Belichick Blind Spot

[Deus Irae]

Equivalent numbers, one for one game played to completion and a few mop up efforts, the other for 136 games over 14 years. Evidence of equivalent ability? - not in my book.
Frerotte defines journeyman. Cassell will never ascend to that level.

Wait... if you can't compare the equivalent numbers, how you can reasonably make a claim as to a comparative evaluation?

 

[DarrylS]

As much as I have a vague concern, have to remember who our back up was last year... but do not expect that back up to be on the roster this year.. read where Charlie Batch went down yesterday.. not sure there is a lot available right now to fit this need.

Do not think it is a blind spot though..

 

[LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks]

I don't think Belichick undervalues depth at the QB position at all. As others brought up, he thought highly enough of backup QB's to use a 3rd rounder on a guy that you pray never sees the field.

The problem is that good backup QB's are tough to find because the majority of them are just starters for bad teams. Another "problem" is that Brady is as durable as anyone in the league and will obviously never be benched due to poor play. There's really no incentive for a very good backup, like say, Chad Pennington, to come here because he knows he'll never get on the field...so they go to teams with mediocre quarterbacks or young, unproven quarterbacks and a chance to start.

The Colts have the same "problem". No one good wants to play behind a future Hall of Famer who has been remarkably durable.

 

[Fencer]

There is no team in the league that is good enough to win the Super Bowl with their backup quarterback.

It's been done in the past.

Of course, that was in the pre-salary-cap era, and in a time of much simpler offenses.

 

[Fencer]

Brady behind Bledsoe

Uh -- good point.

 

[strongside]

I thought we agreed that dumb threads would stop after TC started?

Not sure why you think this is a dumb thread but I think the poster has a valid point.

Lack of QB depth is really a league wide problem. No team would be in great shape if they lost their starting QB. However, I have always been a big fan of having a vetern guy as your back-up and a #3 that you develop. In addition I think having a backup the TB respects like Testeverde helps in his preperation. Not that TB doesn't respect Cassel ect but it must be tough to play teacher every year with this guy.

 

[jmt57]

I had a major sense of déjà vu with this thread, but now I know why.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=89893

 

[Patriotic]

Brady's don't grow on trees.

True. But what about Ryan Leaf?

 

[p8ryts]

Rohan Davey was with Arizona for a year.

 

[RayClay]

I'd like to see a quality vet backup too.

I think the problem is about twenty teams starters are really quality backups or worse.

I think he feels, at any given time, he can pick up one as good as any he could carry on the roster.

 

[blackglass3]

I'm sure Belichick is fully cognizant of the need for a good backup QB. Sadly, they don't grow on trees. Many teams don't even have a good starting QB.

I think Bella got to the root of the problem. Look at some of the STARTERS in the league. Chris Redman, Tavaris (sp?) Jackson, Grossman OR Orton, Kyle Boller, Brodie Croyle...The league is too big and the QB play suffers. The Giants signed David Carr in the offseason and considered him an upgrade, for God's sakes. Yes, the same David Carr that runs for his life every time he drops back to throw.

Cassell is not great, we all agree. Right now he is decent at best. But would we be better off with Daunte Culpepper or Aaron Brooks?

 

[NormZauchin]

Wait... if you can't compare the equivalent numbers, how you can reasonably make a claim as to a comparative evaluation?

Very simply.

Three coin flips. Three right guesses. One hundred percent accuracy.

Twenty coin flips. Twenty correct calls. One hundred percent accuracy.

Percentages are the same, the degree of luck is not.

Percentages are very useful, but they have to be considered in the context of the number of trials.

 

[Deus Irae]

Very simply.

Three coin flips. Three right guesses. One hundred percent accuracy.

Twenty coin flips. Twenty correct calls. One hundred percent accuracy.

Percentages are the same, the degree of luck is not.

Percentages are very useful, but they have to be considered in the context of the number of trials.

Now......... extend the logic you are using and figure out just why, using your own examples, it's completely idiotic for fans to be getting set in their evaluations of Matt Cassel right now.

 

[NormZauchin]

I think Bella got to the root of the problem. Look at some of the STARTERS in the league. Chris Redman, Tavaris (sp?) Jackson, Grossman OR Orton, Kyle Boller, Brodie Croyle...The league is too big and the QB play suffers. The Giants signed David Carr in the offseason and considered him an upgrade, for God's sakes. Yes, the same David Carr that runs for his life every time he drops back to throw.

Cassell is not great, we all agree. Right now he is decent at best. But would we be better off with Daunte Culpepper or Aaron Brooks?

I guess that is the key question. Is the quarterback position in the NFL so diluted of talent that it is not possible to bring in any quarterback who is better than Cassell.

