).

Ok my bad

They are tagging him at all cost.

 

[PatsDeb]

They'll unquestionably tag him if they have to. They've said as much. So there won't be any free agency for him this year.

And of course, the 49ers, unlike the Pats, can afford to tag Jimmy G. when he asks for way too much $$ (I'm kidding about asking for too much - he should obviously milk it for all it's worth). It will be interesting to see if Jimmy G. plays under the tag. If he does, does that redeem BB in the eyes of those who think he got too little (I am not in that crowd)?

 

[reflexblue]

Hes Gone

 

[PatsDeb]

Hes Gone

You could just, I dunno, not read the thread? That's the PatsDeb way of making it stop.

 

[rochrist]

And of course, the 49ers, unlike the Pats, can afford to tag Jimmy G. when he asks for way too much $$ (I'm kidding about asking for too much - he should obviously milk it for all it's worth). It will be interesting to see if Jimmy G. plays under the tag. If he does, does that redeem BB in the eyes of those who think he got too little (I am not in that crowd)?

Pretty sure he'll play under the tag if he has to. But SF has said they want to work out a long term deal and I expect they will either now, or later.

 

[rochrist]

BB never said they would have tagged Jimmy.

We were talking about SF.

 

[Observer]

Well, yet another reason why it sucks to be the browns

 

[reflexblue]

You could just, I dunno, not read the thread? That's the PatsDeb way of making it stop.

I can't avoid seeing the thread, and You Didn't have to respond

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Put yourself in BB's position. Cleveland is a pain to deal with, they reneged on deals and failed to send in paperwork on others. there is a risk they screw up the trade (negating the deal and league office won;t help) and Jimmy leaves as free agent, netting the Pats a late third (maybe if there is no offsetting signings). They might have hedged on picks and been a risk to back out at the last minute. Compare that to SF ( like Arizona w Chandler Jones). It was a stealthy deal that went off without a hitch...Value of pick was less but deal went smoothly....
Looking at it in the macro, I can see SF being more than willing to deal with the Pats again ( obviously). In a league where the reputation was " if you are making a deal with the Pats you're going to get screwed", this shows the opposite can be true...
Belichick did what was best for the Patriots, it just also happened to be what was best for Jimmy G.....
Finally this is revisionism on the part of Sashi to make himself look good for future employers.......I don't believe they ever offered it beyond feelers,,,,This is an organization that just put together the WORST two year stretch in NFL history, worse than the expansion TB Bucs ( they were 2-26)..........Browns were 1-31 and we are supposed to beleive they wanted Jimmy G.. Had he gone 0-5 and not 5-0 and Sashi would have been saying he was glad they never made an offer for JAG.......
rant over...

 

[PatsDeb]

I can't avoid seeing the thread, and You Didn't have to respond

Yes, I can see that by your profile pic...

 

[hornetfb85]

Oh no, not again!!!!

 

[nabwong]

Another point. I’m not sure if anyone has said this but we essentially traded Jimmy for a 2nd AND Hoyer. I don’t think we’d be able to get an adequate backup had we traded Jimmy to the Browns.

 

[reflexblue]

Yes, I can see that by your profile pic...

Thats me being forced to watch the game day thread.