Could we stomache a down year to grab draft cap after brady goes?

[Yorkshire Pat]

Personally I would rather save draft cap and not get a QB in the draft whilst brady is here. Would anyone else be happy with us using hoyer and going 2-14 for a year in order to get a really high draft pick and then bag the next baker mayfield.

Or do you place the year spent under brady as mor eimportant

 

[Brit patriot]

We draft well in the next two years, I feel Hoyer could get us to 9-7 at least.

So no, get a QB to learn.

 

[jan08]

Regardless of whether we would or not, I'm certain the head coach and GM wouldn't be happy with a 2-14 season

 

[farn]

Never. Play to win every game. Losing leads to losing with losers.

Suck for Luck became suck with Luck. Win. None of the « can’t miss prospects » are actually can’t miss...

 

[Yorkshire Pat]

interesting. there is always a risk that the draft that year has zero standout QBs. My thought process was mainly to make the most of bradys last few years and give him a good team. Persoally i wouldnt be that uset having a crap year the year after brady goes if we can get long term QB.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

I wouldn't tank a season for draft capital and I doubt anyone in the Patriots organization thinks that way.

However, we've won more and more consistently than I could ever imagine and if we have a few years of average to mediocre performance, I will still be strong.

 

[RedSleevesPinkStripes]

I would value "the next guy" having a year under Brady, and I would never want Hoyer to be the starter nor see the Pats tank.

farn already said it best: "Losing leads to losing with losers."

 

[mgteich]

Tanking a season to get one top draft choice is not the patriot way.

 

[mosslost]

Personally I would rather save draft cap and not get a QB in the draft whilst brady is here. Would anyone else be happy with us using hoyer and going 2-14 for a year in order to get a really high draft pick and then bag the next baker mayfield.

Or do you place the year spent under brady as mor eimportant

Etling gonna roll

 

[mosslost]

Never. Play to win every game. Losing leads to losing with losers.

Suck for Luck became suck with Luck. Win. None of the « can’t miss prospects » are actually can’t miss...

Luck is looking pretty good now though. (Though I think he could suck again)

 

[mosslost]

Never. Play to win every game. Losing leads to losing with losers.

Suck for Luck became suck with Luck. Win. None of the « can’t miss prospects » are actually can’t miss...

also, out of fairness farn Luck went 11-5 his first three years and then 10-6 this year. I have always ragged on the Colts, but their new coach is good, and you never know what they might do. All the more reason Brady needs to play until he is 50.

 

[mosslost]

interesting. there is always a risk that the draft that year has zero standout QBs. My thought process was mainly to make the most of bradys last few years and give him a good team. Persoally i wouldnt be that uset having a crap year the year after brady goes if we can get long term QB.

I know Brady is the "exception" but doesn't it seem true that the great QBs don't necessary HAVE to be top 3 picks in round 1? (Brady obviously, Montana)

Yes, they have to be good but any QB that gets drafted must be able to be coached up. Everyone talks about Brady being 199. And 6, some terrible QBs were drafted ahead of him.

But even still, that means that in the entire country, Brady was essentially considered a top 7 QB prospect, no? 7 out of the whole country. My son and I talk about that sometimes, it means he was pretty good.

At least that is how I think about it sometimes.

 

[sb1]

Wait a couple years then we can Lose for Lawrence

 

[farn]

also, out of fairness farn Luck went 11-5 his first three years and then 10-6 this year. I have always ragged on the Colts, but their new coach is good, and you never know what they might do. All the more reason Brady needs to play until he is 50.

In fairness to you : I don’t give a rat’s *** about regular season “success”. WHAT the hell is that ? It’s loser talk for “we suck in the playoffs”.

Andrew Luck will be THIRTY before the second game of next season. What does he have ? Universal praise, an ugly beard, and - best yet - one BLOWOUT appearance in the AfcCg. Not the SB. He’s not even good enough to be a SB loser.

September 1989. Zero SB appearances. Loser.

Yes, yes : blah blah blah NE was awful for years...... that was no more acceptable. Win. I know it’s 2019, but I don’t care about feelings. Win. Produce. Win.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

Could we stomache a down year to grab draft cap after brady goes?

What is a draft cap?

 

[oldrover]

Could we stomache a down year...

That's where I stopped reading. Dude... after a two-decade dynasty, if Pats fans can't handle a down year...

...for any reason at ALL...

 

[farn]

(having said that, I love me some @mosslost - just so sick of the excuses everyone has for losers... SB wins are everything... there is first place and F all...)

 

[Steve102]

Tanking a season to get one top draft choice is not the patriot way.

There's not a big enough like button for this. Have we not learned that we don't need to pick at the top of the draft board to compete? While I fully am prepared for a 6-10, 5-11, 7-9 seasons once BB and Brady go, I think the notion of tanking is ridiculous. The Steelers were 6-10 in 1999 and 2003. It can happen here and it won't be the end of the world. Compete and get better.

 

[mosslost]

In fairness to you : I don’t give a rat’s *** about regular season “success”. WHAT the hell is that ? It’s loser talk for “we suck in the playoffs”.

Andrew Luck will be THIRTY before the second game of next season. What does he have ? Universal praise, an ugly beard, and - best yet - one BLOWOUT appearance in the AfcCg. Not the SB. He’s not even good enough to be a SB loser.

September 1989. Zero SB appearances. Loser.

Yes, yes : blah blah blah NE was awful for years...... that was no more acceptable. Win. I know it’s 2019, but I don’t care about feelings. Win. Produce. Win.

I pretty much agree with you but Peyton Manning was 29 or 30 when he won his first Super Bowl. Luck has been to AFC title game one time (same amount Manning had been to by his 30 year old season) so I am just saying that Luck, who I basically ridicule because we just dominate him, has had some success, that's all. Compare his win loss record to many QBs. Honestly only a few (Brady, Rothlisberger, possibly Brees but not sure) are better givend the same time period. Rogers even probably just right around the same as Luck. (and he does have like 4 playoff wins too)

 

[brdmaverick]

I am 1000% ok with us not doing well after Brady goes.

My logic is this............

Brady is a 'once in a lifetime' player. We need to give him all the help he needs for TODAY. We can't worry about 'post Brady' b/c....

I think any QB who comes in after Brady is setup to fail. The expectations would be too enormous. I think it would be better for the franchise to stink for a year or two while trying to rebuild.

Once we've had that bad 'rebuilding taste' in our mouths, we'd be able to appreciate and up and coming team. We would actually appreciate a team just making the playoffs (even as a wild card). Meanwhile if we don't rebuild 'just making the playoffs' will seem like a huge failure.

So count me in the camp of 'it's ok to go backwards before we go forwards again'