I should mention in an aside that I have not always been down on Cassell. I thought drafting him with a low pick was a clever, high reward, low risk type of move that Red Auerbach made in his heyday. The best day of Cassell's career was the last game of the 2006 season when he almost beat Miami. Since then he does not seem to have progressed.

Unless Belichick has actively sought to bring in veteran QBs and has failed, I remain puzzled why he sticks with a backup like Cassell, when he (Belichick) wouldn't trust him with a 21 point lead in the second half against the weakest team in the league.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I must begin (to ward off anticipated sniping) by saying that I think Bill Belichick is the best coach in the NFL and perhaps the best of all time. I will be eternally grateful for all he has done for New England Patriots football.
That said, I have no idea why he thinks that quality depth is important for the offensive line, the defensive line, the secondary, etc., yet apparently has seldom thought that quality depth is important at quarterback.

The game last night highlighted the dilemma the Pats will be in if Brady should ever go down. But this year is not unique. Does anyone remember the Rohan Davey experiment? After we cut him, no team bothered to pick him up, even for a tryout - and that includes Romeo out in Cleveland. Last year and apparently this year, Belichick has been content to go with backup QBs, not one of whom could win more than 2 or 3 games in a 16 game season. I do not believe that there are not retired or inactive QBs better than the likes of Cassell (and Davey in past years).

When we had Damon Huard and number 12 as backups, we had real depth. Those days are gone. Even Flutie and Vinnie provided some degree of insurance. This crew does not.

I suggest that Bill call the following ex-Patriot quarterbacks to see if any one is willing to come back and hold a clipboard: Vinnie, Flutie, Bledsoe, Grogan, and Plunkett. It would be an improvement.

How do yopu know that Vinny is NOT on speed dial?? I think you are a dollar late ...

 

[NormZauchin]

Now......... extend the logic you are using and figure out just why, using your own examples, it's completely idiotic for fans to be getting set in their evaluations of Matt Cassel right now.

Well, for one thing, fans are probably looking for something more than they have seen from Cassell in a fourth year player. Frerotte had played a significant number of games by the time of his fourth pre-season.

There is also something that goes beyond pure stats. I remember watching a pre-season game in Brady's second year in which he got significant playing time. The offensive moved when he was out on the field - not always to a score - but definitely better than it had been doing under Bledsoe. I remember remarking to a friend who was watching the game with me, that I'd like to see Brady be given a shot at the starting position.

During Thursday's game I had a bit of that feeling with O'Connell. (Not that I want him to start in place of Brady.) The team seemed to move with him in there. I do not get the same feel with either Cassell or Gutierrez.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, for one thing, fans are probably looking for something more than they have seen from Cassell in a fourth year player. Frerotte had played a significant number of games by the time of his fourth pre-season.

There is also something that goes beyond pure stats. I remember watching a pre-season game in Brady's second year in which he got significant playing time. The offensive moved when he was out on the field - not always to a score - but definitely better than it had been doing under Bledsoe. I remember remarking to a friend who was watching the game with me, that I'd like to see Brady be given a shot at the starting position.

During Thursday's game I had a bit of that feeling with O'Connell. (Not that I want him to start in place of Brady.) The team seemed to move with him in there. I do not get the same feel with either Cassell or Gutierrez.

The guy made 4 pass attempts behind an offensive line that supposedly was getting beaten, and untrained people are acting as if they know what the hell they are talking about and insisting that a player who beat out Testaverde sucks despite BB's having him on the roster for years. It doesn't get much more stupid than that.

 

[NormZauchin]

The guy made 4 pass attempts behind an offensive line that supposedly was getting beaten, and untrained people are acting as if they know what the hell they are talking about and insisting that a player who beat out Testaverde sucks despite BB's having him on the roster for years. It doesn't get much more stupid than that.

One reason why I seldom post a thread is because it is difficult to have a discussion without someone resorting to name calling. Yes, everyone who questions Matt Cassell's ability and his role as primary backup is stupid.

 

[wdkantro2]

In the only NFL game of any real importance that Cassel has played significant minutes, the kid played well enough that the Patriots had a chance to win the game in the last minute of the game. His struggles in one preseason game should not be enough for people to be attacking him the way they are.

You mean against the Dolphins, when he immediately threw a pick 6 against a team who would only win one game all year which would lead to him getting yanked while still up 21 because he can't be trusted with that lead? Yeah, that guys' definitely a viable backup.

 

[Deus Irae]

One reason why I seldom post a thread is because it is difficult to have a discussion without someone resorting to name calling. Yes, everyone who questions Matt Cassell's ability and his role as primary backup is stupid.

I didn't call you, or anyone else, stupid in that post. The act of making a fixed evaluation based upon such limited data is what I called stupid.