do math, Brady would win 90% in the scenario and Mallet 67%. Its entirely hypothetical, it would give Mallet experience before he has to shoulder the starting job. I'm young, I plan on rooting for the team after Brady and want to see the best long term solution which right now is to give Mallet experience.
I feel like I'm just taking the bait, but how can you say that is the "best long term solution" for the Patriots? You can't, because, like the rest of us, you've never seen Mallet play a meaningful down in an NFL game. So, you might be guessing, but you can't know.
The best thing Mallet and Hoyer have going for them in this discussion as far as I can see is that Bill Belichick has had a chance to observe them up close for one to three seasons in practice and in Camp and hasn't cut either of them.
Since Belichick is rational, we can reasonably surmise that he thinks one or the other could stand in for Brady should he be injured. Beyond that, we have no idea if he thinks that one or the other or both of them might be a potential successor to Brady or if he thinks that one or the other or both of them has or will have trade value.
None of us can have any idea what Belichick's Plan A, B or C is when it comes to replacing one of the GOAT QB's, who is still playing at the top of his powers and, by all indications, is ready to do so again this year.
And, please, give up this "tag team starters" idea. NFL teams don't field multiple starting QB's for many reasons, not the least of which is that the timing and cadence of the offense is unique to each QB. Making an Offense re-adjust multiple times in a season to a new QB, no matter how talented, is not going to work.