MMQB - Brady is last of the Mohicans and not planning to leave any time soon.

[Deus Irae]

A first year player will still be getting into the groove, that's why weeming him in would be effective, If Brady starts 10 or 11 games he will win probably 9 of them or more, and Mallet will probably win no less than 3, probably 4 of the 5 or 6 that he starts. That is enough for 12 or 13 wins, making the playoffs and have Brady light it up for a SB run.

It's not going to happen, so there's no use in you beating the drum for it.

 

[BradyFTW!]

A first year player will still be getting into the groove, that's why weeming him in would be effective, If Brady starts 10 or 11 games he will win probably 9 of them or more, and Mallet will probably win no less than 3, probably 4 of the 5 or 6 that he starts. That is enough for 12 or 13 wins, making the playoffs and have Brady light it up for a SB run.

So, by your estimation, the Patriots will win approximately the same percentage of games with Mallett as with Brady? Well damn, in that case why not just trade Brady? He may be one of the best QBs of all time, but apparently you've seen enough of Mallett to know that he's equally as good.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

A first year player will still be getting into the groove, that's why weeming him in would be effective, If Brady starts 10 or 11 games he will win probably 9 of them or more, and Mallet will probably win no less than 3, probably 4 of the 5 or 6 that he starts. That is enough for 12 or 13 wins, making the playoffs and have Brady light it up for a SB run.

Honestly, you need to give this nonsense up. Even GB couldn't pull that off. Neither could SF. Had Montana been healthy Young might have never started there, because the starter has to get the vast majority of the reps in practice or nothing works, although back in those days you could keep a player on your roster indefinitely in anticipation of something happening because there was no cap or contract limitations. And further back no real FA.

Mallett is here no longer than through 2014, period, unless Brady goes down and stays down, and there is no guarantee even if he does that Mallett is the successor. Could be Hoyer if it happened this year. They'd just have to extend or tag him ala Cassel. Or the next QB Bill signs going forward. Mallett has some tools or skills, but lots of college QB's have yet somehow they don't succeed in transition. And he didn't fall out of the first solely because of character concerns, there are lots of teams that will overlook those. He was consisdered a borderline first rounder to begin with by many scouts because of questions about/holes in his game.

I can understand fans wedding themselves to most any backup when the incumbant isn't getting the job done. Saw that here with Bishop before anyone even knew who Brady was. But in a case like this it's more like be careful what you long for... Mallett may prove to be a starting quality QB in the NFL, or he may not. And whether he does or doesn't it may or may not happen here. Insuring he makes it anywhere isn't likely a BB priority. He's not Andy Reid. He drafts backups first as backups and then as developmental projects and possibly trading chips. But it's on them, all he gives them is a shot to prove they can develop. He's not the kind of HC who makes a point of manufacturing spin or driving perception. He's too busy trying to figure out how to win now and keep winning consistently with the team he is fielding. And for as long as he's still standing here that will be with Brady not only starting every game but taking 99% of the 1st team practice snaps.

 

[Avenger]

So, by your estimation, the Patriots will win approximately the same percentage of games with Mallett as with Brady? Well damn, in that case why not just trade Brady? He may be one of the best QBs of all time, but apparently you've seen enough of Mallett to know that he's equally as good.

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.

 

[Deus Irae]

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.

Over the course of the last 30 years, how many team in the NFL have purposefully, and by explicitly stated design, had a top 5 QB splitting seasons with untried backups for any reason other than injury/blowouts/wrapped up seasons?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

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.

 

[Steve102]

It's not going to happen, so there's no use in you beating the drum for it.

I'll say this for him, at least he's consistent.

 

[BradyFTW!]

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.

This is me doing math:

Brady- 9 of 11: 81%
Mallett- 5 of 6: 83%

There is overlap in your predictions, and it makes absolutely no sense.

Most importantly, you're completely missing the point of why you develop a young quarterback. You develop him against the off chance that, if you get really lucky, he might one day be two thirds the player that Tom Brady is. You don't put Tom Brady on the bench so that you can groom a guy who has basically no chance of being as good as Brady is.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I'll say this for him, at least he's consistent.

You know the definition of insanity, right?

 

[ProudestRyno]

It's not the physical side of the game that's changed with Brady. It's the mental side of the game, i.e. the decison making, the lack of executing basic throws etc. that's changing. TB's decision making in big games against good defenses has declined over the past few years. It's nice that they're adding more weapons to this Colt offense but it's not going to matter if the guy throwing the ball makes bad decisions/bad throws at the wrong time.

What an ignorant post.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Avenger]

This is me doing math:

Brady- 9 of 11: 81%
Mallett- 5 of 6: 83%

There is overlap in your predictions, and it makes absolutely no sense.

Most importantly, you're completely missing the point of why you develop a young quarterback. You develop him against the off chance that, if you get really lucky, he might one day be two thirds the player that Tom Brady is. You don't put Tom Brady on the bench so that you can groom a guy who has basically no chance of being as good as Brady is.

I said Mallet would probably get 4 wins in 5 or sic games, that is 67% and 80% winning
With Brady it would be 81% and 90%.

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.

It is the best long term solution to see him in games and see how he develops before we have to rely on him, if he ends up sucking then we wont be stuck there with our thumb up our ass. If we see Mallet suck in 4 games starting, we will know we need to bring in another QB, if he does good we are all set.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Considering the advance of sports medicine and the new safety rules protecting QBs in the game. It is quite possible that brady plays to at least age 40 and wins a few more championship rings along the way.

I mean Elway won a championship at 37. So I don't see any reason Tom can't, especially when the Pats have stocked the fridge with so much talent.