Hoyer Cut

[patfanken]

Which means none of those six teams (maybe five if we are one who would resign him) would offer any sort of pick, even a "take Hoyer and a seventh for our sixth" kind of trade.

How do we know?

Well if DEN just did that deal for Dawson, clearly we were shopping Hoyer around as well, IMO.

If for instance IND had serious intent, surely they call and ask about Hoyer yesterday, no?

I don't disagree at all, and that's why I postulated he wouldn't get cut long term. If the Pats KNEW they were letting him go, wouldn't they have tried to get something for him, even a low pick?

So I'll either be vindicated when he gets back or I'll be PISSED at the fact they let an asset go for nothing. I won't be upset about being wrong. It happens.

 

[patfanken]

I posted it a few times but didn't finish it on that post. Hes never been a starter on a team that won more than 3 games in a row.

Oh, now I get it.

 

[ALP]

The point still stands, because BB wasn't willing to expose Stidham to being snatched away by another team, whereas with Hoyer he was.

It's clear BB values Stidham more, so the next question is, why bring Hoyer back and take up a third spot on the 53 man roster for him?

Hoyer is not eligible for practice squad, and it's clear BB doesn't want to risk losing Stidham by putting him on the practice squad, so those doors are closed.

I suppose if we have players we want to move to IR that could happen, yet we're already being told that Thomas is being positioned for that move.

Maybe if we have more than 2 players to move to IR, or maybe if DT ends up on DEN as is rumored?

If you're Hoyer, do you really want to be brought back to be third string instead of keeping the guaranteed money and getting on with whatever is next in your life?

i don't think this has anything to do w/ who BB values more, but with who other teams would value more...hoyer had a much higher likelihood of not being targeted by other teams, but any team that would have drafted Stidham would have targeted him if he were released

 

[IcyPatriot]

Stidham gets more reps to advance his growth ... it is/was the right move.

 

[PP2]

Count me amongst those who whiffed on this move. My predicted roster had 3 QB's on it.

I guess that the team is making a huge gamble here in favor of accelerating Stidham's growth and that can only happen if Stidham is taking QB2 reps.

 

[Patsgofor4]

 

[Ring 6]

retired players don't make $1.5M

He would since his 1.5 mill was guaranteed.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Count me amongst those who whiffed on this move. My predicted roster had 3 QB's on it.

I guess that the team is making a huge gamble here in favor of accelerating Stidham's growth and that can only happen if Stidham is taking QB2 reps.

It is a gamble no question

...but the right one to take

 

[Ring 6]

I posted it a few times but didn't finish it on that post. Hes never been a starter on a team that won more than 3 games in a row.

How many backups have?

 

[ralmat55]

I’m sure they tried to trade him. They had $1.5 million reasons to do so as the team he was traded to would assume his salary guarantee.

My guess is the guarantee was the reason he wasn’t traded. And, if that’s the case, the offers he probably will be getting as a FA might not be enough of an inducement to sign anywhere quickly.

 

[Ring 6]

It is a gamble no question

...but the right one to take

I don’t know. If Brady goes down I’d rather not have a rookie QBs more than I would miss the 53rd player we kept in order to release Hoyer.

 

[Ring 6]

I’m sure they tried to trade him. They had $1.5 million reasons to do so as the team he was traded to would assume his salary guarantee.

My guess is the guarantee was the reason he wasn’t traded. And, if that’s the case, the offers he probably will be getting as a FA might not be enough of an inducement to sign anywhere quickly.

The possibility of bringing him back probably was the reason.

 

[PP2]

It is a gamble no question

...but the right one to take

I hope we don't find out for a couple more years. At least two, preferably.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don’t know. If Brady goes down I’d rather not have a rookie QBs more than I would miss the 53rd player we kept in order to release Hoyer.

My view is the are f__ked ether way.

Might as well see if the kid has it sooner rather than later.

 

[Froob]

Safe to say he definitely isn’t coming back? Cassel outta be available if we need him later.

 

[Family]

Someone on one of the sports stations made a good point. If you really want Stidham to develop, he needs to run the scout team and do the things a backup QB does.

Making him watch is like a redshirt year (this is my opinion now), which we know historically is not to the best interest for the players development.

It's not like the old days when defenses stayed together for a decade.

 

[Ring 6]

My view is the are f__ked ether way.

Might as well see if the kid has it sooner rather than later.

What if we are 8-3 and Brady goes down for 3 weeks?

 

[Ring 6]

Someone on one of the sports stations made a good point. If you really want Stidham to develop, he needs to run the scout team and do the things a backup QB does.

Making him watch is like a redshirt year (this is my opinion now), which we know historically is not to the best interest for the players development.

It's not like the old days when defenses stayed together for a decade.

You can have him do all that but have Hoyer around in case of injury

 

[Family]

You can have him do all that but have Hoyer around in case of injury

If he's practicing as the backup, and will not play as well as Hoyer, then he does not have starter potential and you might as well move on.

 

[Ring 6]

If he's practicing as the backup, and will not play as well as Hoyer, then he does not have starter potential and you might as well move on.

The assumption is that he isn’t ready to play. Why would forcing him on to the field change that?
I’m saying if you keep 3 because you want Hoyer to play if there is an injury and Stidham to develop you can still get Stidham plenty of practice reps.